Talk:Hadji Girl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 People should see the song for themselves 2 Dispicable, but remain calm 3 Accidently created a new article 4 What the fuck? 5 Newest Changes a step away from NPOV. 6 A Joke? 7 Lyrics

[edit] People should see the song for themselves

I corrected some of the lyrics yesterday by ear after watching the video a few times. I noticed a picture was added since. I also realized that many links such as You Tube had been taken down. I believe people really need to see/hear this song for themselves. This guy does have a really good voice and while I see why some people take offence, reading the lyrics doesn't accurately portray his performance of the song. Too bad this song will likely negatively follow this guy for the rest of his life, kind of weird how media technology has changed in the past ten years. - Iceman. June 15, 2006

[edit] Dispicable, but remain calm

While this is probably some of the worst stuff I've ever heard, I think it's important that we as Wikipedians keep a cool head and maintain NPOV, as this will no doubt draw more and more attention and anger as the days pass. Some points I think we need to establish: 1) This is only allegedly a US Marine. 2) The song was condemned by both CAIR and the USMC. 3) An investigation is underway. I've added that info as well as the horrible lyrics to the article. —Aiden 00:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Whats dispicable about it? Its just a song. IMO what is dispicable is anyone's attempt to railroad this poor guy for entertaining his fellow soldiers in arms. --Jack DeLeon 10:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Well let's stay on topic of the article, but I think we'd all agree there is a line that he crossed singing about the deaths of people as a joke. —Aiden 14:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

So, I assume you condemn a great deal of gangsta rap as "crossing a line" and would call it "despicable"? Aaronimo 14:50, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Put yourself in the position of a citizen of a country which has become infested with soldiers who are entrusted with protecting you, only to learn that in their spare time they're writing songs about killing you and laughing about it. I'd call that at least borderling "despicable". Or at least disgustingly immature. As an Iraqi, would you trust that guy to help you? Hannah 02:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

You didn't answer the question. As far as I can tell, a good deal of gangsta rap boasts about killing people. Is it also "despicable"? Aaronimo 22:07, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for expanding the article, when I initially created this article I had 1 line of info and 2 external links. I was more concerned about creating it so that when people search "hadji Girl" on the net, this article would be one of the first things to come up. I do think this video is significant, especially during these times of marine murder allegations in Iraq. At the moment I think only msnbc has had an article about it, not sure if any other media outlets picked it up yet. This could be big news in the media, or it might never develope into anything important. It will be intresting to see what happends if anything. —Pallfy 11:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Accidently created a new article

I accidently created a new article for this. I have redicted my article to here. Although most of what it states appears to be better covered here, perhaps it will be useful so I have included it below:

The Hadji Girl video is a video posted on the site YouTube, but subsequently removed by the original uploader, which has garned considerable controversy. It features a man in uniform, allegedly a marine, playing a guitar and singing a song which appeared to glorify the killing of Iraqi civilians [1]. Members of the audience appeared to cheer and clap to the lyrics in the background [2]. The identity of the person in the video and the location it was shot is unclear [3].

The Council on American-Islamic Relations has called for an investigation in to the video [4]. The US Marine Corps responded stating that "The video that was posted anonymously is clearly inappropriate and contrary to the high standards expected of all marines." [5].

== External links ==

The video can be viewed at the Council on American-Islamic Relations website (http://www.cair-net.org/)

Nil Einne 13:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What the fuck?

Bot run amuck. I try to edit the page, only to have it immediately reverted by TAWKERBOT2. Despite when I try to revert it back again to my edit:

If an edit of yours is reverted by accident by Tawkerbot2 please simply revert again, it will not revert more than once, but please leave a note about what it considered vandalism; we need to know of every false positive so we can prevent them from happening again.

Which does NOT happen.. instead I get THREATENED:

This is your last warning for editing Hadji Girl. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. // Tawkerbot2 16:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Fuck this. I'm outta here. It's not worth my time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.56.10.196 (talk • contribs).

Hmm... It is probably because you aren't registered. —Aiden 16:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I suspect it's also because he was primarily adding the word fuck and nothing else. While it might have been justified in this case (although it's irrelevant now that the lyrics are gone), it would be difficult to programme a bot which is smart enough to realise adding the word fuck in this case to a page was not vandalism. I guess it could perhaps be programmed to realise replacing f*ck with fuck and replacing expletive deleted with fuck is probably not vandalism but other then that I don't know. But given that this issue rarely comes up it isn't a problem IMHO Nil Einne 09:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Newest Changes a step away from NPOV.

The last batch of changes by 169.200.225.34, including the "editorial" claim about how the Marine's song doesn't reference "who started the war" ought to be reverted out as they are decidedly non-NPOV.

