You'd love to see him die what?

March 20, 2006 7:56 PM

Mr. Hincandenza, this is the United States Secret Service. We've got a few questions for you about something you posted on the internets.
posted by dersins to Etiquette/Policy at 7:56 PM (43 comments total)

Bite me.
posted by hincandenza at 7:58 PM on March 20, 2006

Since when is the Secret Service protecting Fred Phelps?
posted by availablelight at 8:02 PM on March 20, 2006

I thought it was a great rant. Would read again.
posted by Effigy2000 at 8:03 PM on March 20, 2006

Since when does Fred Phelps vacation in Kennebunkport?
posted by dersins at 8:03 PM on March 20, 2006

I'd love to see Phelps gunned down.

But you're too afflicted with malaise and/or weak genetics to take care of it yourself, by your logic.
posted by Gator at 8:05 PM on March 20, 2006

The secret service just totally blew its cover.
posted by boo_radley at 8:08 PM on March 20, 2006

The secret service just totally blew its cover.

Oops.
posted by dersins at 8:12 PM on March 20, 2006

Go! Go! Go! Go! It's a sting, we've been burned.
posted by mlis at 8:14 PM on March 20, 2006

No, Gator, it's that Phelps hasn't wronged me personally. I'd like to see him go the same way I'd like to see Osama go- if I read in the paper tomorrow that Phelps had the snot kicked out of him by foot soldiers in the gay mafia, I'd actually smile a little- but I am not gay, nor has Phelps protested at a loved one's funeral, so I'm not going to be passionate about it. And forgetting even assassination of Phelps, hasn't he pissed off enough people that- scam or no scam- it's surprising the guy hasn't been beaten into a coma by now? I mean, if I heckled the funeral of someone, I'd expect the family to be damned pissed off, and wouldn't be shocked if at least one punched me in the face. This was, after all, the question the original poster was asking. I merely extended it to the question of why we don't see more attacks or violence on the powerful in general. Take the following as axiomatic:

• Humans are often violent by nature
• Humans are passionate, especially the more directly something affects them
• Humans often irrationally use murder and violence to solve problems

We know these to be true; we know that parents have beaten their children to death in the act of "disciplining" them, or killed their spouses or their spouse's lover over some imagined wrong, or gunned people down on the highway or beaten them up outside a bar, or any other senseless acts of violence that seemed so justified in their minds long enough for them to commit murder. Yet... how many were wronged by the executive team of Enron? How many of those people are gun owners? How many are even right-wing, pro-death-penalty types who wouldn't necessarily blanche at violence, or could have been found uttering comments like "We should just nuke the middle east and turn it into a glass parking lot!".

Yet... with all those ingredients, was even one attempt made on Ken Lay's life? Has even one Nicaraguan tried to exact revenge on people involved with the School for Americas? That was my point- not a call to violence, but an honest and recurring question of why so violent a species as man so rarely sees violence on the powerful except by other powerful people looking to seize more power?


As for dersin's point about Kennebunkport... is that what you were all tensed up about?! Jesus, dude, re-read the rant. I wasn't suggesting it happen, I'm just surprised that if people can get the passion to give their own lives to kill others as in 9/11, and have the resources and enough education and Westernization to pull it off... why don't these people target the damned Carlyle group? Do they not have Netflix enough to know that you're supposed to kidnap someone's daughter and send them ransom or extortion notes (at least until Bruce Willis or Arnold Schwarzenegger comes crashing through the door)?

And am I so wrong for asking that if these extremists are going to use violence to at least target the people who had more to do with whatever they believe wronged them? Fly a plane into Henry Kissinger or the headquarters of PNAC or something, not innocent people! How many people died on 9/11 who had no beef with the middle east... or were even from there? They died because a few powerful actors in our government did some stuff years ago in our names, which we may not have even known of much less consented to.

Violence is a sad fact of human life... sadder still that it, like shit, rolls down hill. Hit a man often enough, and he won't hit you back: he'll find someone weaker to hit instead.
posted by hincandenza at 8:32 PM on March 20, 2006

Funny, I've wondered about situations like this before.
If we are the copyright holders of our comments, I assume each of us are legally responsible for what we say. However, if those comments are subject to the approval of an authority, are the moderators also responsible to a degree?

