Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-12-2019, 10:29 PM
ishamael69 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 142

"Some people did something" quote


I’m hoping to keep this GQ, but I have my doubts as to if it is possible.

Rep. Omar said, “far too long we have lived with the discomfort of being a second-class citizen and frankly, I'm tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired of it. CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”

I’ve seen a lot of people and articles complain that her words above were being taken out of context. I understand how some might agree or disagree with her characterization, but how are they being mis-contextualized? Is she not referring to the 9/11 attacks? Isn’t the context right there that she is talking to CAIR about why CAIR was founded?

Last edited by ishamael69; 04-12-2019 at 10:30 PM.
  #2  
Old 04-12-2019, 11:30 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 11,714
It is tribalism--one side gives knee-jerk attacks (no matter how tenuous) againt the other side, while the other side must give knee-jerk defenses, no matter how strained.
  #3  
Old 04-12-2019, 11:56 PM
simster is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by ishamael69 View Post
I’m hoping to keep this GQ, but I have my doubts as to if it is possible.

Rep. Omar said, “far too long we have lived with the discomfort of being a second-class citizen and frankly, I'm tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired of it. CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”

I’ve seen a lot of people and articles complain that her words above were being taken out of context. I understand how some might agree or disagree with her characterization, but how are they being mis-contextualized? Is she not referring to the 9/11 attacks? Isn’t the context right there that she is talking to CAIR about why CAIR was founded?

The folks that seem to be quoting her are quoting only the "some people did something", and are implying that she is trying to whitewash it. They want everyone to remember 'the muslims did it'. THey leave out the context of the rest of the sentence you have quoted, which clearly shows that the 'some people' were referring to muslims.
  #4  
Old 04-13-2019, 01:29 AM
Sigene is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,373
They want to imply that she is minimizing that 3000 people died by saying it was 'just' someone did something.

Like someone just ran a red light or something....not really a big deal.

THat's the context that the statement is trying to be cast as.
  #5  
Old 04-13-2019, 07:50 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,093
Here's a Washington Post video about it. The idea that her critics are attempting to convey is that she was being flippant or minimizing something awful.

Listening to the fuller context, I don't find what she said to be at all eyebrow-raising or controversial.
  #6  
Old 04-13-2019, 08:39 AM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by ishamael69 View Post
I’ve seen a lot of people and articles complain that her words above were being taken out of context. I understand how some might agree or disagree with her characterization, but how are they being mis-contextualized? Is she not referring to the 9/11 attacks? Isn’t the context right there that she is talking to CAIR about why CAIR was founded?
The people criticizing her don't give the full quote. They simply include the "some people did something" bit, and then act like she was using this phrase to describe what happened on 9/11/01. That's taking the phrase out of its context.

I'm not sure it would matter, much, to the audience that her critics are addressing. Even if the full quote were given, people would still harp on her choice of words. If she had been thinking of the impact of what she said on a wider audience, she might have chosen to be more clear as to her meaning, which is that the actions of "some people" have resulted in a restriction in rights for "all of us".
  #7  
Old 04-13-2019, 09:17 AM
senoy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,830
It's also incorrect and the idea is that CAIR was founded as a reaction to 9-11. CAIR was founded in 1994 to react to a movie in which the bad guys were Islamists. The claim that it was simply a reaction to post-9-11 rights violations serves to downplay accusations against it of ties to Islamist groups by painting it as a victim. Whether it is or is not a victim is immaterial, but rather that it is a claim which intentionally distorts history to advance a narrative, regardless of the veracity of the narrative.
  #8  
Old 04-13-2019, 10:32 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,165
[Moderating]
Quote:
I’m hoping to keep this GQ, but I have my doubts as to if it is possible.
I'm having doubts, too. You're asking us to speculate about others' motives, in a context where taking their word on their motives won't be adequate. I can't see how any factual answer could be possible. Moving to GD.
  #9  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:51 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,802
It seems to me the right wing media is purposely trying to make it seem as if she was referring to the 20 terrorists as being the “some people who did something.” Upon reading the full quote it’s clear she isn’t talking about the terrorists at all, but rather about the people who responded. The way I interpret what she was saying seems to me to be something like this.

