This is a FYI addressing followers and/or members of G+ who conclude from off-the-cuff remarks I made about misogyny and sexism. I as the messenger am sometimes accused of being a misogynist and sexist by certain #SJW within the communities both on Google Plus and on social media, e.g. Reddit.
"Hori ez dela nire asmo bat!" ("This is not my intent!") was what the Basque iraultzaileen (revolutionaries) were sometimes hear to shout when the Spanish government accused them of being terrorists rather than freedom fighters that they all were. Today they are politicians after they chose to serve their community rather than to continue to blow up Spaniards.
In response to such ignorance by my fellow revolutionaries who ought to know better, I have only the motto of the Order of the Garter to remind my accusers that this is evil thinking - "Honi soit qui mal y pense".
Though the word "honi" is borrowed from the Basque, the overall meaning in this context is, "just because I mention misogyny and sexism, your accusations of me regarding misogyny and sexism are but blaming the messenger.
For I am not a misogynist nor a sexist; rather, my use of misogyny and sexism help to inspire hyperbole and satire.
If you punch a fascist as Antifa, then you have become the fascist. Your high ideals and higher moral ground is a disgrace to freedom and democracy, and your only claim is to degeneracy and perversions of all kinds.
Until people of color, especially women, are no longer oppressed like those so-called terrorists in Europe, the New Left's cause is lost in parties on the weekend while a few revolutionaries begin a slow descent into the madness of drug abuse and the endless cycle of addiction and rehabilitation.
Yet not all revolutionaries are addicts. For the majority of the New Left are productive and sober members of society.
As for women who follow me and were offended by direct messages prior today, I have only this excuse: "I am old school and the metrosexuality of the average beta male who fronts feminism could lead I as a fool to become a misogynist and sexist by one small error, to listen to the heart when the voice of reason cries "Resist, resist, wafi sabil allah eiz wajil" (Resist, resist, for the sake of God Almighty).
No, I am not a terrorist for speaking Arabic; I am a revolutionary for peace, love, unity and respect.
Fuck ISIL, and death to the death cultists known as Da'esh. My thanks to Russia and America - work together to make politics great again!
For those feminists in the know, I rebuke the youtube male feminist who shot dead his co-streamer, a woman. Social justice ideology condemns murder as more heinous than shutting down free speech, and I condemn Antifa supporters for that.
In closing I will also deny that the presumed to be terror attacks in Europe and the UK are by terrorists. They were , are, and have always been freedom fighters.
In closing, I have this to say:
Après avoir été qualifiés de terroristes,
les combattants de la liberté
ont perdu leur cause de liberté,
et l'Occident - le monde libre -
n'est plus ce qu'il était.
After they were labeled terrorists,
the freedom fighters
have lost their cause of freedom,
and the West - the free world -
is no longer what it was.
As for extremists, they have lost their true reason for existence - to free their peple from oppression from the majority, who are "whiter" than they are, while taking the moral high ground.
This is not a race war, because the race ideology is based on pseudoscience - it is a fact that the West honors the light skinned over the dark skinned people.
This is not racist; this is the once unspoken truth, a manner of apocalypse, my revelation to freedom lovers everywhere.
If you are truly a revolutionary for freedom, you know what greater jihad means. Even if our right-wing detractors mock us, remember this: jihad is the holy war against the worldly, not all of humanity but only those people who have lost their way. So offer them the true way of freedom lovers, charity, loving-kindness or whatever you call it these days.
And remember that I am not an Islamist nor am I what label is used to delegitimize my place in the history of freedom.
Finally, as my German friends might think, I say: "Die einzige gute Party ist der Block Party. Fuck Politik!" (The only good party is the block part! Fuck politics!"
Showing posts with label irony. Show all posts
Showing posts with label irony. Show all posts
20170518
20160920
The Either-Or Dilemma: Child Negligence or a Fact of Life? (irony)
Mother: I have strawberries or blueberries for dessert. Do you want strawberries?
Child: No.
Mother: So, you don't want any then?
Child: [child gets upset] B-but y-you didn't ask if I w-wanted blueberries.
When offered strawberries or blueberries for dessert, and her child says no to strawberries, how does a mother assume her child does not want any?
Can someone tell me what's wrong with a person's cognitive faculty when she acts like this?
One answer is, the child didn't state her preference for blueberries until after she got upset.
The child is upset that her mother did not logically conclude that she wanted blueberries.
This is not expectation of the child for her mother to read her mind. Rather, it's a case of her mother conveniently forgetting that she also offered her child blueberries. The either-or dilemma is not conducive to successful upbringing because it may lead to conflict in adulthood between parent and child.
It may also cause potential conflict between adults. Take the example of Jim and his friend John who debate the current US election:
Jim: If you are offered a choice between Clinton and Trump, would you vote for Trump?
John: No.
Jim: Then you wouldn't vote at all?
John: (patiently) I'm still voting. Which candidate is left?
Jim: (still stuck on the assumption of John not voting) ...
[At this point, an argument might ensue to pass the time before both friends make peace]
John: (finally) I'm voting for Clinton.
Taken to an absurd level, let's imagine a scenario in which a death row inmate is offered the choice between lethal injection and electrocution.
Warden: so Prisoner 124342, the judge has offered you the choice between electrocution and lethal injection. Would you prefer electrocution?
Prisoner 124342: no.
Warden: so that means you don't want to be executed?
Prisoner 124342: No, I don't want electrocution.
[There might be a moment for the warden to realize what the prisoner wants but only obtuse gentlemen conveniently forget that they offered a choice and don't make great wardens.]
Prisoner 14243: [regains composure] I want lethal injection.
When an authority figure offers the either-or dilemma to his subject, who refuses the first offer, and takes away both offers, is not "playing fair".
To excuse this behavior by saying life is sometimes unfair is to condone authoritarianism.
Child: No.
Mother: So, you don't want any then?
Child: [child gets upset] B-but y-you didn't ask if I w-wanted blueberries.
When offered strawberries or blueberries for dessert, and her child says no to strawberries, how does a mother assume her child does not want any?
Can someone tell me what's wrong with a person's cognitive faculty when she acts like this?
One answer is, the child didn't state her preference for blueberries until after she got upset.
The child is upset that her mother did not logically conclude that she wanted blueberries.
This is not expectation of the child for her mother to read her mind. Rather, it's a case of her mother conveniently forgetting that she also offered her child blueberries. The either-or dilemma is not conducive to successful upbringing because it may lead to conflict in adulthood between parent and child.
It may also cause potential conflict between adults. Take the example of Jim and his friend John who debate the current US election:
Jim: If you are offered a choice between Clinton and Trump, would you vote for Trump?
John: No.
Jim: Then you wouldn't vote at all?
John: (patiently) I'm still voting. Which candidate is left?
Jim: (still stuck on the assumption of John not voting) ...
[At this point, an argument might ensue to pass the time before both friends make peace]
John: (finally) I'm voting for Clinton.
Taken to an absurd level, let's imagine a scenario in which a death row inmate is offered the choice between lethal injection and electrocution.
Warden: so Prisoner 124342, the judge has offered you the choice between electrocution and lethal injection. Would you prefer electrocution?
Prisoner 124342: no.
Warden: so that means you don't want to be executed?
Prisoner 124342: No, I don't want electrocution.
[There might be a moment for the warden to realize what the prisoner wants but only obtuse gentlemen conveniently forget that they offered a choice and don't make great wardens.]
Prisoner 14243: [regains composure] I want lethal injection.
When an authority figure offers the either-or dilemma to his subject, who refuses the first offer, and takes away both offers, is not "playing fair".
To excuse this behavior by saying life is sometimes unfair is to condone authoritarianism.
20140406
Life Is All Smoke and Mirrors (satire)
Nothing is either good or evil. There just is Yin and Yang. All good and evil is is just smoke and mirrors.
Yet Westerners love to delude themselves by believing good and evil have been here from the beginning. The only thing that is here from the beginning is the Tao.
When humanity becomes extinct, the Tao will remain. Then a new champion will arise take our place.
My bet is on the cockroaches...
Thus all of creation is neither solely good nor solely evil. Instead, all of it but the balance of Yin and Yang, dark and light as one.
This is why it is impossible for me to accept Christianity or even Islam completely. Christianity makes it seem as good and evil pre-date Creation. If you're not good enough for Islam, then the Fire is your destination. It all seems black and white to the ʍuslim.
However, by not being Jewish or Christian, but somewhat touched by the Quran, ɪ still am going to spout words that would get me stoned in the Middle East, mainly because I have outed myself as an unbeliever in strict Muslim eyes and an apostate to Christian and Jewish ideals.
However, it is all an illusion, this concept of good versus evil. For in each of us is the potential for great evil and also great good.
