Comments on: Terry Jones Monty Python Observer

Terry Jones Monty Python Observer

thedailygrowl — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:31:55 -0800

Terry Jones of Monty Python fame attempts to apply the Bush administration policy to his own neighborhood.

By: jdroth

jdroth — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:40:16 -0800

This is good stuff. The one certain way to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers targeting the US or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim countries that have never threatened us. Ha! Nice link.

By: fishfucker

fishfucker — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:41:46 -0800

amusing, certainly, but probably not the best analogy in the world. (of course, good analogues are few and far between.) i'm surprised to see terry jones around -- he is, apparently, the quiet python... thanks for the link.

By: fishfucker

fishfucker — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:45:28 -0800

ps. terry jones.

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:54:00 -0800

Actually, it's an awful analogy. Let me fix it. Had Mr. Johnson been gutting the neighbors cats in the front yard and leaving them to hang on his mailbox, then stood on a soapbox in front of his home and declared that he would ram a fiery sword up Terry Jones' ass, then he would have sounded more like Iraq.

By: Potsy

Potsy — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:58:31 -0800

I think you just killed that poor geocities site, fishfucker. :-(

By: owillis

owillis — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:03:33 -0800

Actually it's more like the guy who lives all the way down the block (who Mr. Johnson talked to once) used a flamethrower that Terry Jones gave him 20 years ago to torch Terry's house, and in retaliation Terry killed Mr. Johnson's family because he looked at him funny.

By: muckster

muckster — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:07:49 -0800

I'm a peacenik and all, but that was painfully oversimplified and poorly executed.

By: fishfucker

fishfucker — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:09:27 -0800

ack!!! my apologies to geocities site owner. i should've at least tried to mirror it. anyhow, it's a very nice looking site and i do recommend it if it comes back up.

By: LouReedsSon

LouReedsSon — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:12:34 -0800

I feel kinda guilty laughing because unlike Terry Jones, George Bush isn't joking. sigh.

By: bitdamaged

bitdamaged — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:16:42 -0800

I would have liked it more if he just carried the analogy through without making the direct correlations to Bush's policy.

By: chaz

chaz — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:20:52 -0800

Actually it's more like there's an incredibly rich, super-asshole neighbor down the street whose totally guilty of all kinds of stuff, and even though he can't really get me, I can get him and all his stuff, and probably help is family out in the long run after I kill a shitload of them to get to him. Most people hate the guy, and are willing to let him hang himself or die eventually, but I'm the only ones with the guns and the greed. SO in the end no one will really care if I smoke him because he was a right shit to begin with.

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:34:13 -0800

I am (for) (against) the war. People who are (against) (for) the war are poopyheads.

By: mcsweetie

mcsweetie — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:35:59 -0800

god, he's probably french too. or related to alec baldwin.

By: SweetIceT

SweetIceT — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:37:34 -0800

This IS exactly what I have been saying for some time now only to be shot down by fellow mefi members. I agree Mr Jones "Where is the logic". Why is the government allowed to do things that I am NOT allowed to do? I have yet to find one person that convinces me. This is not Medieval Times, this is not the Old West, this is civilization. I commend Mr Jones for making the point much more humorously than I ever could.

By: namespan

namespan — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:40:27 -0800

"Don't you SEE? O'Grogan SWALLOWED a VALUABLE COIN COLLECTION and HAD to murder the ONLY MAN who KNEW!!" But really, I think owillis and chaz's analogies both come pretty close. Maybe we could, by doing Terry Jones ad nauseum, spawn a whole new genre of political commentary....

By: sgt.serenity

sgt.serenity — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:45:39 -0800

why dont they just bump hussein off?

By: Joey Michaels

Joey Michaels — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:50:12 -0800

Hey! I wrote a sophomoric and overly simplified thing almost exactly like this months and months ago! I should be let into Monty Python right now. In fact, I demand it.