1. Something bad happened, the 9/11 attacks.

2. Some people actually did something about it, as opposed to sitting on their asses and not doing anytiing.

3. Therefore we should be inspired to continue the fight against the terrorists / bad guys in general, and also do something rather than just sitting on our asses.
  #10  
Old 04-13-2019, 12:52 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 9,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
...
Listening to the fuller context, ...
Now where's the outrage in that?
  #11  
Old 04-13-2019, 01:07 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
It seems to me the right wing media is purposely trying to make it seem as if she was referring to the 20 terrorists as being the “some people who did something.” Upon reading the full quote it’s clear she isn’t talking about the terrorists at all, but rather about the people who responded. The way I interpret what she was saying seems to me to be something like this.

1. Something bad happened, the 9/11 attacks.

2. Some people actually did something about it, as opposed to sitting on their asses and not doing anytiing.

3. Therefore we should be inspired to continue the fight against the terrorists / bad guys in general, and also do something rather than just sitting on our asses.
I don't read it that way at all. She is saying that on 9/11, "some people did something" meaning that some extreme Muslims did something and now every Muslim is in danger of losing their civil liberties because of it.

Not a bad point to make, but the phrase "some people did something" seems awfully dismissive what what those some people did.

It would be like a southerner who professed to be for equal rights for blacks in the 1960s complaining that the federal government was intruding on state powers and hurtful to southern whites simply because "some people did something."

Whatever the correctness or incorrectness of the point being made, it is insensitive to describe terrible atrocities or terrorist attacks as the equivalent of a few kids drinking beer tossing litter on the highways. That's the way it comes across, and when you have a history of insensitive comments, you opponents will seize on that.
  #12  
Old 04-13-2019, 03:51 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,421
What Omar said was a pretty bad choice of words. That being said, flubs happen. Nobody has an entire speech pre-scripted and rehearsed in advance; when one has to make a long steady stream of remarks on the fly, something less-than-ideal is bound to be said.
  #13  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:02 PM
Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 13,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
I don't read it that way at all. She is saying that on 9/11, "some people did something" meaning that some extreme Muslims did something and now every Muslim is in danger of losing their civil liberties because of it.

Not a bad point to make, but the phrase "some people did something" seems awfully dismissive what what those some people did.

It would be like a southerner who professed to be for equal rights for blacks in the 1960s complaining that the federal government was intruding on state powers and hurtful to southern whites simply because "some people did something."

Whatever the correctness or incorrectness of the point being made, it is insensitive to describe terrible atrocities or terrorist attacks as the equivalent of a few kids drinking beer tossing litter on the highways. That's the way it comes across, and when you have a history of insensitive comments, you opponents will seize on that.
I don't believe I've ever agreed with UltraVires before but I do here. This is exactly how i read her statement as well.
  #14  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:12 PM
Royal Nonesutch is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
This is exactly how i read her statement as well.
Probably because that is exactly, precisely how she meant it.
  #15  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:18 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal Nonesutch View Post
Probably because that is exactly, precisely how she meant it.
Another Doper mind-reader! Kudos to you for your superpowers, and I hope you use them for good and not evil!
  #16  
Old 04-13-2019, 04:49 PM
UnwittingAmericans is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 374
I don't even know what she meant, it's babble within the context of the sentence.

If by "something," she meant 9/11, then basis for taking offense I suppose is to say she's trivializing it by not using one of the many cliched phrases that people typically recite by rote.

Which should be at about the same level as not wearing a flag pin.
  #17  
Old 04-13-2019, 06:11 PM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 346
It occurs to me that if Trump described, say, the Unite the Right rally as “Some people doing something” then, regardless of context, posters here wouldn’t let him forget it for a thousand years.
  #18  
Old 04-13-2019, 06:16 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
It occurs to me that if Trump described, say, the Unite the Right rally as “Some people doing something” then, regardless of context, posters here wouldn’t let him forget it for a thousand years.
He referred to them (or some of them, anyway) as "good people". Were you not aware of that?
  #19  
Old 04-13-2019, 06:20 PM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
He referred to them (or some of them, anyway) as "good people". Were you not aware of that?
Of course I was. Irrelevant. If he hadn’t referred to them as good people, and if instead he’d described them as “Some people doing something”, posters here wouldn’t have let him forget it for a thousand years.
  #20  
Old 04-13-2019, 06:21 PM
Declan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Barrie , Ontario
Posts: 5,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by ishamael69 View Post
I’m hoping to keep this GQ, but I have my doubts as to if it is possible.

