Hey thanks for coming. Don't forget to pay the minimum 70$ monthly subscription fee to enjoy MACBLOG - BISMUTH benefits, like free ice cream and other lies.

« BIMMY'S GETTIN FRUSTRATED | Main | OH, SHIT »

Rate this Entry

Five Five Five Six

Posted 01-09-2015 at 04:09 PM by Mac Sirloin
Updated 01-09-2015 at 06:38 PM by Mac Sirloin

I think that the people at Charlie Hebdo were agitators. If anyone's surprised that some insane, murderous piece of shit blew them away they're likely not familiar with the extent of Charlie Hebdo's racist xenophobic bullshit.

That being said, those gunmen (and their accomplices) are/were scum of the earth, and I sincerely hope that the consequences of their hideous crimes serve as a lesson to any other extremist piece of shit out there. My heart goes out to the families of the employees, but moreso to the officers who were gunned down protecting their right to draw shitty racist cartoons.

Enough politicizing. I just felt like posting that here since I was having a discussion with someone on facebook about it and he deleted my comment because it called him out as the ignorant pop science yokel that he is. Adam if you're reading this, and you probably aren't, that was some weaksauce bullshit and I won't soon forget it.

Oh-kay, in other Meatman news, me and J-Dawgs tried robotripping on wednesday night. Robotripping is imbibing a big ol' bottle of robitussin cough syrup and then feeling simultaneously gross, euphoric, and mildly despondent at length. We spent four hours, FOUR FUCKING HOURS, watching a woman sell jewellery on the shopping channel, completely entranced. Thanks to the chemical significance of the whole ordeal I can't deny that I genuinely think this was time well spent. The purpose of this adolescent-grade drug abuse was to cheer Jizzle up about the whole Charlie Hebdo thing, and legions of assholes jumping down muslim throats over it. Instead I think it just made him more depressed.

All in all, it was a pretty good time. I didn't feel it until I vomited, at which point I was instantly euphoric and felt the all-seeing message of glowing god love permeating all things. We got fuckin transfixed on whether one of the jewellery models was the same person as the lady actually selling the products; we couldn't see her face, but their sweaters were similar. However, the model had a mole or a big hair or something on her neckline, and the host did not.

Comments 39

Total Comments 39

Comments

You truly are scum. Have you ever heard of satire? Because that's what they're magazine was.

Protesting their right to draw shitty racist cartoons.

Wow, you sure love pulling out the "racism" card today, don't you?
They were making a joke about a religion (and frankly a ridiculous religion at that. Make fun of Scientology all you like, but don't forget that Mohammad flew to heaven on a horse, where his 72 virgins were waiting).
Freedom of fucking expression means you should be allowed to joke about what you like without being shot by some insane fucks. Notice how I didn't use the term "extremists" or "radical muslims"? It's because they're not. All they were doing is following their religion. If anything, Muslims who don't do this shit cannot be considered "true" Muslims. Similar to how the Westborough Baptist Church are the closest group to being "true" Christians.

Posted 01-09-2015 at 07:17 PM by Nepsotic

Updated 01-09-2015 at 07:21 PM by Nepsotic

	They published a picture of Mohammad's butthole exposed with his dick and balls hanging out, I don't call that satire. I'm offended and I'm a nihilist at best. Just shut the fuck up already. : Similar to how the Westborough Baptist Church are the closest group to being "true" Christians. Are you fucking with me or are you actually this dumb? : You truly are scum.
	Posted 01-09-2015 at 08:36 PM by Mac Sirloin Updated 01-09-2015 at 09:01 PM by Mac Sirloin

	: Have you ever heard of satire? Because that's what they're magazine was. Just because people have the right to free speech, doesn't mean they should exercise it. They were professional shitkickers who enjoyed poking bees' nests for shits and giggles. Obviously they didn't deserve to get killed, but at the same time lets not go overboard and call them heroic poets either.
	Posted 01-09-2015 at 10:37 PM by Nate

	I never called them poets, but they have the right to publish whatever they like without being shot, bee pokers or not. If Charlie Hebdo were shit lockers, South Park are the biggest dung beetles in history. That analogy got away from me, but you get my point. No line was crossed, and even if it was, what right do they have to punish them? Let alone murder them.
	Posted 01-10-2015 at 01:40 PM by Nepsotic

	: Just because people have the right to free speech, doesn't mean they should exercise it. If course it does, and that's the point of draw Muhammad day. It's exactly about agitating them, and showing those fucks you can't silence people with violence.
	Posted 01-10-2015 at 01:43 PM by Nepsotic

they have the right to publish whatever they like without being shot, bee pokers or not.

No-one on this forum has been saying otherwise.

If course it does,

It comes down to ethics. Being a dick is wrong. People should not be dicks. The people at Charlie Hebdo were dicks. They were wrong to do so.

And, because you seem to love misinterpretting that sort of statement: Being dicks does not justify their murder. No-one is claiming that. I'm just saying that the world would be a better place if there were fewer dicks and fewer terrorist murderers.

