Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by raldi 4194 days ago
Is your first paragraph intended to be sarcastic? If so, could you rephrase it without the sarcasm?
1 comments

I'm merely making point that Sony chose NK because they don't matter. A movie about killing David Cameron might have set some red telephones ringing.

   Scene. Oval Office. Red telephone rings. Ring ring...

   Obama: Hey David, what's up dude?

   Cameron: um, you know, this new film about me being blown 
   up in my Prime Ministerial helicopter by some of your 
   special agents, because I'm an evil dictator?

   Obama: Oh, yes. Funny. Got a sneak preview of that. They 
   got you and your Eton homies down bro

   Cameron: hmm, yes. You know, could you ask them to stop 
   it? You know, or I'll let the GCHQ boys loose on the old 
   reservation if you know what I mean...
Yeah, it isn't believable, but that's the point. NK are the western's 'devil incarnate'. We can say whatever we want to about them, even make a movie just about killing their nepotistic dictatorial family, but it doesn't matter if it offends, because diplomatically NK are like a turd under the world's proverbial shoe.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why they are such a perfect scapegoat, and more importantly, that is why I find it so suspicious.

N.B. If it isn't obvious, my 'script' above is offensive. Whether or not I like or support David Cameron policies is irrelevant, but he's still my Prime Minister and he's a real person with a wife and child. Similarly Barack Obama is not some gangbanger, he's a smart man with noble beliefs (albeit a button that got pushed to make him flip flop on the NSA but who wouldn't), but still both British people and American people might find that script offensive. And just to be absolutely crystal clear, David Cameron having GCHQ hack a US film studio is of course an incredibly imbalanced response.