The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info -----------------------
Last updated on March 6th, 2018 at 12:31 am
Fearing further Catholic rioting, SBS has withdrawn an episode of South Park that mocked the Pope:
Given the current worldwide controversy over cartoons of religious figures, we’ve decided to defer this program.
Pathetic. And in Malaysia, a newspaper has apologised for running a cartoon about the cartoons:
“We apologise. Unreservedly,” the New Straits Times, a government-linked English daily and one of the oldest in South-East Asia, said in a front-page notice in thick letters.
The newspaper will abide by “any action” the government takes against it and its executives, the notice said.
Hanging is out of the question, as a spine is required.
- Didn’t Southpark mock the pope in a much earlier series?
I don’t recall too many Catholic riots afterward.
Posted by Mike Jericho on 2006 02 23 at 11:46 PM • permalink
- The good outcome is that they’ll show something else in place of this tired, lazy show.Posted by Honkie Hammer on 2006 02 23 at 11:49 PM • permalink
- Maybe it’s time for them to riot after consumerism has been cruel to them as well.
Start a Riot Catholics, Church of England, HillSong, Seventh Dayers, Tammy Bakers, Later Dayers, Methodists, Uniting etc
Start a Riot and sing about how you disaprove to make a stand.
Get angry and feel god love you for rioting.
- LMAO at the “spine required” comment. 😀
I’m serious, I just can’t believe all the crap that has gone down in the last month. It’s just surreal, and if I was one of the 30+ people who’ve been killed in riots (or by rioters) I’d be feeling pretty pissed off about it. I mean, being killed because a newspaper in a far-off land published some cartoons? WTF? And the snivelling way that the West has responded? I feel embarrassed for our culture. The world has gone crazy!
Posted by Mr Snuffalupagus on 2006 02 23 at 11:52 PM • permalink
- Long url removed. Go search the Arabnews.com website for it. The Management.
Talking of ban’s Saudi students want a cinema.
The film asks the question ‘why is there no cinema here?’ It’s a spark to get people to talk about the subject,” Eyaf said.
I think it’s called Islamic mind control EYAF!! It’s not poverty!
- Well i ain’t a catholic, but from just the brief description of blood spraying in the Pope’s face, i think that is a fairly rank thing to show, and part of the reason why i despise South Park for the vulgar crud it is…
but still in our rush to relatvism, i don’t think a few lame cartoons quite equate to South Park’s fairly gross representation… its like equating holocaust denial with harmless cartoons and people saying “if u gotta show one, u gotta show em all!” i think some crud should probably be censured or stuck at the 2am time slot rather than shown in primetime…
their used to be a time not so long ago when there used to be a few standards about what could and couldn’t be shown or said in public…. quite obviously we are now scraping the bottom of the barrel in terms of decency… and i don’t necessarily think that is a position to be revelling in, giving out high 5’s over and claiming how progressive are we that this shite can be broadcast!!!
i mean if mohammed had been shown in some really, really disgusting situation i could probably comprehend the muslies anger more and even maybe have a slight amount of sympathy… but i guess its an example of the controversy that starts breaking out when u pick and choose what will and won’t be seen… although i think some people with a bit of common sense and taste would be capable of excluding most of the worst rubbish…..
- I think Christ has been diluted so much I think some car company will come out with the New Joo Joo Jesus mini Van.
That’s why it’s so easy to come up with concepts about Allah and the Mo.
Introducing the new “Mo Mo mobile” out now fun and yet boxy buy now in Saudi Arabia for only 20,00000! Oh, girls can’t drive it as well, so you can have all the fun!!
- #6 paco
I too am Catholic, and South Park does offend me when it does stuff like that. But I just don’t tune in, and avoid buying their merchandise. I’d be prepared to boycott their advertisers too. Rioting, flag-burning and killing are not an option. Not to mention that if I tried it they’d lock my ass up, and very quickly at that. And the media would condemn me en masse, just like they did with the Islamic riots. Oh, wait a minute…
FWIW, South Park stopped being funny about season 4, IMHO. After that it was just crap.
Posted by Mr Snuffalupagus on 2006 02 24 at 12:05 AM • permalink
- I like South Park. I’m mighty pissed off that they have cancelled a show. South Park have “dissed” so many, so many times, that I can’t believe that SBS would now actually pull an episode.
If they’re consistent they should never show any episode of South Park again. And that would be not only a real shame, but a disgraceful limitation on free speech.
Posted by eagle bomber on 2006 02 24 at 12:26 AM • permalink
- Well, I don’t think the show’s past its use-by date. Last week they tipped the bucket on Scientology, and I thought it was hilarious. The toon Scientologists were threatening to sue Stan, who yelled back “I’m not afraid of your lawyers!”, immediately followed by the credits, where all production personnel were listed as John Smith or Jane Smith. I particularly liked the telling of Scientology’s theory of creation (with the golden DC8s, Xenu, volcanoes, etc.), all through which they flashed a large banner saying “Scientologists actually believe this”.
Now you’d think that the xmas episode where Jesus was gunned down by Iraqis would set off more alarm bells than any pope episode would. After all, the pope’s just the local sales manager for the business.
I wonder if they’ll ever do Mo? If anyone does, it’ll be them.