Posted 01-10-2015 at 03:09 PM by Nate

	I've got another shipment of straw men coming for you tomorrow Nepsotic, fear not.
	Posted 01-10-2015 at 03:18 PM by STM

	Obviously they knew people would be offended, but there's also the side that they know there are people that find them at least somewhat amusing. Essentially yes they are dicks in the sense that they know people would find them inappropriate, but at the end of the day, they're drawings and it's up to those offended people to get over it.
	Posted 01-10-2015 at 03:35 PM by RoryF

	Wow, Matt Stone and Trey Parker are massive dicks.
	Posted 01-10-2015 at 07:56 PM by Nepsotic

Essentially yes they are dicks in the sense that they know people would find them inappropriate, but at the end of the day, they're drawings and it's up to those offended people to get over it.

That's like saying I could stand on the streetcorner and start calling passers-by "Angry cuntfaces" and "Asinine wolf-fuckers". At the end of the day, they're words and it's up to those offended people to get over it.

Doesn't make me any less of a arsehole for doing it.

Posted 01-10-2015 at 08:05 PM by Nate

	There's quite a difference between a drawing in a magazine and directly calling people names in a street.
	Posted 01-10-2015 at 08:42 PM by RoryF

	Drawing in jest, no less.
	Posted 01-10-2015 at 09:29 PM by Nepsotic

	: There's quite a difference between a drawing in a magazine and directly calling people names in a street. Yes, there is. Doesn't mean they're not dicks, though.
	Posted 01-10-2015 at 09:44 PM by Nate

	What? Stabbing somebody in the face is a dick move, and so is fucking your friend's girlfriend. I don't think the two are comparable.
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 02:37 AM by Nepsotic

I always vomit when I robotrip. Well, all four times that I've done it I puked. Felt great after, though. Especially great after a big ol' bong hit. I swear I can't even do the stuff without weed. Way too sludgy. Bearable, but weed just rockets it into bliss-dom.

As for the other topic presented in this blog, I'm afraid I currently have nothing to say about it that hasn't already been said. Or just... in general. Other than that it's really, really shitty. Just kinda slapped this on the bottom to seem like less of a moronic cunt. Probably didn't work.

Posted 01-11-2015 at 03:16 AM by Mr. Bungle

	: Yes, there is. Doesn't mean they're not dicks, though. Oh yeah they're still dicks, but what I meant was the actual person being offended should just ignore it in this situation. It's a magazine so it's not like they're forced to look at it.
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 06:12 AM by RoryF

@Bungle, it seems like puking is part of the package, but it wasn't so bad as I thought it was. I imagine wolfing down some hot 420 doobers in addition will probably discourage the weirdly myopic moments; I found that 50% of the time was a sort of passive bliss, while it was punctuated with a half and half of 'extra 2% thickened cream bliss' and outright despondent thinking. Problem is, weed makes me pretty nauseous if I combine it with too much of anything else. I'll definitely give it a shot next time though.

Drawing in jest, no less.

No, Nepsotic. You don't get to be reductive about just how malignant and deliberately offensive the cartoons were. The implication that they were drawn for the sake of comedy or satire, and nothing else, is ignoring the xenophobia exhibited from Charlie Hebdo. It was anti Islamic and the lengths they went to offend muslims were disgusting.

Posted 01-11-2015 at 06:50 AM by Mac Sirloin

	You're right. I'm glad they were shot, those pigs. Let's hope their parents are murdered, too.
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 07:40 AM by Nepsotic

	No one is saying that and you're an asshole to imply that's my point after we've all carefully explained that's not what we're talking about.
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 07:58 AM by Mac Sirloin

	Then I don't get why you're so determined to convince us that they were racist pigs, as if it's a valid point.
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 08:54 AM by Nepsotic

Then you're not looking at this entire discussion the right way.

I'm trying to make the point that people shouldn't get caught up in supporting Charlie Hebdo when doing so would mean ignoring the fact that they'd be standing up for the opinions of racist xenophobes. Saying 'the victims didn't deserve it' is fine. Saying 'and what they published wasn't harmful or detrimental either' is straight-up ignorant.
This isn't an Islam vs. Hebdo argument dude, it's a discussion on the varying levels of extremism different cultures indulge and how we can learn from this tragedy to suffocate that extremism in its sleep.
Charlie Hebdo represented an extreme form of 'satire' that singled-out a group of people and served to misinform about them. They were not helping with the perception of Muslims in France and it's tragic that people are letting the actions of other extremists validate the hateful diatribe they espoused.
My opinion is that the level of disrespect and offense they directed at Muslims qualifies them as xenophobic assholes. I'm not going to force anyone to think the exact same thing, but I'm doing the right thing by pointing out how and why what they published qualifies them as such in my mind. At the very least you could accept that their modus operandi was distasteful when framed against the already disengenuous popular perception of muslims, which you validated was the line of thinking you subscribed to with the line "it's the majority who support what the extremists are doing." in the Thread.

