Enough already

|
(106)
Flowers at the site of the attack
Guardian.co.uk

The gruesome and sordid attack in Woolwich, UK has alarmed and horrified that nation and a fair amount of the world. An unprovoked beheading by cleaver of the 25 year old Afghanistan war vet has stunned London and in the wake of the killing, reprisals have been carried out against Muslims in the UK as well. There have been heroes in this story as well, but it is impossible to imagine that anything would balance off this lunatic brutality. 

As has become almost rote in the wake of these events, both sides in this battle are already fully engaged. I don't mean the British military and local terrorists. I mean the dildos and dildettes of the Net, who regard every news story no matter what it is as vindication or repudiation of their cause.

When it became clear that the attackers were Muslims, you could almost hear the Pamela Geller's and Steven Emerson's of the world climaxing in sexual ecstasy over the intertubes. Their "opposition", the people that trot out Tim McVeigh as the "white Christian terrorist" by way of "everyone does it" when these attacks occur were silent--they'd lost this one. Better luck next time, I suppose.

Which isn't quite as sickening as the violence itself, but shit: What is wrong with these people? A dad had his head lopped off and for all the expressed sorrow by Islamophobes, they were actually pretty jazzed. Whether they admit it or not, what's one dead dude you never met compared to the thrill of rubbing it in some "dumb lib's" face? You were right and what's better than that? Nothing!

It's just as bad when it's some white supremacist asshole and the "I told you so" palaver comes from the left. 

Thing is, the idea that "my team won, yay!" over this story and other negates the painfully obvious. This is a complex issue. It doesn't boil down to "see, I told you the Islamofascists were crazy/No, they aren't". Imperialism, propping up bogus sheikdoms, coups, invasions, nationalism--a melange of those plus the asymetricality of terrorism is complicated. Nobody wants to delve too deeply into the actual cause. They just wanna be the "right person at the water cooler this morning". To which I say enough already. Really. 

 

 

Comments

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:09 pm

you are anon.

Bestemor.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:25 pm

You're just a liar.

Posted by anon on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:39 pm

Throughout all the 57 muslim countries, From Saudi Arabia to the tiny Maldives, nonmuslims are persecuted, prosecuted and murdered. In turn, islamic law is quoted by both governments and civilians defending their actions!

In the west, hatred of nonmuslims is advanced in the majority of mosques....

from America to Sweden, muslims threaten to kill, kill, and riot, burn and cause mayhem.

Yet we are told to believe that the problem lies with the likes of Pamela Geller...?!

Truly, you are a sordid and inane lot, drenched with oil money and stuffed with petrol dollars; bought off to continue like the capos of old, cravenly serving the ends of the enemy as you commit the lives of ignorant men and women to hell...

Crassus of old will seem better served when you will have to imbibe your own vicious lie.

Posted by steiner on May. 23, 2013 @ 4:59 pm

And you have a real fist-pumping slab of metal.

You've missed your life's calling.

 

Posted by JohnnyW on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:09 pm

routine get old once you're past 25? Which from the looks of you was 25 years ago.

I understand Steven and Tim felt like they were being beaten to a bloody pulp in the comments, which isn't hard since their writing is such shit, so they brought in someone from the ancien régime, the Guardian's glory days of the late 1990s, to help them out. But your tune is so outdated it's not even a classic - it's akin to MC Hammer attempting to refashion himself into a gangsta rapper.

You want respect? Act like a man in the comments and not a juvenile boy. If you can't stand the heat - get the fuck out of the kitchen. To paraphrase Mao: "The Guardian's comment section is not a dinner party."

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on May. 23, 2013 @ 6:09 pm

Of course. JW has been brought in as a bruiser.

The problem is that he isn't very smart, and looks like some overgrown dropout who has never held down a job (which, it turns out, he admits is true).

It's a testament to how desperate SFBG must be to engage someone who doesn't even live in SF, and who is still wearing a baseball cap backwards, which most of us grew out of in out early 20's.