Posted by Mr Hackenbacker on 2006 02 24 at 12:28 AM • permalink
- I think Christ has been diluted so much I think some car company will come out with the New Joo Joo Jesus mini Van.
To late 1.618 – take a look at God-Jesus
I want one!
As a Christian I confess feel uncomfortable when South Park (which I can take or leave on occasion) makes fun of what I hold sacred but it says more about the character of the mocker than the One who’s being mocked.
I think that could be the reason why Muslims riot and Christianity, amongst other religions, do not.
— Nora
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2006 02 24 at 12:29 AM • permalink
- I didn’t realize tvs in Australia didn’t have “off” switches.Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 02 24 at 12:30 AM • permalink
- You can write to the Pope.
After criticising both the cartoons and the violent protests in Muslim countries that followed, the Vatican this week linked the issue to its long-standing concern that the rights of other faiths are limited, sometimes severely, in Muslim countries.
I don’t care what this url led to (something on Reuters, search for it yourselves), I removed it because it BROKE THE PAGE. I will remove—not fix, remove—all urls that do this. USE THE LINK BUTTON. The Management.
Saudi Arabia bans all public expression of any non-Muslim religion and sometimes arrests Christians even for worshipping privately. Pakistan allows churches to operate but its Islamic laws effectively deprive Christians of many rights.
GO the POPE!!!
- Oh, and 1.618725 whatever? Could you stop:
1. posting long urls here—it’s not that difficult to learn how to put up a link, I even have guidelines,
and,
2. drop the cute “Hi guys!” random nonsensical chatter act. It’s getting on my nerves. Say something relative to the conversation or don’t comment.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 02 24 at 12:32 AM • permalink
- You can keep commenting, 1.618, as long as you stop doing those two things I listed. It hardly has anything to do with “not fitting in here.”Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 02 24 at 01:00 AM • permalink
- SBS didnt have a choice – If they ran the Southpark episode they’d be accused of hypocrisy for not having shown the mohammered cartoons.Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 24 at 01:06 AM • permalink
- It’s true that South Park jumped the shark sometime around Season 4. Then–sometime in the past couple of years–they jumped right back, and the past couple of seasons have been the best of the lot. “Woodland Critter Christmas”, f’rinstance, is one of the best half-hours of TV I’ve ever seen.
The target of this particular episode isn’t really the Pope at all–it’s 12-step programs like AA, which (they argue) rob people of the strength required to enjoy life in moderation.
(Mild spoilers follow)
Stan’s dad gets busted for drunk driving, has to go to an AA meeting, learns that alcoholism is a “disease” over which he has no control, and promptly retires to Grandpa’s wheelchair to drink himself into a stupor. Then he learns of a bleeding Virgin Mary in a neighboring town, and sets out to get himself “cured”…
As usual, the show is entirely sensible in its basic message, while simultaneously being entirely over the top in tastelessness and vulgarity. But I like that.
- Andrea, I’m new to blogs (a week or so). I’m not really sure of the rules, so to speak, but are you including “That was a funny comment you made” and “I totally agree” type posts in your criticism of 1.618? To be honest, his posts seemed fine to me. Also, I enjoy these forums, and sometimes someone says something that triggers an somewhat unrelated thought that I post. Is this not OK? This is a serious question from a newbie, BTW, so be gentle with me. 😉
And, while I have you, is there a way that we can upload our own avatars? They add character to the posting, IMHO. Just asking…
Posted by Mr Snuffalupagus on 2006 02 24 at 01:19 AM • permalink
- SBS was completely right to ban the Pope episode. Them mackerel-snappers is capable of anything…Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 02 24 at 01:22 AM • permalink
- Both Moslems and Christians could learn some tolerance from Buddhists. Buddhism often gets slighted or insulted. Everytime Jamie Durie plants another severed head of The Buddha amongst the yakkas or some other lifestyle show uses one as a fancy door-stopper, we feel offended. Imagine, if Buddhists did this with statues of the Virgin Mary; or hung pictues of Jesus exposing his heart above the toilet roll in the outside lav.
Well,we just accept that some Christians are a bit thick when it comes to other people’s religion. Nobody’s rioted or burnt down Channel 9. Not yet.
- You can lampoon someone or something without having to be grossly offensive… the two are not mutually inclusive…. in fact most of the great thinkers, philosophers and orators of history could make a point and change an opinion without thrashing around in the gutter….
i have recently been reading some of Abraham Lincoln’s and Churchill’s quotations, and they were more powerful than anything the dregs at south park will ever come up with…. and yet they wouldn’t have required any warnings before them in terms of language or content…
those people have my respect… the garbage peddlers like south park and jerry springer who wrap themselves in the free speech flag and tell everyone there tv’s have off buttons do more damage than good for society IMHO….
- #38 “The late Dave Allen lampooned the popes constantly…”
And NOOO-BODY FORGETS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!
