1
   

Never forget. Some need a reminder. Powerful video clip

 
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:06 pm
a-HA!
0 Replies
 
willow tl
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:08 pm
Lash wrote:
Well, Willow, I know some of us just want to plant our opinions and be done with it. You certainly have that right.

I was just really surprised at the reaction...the overwhelmingly negative and threatening posts that directly followed Xena's clip. Sometimes, we like to understand others' reactions--and I was trying to.

But, for sure, don't feel as if I'm trying to compel you specifically to respond. Its just a puzzling phenomena to me.


i went back over my posts and the other first 2 pages of the post...and my feelings still stand...there was nothing threatening ...but verbal fights just keep going on and on...and sometimes when a rabid dog is attacking you you beat them off with a stick..when "stay" heel" "lay down fido" just don't cut it anymore..i'm not quite sure what you mean by "Be done with it"...but am willing to dialogue with you...and maybe i just let my feelings out more than others...and some are not comfortable with feelings...especially angry ones...but if you really want to know more why i feel this way you only have to ask..
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:09 pm
Einherjar wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
I was mostly just playing with the Bear there, Einherjar. There's nothing invalid in my posts, but there's no need to take them so seriously.
Sorry, won't happen again.
Quote:
I was just having a little fun with the hypocrisy. :wink:

I fail to see any hypocrisy.

Oh, sorry about that, was taking you seriously again. Embarrassed

You'll get your turn. But this is the wrong discussion on the wrong thread at the wrong time. I need a break from Iraq. I bet Ican would be happy to accommodate you though. Idea
0 Replies
 
bashtoreth
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:09 pm
Acquiunk wrote:
Remember the 5 minute hate in the novel 1984. That clip reminded me of that.


It's pretty sad that I don't remember it. Looks like I have a book to reread.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:11 pm
Hmm - I have not reacted to this clip re Bush - I have reacted because of my extreme disquiet about the elements I have already mentioned.
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:19 pm
The absurd notion that this isn't a cheap appeal to pity argument (see Argumentum ad misericordiam) with political motivation is belied by the fact that the author states said motivation explicitly.

The author states the reason for "Blood of Heroes" and exposes a political motivation that many here suspected and that others tried to imagine was not there.

Here are some relevant excerpts from the author's politically motivated rant.

Quote:
Why is the "Blood of Heroes" web site here?

In October of 2002, after hearing all the nay-sayers whining about going to war to fight against terrorism, (and to protect our interests and defend our allies) I wondered; how exactly do we defend and maintain our freedom then? If not by the violent destruction of those who would threaten us, then by what means? There comes a time when even peace loving people have to fight.

With all the invective about "blood for oil", we are not only justified in going to war - we were obligated to do it - and to do it in every place on this earth that ever poses a threat to the American way of life. It isn't blood for oil. It's blood for freedom - the blood of our heroes. We owe it to them... and we owe it to our children. Period.

If you are not willing to do everything in your power to defend this Great Nation, even taking up arms if it is necessary, then who will? If you will not defend America, that is your choice - but sit in silence and do not criticize those brave and valiant individuals who have the sense of duty, the measure of courage and the determination of heart to protect America... and, I might add, your cowardly soul.

I hope you will take a few moments to reflect on what we have and who paid for it. Look up and thank God that you live free in a nation that is blessed by Him and defended by heroes.

Romans 5:8,9

May God continue to bless America and all who defend her.

Fly the flag.


Through phrases like "blood for oil" it is clear that the author is not only using the emotional appeal in a call to general militarism but specifically making a case for the war in Iraq.

These arguments are idiotic, and I feel the same way about them as I do when I criticized liberal and conservative debate by way of gore about Iraq.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:28 pm
Willow--

I was primarily curious about the responses before Xena posted that long "letter". The ones that initially reacted so negatively before mention of Bush.

It seemd they perceived the clip so much more negatively than I did.

What about the clip did you find so offensive, and moreso, why did you (if you did) immediately connect it to propaganda? As I asked before, I'm interested to know what your perception would be if Clinton had been President during the attack.