Does the First Amendment have any sway, if the site is run and hosted in the US? Does the nationality of the poster matter? Should this be an AskMe?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:36 PM on March 20, 2006

+++ GREAT POST! WOULD BACK AWAY SLOWLY AGAIN!!!!
posted by boaz at 8:38 PM on March 20, 2006

yikes.
posted by puke & cry at 8:40 PM on March 20, 2006

Very appropriate use of bullet points.
posted by mullacc at 8:57 PM on March 20, 2006

I dare you to write an even longer post.
posted by Falconetti at 9:11 PM on March 20, 2006

Dumb callout, especially because the offending post asks questions I'd be interested to see answered.

Kind of reminds me of a Bill Hicks bit, actually.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 9:22 PM on March 20, 2006

if I read in the paper tomorrow that Phelps had the snot kicked out of him by foot soldiers in the gay mafia

There's a gay mafia? fockin' hell, where do I sign up? Or do I have to have someone say I'm a good guy first? Something like Donnie Brasco: "this is Tuwa, he's a good guy; he bakes a good quiche." Except, well, I'm a vegetarian, and I don't bake a good quiche. Can I get in on the strength of my shepherd's pie, or do we have to fall back on something else, like the number of Marthat Stewart points and gay "conversions"? (Stephen Fry? He used to be straight. That was me. Well, me and him, and that was a long time ago.)

Wait, wait, hold on, I'm getting ahead of myself--this gay mafia, what do they wear? Is shorts and sandals okay, or do I need some business suits? If it's the suits, what kind, because I know what they say about gays and relative wealth and all that, but in spite of not having children I'm also not wealthy. Yes, honey, I'd love to have some Armani but I just can't afford it.

And the guns. Oh, the guns, that's a problem too. Violence is so distasteful, don't you think? Can we carry wiffle bats? Or pillows? I can go with pillows. Unless you'd prefer water guns. Come on, help me out here.

Where is this gay mafia, anyway? I've never seen them.
posted by Tuwa at 9:27 PM on March 20, 2006

Humans are often violent by nature.
Humans are passionate, especially the more directly something affects them.
Humans often irrationally use murder and violence to solve problems.

Ninjas are mammals.
Ninjas fight ALL the time.
The purpose of the ninja is to flip out and kill people.

</obvious>
posted by monju_bosatsu at 9:33 PM on March 20, 2006

There's a gay mafia? fockin' hell, where do I sign up?

Of course there's a gay mafia. And Elton John is the Don. Don't you watch Will and Grace?
posted by ereshkigal45 at 9:41 PM on March 20, 2006

I would have stuck with "bite me."
posted by brain_drain at 9:42 PM on March 20, 2006

It's a dumb question only because it's easily answered. People beat their wives rather than Ken Lay in small part because, TV notwithstanding, that's the nature of "faceless evil"; because domestic violence is emotional and irrational and entirely distinct from the nature of premeditated murder; and because mostly they know they'll get away with slapping their wives while they'll certainly spend life in prison for taking a shot at some executive. It ain't rocket science; it's the sort of lazy question that could only stump someone who hasn't spent much time pondering it.

On the other hand, ninjas are awesome. The only thing better than just plain ninjas are ninjas ON A PLANE.
posted by cribcage at 9:49 PM on March 20, 2006

ninjas ON A PLANE fighting ZOMBIES.
posted by Tuwa at 9:53 PM on March 20, 2006

Zombie pirates?
posted by shnoz-gobblin at 10:02 PM on March 20, 2006

Ninjas are mammals.

Why can't spiders or snakes be ninjas ? They're not mammals.
posted by y2karl at 10:02 PM on March 20, 2006

Rhetorical questions are not the same as dumb questions.

"Bite me" was perhaps the perfect response to this thread. I applaud hincandenza, who is clearly a freaky bastard, but based on some of his more amusing rants, is a freaky bastard for whom I'd gladly buy a cocktail of his choosing.

And drink it, if he wasn't, you know, down with the whole alcohol thing.

Suggested counterpoint, just for the sake of argument, to Mr Incandenza's thesis, perhaps: the Oklahoma City bombing.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:03 PM on March 20, 2006

Why can't spiders or snakes be ninjas?

