Give Me a Urinal or Give Me Death!

[Shatterface]

No comment ...

No thanks, I'll stick with the original.

http://www.indiewire.com/wp-content/upl ... .jpg?w=780

[#32 Rat]

White Feminism. Melby's tweet is a dog whistle for white supremacy. The principle of charity is a colonial social construct that privileges white experiences over that of POC.

[Kirbmarc]

Also I've never heard Trump say anything on crime other than the usual Republican pap (tough on crime, a militarized police and a private-run prison system are A-OK, the War on Drugs works, the usual)

Just the other day he called Pres. Duterte Harry and congratulated him on the good work he's doing on the war on drugs (sending cops out to carry out thousands of extra judicial killings) and has praised Putin for being a strong leader. It doesn't make him a fascist, just a fan of fascists.

Fan of people who use authoritarian measures? Absolutely. Fan of fascism as an ideology? Neither Duterte nor Putin are ideologues. They're just tyrants. Authoritarians, not totalitarians. Closer to Pinochet, Mobutu, Suharto, Gaddafi or Assad than to Mussolini or Hitler. They're in favor of everything that's popular with the "common man": religion, safe streets, no LGBT or other "weird" people around, traditions, the "quiet life" with no "troublemakers", etc.

They use every method to create easy and popular solutions, regardless of the cost in human rights or human lives. They aren't interested in a Bright New Future with the Ubermenschen or the New Fascist Men, they're interested in not being criticized while they stay in power and reward their cronies. They kiss crosses and crack skulls, all in the name of the "good old ways". They're authoritarian conservatives, not revolutionaries in the name of the Racial or Imperial Utopia.

Of course if you call all authoritarians who are pro-religion and pro-conservatism "fascists", regardless of their ideology or lack thereof, then yes, he's a fan of fascists. Again, so was Berlusconi, who was a personal friend of Putin's and of Gaddafi's. Pretty despicable, but hey, the US have been propping up authoritarian conservative/fascist regimes in South America and elsewhere for decades. Reagan was a big fan of Pinochet back in the day, and so was the Catholic Church, and Pinochet wasn't much better than Putin or Duterte.

[Tigzy]

Fuck all on Pharyngula about the Manchester killings. You'd think the murder of so many young girls would have got his Peez's siren blaring, but...apparently not. In fact, Yemmi seems to have been the only FTBer to have made a post about it.

Can't imagine how such an atrocity passed under FTBs radar. That said, I would rather Peez and his kind opted for silence over the likely dumbassery they spew whenever the Religion of Brown People is involved.

[Kirbmarc]

Hell, Putin or Duterte aren't worse than Saudi Arabia, and the US have been pals with the Saudis since the Fifties.

American presidents talk big about defending democracy and human rights, but in practice they defend their interests and allies, just like everyone else does. If their allies are democracies it's fine for them, but when they're bloodthirsty dictators (South Vietnam, half of South and Central America during the Cold Car, most of US-friendly Africa, etc.) they're fine too, as long they're willing to help America fight their rivals and to further American interests.

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

Fuck all on Pharyngula about the Manchester killings. You'd think the murder of so many young girls would have got his Peez's siren blaring, but...apparently not. In fact, Yemmi seems to have been the only FTBer to have made a post about it.

Can't imagine how such an atrocity passed under FTBs radar. That said, I would rather Peez and his kind opted for silence over the likely dumbassery they spew whenever the Religion of Brown People is involved.

I really like their dumbassery. It is both funny and helps serve as a warning as to what happens when you drink deeply of the regressive Kool-Aid. I think the only reason PZ exists anymore is to provide a bit of amusement for us and an easy target for Coyne and Nugent.

[shoutinghorse]

How's Fred West to work with?

Murder.

Thing with Fred was he just kept digging

[free thoughtpolice]

From the source of all lies:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism,[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce

Sounds like Putin, Pinochet, Assad, the Saudis and others although I suppose one should call them neo-fascists. I'm not sure how far Duterte Harry has gone to control industry and commerce, so he may just qualify as a violent authoritarian thug. Give him time though.

[Kirbmarc]

From the source of all lies:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism,[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce

Sounds like Putin, Pinochet, Assad, the Saudis and others although I suppose one should call them neo-fascists. I'm not sure how far Duterte Harry has gone to control industry and commerce, so he may just qualify as a violent authoritarian thug. Give him time though.