Thank you for entertaining my questions.
0 Replies
 
bashtoreth
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:34 pm
Craven de Kere wrote:
The absurd notion that this isn't a cheap appeal to pity argument (see Argumentum ad misericordiam) with political motivation is belied by the fact that the author states said motivation explicitly.


I fail to see the "appeal to pity" connection here. The author states that we "owe" it to the "heroes" who died, and to our children. This is not an appeal to pity. Who pities heroes? If the author had said that we should go to war in Iraq because of the suffering widows and mothers... now THAT is an appeal to pity.
0 Replies
 
bashtoreth
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:37 pm
Quote:
Through phrases like "blood for oil" it is clear that the author is not only using the emotional appeal


Also--"appeal to pity" does not equal "appeal to emotion"
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 07:41 pm
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
dlowan wrote:
Oh god! Not that thing again.

I do remember, and I find that drivel an absolute insult both to me and to the people who died.


I find this reaction puzzling.

In what way is the message stupid or senseless?

Why do you feel insulted by it, and more importantly why do you think it insults the people who died?


I feel insulted, Finn, because I find it devastatingly irking that the likes of the people who made that thing, and, it seems, Xena, think that unless one is baying for revenge and supporting the war in Iraq then one is a stupid, unfeeling ostrich.

I watched those awful events, as so many did, and I actually still cannot think of it without becoming tearful. I very much want to return to New York ( a city I love) to spend some time thinking of those people where so many of them died.

At the same time, I was thinking of all the other victims of terror in the world - including those who were victims of American and other western nations sponsored terror, and a part of me was torn, because I knew that THESE (9/11) victims would have a status and importance denied to so many others, who also died horrifically far from the media spotlight - and from our thoughts or regard, here in our rich countries.

The thing I feared most was a visceral, unexamined American response - and I was cheered that such did not seem to be forthcoming.

You see, we are, are we not, a primitive species, much given to being driven by our most basic urges, with but a veneer of rationality and civilisation? It is SO easy, it seems, for us to be manipulated either by our natural reactions, or by the carefully researched strings of mass manipulation - and for us to dress up these basic urges in the language of "defending freedom", or "fighting for the one true god", or "avenging the fallen" or "the stab in the back" or "the dictatorship of the proletariat".

I therefore enormously value clear and complex thought about the issues facing us. (Though I by no means always achieve it myself!)

The piece we are all discussing is, I believe, made to eclipse thought and encourage the very mindless emotionalism I most fear - in all countries and groups - and which we can see operating all the time.

I find that using the very real suffering and horror experienced by all killed, injured, or bereaved in 9/11 as a mawkish call to abandon thought and genuine emotion and engage in a self-indulgent emotional trip to be appalling.

As is the notion that, if we refuse to do so,we are stupid, unfeeling dolts, who would not lift a finger to defend ourselves, or our country, when this is really required.

Actually, I found the end bit, which calls us to remember the sacrifices of those who died defending our liberties, and live in a way that makes their sacrifice meaningful, the best part. For me, this includes using my brain and refusing to be sucked into the sort of emotive propaganda morasses that allow our governments to do terrible things, or us to become involved in unspeakable acts of murder because we think we are threatened and are defending ourselves against the damn infidel, or whatever group has been demonized. It is a moveable feast, is it not, this demonization?
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 08:04 pm
We were all there that day, Xena, in our own ways, and some on a2k were pretty close by.

Our US president doesn't have the ownership of care for our country - from the point of view of vast numbers of US americans - and hasn't been annointed as wise leader of the world, as he flirts daily as the direct opposite of that, from the view of many in the wide world.

Reasoning people can differ on ways to deal with chaos in civilization wrought by acts of war. This is a complex subject that affects the world as a whole, and includes many acts of war.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 08:54 pm
Hmmm - this may be interesting to some apropos this discussion:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/politics/campaign/17ads.html?ex=1255665600&en=f2c61302dd65c603&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt
0 Replies
 
bashtoreth
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 08:58 pm


Thank god I never really liked either party.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 08:59 pm
Yes - not high-minded tactics.
0 Replies
 
willow tl
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 09:06 pm
Lash wrote:
Willow--

I was primarily curious about the responses before Xena posted that long "letter". The ones that initially reacted so negatively before mention of Bush.

