In Vinod’s post last week following Benazir Bhutto’s tragic assassination, there was some legitimate debate about whether and how to criticize the recently deceased (not that we need to restart the argument ;-).
Well, it’s been a week, and we’re starting to see various media outlets printing sharp critiques of Bhutto (see Dalrymple, for instance, in Outlook…). But more than that, we’re seeing American politicans crassly exploiting the tragedy to promote their own sorry asses:
The biggest problem with ads like this, of course, is that they tell people to vote based on fear rather than logic.
Oh. my. god. That ad is SO over the top that I feel bad for anyone who takes it at face value and votes based on that.
9/11 changed everything. Including the butterfly effect. A gunman fires shots in Pakistan, leading to a fence around Mexico.
I am 9/11 and I approve this message.
Also, I’m really sick of Giuliani exploiting the terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers while he was mayor for political leverage.
What’s funny (and sad) is that I wouldn’t be surprised if that ad or something very similar to it was used as a CNN commercial for one its news reports/’investigations.’
Wow, yes, I would put that one down as a “fear-mongering classic,” even though I incline toward the GOP.
is that they tell people to vote based on fear rather than logic.
point taken, but do note most humans are tards who are more moved by emotional appeal. there’s a reason why politicians resort to viscerally negative ads. talk to me about logic when everyone’s read their quine 馃槈
By any chance, is this a parody ad? Just asking…
is that they tell people to vote based on fear rather than logic.
Then he’s lock, step with the republican electoral playbook.
“Guiliani likes to talk about how great he was on 9/11, He really stepped it up for NY on 9/11…. but how about on 9/10? 5/24? 3/12? Pick a date mother fucker!”
-Chris Rock.
DISGUSTING on so many different levels, that I cannot even type!
Rudy Guiliani is an opportunistic bastard and interestingly he looks like one. He is truly puke inducing (but good for weight loss)
Seriously, the voiceover might as well have been. “Remember… bad muslims are still out there. Rudy will make them go away.. Vote Rudy Guiliani”
Ugh, horrible, disgusting, etc. Giuliani needs to stop misusing 9/11 for his campaign.
does Giuliani relate EVERYTHING to terrorism, 9/11 attacks, and the middle east. get a life. . .
is that a tower of babel at 0:18? almost subliminal
REMEMBER PEARL HARBOR??
buy american cars.
Giuliani To Run For President Of 9/11
The campaign poster shown in the link is sinister yet hilarious…like Rudy’s campaign.
And Guiliani partners will help avert another 9-11 by working for Gulf sheikhs (including supposedly Saudi sheikhs).
Fareed Bhai puts it best, “Guiliani is running for Fear Mongerer in Chief”
You know what’s really sad about this? I might indignantly point this out to some ignorant individuals I know and they will look at it and think, “I don’t get what’s so bad about this advertisement–it’s not like it’s lying! Those things are really happening out there”.
head desk
As a former New Yorker and JerseyCityite, I’d like to point out that Rudy was most famous for his war on sqweegie-men, prior to 9/11.
That is all.
There is a piece about Rudy in this week’s New Yorker. Elizabeth Kolbert isn’t a fan and writes about his “clean up the City” years:
However, my favorite line in the article–which I read aloud to appreciate its absurdity–is:
It’s not just politicians but marketeers, pornographrs and random bored teenagers. I looked up Sanam Bhutto and was directed to a porn site. And now it turns out that Bilawal’s facebook profile is a hoax. I think the devil pic is portentous.
That was over-the-top fear-mongering. But here is my issue: It seems that if he fear-mongered on some other social issue, such as health care or illegal Hispanic immigration, you mutineers wouldn’t make many comments about it. It’s only when someone fear-mongers on Islamofascists do you people seem to be roused.
Other than that, I do think that Islamofascism is a big threat to the world.
nala, I was thinking the same thing!
Then you have not been reading the vast majority of posts here at the mutiny. We have discussed both health care and immigration policy vis-a-vis the southern border.
I was disgusted that political hay in this country was being made merely one day after the assassination.
However, what really made me almost throw up in my mouth was when I heard a sound bite of Giuliani saying something like “the American people sympathize with the people of Pakistan in the aftermath of this terrorist assassination because of the similar thing that’s happened to us.” Bastard.
Of course, I think Joe Biden summed up Giuliani’s moribund talking points best of all.
boston_mahesh
sepiamutiny bloggers and posters are largely made up of a self righteous group of liberals who treat anybody who disagrees with them patronizingly or subhuman
in the same threads camille points to you can see that
in fact, you can tell from some of the comments here
i barely even lurk here anymore for that reason (if i want reasoned politics i’d head to tpm or something)
by the way coach diesel. as a current and longtime nyc resident, Giuliani was most famous for reducing crime in nyc which had a positive ripple effect in other areas…you can keep your squeegee’s and newark-esque violence, but i’d rather not have to get mugged and see my friends get shot/beat up
22 脗路 boston_mahesh said
That’s because those stories don’t necessarily have brown angles to them, whereas this ad specifically used an image of Bhutto to remind us of her assassination and did. I agree with you re: Islamofascism, and I also think the left underplays or even overlooks it, but this ad is just ridiculously over the top and doesn’t accomplish anything but more fear mongering.