I also recall a Python routine “The Bishop.” (Think the Avengers.) Wasn’t he C of E?Posted by Old Grouch on 2006 02 24 at 02:04 AM • permalink
- You can lampoon someone or something without having to be grossly offensive…
Well, sure. The owner of this site does that all the time (though many people apparently do find him grossly offensive). So does P.J. O’Rourke and Mark Steyn (also found highly offensive by many). But it doesn’t have to be that way. Ever since satire began, there’s always been a place for sharp, ribald humor. As Brian Anderson (author of South Park Conservatives) writes:
[T]here’s no doubting South Park, joining a long tradition that runs from Aristophanes to Tom Wolfe, exemplifies the essence of satire–“the comic as weapon,” as social thinker Peter Berger describes it in his book on the comic imagination. Satire, Berger writes, has four criteria: fantasy (often grotesque), a firm moral standpoint, an object of attack, and an educational purpose. South Park meets all four.
Having seen it, I can say that the episode in question easily meets those criteria. By laughing at the grotesque humour, you’re much more open to the serious point underlying it. But here’s the thing: no-one’s making you watch. Enjoy your quotations.
- # 10 casanova
Good point about equating harmless cartoons with holocaust denial and the like. The relatively tame cartoons mildly ridiculed a horrible truth – that Islamists kill innocent people and are promised a bizarre reward for doing so. The holocaust ones are making fun of genocide.I think the ones that created the most furor among Muslims – the exploding turban and the virgin shortage – were funny because they pointed out how crazy this behavior is. Maybe that’s what made them even angrier, (besides being manipulated into a frenzy by the Imams with the fake cartoons.)
Appeasement didn’t work the time it was tried with the Nazis. I wonder why anyone expects it to work better this time.
- #45.. That Brian Anderson is quite a word smith isn’t he… :o)
He knows how to peddle an intellectual line that really touches on none of the reality and vulgarity of how South Park conducts itself, and even manages to try to graniosely attach it as the latest incarnation of some noteworthy tradition of important social comment going back to Greek times is it???
taking such a 4-point text book approach to justification, i’m sure the cartoons and stories that the notorious Jew-baiter Julius Streicher used to but in his anti-semitic rag Die Sturmer in nazi germany could equally well qualify and be defended as serious and important work…
and likewise i guess those jews who didn’t like reading it didn’t need to buy the newspaper either… pity they couldn’t similarly opt out later of the consequences when this manure later helped build and confirm anti jewish feelings in Germany, to coarsen and harden the feelings of the general population around them???
these people are experts in coming up with high falutin’ arguments making them look like our last line of defence for the freedoms we enjoy… Jerry Springer is a classic, you’d think he had made it his personal mission to protect your constitution by having on an endless line of trailer trash guests to titilate the vacant retards that comprise most of his audience…
it doesn’t take much analysis to figure out what they are really worth… but thanks anyway mgl….
- News.com.au is having a survey and vote about this South Park episode even as we type. You can have your say and vote here.Posted by Mr Snuffalupagus on 2006 02 24 at 03:11 AM • permalink
- #44 Old Grouch, thanks for reminding me of The Bishop. That is one of the funniest things ever . Has me in stitches everytime I’m lucky enough to see it.
For those who don’t know this gem, a bit of detail here.‘C. OF E. FILMS’
‘IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE SUNDAY SCHOOLS BOARD’
‘PRESENT’
‘THE BISHOP’
‘STARRING THE REVEREND E. P. NESBITT’
‘AND INTRODUCING F. B. GRIMSBY URQHART-WRIGHT AS THE VOICE OF GOD’
‘SPECIAL EFFECTS BY THE MODERATOR OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND’
‘DIRECTED BY PREBENDARY “CHOPPER” HARRIS’Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 02 24 at 03:28 AM • permalink
- Hanging is out of the question, as a spine is required.
This is true, (pay attention, paco)– the proper method of hanging results in a snapped neck, probably one of the most humane methods of execution possible.
The idiots who try it themselves usually strangle themselves, not an enjoyable death, we can be reasonably confident.
And what the &*$#$ is unfunny about Mr. Hanky?!?
Anyway– if you don’t enjoy S.P. just because it “offends” you, you need to loosen up. It offends me quite often, but I also am not so thin-skinned that I fail to see where they’re coming from, as it were.
If I couldn’t “ignore” the times they offend moi, then my enjoyment at the times they mock others would not be true humorous appreciation, but malicious schadenfreude masquerading as laughter. We should all know the difference by now.
Long Live “South Park Republicans”!!!
Posted by zeppenwolf on 2006 02 24 at 03:36 AM • permalink
- This is exactly what we didn’t want to happen in the wake of the cartoon riots.
The cartoon episode has now increased sensitivity so that religious groups can feel empowered to force programs off the air just by kicking up enough fuss.
Precedent will pile on precedent and before you know it certain subjects will be off the agenda. The end result is much closer to what radical Islam would like then what would be expected from a liberal democracy.
I just hope no-one decides we atheists are fair game.
- #49 mgl.
Not so fast, mgl. Check out the Godwin’s Law FAQ. In particular, look at point 6.Game ain’t over yet, dude. 😛
Posted by Mr Snuffalupagus on 2006 02 24 at 03:53 AM • permalink
- I’m disappointed they protested, albeit a quiet one. I’m a Christian and I’m all for the freedom to blaspheme in the media and the arts. Can’t these Catholics see what they are doing by trying to stifle freedom of the media? They will simulatneously and inadvertantly stifle debate on Islam – the one thing that is desperately needed!
