Skip

Fundamentalism Reaches Fever Point on U.S. Soil.
September 21, 2001 12:53 PM   Subscribe

Fundamentalism Reaches Fever Point on U.S. Soil. Extremism is spreading and is now affecting our very own. Or as Greta Garbo's famously didn't say "I vont to be alone!". The question is: do you?
posted by MiguelCardoso (31 comments total)

 
Wow.
posted by aaronshaf at 1:02 PM on September 21, 2001


I dunno, Miguel. It's the freakin' New York Post. Which is always extreme, or at the very least cheesy and overtly (highly, extremely, you can't understate this) sensationalist.
posted by raysmj at 1:03 PM on September 21, 2001


The more that speak out against the U.N., the better. It was supposed to be an organization promoting peace and liberty, but it's turning more and more into a wannabe global government of rogue nations and internationalist socialists, promoting global wealth "redistribution" more than peace and certainly liberty.

Its "conferences" are more often than not pure farces, on the taxpayers' expense. And like Peyser rightfully points out; when it finally got an opportunity to speak out for the very ideals it was founded to promote -- peace and liberty -- like after the terrorist atrocity we've all just witnessed -- it's quiet like a clam. I, for one, second Peyser's column. It's time for the United Nations to get the hell out of town.

Without the US, it'll collapse like the house of badly played cards it is.
posted by dagny at 1:07 PM on September 21, 2001


Her way of expressing herself may be rough but it is does illustrate the recurring wave of isolationism that overcomes the U.S. every so often.
It could even be argued Bush rode in on one of them.
But, at a time like this, isolationism is a real enemy if this war against terrorism is to be properly waged and won. And baiting foreigners in general is surely the lowest guerilla tactic of all.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 1:08 PM on September 21, 2001


I didn't see much illustration about isolationism as much as I saw insults and media name calling. Is the NY Post always Newsmax-worthy?
posted by skallas at 1:18 PM on September 21, 2001


Oh dagny, you're so predictable. Which is good, because it saves time.

Anyway, that's the familiar Murdoch line being trawled in the Post: a man who's probably shitting himself at the thought of a clampdown on money launderers, given the baroque financing of his own media empire. And I suspect that Andrea Peyser hasn't been helping the rescue effort, given that it probably takes most of the day to sharpen that crayon.
posted by holgate at 1:22 PM on September 21, 2001


It has become clear that the most popular passtime in these uncertain times is dispensing venom and vitriole.
posted by shagoth at 1:25 PM on September 21, 2001


Cool - guest commentator Ed Anger! I thought he was out chasing Bat-Boy for the National Enquirer!

What an exquisite rant. I really, honestly loved it. It was so surreal, it was self-parody.

I hope...
posted by Perigee at 1:25 PM on September 21, 2001


I did like how Peyser accuses the UN of "libel," though. Pot, kettle, etc.
posted by bcwinters at 1:28 PM on September 21, 2001


Fundamentalism reaches a fever point? Indeed, for some it does. The reasoning of the writer of this New York Post article and dagny in the comment above is very familiar for me: it's exactly like the reasoning of many of the people of organizations like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and radical Hizballah supporters I have talked to and have interviewed in the Middle East. It's rhetorical and populist, its all accusations of "the others" without any sound arguments. Those fundamentalists are so angry that they lost their patience for analysing, that they don't take the time anymore to listen and to base their opinions on facts. They only want to satisfy their craving for revenge...

When attacking the UN or any other organisation... don't just accuse. Argue your case, otherwise you're just flaming.
posted by igor.boog at 1:30 PM on September 21, 2001


I tend to disagree with the article. It is totally unfair to say that UN is full of anti-americanism. The Taleban, whom the author implies having human rights problems, do not even hold the Afghanistan seat in the UN. That seat is held by the Taleban Oppositon, the northeren alliance.

The United Nations has always been a place where the United States has gotten support from. There was no need of a new resolution from the UN after 9.11 because the UN already has such resolutions. And if need be, it will be a quick job to get one.

When is that an agenda backed by the US has not passed. or vice versa ?

