70 Comments 
I look forward to the day when we can cut off all aid to Pakistan.
As horrible an asshole as he was – I look at the hateful and idiotic forums posts/tweets/updates flooding the Internet and wonder if this really makes anything better. Now his movement has a martyr, there's a power vacuum, and it feels like we're just perpetuating the violence without ever having to really address the issues Osama had with us in the first place.
This news doesn't leave me excited, but I'm not sure what a more optimal outcome could have been. Hopefully it brings some peace to those that have suffered loss by his plans.
Not me. I'm always happy when a mass murderer gets what's coming.
As for what's changed, well, as I understand it Bin Laden has a pretty serious headache. That will probably retard his operational efficiency, or something.
Robert, there is a place for hate. It is unfortunate that idiocy is ubiquitous, but there's not much we can do about that.
"without ever having to really address the issues Osama had with us in the first place."
Please. I don't care what his issues with us were (though a lot of them sound a lot like "We are Americans"), He was a mass-murderer. They give up the right to have us address their "issues" when they make it their life's work to kill as many of us as possible.
I hope Osama died slow.
The issues Osama bin Laden had with us? You mean like not returning Spain to moslem rule?
I have to say: I am fine with deciding not to use the body in all sorts of crowd-pleasing but barbaric ways. But I'm not entirely clear on the logic and strategy of giving a swift and (allegedly, attempted) Islamic-compliant burial. If the intended message is "we're not at war with Islam," I'm not sure the message could possibly convince anyone who needs convincing of that.
Hi, I am a frequent reader but this is my first comment.
I live in NYC, have since 1999. I was downtown on 9/11 as was my wife. I heard the news this morning that we popped Bin Laden, and it felt like a weight had been lifted from me that I had not known I was carrying.
I hope he died slowly, but the reports are that he was shot in the head, a far more merciful death than he deserved. Also heard that he was buried in accordance with his religious traditions. I don't know if I would have given him that respect, but I suspect it was the right thing to do.
Ken, its part of the pathetic attempt to pander to the sensibilities of extremists who already hate our guts. Its silly.
Didn't vote for Obama, never will.
But, I give credit where credit is due.
As for OBL's issues with us, it's a non-starter. He was pissed that Saudi Arabia allowed us access to wage a campaign in the first Gulf War. Also, as long as we were supporters of Israel, he wasn't going to stop.
The man was evil, pure and simple. No amount of talking was going to effect a sea change within him.
Glad he's gone.
SPQR, I think there is at least an element of avoiding the creation of a bin Laden shrine someplace — but I still don't completely get it.
I'm fine with him being dead, as he was a horrible, evil human. I'm not fine with celebrating his death, displays of blind patriotism, and pretending that the reason behind every slight against the US can be reduced to "oh, he's evil". Even trying to pin his reasoning down to a single sentence is dismissing the many factors involved and is a decidedly US-centric view.
Terrorism by its definition is one of the most horrible things humans can do to other humans, so I do not condone or attempt to explain it away. My point was that nothing is ever clearly black and white, and it seems like it wouldn't hurt the US to consider that some actions might really piss people off.
Maybe I'm being naive and the world needs a giant asshole, who knows.
This news doesn’t leave me excited, but I’m not sure what a more optimal outcome could have been.
Locking him in a room with Donald Trump?
I wake up and this is what I find. Am I in bizaro world? Because I'm not going to discount it.
Robert,
The fact that as a nation we do things that really piss some people off is immaterial. Roughly 50% of Americans do things that really piss off the other 50% of Americans every day. So what?
Do you really think that "the US" didn't consider that someone might be pissed off by our support of Israel or Kuwait? It is fine for people to disagree. It is fine for entire societies to disagree with each other. When societies disagree so strongly that only violence can resolve the dispute, they designate certain of their members (typically called "soldiers") to resolve the dispute with violence. Those soldiers publicly self-identify themselves as targets and they target the soldiers of the other society.
When members of one society do not publicly self-identify themselves as targets, and through deception try to kill as many members of the other society, regardless of their identities, as possible; the issue is in fact black and white.
My point was that nothing is ever clearly black and white, and it seems like it wouldn’t hurt the US to consider that some actions might really piss people off.
I'm trying to think of an example of a group for whom that would not apply. No luck so far.
But I also have trouble thinking of anything that the US does, or can do, that won't really piss somebody off somewhere in the world. If "don't piss anybody off" is a criteria for decision making, then we would end up doing nothing, which I am sure would also really piss somebody off.