- You can download the forbidden episode (Bloody Mary) at http://www.lando.co.uk/ .
Most people would find the scene offensive irrespective of their religion – It’s just something about Menstrual blood being enthusiastically sprayed on peoples’ faces.
Ask Mamdouh Habib…
- SBS did not hold back from an earlier South Park episode with attacked the Catholic church over paedophile priests.
The widespread criticism the Catholic church received over this issue compelled it to “clean up its act” in this area.
Bottom line: Insulting a religion works. We need to focus on the potential of these insults to save lives.
- “Given the current worldwide controversy over cartoons of religious figures, we’ve decided to defer this program.”
And cartoons of political figures, heads of state, Martians, my in-laws, oenologists, masseuses and people who are differently advantaged?
Start this ‘offence’ racket and TV schedules are going to thin out rapidly. There are already scandalously few programmes on SBS about masseuses.
- How hypocritical of SBS, the second public broadcaster in Australia. It is usually a tits and bum movie channel, mostly dubbed fillums (of course!), together with PC news and PC current affairs, and soccer. And cartoons such as South Park.
SBS has not been sensitive to religion (Christianity, being the dominant one in Australia). Now, they’ve found some sensitivity since the some Muslims have found and taken offence. Being offended is the new social scandal.
BTW, I don’t mind some of the South Park cartoons. Some make me chuckle, others don’t. I’ve probably only watched about 20 episodes in my life. I liked the gay lion that went “rore”.
- I suppose we get to the idea of ‘some things should be taboo’. Personally, while its peurile, there is an amusing satirical element to it, think about it, the South Park crew have pretty much sent up everything they possibly could thus far and are scraping the bottom a bit.
The point in relationship to the Motoons, is that whilst both cartoons could be deemed as being offensive to either group in some way, only one of the groups is behaving like a bunch of monkeys in a banana plantation.
I thought Mr. Hankey was pretty good. Think of Clover Moore when you watch it.
- #7 Mr Snuffalupagus:
I had the same reaction on the events of the last several months, how surreal. But it ain’t, it’s real. I reckon the reason is the rise in fundamentalism, a literal belief in the texts and ideas of man made faiths. I’m a bit cruel there on religion, but that’s what they are. Some commentators put the fundamentalism down to a reaction to the uncertainties of the 21C. I beg to differ with Islam where its fundamentalists and leaders seem to want power … political, legal, social and religious … Islamofascism is a term used but it’s an awkward one.
Back to this thread, free speech should always usurp religious ideas. Even if the free speech is mocking, absurd or offensive. If the free speech are printed or animated cartoons deemed by some to be inferior humour, let me decide if it’s inferior, not the editorials or the malevolent Muslim masses. I’ve got nothing more to add … it’s becoming surreal again.
- Not so fast, mgl. Check out the Godwin’s Law FAQ. In particular, look at point 6.
So, what about it? It says that intentionally invoking Godwin’s Law to end a thread is a no-no. mgl merely pointed out that this thread now qualifies for Godwinning thanks to casanova’s South Park:Stürmer comparison, he didn’t actually invoke it himself.
If you’re referring to the somewhat muddled “Not only is it wrong to say that a
thread is over when Godwin’s Law is invoked anyway” part, that merely states that you can’t just summarily declare the thread to be over. You’re certainly still allowed to drop the discussion from your own side, which is all mgl did.
- Mr Snuffalupagus – we have all seen enough of Sesame street to know what you look like. Preserve us from avatars please.
As for 1.618 – well, a girl about that height in sexy shoes would have to look great.
Imagination works. Like some kid long ago is supposed to have said, when asked whether he preferred TV or radio – “Radio”, he said. “The pictures are better”.
- The sacrilegious amongst us can download the offending episode via this torrent,
http://mrtwig.net/torrents/SouthPark_914_-_Bloody_Mary_(avi_MrTwig_net).torrent
If you haven’t heard of bittorrent before and want to have a shot at it I recommened installing Shareaza, then you just have to click the link above and the download is initiated.
- #64 blogstrop:
Yeah, but I don’t know what you look like, blogstrop. You could be a hell of a lot more attractive than you sound. 😉
What if I shaved?
Posted by Mr Snuffalupagus on 2006 02 24 at 09:17 AM • permalink
- #63 PW:
It’s not somewhat muddled; it states very clearly:
Not only is it wrong to say that a thread is over when Godwin’s Law is invoked anyway…
and then follows on to talk about intentionally invoking it. If you want it spelled out more plainly, the opening paragraph says:
One of the most famous pieces of Usenet trivia out there is “if you mention Hitler or Nazis in a post, you’ve automatically ended whatever discussion you were taking part in”. Known as Godwin’s Law, this rule of Usenet has a long and sordid history on the network – and is absolutely wrong.
As it states, Godwin’s Law is:
As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
I stand by what I said. And Andrea’s gonna be pissed at us now for sidetracking the thread. 8-|
Posted by Mr Snuffalupagus on 2006 02 24 at 09:29 AM • permalink
- #53 “I just hope no-one decides we athiests are fair game”
Actually, I suppose athiests have killed more people than any other group in history , (although I’m not certain about where the Muslims fit). Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot not to mention all the other lesser mass murderers among the communists. And don’t forget about H., one of the worst mass murderers of all. (Can’t name him because of Godwin’s stupid law.)