Then again, SFBG believes in the Peter Pan principle, that SF is heaven for losers everywhere, so perhaps it should not shock us.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 6:21 pm

are quite possesive of these comment pages as they react with horror and defensiveness by JAW's resistance to their constant idiocy and hatefulness.

Which makes sense as these pages are the only place in their empty lives where they have some sense of control.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 7:08 pm

at the SFBG finally bringing in a writer who can match my overwhelming intellectual prowess. Unfortunately with Jon-Jon that doesn't appear to be the case.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on May. 23, 2013 @ 7:27 pm

... lonely and miserable as always without even lilli around to cheer you up. Maybe you'll have a better day tomorrow, but I seriously doubt it.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 8:45 pm

That's how I roll.

You sound like you're projecting - what's that all about?

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on May. 23, 2013 @ 9:14 pm

Adding to that...

which they have turned (this forum) into a backwater cesspool.

Such Big Talkers™ (the two of them) cowering behind their keyboards acting all big and tough with their pathetic and wasted lives.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 9:29 pm

That's a big value add right there.

Posted by Guest on May. 24, 2013 @ 6:06 am

How do you know this? I have traveled to many Muslim countries and have never seen this persecution you speak of.

Posted by Chris on May. 23, 2013 @ 6:17 pm

Last time I checked, there were still quite a few Christians living in some Muslim countries. Not all Islamic countries are radical

Posted by basta on May. 23, 2013 @ 7:01 pm

This so-called piece of 'journalism' is the most false, pathetic diatribe I have ever had the misfortune to read. It is so full of holes as to be laughable if the subject matter weren't so serious! You are one of the many reasons nobody in the western world is able to have an honest and open conversation on the realities of i-slam.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:06 pm

writer of all time.

And that serves him right given that he has displaced a paid writer.

Scab.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:11 pm

what would constitute "an honest and open conversation on the realities of i-slam."

Posted by Chris on May. 23, 2013 @ 6:19 pm

Let's stop invading predominately Muslim countries, killing their inhabitants and stealing their resources, and then see what happens to terrorism.

Oh, by the way, Israel kills way more Palestinians than vice versa (like 10 to 1) in their dispute. So are Jews more violent than Muslims? Maybe steiner can consult Pamela Geller and get back to us.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:18 pm

and more than 20% of Israelis are non-Jewish and include Druze, Muslims and other religious groups.

The Jew vs. Muslim dichotomy as encapsulated in your statement is wrong.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:27 pm

And growing. Someday in the not too distant future, it'll be 50%. It's already over 50% when you include the occupied territories.

Posted by Greg on May. 25, 2013 @ 9:34 am

Israel kills more Palestinians than vice versa because the Palestinians are incompetent. It's not for lack of trying. Do you think they fire those thousands of rockets just to make noise? No. They're doing their damndest to kill Israelis (civilian or military, meh no difference). They're just not very good at it. At least when Israel retaliates they try to avoid civilian casualties (kind of hard when Hamas uses their civilian population as human shields). The Palestinians just chuck rockets into Israel and hope they kill someone.

The Palestinians should be given a pass because the Israel stops them from killing Israelis?

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 7:57 pm

Now back to our show on our stolen land.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 8:15 pm

Blood soaked land. Stolen land.

Get a rope. It's the only way to exorcise your guilt.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on May. 23, 2013 @ 8:29 pm

White man's burden.

Or in your case, civil discourse's burden.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 8:46 pm

Re: Invading Muslim countries

Which countries?!

1. Afghanistan -

There is a lot to be said about Afghanistan, but few will notice. The reality is that Afghanistan was being taken over by Russia. What did America do? they actually helped the Muslims in Afghanistan fight off Russian forces. America's interests were also being served, but Muslims there should at least have been thankful for receiving America's help...Why was America bombed if they had supported Muslims and Osama in Afghanistan??? Has anyone bothered to ask what reasoning was given by Muslims for the Twin Tower bombings, as well as the bombings of various American embassies around the world during that same period of time? Obviously here America had acted as a friend, yet Muslims treated her as an enemy.