It is true that the US has lost its seat in the Human Rights group within the UN but the US has not been evicted. US lost in an election. A democratic election. Though the US congress retalitated by saying that we will not pay the UN what we owe it, unless they give us back our seat. Ironic, cuz elections will be held next year wont they. If not then may be a year later.

"Without the US, it'll collapse like the house of badly played cards it is."
So is that why US "harbors" the UN headquarters ? To fulfill its demands and wishes like a hearless, soulless, zombie ?

It is not graceful to cry foul if every thing does not go according to plan.
posted by adnanbwp at 1:31 PM on September 21, 2001


Andrea Peyser has never been anything more than a hack columnist, but I have to admit something about the phrase "CNN war slut" made me laugh heartily.
posted by aaron at 1:47 PM on September 21, 2001


Skallas:

Andrea Peyser is no nutter. She's a respected attorney who does a lot of pro bono work and, judging by her columns, strikes me as an intelligent and by no means illiberal commentator.
So it came as a shock to me to find an intelligent writer let herself be taken over by xenophobic demons.
That's why it's illustrative. Isolationism is a major force in U.S. politics(it actually makes sense, that's why so it's been so appealing, on the right and on the left)and for it to resurface now, when Bush is talking about allies and an international war against terrorism, is a bit unsettling.
It is sincere, though and I bet a lot of New Yorkers agree - if only for those pesky unpaid parking fines.

raysmj: a lot of people buy and enjoy the Post(including me)and it's not like it's the Enquirer or something.

But holgate, as usual, is disconcerting and is probably on to something. The post's new Australian editor(Col Allen?)has been getting a lot of stick from the U.S. press lately and, judging by the fiend Murdoch's track record, there definitely could have been a News Corp fatwa on "smarmy Europeans" and the United Nations.

Plus; does anybody know if the U.S. has paid its U.N. bill yet?

Viva Woodrow Wilson, anybody? Aw shucks...
posted by MiguelCardoso at 1:47 PM on September 21, 2001


Perigree: Was that a slander against Ed Anger? I can't decide. The NY Post doesn't have a Dear Dotti imitator yet, though, so it's still behind the curve. Accept no substitutes . . . or something. Speaking of which, I wonder if the alien with the crystal around his neck - the one who appeared on the WWN cover with Rush prior to the GOP takeover in '94 and Clinton prior to reelection in '96 - has talked to Bush about this situation yet? Hmmm.
posted by raysmj at 1:55 PM on September 21, 2001


Tell the U.N. to pay parking tickets. Tell Anapour she is not needed cause CNN now has Paula from the right-wing channel. Tell the Post to take meds.
posted by Postroad at 2:05 PM on September 21, 2001


Crazed nut. He probably even eats Almond Joys.
posted by fleener at 2:32 PM on September 21, 2001


Huh?

That writer wasn't Fundamentalist, just Nationalistic. There was no religious pitch to her artical at all
posted by delmoi at 2:59 PM on September 21, 2001


MiguelCardoso, isolationism is an interesting topic, but, honestly, listen: One editorial really does not prove anything, or even suggest anything. (Even a poll "showing" Americans favor ditching the U.N. would be a better jumping off point.) "Extremism is spreading and is now affecting our very own" -- come on. Let's talk about how you arrived at that conclusion.

The NY Post is regarded by all but a few New Yorkers as just an entertainment -- especially the editorials, which are essentially humor columns.
posted by argybarg at 3:02 PM on September 21, 2001


I have to admit something about the phrase "CNN war slut" made me laugh heartily.

True, she's that, and in the worst and shallowest CNN fashion. Incidentally, British MeFites and devotees of BBC news will have felt a familiar frisson as Kate Adie reported from Ground Zero. I can only presume that she was the model for "War" in Gaiman and Pratchett's Good Omens: Journalist of the Apocalypse, that woman.