No opposable thumbs. Come to think of it, no thumbs at all.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:04 PM on March 20, 2006

It's a dumb question only because it's easily answered.

You should have posted the answer in the thread, I guess. Don't keep us hanging!
posted by Optimus Chyme at 10:06 PM on March 20, 2006

He's right. No thumbs, no ninja. Otherwise the human race would have been devoured in 1142 by a civilization of shark ninjas. And then there wouldn't have been any planes.
posted by cribcage at 10:16 PM on March 20, 2006

GAY MAFIOSI ninjas ON A BURNING PLANE fighting ZOMBIE SNAKES to WREST CONTROL OF THE ILLUMINATI from the FLINTSTONE KIDS (ten million strong -- AND GROWING!).
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:24 PM on March 20, 2006

Dr. McNinja fights a dino-freakin-saur. Pirates are so last episode.
posted by blue_beetle at 10:35 PM on March 20, 2006

dumb callout. also unfunny phrasing. and i HAVE been visited by "terrorism authorities" because i used the phrase "weapons of mass destruction" in an email sig. i'd also like to see ken lay brutalized by the people he ripped off and i'd like to see all manner of shoddy overpriced hyperbolized "consumer products" shoved up the asses of those who lie about them to enrich themselves. i can't think of a single thing which would promote a healthier climate of capitalism and prosperity than to see corporate theives, liars and con men publicly strung up by enraged mobs. furthermore..., oh wait! it's almost time for american idol!
posted by quonsar at 4:33 AM on March 21, 2006

Flying a plane into Henry Kissinger sounds like an excellent idea. Why hadn't I thought of that?
posted by nebulawindphone at 5:32 AM on March 21, 2006

What Optimus said, and stavros, and quonsar. Dumb callout of a great rant. Here, let me repeat the nub for those too lazy to read the whole thing:

there's some fucked up authoritarian gene in us that makes us refuse to attack the tribal chief, even at our own expense- that people are such innate cocksuckers of power that the idea of killing someone of wealth or influence doesn't even cross their mind, but in their sublimated rage and frustration they will gladly beat, torture, and kill those weaker than themselves- including loved ones or innocent people.

This is true and infinitely depressing, and those of you who think the answer is "we're better than he is" or "because they wouldn't get away with it" are deluding themselves.

I'll buy you a drink, too, hincadenza. And hell, one for stav while you're at it, barkeep. And keep the change.
posted by languagehat at 5:50 AM on March 21, 2006

languagehat : "This is true and infinitely depressing, and those of you who think the answer is 'we're better than he is' or 'because they wouldn't get away with it' are deluding themselves."

I don't think that's fair to say. The obvious thing about killing innocents is that you can be startlingly imprecise. If you try to kill Ken Lay, you've got to kill Ken Lay. If you want to kill a bunch of people because Ken Lay pissed you off, you have a much likelier chance of succeeding, because you don't have to track individual folks or aim carefully or whathaveyou. You just have to go somewhere were people are, and take your pick.
posted by Bugbread at 6:33 AM on March 21, 2006

> some fucked up authoritarian gene in us that makes us refuse to attack the tribal chief,

It's possible that we don't try to off the Man very often because of some Darwinian thing where the Head Primate has all the lower-ranking primates by the balls.

OTOH, Phelps isn't much of a tribal chief, is he? So maybe there's another explanation. It's equally possible that this doesn't happen much because we generally agree that people who issue death threats--let alone carry them out--are, y'know, naked savages with chicken bones through their noses.

John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray, Timothy McVeigh. Good luck getting dates after you let it be known that that's your crowd.

posted by jfuller at 6:59 AM on March 21, 2006

bad callout. good hincandenza.

oh, and I believe that nobody tries to kill phelps because it would martyr him and solidify his cause and organization.

most people who flip out and kill someone famous do it out of a perverse love for the person. (I can't provid statistics on that or anything, so take it as you will, but to my recollection that's the case.) cf: john lennon, the attempt on bjork, bobby kennedy (in a sense), Serena.

