He's dead, though, right? Or so deeply incapacitated that it doesn't matter. Right?

Does anyone even pretend he's leading some kind of movement anymore? This was his decade to rock 'n roll... It was Justin Timberlake who was supposed to fade from view.

When I was a young adolescent, we started making Jimmy Hoffa jokes. OBL is only two years older. A couple good punch lines could carry me through every cocktail party until my grave.

Just one minor note: "Osama expected his sons to also become suicide killers". The "also" is rather misplaced, don't you think? Osama himself was not a suicide killer. It is for other people to blow themselves up.

Crid, there has got to be some cocktail mileage in the similarity to another name. Osama expects others to blow themselves up, Obama expects others to...pay up? Non-PC enough to get anyone's attention - dunno if you'll be invited back, though.

Random anecdote: Shortly after 9/11 a truck driver was stopped at the German border. He wanted to explain that he had just taken on a load, but spoke only poor German and he said instead "bin laden" (roughly "I am loading"). Took the poor guy hours to get himself out of trouble...

In Saudi Arabia they wear the niqab and the abaya, not the burka.

Interesting take on it. I was at a spa in Germany a few years ago, and all the other English-speakers were the Arabs. I met a man from the house of Saud. He mentioned that his father had had 42 wives, of which his own mother lasted the longest... 8 years. My internal reaction was, "Wow, 42 wives and he never found love".

Call me an idealist, but I do think that love between men and women, both familial and romantic, is important, and that a lack of it can result in serious problems. I have some girlfriends who have bad relationships with their dads, and they are rather messed up. (Though not suicide bombers).

Nicole, I don't really think accuracy is necessary when deriding dark-age cultures.

Either women are people, or they are not. This is the core difference between our society and theirs.

The name of the clothing used to mark a woman as property is unimportant.

From the article: he specializes in killing life.

As opposed to killing death?

Crid writes: When I was a young adolescent,

Someday I'd love to hear about when you were in your old adolescence.

Apparently, I'm in a pedantic mood today. Sorry, everyone.

"Someday I'd love to hear about when you were in your old adolescence." Hey, I'm in mine now! Ahem...

bin Laden clearly represents a really screwed-up idea of masculinity. His life is, in a way, a microcosm of Saudi culture. And don't think for a minute that he doesn't get tons of support from the House of Saud. I've heard the intel reports for some years now that he's in very poor health, but I don't know if that matters much to al Q -- it's his importance as a symbol and as a sort of martyr, and that will outlive the man himself. That's why I get frustrated at the people who think that capturing him will put an end to al Q. It won't. In fact, at this point, capturing him might be a bad thing, because it would give him access to the worldwide media again. He's less dangerous living like a dog in an Afghan cave.

I do not think we have heard the last from Bin Laden, Crid. I expect another well organized attack in this country.

Which will promptly be blamed on Bush. And used as an excuse to pull all troops from everywhere in the world back home.

Um, she lived an imprisoned life, yet chose one of his other wives? How's that work?

I think that Blame Bush excuse has reached its sell by date.

> I expect another well organized
> attack in this country.

Yeah, but they'll claim credit for him or inspiration from him whether he deserves it or not, like when Miami started doing well with Shaq.

(Hope that's a clever analogy. I don't know enough sports to be sure. But you see where it was going, right?)

> I expect another well organized
> attack in this country.

Eric, I fear that you are right and it's only a matter of time....and it wouldn't need to come from "overseas" either--there are plenty of groups right here in our own backyard, enjoying our constitutional freedoms and economic prosperity....

>>Um, she lived an imprisoned life, yet chose one of his other wives? How's that work?

Jen, I'd point you to the book "The Bookseller of Kabul" written by a Danish(?) journalist who spent some time living with a fairly successful Afghan man and his family. It's quite an interesting read--and based on my interactions with and observations of several of the Afghan people--rings true. In her book the author follows several different women in the family and their stories/perspectives. It's hard, without any background or perspective on the culture over there, to truly grasp how very different it is from Western society...

PS to FTC: Not getting any kickback from the author of aforementioned book...

This man should be irrelevant, but what makes that so tough was watching thousands of my fellow Americans perish on 9/11. It got pretty personal.

If this man were to be captured at some point and publicly humiliated and tortured at the hands of his non-burqa wearing country-women, I would be pleased.

This is a big stretch.
If polygamy produced Osama, then monogamy produced Hitler?
And Catholicism-monogamy produced Nixon? Bush is a the pre-determined result of a monogamous-Christian family?
Obama is what you get when a man comes to Jesus?
Stalin was an atheist.

and your a moron

Hope that's a clever analogy. I don't know enough sports to be sure. But you see where it was going, right?

