Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
RIFHMAO
(Rolling in flour, halfbaking my ass off)

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                                               

All white news reporters wear burqas overseas.

safety precaution
  (-3)
(-3)
  [vote for,
against]

They aren't allowed to check underneath right?
bob, Sep 03 2014

Attacks on journalists https://duckduckgo....acks+on+journalists
If information is power then, the logic goes, information must be controlled. The purveyors of information are journalists. Therefore, Aristotle tells us, journalists must be controlled. And if they are unwilling to be controlled then they must be stopped. The inexorable logic of the power mad the world over. [DrBob, Sep 03 2014]

Actual footage of Doctorremulac3 fighting a lion. https://www.youtube...watch?v=4w9aNqF-3vs
I swear to God. This is me fighting an actual lion. It was on the news and everything. [doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014]

Your tone is antagonistic and you're making me very angry https://www.youtube...watch?v=w6UhXivPyw4
[calum, Sep 03 2014]

[link]






       Sarah Smith, Washington Correspondent
Judith Chalmers, reporing from the Cayman Islands
*lingering shot of frozen, burqa-clad corpse of Damian Grammaticas on the Ronne Ice Shelf*
calum, Sep 03 2014
  

       The solution to this barbarism is very simple. The price of one video beheading is 1,000 airstrikes. Drop leaflets at the site of the bombing saying "The preceding attack was in retaliation for the beheading of so-and-so reporter."   

       If you want to communicate with somebody you speak their language. Don't bother speaking latin to a dog.
doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014
  

       The beheadings and associated noise is ostensibly directed at the US and Western Powers, but the real audience is an internal one - the real message is "look how strong we are, look how we stand in the face of imperial might and act as we please" - that message is marginally diluted by the key actors appearing in veils and masks, but that is essentially what it is. It is a message that says, "join us, we are strong, we are bold - do not cross us, for we are also ruthless and merciless and will enact our vengeance on anyone who stands in our way". That's an important message to give off when you're trying to hold a large area with a relatively small force - you need to make the local population so afraid of you that they allow you to remain in control. So the West is the foil to this posturing, but not its intended recipient.
zen_tom, Sep 03 2014
  

       Well, according to the messenger, the message was specifically directed to the United States as a deterrent to our engaging in air strikes against them.   

       Let's not spend too much time figuring out the deeper meanings of some guy walking up to you and punching you in the nose. You punch back or submit. No amount of intellect will pull another option out of thin air. Part of being clever is knowing the limits of clever.
doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014
  

       Hmmm. I kind of agree with you. Though I'm not sure why you're being antagonistic - the response we need to formulate might not be any different - but it is important to know the reasons why a person or organisation acts the way it does. To blindly act otherwise is to be deliberately naive. That might be very honorable, and easy to understand, but it doesn't win conflicts.   

       //No amount of intellect will pull another option out of thin air.// Lots of military history will take issue with that.   

       I do take issue with some of your rhetoric, as much of it is bollocks. But I get it, it's emotional.
zen_tom, Sep 03 2014
  

       //I'm not sure why you're being antagonistic//   

       I should probably put more smiley faces in my posts, not meaning to be nasty, just respectfully disagreeing.   

       //I do take issue with some of your rhetoric, as much of it is bollocks.//   

       Specifically...
doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014
  

       //Let's not spend too much time figuring out the deeper meanings of some guy walking up to you and punching you in the nose//

Well, if you are standing uninvited in his garden & pissing against his rose bush you probably deserve it.

Inappropriate metaphors rule OK.

As to the idea, I suspect that most experienced overseas correspondents already take measures to try & blend in with the locals but eventually they have to talk to people in order to do their job and there is no real defense for a lone individual (which is what they are, don't forget) against being ratted out by someone you trust or being systematically targeted by organised gangsters.
DrBob, Sep 03 2014
  

       So.... the reporters deserved to get their heads sawed off?
doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014
  

       //Specifically// //Well, according to the messenger...// This is just naive - letting the messenger set the context of the argument is unhelpful and gives an undue amount of power to that messenger. Far better to apply rational, critical thought to that question and see who benefits - that's just normal day-to-day cynicism/criticism that you apply to normal day-to-day interactions with salesmen, tv-advertisements and any other communications with self-interested parties. To deliberately adopt a naive, trusting, face-value approach can lead to problems.   