It seemd they perceived the clip so much more negatively than I did.

What about the clip did you find so offensive, and moreso, why did you (if you did) immediately connect it to propaganda? As I asked before, I'm interested to know what your perception would be if Clinton had been President during the attack.

Thank you for entertaining my questions.


I think it brought back the horror of that day for me ...and i take things (probably too much so) personally when i feel attacked emotionally..i connected it to a bush ad from not too long ago that used images of 9/11 in the back round...and probably carry over from other threads that connect 9/11 with Iraq or that i have a lack of patriotism because i refuse to support a war that i feel is unjust...I wish i could answer the Clinton question..however in all honesty i don't believe Clinton would have used 9/11 as political propaganda...and i guess Lash, love, that there is so much division and dirty politics(both sides) that I just down right feel SAD...and angry ...and feel like nothing i say can make a difference..but that doesn't make the feelings go away..and if you try to talk rationally to some(again not all) you get kicked in the teeth..and sometimes I just kick back...thanks for asking ...Tammie
0 Replies
 
bashtoreth
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 09:06 pm
Did I say never? Actually, that's a little spin. I was a dittohead back when I was in high school... Then I started using my own brain.
0 Replies
 
bashtoreth
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 09:13 pm
willow_tl wrote:
I wish i could answer the Clinton question..however in all honesty i don't believe Clinton would have used 9/11 as political propaganda...


That's a joke, right? I seem to recall that as "Interngate" was in its upswing Clinton bombed a pharmaceutical plant in Africa, which he claimed faulty intelligence had indicated was a WMD plant. The administration didn't even try to explain that one. They just shrugged it off.
0 Replies
 
Magus
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 09:32 pm
Demonization, politicization, manipulation... all are done to foment conflict and rally support for Partisan "efforts".

When Bushieboy said "I'm a uniter, not a divider", and some of us found it ludicrous, others reacted vehemently to our response.
They (the Bush cheerleaders) accused us of being "negative".

Since then, we've had pResidency by Court order (a stalemate twisted into some make-believe mandate), the WTC Attacks, the PRE-emptive invasion of Iraq... and a precipitous rise in petroleum prices.

Photo ops, soundbites and media bias.

Blinded by their Pom-poms, the Bushieboy Pep Squad just can't get what it is that everybody else is upset about.

Duh-duh-Dubbyah's in the White House, and this is the best of all possible worlds! (Until November 2...)

When the Pep Squad arrogantly serves up more of their swill and get raspberries in return, their pride is injured and they object... but, alas, the liberal hearts do NOT bleed for them.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 09:44 pm
People accused you of being negative? Shocked I wonder what ever gave them that idea. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 09:45 pm
bashtoreth wrote:
Craven de Kere wrote:
The absurd notion that this isn't a cheap appeal to pity argument (see Argumentum ad misericordiam) with political motivation is belied by the fact that the author states said motivation explicitly.


I fail to see the "appeal to pity" connection here. The author states that we "owe" it to the "heroes" who died, and to our children. This is not an appeal to pity. Who pities heroes? If the author had said that we should go to war in Iraq because of the suffering widows and mothers... now THAT is an appeal to pity.


You don't seem to understand the logical fallacy appeal to pity (Argumentum ad misericordiam).

It is a name for a logical fallacy, and my citation of it is not an indication that I thought the author wanted the "heroes" to be "pitied".

Furthermore, implicit in both the clip and the author's explanation of his motivations is the notion that we should go to war.

bashtoreth wrote:
Quote:
Through phrases like "blood for oil" it is clear that the author is not only using the emotional appeal


Also--"appeal to pity" does not equal "appeal to emotion"


This is a logical falsehood.

Appeal to pity = appeal to emotion

Appeal to emotion != appeal to pity
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 02/08/2025 at 02:55:19