Rep. Omar said, “far too long we have lived with the discomfort of being a second-class citizen and frankly, I'm tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired of it. CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”

I’ve seen a lot of people and articles complain that her words above were being taken out of context. I understand how some might agree or disagree with her characterization, but how are they being mis-contextualized? Is she not referring to the 9/11 attacks? Isn’t the context right there that she is talking to CAIR about why CAIR was founded?
She is politically tone deaf and she was broadcasting. Some people did something at Nanking, Bergen Belsen, dachau and for shits and giggles, see what she says about some people did something at Sabra and Shatilla.
__________________
What would Bugs Bunny say
  #21  
Old 04-13-2019, 06:22 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
Of course I was. Irrelevant. If he hadn’t referred to them as good people, and if instead he’d described them as “Some people doing something”, posters here wouldn’t have let him forget it for a thousand years.
LOL. What he said was far, far worse than "some people doing something". He praised white supremacists.
  #22  
Old 04-13-2019, 06:26 PM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
LOL. What he said was far, far worse than "some people doing something". He praised white supremacists.
Point comprehensively missed.

Pretend he’d never said they were good people. Pretend he described the event as ‘Some people doing something’.

Picturing that? Good.

Regardless of context, posters here wouldn’t have let him forget it for a thousand years.
  #23  
Old 04-13-2019, 06:28 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
Point comprehensively missed.

Pretend he’d never said they were good people. Pretend he described the event as ‘Some people doing something’.

Picturing that? Good.

Regardless of context, posters here wouldn’t have let him forget it for a thousand years.
Okay, I'd suspect that posters would have moved on very quickly, because he's since said many (hundreds?) things that were much, much worse than that.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 04-13-2019 at 06:28 PM.
  #24  
Old 04-13-2019, 06:55 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Okay, I'd suspect that posters would have moved on very quickly, because he's since said many (hundreds?) things that were much, much worse than that.
Yeppers. Trump says shit that we'd have not let GWB forget for months at least, and it's just another Thursday. On Friday, he'll say something equally crazy.
  #25  
Old 04-13-2019, 09:08 PM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
It occurs to me that if Trump described, say, the Unite the Right rally as “Some people doing something” then, regardless of context, posters here wouldn’t let him forget it for a thousand years.


If he had said “some people were doing something and it shouldn’t be assumed that all white people agree with them” it would be a non controversial statement that nobody would have talked about for a thousand years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  #26  
Old 04-13-2019, 09:42 PM
senoy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,830
I think the context though is the issue. She gave the speech in front of CAIR. CAIR is at the very least a suspect organization and she historically revised their founding to provide cover.

Let's do the Trump analogy again. He's standing in front of the European Heritage Club which presents itself as a group dedicated to fighting injustices against European Anericans. We know that its founders were involved with the Klan and went to great trouble to hide that fact. The group has been accused of contacts with the Aryan Brotherhood by the FBI. Their founder has written letters to Anders Breivik thanking him for his donation and calling him a great defender of European heritage. Trump then goes in front of the group and says that for too long Europeans have been oppressed and that the European Heritage Club was founded after that stuff that happened in Charleston to combat oppression. We would certainly find such a statement inappropriate at best.

Obviously the treatment of Muslims in the US is not the same as the treatment of Europeans, but that is still essentially what Omar just did. CAIR does not have a spotless history, (though I am not suggesting it truly is an Islamist front group as some on the right contend ) and while it does good things, a Congressperson should at the very least be wary of giving them political cover and certainly should choose their words more carefully, especially in light of the fact that she can't go two weeks without saying another shady thing. Eventually, people are going to assume the smoke is indicative of fire.