By: Civil_Disobedient

Civil_Disobedient — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:54:22 -0800

Stay tuned for Terry's next piece: Applying the Bush economic policy to his own neighborhood. Excerpt: I was walking down to my Cambridge reunion party yesterday and must have tripped over half a dozen people on the dole. Now, I've been eyeing this really beautiful Aston Martin roadster lately, and thought, if I could buy it, I wouldn't have to deal with these indigent, lazy people. And what do they use their money for, anyway? Smoke and spirits? Why, my cause is much more important than there's, and anyway, I've contributed to national culture. So I've decided to rob them, with the help of my local MP, since they aren't using the money half as well as I would."

By: RylandDotNet

RylandDotNet — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 22:58:22 -0800

I agree with him about the whole issue, but I expected more from Terry Jones than tortured analogies and ham-handed satire, merely to preach to the already-converted. The humor is too poor to appeal to people who agree with him, and the arguments are too weak for anyone who disagrees to possibly listen to them - I'm not sure what the whole point of this piece was.

By: hama7

hama7 — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 23:01:28 -0800

Terry Jones. I'm not sure what the whole point of this piece was. Terry Terry Terry Jones.

By: SweetIceT

SweetIceT — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 23:03:37 -0800

So did I Joey Michaels...all I got was a "Pshaw" outta this bunch. Its just too simple for them to understand I think. This crowd leans towards the complicated.

By: mblandi

mblandi — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 23:23:04 -0800

I find the Pyongyang "commentary" on pre-emption less amusing.

By: hob

hob — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 23:29:13 -0800

starting here and going on and on and on and... :)

By: George_Spiggott

George_Spiggott — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 23:40:48 -0800

Civil_Disobedient: utterly brilliant. Both sharper and more poignant than the estimable Mr Jones' piece. Less labored, too, though that might be by virtue of being shorter.

By: crasspastor

crasspastor — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 02:22:37 -0800

Best Post Ever Terry Terry Terry Jones.

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 04:57:46 -0800

Eyeballkid ("Had Mr. Johnson been gutting the neighbors cats in the front yard and leaving them to hang on his mailbox, then stood on a soapbox in front of his home and declared that he would ram a fiery sword up Terry Jones' ass") - You're speaking of North Korea, right? Civil_Disobedient - *Claps loudly* Can I adopt that for US consumption? It might be a meme-maker ("memer"?). So why shouldn't I be able, with my fellow American citizens, to legally purchase surface to air missiles, artillery and anti-tank ordnance, mines, tanks and heavy machine guns, or even ballistic missiles on the open market? OK, I think nukes and biological agents should be strictly off limits, but I know some of my neighbors are up to something...why, last week, there was a burglary!....and pistols and rifles are not a sufficient deterrent anymore. I need something more forcefull....It's a rough world out there, folks. "preemption....it's not just a word. it's a lifestyle!" "Don't look at me like that...I'll...I'll preempt you!" "...Are you talking to ME?" - Robert DeNiro, "Taxi Driver" *...Surveying the devastation, turns chiseled profile to fading light, shoulders surface to air missile, mounts staggering horse, rides off into sunset*

By: nofundy

nofundy — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 05:11:17 -0800

How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every single terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist is only a terrorist once he's committed an act of terror. What about would-be terrorists? These are the ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known terrorists, being suicide bombers, have already eliminated themselves. Minority Report - Phillip K. Dick It's all about the pre-emption. Kill 'em before they do something really bad! Yeah, that's the ticket! Pre-emption is bad policy.

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 05:32:03 -0800

Ah....now it all become clear to me. Fill your minds not with thoughts of war, for these lead down the terrible road to HELL: No, I say, but instead render up a prayer to the heavens, and entreat the allmighty, God on high, that ye be filled by divine LOVE!:

By: hama7

hama7 — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 05:49:45 -0800

Off topic: Do people know that using image bandwidth from sites without permission costs a lot of money? Not your money: theirs! I would really hate to pay hundreds of extra dollars per month just because somebody linked my image to a high-traffic site like Metafilter. Here's more . Spread the word.

