Marxists. Do you know this man, who once said “Mexicans are a band of illiterate Indians”?
Here’s some stuff he wrote in his book The Motorcycle Diaries.
“The black is indolent and a dreamer; spending his meager wage on frivolity or drink; the European has a tradition of work and saving, which has pursued him as far as this corner of America and drives him to advance himself, even independently of his own individual aspirations.”
“The blacks, those magnificent examples of the African race who have maintained their racial purity thanks to their lack of an affinity with bathing, have seen their territory invaded by a new kind of slave: the Portuguese.”
“The first person we hit on was the mayor, someone called Cohen; we had heard a lot about him, that he was Jewish as far as money was concerned but a good sort.”
“The episode upset us a little because the poor man, apart from being homosexual and a first-rate bore, had been very nice to us, giving us 10 soles each, bringing our total to 479 for me and 163 1/2 to Alberto.”
I don’t think I have to comment on any of this. It’s clear what kind of a man he was.
I’ve never been a big fan of Gandhi, even before I came to know that he was racist in his youth. I don’t know why, but it was perhaps because of my belief that all honourable men are indeed quite “honourable” …. Nevertheless, Gandhi is held up as a modern saint, the father of ‘avihimsa’. It’s truly amazing how history has overlooked the fact that he was a racist, and has made the scoundrel a saint… Gandhi has written a lot of racist stuff. Here’s one of them. This is an excerpt from a letter he wrote to an english friend of his named W.T. Stead in 1906. “As you were good enough to show very great sympathy with the cause of British Indians in the Transvaal, may I suggest your using your influence with Boer leaders in the Transvaal? I feel certain that they did not share the same prejudice against British Indians as against the Kaffir [offensive word in South Africa] races but as the prejudice against Kaffir races in a strong form was in existence in the Transvaal at the time when the British Indians immigrated there, the latter were immediately lumped together with the Kaffir races and described under the generic term ‘Coloured People’. Gradually the Boer mind was habituated to this qualification and it refused to recognise the evident and sharp distictions that undoubtedly exist between British Indians and the Kaffir races in South Africa” … A simple google search will give you many such stuff written by Gandhi. So there’s no point in me writing them all here… Gandhi believed in the Hindu caste system. Why do you think castes are called ‘varna’ in India? Perhaps as R.S. Sigh wrote, that explains his racism towards black races… The funny thing is, Gandhi even hoodwinked Luther King, Jr.
Sittingnut, that dishonest government propagandist, that son of a miniature mediterranean dog, has censored 3 comments I made on his yellowish blog….. This so-called libertarian, who once proved himself to be non-libertarian by claiming that the government should have given one-off cash grants to all tsunami victims, wrote an article titled “a questionnaire for pro westerners in sri lanka” and had written at the end of the post “if anyone wants to honestly dispute what i say, comments below (never censored), is open to all.” ….. For the past couple of months, I refrained from posting comments on his blog because I imagined he’d censor me, for I knew better than anyone that he’s not a true libertarian. But upon reading the sentence I’ve quoted above, I decided to comment there. It was stupid. I shoul have known, for if anyone knows that this guy’s a lying son of a bitch, that’s me, considering all the lies he spread and continues to spread about me, from me being gay, from me being the gay lover of Indi, to censoring his comments. No one needs to believe me when I say he’s a lying son of a bitch. Just ask him to swear by his mother’s soul if all he said and says about me, accused and accuses me of, are true….. Yesterday (25th March) I made two comments on his blog, that were the first two comments anyone had made on that post. He published them and although didn’t answer me, made a reply, saying something about me being irrational and him being libertarian because he published my comments. There were few Anonymous goons too to applaud him….. Then I made another comment, laughing at his claim about me being irrational, and at his belief that conspiracies happen out in the open. He didn’t publish it…. After several hours, since that comment wasn’t published, I made the same comment again with minor modifications. I also made a comment ridiculing a stupid comment of an anonymous commenter. He didn’t publish those two comments either. Instead, he had published two comments of two anonymous commenters, and one comment of the self-proclaimed racist Bardo Flanks. All of them had made comments after me…. If I am lying about any of this, I challenge that lying son of a bitch, sittingnut, to swear by his mother’s soul that I’m indeed lying and that he didn’t censor me…. Is this your libertarianism sittingnut? A-HOLE.