If that's all it takes, then yes, they're fascists. Don't know about Duterte, either. However when I was in school I was told that fascism requires an ideology which aims to change human nature towards an ideal of perfection (the Ubermensch, the New Fascist Man of Mussolini) which values strength, aggressiveness, ruthless social competition, respect for traditions, loyalty and a collectivist mindset where the collective is the ethnos, as opposed to the Marxist ideal of Perfection (the New Socialist Man) which values self-sacrifice, destruction of individuality, disdain of tradition in favor of progress, internationalism (at least in theory), removal of differences, and a collectivist mindset where the collective is the workers.

My school lied. :bjarte:

[Suet Cardigan]

Russian Deadpool has now been charged with first-degree murder:

http://www.nbc11news.com/content/news/424071683.html

[Kirbmarc]

From the source of all lies:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism,[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce

Sounds like Putin, Pinochet, Assad, the Saudis and others although I suppose one should call them neo-fascists. I'm not sure how far Duterte Harry has gone to control industry and commerce, so he may just qualify as a violent authoritarian thug. Give him time though.

This definition of fascism is so vague that Stalin or Kim Jong Un might also be classified as fascists: authoritarians: check, nationalists: check, dictatorial power: check, suppression of opposition: check, control of industry and commerce: check, it's all there.

[MarcusAu]

Yes it's probably a mistake to stick everyone together in that category.

[Kirbmarc]

Yes it's probably a mistake to stick everyone together in that category.

Don't get me wrong, it's not like they don't have a lot in common, they do, but I don't know, I think political terms should be more precisely defined. Especially since some people love to use "fascist" or "socialist/communist" as meaning "anything I don't like". I've read of people talking about "fascist beauty standards" and arguing that ID cards are "communism".

[jet_lagg]

If that's all it takes, then yes, they're fascists. Don't know about Duterte, either. However when I was in school I was told that fascism requires an ideology which aims to change human nature towards an ideal of perfection (the Ubermensch, the New Fascist Man of Mussolini) which values strength, aggressiveness, ruthless social competition, respect for traditions, loyalty and a collectivist mindset where the collective is the ethnos, as opposed to the Marxist ideal of Perfection (the New Socialist Man) which values self-sacrifice, destruction of individuality, disdain of tradition in favor of progress, internationalism (at least in theory), removal of differences, and a collectivist mindset where the collective is the workers.

My school lied. :bjarte:

So, many words. Just tell me if I'm allowed to throw communists out of helicopters or not.

[Kirbmarc]

Anyway both fascism and communism have something in common: the denial of individuality and of individual rights, in favor of collectivism.

[Guest_440911e7]

re the media map, heatst these days, sans Louise Mensch, actually seems pretty good. Media consisting mostly of bloggers re-reporting what others have written about, but factually accurate, and often digging down and linking to the prime sources which other media won't or is too lazy to do.

I am hopeful they will do well.

[Kirbmarc]

If that's all it takes, then yes, they're fascists. Don't know about Duterte, either. However when I was in school I was told that fascism requires an ideology which aims to change human nature towards an ideal of perfection (the Ubermensch, the New Fascist Man of Mussolini) which values strength, aggressiveness, ruthless social competition, respect for traditions, loyalty and a collectivist mindset where the collective is the ethnos, as opposed to the Marxist ideal of Perfection (the New Socialist Man) which values self-sacrifice, destruction of individuality, disdain of tradition in favor of progress, internationalism (at least in theory), removal of differences, and a collectivist mindset where the collective is the workers.

My school lied. :bjarte:

So, many words. Just tell me if I'm allowed to throw communists out of helicopters or not.

Ask Ronald Reagan or John Paul II, they were OK with that as long as you didn't kick up too much of a fuss.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Russian Deadpool has now been charged with first-degree murder:

http://www.nbc11news.com/content/news/424071683.html

Kolpakov was arrested shortly after the shooting. He remains in jail on a $500,000 cash bond.

Someday, someone will really have to explain to me what's the point of a cash bond on such cases.

[MarcusAu]

Yes it's probably a mistake to stick everyone together in that category.

Don't get me wrong, it's not like they don't have a lot in common, they do, but I don't know, I think political terms should be more precisely defined. Especially since some people love to use "fascist" or "socialist/communist" as meaning "anything I don't like". I've read of people talking about "fascist beauty standards" and arguing that ID cards are "communism".