Last edited by senoy; 04-13-2019 at 09:44 PM.
  #27  
Old 04-13-2019, 10:41 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,823
Missing the point does seem to be a strong suit with the right these days.
  #28  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:05 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,867
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
It occurs to me that if Trump described, say, the Unite the Right rally as “Some people doing something” then, regardless of context, posters here wouldn’t let him forget it for a thousand years.
If what had happened after the "Unite the Right" rally was that white people as a group started getting, say, their churches firebombed and their immigration and visa requests denied and their civil liberties curtailed and their kids harassed at school and their entire cohort constantly and viciously attacked as bloodthirsty murderers...

...and if Trump or any other white conservative then complained, not unreasonably, that "some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties"...

...then posters here would not have objected to that remark at all. Your attempted analogy is crap.
  #29  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:23 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by senoy View Post
I think the context though is the issue. She gave the speech in front of CAIR. CAIR is at the very least a suspect organization and she historically revised their founding to provide cover.
...this isn't about "CAIR." This is about narrative framing. This is about understanding how propaganda works. For example:

Quote:
Let's do the Trump analogy again. He's standing in front of the European Heritage Club which presents itself as a group dedicated to fighting injustices against European Anericans. We know that its founders were involved with the Klan and went to great trouble to hide that fact. The group has been accused of contacts with the Aryan Brotherhood by the FBI. Their founder has written letters to Anders Breivik thanking him for his donation and calling him a great defender of European heritage. Trump then goes in front of the group and says that for too long Europeans have been oppressed and that the European Heritage Club was founded after that stuff that happened in Charleston to combat oppression. We would certainly find such a statement inappropriate at best.

Obviously the treatment of Muslims in the US is not the same as the treatment of Europeans, but that is still essentially what Omar just did.
You've just recontextualized a two-second sound byte as comparable to a hypothetical involving Trump. You've invoked the Klan, the Aryan Brotherhood, Anders Berivik and compared that to an organization that actively disputes every allegation that it has ties to terrorist organizations.

That's how you "narratively reframe" a story. Its literally how propaganda works.

Quote:
CAIR does not have a spotless history, (though I am not suggesting it truly is an Islamist front group as some on the right contend ) and while it does good things, a Congressperson should at the very least be wary of giving them political cover and certainly should choose their words more carefully, especially in light of the fact that she can't go two weeks without saying another shady thing. Eventually, people are going to assume the smoke is indicative of fire.
Nope.

If you want to argue that people shouldn't associate with CAIR then make that case here. Lay out the evidence.

And when Omar gets labeled "anti-Semitic" for calling known white nationalist Stephen Miller a "white nationalist": it should be pretty fucking clear that no matter how carefully she "chooses her words", she is going to get attacked for what she says regardless. As long as people like you continue to "reframe the narrative" then people are going to assume the smoke is indicative of fire. So just stop doing that already.
  #30  
Old 04-13-2019, 11:55 PM
Chisquirrel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
Point comprehensively missed.

Pretend he’d never said they were good people. Pretend he described the event as ‘Some people doing something’.

Picturing that? Good.

Regardless of context, posters here wouldn’t have let him forget it for a thousand years.
Sure, if you had in "and white people everywhere were ostracized, attacked, and felt their liberties severely curtailed for no reason other than sharing the same skin tone as the perpetrators."


Ignoring the rest of the quote is to completely miss the point, no matter how you try to argue that Dopers are as dumb and narrow-minded as many Republican leaders.
  #31  
Old 04-14-2019, 02:20 AM
Ludovic is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
Sure, if you had in "and white people everywhere were ostracized, attacked, and felt their liberties severely curtailed for no reason other than sharing the same skin tone as the perpetrators."


Ignoring the rest of the quote is to completely miss the point, no matter how you try to argue that Dopers are as dumb and narrow-minded as many Republican leaders.
I was about to post the same thing: in context, "some people did something" would not be the remarkable part of the sentence (although even in context, the SCROTUS does find a way to make everything he says objectionable so it would still likely draw comment.)
  #32  
Old 04-14-2019, 04:20 AM
Fuzzy_wuzzy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,119
She was likely attempting to minimize the awfulness of the event to make a political point. I believe this to be the case because 99% of politicians are similarly adept with their use of words. It's what politicians do. Sure, Omar be among the 1% of politicians who steelman opposing arguments but until otherwise proven I'm lumping her in with the 99% of politicians who euphemise or exaggerate when they feel it helps their cause.
  #33  
Old 04-14-2019, 09:30 AM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 59,255
While I can picture "some people did something" as an understatement in reference to the 9/11 attacks, I can't quite contort mentally enough to see how it could be offensive.
  #34  
Old 04-14-2019, 10:00 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,855
I think what she was trying to say was just because some group of people did something bad doesn't mean that the rest of the country's Muslims have to pay for it. She could have chosen her words with more precision. She might have subconsciously been trying to downplay the association of Islam with 9/11 but that makes sense considering that she was trying to deliver a speech to empower Muslims so that they don't have to feel ashamed of who they are.

Meaning is conveyed in different ways, not just the literal denotation of words -- we all know this on some level. The people criticizing her could make an attempt to listen and understand the speech in its entirety, but they're not interested in that. They're deliberately choosing to mischaracterize what she's saying so that they can justify their own bigotry toward the new faces of Congress, like Reps. Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, and Tlaib. The right wing is playing a dangerous game of trying to use ethnicity to smear Omar and others. But it's hardly surprising because racism is their brand.
  #35  
Old 04-14-2019, 10:13 AM
orcenio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NCR
Posts: 2,219
Tweeting out a 45 second video of Omar cut & looped with interspersed video of 9/11 attacks seems much more offensive (and in the modern climate even dangerous for the congresswoman's safety).

Last edited by orcenio; 04-14-2019 at 10:15 AM.
  #36  
Old 04-14-2019, 10:26 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,855
It's the demonization of "the other"
  #37  
Old 04-14-2019, 11:00 AM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
If what had happened after the "Unite the Right" rally was that white people as a group started getting, say, their churches firebombed and their immigration and visa requests denied and their civil liberties curtailed and their kids harassed at school and their entire cohort constantly and viciously attacked as bloodthirsty murderers...

...and if Trump or any other white conservative then complained, not unreasonably, that "some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties"...

...then posters here would not have objected to that remark at all. Your attempted analogy is crap.
Sorry, but I can’t conceive of any possible universe in which Trump could describe the Unite the Right rally as ‘Some people doing something’ without posters here raining scathing condemnation on him from now until the end of time, no matter what happened afterwards. Especially if the ‘Unite the Right’ marchers had killed three thousand people.
  #38  
Old 04-14-2019, 11:12 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy_wuzzy View Post
She was likely attempting to minimize the awfulness of the event to make a political point.
This is a central point, precisely because of how absurdly wrong it is.

9/11 is the single most influential event in American culture in the past half century, certainly in this millennium. It's shaped how we view world politics, how we view each other, and how we view Muslims.

If there is one thing that a savvy American Muslim politician will not do, it'll be to "attempt to minimize the awfulness" of 9/11. That plays so perfectly into the xenophobic right's narrative that it's political suicide.

There's no fucking way that she was doing that on purpose.

Omar needs to pay better attention, in my opinion. She needs to look at the alligators snapping at her from the swamp, and she needs to keep her feet well away from the water. It was clumsy and foolish of her to phrase things this way, and although it's kind of ridiculous that it's this way, she ought to phrase everything so that those snapping alligators can't get at her. She should've said something like, "CAIR found new purpose after 9/11 because they recognized that as a result of that act of brutal mass murder by a few madmen, all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties."
  #39  
Old 04-14-2019, 11:13 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
Sorry, but I can’t conceive of any possible universe in which Trump could describe the Unite the Right rally as ‘Some people doing something’ without posters here raining scathing condemnation on him from now until the end of time, no matter what happened afterwards. Especially if the ‘Unite the Right’ marchers had killed three thousand people.
As for this, I'm going to concede this imaginary point in this imaginary universe to you, and join you in condemning Alt-Me in that Alt-Universe as a hypocrite, mostly because I don't give a shit about imaginary hypocrisy in other timelines.
  #40  
Old 04-14-2019, 11:29 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
Sorry, but I can’t conceive of any possible universe in which Trump could describe the Unite the Right rally as ‘Some people doing something’ without posters here raining scathing condemnation on him from now until the end of time, no matter what happened afterwards. Especially if the ‘Unite the Right’ marchers had killed three thousand people.
You must have a dull imagination, since Trump has said many much, much worse things than this, and those things have been moved on from once he said something even worse, because he always says something worse.
  #41  
Old 04-14-2019, 11:51 AM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
You must have a dull imagination, since Trump has said many much, much worse things than this, and those things have been moved on from once he said something even worse, because he always says something worse.
Well, maybe I do. Maybe we’ll just have to agree to disagree. But the notion that Trump could describe the ‘Unite the Right’ marchers as merely ‘Some people doing something’ - in any context - without getting an absolute ton of shit for it is something I just can’t crowbar my mind open wide enough to accommodate. Hell, Trump couldn’t even describe MS-13 as animals without catching some shit, and they’re a bunch of killers and sex traffickers.
  #42  
Old 04-14-2019, 12:31 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
Well, maybe I do. Maybe we’ll just have to agree to disagree. But the notion that Trump could describe the ‘Unite the Right’ marchers as merely ‘Some people doing something’ - in any context - without getting an absolute ton of shit for it is something I just can’t crowbar my mind open wide enough to accommodate. Hell, Trump couldn’t even describe MS-13 as animals without catching some shit, and they’re a bunch of killers and sex traffickers.
Animal lovers were especially offended by the comparison.
  #43  
Old 04-14-2019, 12:33 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 26,736
Right wingers offer “thoughts and prayers” for tragedies like Sandy Hook, and they think it means something, even in full context.