Cigerrette Smoking man (a.k.a Cancer Man, CSM, Old Smoky) needs no introduction. He appears to be the nemesis of Fox Mulder the truth-seeker. Old Smoky kills, bribes, threatens, kidnaps, suppresses truth, and to top it all, believes what he does is right. Of course, that’s why anybody does anything… To any ardent fan of The X-Files, I think it’s quite clear that the Smoking Man is fighting alien colonists in his own way. The Consortium of which he’s part of, actually worked against the grey aliens in the beginning, but finally gave up and tried to save their own lives and of their families (only to get killed by shape shifting aliens). But the Cigerrette Smoking Man never gave up the fight. He does what others won’t do. Mulder’s goal to expose everything is an obstacle for him. But for not very clear reasons, he protects Mulder, perhaps so he can prove to Mulder, and assure himself, that what he’s doing, not the righteous crusade of Mulder’s, is right… I believe Mahinda thinks the way CSM does. Clearly, Mahinda isn’t just a big despot (he is a despot), he also has plans for this country. He has a utopia in his mind, which is a Dystopia for democrats. He does what he has to do reach there. He fights the fight in his own way… Once CSM was about to shot Frohike dead, and the decides against it. He says to himself “I can kill you [Frohike] anytime I like. But not tonight.” He’s so powerful that he feels it’s pointless to kill someone who’s a threat to him. Similarly, Mahinda’s government doesn’t anymore feel like it has to protect itself from the local press. Ask Laxman Hulugalle about that… There are differences between CSM and Mahinda though. CSM can quote Aeschylus by heart. I don’t think Mahinda can. CSM writes history, invents future, but doesn’t want to be acknowledged. Mahinda does. But he’s still the Cigerrette Smoking Man.
I’m not saying Mahinda Rajapakse’s a Nazi. No no. He’s got to kill another few million in gas chambers and concentration camps to be called that. But he’s definitely learnt one or two things from Hitler’s right-hand man, genius propagandist, Joseph Goebbels…. Otherwise how do you explain his animosity towards free speech and freedom of information? How do you explain his desire to control news? Goebbels said “During a war, news should be given out for instruction rather than information.” I believe Voice In Colombo is a Goebbels fan, for he was against Sirasa TV reporting an LTTE attack on an army air base… What about the conspiracy theories. They are sticking to it all the time. Miliband, Westborg, Solheim, Ban ki Moon, Bush, Kofi Anan, Gordon Brown are all part of the great western conspiracy against us. When people get tired of those names, they find a new name. This time it’s AKON. AKON the Conspirator. The nemesis of buddhism, and Sinhala-Buddhist culture. This may seem ridiculous tribal nationalist bull crap. But Goebbels doesn’t think so. “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly – it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.” Read few posts of sittingnut to get what Goebbels means…. Truth is the enemy of authoritarian governments like Mahinda’s. Free Speech is the enemy of truth. Goebbels wrote “It thus become vitally important for the state to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” I bet those dead journalist have something to say about all this. Perhaps they found the truth.
Who dares not speak his free thoughts is a slave.
I believe the above was written by Euripides, the great tragedian of classical Athens. The key word here is “slave”, for religion’s goal is to make every man and woman and child its slave. What makes people believe in relgion? Fear. It is the fear of being born in hell after death that makes us believe in religion. Here, hell simply means anywhere that is not good to live. All religions have a hell to put all the non-believes and those who breaks its rules once they die. Fear is our motivation to believe in religion. That is why we become slaves of relgion.
Free speech is against relgion. If people are allowed to say whatever they like, that will allow them to think and believe in whatever they like and make others think and believe in different ways and that would most definitely harmful to religion that wants to make everyone a slave. That is why every relgion – Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Hindusim et cetera – are inherently against secular values such as freedom of speech.
Slaves of religion, just like all other slaves, are virtually incapable of thinking. Of course some publications, some movies, some songs can be a threat to the religion they believe in. But in this Akon case, a little bit of thinking would make them realise that Akon (who is a moronic, insignificant singer) can do nothing against buddhism that actually matters. They just can’t think.
Even if Akon is truly capable of converting believers of buddhism into non-believers (he isn’t), that gives them no right to protest violently and attack a media station with stones. They do have a right to protest, but they must do so peacefully.
I think Akon’s video was too offensive and he shouldn’t have done it. I think that using-Buddha’s-penis-to-switch-on-the-light-bulb scene in the movie “Juno” was too offensive and they shouldn’t have done it. But I believe they have the right to do so. It’s a matter of Free Speech. The same can be said about the Da Vinci Code book and the movie.
Killing free speech – attacking media staions, banning books and movies, killing journalists – are heinous acts, for they hearken back to Nazi book burnings, issuing a Fatwa against Rushdie, Catholic inquisitions, to Athanasius issuing an Easter letter demanding to burn unacceptable writings in AD 367, those pre-civilised times.
“The most beautiful thing in the world is freedom of speech.”
Sittingnut has, as I have already proven, betrayed all libertarian principles if he ever was a libertarian. The truth is that he was always only a dishonest propagandist of this authoritarian government full of sinhala-buddhist lunatics. This ridiculous Akon Drama tells it all. MTV/MBC building was attacked. What do you expect a true libertarian to do? Unreservedly condemn the attack, right? It is against everything a libertarian believes in. Freedom of Expression is in the heart of libertarianism.
What does the Lanka Libertarian do? He writes “iow , imo all this looks like a cheap publicity stunt.” Does anyone believe that it was a publicity stunt by MTV? MTV that has been attacked multiple times in the past? Does Sittingnut really think that the MTV would do something risky as this after all that? Sittingnut doesn’t believe. He just says. He’s just a propagandist.
He also wrote “even though 99.99%+ sri lankans don’t know and care about him [Akon] there is supposedly some ‘vast movement’ (consisting of a fell-from-the-sky facebook group of few ppl) objecting and protesting against him, bc akon has supposedly insulted buddhism.” What does he (sittingnut) have to say about government denying Akon visa? It is true that there never was a “vast movement” objecting and protesting against Akon. But there was a violent protest and this sinhala-buddhist lunatic government used it as an excuse to deny visa to the insignificant singer. So far the so-called libertarian hasn’t condemned this denying of visa either.
He wrote “stones were in fact thrown at offices of media group promoting the moron, by ppl who definitely did not look like they were practicing buddhists but looked more like few jobless idiots hired to throw stones.” This dishonest government propagandist would even say those who fought against the Muslims in the Crusades weren’t practising Christians and that they looked more like few jobless idiots hired to occupy a piece of desert if his masters told him to say so.
He wrote “will i get attacked through second hand blogs for pointing out who is helping out in cheap publicity stunts? lol”
I wonder what he wrote about the assholish ban on The Da Vinci Code. Gotta find that post.
Sri Lanka government has rejected visa for Akon. Why? A bunch of religious fundamentalist terrorists threatenes to kill the insignificant singer, and attacked the MTV/MBC building with stones. And yes, they are terrorists. They use terror as a weapon. So what else you call them? … This is worse than appeasing Tiger terrorists, for they even had a small Navy and an emerging Air Force. But bowing down to this bunch of buddhist lunatics who firmly believe there’s an international conspiracy against buddhism and Sri Lanka, is just ridiculous… But of course, it isn’t the government that is bowing down. If they wanted Akon to come, he will come. The threat to the life of the president was always much higher during the war time than the threat to the life of Akon. Our military knows how to give protection. But the government consists of countless number of villains and terrorists who don’t believe they are villains and terrorists. They believe what they’re doing is right. It is they who protested violently, then used it as an excuse to deny Akon visa… So who’re bowing down to terrorism? We the democrats are. It’s embarrassing as well as heartbreaking… President Mahinda Rajapakse told the Strait Times in an interview about how he wants to be remembered. Don’t know much about that. But I will remember him for who he is.