2. Iraq -

There were 2 main wars fought in Iraq. The first one was a consequence of Saudi Arabia asking the U.S. to save it from Saddam's army. Saddam had invaded Kuwait, was going to invade Saudi Arabia as well as Qatar and what not in that area .... Saudi Arabia asked America to quickly intervene; consequently the Americans rolled back Saddam's army but stopped short of taking over Baghdad. During this time we witnessed the Shiite insurrection as well as the Kurdish one in Iraq. Saddam used extreme cruelty to neutralize both. Many Muslims then wanted America to completely oust Saddam, as well as called on America to protect the Shiites and the Kurds..."How could America be so cruel and not invade Baghdad as well?" Muslims asked as they blamed the Americans, accusing them of looking out only for their own interests...

The Kurds were being gassed...and were retreating to the snow covered mountains in the face of Saddam's cruelty...The Americans and the British came to their help, set up a no-fly zone...etc. etc. but it did not stop there...Saddam continued to threaten the Kurds,...continued to subvert U.N. efforts to ascertain that he was not involved in the rebuilding of chemical as well as possible nuclear weapons...Ultimately, there was a second war in Iraq. Did the Americans steal Iraqi oil? no, in fact, America invested trillions of dollars in Iraq to try and stabilize it...Did America make a mistake in going to Iraq the second time, yes...were the Americans responsible for the many deaths there? no they were not.

I still remember reading in dismay about a particular event where up to 200-300 Iraqis jumped a bridge to their deaths as they thought to flee...not Americans, but what they believed was a suicide bomber in their midst....

The people responsible for the explosions, the killings, the mayhem, were not the Americans, but other Muslims who wished and still wish to control the affairs of a state through cruel violence...

So what Muslim lives are the Americans responsible for? If anything, the Americans tried to bring order and justice to a place that even today is filled with hatred due simply because of religious bent...the same kind of hatred that motivates Sunnis in Pakistan to blow up Shiite mosques as well as other "nonmuslim" mosques and vice versa...

3. Serbia - The English and Americans stopped the Serbs from massacring the Kosovan Muslims (despite the fact that it was the Muslims all along that had initiated subversive violence against the Serbs...)

To make America, or the West seem as the culprit for Muslim violence is quite outrageous and outright malevolent..

4...but what about..those Jews in Israel...they must be the ones responsible for all the problems Muslims are having..right?!

As I reflect on what is happening in Sweden, in France, in Belgium, in England, in Burma, in the Philippines, in Thailand, Papua, Nigeria, Ivory Coast...yes even Kosovo...and etc. ..

I begin to sense that the Palestinian cause is everywhere to be seen!...Should the neoPalestinians have their own states in Sweden, Norway, Germany, Thailand, the Philippines, Burma...etc..etc.?

Seeing the rock throwing in Sweden and the burning of whole areas reminds me of how a neoPalestinian approach to nonMuslim countries is the common theme....

Bear in mind that there are over 57 states that are Muslim...isn't it unfair to demand that the Jews have no state of their own...one which even in their quran is historically known to be the state of the Jews?

The reality is that Jordan is a Palestinian state. Over 70% of the people in Jordan are Palestinians.

Arafat, the popular hero of the so called Palestinians was an Egyptian...many of the so called Palestinians are a mixture of Egyptians, Syrians and Lebanese descent.

In fact Arafat is related to the mufti of Jerusalem (who not only organised death squads in Israel, but in Europe organised Islamo-Nazi brigades who cruelly murdered and hacked to death tens of thousands of Jews and Serbs...and consistently called on Hitler to annihilate the Jewish people)..

If the muslims can claim 57 states, then surely, the Jews have a right to...?!...one.

Finally, regarding the oil that muslim always claim to be stolen by nonmuslims...