Grr, didn't close those italics. That was only suppose to be the first paragraph.
It sure was wrong of us to aid China in the '30's in its war against Japan since that pissed the Japanese off … we really should have thought about that….
let's see if I can turn them off.
Guess not.
We shouldn't gratuitously piss people off, is the thing. If pissing someone off would gain us more than the actions they will therefore take against us (or our efforts to stop them) would hurt us, taking into account the deterrent value of our being known for not being afraid to piss people off, then go ahead. But if pissing someone off doesn't bring us any benefits, better to be nice.
So, the arguments against being a better participant in world affairs are 1) that killing people in war is justified and natural as long as it abides by certain rules, and 2) we're damned if we do, damned if we don't, so we should just act in self interest.
@jb – I agree, but complicating things is that the US usually pisses people off in an attempt to maintain the status quo, so there is benefit, at least for the decision makers. Quantifying this benefit in respect to time frame and reach is an inaccurate art at best, and usually leaves the majority affected by the decisions in a gray area between complacency and 'French Revolution'.
Italics closed.
As for me, I'm a simple man. I read of his death just before I was scheduled to turn in last night, concluded it had to be some weird joke, then found out it wasn't.
Then I stayed up three hours watching the news, in happiness. I'm very happy this man is dead, and my only regret is that he apparently didn't suffer as much as I'd have liked. I wish they'd taken him alive and sent him to Cuba for some Giuliani-Time. I wish he'd met his end fighting off an endless rain of hungry jaguarundi, being dropped on his head on prime time television. I'm not going to insult anyone by pretending otherwise.
What I don't understand is why some of you fools feel differently, but I guess it can be explained by remembering that even Hitler had a girlfriend. Tim McVeigh was deluged with marriage offers before he died. There's someone for everyone.
But you ladies aren't even getting a conjugal visit.
Robert,
No, there are no arguments at all against being a "better" participant in world affairs. Everyone always strives to be the best participant in world affairs. Do you really think any president took any action that he did not think was the best option, all things considered? Every administration tries its best. The fact that you would have made some decisions differently is immaterial. No one is gratuitously pissing people off.
Should we be involved militarily in Libya? How about Syria? If the intervention in one or non-intervention in the other becomes the justification for a terrorist group blowing up a bunch of schoolchildren in Des Moines, will you claim the issue isn't black and white?
I think it is good general rule to not mock the dead, if for no other reason than respect for the feelings of the mourners.
On the other hand, some people are personally responsible for such evil that mockery and mirth is are entirely appropriate responses to their death. And as for the people who'll mourn Bin Laden (and aren't personally related to him)? Fuck 'em.
Let me quote from someone as impeccably pacifist as Pete Seeger:
"When tyrants tremble, sick with fear,
And hear their death-knells ringing,
When friends rejoice, both far and near,
How can I keep from singing?"
No-one dances gracefully on another's grave. Ever.
Wow! Lots of hatred on this blog.
I may not dance gracefully on his grave, but I will dance.
I can't dance on his grave 'cause its a deep and watery one.
No-one does themselves any favours by behaving as Bin Laden perceived you. Rise above it. In the eyes of internationals, you will look not too different from those in the Middle East who start jumping up and down when Americans die. You know, those scenes that get broadcast from some random Middle East street that piss Americans off.
I loathe what Bin Laden said he did, promoted, and everything he stood for but I will not or want to rejoice. My overwhelming feeling is just sadness: look at the state of the world. This should be a time for reflection. Nearly a million people have died worldwide, pain, fear and a whole lot of prejudice still exists. We do not need to lower our actions to the level that fuels another vicious circle of pissed off people. Grace is a whole better strategy.
Alison, the last thing I'm going to do is allow a bunch of religious prudes, the least enlightened people in the Middle East, to dictate my behavior online. I don't allow liberal and enlightened western prudes to do it either, so why should I condescend to the other?
One wonderful thing about the capitalistic, pluralist web is that it provides an outlet for mockers and scoffers, as well as for Grace. If Bin Laden's revolution had come to pass, there would still be a web, but it would contain only Grace.
In other words, I have to dance on Bin Laden's grave, or the terrorists will have won.