216.17.139.240 21:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Joke?

When I searched for this video on google, most of the websites or forums that had this video linked had a similare type commentary. They said its a just joke, and that if you are a lefty wuss you shouldnt watch.

How is this in anyway a tastefull joke? "Hadji" is a racist word used by marines for Iraqis, it is not a word of affection. Would you say a similare song titled "N-Word* Girl" would be a joke? Using a little girls as human a shield and laughing "maniacly" when the blood splats between her eyes is just bad taste.—Pallfy 22:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Nice signature. —Aiden 23:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Good point - I Agree -wildboyz_211 14:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

This is surely not a joke. If anyone uses "kosher" this way, he or she will be screwed in a billionth of a second. -- Toytoy 15:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd say it is a joke, albiet in very poor taste. Its classic gallows humor, the kind of dark comedy people in dire situations find funny. There's a combination of dark irony and amorphous justaposition. The funniest line to the observing marines is when the song's protagonist adopts a tactic of the enemy and utilizes a human shield. It is humorous to them in that it is an unexpected and out of character action. Much as if you wrote a song about Ghandi and posited that, upon arrival of British troops, Ghandi pulled out a weapon and open fire. Likewise, if you had a song with an extremist Insurgent as the protagonist but, upon capturing an American prisoner, your song says that Insurgent contacted human rights organizations to receive counsel on the Geneva Convention and to ensure proper treatment of prisoner (instead of hacking off his head on video). The absurdity of these examples is what makes them funny, and I have no doubt that's what the marines found funny about the song here. Its comedy of the absurd, and by the way, not a new thing. Consider some of the most popular "gangsta" rap songs, not to mention the work of Eminem (e.g., "Stan"); or some of the off color heavy metal songs I remember from some time ago (e.g., Guns n Roses ("I used to love her, but I had to kill her") or Motley Crue ("You're All I Need"). Was it in poor taste? Of course it was. But for my part I am concerned that the song is being reported in the media as if it is a serious song glorifying the hunting down of innocent civilians. Too much of the reporting has obfuscated the content of the song and conveniently left out the fact that the protagonist was ambushed by a family of insurgents that would not fit within the general conception of "noncombatant." 216.17.139.240 17:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Whatever the author of the song may have intended and thought of when writing the song, it's quite clear certain aspects of the song would be unacceptable behaviour from the marine (or any military or police personnel). For starters, using a human shield (especially an unarmed one) is never acceptable. Secondly, it appears the 'Hadji girl' was unarmed as was as well. Since he killed everyone in that house, we must assume this includes the 'Hadji girl'. In the case of unarmed civilians, calling them 'insurgents' is a bit of stretch. The author may have thought of them as 'insurgents' but the fact of the matter is, there is no way anyone in the situation could know what their intentions were. It could easily have been possible that these two girls were civilians captured by the 'insurgents' to be used as bait or whatever. Of course it's clear that this wasn't what was on the mind of the author, but the point is that this is an easy possiblity in the situation. In any case, even if these two girls were insurgents, killing them when they are unarmed and posing no immediete threat is unacceptable. If they were killed in the fighting by accident, the circumstances might have been enough that no blame could be placed on the marine but in this case, it's quite clear the marine slaughtered them. Of course, this is only a song but the point is, the behaviour in this song was clearly unacceptable. While there may be some comparisons to other popular songs, the key difference is that this one was written and song (to the cheering of the audience) by a marine on active duty.

Expressing the behaviour in the song and especially the use of the racial slur is unacceptable for this reason. There is a kind of professionalism expected in most countries from their people in uniform that exceeds that expected from ordinary people. Also, another key point is the person singer the song. If this song were song by an Iraqi police or army officer, the circumstances would be different. This is similar for example to the kind of outcry you would expect if for example a white country singer were to sing about killing niggers. Sure nigga or nigger may be used by black rappers and their songs tend to be quite violent, but that doesn't mean it would be acceptable for a white country singer to sing about killing niggers.

Another key point is that in the cases of rappers and the like, it's quite clear that it's mostly an act they maintain for the commercial and popularity reasons. No one seriously thinks that these people really think the way they express in their songs. Furthermore, I think many of us, except the conservatives nutters don't really see a problem with people enjoying such material even if we find it silly ourselves. This song on the other hand is the kind of song that many of us find disgusting that anyone could enjoy. And I expect that many of those who defend it would similarly be extremely critical and find it disgusting if insurgents start singing a song which involved the glorification of the killing of American miltary personnel trying to ambush them (and yet at least the people killed would be totally military personnel in such a case). If this glorification were to be expanded to include the wives or whatever of these American military personnel (not that the wives would ever be part of an ambush but the point is that it's similar to the connection between the Hadji girl and sister to the insurgents) we can imagine the kind labels that would be bandied about.