Right, we agree they should not all be bundled together.

[free thoughtpolice]

This definition of fascism is so vague that Stalin or Kim Jong Un might also be classified as fascists: authoritarians: check, nationalists: check, dictatorial power: check, suppression of opposition: check, control of industry and commerce: check, it's all there.

I suppose that the extreme right wing thing should be in there to differentiate. The communist types do have a lot in common with the fascists though and the more extreme they are the more they tend to resemble each other.

as opposed to the Marxist ideal of Perfection (the New Socialist Man) which values self-sacrifice, destruction of individuality, disdain of tradition in favor of progress, internationalism (at least in theory), removal of differences, and a collectivist mindset where the collective is the workers.

The communists have not always fit in with the strict definition of them either.

[DrokkIt]

No comment ...

I changed my mind. I do have a comment. I suspect something is wrong with her and I am not talking about her huge feet either.

What is it about Harold Shipman that women find so enticing?

[piginthecity]

IRA:
* Believes they are a legitimate belligerent entity engaged in armed resistance against an illegitimate military occupation;
* Ideology is secular, based on the false belief that the 1921 Peace Treaty was invalid;
* Goal is political, specific, with a one-time permanent resolution;
* Strategy & tactics intended to pressure opponent toward a political, negotiated solution.

ISIS
* Believe they are the anointed warrior of Allah engaged in a holy war against all infidels;
* Ideology is theological, ideological, cultural, political;
* Goal is all of the above, all-encompassing, perpetual;
* Strategy & tactics intended to gradually conquer the entire world; infidels to be wantonly killed or taken as sex slaves, heathen art & architecture to be destroyed in the process.


I'm not going to belabor the profound differences in target selection or collateral damage.

Well OK, Matt - I'm not going to call you an 'idiot' for making the comparison between the two. Your post is quite right for an entry-level overview for those new to the story and there certainly are some differences between the two organisations, and between the two ideologies or religions which underpin them.

Going more into the substance, though, we can look at through a 'Sam Harris' style lens of the relationship between beliefs which an individual holds and the ways in which those beliefs may manifest in violent behaviour. It's not always enough to simply look at the stated, or ostensible, aims of an organisation or group and assume that it maps perfectly on to the minds of all whose minds are in the grip of the group's ideology.

It seems to be true that a subset of our species are capable - even willing - to see other people's children reduced to an unrecognisable bloody pulp for the sake of "The Cause" and a larger subset are able to verbally tap dance around and justify it with varying degrees of sophistication and weaseality. There are a variety of different ways an ideology or organisation can operate to exploit this.

Also, of course, any organisation has to please its financial backers, and the methodology of the IRA had to be acceptable to the Americans who funded it, as ISIS has to be attractive to its Sunni backers.

In the case of the IRA, there is a strong 'Death-Cult' feel about it, especially as regards its apologists online. The 'political' veneer seldom lasts very long. The green book is all about "The Struggle" subsuming the individual and emphasising obedience to the hierarchy above all. Other data points are the fact that the IRA has turned its violence inwards towards policing the 'catholic' community, using a 'purity' type argument of racial and cultural exceptionalism and the fact that the bodies which the IRA won't return to the families are the catholic ones, as the punishment for these apostates is one of exclusion which is to continue into the hereafter.

Another very important aspect of this, which is much overlooked, is that the violence has to be perpetuated in order to justify the previous violence. A sort of moral version of the sunk-cost fallacy.

While I'm on the subject of weasel words, I don't really buy that you can just mention 'collateral damage' and then bale out. That's beneath you, Matt. You're better than that. I will have to 'belabor' the point for you, as you haven't the time. It needs belaboring. Belaboring will by my pleasure. Two particular examples that pop into my head for belaboring are the Warrington and the Eniskillen bombs. You are on very shaky ethical ground, to say the least, if you use your 'collateral damage' and 'target selection' forms of words to describe the people killed and maimed in these events. Somebody listening would be right to infer an ethical judgement you are making, consciously or not, about the value you place on these civilian lives and well-being. Not to your credit.

I wonder if in twenty years time apologists will say that any mention of the recent Manchester victims is 'Belaboring'. I think we know the answer.