By: digiboy

digiboy — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 06:06:03 -0800

--- The humor is too poor to appeal to people who agree with him --- Well, I thought it was funny...

By: hadashi

hadashi — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 06:38:23 -0800

Hmm. Apparently his best work is behind him. Poor analogy, poorly executed. Tell ya' what - how about having ol' Terry go down to this guys place and see how popular his humor is. I'm sure they'll be greatly amused - so amused, they'll exempt him from their murder plans! Dear Mr. Jones: We like you. We'll protect you, even if you are daft.

By: matteo

matteo — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 06:45:19 -0800

Well, I thought it was funny... same here

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 06:46:17 -0800

Hama7 - You're right. I wasn't even considering it. Mea culpa!

By: stifford

stifford — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 07:09:19 -0800

It's all about the pre-emption. Kill 'em before they do something really bad! Yeah, that's the ticket! Pre-emption is bad policy. Not when you have psychics that poop out pool balls...

By: adampsyche

adampsyche — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 07:23:51 -0800

I think a better analogy would be if Mr. Johnson borrowed a cup of sugar from Mr. Terry and forgot to return the container.

By: caddis

caddis — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 07:24:25 -0800

troutfishing: Perhaps you did swipe some bandwidth, even if most university systems have gobs of it, but that post was very cool.

By: soyjoy

soyjoy — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 07:31:26 -0800

muckster and bitdamage have already said it, but it bears repeating: I love Terry Jones. I think the analogy is solid. I think the idea is solid. But this piece just sucks. I was greatly disappointed after the first couple paragraphs, where I had expected Mr. Monty Python to take the supposed domestic situation and reduce it to absurdity, providing laffs and insight at the same time. His anger apparently got the better of him, and he started explaining to us the painfully obvious analogy instead of drawing it out in comic ways. Boo. Hiss.

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 08:00:59 -0800

soyjoy - Would that boil down to sledgehammering vs. tickling with a feather? caddis - I'm not sure if hama7's point was valid or not, especially in context (though I think he may have been just sniping, mad over something else I posted today) - but the original Mefi post I got them from sure would have gobbled up some bandwidth: those pics are from sgt_serenity's great post just behind this one, on the spiritual practices of St. Ignatious of Loyola, in the "some pictorial help here" link. There are over 50 of those incredible pictures on the page! Priceless.

By: magullo

magullo — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 08:08:42 -0800

Pssst , hadashi: Saddam is anything *but* a religious fanatic. Read up before posting or you will risk losing the feeble punch on your condescending remarks every time around.

By: hadashi

hadashi — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 08:32:29 -0800

Pssst, magullo: I'll spell it out for you in small words (so that you get it this time). The point is that Mr. Bush is doing what is necessary to prevent people like Saddam from supplying people like Mr. Hook with weapons that will kill people like Mr. Jones. In other words, "he's daft, but we'll protect him anyway because it is in our best interests to do so." Note that Mr. Hook and company already had Ricin, so they are obviously interested... Perhaps engaging your forebrain before critiquing the comments of others will keep you from embarrassing yourself every time around. Oh, I'm sorry. Was that condescending? Are you little feelings hurt? Tough.

By: stifford

stifford — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 08:51:38 -0800

Saddam is anything *but* a religious fanatic Definitely not fanatic, but I believe Saddam has been trying to appear "More Muslim" over the last ten years. I saw the Uncle Saddam documentary and it said that Saddam was in the process of building a Mosque bigger than Mecca.

By: moonbiter

moonbiter — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 08:57:09 -0800

Do people know that using image bandwidth from sites without permission costs a lot of money? Yes. That's why when I do it I post the image from my own server. Still, this should probably be in the FAQ.

