Comments on: Grr

By: Germain

Germain — Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:16:35 +0000

When I first read Montoya’s essay, it sounded all wrong…totally ridiculous, in fact. Then I read it aloud and pretended I had written the words, and it was absolutely the truest thing ever said or thought in all of human history.

By: CathiefromCanada

CathiefromCanada — Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:56:55 +0000

Some philosopher once said “whether you get an idea from looking at a sunset or a beehive has nothing to do with its merits.” Whether a politician uses 9/11 to advance a political position has nothing to do with its merits—but as Montoya’s satire implies, the test is whether the politician insists that his view should not be open to any debate or disagreement because of 9/11.

By: Pacific John

Pacific John — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:45:18 +0000

Great post Julia. I have it on good authority some people were already saying that sort of thing when Montoya posted his humorous essay. The irony of this Devil’s dance is that an attack on secular liberalism gave our own fundamentalists the excuse to throw their weight around. (Please pay no attention to the ideology of domestic terrorists, please). …and the Philosoraptor post was brilliant.

By: serial catowner

serial catowner — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:28:55 +0000

C’mon, admit it, the only thing that could have improved that essay would be Sebastian showing how much truth there is in the humor. Thank god Sebastian exists, only Kurt Vonnegut could invent him.

By: julia

julia — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:06:26 +0000

E.g., nobody can deny that 9/11 showed us that the US is threatened by organized terrorsts who are willing to devote their lives to killing large number of Americans. True ‘nuf. It’s entirely possible, though, that someone could make a case that since those terrorists were almost exclusively financed by Saudi Arabia as part of their longrunning initiative to pay off their own militant religious fundamentalists and keep from being made to pay for their rapine of their own resources and people, attacking a crippled secular regime in the region was not necessarily the way to go. Particularly since the destruction of that country was one of the top 5 goals of the guy who sent the planes into the World Trade Center. On the other hand, I do acknowledge that it’s a bit much to ask George Bush and his administration to take a stand against paying off militant religious fundamentalists to keep from being made to pay for abusing the people and resources of a country one wasn’t, strictly speaking, asked to run.

By: David

David — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:12:35 +0000

I agree with Montoya that many on all sides of the issue have used 9/11 to justify their particular world view. However, it’s a fallacy to believe that just because a proposition OFTEN holds, it ALWAYS holds. Some interpretations are unarguable. E.g., nobody can deny that 9/11 showed us that the US is threatened by organized terrorsts who are willing to devote their lives to killing large number of Americans.

By: radish

radish — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:33:23 +0000

Sebastian: Ouch. You’re not really mistaking a critique of exclusively self-centered interpretations of 9/11 for a critique of trying to find any meaning at all in 9/11, are you? I think I’m gonna assume that was a sly joke, caricaturing people who, literally unable to conceive of any interpretation of 9/11 other than their own, feel like any discussion at all is an invitation to take their marbles and go home… that is what you were aiming for, right?

By: Ricky

Ricky — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:21:18 +0000

Pretty good, except that there weren’t bombings at the WTC (unless the Oct. ‘01 article pertains to the bombing – singular – in ‘93).

By: james

james — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:14:32 +0000

sebastian, either you’ve missed a trick, or I have. Surely it is applicable to left as well as right – the reaction lampooned is shared by many people from Noam Chomsky to Jerry Falwell via lots others.

By: Alex

Alex — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:35:41 +0000

When I first saw “jsm”, I thought somebody misspelled “jism”. Brilliant essay though.

By: John Isbell

John Isbell — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:39:59 +0000

julia sticks the knife in. I also like the Weird Al song title. I also find it healthy to read the “me” in this essay as me, right here. Which is what it says. Ouch.

By: Pacific John

Pacific John — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:36:26 +0000

jsm’s Sept. 12 essay tosses a nut in the right garbage disposal. For every faithful legion of Holsclaws, you can find someone who can cobble something like this together. … and we do need “What? Are You Fucking Stupid?”

By: Tongue Boy

Tongue Boy — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:37:25 +0000

The last line makes me almost think Robert Byrd wrote the essay.

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:19:30 +0000

That essay only makes sense if you replace “me” with me.

By: Matt Weiner

Matt Weiner — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:53:11 +0000

It’s the most satisfying takedown I’ve read since John Holbo read David Frum. …three whole days ago. My, the blogosphere moves quickly. (Still, it’s not faint praise—Holbo is hard to top, and deserves the extra link.)