[Spike13]

Russian Deadpool has now been charged with first-degree murder:

http://www.nbc11news.com/content/news/424071683.html

Kolpakov was arrested shortly after the shooting. He remains in jail on a $500,000 cash bond.

Someday, someone will really have to explain to me what's the point of a cash bond on such cases.

The cash bond ensures that you show up for your court date. If you run ( or don't show up) you forfeit the bond. the bond is usually supplied by a bail bond company. You or a family member will sign over something of great value like a house or all your assets to the bond company, if you skip they get the collateral.

In a case like this RD probably doesn't have anything that he can use to secure a bond. ( if his parents are in the US. They might be able to secure the bond for him.

[free thoughtpolice]

Russian Deadpool has now been charged with first-degree murder:

http://www.nbc11news.com/content/news/424071683.html

Kolpakov was arrested shortly after the shooting. He remains in jail on a $500,000 cash bond.

Someday, someone will really have to explain to me what's the point of a cash bond on such cases.

I think that he only needs to raise 10% of that and find a bail bondsman supplies the rest. Presumably a parent or friend takes out a second mortgage. If he he absconds and doesn't live up to bail rules the parent or friend loses the 50 grand, and the bail bondsman sends out this guy to catch him so he doesn't lose the 450.
[youtube][/youtube]

[free thoughtpolice]

:nin:

[Kirbmarc]

This definition of fascism is so vague that Stalin or Kim Jong Un might also be classified as fascists: authoritarians: check, nationalists: check, dictatorial power: check, suppression of opposition: check, control of industry and commerce: check, it's all there.

I suppose that the extreme right wing thing should be in there to differentiate. The communist types do have a lot in common with the fascists though and the more extreme they are the more they tend to resemble each other.

as opposed to the Marxist ideal of Perfection (the New Socialist Man) which values self-sacrifice, destruction of individuality, disdain of tradition in favor of progress, internationalism (at least in theory), removal of differences, and a collectivist mindset where the collective is the workers.

The communists have not always fit in with the strict definition of them either.

All very true. Still, at least in their rhetoric, commies tend to rave about an utopia of equality and progress, while fascists value strength and natural inequality, with some destined to lead while others are destined to follow, even with the ethnos. Fascists are often Social Darwinists.

Average conservative authoritarian cunts tend to simply say that their job is to restore law and order after chaos, and don't really care about utopian dreams, only about a conservative project through authoritarian means. They're fine with religious charities if their members aren't troublemakers, for example, and see no point in trying out Social Darwinism just to create a New Man.

The difference is that a communist dictator will shoot you for being a greedy, selfish hoarder who's not sharing enough with the State and a fascist dictator will shoot you for being weak verminous scum who's dragging down society, while a garden-variety tyrant will shoot you for being a troublemaker who's fostering chaos. Theocracies tend to be closer to the conservative variety of dictatorships: they don't want change, they despise change actually, even competitive, strength-based change. It's all about keeping everything orderly.

[Spike13]

:nin:

I forgot to mention about the hirsute pursuit of you skip the bond.

[CommanderTuvok]

re the media map, heatst these days, sans Louise Mensch, actually seems pretty good. Media consisting mostly of bloggers re-reporting what others have written about, but factually accurate, and often digging down and linking to the prime sources which other media won't or is too lazy to do.

I am hopeful they will do well.

Shame what happened to Mensch. She got a lot of admiration from me for her work on exposing the liars pushing the fake narrative around Tim Hunt, but fucking hell, she's gone nuts over the Russians.

[CommanderTuvok]

Re: Eric Clanton.

I hope he realises that bike locks are hard to come by in prison, but a sock with a heavy object in it......well....he'd better be watching his back. And his backside of course, being a prison, and all.

[Oglebart]

So it is being reported that Jeremy Corbyn is going to give a speech tomorrow at a campaign event that will suggest that the rise in terrorism is in large part due to the foreign policy of the UK, the old "we helped create them " schtick.

This should be interesting so soon after Manchester, I don't think people are in the mood for the North London Labour set apologetics wankery right now, and it could finish them off. Watch this space.

[Kirbmarc]

So it is being reported that Jeremy Corbyn is going to give a speech tomorrow at a campaign event that will suggest that the rise in terrorism is in large part due to the foreign policy of the UK, the old "we helped create them " schtick.

This should be interesting so soon after Manchester, I don't think people are in the mood for the North London Labour set apologetics wankery right now, and it could finish them off. Watch this space.

