On page 256 of my e-copy of the Stephen King novella collection Four Past Midnight begins a scene that sidles up to the boundaries of good taste, and in my opinion smashes those boundaries over the head with a hammer before having its way with them. I will quote two things from it in order to frame what I wish to say here. Continue Reading
If you want an example of how weasel-words can turn apologies into insults, look no further than #JeSuisAhmed Reveals the Hero of the Paris Shooting Everyone Needs to Know, as written by Sophie Kleeman.
What troubles me the most is that Sophie is repeating the wordings of the Twits that she quotes. “I am not Charlie, I am Ahmed the dead cop. Charlie ridiculed my faith and culture and I died defending his right to do so.” writes one Dyab Abou Jahjah. “True Hero, protecting the magazine who made fun of his religion.” writes one Faran Ahmed Khan. But the really galling one for me is “#JeSuisAhmed, the policeman who died defending a magazine’s right to insult his religion and culture”, as written by one haroon moghul (I hope that is an alias, and see what an insult really looks like, haroon?).
All Muslim men have tiny penises and are too babyish to deal with real, strong, or independent women.
Islam is a load of bollocks dreamed up by a Sheikh to distract from his pedophilia.
Muslims in general disgust me, but if I could make it mandatory that all their boys have their balls chopped off and stuffed in glass jars, I would do so faster than you can shit.
In order: ridicule, making fun, and insult. (Or at least what I perceive as examples thereof.)
Actually, there is not really a singular statement in that pack that is not factual. Males who live in Islamic theocracies act like babies. A man of some status wanted to create a religious movement in order to distract from the fact that he “married” girls who were a significant number of years below the age at which puberty generally occurs. And the behaviour of people who think I should be murdered for pointing out those two things makes me contemptuous of them. All. Solid. Factual. Statements.
Oh yeah, and since we are keeping score here, I want to repeat a little factoid that Islam-aid-drinkers apparently fail to understand. Those genes people have that result in you looking Arabic or African or Jewish or what have you, those are involuntary. That is, the person was born with these attributes and can change them no more than they can change the colour of their eyes, or the colour of the sky. Even changing one’s sex is easier than changing your racial attributes. Believing that a man who married and traded marriages to bed pre-pubescent girls had a personal hotline to an Abrahamic deity, whose existence is extremely unlikely let us not forget, is voluntary. A person can stop it as soon as they please and have the will to commit to doing so. In fact, it was harder to get me to believe similar nonsense when I was a small child than it is to cease and desist from believing it. If the voluntary nature of belief were properly understood by law and science, the belief that is the very core of Islam would be considered insane to boot.
To recap, nationality/race involuntary, Islam voluntary.
(That is, when you decide you do not want to be Islamic anymore, nature/reality does not respond to you with Tumbleweed silence. This is why Muslims cannot ever meet the definition of a minority group. The first, and in my opinion most important, part of the United Nations’ definition of a social minority group is, quote, “involuntary membership”. It is possible to be considered a part of a minority group in America or Australia if you are of Middle Eastern origin, and on that basis alone. It is not possible to meet the proper definition of a minority group anywhere in the world just because you drunk the Islam Drool-aid.)
That is not insult, ridicule, nor making fun. It is a fact.
One of the reasons that Muslims and Islam are both so repellent to outsiders is not prejudice, not fear, nor the crybaby standby of racism. It is in fact a desire for safety from people who think that ideas should have the same rights as people. Muslim fanatics urge violence when people have the audacity to say, write, or do anything that is critical of Islam. Even people are not allowed to absolve themselves of being subject to criticism, so the argument can be made that Muslims want Islam to be treated better than people. Some of us keep the stones to say that this is an idea that is not merely bad, but abhorrent to everything it means to be Human. Muslims pretend this is, their word, “Islamaphobia”. Yeah, well, I do not tolerate the idea that people should be allowed to maim or otherwise diminish the quality of life of girls on the sole basis of being girls from Christers, either. This, Christers, is your cue to start throwing words like Christerphobia around. Consider it a free tip because I want the limp-wristed Keep Everything The Same media to learn what a leaky sock of runny shit the word Islamaphobia is.
So I say unto Sophie Kleeman, you have done the people wishing to be allowed to escape and leave behind the mind control that is Islam a grave disservice. You have done discussion, and the right of people to not have Islam shoved into their faces despite their wish to not be a part of it, a grave disservice. Islamic scripture urges violence against the outsider, and nobody in the Islamic leadership has exhibited the balls to say “this text is hereby removed from the version of the Koran that we distribute” or “if these violent, childish assholes who cannot withstand criticism want to call themselves Muslims, then we are going to start calling ourselves something else”.
That, Sophie, is how a member of a society that urges and organises violence against outsiders protests that violence.
Our right is to hold Islam up to examination and say “this is ridiculous, even criminal”. Our right is to say “if you are going to treat women in an even worse manner than we already do, we do not want you around us”.
You, Sophie, would do well to remember the old saying that he who is silent (or insufficiently voicing objection) is understood to consent.
If what it takes to remove an unacceptable idea from our world is to remove the people who believe it and teach it to others, fair trade as far as I am concerned. In case it was not already apparent, we have more Humans on the planet than we can survive having, anyway.
(Regarding my statement that Islamic scripture urges violence, this particular page is a wealth of information of why there cannot and never will be any real thing called Islamaphobia. I will quote part of the page here:
“The thought of an old man becoming aroused by a child is one of the most disturbing thoughts that makes us cringe as it reminds us of pedophilia and the most despicable people. It is difficult to accept that the Holy Prophet [Mohammed] married Aisha when she was 6-years-old and consummated his marriage with her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old.”