- Given the current worldwide controversy over cartoons of religious figures, we’ve decided to defer this program.
Translation: We realize we’re craven frauds, but we think you’ll be too stupid to realize this if we don’t show a program that might be offensive to Christians. Which we would normally do, and might do later anyway.
I agree with mr. magoo about Buddhism.
- #68:
Let’s try this again…making a spurious Nazi comparison is what invokes Godwin’s Law, not the act of pointing out that such a comparison was made. Point 6 talks about the former, mgl did the latter, hence it doesn’t apply. An example of point 6 would be if I said “you’re just like Hitler, he wouldn’t have understood it either” just to get out of this conversation. 😉
See Point 5 where it’s quite clearly spelled out what “invoking Godwin’s Law” refers to. It’s not what you seem to insist it means.
- Evidently casanova has never read any Rabelais (sp?), or even, perhaps the Memoirs of Casanova. What about the Canterbury Tales? (“He let fly a farte like a clappe of thunder” is among the less gross presentations.)
It’s a very simple concept we’re dealing with here. If you don’t like it, don’t look at it. Don’t try to tell me either what I should or shouldn’t like, and don’t try to prevent me from looking at what I like.
And don’t give me stuff about child pornography. Child pornography is only bannable due to its inappropriate use of children, not for its otherwise content. When 3D simulation and/or computer technology gets good enough to make fake indistinguishable from real, it’s hard to see how one could even reasonably ban child pornography. I don’t intend to ever look at any, but there are reasonable studies that indicate that it might be helpful to some pedophiles to sublimate their behavior.
Anyhoo, censors are pretty much the same everywhere you look. Politics doesn’t matter, religion doesn’t matter, culture doesn’t matter. All that matters is that *they* get to tell *you* (or *me*) what we should be able to look at.
Thanks a bunch, casanova.
Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 02 24 at 01:30 PM • permalink
- #52: “The proper method of hanging results in a snapped neck, probably one of the most humane methods of execution possible.”
Well, usually, yes. On the other hand, the State of Arizona gave up the practice after a botched hanging in 1930 resulted in the decapitation of one Eva Dugan. Nothing like an incompetent hangman.
- Francis H 53
I just hope no-one decides we atheists are fair game.
Newman 70 misquoting Francis H 53
#53 “I just hope no-one decides we athiests are fair game”
Note to Francis H: Looks like your hope is in vain.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 24 at 02:28 PM • permalink
- Dave S 73
Give the Muslims and Christians 20th century weaponry in 1300, along with 20th century social organization and population density, and see what happens.
Better also give them a 20th-century-sized population. It’s hard to run up Stalin-scale body counts in a 12th-century landscape.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 24 at 02:32 PM • permalink
- Hey wait! You DID put in the thing about population density. Bah! Never mind then!Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 24 at 02:34 PM • permalink
- Yeah well THIS year I ain’t wearing no FOUR skis for it, and that’s final. The whole “barnyard-cyborg-assassin foldy-legged goat” look is sooooo 2005, doncha know. I want to ski upright, like a real boy! So put in a word with PW at the Assassin Disguise Special Surgery Clinic, or find yourself a new agonizer, period, end of discussion.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 24 at 03:40 PM • permalink
- #80:
Oh, that’s just swell. First, I lead us to a respectable ninth-place finish in the summer bobsled event, taking the cork (name any other athletes whose medals say “Property of the Athens Motel 6 Bar”!), and now you’re backing out of the ski jump after I’ve spent a week’s minion pay on bandages, iodine and leg splints (four leg splints, if you please!).
Sigh. You’re just too modest, Stoop, obstinately resisting these efforts to cover yourself with glory. Well, just remember: as my ol’ granny used to say, “He who tooteth not his own horn, the same shall go untooteth”.
- She did NOT used to say that!Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 24 at 04:32 PM • permalink
- Well okay, maybe she did. But I’m still resisting your insidious blandishments. Resisting them, do you hear? I want regular human-type knees, like all the other minions and minionettes have, or I ain’t jumpin’ no ski-jumps, no matter how many bandages and splints you wave at me. So there!Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 24 at 04:50 PM • permalink
- Spine? What reserves of fortitude do you call on as you sit around surfing all day trawling for opportunities to disparage all muslims? From which lonely well of courage do you sup as you steel yourself for another round of laboured potshots, cut and pasted from behind a keyboard?
You need to get out into the field, Dear Leader – and I don’t mean whistle stop junkets of redneck-infested backblocks that end up at irrelevant blogheaded sidebar events to major political conventions.
However, oh fearless one, I can understand your reticence. It’s prudent today for lunch-loving middle class boys not to stray too far from home, the risk these days of being swifted to an Egyptian dungeon in one of those ad-hoc reditions is just too great.
Posted by Miranda Divide on 2006 02 24 at 04:51 PM • permalink
disparage all muslims?