The internet is just an extension or mirror of society, who we happen to be. No-one is dictating you anything, how you behave is between you and your conscience alone. However, I do think we ALL have a responsibility towards world peace, otherwise we just go enter a circles until the end of time that becomes a void. What our actions are, what we say, how we behave; like it or not has ripples in a bigger universe. Including yours. (The saying it takes two to tango doesn't exist for no reason).
What exactly are *you* achieving by this post to promote world peace, or reach out to "the other". To solve this. I don't want an answer, it is just a question that exists between you and your conscience.
Dancing on the graves, places you exactly where terrorists / Bin Laden wanted or perceived you. There is more than one way to skin a cat.
What exactly are *you* achieving by this post to promote world peace, or reach out to “the other”. To solve this. I don’t want an answer, it is just a question that exists between you and your conscience.
But answer you shall have, stated as succinctly as I have ever seen it stated.
You can send me dead flowers in the morning
Send me dead flower by the US mail
Say it with dead flowers at my wedding
And I won't forget to put roses on your grave
I think this subject is being over analyzed, and I will leave it at that.
I loathe what Bin Laden said he did, promoted, and everything he stood for but I will not or want to rejoice. My overwhelming feeling is just sadness: look at the state of the world. This should be a time for reflection.
And reflecting we have been.
I've just been doing it over cheap champagne and cheaper cigars.
OBL was a God Damn Monster, and if we can not celebrate the death of such a being, then what the fuck is freedom good for?
I mean, you are wanting us to "behave" so as to not offend people who would have you beaten because of your avatar.
Are these really people who are deserving of even the barest of effort to placate? I say no, and if my unspeakable, indescribable, unending joy at the death of OBL should happen to offend them, all I have to say to them is
"Your mother regularly felated hogs."
A well-performed dynamic entry raid by a well-drilled team of operators is a work of art.
Dancing on Bin Laden's grave does not place me exactly where he wants me. Where he wanted me was in a grave of my own while he creates a perverted version of the dar es islam for the entire planet.
He is not happy when I dance upon his grave. He wanted me (and all westerners) to convert to his form of Islam or die. That is what he wanted.
This reminds me, a bit, of the disputes that tend to arise on the internet when someone famous dies. Say, Heath Ledger.
It follows a familiar pattern: first people express shock and sadness. Then other people belittle the first people, pointing out that none of them knew Heath Ledger and that it's silly and pretentious to mourn him and why don't they mourn the tens of thousands of other more anonymous people who died that day?
That the criticism is arguable misses the point. It's deeply human to express sadness at the death of someone when we feel as if we knew him, even if we really didn't. It's deeply human to single that person out and not feel the same way for the masses of humanity we don't know.
Similarly, I think it's perfectly arguable that rejoicing over bin Laden's death might harden some hearts, that it might enrage some violent people, that we don't like it when the baddies rejoice when they kill our folks, and that we are on some level diminished when we celebrate the death of any man. But saying that those things are arguable — and backing them up with bogus quotes from famous moral thinkers — misses the point again. We're human. It's very human to celebrate the death of someone monstrous who has gleefully killed our fellow men. Prim instructions to our fellows in the first few heady days following an emotional event is unlikely to change any hearts — rather, it seems somewhat self-indulgent.
If people are still gnashing their teeth in a week or a month because we can't put Osama's head on a pike at Ground Zero, then maybe someone ought to say something. Until then, it's reasonable to ask — are critics promoting God and peace, or promoting their own self-image?
Seems to be a lot of "thought" that you have to hate someone in order to kill them efficiently and with a clear conscience. Not true.
In fact, it's usually better to be cold-blooded about it.
I'm glad he's dead. And I'm mad at him, that he was such a monster that I'm glad he's dead. Which side of the aisle does that put me on?
And this conversation reminds me of the Simpsons where Bart says "ooh, Lisa, I'll dance on her grave" and Marge says "Bart!" and he says "What? Oh, right, napkin." It's hard to have a conversation with someone who doesn't share your premises.
The internet is just an extension or mirror of society, who we happen to be.
Hardly. The internet has the potential to become such, but to date no one (apart from a few Koreans hogging the Lineage machine at the local internet cafe) has died on or because of the internet. The internet is, at its best, merely a high tech version of Catherine's salon in which we, ghetto Voltaires, expound on ideas while the Potemkins of the world deal with very real Pugachevs and Tatars.
No-one is dictating you anything, how you behave is between you and your conscience alone.
With all due respect, your mystical talk of grace and my duty to advance world peace leads me to believe you think otherwise. Yet while I have many stains on my conscience, this post is not one of them.