Does Corbyn want to lose? Because leaving aside all ideology now it's really not the time for that kind of rhetoric. If by "foreign policy of the UK" he means supporting Saudi Arabia then he's not too wrong, but something tells me that's not what he means.

[Oglebart]

No comment ...

I changed my mind. I do have a comment. I suspect something is wrong with her and I am not talking about her huge feet either.

What is it about Harold Shipman that women find so enticing?

Unlimited Valium perhaps?

[Easy J]

Anyone who compares the PIRA Britan campaign to Islamic Militant attacks, is an idiot.

IRA: more SJW style Victimhood narrative.
Jihadis: more God (slightly)
Sense of entitlement to take human life: same.

IRA:
* Believes they are a legitimate belligerent entity engaged in armed resistance against an illegitimate military occupation;
* Ideology is secular, based on the false belief that the 1921 Peace Treaty was invalid;
* Goal is political, specific, with a one-time permanent resolution;
* Strategy & tactics intended to pressure opponent toward a political, negotiated solution.

ISIS
* Believe they are the anointed warrior of Allah engaged in a holy war against all infidels;
* Ideology is theological, ideological, cultural, political;
* Goal is all of the above, all-encompassing, perpetual;
* Strategy & tactics intended to gradually conquer the entire world; infidels to be wantonly killed or taken as sex slaves, heathen art & architecture to be destroyed in the process.


I'm not going to belabor the profound differences in target selection or collateral damage.

I started a post a few days ago but my attention span expired before I posted. Something along the lines of "Remember the good old days when terrorists posed as embattled freedom fighters & pushed a plausible victim narrative?" Even al Qaeda had a "get off my land" message. There was a nod to a guilty conscience about their violence that needed rationalizing.

Isis doesn't do much of a hearts-&-minds campaign outside of the people they target for recruitment. Their message seems to be "Die infidel!!! See how evil we are?!!". It fucks with my default rational actor worldview.

[deLurch]

Who else wants to be in on Team Emma.

(Not me)

[Oglebart]

So it is being reported that Jeremy Corbyn is going to give a speech tomorrow at a campaign event that will suggest that the rise in terrorism is in large part due to the foreign policy of the UK, the old "we helped create them " schtick.

This should be interesting so soon after Manchester, I don't think people are in the mood for the North London Labour set apologetics wankery right now, and it could finish them off. Watch this space.

Does Corbyn want to lose? Because leaving aside all ideology now it's really not the time for that kind of rhetoric. If by "foreign policy of the UK" he means supporting Saudi Arabia then he's not too wrong, but something tells me that's not what he means.

Well, that would be a surprise! But, no, I'm sure that's not his angle.

[Kirbmarc]

Who else wants to be in on Team Emma.

(Not me)

She's getting famous for doing what she likes (bondage). Female privilege: no one would line up to see a man wanking. :lol:

[deLurch]

Sounds like she is a bit worn out.

I can understand with her subscriber count number, and the attention she received, and the sheer volume of people who wanted to "convert" her that it would be way too much all at once.

You would think she would know how to manage and moderate mass numbers of "fan" messages by now, but I guess if you throw in a perspective shift it is too much for her.

[deLurch]

She's getting famous for doing what she likes (bondage). Female privilege: no one would line up to see a man wanking. :lol:

NSFW (but not exactly wanking)

[Easy J]

Re: Eric Clanton.

I hope he realises that bike locks are hard to come by in prison, but a sock with a heavy object in it......well....he'd better be watching his back. And his backside of course, being a prison, and all.

They still have padlocks with a plastic body. They don't have any thump when swung in a sock but you can still grip them with the metal ring over a knuckle & ping someone pretty good with them. Given his granola-hippy physique & solid middle class breeding, I'm sure he'll be having his privilege (& reality) checked soon enough.

[Guest_440911e7]

Yes, by being

+ an attention whore
+ financially or emotionally rewarded for playing the victim

So yes, all of that is a huge win.

She's been a student at the Whitney, this piece seems critical of the Whitney without giving any context as to why. Is the Whitney oppressive or part of patriarchy just by being a major art institute? Does the Whitney agree, or is this another of her false rape accusations?

Who put her in high heels? She, the Whitney or "Master Avery"?
Who put her in a thong and bikini? She, the Whitney or Master Avery? And why isn't she nude?

Master Avery asks if anyone wants to join in, and Emma is shocked someone does. But isn't her whole point of view about how rotten society is and how everyone is raping her and all other women and artists? Why should anyone be shocked someone slaps her at a performance piece where she is being bound and berated? Isn't that exactly what she would have predicted if her thesis was correct?

Perhaps the Whitney or Master Avery should've stepped in to stop that abuse, you know, in a patriarchal condescending, white knighting fashion. Maybe she should've used her words and said, hey, no, that's not what this piece is about, it's about me!

[CommanderTuvok]

The Graun has an article on that crazy case about the Neo Nazi turned Muslim who murdered who other Neo Nazis.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... pside-down

I also noticed it had a lot of people confused, as the regressive left AND the far right tried to push their narrative based on the event.

[Service Dog]

Tropes Against Women In Feminist Art

[Matt Cavanaugh]

IRA:
* Believes they are a legitimate belligerent entity engaged in armed resistance against an illegitimate military occupation;
* Ideology is secular, based on the false belief that the 1921 Peace Treaty was invalid;
* Goal is political, specific, with a one-time permanent resolution;
* Strategy & tactics intended to pressure opponent toward a political, negotiated solution.

ISIS
* Believe they are the anointed warrior of Allah engaged in a holy war against all infidels;
* Ideology is theological, ideological, cultural, political;
* Goal is all of the above, all-encompassing, perpetual;
* Strategy & tactics intended to gradually conquer the entire world; infidels to be wantonly killed or taken as sex slaves, heathen art & architecture to be destroyed in the process.


I'm not going to belabor the profound differences in target selection or collateral damage.

Well OK, Matt - I'm not going to call you an 'idiot' for making the comparison between the two. Your post is quite right for an entry-level overview for those new to the story and there certainly are some differences between the two organisations, and between the two ideologies or religions which underpin them.

Going more into the substance, though, we can look at through a 'Sam Harris' style lens of the relationship between beliefs which an individual holds and the ways in which those beliefs may manifest in violent behaviour. It's not always enough to simply look at the stated, or ostensible, aims of an organisation or group and assume that it maps perfectly on to the minds of all whose minds are in the grip of the group's ideology.

It seems to be true that a subset of our species are capable - even willing - to see other people's children reduced to an unrecognisable bloody pulp for the sake of "The Cause" and a larger subset are able to verbally tap dance around and justify it with varying degrees of sophistication and weaseality. There are a variety of different ways an ideology or organisation can operate to exploit this.

Also, of course, any organisation has to please its financial backers, and the methodology of the IRA had to be acceptable to the Americans who funded it, as ISIS has to be attractive to its Sunni backers.

In the case of the IRA, there is a strong 'Death-Cult' feel about it, especially as regards its apologists online. The 'political' veneer seldom lasts very long. The green book is all about "The Struggle" subsuming the individual and emphasising obedience to the hierarchy above all. Other data points are the fact that the IRA has turned its violence inwards towards policing the 'catholic' community, using a 'purity' type argument of racial and cultural exceptionalism and the fact that the bodies which the IRA won't return to the families are the catholic ones, as the punishment for these apostates is one of exclusion which is to continue into the hereafter.

Another very important aspect of this, which is much overlooked, is that the violence has to be perpetuated in order to justify the previous violence. A sort of moral version of the sunk-cost fallacy.

While I'm on the subject of weasel words, I don't really buy that you can just mention 'collateral damage' and then bale out. That's beneath you, Matt. You're better than that. I will have to 'belabor' the point for you, as you haven't the time. It needs belaboring. Belaboring will by my pleasure. Two particular examples that pop into my head for belaboring are the Warrington and the Eniskillen bombs. You are on very shaky ethical ground, to say the least, if you use your 'collateral damage' and 'target selection' forms of words to describe the people killed and maimed in these events. Somebody listening would be right to infer an ethical judgement you are making, consciously or not, about the value you place on these civilian lives and well-being. Not to your credit.

I wonder if in twenty years time apologists will say that any mention of the recent Manchester victims is 'Belaboring'. I think we know the answer.

You're telling me the IRA was bad. That's not disputed. The regressive left is saying the IRA was just as bad as ISIS. To refute that, I don't need to claim that every IRA attack was squeaky clean, only that it on occasion showed restraint, then point to utter lack of similar constraint by the jihadis.