A case in point: Qatar is a small racist arab nation compromised of approximately 2- 3 million people or less; yet it sits on app. 10% of the oil reserves, and consequently has, through no reason of its own making, control over the economics of the 7 billion people in this world...It influences policy around the world..in Europe, in Africa, China....etc. and often gets its way.

Why should Qatar; a small racist arab nation hold so much sway over the economies of the world when its people have done quite measurably, absolutely nothing, but sit on those oil reserves? Yet, they freely sell their oil, build and establish themselves on the back of the technological advancements made possible by the civilization of the West and the Jewish people...

Do take a look at the number of Nobel Prizes awarded to Jewish people as well as the West..contributions that have benefited the world and continue to do so...despite the continued disparagement received by those who are bent on following the shariah...cutting off of hands, feet, hanging, torturing, enslaving,raping, persecuting those who turn away from Islam, criminalizing freedom of conscience, and overall remaining in a mind set that is bent on annihilating those that will dare criticize the founder of their religion..as well as its tenets...and further continuing their war on the Jews as well as Christians and non-muslims because it is commanded in their writings to do so!

To this day Jews are not even allowed to live in Saudi Arabia because muhammad said so...does anyone wonder what made muhammad say so?

Yet, we are told that Geller is the problem...

Posted by steiner on May. 24, 2013 @ 5:02 am

One, does the Israeli information ministry pay you per word?

Two, does that money reduce Pamela Geller's cosmetic surgery budget?

Posted by Guest on May. 24, 2013 @ 7:00 am

How does the belief in Jewish superiority differ from the belief in Aryan superiority?

Posted by Guest on May. 24, 2013 @ 7:13 am

...Anon has switched to Guest!

You are absolutely correct that no Scandinavian Grandmothers have been involved in terror attacks. But neither have any black grandmothers. Or white grandmothers. Or any grandmothers period.

I love how Anon has attributed this to Black while conveniently ignoring poor. I've met guys like this - they're often simply intimidate by the Black cock. Sorry God wasn't on your side for that one.

Posted by TheBFCE on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:41 pm
Posted by anon on May. 23, 2013 @ 6:04 pm

Very, very few grandmothers are involved in terrorist activities, according to those stats you refer to

Posted by Hafez Assad on May. 29, 2013 @ 8:29 pm

The illiterate person who wrote this garbage should be ashamed of himself. "Sexual ecstasy" at the beheading of a British soldier by deranged religious fanatics?

For your mind even to go there, you must be a filthy pervert. It is a DISGRACE that the SF Bay Guardian has allowed you to post such perverse trash.

SHAME ON YOU.

In the meantime, pervert, the people who have been warning us about ISLAMIC TERRORISM have been correct, despite your disgusting and depraved remarks.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 5:51 pm

that they have engaged a washed-up ageing welfare recipient to be the voice of this failing journal.

So sad.

Posted by anon on May. 23, 2013 @ 6:08 pm

Although I doubt anyone was getting any "sexual ecstasy" from watching the video or reading about the attack, the author's point seemed to be that the anti-Islam factions are already primed with their canned responses. The latest attack gives them the perfect opportunity to tear it up on the web to further their "cause."

In case you're a speed reader, but a bit slow on comprehension, you may want to reread the sentance again:

"When it became clear that the attackers were Muslims, you could almost hear the Pamela Geller's and Steven Emerson's of the world climaxing in sexual ecstasy over the intertubes."

The author even made it easy for us (myself included) to find out a bit about Pamela and Steven by embedding links to their respective Wikipedia pages. And after reading a few links found via google about these individuals, "climaxing in sexual ecstasy over the intertubes" is a very clever and forceful use of language.

Opinion columns are designed to take a point of view that hope to illicit a visceral reaction in readers. It appears Johnny's piece was a success by your reaction.

