Osama's Book Club

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Saying you 'understand' bin Laden's point of view is no different from saying you 'understand' Hitler's point of view. Actually, it's worse, since Hitler actually had some claim to being a statesman - bin Laden doesn't even have that in his favor.

There is no moral equivalency between acts committed by a state and acts committed by an individual.

How is "understanding" someone's point of view an evil? Condoning it is another matter altogether. I can try to understand Hitler's and Bin Laden's point of views and still think they are wrong and evil men. But if you don't even bother to take the time to understand the why before blanket condemning it- you're not some saint, you're just lazy.

That said, I'm not saying everyone in this thread is saying that- far from it. But you keep acting like trying to understand this is wrong. Perhaps, you can say that sane people trying to understand it is impossible because it's the derranged rantings of a madman. But that at least implies some sort of look at motive.

On a tangent, waiving the "I went to funerals of dead friends" card just cheapens their memories. The way you sound, it just means you're even farther into the trees so you can't see the forest. That doesn't make you any more objective or a better judge. Go play that emotional blackmail game somewhere else.

SI

[ThunderingHERD]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

That's not the case the author is making in the quotes at the top of the thread - he says he's "amused" by bin Laden's endoresment. That's a horrifying choice of words.

He's not the only one who is amused by the concept of Osama recommending a western book. I've seen many jokes about it on late night tv and the setup itself gets laughs. In fact, isn't the whole oprah/osama parallel drawn by the initial post of this thread a joke?

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

How is "understanding" someone's point of view an evil? Condoning it is another matter altogether. I can try to understand Hitler's and Bin Laden's point of views and still think they are wrong and evil men. But if you don't even bother to take the time to understand the why before blanket condemning it- you're not some saint, you're just lazy.

That said, I'm not saying everyone in this thread is saying that- far from it. But you keep acting like trying to understand this is wrong. Perhaps, you can say that sane people trying to understand it is impossible because it's the derranged rantings of a madman. But that at least implies some sort of look at motive.

On a tangent, waiving the "I went to funerals of dead friends" card just cheapens their memories. The way you sound, it just means you're even farther into the trees so you can't see the forest. That doesn't make you any more objective or a better judge. Go play that emotional blackmail game somewhere else.

SI

Fair enough. I perhaps am a little carried away by my own emotions.

My core argument, however, is that it is immoral to allow or encourage somebody like bin Laden to sell your product. I don't know how anybody can convince me otherwise.

And, on another tangent, 'trying to understand Hitler' is indeed not per se immoral or evil, but is perhaps necessary. Actually understanding Hitler, however, and arguing that the man had some good points, is generally frowned upon, and for good reason. I just don't see how it's any different when it's bin Laden we're talking about.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by ThunderingHERD

He's not the only one who is amused by the concept of Osama recommending a western book. I've seen many jokes about it on late night tv and the setup itself gets laughs. In fact, isn't the whole oprah/osama parallel drawn by the initial post of this thread a joke?

It's a joke I won't be laughing at during my time on Earth.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

And, on another tangent, 'trying to understand Hitler' is indeed not per se immoral or evil, but is perhaps necessary. Actually understanding Hitler, however, and arguing that the man had some good points, is generally frowned upon, and for good reason. I just don't see how it's any different when it's bin Laden we're talking about.

I will say that I agree with bin Laden that we have been assholes in general to the Arab people, and I would welcome you to try and convince me otherwise, but I don't think that you can.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

I will say that I agree with bin Laden that we have been assholes in general to the Arab people, and I would welcome you to try and convince me otherwise, but I don't think that you can.

I don't know if you're trying to take me on a tangent, but staying on topic, why would you need to enlist bin Laden in making that argument? Does he make that case more coherently than some people who have not revealed themselves to be sociopathic madmen?

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I seriously doubt that they would be making this case if, like me, they had attended roughly 20 funerals in the 4th quarter of 2001. Even were bin Laden the most brilliant philosopher of the last century (which he isn't), his actions should have discredited him to the point that anybody using his quotes to support an argument should be laughed out of the room.

I don't think my dim view of US foreign policy over the past 40 years would be changed by the number of funerals I attend.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I don't know if you're trying to take me on a tangent, but staying on topic, why would you need to enlist bin Laden in making that argument? Does he make that case more coherently than some people who have not revealed themselves to be sociopathic madmen?

I don't think he actively enlisted bin Laden's help. I don't think he is the best at making the argument, but that doesn't make his conclusions wrong. I wouldn't begrudge the guy if he totally disavowed Osama's recommendation, I think it's an individual's decision.