However, I do think we ALL have a responsibility towards world peace, otherwise we just go enter a circles until the end of time that becomes a void.
I'm not so presumptuous as to think so. I try to exercise good will toward my metaphorical neighbor (unless he has it coming) which might advance world peace, but I'm not so egotistical as to think that my open admission of hate toward a man who engineered or inspired tens of thousands of deaths in America, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Kenya, and Tanzania will impede the progress of world peace.
No, my mission is a smaller one: to promote the political and social philosophy of Neo-Goldsteinism. The tenets of Neo-Goldsteinism are many but mostly unwritten, based on a number of axioms which are accepted by all adherents of Neo-Goldsteinism, and many related movements. The exact beliefs of neo-Goldsteinism are beyond the scope of this post, but suffice it to say that violence and even war are permissible to followers of the movement, where justified.
So how can I take responsibility for world peace?
What our actions are, what we say, how we behave; like it or not has ripples in a bigger universe. Including yours. (The saying it takes two to tango doesn’t exist for no reason).
More mysticism. We neo-Goldsteinists are a practical lot. We don't see the correlation between killing 3,000 people in one day, and rejoicing when the killer suffers his karmic retribution. In fact, we don't believe in karma at all, except as it is brought to pass by men.
What exactly are *you* achieving by this post to promote world peace, or reach out to “the other”. To solve this. I don’t want an answer, it is just a question that exists between you and your conscience.
Well, you're going to get an answer, whether you want it or not.
World peace is possible only through world tyranny. Man is descended of the savage ape, who is naturally free and wild and beyond good and evil. This heritage cannot be erased. It is the lawful right of every ape, when his life, his freedom, his family, or his home is threatened, to band together with friendly apes to drive off and even kill the oppressor apes. To deny the ape his heritage is impossible save through force, and confronted with force of a magnitude sufficient to threaten apes the world over, it would be the right, in fact the duty, of every ape to kill those who would commit such a crime against nature.
Therefore world peace is impossible. (This is one of the tenets of neo-Goldsteinism, by the way.)
Dancing on the graves, places you exactly where terrorists / Bin Laden wanted or perceived you. There is more than one way to skin a cat.
I don't care what Bin Laden perceived me to be. In fact, his perception of me personally is probably correct. I am a Godless libertine, a scoffer and a weirdo.
As for where Bin Laden wanted me to be, I'll quote a spiritual cousin of us neo-Goldsteinists:
In late September [2001], news agencies all over the world printed this concise cultural analysis made by Afghan mujahedin fighter Maulana Inyadullah, the Ricky Carmichael of eXtreme Musliming:
"The Americans love Pepsi-Cola, we love death."
Well, it's January and I'm drinking a Pepsi and Mr. Inyadullah is probably dead. So, contrary to the dire predictions of the clerk at the food coop, the war had a happy ending for everyone.
I am a Godless libertine
Yes, but you are our Godless libertine… 
Damn, I wish I could do the barbed snark like Patrick.
Coincidence, Osama was killed on Yom Hashoa, the day or remembrance for the Holocaust victims.
Is it me or are the default generated avatars reminiscent of a smart phone scan code?
Pfft… I just wish I could figure out how to NOT have the default pic…
I think I uploaded vampire cat to gravatar.
Pfft… I just wish I could figure out how to NOT have the default pic…
Tie it to the email address you use for comment at WordPress blogs.
Perhaps we can at least agree that, thanks to the actions of some, OBL will never again have the opportunity to assist in plotting the murder of noncombatants of any faith, nationality, etc, or other acts of terror. Further, others will not have to dedicate some portion of the remainder of their lives to ensure his continued good behavior.
For those things, at least, I am thankful.
put another way – OBL chose to remove himself from the bounds of polite society. Polite society has chosen in response to remove him.
I live in Europe, my views are reflective of many people outside the US (check the media outside the US sometime). Here's a bit of news: the US isn't the centre of the universe. Stop behaving as such. The US needs to quit playing victim, and implying that it has no cause on world affairs.
How about a more intelligent post, like examining the legal merits of going into another country and killing an unarmed person. At least in Europe we had the Nuremberg Trials for all horrors they presented.
I spend a lot of time in the US and the media is just fear on steroids, you notice it every time.