See where you were going, analogy was off base. When Miami got Shaq, he was still the most dominant center in the game, and probably second best big man to Tim Duncan. Better analogy would be Shaq going to Cleveland (if the Cavs win the title this year).

If polygamy produced Osama, then monogamy produced Hitler?

Actually, my friend Satoshi Kanazawa argues pretty persuasively in Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters that almost all homicide bombers are Muslim because of polygamy in their culture. A few rich old guys get lots of women, shorting the young guys, and then there's that promise, for the gullible of gullible primitives, that they'll get 72 virgins in heavens after obliterating themselves and a bunch of innocent people.

Um, she lived an imprisoned life, yet chose one of his other wives? How's that work?

Likely she met someone at mosque to suggest.

-Julie

"Um, she lived an imprisoned life, yet chose one of his other wives? How's that work?

Likely she met someone at mosque to suggest.

-Julie"

I don't think they let "their" women go to mosque. Perhaps it was somebody she knew would be an ally. In her situation, having an ally of that sort would be important.

Still, weak.
Stalin justified his atrocities by suggesting that w/o God, there is no moral compass, and so all is fair. (A wonderful section of the classic American novel, "All the King's Men" is devoted to this same topic.)
Yet I am an atheist, and I find it hard to kill the mice in my house, and I find most atheists (and especially hedonists) to be very humane.
Anyway, as I am sure you know, nothing is flimsier than long-range pseudo-psycho-analysis.
Some blame Osama's philosophy and actions on radical Islamic schools financed by Saudi Arabia, that he attended. Buttever.
Add to that, who can explain the actions of the Saudi Arabians who actually manned the 9/11 attack? Did all come from polygamous families?
Or, who can explain, through the lens of religion, the actions of US soldiers at My Lai? Shooting down 400 women and children in cold blood at close range? Christians love to shoot children? Monogamy produces monsters?

I am not surprised that Western women find polygamy offensive, and are very close-minded on the topic, even bigoted.

Most "modern" women praise gay marriage, and then as quickly condemn polygamy. So they attribute horrors to it. 40 years ago, we thought homosexuals were filth and perverts. Times change.

The inhumane actions of man--who can really explain them?

About Sociopaths
09/28/09 - NeoNeocon

Quip: I wonder. Does a fly feel pain when I tear off its legs?

I like this comment by Artfldgr:
"Imagine 1/25th of the population having no conscience at all, no guilt or remorse, no sense of concern for the well-being even of family members. Imagine no struggle with shame, no matter what kind of selfish or immoral action you take."

I don't think they let "their" women go to mosque. Perhaps it was somebody she knew would be an ally. In her situation, having an ally of that sort would be important.

Women are allowed, but must be separated from the men, usually sitting behind them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosque#Gender_separation

-Julie

Well, well, well. If men are shaped by their relationships with their mothers, how do feminists explain the HORDES of insensitive, misogynistic beasts supposedly running around in our own society?

Thought provoking!

Feminism:

the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feminism

How does the above definition refer in any way to misogynistic beasts?

-Julie

Julie: As in the dictionary definition of the word "liberal", it tells you nothing about how it's actually working in practice. Feminism today is dominated by the gender feminists -- it's the Jessica Valentis and Amanda Marcottes who lead the movement. Equality between men and women is absolutely the last thing they want. Yes, I'm much prefer it if the feminist movement was being led by women like Amy and Wendy McElroy and Christina Hoff Summers, but it's not, and I see no sign that that's going to change anytime soon.

"the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men."

In Fairy Tale World. Is that where you live, Julie?

How do you imagine the National Socialists described themselves in pre-war Germany? They would have sounded like a group that deserved our support, no doubt, what with all the uplifting and noble-sounding talk about patriotism and pride and stuff -- they just wanted equal treatment for Germany and Germans, after all. Feh.

Classic case of don't listen to what they SAY, watch what they DO. In the absence of the alleged unending victimization of women at the hands of the Patriarchy's constant supply of "misogynistic beasts," feminism would not exist. What can FEMinism ever do to promote equality, when it inherently and steadfastly ignores, and in fact relentlessly opposes, masculine interests? Or is equality a one-way street for feminists?

Equality with men? Good God, women will have far to fall, and many will have to suffer or die, before that dubious goal is ever reached! Feminism in actual practice seeks to protect women FROM equality with men -- it's just a hateful perversion of chivalry. Kind of like chivalry with cancer. Feminism also exists to destroy the institutions of marriage and family which, despite what the vast majority of women foolishly THINK they want, only enslave them and keeps them from their fulfilling their true and better destinies -- being tax-and-wage slaves for government and big business.

But of course you already know this, and you're just pullin' my chain, darlin'!

Or, maybe you do live in Fairy Tale World ... .

And Catholicism-monogamy produced Nixon?

Huh? Nixon's parent's were practicing Quakers.