I generally have a low regard for Omar, but it is crystal clear that the point of her comments was how so many Americans are using a tragedy to carry out a campaign of hatred against all Muslims. The mass-murder was obscene, and the acceleration of racism is also obscene.

But strangely, so many white people are taking such great umbrage to a not-well-thought-out reference to the former, that they don’t have one second to think about the latter.

How many people are shocked by that? I mean, using any excuse whatsoever to turn the dialogue so that we can’t discuss bald-faced racism? This must be the first time in American history anything like that has happened, so I’m gobsmacked.
  #44  
Old 04-14-2019, 01:11 PM
Fuzzy_wuzzy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
This is a central point, precisely because of how absurdly wrong it is.

9/11 is the single most influential event in American culture in the past half century, certainly in this millennium. It's shaped how we view world politics, how we view each other, and how we view Muslims.

If there is one thing that a savvy American Muslim politician will not do, it'll be to "attempt to minimize the awfulness" of 9/11. That plays so perfectly into the xenophobic right's narrative that it's political suicide.

There's no fucking way that she was doing that on purpose.

Omar needs to pay better attention, in my opinion. She needs to look at the alligators snapping at her from the swamp, and she needs to keep her feet well away from the water. It was clumsy and foolish of her to phrase things this way, and although it's kind of ridiculous that it's this way, she ought to phrase everything so that those snapping alligators can't get at her. She should've said something like, "CAIR found new purpose after 9/11 because they recognized that as a result of that act of brutal mass murder by a few madmen, all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties."
I may be wrong but I'm not absurdly wrong. Only Omar knows why she used those precise words. Neither you nor I can read her mind. However, she is a politician. I gave her the same motivation as the average politician. In a speech about the repercussion of 9/11 on the US Muslim community she did not dwell on the death, carnage and destruction of the event; nor did she dwell on the terrorist events in the West since 9/11. I wouldn't expect anything different from a politician railing against the excesses of the security services(specifically against Muslims)since the event. However, I don't expect the event to be described merely as 'some people doing something'.

I am as good as certain Omar would never describe the recent act of terrorism against Muslims last month as 'that thing that somebody did in New Zealand'. She would NEVER be so flippant about that event.

Last edited by Fuzzy_wuzzy; 04-14-2019 at 01:12 PM.
  #45  
Old 04-14-2019, 01:16 PM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 59,255
I know very little about Omar but I'm prepared to wager that she could be both drunk and concussed yet still more articulate than Trump.
__________________
Don't worry about the end of Inception. We have top men working on it right now. Top. Men.
  #46  
Old 04-14-2019, 02:47 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy_wuzzy View Post
I am as good as certain Omar would never describe the recent act of terrorism against Muslims last month as 'that thing that somebody did in New Zealand'. She would NEVER be so flippant about that event.
..."somebody did something" would be the perfect way to describe what happened here. That wouldn't be flippant. We don't even speak his name here. He's just somebody. And he did something. I couldn't imagine a better way to describe him. In fact I'm going to say it.