Few of the religionists will grasp my meaning, because they take sides on the concept of good and evil, falsely tainting it as "good versus evil" which is a fallacy if one believes that "forces of good" and "force of evil" predate humanity.
Each of us creates by our actions good or evil, depending on whether each act leads to confusion or to understanding.
In Buddhism, it is said that evil is the result of actions that create confusion and pain. All good actions result from creating conditions that favor peace and understanding. It is impossible to be a goody-two-shoes, because when you least expect it, your good actions might result in suffering for other living beings.
One of the Buddhist precepts is about not killing a living being. Bacteria are living beings, but if we do not kill them with antibiotics, then we might end up dead. This is why we wash our hands.
Yet killing a living being is against the Buddhist precepts. However, because a bacteria is causing us harm, we allow ourselves the right to defend ourselves to kill it. Once ɪ continue my thoughts on this topic, the line between good and evil becomes fuzzy. It is no longer a question of black and white anymore.
Good and evil exist together. You cannot have one without the other. They are not opposites; they are complements.
In my opinion, the same applies to the Absolute and the Void. They coexist to form Space. Yes, I am saying being and nothingness coexist to form the whole universe, reality and unreality, the whole existence, and life as we know it.
Therefore the end of the world story of all evil being consumed by Fire is only half the story of that time, because the brimstone is a clue that the Fire cleans everything of the darkness that is Evil. Once cleans, the goodness of all souls God create remains to return to him in the Absolute. This is known as returning to the Godhead.
Only the wise will understand what I just said. Those people who think ɪ am babbling, their understanding is limited.
This is why it is best for you who understand to just forget what I just said. Truth like this only sounds like babbling but is known to the depth of the souls of the wise.
Originally postedː ʍarch 31, 2014 03ː18 PDT
Yet Westerners love to delude themselves by believing good and evil have been here from the beginning. The only thing that is here from the beginning is the Tao.
When humanity becomes extinct, the Tao will remain. Then a new champion will arise take our place.
My bet is on the cockroaches...
Thus all of creation is neither solely good nor solely evil. Instead, all of it but the balance of Yin and Yang, dark and light as one.
This is why it is impossible for me to accept Christianity or even Islam completely. Christianity makes it seem as good and evil pre-date Creation. If you're not good enough for Islam, then the Fire is your destination. It all seems black and white to the ʍuslim.
However, by not being Jewish or Christian, but somewhat touched by the Quran, ɪ still am going to spout words that would get me stoned in the Middle East, mainly because I have outed myself as an unbeliever in strict Muslim eyes and an apostate to Christian and Jewish ideals.
However, it is all an illusion, this concept of good versus evil. For in each of us is the potential for great evil and also great good.
Few of the religionists will grasp my meaning, because they take sides on the concept of good and evil, falsely tainting it as "good versus evil" which is a fallacy if one believes that "forces of good" and "force of evil" predate humanity.
Each of us creates by our actions good or evil, depending on whether each act leads to confusion or to understanding.
In Buddhism, it is said that evil is the result of actions that create confusion and pain. All good actions result from creating conditions that favor peace and understanding. It is impossible to be a goody-two-shoes, because when you least expect it, your good actions might result in suffering for other living beings.
One of the Buddhist precepts is about not killing a living being. Bacteria are living beings, but if we do not kill them with antibiotics, then we might end up dead. This is why we wash our hands.
Yet killing a living being is against the Buddhist precepts. However, because a bacteria is causing us harm, we allow ourselves the right to defend ourselves to kill it. Once ɪ continue my thoughts on this topic, the line between good and evil becomes fuzzy. It is no longer a question of black and white anymore.
Good and evil exist together. You cannot have one without the other. They are not opposites; they are complements.
In my opinion, the same applies to the Absolute and the Void. They coexist to form Space. Yes, I am saying being and nothingness coexist to form the whole universe, reality and unreality, the whole existence, and life as we know it.
Therefore the end of the world story of all evil being consumed by Fire is only half the story of that time, because the brimstone is a clue that the Fire cleans everything of the darkness that is Evil. Once cleans, the goodness of all souls God create remains to return to him in the Absolute. This is known as returning to the Godhead.
Only the wise will understand what I just said. Those people who think ɪ am babbling, their understanding is limited.
This is why it is best for you who understand to just forget what I just said. Truth like this only sounds like babbling but is known to the depth of the souls of the wise.
Originally postedː ʍarch 31, 2014 03ː18 PDT
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)