       //Let's not spend too much time figuring out the deeper meanings of some guy walking up to you and punching you in the nose// No, equally, let's not allow ourselves to be kneejerked into any action that might be helpful to our enemies either.   

       //You punch back or submit. No amount of intellect will pull another option out of thin air.// Equally, limiting your reactions to two options, and linking your actions to surface-level jibes and provocations means handing over a great deal of your power to people who have the ability to bend and misuse it.   

       //Part of being clever is knowing the limits of clever.// Agreed - this is a tautology - it does however have nothing to do with the question at hand - more importantly part of being clever is knowing how not to be manipulated by parties who do not have your best interests at heart. Part of being clever is outplaying your enemies so that they defeat and destroy themselves without any non-essential effort made on your part. A key part of doing that is not allowing them to set or control the agenda through their chosen methods of propaganda - it's to counter their efforts with your own so that they end up spending more energy on achieving less, while you sit back and win the strategy with minimal loss to your own side.
zen_tom, Sep 03 2014
  

       // reporters deserved to get their heads sawed off? //   

       Pretty much the definition of a reporter, actually.   

       Very few of them justify the amounts of food, oxygen and alcohol they consume.
8th of 7, Sep 03 2014
  

       Good, so what would a frightfully clever person who can see beyond the simplistic "punch back or submit" paradigm do when punched in the face?   

       Remember, another punch is coming in a few seconds so might want to dazzle with cleverness sooner than later. No flowery generalizations please, specific situation here. You said it's foolish to limit yourself to two options, so you're punched in the face, you...
doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014
  

       Running might be a good idea in that scenario. Or is that not manly enough for you?
DrBob, Sep 03 2014
  

       ...melt them with acid?
zen_tom, Sep 03 2014
  

       //Running might be a good idea in that scenario. Or is that not manly enough for you?//   

       So you'd be a total pussy and hope the bully doesn't come back tomorrow.   

       Guess what. He's just tagged you as the perfect person to punch in the face. Guess who's getting punched in the face on a daily basis.   

       Or melt them with acid.   

       Ok, thank you for that. I think we're done here.
doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014
  

       ...dismember their punching arm with some kind of mechanical ratchet device?
zen_tom, Sep 03 2014
  

       ...capture the energy from their punch and redirect it into the face of their spiritual leaders?
zen_tom, Sep 03 2014
  

       ...duck out of the way so that their punch lands on the last person who tried to punch you in the face?
zen_tom, Sep 03 2014
  

       The punch in the face analogy is flawed, as it assumes a symmetry of available force and no other external actors or influences.   

       As to the idea, I do like the image it conjours of row upon row of burqa-clad journos sat in the White House press room, or interviewing Wayne Rooney, voices rising from who knows where to ask whether he's happy playing right back in a 442
calum, Sep 03 2014
  

       Reduce them to paroxysms of laughter?   

       Well, I'd certainly like to see that tried anyway. It would be a gutsy response, I'd give you that.   

       //The punch in the face analogy is flawed, as it assumes a symmetry of available force and no other external actors or influences.//   

       So that's what you'd tell the guy as you hit the ground?   

       We're calibrating here, talking about general attitudes about response to aggression. I'm trying to get somebody to drop the thesaurus and say "I'd defend myself."   

       I've got to run so I'll give the correct answer. If somebody attacks you, you defend yourself. Really. Even if you're clever.
doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014
  

       Yes, I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise - we're just saying that the best form of defence isn't necessarily the obvious one. Sometimes the most effective course of action is no-action (maybe not in this case, and maybe not in most cases - but sometimes, it could well be).   