Let's be honest. Over the past 50 years governments around the world have been tightening the screws on marginalized groups, whether they be disenfranchised populations in areas with lots of natural resources or strategic military value (ie, Iraq, Palestine, Iran), or more commonly, subtle economic attacks against the least wealthy 66.6% of the population by enacting policies that cause increased housing costs and higher regressive taxes. Of course a few humans will react, some violently, to these calculated attacks upon them. A more violent world increases the need for increased military, police, surveillance and population suppression, which increases the need for even more government power and expansion, which then creates more reactionary violence. It's "win, win" from the government's perspective.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 8:42 pm

Are you also afraid of your own shadow? Get. A. Grip.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 9:32 pm

I sure am glad the Light Bringer from Hawaii via Chicago has irradicated all racial animosity.

Posted by Guest tedh754 on May. 23, 2013 @ 6:55 pm

Johnny Angel has breathed some life back into SFBG!

Posted by Ralph on May. 23, 2013 @ 7:01 pm

So, you're on a deserted island with two women. Huma Abedin and Ann Coulter.

You can sleep with one of them.

?

Posted by JohnnyW on May. 23, 2013 @ 7:05 pm

LOL, Johnny.

That's good

Posted by Henry on May. 23, 2013 @ 9:24 pm

I'd choose my hand.

Posted by Greg on May. 25, 2013 @ 9:36 am

Let me get this straight: another case of Muslim terrorism like countless others, and who does Mr. Wendell have beef with?
That's right, the people who actually have the guts to speak out about Islam's inherently vicious, violent nature - Geller and Emerson.

How clueless can you be, Mr. Wendell?
Lenin would have called you a "useful idiot". I'd say you seem to be pretty useless, but the "idiot" part is right.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 7:26 pm

Geller is an unhinged loon. And "Islam's inherently vicious, violent nature"? Pardon me, but your slip is showing. Let me guess, you get really excited by the white sales in January?

Posted by Citizen Charles Foster Kane on May. 24, 2013 @ 2:41 am

Johnny told the truth and many people can't stand to hear the truth told, especially in the U.S. (the little fragile delicates with a big head). It makes them squirm and very uncomfortable to hear the truth and then they attack the Messenger (Johnny) because they prefer to live in Denial with their "team" mentality (the modus operandi in the U.S.)

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2013 @ 9:52 pm

What a blithering idiotic column. When all else fails, turn to McVeigh. FYI, he was not a fundamentalist Christian. But let's not allow reality to intrude into our screed. Oh yeah, it's all very complex. A couple of Jihadist monsters saw a young man's head off and it's oh so complex. The only complexity that these two confronted was what size cleaver they chose to use. The West in general and SF in particular is busy nuancing itself to death.

Posted by Guest on May. 24, 2013 @ 5:24 am

First of all the executioners of that young man were converts to Islam and from Nigeria making them African not Arab. However, the ideology of attacking innocents is coming from an Arab country called Saudi Arabia. The whole teaching of the Koran of today (compared to the Koran of over 150 years ago - do your research they are different) is like apples to bananas. Today's Madrassas ARE teaching the ugly verses that were put in there after the beginning of the last century. The Armenians were slaughtered due to this teaching; Haji al-Husseini bequested a translated Koran into German and gave it to Adolf Hitler in the 1920s who made his own version aka Mein Kampf.

In case no one has noticed we ARE in a war - a fanatic war of those who hate us because we are not compliant with the ideologies of modern Islam. Al Queda, Hamass, PLO, Hezbullah, etc. are just representatives of the mindset of Islam of today. It is not a religion but is a cult as it undermines the culture of the western ways. Women are to be covered from head to toe, no homosexuality, children can be married off (aka sold), slavery can exist (aka Darfur, Eritrea, etc.) and bigotry abounds plus Apartheid.

The author of this piece is an apologist for this behavior demeanizing the Pam Gellers etc. Why not condemn this act? We already have honor killings and beheadings in this country (Jersey City 2007, Texas cabbie killed his daughters for being too western). We need to stand up against this - but above all - we need to see those who are Muslim to stand up and make a loud noise against this.

