Jason Says a Lot More Than His Prayers

After numerous tries to post the response below to a comment left on one of our recent posts on Jamaat ul-Fuqra by someone named “Jason” I gave up the attempt. Blogger Comments do not seem to be functioning - at least with our present dial-up situation.

Instead, here are his remarks and my response, converted into a post (which you will see if Blogger itself is working).

First of all, we don’t get many Jason-types on Gates of Vienna, though I know other conservative blogs are plagued with them. The vitriol and lack of coherence in these kinds of remarks always amazes me. People like Jason seem to break out in an angry rash when they run across something which lies outside their particular viewpoint or experience. The response is inevitably reactive, insulting and sneering.

Jason’s comment is a cut above some of the remarks I’ve seen. At least his excretory insults are confined to urine; most of them are more fecal in nature. These tirades bring to mind a child I knew, who, when very angry at some perceived personal injustice, would stamp his foot and retort, “pee, poop, piss, damn!” This crowning insult would be delivered in a very loud, angry voice. The adult interlocutor was supposed to be devastated by this “argument,” but sometimes it was hard to keep a straight face.

With that, let me present Jason, in full flower:

ugh. you disgusting, racist, xenophobic bigots.

ever heard of the melting pot? america is full of lots of different kinds of people who all have different religious views. why are you so afraid of what you don’t understand?

the strawman argument you make is laughable at least. we are in no way even close to being ‘taken over’ by islam. the tiny percentage of people in America that are muslim is so small there is no way, even if they had such pernicious plans you hold in your feverish imaginations, that they could take over anything.

How is this one muslim you are so afraid any different than the christian terrorists here in the US who shoot doctors or blow up clinics or blow up buildings in Oklahoma? McVeigh was a Christian.

I’m more afraid of my Constitution being destroyed by your abject piss-stained fear.

I don’t often bother responding to this kind of juvenilia. It reminds me of the arguments I see on adolescents’ Live Journals. This is especially the case when a commenter fails to use caps when he starts a new sentence.

But to give Jason credit, he actually spells out “you” and “your” instead of resorting to the ubiquitous “u” and “ur.” Though it is obvious he never took Rhetoric, and probably didn’t join the debate team, I give him credit for being able to spell correctly, and he builds sentences which contain clauses. Again, a plus for him, given the poor quality of his argumentation in general.

Jason—

Your comment tells me we’re on the right track.

Not only is the spotty “information” you supply woefully out of date, it consists entirely of retreaded MSM talking points. These are boring, Jason. Everyone has heard them repeated ad infinitum, ad nauseam. You are free to believe them, but the rest of us find them wearisome. Like gnats.

Instead of whatever it is you do to get information, try some first-hand investigation yourself. Talk to the scared, intimidated people who live near these compounds. Especially some of the people who’ve had assault rifles pulled on them by these thugs.

The neighbors who live in these small towns near the compounds in Georgia, VA, SC, NY, etc., are indeed afraid, though none of their many emails to us expressing this fearfulness have mentioned “piss stains.” Perhaps they’re embarrassed?

On the other hand, I’d be interested to observe your reaction should someone pull an assault rifle out of his truck and threaten you with it. Would we have any opportunity to observe “abject, piss-stained fear” in such an encounter? And whose clothing would be wet? Would it be the angry man waving the assault weapon in your face or would it be sneering Jason with the dark stain on his trousers?

You say “one muslim” ?? These are groups of thugs whose leader is persona non grata in the US because of his terrorist recruitment within our borders. Gilani started this in 1980. His followers have murdered peaceful Hindus in this country and blown up their community centers. One dissident was brutally murdered in his home.

These guys cash their welfare checks and send at least 30% of the proceeds to Gilani in Pakistan, where he lives royally. He’s also been implicated in the execution of Daniel Pearl.

We are xenophobic? My dear, you are abysmally ignorant and it may be an impediment you are no longer capable of surmounting. For one thing, your spittle-flecked prejudice regarding Christians is so pedestrian and predictable it has become boring. Surely you have a less shop-worn argument to display?

In truth, what you presented was not an argument, son — it was a tirade. Tirades are resorted to when there is insufficient knowledge of a subject, or a lack of intellectual acumen, or simply a hair-trigger reactivity which betrays insufficient emotional maturity to hold one’s own in an intellectual exchange.

Tirades are neither novel nor creative. They do not have enough gravitas to carry the discourse forward. Think of Rumpelstiltskin, Jason; he indulged in a tirade. People inclined toward a despotic character do the same thing.

If you haven’t taken Rhetoric 101 yet, you might give it a try. Learning the rules of rhetoric and argumentation provides a skill that would allow you to construct a coherent argument. That’s argument, Jason, not tirade. The latter does not qualify as argument and it reflects poorly on the person producing it. Tirades have their place: in the school yard and streaming from the mouths of despotic tyrants. They have no place in civil discourse.

Study some methods of debate so you can avoid the abundant errors you left on this blog in your several comments.

I’ll point out a few of these errors — ones which weaken your side of the debate; ones which could be addressed in some remedial rhetoric classes:

• ad hominem attacks,
  
• appeals to the lowest common denominator,
  
• specious, one-off comparisons,
  
• accusations without back-up information, and
  
• flagrant categorical errors.

Son, you need lessons in civil discourse... real bad and real soon. Your lack of skill is as embarrassing to read as would be the essay of someone who couldn’t spell and had no inkling there was such a thing as a paragraph. You have those skills. Now you can build on them.

Whoever may have demonstrated by example, or may have told you that winning arguments by sneering, by insulting your interlocutor, or by making prejudicial remarks as you accuse others of bigotry... well, Jason, they led you down the primrose path. Such tactics are counter-productive, at best. At worst, they diminish your own character and virtue.

If you like, I can show you how to make your statements into civil discourse. Quite possibly you are accustomed to arguing only in the manner you show here. However, if you google Aristotle’s The Art of Rhetoric, you will find excellent translations and study guides. When I looked just now, there were almost a million hits. See how easy it would be to fill in the lacunae left by your illiberal education?

Learning the manners neccessary to hold a discussion in the public square can be compared to learning a new language. Past a certain age, it will never be a native tongue, but you can limp along with a charming patois if you apply yourself.

It is not essential that people agree, only that their exchanges remain civil. It is an acquired skill, a subset of critical thinking. Unfortunately, it is one no longer taught in many schools.

Or you could just continue your tirades. But not here, son. In the future, I’ll simply remove your ravings. Life is too short, and bandwidth is too narrow to be cluttered with rude logical fallacies, and a long parade of the horribles.

In other words, Jason, get a courtesy clue bag and use it liberally while commenting here or I’ll delete your butt.

[End of post]