       Personally, I quite like the melt-with-acid option.   

       But the point here is that there are options - closing those options down by suggesting that even thinking of them is being over-intellectual means limiting our actions unduly - effectively tying our own hands (cue further punch-in-the-face analogising). That in turn opens up ourselves to manipulation and gives power to our enemies. It's a very nice argument to have in the pub, but it's not a viable strategy to adopt in the real world.
zen_tom, Sep 03 2014
  

       Well I think we've wrapped it up here. If a mountain lion attacks you, there are now at least 3 options:   

       a) die   

       b) fight back or   

       c) consider that closed minded didactic tautology opens ourselves to manipulation and gives power to our enemies (then die)   

       Ok, gotta run. Thank you Zen, Doc and Cal. (really, not being a smartass, interesting debate)
doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014
  

       Haha!   

       You forgot d) consider that closed minded didactic tautology opens ourselves to manipulation and gives power to our enemies (then fight back)   

       Ok, not sure how to reevaluate this conversation now we've added the complication of a mountain-lion, but it could well be the case that c) isn't the best option here - at least not initially anyway. However, what if that mountain lion was a minor player in a wider mountain-lion society and he'd just made a bet with all the other mountain-lions that he couldn't get in a fight with a human and lose. The details of that bet might be such that if the human fought-back, the other lions would all join in and take over the planet in some awesomely planned lightning-strike event. Meanwhile, if another faction of mountain lions had an agreement with the lynx and possum coalition that should any mountain lion kill a person they'd launch a counter-offensive against the minor-mountain-lion sect, utterly destroying them. And if the human somehow aware of all this knew that by not fighting back they might save all of human kind - what would they do then?   

       What if, the humans had learned of these plots and machinations, had sent in a person deliberately to provoke such an attack and follow paths a or c, causing the troublesome mountain-lion sect to be utterly destroyed by both friendly mountain-lions and possum/lynx coalitions, thereby extinguishing once and for-all the blight of mountain-lion separatism. What then? Is a single human life a price worth paying for such a prize?   

       Who knows, the answers may not surface here today, or even tomorrow - but out there they must be. You're welcome Dr.
zen_tom, Sep 03 2014
  

       Ah ha! I lied, one last post just because it just occurred to me I'm going running where there are mountain lion warnings.   

       And the warning signs say "Do not hike alone" in this area.   

       If you don't hear from you you'll know that in the age old battle of claws vs opposing thumbs claws won this round.   

       Shit, now I'm making myself paranoid. Maybe I'll just go to the gym.
doctorremulac3, Sep 03 2014
  

       //row upon row of burqa-clad journos //

<Life of Brian> Are there any women here today?</Life of Brian>

Also, I see we've moved on from being punched in the face to being attacked by a Mountain Lion. When you went into this bloke's garden to piss on his roses did you, by any chance, walk past a notice saying 'Beware of the Mountain Lion'?

Sorry, I'm getting a bit facetious now. On a more serious note...

//So.... the reporters deserved to get their heads sawed off?//

That's not what I said, was it. And, frankly, I'm offended that you would imply that I did. I was drawing attention to your metaphor, as you well know.

//If somebody attacks you, you defend yourself.//

Depends. No, really, it does. Search the interweb for 'Kent State Shootings' and take an example from modern US history.
DrBob, Sep 03 2014
  

       Well, if you punch a mountain lion in the face, it's pretty likely to attack you. Mountain lions are not by and large given to pensive moments while they consider the full implications of closed minded didactic tautology. They're much more likely to rip out your throat and then eat large portions of your musculature before settling down with a full stomach for some serious philosophy and metaphysical speculation.   

       // Don't bother speaking latin to a dog //   

       No ? Two thousand years ago, in Italy, pretty much everone spoke Latin to their dogs. Today, in Russia, most Russians speak to their dogs in Russian, and as far as they are capable, the dogs understand and respond. We don't think that's a good analogy.   