Oh, and Ann Coulter's apparently as incommunicado as Dick Cheney these days, so it's not all bad.
posted by holgate at 3:24 PM on September 21, 2001


Well, argybargy, it just looks to me as if everyone is jockeying for position here, with extremists on both sides of the spectrum hogging the airwaves and the presses.
It's either total war or totally wuzzy peace.
Media people, in particular, have gone haywire. They're all scrambling for attention - I am one and I know what it's like - and the easiest way to do this, they stupidly figure, is to work themselves into dishonest frenzies.
For once I think the most level-headed Americans are actually in the administration! Powell, but also the brilliant Rumsfeld and supposedly ultra-conservative Ashcroft, seem more moderate, liberal(in the good, European sense)and generally more level-headed than almost any of the columnists.

I do keep up and this is how it seems to be.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 3:54 PM on September 21, 2001


Fair enough. I sense some of the same, too. I just don't think it's evidenced by one editorial.

As I see it, the moderate, level-headed opinion is quiet at the moment because it's based on waiting. Very little has yet happened, aside for jockeying for rhetorical position, and I, for one, am reluctant to read tea leaves. Just have to help frame the arguments and see what happens.
posted by argybarg at 4:12 PM on September 21, 2001


holgate: Oh dagny, you're so predictable. Which is good, because it saves time.

Au contraire, holgate. Dagny is consistent. Which is good, because she is right. ;-)
posted by davidmsc at 4:37 PM on September 21, 2001


Geez. Does Andrea Peyser talk to Jesus with that mouth?
posted by paddbear at 5:08 PM on September 21, 2001


Why is it that this thread reminds me of Robert Frost's Mending Wall?

"Good fences make good neighbors"

or

"Something there is that doesn't love a wall"

I don't know if they'd publish it in the Post...
posted by bragadocchio at 5:36 PM on September 21, 2001


Lucidity itself, arybargy. Here in Portugal, when we agree strongly, we say "I make your words mine" or "I'll sign that with an X", meaning unreservedly.
What would be the best American or English equivalent, apart from "I'll drink to that"?
Because this - a large gin and tonic, actually - I'm already wholeheartedly doing, natch.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 5:43 PM on September 21, 2001


Miguel, I'll join you there in agreeing with argybargy.

What words in american english?

"I'll second that."

or, even (if you're shooting for brevity):

"ditto"
posted by bragadocchio at 5:50 PM on September 21, 2001


Rather amusing to label the UN anti-American, when all UN mission flags have been at half-staff but Iran's and Libya's, according to the Post's own reporting. (Of course, that's probably the reason for the spew above, but when has a 2 bad apples out of 150 ratio stopped the Post?) Will they give the UN credit for supporting the US demands on the Taliban? No. Will they notice when the Secretary-General visits the disaster zone in New York? No. Will they notice when the Security Council votes unanimously to condemn the terrorist attacks (including Russia, China, and several heavily Muslim states)? No. Why give them any credit at all when you can upchuck the same old vomitus?

Miguel, other phrases to use are Wish I'd said that, or (commonly online) What _______ said and Just read what ____ said.
posted by dhartung at 6:07 PM on September 21, 2001


Note that the Post has indeed reported on all three of those items above, but the opinion column fails to mention them. I guess that means they didn't technically lie to their readers (along the lines of FOX News reporting that Trent Lott led a delegation of US Senators to New York, when it was Majority Leader Tom Daschle and Trent Lott together; they quoted Lott but not Daschle, though he was mentioned near the end, as if he were a hanger-on).

Oh, more reasons to dislike the NY Post: their archive search feature asks you to pay for articles it finds, even if they're within the last seven days and are still available for free.
posted by dhartung at 6:14 PM on September 21, 2001


It is totally unfair to say that UN is full of anti-americanism.

I dunno...I'd be anti- anyone who didn't pay their damn debts.
posted by rushmc at 6:30 PM on September 21, 2001


What bragadocchio and dhartung said.
I'll second that and ditto besides.
Plus I wish I'd said that. (Rex Whistler's reply to Oscar Wilde when he thus remarked: "You will, Oscar, you will ")

My words exactly; funny you should say that and you both took the words right out of my mouth.

Thanks!

(My italics and links don't work, by the way)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 6:40 PM on September 21, 2001


Amerislang that's even shorter than "ditto": "Word."
posted by diddlegnome at 7:28 PM on September 21, 2001


« Older The director, actor and self proclaimed messiah...   |   Crypto guru getting blamed for his software. Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post