Personally, I blame the Quakers for his wage and price control fiasco, but give them credit for the opening to China. Watergate was probably all Billy Graham's fault.

/shrug

Seriously, this kind of "root causes" analysis of any given individual is almost pointless. For every OBL, you can find 10,000 examples of Arab men born to 4th wives of distant fathers who do nothing more offensive or misogynist in their lives than ogling a Thai prostitute in a Bahrain hotel. And 100,000 who are even less offensive than that.

And I'm pretty sure you can find plenty of middle-aged Quakers who aren't trying to sick the IRS on their enemies.

The arrangement of multiple husbands and one wife is polyandry, not polygamy (I hate it when you first have to educate someone in order to have a debate with them).
As for me, I do not find polyandry offensive--indeed both polyandry and polygamy may make sense in the modern Western culture, and it wouldn't surpirse me to see more adoption of these forms in the future.
Why? Raising a child is very hard for a couple, especially when both are employed, yet dual employment seems both a social and economic necessity.
It would make sense for a man to have two wives, one employed and one stay-at-home.
Alternatively, if a woman wishes not to work, it might make sense for her to take two husbands, to boost income.
My main point is that such arrangements are neither good nor bad, they are merely logical reactions to economic and social realities--and no business of the state.
Why outlaw polygamy but not gay marriage?
Moreover, I doubt that monogamy, polygamy or polyandry is any better or any worse for children per se, though I could argue in poly marriages there are more adults around to supervise and serve as role models.
It is difficult to know what make people kill.
In ancient Rome, great architecture and art was created right next to stadiums full of people killing each other for public amusement. American soldiers gunned down women and children at My Lai, and then their leader was martyrized by the American right upon his return to home. Imperial (and Shinto Buddhist) Japan sent soldiers who practised incredible barbarity in SE Asia. Germany, WWII, Stalin, the drug lords of Mexico--is there a common thread to callous murder across so many periods?
Only that the perps are always men, I see none.

Note: Right, Nixon was raised a Quaker--and liked to bomb SE Asian countries, before retreating in near-total defeat. They say we killed a million people in SE Asia, all for nought, and with extremely few concerns about it. Because we are a Judeo-Christian nation?

You are indeed secure, but that is little excuse for sloppy English by someone who writes for a living.
I do feel superior to the posters populating this blog, a confederacy of dunces if ever there was--maybe that is why I join in here. A break. Kind of like playing poker at the Sahara on Tuesday night--you know you are going to win. It's dufus-town, and everybody has $40 to lose.

> that is little excuse for sloppy
> English by someone who writes for
> a living.

Jesus fuck. Can you imagine saying something so personally condescending like that to a woman you don't even know, whose hospitality you enjoy, and for whom your opinion carries absolutely zero weight? Can you imagine being that socially disturbed?

Well, I certainly can... I've probably done it to her a hundred times over the years.

Still, it's fuckin' weird behavior.

Brian, accuracy IS important when describing these issues. Mainly because Amy has a good point, but it could get lost if she flubs the details.

But yes, your point about them both being harsh and psycho is well taken.

But Crid, you are *welcome* at the party. It makes a big difference.

In the US, when a gang-banger manages to knock up three or four different women, it is kind of the same thing as polygamy, even though no marriages usually take place. Judging by the fact that these arrangements lead to net social costs, we can't call it a successful family model.

Now with polygamy in the LDS culture, we had/have the issue with "lost boys" being thrown out of their homes at young ages. Again, it's an arrangement that leads to net social costs.

We manage to absorb the impact of these fuck-ups here, because most people don't do things that way. We have enough people who are the products of successful families to keep the boat afloat. But in backwards, primitive Muslim cultures, where everyone is doing it the wrong way, look what happens.

I note that no one here has even questioned whether all these frankly outrageous claims by Chesler are true, or where she came by the information. As far as I'm concerned OBL can burn in Hell and all his mates with him, but swallowing that story hook line and sinker is a bit like believing the press releases Paris Hilton's PR people send out on the hour.

In the US, when a gang-banger manages to knock up three or four different women, it is kind of the same thing as polygamy, even though no marriages usually take place. Judging by the fact that these arrangements lead to net social costs, we can't call it a successful family model. ... Now with polygamy in the LDS culture, we had/have the issue with "lost boys" being thrown out of their homes at young ages. Again, it's an arrangement that leads to net social costs. ... We manage to absorb the impact of these fuck-ups here....

Yes, we have thus far managed to absorb the impact. But for how much longer?

Also a factor in the fundamentalist polygamy culture is that the extra wives (the non-legally married ones) often go on public assistance since the husband does not make enough to adequately support multiple families and the wives (even extra ones) are not allowed to work.

If you want to marry multiple partners, that's your business. Just don't ask me to bankroll it.