P.S. as a reminder, other countries experienced terrorism too. However, I don't see dancing around e.g tube stations in London, at the Atocha Station in Madrid, etc. And oh, a member of my family was a firefighter at WTC. Doesn't change my view. People who decide to go down to the level of lacking grace, all I can say: I sure hope you don't hold a position of responsibilty. Because that it precisely how power gets abused.
I live in Europe, my views are reflective of many people outside the US
Hold up there.
I definitely noticed you were EU. The self-importance and thumbing your nose down at us un-enlightened 'Mericans in your posts is pretty impossible to ignore. But you know what else I noticed? That people in the US often act the same way when looking back across the Atlantic. I tend to find these sorts of people – on both sides – to be ridiculous at the best of times (and idiotic hypocrites at the worst). Frankly I would be happy to round up everyone who is doing nose-thumbing and dump them, naked and covered in BBQ sauce, on a velociraptor filled island. Since I lack the means to do that, I'll just continue to engage people in debate instead. Really, we're much better off without this sort of nonsense (the raptors will go hungry, sadly).
Nobody here thinks or believes the US is the center of the universe. Talking heads think that but anybody who thinks the talking heads are worth paying attention to is worth taking seriously. Oh, sure, plenty of United Statesians think that but I don't see any here, and anyway they've got plenty of equivalents on your side of the pond. The US' position in global affairs is undeniable (though how is it that you accuse us of both acting like the center of the universe, and acting like nothing we does matter on a global scale?), though it also isn't an important part of the current discussion is it? Nobody here expects people inside *or* outside of the US to take specific positions (but you can bet that any position will be examined). You are free not to dance the next time France experiences a situation similar to 9/11 and then the mastermind behind it is killed. But while you are free to do that, you can expect the argument that apparently accompanies that decision to get sneered at in some parts.
And with good reason. Ken has the right of it; there are valid questions concerning the reaction to Bin Laden's death. But they have not been asked here (well, Ken hinted at them) and they most certainly have not been asked by you. The glee people are experiencing is not inherently bad, despite what you might think. And it certainly isn't a barrier to world-by-god-peace. I still can't believe you argued that with a straight face. We're beyond melodrama/hyperbole there. You are in the plaid on that one. That it is your opinion doesn't make it any less ridiculous.
You have lots of people agreeing with you? Super. As the man said, that just leaves more for doubt to slaughter.
Ours is not a high horse, madam.
To add, personally I am really looking forward to the next few weeks. As the afterglow (such as it is) fades, the rush by the two bumbling fucking morons that are the two primary US Political parties to mimize the credit the other guy can claim for something that transcends presidencies is going to be really entertaining.
Wow Alison, in one comment you've managed:
a) to paint an entire nationality with the brush of cowardice, arrogance, and self-centeredness based on disagreement with one member of that nationality (one you'll never meet, I'll add);
b) to demand that others assume that your quasi-religious belief in some mystical abstraction you call "Grace" is a moral standard by which all others must be judged;
c) to claim moral authority by association with an unnamed martyr (perhaps a Saint in the Church of Grace) whose identity and connection to you we can never verify;
d) to flout your "European" identity as self-evident moral superiority while lecturing to people whose soldiers and taxes have paid to defend you and your ilk from people who would ransack your insular little union like Huns if given the opportunity; and
e) not answered a single criticism anyone has expressed of your views, whether of the Neo-Goldsteinian variety or otherwise.
If I were as shallow as you, I would simply dismiss you as a troll. If I were as bigoted as you, I would insult your "European" identity. If I were as ignorant as you, I would simply repeat what I'd written earlier without addressing any of your points. If I were as self-important as you, I would question your intelligence and education.
But I'm none of these things. So I'll give you an opportunity to write a better reply.
as a reminder, other countries experienced terrorism too. However, I don’t see dancing around e.g tube stations in London, at the Atocha Station in Madrid, etc.
Forgive me, for I am not as civilized as Patrick.
Bitch, go fuck yourself.
When Spain or England lose around 3,000 people in less than 8 hours, manage to find the person who both bankrolled and masterminded the entire event, and then do as they wish with him, then those pansy-ass countries (who rely almost entirely upon the military forces of NATO – and thus by extension the United States – for their defense as they have virtually nothing of their own) can lecture us on how we should conduct ourselves.
Not one. Fucking. Second. Before.
You are your exaggerated sense of self-worth and self-importance can die in a fire. The United States may not be the center of the Universe, but that center sure as all fucking Hell isn't anywhere near Europe.