       So, this punching-the-mountain-lion contest ... is this going to be a cage fight, or in an arena, or what ? If it's in the woods, you're going to need lots of cameras to catch all the action.
8th of 7, Sep 03 2014
  

       I tend to agree that there's always more than two options.   

       1) submit (stop the airstrikes)   

       2) Retaliate.
2a) (hit them 1000:1) randomly bomb territory and infrastructure they control. If someone bombed you then gave you a leaflet blaming it on the actions of the xxxx party would you me more upset at the bomber or the xxxx party?
2b) Carefully only attack military targets.
2c) Send in assassins to go after the leaders in hopes that the troops will disperse once the head is cut off.
  

       3) Ignore them. For the punching analogy: if a 3 year old comes up and punches you in the thigh, in some cases pretending they don't exist and that they didn't punch you is the best action. Having a US journalist killed is bad, but the damage to the USA by that act is pretty small. These terrorist have killed thousands more people who were more innocent than the reporter, so if the USA goes nuts over this, it seems like we have a very self centered attitude. What if we just honor the reporter as a hero who died in the pursuit of truth. Treat it no differently than we would a reporter who died from Ebola while reporting on the epidemic. Don't even acknowledge the terrorists as anything more significant than a natural disaster or disease.   

       4) Run away. In the case of a fist fight there are many good reasons to run. If you're completely outmatched, but you happen to have a gun hidden in your ankle holster, you may be able to use it if you get some separation. Alternately you may be able to lure your attacker into a situation where you have more advantage. In some cases, just running away is good enough. If it's a random mugging in a part of town where you rarely go, it's perfectly logical to just save yourself and leave teaching the thugs a lesson to someone else.
scad mientist, Sep 03 2014
  

       Why not take all the videos released by the fundamentalists, overdub them in very silly squeaky voices (with a few judicious changes to the content) and re-release them (the videos, not the fundamentalists)?   

       I'm sure that, if every video they released was greatly overshadowed by some embarrassing parody, they'd... well, at least they'd be annoyed.
MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 03 2014
  

       Max, I seem to recall that technique was used by the Thatcher govt. in re Sinn Fein.
calum, Sep 03 2014
  

       What [Max] said. I guess laughing _at_ them is yet another alternative similar to ignoring them. Although if you do that to a three year old hitting you, it will likely cause them to continue hitting even harder and harder until they wear themselves out or injure themselves.
scad mientist, Sep 03 2014
  

       // I seem to recall that technique was used by the Thatcher govt. in re Sinn Fein.//   

       Are you sure that wasn't Spitting Image?   

       //I'm not sure after hacking off someone's head "That's the way to do it" would actually help.//   

       It's probably not going to help the person who's head has just been hacked off. Howevertheless, if the overdubbed videos were sufficiently demeaning, and if (and I'm sure Mr. YouTube can do this) they were the only versions to be found online, then perhaps it would remove one of the incentives to hacking off the next guy's head.   

       I'm thinking the voice should maybe be an Arabic John Inman. Maybe with a little Village People playing in the background.
MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 03 2014
  

       What I would like to do and I don't think we've tried that hard is to show them exactly what Islam is. Get some badass cleric who knows his Qur'an inside out to engage with them in a shouting war. Expose them as the hypocrites they truly are. Confuse those who want to join with another badass message. When they engage in the shouting match, then they get all flustered and expose themselves somehow. Attack the religious core with its own inconsistencies and flaws.   

       Then show them some badass capability of the American military. Publicize exactly what we can do.
RayfordSteele, Sep 03 2014
  

       lets-all literally in the title [-]
Voice, Sep 03 2014
  

       //lets-all literally in the title// Although not literally in the literal sense of literally.
MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 03 2014
  

       And the blue reporters? So sad.
popbottle, Sep 03 2014
  

       This was probably baked the movie in Carry on Spying but I no longer don't have a time machine to rewatch it.
bob, Sep 04 2014
  

       Does that mean you do have one, or will acquire one in the future past?
RayfordSteele, Sep 04 2014
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle