My city has several “no-go” zones. People are literally banned from entering these neighborhoods and the government is complicit in arresting people that enter them without permission. The Arabic term for them is apparently “gated community.”
And they operate under Pariah Law, a strange set of rules unfamiliar to you and I. If you decorate your house the wrong way or become friendly with the wrong person, you become a pariah. The punishments for such breaches of the religion of wealth are severe and unforgiving.
They must always follow the great Profit, a piece of it be upon them always. According to their holy book, there are five pillars of their faith: (1) everyone must declare that there is no God but mammon, (2) everybody should do a line of coke five times a day facing the pool, (3) everyone should give to charity, provided the entire amount is tax-deductible and the bulk of it goes to pay friends and relatives as ’employees’ (4) all hired help should be paid a wage that encourages fasting and going without (5) everybody must make a pilgrimage to the plastic surgeon at least once in their lifetime.
I found the following script in the commentariat in an article by The Atlantic “Why the Muslim ‘No-Go-Zone’ Myth Won’t Die”. In three successive messages, a person with the label sweetjazz3 gave a pretty decent demonstration of apparently gentle, but derisively savage art of satire.
All hail sweetjazz3!
Should he/she ever wish to stand up, they are welcome to claim their prize, which is honorable mention in an obscure blog; because I believe in giving honour to whom honour is due.
The Zenith of French Glory – The Pinnacle of Liberty
by James Gillray
Publisher: Hannah Humphrey (London)
Date: February 12, 1793
It has been a working hypothesis since the late 1980s, and a firm assertion since the mid 2000s; that, to paraphrase Lord Chesterfield’s assessment of the French
In short, all the symptoms which I have ever met with in History, previous to great Civic Conflagrations and Wars, now exist and daily increase in America.1
This certainly comes to mind in recent talk of state nullification of Federal Government edicts and decrees by its executive branch, but more so from its judiciary. Nullification reaches back to Vice President John C. Calhoun (1825-32) who spearheaded use of this principle for South Carolina in the North-South tariff wars; one of the causes of the American Civil War, which has largely been forgotten. As the writer states:
But if some states can pick and choose laws, others will surely do the same—and in such a polarized national landscape, they’ll start picking and choosing increasingly contradictory options. Liberals states will start refusing to enforce laws they don’t like. (This happened with the Fugitive Slave Act, in fact; Wisconsin ruled the law unconstitutional; southerners who otherwise championed states’ rights objected; and the Supreme Court overruled it.) It’s a ticket to dissolving the union, all in the name of preventing same-sex unions.
Continue reading “Red State v Blue State Philosophical Sectarianism”
The largest number of unthinking apologists for unlimited free speech and expression emanate from the United States; whose quasi-religious dogmatic devotion to a constitutional creed continues, despite widespread infractions of the principle sanctioned by their courts. For, in the minds of the adherents of these various religions, these Entities are real. But in America, corporations and corporate brands are knowingly fictional entities, constructs and concepts by their very creators and followers.
And yet the courts seem fit there and elsewhere to protect these alleged realities from defamation and libel, which are less scurrilous than those depicted of religious figures by Charlie Hebdo. Walmart does not actually exist as a flesh and blood, material and/or even conscious being. Yet the monkeys on the U.S. Supreme Court saw fit to classify these fictions as legal persons, just a few decades after denying that same designation to flesh and blood blacks (1857); a fairy tale, which continues to be aped to this very day.
If a mere untruthful and untruthfully held published opinion, which is deemed to cause damage to the reputation of these fictional non-entities, with ensuing loss of customers and revenues, is liable to civic suits; how is untruthful and untruthfully held published opinion about entities, which some hold to be true, and which likewise causes damage to reputation and ensuing loss of congregants and tithes/offerings any different? If the CEOs of the various Churches can be subject to such blatant editorial and pictorial infamies, then only selectivist hypocrisy prevents a similar defamation of corporate CEOs. If Charlie Hebdo can gratuitously display nuns masturbating; rational consistency demands that we can likewise flood the zone with generic depictions of computer code writers in Silicon Valley or Seattle, engaging in various acts of zoophilia.
© Copyright Johnny Hutchinson
I have respected Peggy Noonan in past, partly because, unlike other journalistic courtesans of the American elite, she sensed that the disturbing disquiet, which existed on the other side of her ideological and socioeconomic gated community, might threaten her community. But yet another talking head zombifies.
In her recent offering “On the Matter of the Pictures”, concerning those gratuitous cartoons against Mohammed, Muslims and other religions, she offers this gem of reasoning for their widespread release.
You kill to stop a cartoon? We flood the streets with cartoons.
Continue reading “On the Matter of the Pictures: A Critique”
Nothing is sacred. Not even your own mother, not the Jewish martyrs, not even people starving of hunger. Laugh at everything, ferociously, bitterly, to exorcise the old monsters.
One knew that it was going to happen; but not this quickly. This motto of Charlie Hadbo has taken a deliciously ironic if macabre twist.
Patrick Charbonnier, an 80 year old founder of Charlie Hadbo, excoriated its slain editor for jeopardizing the staff of that magazine by excessive forays into
“I really hold it against you…What made him feel the need to drag the team into overdoing it,” he writes in the Left-leaning magazine Nouvel Obs.
Richard Malka, lawyer for the Charlie Hadbo magazine, complains about Patrick Charbonnier criticism of the slain editor:
Charb has not yet even been buried and Obs finds nothing better to do that to publish a polemical and venomous piece on him. My disappointment is immense.
I wonder if they get the irony. If Charlie and its supporters are true believers in the purported principles of that magazine, than the polemical and venomous piece on these corpses of Charlie Hadbo is quite consistent with its principles.