As a man who has two nieces, both of whom will be five years old at the end of this year, I find it utterly repugnant and indicative of unacceptable flaws in your character that you can find fault with me for desiring a voluntary characteristic based on the work of this individual be kept out of my society and more importantly theirs (my nieces’, that is).)
In closing, I shall quote Ibn Warraq, “The Two Faces of Feisal Rauf“:
Sharia [Islamic law] is totally incompatible with the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. Women are inferior under Islamic law—their testimony in a court of law is worth half that of a man; their movement is strictly restricted; they cannot marry non-Muslims. Non-Muslims living in Muslim countries also have inferior status under Islamic law; they may not testify against a Muslim. In Saudi Arabia, following a tradition of Muhammad, who said that “two religions cannot exist in the country of Arabia,” non-Muslims are forbidden to practice their religion, build houses of worship, possess religious texts, etc. Non-believers or atheists in Muslim countries do not have “the right to life”; all the major law schools, whether Sunni or Shia, agree that they are to be killed. (Muslim doctors of law generally divide sins into great sins and little sins. Of the 17 great sins, unbelief is the greatest, more heinous than murder, theft, adultery, etc.) Slavery is recognized as legitimate in the Koran. Muslim men are allowed to cohabit with any of their female slaves, and they are allowed to take possession even of married female slaves. One does not have the right to change one’s religion if one is born into a Muslim family; here is how the great commentator Baydawi sees the matter: “Whosoever turns back from his belief, openly or secretly, take him and kill him wheresoever you find him, like any other infidel. Separate yourself from him altogether. Do not accept intercession in his regard.” And here are the punishments in store for transgressors against the Holy Law: amputation, flogging, crucifixion, and stoning to death.
Being autistic makes it impossible for me to follow Sharia to the satisfaction of Muslims. Being autistic is not voluntary. Ergo, it compels me to spit on Muslims and spit on anyone who will indulge in apologism for them.
Hence, not one of your apologies will ever be accepted by me.
For all of the songs that go on about Summer as if it were a time where sparks shoot out of our arses and we get to piss champagne, I just wish there was one song dealing with the reality of my Summer. My Summer is a painful, crippling place where heat leaves me unable to sleep, exhausted when I am awake, and sweating so much that you could collect it in a bucket. Continue Reading
The “ink” is barely dry on a post in which I compared Jerry Seinfeld to a racially-charged designation of people who are, effectively, traitors to their own kind. I pointed out the history he apparently does not want to talk about of going and promoting our “cure” (read: murder, because that is what it is). I pointed out to all and sundry that instead of saying “welcome, brother”, YOU (that is, passives who presume to speak for all of us) should be saying “in light of your anti-autistic behaviour in the past, you are going to need to prove this”. Continue Reading
I will get this out of the way first. I hate Bill Cosby. I know that is a pretty strong statement to make about a person you have never met in person, so to speak. But disgust is a great description of what I feel whenever I see his image. Continue Reading
This post, as angrily-written as it is (and Fudgebook “temporarily” silenced me for it because it is now blatantly obvious that bigotry and promotion of child sex offence is just fine with them but argument for autism civil rights is not on Fudgebook, by the way, John, why do you never post about that fact?), expresses what one PTSD-suffering autistic adult feels about this horse-poo. I will summarise the points here:
1) Asshole… I mean, Seinfeld, is being subjected to a burden of proof that is so far below that which real autistic adults are subjected that that in itself is an insult. Seinfeld could afford to have Attwood, Hénault, and at least one other real expert in front of him at his pleasure. He has not done this. That makes his declaration suspect on its face.
2) I was knowingly autistic when Seinfeld was proclaiming that we should all be cured. I was there to be told “oh, hey Dean, here’s a video of someone asking Seinfeld if he even cares what we think of the words he is shoving into our mouths”. His behaviour in that video demands apology and also makes his no-burden self-diagnosis even more suspicious.
3) I theorise in this writing that Autism Speaks For Normie Assholes has paid him to make this declaration and will pay him again to proclaim his desire to be cured in national advertising. I would be happy to be proven wrong. But this is the point people like you (apparently deliberately) miss, Robison: Seinfeld has through his own past behaviour set up a need to not only prove his claims, but apologise for his past behaviour. And I will accept nothing less than the means I have outlined for that. If someone proclaims the need for your genocide one day and then proclaims they are one of you the next, you do not say “welcome, friend”, you tell them to go away until they can back up what they are saying.
3a) I have sat not three feet from Attwood and Hénault. They, along with three other people whose credentials concerning autism are far more above reproach than yours, agree that I am autistic. I can meet a very big burden of evidence and I have less means than Seinfeld has in his worst nightmares. Meet that burden, Seinfeld.
4) Lastly, you coming out in support of him only furthers the above. You tried to be the house ni! to the enemy. At best, he is going to do likewise in my opinion. At worst, he is going to do the one-two PR punch at their behest that I speak of.
You do not just throw the swastika in the dirt and say “I am not a Nazi”, Jerry or John. You have to prove it. And even then, as an autistic man who is uncomfortable in his own skin because of the ways in which I have been treated on the basis of my autism, I do not want to be represented by either of you. In fact, John, how do I know that _you_ are not tailing me, running crying to the failure of a Human being that runs scumbook and crying for us to be silenced? How do we know that, John?
It takes twenty-four seconds for a burn to go from superficial to third-degree, John. TWENTY-FOUR SECONDS.