I hate liars. Oh hi, Miranda, I didn’t see you there.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 24 at 04:54 PM • permalink
- “Spine? What reserves of fortitude do you call on as you sit around surfing all day trawling for opportunities to disparage all muslims?” Sir Sinister Foppington languidly drew a cambric handkerchief from his laced cuff, dabbing it gently beneath his sensitive nose.
“From which lonely well of courage do you sup as you steel yourself for another round of laboured potshots?” No, Higgins, you clod! The madeira, not the port!.
“It’s prudent today for lunch-loving middle class boys not to stray too far from home, the risk these days of being swifted to an Egyptian dungeon is just too great” Higgins, remember to shoot the double bolts on the door, and fasten the shutters. It’s getting dark, and I see a rosy glow beyond the yews over the Danish consulate.
Pretentious ass.
- Paco, didn’t you forget to preface that with ‘humongous’?Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 02 24 at 05:24 PM • permalink
- #72 PW:
Yes, I’m aware of what invoking Godwin’s Law is. I understand the point you are trying to make; you do not understand mine. Godwin’s Law does not say that when somebody mentions Hitler the thread is over. As I said in post #68, all Godwin’s Law states is that:
As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
Posted by Mr Snuffalupagus on 2006 02 24 at 07:57 PM • permalink
- Yeah Tim, you said it mate…Pathetic! Yet sadly typical of that silly broadcaster.
They’re so stupid there that within 24 hours of the London bomb attacks last year they sustituted the short, sympathetic, persecution film “OF Middle Eastern Appearance” in place of their scheduled program, apparently jumping to the conclusion that Arabs ‘done it’, but in a way that only the idiots at SBS could understand, they probably felt that they were defending them…like I said, just STUPID!
- # 55
Narnian1: “I’m a Christian and I’m all for the freedom to blaspheme ….”
Blaspheme whom? These Catholics?
Christians, of the evangelical variety, have been blaspheming Roman Catholics since Luther’s day.
There are plenty of websites which will tell you that the bishop of Rome is the “Scarlet Woman”, the “Beast” of Revelations, and the “Whore of Babylon”, “The RC Church: Satan’s Masterpiece”, “Hail Mary! Hail Satan!” and so on.
Some years ago I went to a Seventh Day Adventist meeting which “proved” from the Bible that the European Union was a Roman Catholic plot to take over Europe.
Posted by pog-ma-thon on 2006 02 24 at 09:35 PM • permalink
- #73 Dave S
The Muslims killed a lot of people during agressive warfare and the Christians were involved in sectarian religious wars, but war has been common to all mankind since the earliest recorded history. But the athiests systematically starved millions during forced collectivization and worked millions to death in the gulags and prison camps. It was their hallmark. And they really didn’t need modern technology to simply starve people to death in the name of their misguided ideology. Twentieth century weaponry and population density weren’t responsible for that.
I doubt there is any parallel even on a smaller scale, at least among the Christians. You’ve got to hand it to the athiests for producing mass murderers.
I’m not saying Christians aren’t flawed as well. But I don’t think athiests have anything to be smug about, as far as a violent history goes.
- #41 Casanova
Great point about what we do with our ‘free speech’. Henry Rollins made a similar point once about the KKK demanding their freedom to demonstrate in NYC – its like a snivelling weakling standing behind his tough-ass brother with his middle finger up . . not exactly a display of strength of character.
- #76 Stoop Davey Dave
You’re right. That should be “atheist” not “athiest”. Must be more careful with the spelling – maybe it’s that useless “i” before “e” rule crossing me up again.)I have to admit your spelling is excellent, and spelling is important, but it isn’t all-important. (I’ve even seen the illustrious Bill Whittle misspell “atheist” and he actually is one. He got rather irritable when a commenter snarkily pointed it out to him, but you weren’t as snide about it as she was.)
- #19- Andrea,
I didn’t realize tvs in Australia didn’t have “off” switches.
A fair enough response to our collective bitching, if Southpark were on a purely commerical network.
Turning it off won’t work, the fewer viewers Southpark has, the more SBS will feel the need to show it to the public.
An example: the West Wing was cancelled in the US, barely shown by Australia’s Channel Nine (?) and tax-payer funded ABC (here) snatched it up from them. Their logic: Consumers didnt want the West Wing, therefore Australians (somehow different from consumers) must have it available on public TV.
- Newman 100 & 102
But the athiests systematically starved millions during forced collectivization and worked millions to death in the gulags and prison camps. It was their hallmark. And they really didn’t need modern technology to simply starve people to death in the name of their misguided ideology.
Yeah those notoriously atheistic Confederate soldiers guarding Andersonville, they were a disgrace.
Twentieth century weaponry and population density weren’t responsible for that.
The weaponry and the density are “responsible for” the scale of the slaughter. Borrow Wronwright’s time machine sometime, and replay the 30-years War, only with bombers and tanks; see if you don’t get a result that’s statistically different but morally the same.
I doubt there is any parallel even on a smaller scale, at least among the Christians. You’ve got to hand it to the athiests for producing mass murderers.
Yeah if only they had more religion in their lives, those atheist mass murderers would have behaved all differently. I blame the parents. What they should have done was to have Hitler educated by Benedictine monks. And Stalin? They should have sent HIS ass to seminary school, at Tbilisi or someplace like that. It would have straightened him right out, I’ve no doubt of it.