Posted by Guest on May. 24, 2013 @ 5:44 am

The "attack" was set up by MI5. A guy just got on the BBC and said MI5 had been trying to hire the guy for the past 6 months.

Then, right in the middle of a major political crisis for the tories, two guys supposedly murder a guy in broad daylight, then stand around waiting for the police to show up.

Sure they did.

They "body" was an already dead body with Hollywood bloodpacks on it.

The "Muslims" were British MI5 agents who were told to do what they did, then wait for the police to show up.

Both of the men are still alive in hospital, when we all know they shoot real terrorists dead in their own homes like that Chechen guy in the USA.

Those men were told they would be shot in a non serious place, or they would be shot with blanks and would need to act like they were shot.

Since this is all "terrorism related", no one gets to see the people, ask them if they were recruited by MI5, ask them if they work for MI5, check and see if they have real bullet wounds, if the bullet wounds are real, check and see if they were "miraculously" non fatal, etc, etc.

As for the "victim", he would be doing his military job. His supervisors would tell him his military duty was to go into hiding under an assumed identity after this play acting, so his family would behave in a realistic manner as they mourned him. Maybe he would be promised in 5 years or so when it all blows over he would be reunited with them.

This stuff is easy when you are immoral, evil, and have billions of dollars and all the people you need to pull it off.

Posted by guest on May. 25, 2013 @ 8:35 am

Oooorrrrr..... It was a pair of evil, pissed off Muslims who decided to kill a British soldier because they hate the British army.

Posted by Guest on May. 25, 2013 @ 5:42 pm

If progressives insist on analyzing Islamic terrorism on a left/right basis, the Islamic terrorists are on the right, given their reactionary approach to women's rights, gay rights, and free speech.

Posted by Rob Anderson on May. 25, 2013 @ 9:07 am

and especially during the support of the Mujahadeen by Reagan were quite concerned about Muslim extremism. You could read all about it in various lefty mags of the time.

This nuance thing has them now off handedly making excuses for a culture that opposes western tolerance and ideals. Not that progressives are all that tolerant of differing opinions, but like intolerant right wingers who they mirror, they have yet to advocate for state beheadings for thought crimes.

Posted by Matlock on May. 25, 2013 @ 10:09 am

They may well be on the right, but I don't hear any progressives supporting Islamic terrorists.

That still doesn't give America the right to go in and overthrow governments, right or left.

In terms of who we should fear... as terrorists, there are plenty of terrorists on all sides. In fact, some of the worst terrorist incidents, other than 9/11, have been perpetrated by non-Muslims -Breivik, Tim McVeigh, that Jewish terrorist who went into a mosque and gunned down 50 people with his uzi, Luis Posada Carriles who this country still shamefully harbors (oh yeah, I'm sure you forgot about him -the guy who bombed a civilian Cuban airliner killing 76 innocent people). Personally, I don't spend too much time living in fear of terrorist acts. As horrible as they are, your chances of being caught up in one are slim. And since by their nature these acts are political, the best way to prevent them in the future is not with added security, but by not messing with other people's lives around the world.

Who I do fear, are political fundamentalist Christians. Not because they're worse than the Muslim mullahs (Give them full power, they'd be about equally bad). But they're *here*, in the country where I live. If I lived in (US ally) Saudi Arabia, I'd have more to fear from the fundamentalist Muslims. But I don't live in Saudi Arabia. I live here. And here, the Muslims pose no threat to me whether they are 1% or 10% or 20% of the population. But the fundamentalist Christians... they are a constant threat, because they control an enormous amount of power in this country.

Posted by Greg on May. 25, 2013 @ 10:10 am

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Related articles

  • Boston, a day later

  • Cup-of-tea diplomacy

  • The Feds are watching -- badly

    The FBI's modern snoop program is racist, xenophobic, misdirected, dangerous -- and really, really stupid