I also highlight the import difference in ideals and goals, and to a certain extent, mindset. As I noted, the IRA's justification is based on the false claim that the 1921 treaty was illegitimate. But were that true, then under international law, the IRA would likely deserve belligerent status, and the 'occupation' be just that. Now, belligerent status notwithstanding, the intentional targeting of civilians is a war crime. Anyone who does so is a monster. When the UK formally apologizes for Croke Park and for the four years it made killing as many civilians as possible a strategic war aim, then its j'accuse might not seem so hypocritical.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

I think it's funny how Emma Sulkowicz is half jewish & half asian, and she has one jewish buttock and one asian one.

[Suet Cardigan]

Can i nominate Lily Allen for this year's Cunties?

[Shatterface]

Been watching NCIS: Los Angeles, which is a bit of a guilty pleasure. Formulaic but generally good natured and passes 40 mins pleasurably enough.

One of the actors was Miguel Ferrer from RoboCop and Twin Peaks who died of throat cancer in February this year.

He seems to have worked right up to the very end. He was visibly - and audibly very ill so they made a brave decision and wrote that he was dying into the script.

Playing a dying man when he could barely speak and performing his final scenes in a hospital bed: Christ, that took some balls.

So I thought I'd post this link to Ferrer singing the song that closed the episode dedicated to him as a tribute to a man who seems to represent the very opposite of the pampered safe-space trigger-warning set and just got the hell on with life.

[youtube][/youtube]

[deLurch]

Can i nominate Lily Allen for this year's Cunties?

I already started the thread so we can keep track as we go along.

[Bhurzum]

I think it's funny how Emma Sulkowicz is half jewish & half asian, and she has one jewish buttock and one asian one.

In the interests of maintaining SJW identity purity, I'd like to volunteer for the job of separating her butt-cheeks.

http://leereamsnyder.com/images/uploads/rr-allure.gif

[Shatterface]

I'm not sure who's comeback is the bigger surprise, Sulkowicz or her new assistant:

https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/med ... 1713-1.jpg

Can you see what it is yet?

[screwtape]

I think it's funny how Emma Sulkowicz is half jewish & half asian, and she has one jewish buttock and one asian one.

I daresay many of us would be willing to, er, split the difference.

[Bhurzum]

I think it's funny how Emma Sulkowicz is half jewish & half asian, and she has one jewish buttock and one asian one.

I daresay many of us would be willing to, er, split the difference.

http://i48.tinypic.com/2eyau05.jpg

[Guest_84d94f98]

In the interests of maintaining SJW identity purity, I'd like to volunteer for the job of separating her butt-cheeks.

You have been beat to the punch by both the former fuckbuddy she explictly and repeatedly asked to do that for her, and whom she later accused of rape.

And then videorecorded as an art piece by another "friend" and shown all across the internet.

Do you really think it is worth it even if she requests?

Yours Nutritiously,
-Soylent

[Suet Cardigan]

Who else wants to be in on Team Emma.

(Not me)

I've just read the article.

It appears that gender really is fluid: a man can be a dominatrix:

As the performance started, this man in a suit, named Master Avery, started to berate Sulkowicz.

Weeks before, she had disclosed to me that Master Avery was her close friend and a trained professional dominatrix.

:doh:

[Bhurzum]

Do you really think it is worth it even if she requests?

I'd only do it if she didn't request it.

Consent is such a turn off...

[Za-zen]

IRA:
* Believes they are a legitimate belligerent entity engaged in armed resistance against an illegitimate military occupation;
* Ideology is secular, based on the false belief that the 1921 Peace Treaty was invalid;
* Goal is political, specific, with a one-time permanent resolution;
* Strategy & tactics intended to pressure opponent toward a political, negotiated solution.

ISIS
* Believe they are the anointed warrior of Allah engaged in a holy war against all infidels;
* Ideology is theological, ideological, cultural, political;
* Goal is all of the above, all-encompassing, perpetual;
* Strategy & tactics intended to gradually conquer the entire world; infidels to be wantonly killed or taken as sex slaves, heathen art & architecture to be destroyed in the process.


I'm not going to belabor the profound differences in target selection or collateral damage.

Well OK, Matt - I'm not going to call you an 'idiot' for making the comparison between the two. Your post is quite right for an entry-level overview for those new to the story and there certainly are some differences between the two organisations, and between the two ideologies or religions which underpin them.