This is America. You come at us like Osama bin Laden did, kill thousands of Americans who not only had never heard of him, but didn't even have an opinion as to US foreign policy in the Middle East – people who only wanted to live out a natural life-span in peace – and then get to claim that just because you didn't have a weapon in your hand at the moment we happen to lay our vengeful mitts upon you that you are somehow not someone we should kill.
Hell, I kind of wish what one of his wives is claiming is true – I hope we DID drag him out, hands bound, in front of his family and put two rounds into the back of his head. Not only did he and they deserve it, he deserved to die the slowest, most painful possible death possible. And hour of indescribable anguish for every person who died that day would not satisfy me. He would need to died once for every single person who perished that day.
His suffering, nor the suffering of anyone even remotely connected to September 11th 2001, does not bother me.
And if his suffering and death do not bother me, how about you take a guess as to how much your approval – or lack there of – concerns me.
When Europe quits needing the US to save its collective ass from bad things/people, then I'll give a shit what Europe thinks of our actions. How long did it take for Europe to whine that it couldn't run the air patrols over Libya? 24 hours?
Piss off.
Dear All: you may not know this, but Alison went to law school in the U.K. She is a nice lady, and a bit idealistic (not a bad sin to have these days). Some of you here have succeeded in internet-jumping a woman you've never met. I have met Alison personally and know a few things about her that are not readily accessible in an online conversation. As a result, I know the following to be true–none of you would say the things you've said here if you were face to face with her. I suggest calming down and treating ladies virtual-visiting from the U.K. (or any other foreign country) with at least a modicum of respect. From what I can tell, Alison's greatest offense here happens to be (perhaps untimely) idealism. Seeing a bunch of allegedly educated people internet-jump someone promoting grace (aka MLK's agape) doesn't fit any definition of class that I'm aware of. To end this thread on a positive note, I will leave you with a link to MLK's speech, "Loving Your Enemies." It may not be the most timely reference, but whenever I can play Devil's Advocate and not call a nice lady disgusting names, I'll take that bargain: http://www.southernstudies.org/2011/01/it-is-love-that-will-save-our-world.html
Dear All: you may not know this, but Alison went to law school in the U.K.
Oh, well then. That's different then. Studied the law in the UK? Clearly we were wrong to not give two fucks about her opinion as to our behavior.
She is a nice lady, and a bit idealistic (not a bad sin to have these days).
No, just a very dangerous one, both for herself and whomever she has influence over. We got an idealistic-ish President in 2008, and he's managed to fuck our economy up in all sorts of new and interesting ways.
Some of you here have succeeded in internet-jumping a woman you’ve never met.
I don't give two limp-wristed FUCKS about her God Damn Gender. I didn't jump a woman, I jumped some self-righteous dipshit who dared to assume she was better than me because of her metaphysical bullshit
I have met Alison personally and know a few things about her that are not readily accessible in an online conversation.
Well la-dee-fucking-dah. Isn't that just so fucking special. Look asshole, I don't care if she's your God Damn mother. You know what was readily accessible in the online conversation? That she's a self-important fuckstick.
As a result, I know the following to be true–none of you would say the things you’ve said here if you were face to face with her.
Oh, you really don't know me very well, do you? If I think that you are a deluded, self-important, half-witted. worthless pile of dog shit – and I tell you that online – you can bet the bank that not only would I say that to your face but I would add even more profanity than I do here (if only because while there are many different ways to say the word "fuck", they all lose something when converted into the written word, and I hate to sound too repetitive).
I suggest calming down and treating ladies virtual-visiting from the U.K. (or any other foreign country) with at least a modicum of respect.
Sure thing. Right after you tell your dear friend to try to not a) insult us or b) imply that we have some duty to perform that not only were we not aware of but don't want in the first place.
From what I can tell, Alison’s greatest offense here happens to be (perhaps untimely) idealism.
Read Patrick's take down more closely. While much might be tied to a painfully naive worldview on her part, she chose to come here with it. If she didn't want to be treated like she was fucking stupid, she shouldn't have come here and acted fucking stupid.
Seeing a bunch of allegedly educated people internet-jump someone promoting grace (aka MLK’s agape) doesn’t fit any definition of class that I’m aware of.
That's funny, because telling a bunch of strangers how wrong their feelings and opinions are and telling them how they have failed in some duty that exists only in her quisling mind is not – in my mind – any sort of class I am aware of.
