February 23, 2015
January 8, 2015
In 1988, the Ayatollah Khomeini put a price on author Salmon Rushdie’s head. Rushdie wasn’t wanted “dead or alive.” Khomeini wanted Rushdie dead. I don’t know what the original price tag was for one dead author, but as of 2013, the price on Rushdie’s head was over 3 million pounds.
The Ayatollah is gone. The prices on artists’ heads are not.
In 2004, Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was shot dead on a busy Amsterdam street. The first bullet took Theo off his bicycle. He tried to make it across the street. Theo’s murderer followed him on foot and shot him again. Then Theo’s murderer slashed Theo’s throat and stuck a letter to his chest with a knife. Theo was 47 years old. His crime was a short fiction film aired on Dutch public television depicting a Muslim woman’s difficulties in an arranged marriage.
In 2005, Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard’s drawing of Muhammad with a bomb in his turban put him on Islam’s hit list. There have been multiple attempts to murder Kurt. He lives in a home rivaling a Brinks security office and under police protection to this day.
Also in 2005, Danish publication Jyllands-Posten’s former editors Carsten Juste and Flemming Rose made the hit list – for publishing Westergaard’s drawing.
In 2006, Swedish artist Lars Vilks made Islam’s hit list. He, like Rushdie and Wetergaard, is still alive. He sleeps with an axe by his bed.
In 2010, South Park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker received death threats for their depiction of Muhammad in a bear suit in their animated cartoon. They were assured they too were on the road to Theo van Gogh’s fate. A photo of Theo with his throat slit and a knife in his chest was attached just to make things festive. The South Park guys are still breathing. Probably because stations caved and censored a lot of the episode.
In 2010, in response to the South Park threats, Seattle artist Molly Norris, who worked for a Seattle paper, publicly suggested an “Everybody Draw Muhammad Day.” Molly received so may death threats she quit her job, fled Seattle, and changed her name. As far as I know, she’s still in FBI protective custody.
In 2011, the Paris offices of satirical French magazine Charlie Hebdo were firebombed, forcing the publication to move after its offices were destroyed. Editor Stephane Charbonnier, you guessed it, was on Islam’s hit list. Had been for a while, fending off litigation and death threats. Charlie Hebdo’s crime? A few satirical and not particularly tasteful cartoons featuring Muhammad.
Apparently Muhammad seriously does not have a sense of humor because In 2015, armed men stormed Charlie Hebdo’s new Paris offices with automatic weapons and shot Stephane Charbonnier and 11 other people dead.
There is now an Al Queada Most Wanted poster being passed around the internet showing Charbonnier’s face struck out in red.
Think about that. These murderers, these serial murderers, don’t just keep little photos of their victims to themselves they can cross your face off of. They put your photo on the fucking internet. With a big red X through it.
THAT is fucking blaspheme.
The above is the short list. There are more.
And that’s a long time span.
17 years. For 17 years, artists, filmmakers, satirists, journalists, comics, authors, editors, gallery owners have been threatened, attacked, murdered in the name of defending the honor of a man who heard voices in a cave and has been dead for 1500 years. In Switzerland. Sweden. The US. France. Denmark. All over the fucking globe, artists are targeted, intimidated, threatened, and murdered.
A few bad apples, I am told. Most of Islam is not like that, I am told. Most Muslims are just nice people trying to go about their daily lives, I am told.
You know what a few bad apples are? The Unibomber. He was a bad apple, with a couple buddy bad apples.
This is a fucking orchard.
It’s time to burn that orchard down.
The Silencing of Theo van Gogh
FBI Warns Seattle Cartoonist About Threats
Salman Rushdie bounty increased amid anti-Islam film controversy
Al-Qaida’s ‘dead artist club’
Charlie Hebdo editor Stephane Charbonnier crossed off chilling al-Qaeda hitlist
Swedish Police Hide Threatened Cartoonist
Seattle Cartoonist in Hiding After Death Threats
The Danish Cartoonist Who Survived An Axe Attack
Jihad Against Danish Newspaper
South Park censored after threat of fatwa over Muhammad episode
France manhunt: Police raid homes, arrest several suspects after Charlie Hebdo massacre
Paris Killers Got Wrong Door Before ‘Decapitating’ Magazine
Satirical Magazine Is Firebombed in Paris
October 8, 2014
*I can’t say it better than John Oliver. Watch. Listen. Learn. And if the police ask you if you’re carrying cash when they pull you over? The correct answer is “no.”
September 23, 2014
FOUR GOOD REASONS FOR A MAN TO HIT A WOMAN
~ by Troy Dunn
Lately, there has been much discussion about violence against women by the men in their life. Many have said there is never a good reason for a man to strike a woman but I disagree and today I am speaking out! I have six sons and I have taught them what my father taught my brothers and I: there are four good reasons for a man to hit the woman he loves;
1. Fire. If you look over at the woman you love and discover flames have overtaken your girl, you should absolutely knock her to the ground and start rolling her around.
2. Spider. If your princess discovers a spider wandering across her shoulder and with sheer terror in her voice says “GET. IT. Off! You should smack that 8 legged sucker right off of her.
3. Choking. If over dinner she begins to laugh at another one of your amazingly funny stories and in the process, lodges a bit of her steak in her throat, you have my full support to yank her out of her chair, spin her around and start squeezing her beneath her rib-cage until she spits up!