Going more into the substance, though, we can look at through a 'Sam Harris' style lens of the relationship between beliefs which an individual holds and the ways in which those beliefs may manifest in violent behaviour. It's not always enough to simply look at the stated, or ostensible, aims of an organisation or group and assume that it maps perfectly on to the minds of all whose minds are in the grip of the group's ideology.

It seems to be true that a subset of our species are capable - even willing - to see other people's children reduced to an unrecognisable bloody pulp for the sake of "The Cause" and a larger subset are able to verbally tap dance around and justify it with varying degrees of sophistication and weaseality. There are a variety of different ways an ideology or organisation can operate to exploit this.

Also, of course, any organisation has to please its financial backers, and the methodology of the IRA had to be acceptable to the Americans who funded it, as ISIS has to be attractive to its Sunni backers.

In the case of the IRA, there is a strong 'Death-Cult' feel about it, especially as regards its apologists online. The 'political' veneer seldom lasts very long. The green book is all about "The Struggle" subsuming the individual and emphasising obedience to the hierarchy above all. Other data points are the fact that the IRA has turned its violence inwards towards policing the 'catholic' community, using a 'purity' type argument of racial and cultural exceptionalism and the fact that the bodies which the IRA won't return to the families are the catholic ones, as the punishment for these apostates is one of exclusion which is to continue into the hereafter.

Another very important aspect of this, which is much overlooked, is that the violence has to be perpetuated in order to justify the previous violence. A sort of moral version of the sunk-cost fallacy.

While I'm on the subject of weasel words, I don't really buy that you can just mention 'collateral damage' and then bale out. That's beneath you, Matt. You're better than that. I will have to 'belabor' the point for you, as you haven't the time. It needs belaboring. Belaboring will by my pleasure. Two particular examples that pop into my head for belaboring are the Warrington and the Eniskillen bombs. You are on very shaky ethical ground, to say the least, if you use your 'collateral damage' and 'target selection' forms of words to describe the people killed and maimed in these events. Somebody listening would be right to infer an ethical judgement you are making, consciously or not, about the value you place on these civilian lives and well-being. Not to your credit.

I wonder if in twenty years time apologists will say that any mention of the recent Manchester victims is 'Belaboring'. I think we know the answer.

What a lot of tripe, calling matt's very brief outline of the actual point "entry level" understanding whilst displaying an absolute ignorance of the reality, sent Flags a flying to me that this is satire!

In my opinion, it would be far more apt to compare ISIS to the British state and it's murderous bunch of militants that it dispatches off to the various corners of the globe to murder inocents by the bushel. I wonder if you are part of the subset of the species that can justify seeing other people's children reduced to an unrecognisable bloody pulp, when the cause is justifiable! Justifiable i say! Because i say it is Justified!

[Bhurzum]

In my opinion, it would be far more apt to compare ISIS to the British state and it's murderous bunch of militants that it dispatches off to the various corners of the globe to murder inocents by the bushel.

I've got medals for murdering innocents by the bushel.

Right shiny they are too ;)

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

Sounds like she is a bit worn out.

I can understand with her subscriber count number, and the attention she received, and the sheer volume of people who wanted to "convert" her that it would be way too much all at once.

You would think she would know how to manage and moderate mass numbers of "fan" messages by now, but I guess if you throw in a perspective shift it is too much for her.

Where did she land on the whole issue, for those of us too lazy traumatized to look?

[CommanderTuvok]

Dislike Antifa? SJWs? Bike lock wielding maniacs?

Then this is pure porn.

[youtube][/youtube]

[Spike13]

Do you really think it is worth it even if she requests?

I'd only do it if she didn't request it.

Consent is such a turn off...

The best safety word is "Harder!"

[Karmakin]

Sounds like she is a bit worn out.

I can understand with her subscriber count number, and the attention she received, and the sheer volume of people who wanted to "convert" her that it would be way too much all at once.

You would think she would know how to manage and moderate mass numbers of "fan" messages by now, but I guess if you throw in a perspective shift it is too much for her.

Where did she land on the whole issue, for those of us too lazy traumatized to look?

Considering the tone of the tweet, I certainly doubt she's reconsidered if it's useful to talk/discuss/socialize with anti-SJW types. Probably more the opposite, the way people went after her made that decision more correct.