To end this thread on a positive note,
Read: to condescend to you a bit myself,"
I will leave you with a link to MLK’s speech, “Loving Your Enemies.” It may not be the most timely reference, but whenever I can play Devil’s Advocate and not call a nice lady disgusting names, I’ll take that bargain:
a) Disgusting names? Bubba, if you think those were disgusting, you don't even want to hear some of the stuff I'm self-censoring. I have a couple for you, too…
b) The concepts of "love thy neighbor", "give peace a chance" and "love will save our world" are great when you are dealing with an enemy with whom you can reason, but when confronted as we are with an enemy that wants to kill Linda because she does not cover her face, you for liking bacon, and me for a list of reasons too numerous to list here, there is only one proper response – Kill every fucking one of them.
They want nothing less than your complete submission or your death. You have no choice, you get no say, and you will possess no freedoms. You do what they say and how they say to do it, or you die. They will not spare your children, they will not spare the old and infirm. They do not desire any negotiation.
With people such as that, your only chance for survival is to kill them before they kill you. If they were content to stay where they are and not harm me or my loved ones, I would not care one bit what they did. This country is founded so that each of us has the religious freedom to worship (or not) however they see fit.
The line, however, is somewhere around "wanting to kill me because my faith is not their faith".
but when confronted as we are with an enemy that wants to kill Alison because she does not cover her face,
Terribly sorry. No idea why I put "linda" there originally…
PS – Patrick, mind if I ask how close Matt and Alison's IP addresses are to each other?
Go back and read my comments carefully. I wasn't supporting Alison's substantive arguments. As far as I'm concerned, it's a good day whenever an anti-American Taliban or anti-American Al-Qaeda member is killed. And yet, your comments above are so lacking in grace, you've managed to help support Alison's pro-grace arguments.
In any case, I'll note that no one has addressed one of Alison's more interesting comments:
"How about a more intelligent post, like examining the legal merits of going into another country and killing an unarmed person. At least in Europe we had the Nuremberg Trials for all horrors they presented."
That sounds like a potentially educational discussion. Or, you could drop some more f-bombs. Either way
How about a more intelligent post, like examining the legal merits of going into another country and killing an unarmed person. At least in Europe we had the Nuremberg Trials for all horrors they presented.
There are many people who, given the choice, would have preferred to see bin Laden treated like a common criminal, mug shot, jump suit, trial regarding his mass murders, and imprisonment or formal execution. There is a lot to be said for this, as opposed to blowing his brains out on the spot. And Israel made that choice when they grabbed Eichmann in Buenos Aires in a very elaborate operation and flew him to Israel to stand trial for WW II war crimes for implementing "The Final Solution."
But that choice is not always available.
That sounds like a potentially educational discussion.
Jesus fucking Christ, you don't vote, do you?
Every person at Nuremberg was a member of either an organized, uniformed military or a government.
Bin Laden was neither.
We didn't go into Pakistan and cap Abdul the Goat Herder, we fucking killed OSAMA BIN LADEN.
Yes, everyone should have their day in court, blah blah blah…
I'd submit that maybe – just maybe – if someone has admitted to being behind the death of thousands of Americans, we don't actually need to spend a couple of million dollars putting them on trial to find them guilty of doing exactly what they have admitted to have done.
Scott, "bitch" is uncalled for. And let's not play the "alt" card so hastily. I have not checked IPs and do not plan to. Matt gets treated as his own person until he gives me reason to treat him otherwise. If I have no reason to treat him otherwise, nobody has a reason to treat him otherwise. Every normal – even the most ignorant and misguided amongst you. Also, let me make it perfectly clear that "normal" here applies to anyone who isn't a developer like David or I. you people are all freaks – gets a shot here until they prove, through their own actions, they don't deserve it. I would prefer everyone act that way, though this isn't something that is going to cause me to reach for the stick. I lead through example primarily.
As a result, I know the following to be true–none of you would say the things you’ve said here if you were face to face with her.
Well Matt, I have met two people from Popehat in real life: Patrick and myself. I can say with 100% certainty that we would say all of the things we said to her in real life as well as hear. Patrick and I are old hands at the internet; I am, strictly speaking, a a slight late-comer for my generation but I was still internet fluent in 1993. Patrick has been online since 1934. We're no strangers to the behavioral shifts people undergo from the real world to the tubes and back again. Nothing you have seen from either of us constitutes a radical departure from how we are in real life. While I have never met Ken's physical form, we have communed many times in this realm and in others, and I'm pretty confident he'd say whatever he wanted to her in real life. Ken and Patrick are two of the snarkiest people I know but they come at it from radically different angles (I lie somewhere between them. Once they waged a battle for my soul. But then everybody got bored and we just had beers).