4. Train. If, while enjoying a peaceful, after dinner walk with your lover, you notice she has wandered into the path of a quickly approaching oncoming train, by all means, grab her by her arm and like the strong man you are, yank her backwards aggressively.
Max Note: Cardiac arrest might go on that list too. You know if your love’s heart stops and you want to get it going again it might be okay to smack that heart back to attention. This is also though the best way to commit murder in public, knock someone down and keep whacking them in the chest while shouting “Live dammit live!” So it’s kind of suspect.
September 16, 2014
“Size doesn’t matter” only counts if you’re a woman comforting a man who has a small penis. It won’t count if a big breasted blonde walks through the door.
Splitting your vagina open to give birth doesn’t make you smarter than your childless friends. It makes you awash in hormones with a split vagina.
Poverty does not equal nobility. It just means your grandfather was robbed.
Wealth does not equal nobility. It just means your grandfather robbed someone. [Probably the poverty people above.]
Are you a criminal? Probably. Did you run a stop sign? Break the speed limit? Smoke a joint? Hello, “Criminal!”
Let’s consider what really should be considered criminal. Beating your girlfriend unconscious in an elevator or sexually assaulting a ten year old boy in a college football locker room.
September 8, 2014
June 7, 2014
That is a woman
Being beaten in the street
She wanted the right to vote.
Women won the right to vote in 1920.
Women were imprisoned, starved, and beaten fighting to achieve that.
:::the last time i wore my grandmother’s suffrage sash:::
:::woman’s suffrage led to imprisonment:::
March 23, 2014
Not much, but enough people think I should I figured that would get your attention.
Let’s do something better.
Instead of making me feel like an asshole?
Let’s give you something that makes you feel like less of an asshole.
When I watch this —
I feel uplifted.
And like there might still be hope for the human race.
February 11, 2014
December 18, 2013
I’m seeing this article hit Facebook, repeatedly, with people [allegedly liberals] getting all enraged about it.
It’s about police in Colorado refusing to spend their time enforcing a “take away their guns” policy.
Here’s the article:
Sheriffs Refuse to Enforce Laws on Gun Control [New York Times]
Here are some of the comments I have seen:
“They aren’t fit to hold the office of sheriff. AND they are, for the most part, cessessionists.”
“And here I thought they were to uphold the laws, not just the ones they like!”
“The one good thing is that they are “outing” themselves and, in their ignorance, they think everyone is onboard with them and their ideas. This, of course, is not so and brings them media attention and scrutiny. That tactic has already brought several of these types down.”
In the article, Sheriff John Cooke is pointing out it is impossible to tell whether identical gun magazines were purchased pre-law, or post-law. Which is a valid point. Apparently purchase, sale, and ownership of the magazines is only illegal from the point of the law going into effect — ownership of magazines purchased pre-law going into effect is not illegal.
Gun control advocates who are hard core appear to think law enforcement should spend its time storming gun owners’ homes searching their residences and confiscating legally purchased gun magazines just to be sure. Wow. My liberal brethren. Really?
That’s not “liberal,” btw. That’s “Nazi.” I hope you know that.
*Cue hate mail.
My other, and bigger concern, is, what happened to the law of “conscience”?
It used to be illegal for someone of color to drink out of a “white” drinking fountain. Would the same people going crazy yelling at law enforcement “it’s the law, just do it and don’t ask questions!” applaud, or deride, a police officer who refused to enforce the drinking fountain law?
It seems to me, lately, the question of conscience that should be allowed any officer of the law, according to both the “conservative” and “liberal” camps currently screaming “if I want it just do it, don’t ask fucking questions no conscience required!,” appears to not be a concern.
“If you are doing what I want, your conscience should not come into play.”
“If you are doing what I do not want, your conscience should come into play.”
Not to bring Hitler into the equation, but I am going too, How many people are still enraged the people taking orders in Nazi Germany said, “I was just doing my job”?
The Hitler guys were “enforcing the law.”
[Law, you know, is an arbitrary system made up by people. Yeah, sometimes we do our best. Sometimes we really seriously don’t. It depends who is making the laws.]
Everyone post-Hitler seems pretty agreed, the Hitler employees should have seriously questioned orders and engaged their own free will and conscience.
And yet here we are today, with police saying, “That’s wrong, I won’t do it,” and —
Self professed fucking liberals, yes, fucking liberals! [I get to say that because I grew up a “liberal” and am so betrayed by the whole concept I can’t even begin to stutter out how fucked up this is] screaming at them, “It’s not your job to think, it’s your job to do as you’re told!”
Jesus Christ. Seriously?
You really want to be the asshole saying, “Do the fucking law as written, be an automaton for the state, don’t engage your conscience”?
That’s backing up every Nazi who ever hit a twelve year old kid in the head with a rifle butt.
This is a question of conscience, and whether or not police should enforce all laws, regardless of what those laws are, acting as automatons of the state, or should at times question a law and whether or not that law is correct and/or should be enforced.
I personally am relieved to see some police officers engaging their consciences and thinking about and questioning the rules handed down to them from on high and whether or not as officers of the “law” in a more moral sense, they can or should in good conscience enforce those laws.
This same issue came up during the Occupy Wall Street protests when some law enforcement officers refused to beat and pepper spray peaceful protesters. Were those law enforcement officers entitled to make a moral decision about the orders they received, then, or should they have behaved as automatons of the state then too and beat and pepper sprayed teenage girls along with their gung ho less thoughtful companions?
And going back to Nazi Germany, should any of those guys have made a moral decision on their own? Or should they have just “followed orders”?