Religion is the philosophy of the people. Is Buddhism a religion? Yes, for it believes in a specific theology, promises salvation, and converts non-believers. Therefore, it should be borne in mind that threads, flags and loud ceremonies are integral aspects of Buddhism, not unlike eating bread and drinking wine are integral parts of Christianity….. Indi is the perfect Carlo-Buddhist – someone who believes Buddhism the way Prof. Carlo Fonseka does. Carlo-Buddhists are under the delusion that Buddhism is scientific, and they try to practice Buddhism scientifically. They try to rationalise everything, try to rationally interpret Buddhist teachings, exclude parts of the religion that they deem superficial. This is of course ridiculous, for there’s nothing scientific or rational about religion. Of course it becomes rational if you irrationally begin to believe reincarnation and karma. Obviously that doesn’t make Buddhism rational, does it? … If reasoning can lead us to the truth Buddhism claims to be able to lead us to, then we don’t need Buddhism at all. So the truth it talks about must be beyond reason. Frankly I think that’s a lot of crap. How many enlightened people have you seen? I assume none. Why? There’s no such thing as Nirvana. Even if there is a such thing, then that must be totally unattainable….. So I think, Mervyn, Indi and Carlo Fonseka are all good Buddhists for they all believe Buddhism (even though in two different ways) and have an equal chance of attaining Nirvana. All three have a 0% chance to attain Nirvana. Of the three, I like Mervyn the most, for he’s a true Buddhist and doesn’t pretend to believe in anything other than the Buddhism we know. Through this Akon (an insignificant artist who won’t be remembered by anyone) drama, he has shown us the true face of Buddhism, and of religion as a whole too. Religion is always the greatest threat to democracy.
Is it us, the society that creates these men, or were they born as the spawns of the devil himself, for they are capable of such evil deeds we prefer not to know of. Nothing can seem foul to these men of darkness.
What place do they hold in the history of biological evolution? Can their emergence be even explained by known scientific theories? Can they be explained by modern science at all? I believe they can, for nothing contradicts nature.
Yet as one of those who looked at the face of evil, was tortured by it’s blog of untruth, was a victim of its masturbating fantasies, I wonder whether mother nature herself is scared of his evil. No amount of courage and vigil will protect one from him….. Mother plays a big part in the life of a serial killer. Same applies to a humanoid like sittingnut, which is why he continuously refuses to swear by his mother’s soul that any of the damned lies he tells about me and my blog are true. It has never ceased to amaze me that even in a devil like him, the Oedipal desire to sexually possess his mother is covered with a veneer of love. Is it his Oedipal rage that works against me? In that case I can arrange a DNA test to prove I am not the biological father of his.
But he is most definitely not human, for only a spawn of the devil can tell the lies he tells. Only a pure evil soul, not a human soul with a hint of evil, can attack men like timeseye. He is a devil with the insticts and the desires of a canine.
He is satan. How else can I explain him copying a comment java jones made on my blog and pasting it on his blog of evil? Tell me, for I am clueless.
I wonder what will come up to his mind seconds before he dies oneday of autoerotic asphyxiation. The faces of the men whose lives he destroyed? Faces of the women he desires who are unattainable to him, whose lives he intends to taketh away? Or will he simply say ‘behold I shall live forevermore? Yes. Yes. That will be the case, for he can’t die. He is the devil.
Oh my dear box of chocolates Forrest Gump loved. Will he eat all the chocolates and leave me with an empty paper box? Will I get another cheap box of chocolates as a thoughtless gift of nature?
He who is referred to as Satan, devil, lucifer, sittingnut, knows me by my Christian name. I am cursed. I am doomed. But behold, I shall live again.