fuck yeah, edstock, damn straight. why... to hell with those pesky rules of engagement. more renditions! more! more black ops, more incursions, more drones blowing up children and weddings and the elderly, we'll just call those fuckers taliban insurgents or better yet, human shields. booyah! who knows, we might even be killing some actual bad guys along the way. and isn't that an interesting point because with the way things are going in open and accountable land, we really don't know and we won't soon find out. it isn't like our political class are much inclined to tell us the truth.
what's the rule of law worth if we have to abide by it's limitations? what's the use of having an enemy if we can't get right down in the blood and filth and shit and roll around with him? why have an enemy at all if you aren't going to make yourself just as evil and nasty as you think he is?
somehow the moral superiority of wasting anything that moves, from the safety of a drone's remote control, escapes me. playing the tidy, distant killer with villages is different than attacking a tall building, how, exactly? how dare those corrupt children and their feckless parents insist on living in their homes and being so brown while they do it. fuck 'em, fuck 'em all and call it schadenfreude! that'll make every treaty, covenant and law our fightin' boys get told to shit on an acceptable loss. that'll make every incursion into a neighbour state's territory just a dandy thing. who fucking cares that any one of those attacks and raids and whatnot could be viewed as an act of war?
hell, we had an old villain to kill and his porn to steal. none of that take him alive shit, none of that bring him to trial shit. we got us a spectacle to stage. we got our fat old chests to beat, like a pack of impotent silverbacks, trained in the finest of armchair conflict.
and hey, let's not forget that scourge sweeping our very shores, oh fuck edster, best be climbing under the bed before the honour killers getcha. there's been what, thousands, right? hundreds then... okay, okay tens... well, a handful probably. all right, actually thirteen cases since 2002 and this form of widely advertised domestic violence is the worst thing, on earth, ever. right edstock? because unlike the vanilla spousal abuse and homicide that is carried out with banal regularity across this great land, this crime features the muslims. and here they are, the very rarest and worst exemplars of their faith, not being held to justice at a pace acceptable to you. sweet fuckin' jeezuz, they've got some nerve being tied up in red tape in the system, someone alert the bigotsphere! i feel your pain guy. you aren't alone either, you'll find a shoulder to cry on with the five feet of hatred and the small dead souls bunch.
where edstock, oh fucking where is the outrage for non-muslim canadian women being murdered by their spouses and exes at a rate of one every six days? where are the names of those killers on your rolodex of breathless scorn? where is the horror and sensational headline for the 582 cases of known missing or murdered aboriginal women in 2010? why, maybe that good ol' homegrown misogynistic slaughter is more tolerable than that other kind of slaughter on account of guys called mo being the enemy.
582 in 2010 vs 13 since 2002.
i'm sure all the clinic bombers and doctor shooting religious fanatics fancy they're upholding some insane honour too. i'm confident the obsessive, jealous spouses, boyfriends and exes that are beating their average, western wives and girlfriends right fucking now are feeling pretty entitled to possess and to judge and to punish. well at least we can be thankful they aren't called mohammed, right ed? 'cos then it would be a problem.
fuck you and your not so concealed bigotry edstock.
13 comments:
Well said and about time. I've been wondering for ages what the hell his posts are doing on this blog, and they've made me increasingly reluctant to stop by and see what the other posters might be saying. Thanks, psa, for saying what needed to be said.
PSA, unlike you, I don't do ad hominem, sorry. Throw dirt, you lose ground. You know nothing about me, but you should know better than to behave like that.
Pete, this place isn't for the hard-of-thinking or the dogmatic. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do, via con dios.
Ed
It’s not that action shouldn’t be taken against terrorists, and I am happy to hear someone like fanatical Bin Laden is no longer plotting death to those who oppose his fucked up views – it’s the glee, the vicious, blood thirsty, self-righteous glee over details like that idiot Short went on about (he was shot in the face), and it’s the language (like mowing the lawn). These expressions feed something terrible in us, encourage the attitude that some people belong outside our international laws. We despise them and wage war on them for breaking those laws, but such gloating rhetoric as displayed by Short and Schmidle feeds the belief that while others must never violate international human rights laws, we are perfectly justified in doing just that. In fact, it’s something to brag about, joke about. And we need not define when and for what we can break these laws. Sure, keep it vague, keep it open, no telling whose death we’ll want to gloat over next.
As long as we glorify violence, excuse it in our society on a case-by-case basis, couch killing in cool terms like mowing the lawn, or ridicule or present any death as entertainment, we are fucked. We have no moral standing when trying to shape international laws which address human rights, and we are failing to teach our own societies/cultures that killing and torture are not fun, not entertainment, not cool.
Noo, you don't do ad hominem. But you're just fine with suggesting that anyone who thinks that a substantial portion of your posts are racist bile is "hard-of-thinking" or "dogmatic". Really holding yourself up to a higher standard there eh? How's the view from up there, so far above the fray? Meanwhile, I couldn't help but notice that you addressed and responded to precisely nothing in psa's post.
Aw, Pete, ya just don't get it. You see, there was nothing reasoned or logical with PSA's rant that I could respond to: just parse the sequence of statements produced by a mind in short-circuit. Kinda like dealing with a two year-old having a melt-down, lol.