I'm sorry if she feels jumped on. But outside of "bitch" of Scott's most recent commentary – bitch wasn't called for, the rest is what it is – I don't really see a huge difference between what she gave and got. Oh, sure, the respondees cuss more. I actually have a theory about that. For reasons I am unable to properly articulate, we seem to attract people who aim for, but typically fall short of, the Patton school of profanity. I think it is something we ourselves strive for but fall short of. There's something about the attempt draws people such as us in. It's not really important.
As for Alison's "offense", it isn't idealism and it certainly isn't disagreeing; we're always skeptical of the former (since it tends to get tainted easily) and happy to encounter the later. Alison's looking down on us is impossible to miss. And the suggestion that Patrick somehow caused harm to the world because he laughed at Bin Laden's death is just ludicrous. Alison didn't just come here to disagree. She came her to thumb her nose at us and feel superior. We don't take kindly to such things. For our internet selves, we rather enjoy dining on such things.
I feel confident in saying that nobody reacted to her based on gender. I feel confident in saying that nobody reacted to her being a particular nationality (it's a subject *she* broached, and she did it as part of an attempt to paint herself as superior/enlightened). I feel completely and totally confident in saying we have quite a few commentors who tend to react negatively to such accusations. And look. . . some did.
She is welcome to post here and we will continue to engage her. What you and she might find is that the quality of our discourse is likely to mirror what she and you give. You'll see that both in discussions with Robert – a frequently commentor here – and with initial exchanges with Alison.
We don't much care if Alison is a law student, a bread packager, or Queen of the Winter Ball. She can be from any nation on this earth and any number of nations from other earths. We don't care if she is male, female, white, black, Drow, or 1/7th narwhal. Here, however, you get what you pay for.
Grandy, thank you for your comment. You've got style, class, and superior intelligence–a hard combo to find these days. Ken's got it. You've got it. And I'm nowhere close to getting all three (on my good days, I can sometimes claim 2 out of 3).
I just have one more thing to say: you remarked that you had "100% certainty" about something. Don't be so sure about anything. The world and people will surprise you sometimes. As for me, I am 92.746456% sure that if anyone here who cussed at Alison actually met her, they would not repeat their words to her face Remember: I have personal knowledge, having actually met her. And that's where I'm going to leave it.
I'm not sure whether people would swear at Allison to her face or not. I probably would not; I'm hampered by a sexist chivalrous upbringing. Would Allison indulge in smug utterances of superiority to our faces? I don't know. I've encountered some Europeans who feel free to sneer at Americans to their faces, and some who don't.
The legality of going into another country…? Really?
If you make war on us, we will make war right back on you. We will seek you, we will find you, we will end you. No matter you may go.
No, crunchback, Pakistan is a safe zone, like in freeze tag.
Matt, I don't want to upset you, but I don't perceive time or space the way you do (due to a birth defect of all things; time-head). When I say 100%, I'm not kidding around.
Matt, frankly I would say that same things to Alison's face. And that's because I'm not a nice person.
Its not the idealism, Matt, that annoys. It is the European arrogance coupled with an idealism that can only survive in the kind of bizarre, alternate universe that Europeans live in. An alternate universe where they ignore the history and current events of their own country and the European neighbors and focus on the US as the source of all the tarnish of their shiny idealism.
It is the sneering attitude that is maintained by a deadfast refusal to even notice how European nations only are able to maintain their tattered illusion of superiority over the US by engaging the US to clean up all the trash in the continent. Balkans? North Africa? hello?
German judge files criminal complaint against Merkel for approving of OBL's death.
I don't think Tacitus would recognize the Germans.
Well, Matt (who is American Scott) put up a gentlemanly, chivalrous defense for the lady from Europe. Better than she deserved, I think.
And so on that happy note. I shall close further comment on this post. Will Alison repay Matt for his gallantry? Will Matt betray his country for Alison, becoming a self-loathing expatriate ever yammering of the essential infantilism at the heart of America to please Alison's friends in the cold cafes of Berlin?
Time will tell.
Contact
Subscribe
May 1, 2011 
By 