I'll tell you what, if you got Jodi Foster to say "someone really needs to kill Fred Phelps," I bet it would happen.
posted by shmegegge at 8:07 AM on March 21, 2006

Do they not have Netflix enough to know that you're supposed to kidnap someone's daughter and send them ransom or extortion notes...

I think this is a fascinating usage. "Netflix" as a stand in for "movie-sense".

As someone might say "he has vision enough to look past the short term", or "he has streetsmarts enough to not wander through dark alleys at 2 am", so this.

Meme troops, fall out!
posted by cortex at 8:08 AM on March 21, 2006

oh, the point of the above is that there's a sort of innate understanding, I believe, that when you assassinate someone you make them a hero. It's a desire to provide that sort of legitimacy and legend status to someone you love/obsess over that can drive someone to assassination. Phelps may be safe from that by the very nature of his vile cause. His job is largely to channel violence in a particular direction. He sort of grabs that sort of ideation at its root and directs it toward gays.
posted by shmegegge at 8:10 AM on March 21, 2006

there's a sort of innate understanding, I believe, that when you assassinate someone you make them a hero

While this is true, I think you may be missing the point, which is that if people killed their oppressors as readily as they kill their wives (say), the world would be a very different (and less oppressive) place. It's precisely the instinct of submission that allows thugs to live and thrive, with only the distant possibility of a wacko (or Jodie Foster fan) to worry them.
posted by languagehat at 9:10 AM on March 21, 2006

I got that point, but it's true I wasn't addressing it. I agree.
posted by shmegegge at 9:43 AM on March 21, 2006

languagehat: While this is true, I think you may be missing the point, which is that if people killed their oppressors as readily as they kill their wives (say), the world would be a very different (and less oppressive) place. It's precisely the instinct of submission that allows thugs to live and thrive, with only the distant possibility of a wacko (or Jodie Foster fan) to worry them.

Fawk- what he said. Dang. Why can't I ever put things as simply and succintly as does languagehat? But then, I guess that's why he's languagehat...
posted by hincandenza at 10:50 AM on March 21, 2006

It's a question of accessibility. Where are Ken Lay, Fred Phelps, etc? You can't just go up to these people and pop 'em because the odds are that they live thousands of miles away from you, live in secure homes, work in secure buildings, and that you aren't wealthy and can't just swing on by Freddy's place for a friendly chat and murder, yadayadayada... It's way easier to beat or murder your wife - she's right there.

Yeah, lame call out. Drinks are on me.
posted by ashbury at 11:03 AM on March 21, 2006

Lot of drinks up in this thread. This is good.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:56 PM on March 21, 2006

cribcage writes "It's a dumb question only because it's easily answered. People beat their wives rather than Ken Lay in small part because, TV notwithstanding, that's the nature of 'faceless evil'; because domestic violence is emotional and irrational and entirely distinct from the nature of premeditated murder; and because mostly they know they'll get away with slapping their wives while they'll certainly spend life in prison for taking a shot at some executive. It ain't rocket science; it's the sort of lazy question that could only stump someone who hasn't spent much time pondering it."

This just shifts the question to why are we so willing to commit crimes of passion that we won't commit in a premedated way.

bugbread writes "The obvious thing about killing innocents is that you can be startlingly imprecise. If you try to kill Ken Lay, you've got to kill Ken Lay. If you want to kill a bunch of people because Ken Lay pissed you off, you have a much likelier chance of succeeding, because you don't have to track individual folks or aim carefully or whathaveyou. You just have to go somewhere were people are, and take your pick."

Who knew wacko jobs would be so goal completion oriented.

ashbury writes "It's a question of accessibility. Where are Ken Lay, Fred Phelps, etc? You can't just go up to these people and pop 'em because the odds are that they live thousands of miles away from you, live in secure homes, work in secure buildings, and that you aren't wealthy and can't just swing on by Freddy's place for a friendly chat and murder, yadayadayada... It's way easier to beat or murder your wife - she's right there."

Ken Lay and his like minded cronies maybe though he must speak at public board meetings and that kind of thing. Even if you can't get in the meeting you could target him coming and going. But Phelps gets permits to protest at funerals. Lots of advance notice of his public where abouts.
posted by Mitheral at 7:40 AM on March 22, 2006