By: cell divide

cell divide — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:18:47 -0800

It is true that he is trying to appear more Muslim, in the mosque you are talking about, every single brick is stamped with his name. Which is pretty much the antithesis of Islam. The only religion Saddam cares about is his own cult.

By: magullo

magullo — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:25:19 -0800

Mr. Bush is doing what is necessary to prevent people like Saddam from supplying people like Mr. Hook with weapons that will kill people like Mr. Jones Or so his story goes ... unfortunately, there is no proof of that (despite Powells' best effort yesterday). Which strikes me as the reason why Mr. Jones wrote the piece in the first place. I couldn't help but noticing the abundant references to how he doesn't really know what his neighbor is up to, but *suspects* it is not good. Do you get it now?

By: callmejay

callmejay — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 10:04:49 -0800

Why is the government allowed to do things that I am NOT allowed to do? Because we are subjects of the government, and the government is not a subject of anything else. If there were a world government (please don't say the UN) than our government would have to answer to them. If, on the other hand, we did not have a government, than in fact we as individuals would have to do our own policing.

By: hadashi

hadashi — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 10:16:01 -0800

magullo writes: Do you get it now? Yes, loud and clear. You, also, are naive and foolish. Don't worry, we'll protect you as well. The only ones who remain unconvinced after Mr. Powell's speech are the those could never be convinced, even if Saddam dosed their house with Anthrax personally - or, more likely, have a political axe to grind, aka the "We hate George Bush" crowd. There is going to be a lot of dancing on that side of the fence once the full extent of Saddam's weapons cache comes out - and don't think we're going to spare the "I told you so"...

By: ook

ook — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 11:03:33 -0800

Hey, hadashi, why don't you try being more patronizing and snide; maybe that'll convince him you're right.

By: jnthnjng

jnthnjng — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 11:04:22 -0800

The only ones who remain unconvinced after Mr. Powell's speech are the those could never be convinced ... and the only ones who remain convinced are those who were always convinced.

By: johnny vagabond

johnny vagabond — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 11:59:21 -0800

rough crowd. I, too, thought it was funny.

By: badstone

badstone — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 12:02:54 -0800

There is going to be a lot of dancing on that side of the fence once the full extent of Saddam's weapons cache comes out - and don't think we're going to spare the "I told you so"... Please don't hurt me mister big bad hadashi, but I just want to point a little thing out. Hopefully the world will continue to exist after this Iraq thing is through. It may turn out massive weapons caches exist, it may turn out otherwise, but that's not the point. The point is, what will definitely exist is the precedent we're setting. No amount of money, diplomacy, or guns will erase this "Attack first, dig the evidence out of the body strewn rubble later" policy from the history books. Just as use of nuclear weapons by a major power green-lights use of nukes by any other power, use of pre-emptive striking (especially baseless preemptive striking) does the same.

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 12:41:20 -0800

yaawwnn........hmmm. another thread becomes an Iraq debate..... *mechanically searches for evidence to support position* Ok. here goes: "The chief UN weapons inspector yesterday dismissed what has been billed as a central claim of the speech the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, will make today to the UN security council. .....Hans Blix said there was no evidence of mobile biological weapons laboratories or of Iraq trying to foil inspectors by moving equipment before his teams arrived." OK - pro war Mefi-ites. Your turn for a suitable scathing rebuttal. No cursing please, though. say anything you want...just say it nicely Maybe I should do the rebuttal myself?....it would be just like solitaire (other analogies come to mind too...)

By: turbodog

turbodog — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 14:33:48 -0800

troutfishing: In other words, Hans Blix admits to not seeing what he hasn't seen?

By: lambchops

lambchops — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 16:43:13 -0800

I quite liked Jones' article myself. Perhaps he could have also mentioned that the way to retaliate for a neighbour's beating of his wife and children is to dynamite their entire house...

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Thu, 06 Feb 2003 19:25:11 -0800

turbodog - No No No! You're supposed to post a LINK to suitably scathing rebuttal material! NOT a textual question - that's not strong enough!