27 脗路 nala said
Meh. In the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski, “What’s a few riled up Muslims compared to the fall of the Soviet Empire?” You do realize that most Americans across the political spectrum underplay and overlook their own role in creating the Islamofascists? And would you also agree that the right tends to underplay or even deny the very realer threat of climate change?
Yes, I agree (though I would say that ‘most Americans’ != ‘certain government agencies’). Just because I point out something I believe is a fault among one group (one that I am more familiar with btw, having gone to a very liberal high school and being on a very liberal college campus right now, where disagreeing with popular narratives ironically gets you branded a fascist) doesn’t mean that I don’t recognize that other groups also over- or under-state certain issues. It just leads to both sides having more extreme views if they won’t engage the other side. It’s why I try not to be partisan, unfortunately I can’t say the same for you though.
29 脗路 nala said
Why is that unfortunate when I have no desire to be non-partisan?
I expressed myself poorly on that… what I meant to say is that, honestly, maybe it’s just the nature of the Internet, but I find your tone kind of condescending. It’s not unlike the tone I encounter among many liberals who think they have everything figured out and who will try to insinuate that I’m some kind of wingnut just because I bring up a more moderate position or try to add some nuance to their viewpoints. I felt like that’s kind of what you did with the ‘would you agree that most americans or the right says this too’ point, just because I made a statement about what I perceive to be a problem, which is exactly how both ‘sides’ become more extreme by refusing to engage in dialogue with each other.
Ok, I expressed myself poorly, too. Let’s be friends again. You’re obviously one of those annoying “mature” people.
First of all, you could have said that by quoting Brzezinski I was actually substantiating your point (about the left downplaying Islamofascism) because he was Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor. I would then counter by saying that Democrats are not really “the left” and then where would we be?
What I really meant to say is, if Islamofascism is indeed a problem, how do you solve that problem? By killing people? They don’t want to be killed and they will fight back. In the process, innocent people will die. People who love those innocent people will then become Islamofascists. Or we could arm their enemies, but we see how that played out before (Asian Dub Foundation has at least two songs about this.)
Best response I heard to 9/11 came on 9/13. I had a ticket to see Thich Nhat Hahn in Bezerkeley on 9/13. I had bought my ticket weeks in advance, but then the wheel of history turned and provided an even bigger context to hear this great advocate for peace. But you know what? It was hot up in there, and Thich Nhat Hahn is a very slow- and soft-speaking man. I got bored and fell asleep, but I tell you what, I didn’t mind so much because Nhat Hahn’s opening act rocked my world.
Seriously. This other monk spoke before him. She spoke of America’s greatness. “America is a great nation,” she said. “Nobody doubts that. And America has been hurt, we all know that, and sympathize, too. But how much more greatness would it show if America took food and books and medicine to the people of Afghanistan instead of bombs?” I held up my lighter like I was hearing an encore of “Every Rose Has Its Thorn.” That’s what I was trying to say. That and global warming isn’t nearly as much fun to say as Islamofascism.
And finally, how can I be condescending when I use phrases like “very realer?”
30 脗路 Harbeer said
<
blockquote>29 脗路 nala said
I feel the partisan pull as well. My understanding about how this video might be received among the well-meaning Fox set is probably best summarized by the good folks at Sadly No:
“SAND PEOPLE! VIOLENT AND WICKED SAAAAAAAND PEOPLE!! WANT TO KILL YOU!!! KIIIIIILLLLL YOOOOOOOU!!!! WILL STEAL YOUR SUV AND FLATSCREEN TV!!!! WILL FORCE YOU TO EAT VEGETABLES AND EXERCISE!!!!!! RUDY STRONG!!!!! RUDY STRONG!!!!!”
All of this while spittle-laced exhortations to remember 9/11 cause all within range to gently raise their faces and receive the tough-on-terrorism darshan from Guru Giuliani.
A ripple effect. That’s a new one.
Better back that claim up if you want it to be taken seriously.