Ed, I'm with PSA on this one. And yeah, there were facts aplenty. What's the rate of spousal killing among Muslim and white Canadians, Ed? Who's killing more? Let's see... one in fifty Canadians is Muslim, and four out of five are some variety of Christian. So... we have thirteen killings among the Muslims in the last decade, and nearly six hundred among the Christians every year, or (being charitable here) app. 4800 by Christians in the same period. There are app. forty times as many Christians as Muslims... so if the rate among Muslims were to hold, we'd expect there to be 13*40=520.
Who's killing more women Ed? Oh, and while we're at it, globally, who's killing more 'enemies', Christians or Muslims? Well, since 9/11, the West has killed well over a million people between Af-Pak and Iraq. The muslims have killed how many? Five thousand... let's be nice and say ten thousand. Who are the people who kill, Ed?
Poly, you just don't get it either. TWENTY-FIVE MONTHS have passed. This is proper due process? Ostensibly, this is a very simple case of murder, not something complex, like the police fumbling around Susan Nelles, and it takes TWENTY-FIVE MONTHS?
Instead, you spout inane killing statistics, to try to prove something or other.
Whatever you do, try wearing a helmet when you do it.
well edstock, you've certainly established your credibility in avoiding the ad homs.
hard of thinking, no reason or logic, mental short circuit, two year old having a melt down... well done, i applaud your elevated and pristine argumentation.
you routinely center out muslims for scorn. as i point out in the rather more colourful phrasing of the post, you are silent on issues of domestic violence in canada. you have nothing to say in this area whatsoever, until it concerns muslims. as soon as there is dirt to throw in that direction, you've got your hands full. this is not recent or new, going back through your posts there is a consistent thread of what appears to be bigotry against muslims.
you delight in the bloody details of their deaths, be they warlords or bystanders. they are feckless and corrupt, their slaughter is celebrated with masturbatory glee as you fawn over special-ops teams and weaponry. you spit out garbage like "peace through superior firepower" with fetishistic glee.
you pepper your posts with terms like scourge, islamofascists. you decry muslim swim wear with a pretext of "freedom" for women. the pretext doesn't hold as basically you prefer women to be on display for your voyeuristic pleasure, your battle against oppression of women is best summed up in 'show us yer tits'. god's happy critters indeed.
on issues like the flotilla of humanitarian aid to gaza, your default is to scorn the humanitarian effort and your thoughtful and non-ad hom analysis... "a lot of "progressives" aren't known for depth of analysis or historical perspective." that after aligning the activists in your mind as either willing allies or dupes of hamas.
when it comes to religious lunacy, you're ever so happy to use such colourful terminology as "fart-catcher" and decry the primitive ways of iranians and their cartoon religion, why djinns of all things! your lengthy and considered critiques of catholocism and their policies on witchcraft and possession by demons are... well, i'm sure you'll get around to that.
you did sound a note for the rule of law way back when you wondered about the repatriation of omar khadr as a campaign question. so points for that. but that's more exception than rule for you. there's lots of rah rah for sending fighter jets to libya and creamy admiration for snipers.
you're all about calling folks weasels and multi-kulti bullshit merchants, you whinge about sharia and politically correct bastards at the drop of a hat. any diversion from the white, western way is a betrayal of "canadian values". how very raphael alexander of you. when you decide to bash multiculturalism and the politically correct do-gooders, you invariably reach for the most outrageous pictures of fanatics as your baseline representation. when called on it, as the late and beloved croghan27 was wont to do, you respond with priggish aloofness and condescension. your default deflection settings.
you like to post racist video rants and excuse yourself by disclaiming their not being politically incorrect, that those offended by your fun-time racism are merely getting their tighty-whitey-wedgies on because they are of course, in your non- ad hom phrasing, hard of thinking. and hey, when it comes to your brave and studied position in opposition to "multi-kulti" and wedgies, nothing says courage like intentional offense.
you kicked this year's posting off with a reposting of a mohamed cartoon for no purpose but to be offensive. opposition and outrage created by the response to the original danish publication is your excuse for condemnation of billions en masse. the extremist muslim, to your mind, is inseparable from the entirety of the muslim population.
don't believe me, in your own words...
"Ah, poor ol' multi-kulti: as much as the politically-correct would like to believe in it, multi-kulti never worked. It was dead from the get-go, as a decadent medieval tribal culture burdened with a fundamentalist, intolerant religion could never fit into mainstream Western culture."
i hope my reason and logic manage to surface in this comment edstock. in summation, i think you use the canards of multicultural failure and the evils of political correctness as a tissue of cpover for what, to my eye, appears to be simple bigotry. hence my rant.
PSA, what the fuck is your problem? I mention Honor Killings and you get your ad hominem, hard-of-thinking politically correct-panties in a wedgie. (Insert priggishly aloof and condescending dodge here). lol.
who the hell is smartpatrol?
I know I'm late to the party here, but Edstock's idiocy is why I don't read TGB any more. I followed a link to one of Boris's posts today, and for the first time in weeks I scanned the front page posts. Looks like I'm not coming back to TGB any time soon.
I'm 100% in agreement with you, PSA. Edstock's posts are a racist blight on this otherwise great blog.
Post a Comment