Anyone familiar with the 1939 Cary Grant film Gunga Din knows that our word “thug” comes from “thuggee,” word for members of a Hindu fundamentalist movement dedicated to sneak attack and murder.
Here in the US, it is now being applied to secular, openly-active pie throwers.
Do a Google search on “Horowitz,” “Coulter” (two `victims’), “pie” and “thug.” You will find dozens of hits for right-wing sites decrying the pie-throwers as `thugs.’
This is one of them:
Pie-throwing thugs attacking conservative speakers on college campuses are motivated by left-wing hatred, says free-speech advocate David Horowitz, who warns that the incidents could escalate to serious injury.
It all began last October, when two young men threw pies at conservative pundit and author Ann Coulter.
On Wednesday, March 30, William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard, was attacked with a pie during his speech on U.S. foreign policy at Earlham College. A week later, Horowitz had a pie thrown in his face at Butler University.
Most recently, Pat Buchanan was attacked by a whacked-out college student while giving a speech. The young thug covered Buchanan’s face with salad dressing. He screamed, “Stop the bigotry!” and almost hit him with the bottle. And last February a protester threw his shoe at former Pentagon adviser Richard Perle.
Here is another one:
…throwing a pie at someone is assault. And those students should be expelled by Butler and arrested by the Indianapolis Police Department.
In response to my last post on this issue, someone emailed me:
Oh, my!
Reactions from two of the victims have been particularly interesting.
In his “From the Desk of David Horowitz” column, Horowitz recounted in the first paragraph that:
Only six or seven paragraphs later does Horowitz, in what is essentially a fund-raising piece, mention that the attack was with a pie.
Ann Coulter weighs in with this description of the aftermath of her pie-ing:
Ah, yes! Respond to attempts at humor (no matter how misguided) with violence! That’s becoming the American way.
Which brings me to my real point:
There are American thugs now, yes. But they aren’t the pie throwers. And the real thugs are being continually excused by these very same people who are so “upset” by a few kids with chocolate cream and lemon meringue.
Remember Rush Limbaugh‘s May 4, 2004 reaction to the stacked bodies at Aub Ghraib? Let me refresh your memory:
LIMBAUGH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation and we’re going to ruin people’s lives over it and we’re going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time. You know, these people are being fired at every day. I’m talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You ever heard of need to blow some steam off?
And then there’s Eric Rudolph:
‘When one of these extremists puts out a call to action, oftentimes others do try to follow in their footsteps,’ said Vicki Saporta, head of the National Abortion Federation, which represents 400 US clinics. ‘He clearly is speaking to the extremists who believe in justifiable homicide.’
Reuters reported Thursday that Mr. Rudolph pleaded guilty to the bombing of the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, as well as to attacks on abortion clinics and a gay nightclub. Rudolph said “abortion, gay rights and the federal government” motivated him to attack the targets listed above.
In his statement to the court, Rudolph said:
Now those are the real thugs.
Sometimes the most effective way to destroy someone’s influence and credibility is to make them look ridiculous. In that context, I am pro-pie, and pro-salad dressing.
I remain adamantly anti-shoe, however.
These people are too dangerous to be confronted with nothing more than foodstuffs. But there is no harm in it. And it makes them the butt of a joke, which is good for me.
Fortunately, they seem to be making themselves the butts of jokes without any further help from us. They create the jokes all by themselves.
I just wish more could see it.
can i hurl a pie at you then? If I shut you up, is that funny? Its amazing no one here can tell the difference between pranks friends may play on eachother and a juvenile effort to embarass someone and keep them from speaking words youre too queasy to listen to and counter.
you can throw a pie at me. It won’t shut me up.
Part of the point of a pie is that it is very unlikely to cause physical harm. And frankly, if you are going to throw a pie, you need to be prepared to be arrested, and to pay dry cleaning bills.
A shoe is battery. It’s totally wrong to throw a shoe at anyone.
Personally, I think pies are harmless. I would much rather people throw a pie at Ann Coulter than try to prevent her from speaking at all.
Maybe you think it is impossible to give a speech with pie in your hair. I don’t agree.
Throw a pie at me and I will wear it as a badge of honor as I continue speaking.
No pie ever shut anyone up.
to lay down their guns and bombs and pain rays and napalm and gas, and trade them all in for fluffy delicious cream pies.
speakers. That’s about as illiberal as you can get. It makes it look as if you can’t top the speaker rhetorically. I am suspicious of people who wear masks to do such a thing. If it’s so inocuous, why wear a mask? Why not take responsibility for your free expression? Limbaugh was wrong to downplay abu ghraib to make the point that it was wrongly compared to the iraqi resistance violence. There was no violence at abu ghraib, but rather humiliation. But having a pie hurled at you in front of an audience, not humiliation. maybe next time you can pull down the speaker’s trunks. You really can tell about people and their “liberalism” by what they defend.
I’m confused by your statement that there was no violence at Abu Ghraib.
There were a few fatalities. People were tormented with dogs. People had their arms dislocated.
There were instances of rape.
What do you consider violence?
Pie-ing isn’t a debating device. Often (I am certain) the pie-ers could “top the speaker rhetorically”–but they can’t get the media to pay attention to them, so are effectively silenced.
The pie-ing isn’t an attempt to shut anyone up, merely an attempt to get audiences to understand that someone (though they have been ignored) actually disagrees.
Also, please look into what really happened at Abu Graib. You will find that humiliation was the least of it. As BooMan points out, there was death; there was injury.
is whether we’d consider it “all fair…” if right wingers were hitting Michael Moore et al with pies or some other messy foodstuff in the midst of their speeches. And I throw that out without really being sure how I’d feel about that. So I guess I’m ambivalent on this one.
Alan
Maverick Leftist
If Michael Moore could not react gracefully to a pie-ing, continuing his talk even while spattered with chocolate cream, I would think less of him.