Yes, but isn’t this a symptom of the current conception of what humanitarian aid should look like? The food, books and medicine (I’m assuming she’s referring to food, education and proper medical care) while very good things, will never eliminate poppy as the cash crop of choice. There’s an infrastructure already in place where bribes, afghan authorities and the common farmer combine to produce some of the largest poppy harvests the world has ever seen. The problem is a bit harder to solve than that, noble as the sentiment is.
oh no…there’s history here: “trickle-down” and “domino effect”
Think metaphor, murali. If you want to talk actual policy, I think she would advocate for broad, systemic change (with at least a nod towards ideas of “a commons” and “the common good”), but I may just be projecting.
so you’re just thinking of a “military effort” vs. “non-military effort” kind of dichotomy? I mentioned the policy specifics because when my friends who favor intervention of a non-military nature (i’m defining ‘military’ as including ‘peace-keeping’ operations as well as offensive ops) are asked to be specific, they often come up with the vague, “books, medicine, food” line. I just find it kind of unsatisfying. end of gripe.
Better to be a good Sepia than a bad Kos. Trying to be
somebodysome blog you’re not = failure.32 脗路 Harbeer said
do we have to give credence to the “Islamofascism Awareness Week” folks by ever using the term uncritically(i do see the humor at the end)? I think the ADF songs you speak of are Blowback and Enemy of the Enemy
Funny how the Nazi problem and the Soviet problem were in part defeated by this strategy, killing them and arming their enemies, in large numbers. They didn’t want to be killed either. Not an an unexpected reaction on their part.That does seem to be unfortunately the only way to eradicate such ideologies. Why should Islamofascism be treated any differently ? What makes it eligible for any different kinder, gentler treatment ? And yes, there were innocent people killed when the prior two mentioned ideologies were global threats. No extended lighters is going to solve this.
Snark aside,
Except you brought it up as an example of how ‘most Americans’ don’t recognize how U.S. foreign policy has interplayed with the rise of Islamic terrorism, which I agreed with.
I don’t know the answer to that question. I do know that fear-mongering is not the answer though, and I expressed several times in this thread my aghastness at this ridiculous ad. I don’t think it’s as simple as ‘we killed their family members so they became extremists’ though; there are larger political issues that have to be addressed. By that account, it would be perfectly acceptable for someone whose family was killed by Islamic terrorists to become a hatemonger, right?
And yeah, ‘Islamofascism’ is kind of a fear-mongering term in itself. I’ll refrain from using it.
Also, I don’t think the Democrats are really ‘the left’ either. 馃檪
The problem with the term ‘Islamofascism’ is that conflates different groups that have different goals and different ideologies, though they may have something in common. The other problem is that battling terorrist groups is harder than battling a state, especially when they’re nestled in countries with poor infrastructure and lots of corruption. I mean, if we’re going after ‘Islamofascism,’ why not start with Saudi Arabia?
41 脗路 Vikram said
The Nazis were emboldened and aided by the US and others. The Soviets? They were well on their way to defeating themselves before Reagan inflated the defense budget and made meaningless speeches. They ignored their own intelligence in those cases, too.
I think that is where the battle should have started. But that should have been done years ago. In 1945 Patton wanted to drive the Soviets from Europe after the fall of Germany, when they were at their weakest. But he wasn’t allowed to follow that plan. And we spent the next half century paying for that mistake. The same with Saudi Arabia. It parallels the Soviet Union in that sense… an ideological power that has now grown too strong for direct confrontation on its home turf/sand. And just as with the Soviet sponsored global communist insurgencies and terrorism, we seem to be fighting the Saudi exported Islamofascist terrorism in a hundred proxy wars around the globe. It is now a battle of attrition.
Absolutely… no war is without its Neville Chamberlains trying to make deals that embolden the enemy. And we have seen the results, which further emphasizes why no special treatment should be given from the very start. It is easy now to say the Soviets were on the decline. We have that luxury of hindsight today. In WWII Hitler may have been finally overthrown by rebelling Wehrmacht Generals. There was already one failed attempt. But should the Allies have sat around and waited for that unsure scenario to happen ?
40 脗路 muralimannered said
My humor must be too subtle–I should work on that. If you look closer, you’ll realize that the real butt of every joke I make is me. Yup, those are the songs I referred to.
44 脗路 nala said
These difficulties are further complicated by our tendency to arm both sides. Short-term benefit, meet the long term repurcussions, aka Blowback.
41 脗路 Vikram said
By the way, we did not eradicate them, we turned into them.
38 脗路 muralimannered said
Not at all. I am thinking systemwide holistic change–a fundamental change of consciousness–that might be better characterized as a multichotomy. Let’s start by respecting other peoples/cultures/nations as equals. Let’s stop supporting oppressive dictators who serve the short-term interests of an elite micro-minority in this country. Let’s stop forcing privitization of public resources the world over. I guess I’m thinking of a “justice” vs. “get everything we can force them to give us” kind of dichotomy. Sure, we can kick any countries ass, in the short term. We can make them dance at the snap of our fingers. But don’t we dehumanize ourselves as much as we dehumanize them when we do that?