(I’ve even seen the illustrious Bill Whittle misspell “atheist” and he actually is one. He got rather irritable when a commenter snarkily pointed it out to him, but you weren’t as snide about it as she was.)
Oh yes I was. You’re just not hypersensitive enough to appreciate me properly.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 25 at 09:44 PM • permalink
- There’s a statement by one of the great American philosophers, William James that recently caught my attention. “There is no greater lie than a truth misunderstood.” From this I would assume then that the greater the truth and the more subtle the misunderstanding the bigger the threat of the lie.
For many, there is no greater truth or reality than the truth of Supreme Being, and no greater source of truth than the scared books associated therewith. Any slight deviation or distortion of either would produce a horrific lie.
I believe Southpark prides itself on exposing those subtle lies and distortions—in a manner that is confronting to all and disgusting to some.
We here protect our identities and speak “fearlessly” through the anonymity of our “blog” persona. Do we do a disservice to the truth by holding that which many find sacred up to ridicule? Or do we in fact make firm the foundations of truth—as might a building inspector who peers into the very structure of the social edifice to find missing fixtures and supports.
“Truth lasts and falsehood does not”, say the sages (Talmudic, my cover is blown); and so as the edifices of civilization stretch out over time, as I extend the metaphor to the absurd, towers of many types, built on subtle lies, will eventually begin the not so pretty process of crumbling. We may be already witnessing the cruel conclusions of many a false premise, while that which is proven true persists with infinite patience.
SouthPark does not add to the truth—the sum has already been calculated. It is we who must relentlessly examine ourselves and our society; that our foundations remain solid, whatever superstructure is built atop them.
Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 02 25 at 10:20 PM • permalink
- #86: I surf regularly and I’ve worked on a trawler. Not one Muslim did I see. (And yes, I do know what a Muslim looks like; they always have a camel with them.)
And why do trolls so frequently refer to Tim Blair’s lunch? I don’t get it. What does it all mean?
Posted by Sensible Swim on 2006 02 26 at 07:27 PM • permalink
- If you don’t know about lunch, you don’t know abt the blogmire… it’s where all the hard work gets done, then it’s back to the keyboard to expurgate some flatulence…Posted by Miranda Divide on 2006 02 26 at 09:03 PM • permalink
- #107 Stoop Davy Dave
That’s pathetic reasoning. Comparing 20 to 40 million murders committed by Stalin with a few thousand who died at Andersonville makes no sense. What’s the world population now, 50 billion? The world’s population would have to have increased by many hundred-fold to be able to say the atrocities committed even by the whole Confederate army are of the same magnitude as Stalin’s.
Yes they were brutal, but the athiest wins hands down. He was one paranoid dude.
- 111. I’ll tell you what’s pathetic. There is a new religious-type war going on, with a new and MORE religious enemy. So what do you do? You do exactly what Leunig and Rall and all those other clowns do; you keep right on berating your traditional, familiar, and relatively harmless adversaries, instead of coming to grips with the new one. For L&R, that’s capitalists and conservatives, for you it’s atheists.
Well guess what? Our new Islamofacist enemies are much MUCH more religious than you. That’s what makes them so irrational, you see.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 27 at 06:55 PM • permalink
- 111 Since you again missed (or at least obfuscated to your own satisfaction) the point that Dave S made, way back in post #73, I’ll be happy to lay it out again:
1/ Comparing the relative merits of different philosophical systems by arithmetical comparison of the body counts produced by adherants of those systems is fallacious, in a large way. The great massacres and other atrocities of Christendom happened (mostly) a long time ago, indeed over a quarter of a millenium ago for all of the large-scale witch-hunts and stuff. Slaughterable populations were smaller, and slaughtering technology was more primitive. Had Savonarola or Torquemada lived in the 20th Century, there’s scant doubt that they’d have matched Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin, and whatzisname, body for body, and atrocity for atrocity.
2/ Hitler was either a neo-teutonio-pagan nutbag or a satanist nutbag or a really really bent Christian nutbag, but it’s very doubtful he was an atheist. Solipsist maybe, but he clearly believed in some “higher power,” even if it was himself. Crazy as he was, especially towards the end, it’s hard to reliably classify him into any theological pigeon-hole.
But his followers, tens of millions of them, THEY were Christians. So as far as“I don’t think athiests have anything to be smug about, as far as a violent history goes.”
goes, you can pretty much blow it out your ass.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 27 at 07:18 PM • permalink
- 113 & 114
Calm down, Stoop. You’ll pop a blood vessel.Actually the real point is that atheists (perhaps you’re one) are always whining about religion being the cause of the world’s woes, and religious wars and violence are generally mentioned to prove their fallacious theory.
I can see the Muslim danger as well as you can. Muhammed was a false prophet. I just don’t like to see Christians lumped together in the same religious bag as many atheists do. I’m not saying there haven’t been terrible things done by Christians (some were Christian in name only). Actually the human race is pretty violent by nature. Or do you disagree with that too?