Posted 01-11-2015 at 09:07 AM by Mac Sirloin

Updated 01-11-2015 at 09:11 AM by Mac Sirloin

What? Stabbing somebody in the face is a dick move, and so is fucking your friend's girlfriend. I don't think the two are comparable.

When did I say that they were at all on the same level? They're two very different dick moves. One is much worse than the other. And people shouldn't do either of them.

Oh yeah they're still dicks, but what I meant was the actual person being offended should just ignore it in this situation.

Ignorable or not, people shouldn't be dicks. The world would be a better place if people followed that guideline.

(Everything he posts)

Marry me.

Posted 01-11-2015 at 11:01 AM by Nate

Of course it would be an ideal world if no one was an asscheek, but as the reader, is it really necessary to kick up a stink about something so trivial as a cartoon magazine?

Unless somehow it's directly affecting their lives, I say move on. You can draw offensive stuff too, it's not like they're getting extra rights, there's no need to be upset.

And I'm not saying that people should go out of their way to be as offensive as possible, I'm just saying that retaliation isn't always necessary.

Posted 01-11-2015 at 12:31 PM by RoryF

I'm trying to make the point that people shouldn't get caught up in supporting Charlie Hebdo when doing so would mean ignoring the fact that they'd be standing up for the opinions of racist xenophobes.

I don't think this is what people are supporting when they defend Hebdo. I think they're defending their right to draw shitty cartoons and not be shot, which is totally a right they have, no matter how dickish it is. This is similar to how I would support the Westboro Baptist Church's right to say what they like no matter how utterly reprehensible it is (not that I'd actually go out of my way to do that, but you get what point I'm making). Nobody should be silenced, even Muslims who want to kill people for petty stuff like that. Don't try to shut them up, they are to be mocked, but not silenced (which is again, how I treat the WBO, it's so utterly ridiculous that they don't need to be silenced because literallynobody on the planet agrees with them.
I hope I explained my point well enough there.
Basically you can draw shitty racist cartoons, but you're a dick if you do.

is it really necessary to kick up a stink about something so trivial as a cartoon magazine?

And this is exactly why I mostly blame Islam and not the magazine. Of course there are other groups who would kill for petty shit like that, but Muslim extremists are one of the largest.
I.e. no Islam = those particular people wouldn't have been shot = less violence.

Ignorable or not, people shouldn't be dicks. The world would be a better place if people followed that guideline.

Of course that is the case, but most of the time when people are dicks, they don't see themselves as being dicks. There's a motivation behind it that to them, says it's okay. Not everybody is a Disney villain. It would be nice if that were the case, but it just isn't.

Anyway I think we've all made our views clear and none of us are budging so I'm just going to agree to disagree on this one.

Posted 01-11-2015 at 03:02 PM by Nepsotic

	Ironically, you just agreed with pretty much everyone. : Basically you can draw shitty racist cartoons, but you're a dick if you do. That is what literally everyone else here believes. Now see if you can make the jump from "you're shit if you draw racist cartoons" to "racist cartoonists shouldn't be celebrated just because they died".
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 03:48 PM by MeechMunchie

	No, but I'm saying they have the right to draw them.
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 03:59 PM by Nepsotic

	: And I'm not saying that people should go out of their way to be as offensive as possible, I'm just saying that retaliation isn't always necessary. Name me one person on this forum who has been suggesting that retaliation is necessary.
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 05:04 PM by Nate

	I'm not suggesting that is anyone's point that they should be retaliating, I mean it in relation to whether the magazine or its authors were dickish, it shouldn't matter.
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 05:53 PM by RoryF

	It only matters because people are deifying them (and/or their work). And other people are trying to take a more nuanced view.
	Posted 01-11-2015 at 09:28 PM by Nate

No-one here has ever condoned the actions of those terrorists, or implied that the insensitive nature of Charlie Hebdo lessened the heinousness of the violence wrought against them (and unrelated civilians).

That's not what this debate is about, and it stopped being about that ten posts into the thread when everyone stated a variant of the above. If you want to argue about that, then I'm afraid you're out of luck, because everyone here has pretty much the same view on it.

The topic at hand is whether it's appropriate to celebrate the staff of Charlie Hebdo as artistic martyrs when they were, in the eyes of many people, scumbags.

You can argue about that. You can argue about something else. But there's no point trying to argue about the bit in bold, because there's no argument to have. No-one disagrees with you.

I've been watching two or three people repeating themselves, arguing with imaginary opponents, and it's getting really tedious repeating ourselves in response. So knock it off.

Posted 01-12-2015 at 12:56 PM by MeechMunchie

Updated 01-13-2015 at 09:54 AM by MeechMunchie

Recent Blog Entries by Mac Sirloin

To the tune of mr sandman (09-23-2020)
To the tune of mr sandman (09-23-2020)
Yawning Peaks (02-26-2018)
I find the intensity of your prayer pretentious (10-31-2017)
o canada (07-01-2017)


< > 2024
Su	Mo	Tu	We	Th	Fr	Sa
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31	1	2