Personally I think the issue is somewhat overblown and it is true that the media hasn't really talked much about the this song as a whole. But the more important issue that is the primary reason this has attracted so much attention is because of the kind of mentality it suggests may exist in the marines. Not only with regards to the clearly unacceptable violent and murderous behaviour but also the apparent implication that they think anyone remotely connected to an insurgent is an insurgent themselves. Then there is racial contempt, especially in relation to the use of the term Hadji girl. This together with the clear examples of where marines other US military personnel have shown behaviour or said things many of us find extremely disturbing (Abu Gharaib, Guantanamo & suicides, Haditha etc) makes us wonder how widespread such behaviour is.

Nil Einne 09:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia's only concern is that we have a sourced statement that the singer says it was intended as a joke. People may interpret that statement as they see wish. --Dhartung | Talk 22:11, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lyrics

I don't know if the Corporal considers his lyrics copyrighted, but I've deleted them until the matter is resolved. User:Zoe|^(talk) 23:55, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd say that the lyrics are in the public domain at this point, and in any event given the nature of the issue being cataloged in Wikipedia here, especially the controversy about the song and its characterization by CAIR and others, it seems to me that we have a pretty clear case of "fair use." Have you done anyting to try and contact Cpl. Belile to get a direct indicator on this? If not, I will be happy to do so. In all candor, the suppression of the lyrics, especially in the context of a preemptory fear of copyright issues and in the absence of a request by the copyright owner, could easily be perceived or characterized as departing from NPOV. I am legally trained and have actually dealth with copyright issues. I cannot think of a clearer "fair use" framework than this one (the controversey, about which the article speaks and which is the whole reason the topic gained sufficent prominence to warrant an article, depends on the lyrics, and thus it is fair use to publish them for purpose of commentary and educational use). In any event, the "copyright" implications are not remedied by removing the lyrics from the exisiting edit, as Wikipedia "republishes" the lyrics freely to anyone who looks at a prior version of the article. In other words, if the lyrics _are_ a copyright problem, the problem is not remedied by deletion becuase of how Wikipedia works in archiving prior edits. Suppressing the lyrics in this context serves only to alter the NPOV ballance of the story, IMHO. Just my $0.02 216.17.139.240 04:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

The video was uncopyrighted and posted on YouTube.com. If that's not the public domain I don't know what is. —Aiden 04:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

The lyrics are not in the public domain unless Bellile explicitly states so. Otherwise, under United States copyright law, he has implicit copyright valid until 50 years after his death. It is irrelevant whether the video was posted anywhere. --Dhartung | Talk 07:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Belile said he was worried about how the video will affect his career, his family and the Marine Corps. “I will never perform this song again, and I will remove all video and text in relation to this that I have control of,” he said.[http://www.jacksonvilledailynews.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=42520&Section=News ]

Has the owner of the lyrics explicitly released the lyrics to public domain? If not, we cannot use them. I will issue one last warning -- anyone who posts the lyrics again will be blocked for 24 hours, unless they get a release from the Corporal. User:Zoe|^(talk) 15:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

The lyrics are a useful resource. As a compromise, I will place a link to a site that has the lyrics. I think this is something valid, considering the links to (copyrighted) videos in this article and many others. The lyrics shouldn't be held to any higher standard than other forms of copyrighted material. 72.56.10.196 12:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

FUNNY

I think its hilarious. How can 1 Marine making a funny song bring such a big deal with the Islam American counsel. He isn't talking about an Islamic girl in AMERICA. Now maybe the Islam-Iraqi counsel should have a beef with him. I am so sick of these stupid groups griping about stuff. They need to stop the whining and lighten up, or just shut up! It's funny he can use words from Team America, and yet, no one complained about that movie too much. I cracked up about the song. These guys in Iraq are under great stress and they need some outlet other than ACTUALLY killing a family.

LIGHTEN THE HELL UP!

It's not funny, and just because it's not in America means it's okay to use racial slurs and joking about mass murder? OH OKAY. Trying very, very hard not to invoke Godwin's law here. And by the way, they ARE killing families, have you even seen the news? Ever? Besides watching juvenile movies, that is. Of course there are no pending investigations whatsoever. Get fucking educated. You smack of a young upper middle class white male, and hey, since I'M NOT AMERICAN, IT MUST BE PERFECTLY OKAY! Check your privlege at the door before you say it's okay to use racial slurs.76.185.10.76 12:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)