As far as I can tell, the only berating here has been done by you. You’re pretty quick with the insults. I merely pointed out that the greatest mass murderers of all time, your commie buddies Stalin and Mao, were athiests. (And don’t tell me they were atheists in name only. They were the real deal.) You seem to think that, relatively speaking, they weren’t so bad, compared with those Christians. I think that’s laughable. But go ahead, keep downplaying the 20 to 40m million killed by your old philosophical sidekick, Stalin.
And I think Hitler, the pagan, was a lot closer to being an athiest than he was a Christian. You think differently. Perhaps you’ll meet him one day and he can sort it out for you.
- #114
Since you’re so concerned about obfuscation, let me try to make it simple for you.It’s a fact that the atheist Stalin killed an enormous number, estimated at 20 to 40 million people.
It’s useless speculation on your part to say there’s “scant doubt” that Torquemada, or any other religious fanatic, would have matched him if he’d lived in the 20th century.
Anybody can play your game.
There’s no doubt the atheist Pol Pot would have killed twice what Stalin did if he’d ruled the USSR. After all, he killed a million in tiny Cambodia.
There’s no doubt the atheist Castro, if he had nuclear weapons and the USA had none, and you got him mad enough, would kill 300 million.
Who needs facts. There’s scant doubt because I said so.
- Newman 115
Actually the real point is that atheists (perhaps you’re one) are always whining about religion being the cause of the world’s woes, and religious wars and violence are generally mentioned to prove their fallacious theory.
Yeah right sure thing, constantly and without ceasing I hear this whining; that’s why you’ll have no problem backing up that claim with some quotes from the local atheists, doing exactly that. I’ll just wait here and listen to the crickets while I wait for that to happen.
Muhammed was a false prophet.
I agree. That doesn’t make him different from any other prophet, but yeah, he was that.
I just don’t like to see Christians lumped together in the same religious bag as many atheists do.
Yeah, bummer about how those OTHER worshippers of the God of Abraham are misbehaving. Do you envy their fervor, their commitment, their spiritual focus and energy? I’ll bet you do.
I’m not saying there haven’t been terrible things done by Christians (some were Christian in name only).
“I’m not saying that there hasn’t been some sugar put onto porridge by Scotsmen, but no True Scotsman has ever done that.”
As far as I can tell, the only berating here has been done by you.
Then you’ve either got selective amnesia, or are just a damn liar. So I helpfully call your attention to posts #s 53 & 70. In the first, Francis H makes a lighthearted quip about how he hopes atheists aren’t fair game. This must, in your little world, constitute some sort of “whining about religion being the cause of the world’s woes” because based on that you rolled out your shopworn wheeze (#70)about how it’s “athiest” who cause all the problems. Because of course for a bigot like you, atheists are always fair game.
You’re pretty quick with the insults. I merely pointed out that the greatest mass murderers of all time, your commie buddies Stalin and Mao, were athiests.
That’s right, I forgot, ALL atheists are commies. We’re all gay too, of course. And we all like to have lots of recreational abortions, even the guys.
(And don’t tell me they were atheists in name only. They were the real deal.)
I’ll take your word for it. Aside from not being able to spell it, you seem to have atheism all figured out.
You seem to think that, relatively speaking, they weren’t so bad, compared with those Christians.
If I thought that, I would have said it. And if I do start thinking that, I will say it. Until that time, it’s just some crap you made up.
I think that’s laughable. But go ahead, keep downplaying the 20 to 40m million killed by your old philosophical sidekick, Stalin. And I think Hitler, the pagan, was a lot closer to being an athiest than he was a Christian. You think differently.
I think the arithmetic doesn’t support your claim. Pagans believe in lots of gods; Christians believe in one. Therefore if Hitler was a Pagan, he was farther away from atheism than you are.
Perhaps you’ll meet him one day and he can sort it out for you.
Unlikely. He’s rumored to be dead, you know.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 28 at 03:02 PM • permalink
- 116
Fact: The late Pat Tillman was an atheist.
Fact: So were Thomas Edison and Jonas Salk.
Fact: So is Stephen Hawking.
Fact: Oh yeah, so was Albert Einstein.Speculation: All of this information comes as a big surprise to Newman.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 28 at 05:11 PM • permalink
- #117
Would you stop harping about spelling already. What are you, a 13 year old who just won honorable mention in a spelling bee? Oh yeah, and you’re good with arithmetic, too. Good for you.You mentioned my reply to a “lighthearted quip” about atheists, but you neglected to mention all the dire warnings about “religious groups” feeling “empowered to force programs off the air”, and so forth, just before the whimsical quip.
I merely tried to point out that atheists have nothing to feel superior about, and gave some examples of atheists behaving badly. Admittedly I was not very gracious in the way I did that, and maybe I shouldn’t even have written the comment. But since then you’ve overreacted gone ballistic, claiming over and over that the worst mass murderers in history have not been atheists, but some other murderers of long ago, hypothetically transported to the 20th century. Get real.
Pagans believe in lots of gods;
That’s not true. Some pagans believe in no gods at all. I think Hitler was that type of pagan. Name the “lots of gods” he believed in, if you can.You strike me as someone who is constantly spoiling for a fight, and I’m kind of argumentative myself. I guess that’s why we waste so much time in these comments sections. Any chance we can just agree to disagree and leave it there?
Page 1 of 1 pages
for an interesting slice of hypocrisy from The Age…