"Somebody did something in Christchurch."

Do I deserve to be attacked for that?

In the wake of what happened in Christchurch most of us realized that we had been ignoring the degree anti-Muslim sentiment has infested society. Why the fuck would we find this offensive? Why the fuck would she not say that? Why the fuck would we not stand beside her, in solidarity?

And if she did say that, do you think New Zealanders would react by attacking her? By making videos quoting her out of context, cut with footage from the attacks? Can you imagine that?

I couldn't. I can't. We wouldn't let that happen.

So do you know what actually is flippant?

You invoking Christchurch as an excuse to attack Omar. What you just did. In context it was perfectly fucking clear what she meant. And in context it is perfectly clear what you have done.

I can't believe you just said what you did. And if you actually had the courage of your convictions you would be apologizing for what you said.
  #47  
Old 04-14-2019, 03:09 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,521
...sorry for the double post, but I'm just trying to imagine Jacinda Ardern reacting in the same way that Donald Trump has done in response to "somebody saying something."

Or trying to imagine an orchestrated hate-campaign against a single woman based on misinformation and propaganda happening here. We wouldn't allow it to happen.

Its inconceivable.

How can anyone, in good conscience, defend these attacks on Omar?
  #48  
Old 04-14-2019, 03:11 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy_wuzzy View Post
I may be wrong but I'm not absurdly wrong. Only Omar knows why she used those precise words. Neither you nor I can read her mind. However, she is a politician. I gave her the same motivation as the average politician. In a speech about the repercussion of 9/11 on the US Muslim community she did not dwell on the death, carnage and destruction of the event; nor did she dwell on the terrorist events in the West since 9/11. I wouldn't expect anything different from a politician railing against the excesses of the security services(specifically against Muslims)since the event. However, I don't expect the event to be described merely as 'some people doing something'.

I am as good as certain Omar would never describe the recent act of terrorism against Muslims last month as 'that thing that somebody did in New Zealand'. She would NEVER be so flippant about that event.


Omar's quote was just a case of human nature: People naturally place greater weight on atrocities that affect their side but less weight on atrocities that affect others. This doesn't make Omar a bad person - it's just human nature.

So yes, she would probably take great offense if someone brushed off the New Zealand attack as "someone did something" - but that's how most people would react in a my-group-vs-other-groups scenario. Nobody cares about all things equally; nobody is truly objective or unbiased.
  #49  
Old 04-14-2019, 05:50 PM
kaylasdad99 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
Point comprehensively missed.

Pretend he’d never said they were good people. Pretend he described the event as ‘Some people doing something’.

Picturing that? Good.

Regardless of context, posters here wouldn’t have let him forget it for a thousand years.
"Some people did something" is the setup statement. "All of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties" is the follow through, the punch line, if you like (perhaps the "payoff" is a more apt description).

A reasonably attentive read of the two statements should lead one to the conclusion that, while the payoff line doesn't require a setup in order to be a coherent statement, a setup without a payoff is usually meaningless babbling.

Leaving aside the laughable implausibility of tne America-hating fuckstick eschewing an opportunity to babble meaninglessly, your hypothetical has us hounding him for a thousand years over just a setup. I trust that was not your intention.

So, in your hypothetical, what payoff line did you intend to propose?
  #50  
Old 04-14-2019, 05:50 PM
Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 13,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
I generally have a low regard for Omar, but it is crystal clear that the point of her comments was how so many Americans are using a tragedy to carry out a campaign of hatred against all Muslims. The mass-murder was obscene, and the acceleration of racism is also obscene.

But strangely, so many white people are taking such great umbrage to a not-well-thought-out reference to the former, that they don’t have one second to think about the latter.
I think at least some people are capable of considering-and giving appropriate respective weight to that consideration-of both the overall point and thrust of her remarks AND her harshly insensitive words referencing one of the worst tragedies in our nation's history.

Just because she was discussing an admirable and worthy issue (one in which I fully support the substance of her arguments) does not mean that she did not also make what at the very least can be called a flippant, careless remark re an event that still evokes strong emotional reactions from many Americans (and not just white people).
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017