What’s in your words?

25 05 2010


We may think that as we can all speak, talk and have a big mouth, that language is easy. But I don’t find it so. It is actually very difficult. It’s difficult to put your own thoughts precisely into words, It’s very difficult to put abstract thoughts into words, and when you finally think you made a good job of it it turns out that people don’t understand what you meant to say.
So back to the brainworks, and trying to find another way to express what you meant to say.


And then there’s the concept of lying. I never got the concept of lying. Why bother to say something which isn’t true? How can you trust people after you found out that what they say is a lie? What’s the point of language if you cannot rely on what you are being told?
I never lie. I can’t lie. What I can do is swerve around the subject and suggest something else. Which works fine. But if somebody looks me straight into the eyes and asks me point blanc I can only say the truth. (My mum knew this!) Or remain silent. I cannot lie.
But I know people who lie and twist the truth habitually. It’s like they rather tell a lie than the truth. How do they do it? And then why is it that when I speak the truth I get told I am blunt?

The truth

The truth, for some reason, is never welcome. The truth can hurt. Maybe that is where the concept of lying comes in. When you speak the truth, and it is an uncomfortable truth, People who do not want to be confronted by this truth will ignore it, but if they are hurt by it, they will choose attack you instead. As the proclaimer of that truth they want to bully you into silence, and to nullify your opinions and thoughts, and then, in some Intellectual Acrobatics way, they think the truth you so inconveniently spoke will not matter anymore.

I find such behaviour fascinatingly bizarre. I prefer to meet trouble head on, but this really is the head down in the sand approach. Fascinating to see that happen right in front of you.

There is the other side of truth. You sometimes read a blogpost where the writer’s sentiments are shockingly racist or religiously elitist. Like for example, ”Non-religious people, or people from the wrong religion, are not human entities, they are nothing more than a breathing machine” or ”Atheists have no souls” (therefore you can kill them because they don’t count as human) Now nice-minded moral people are shocked by such evil and immoral writings and call on them to stop writing it, but I don’t agree. I think it’s brilliant that people speak out what is really in their minds instead of putting on a mask of respectability and decency. For myself I really want to know if somebody has an opinion which is diametrically opposite from my own. I like to see who people are without their masks. I prefer reading the truth! However unpleasant or inconvenient!

For those who do not not like the truth, the concept of forbidding free speech is the first choice of stopping hearing the truth and making it easier to ignore it.


And when you are discussing stuff on the internet, on a blog or forum, it becomes clear that your words have to fit your thoughts like a glove. Otherwise people will definitely not understand you. In this sense blogging is a very good excercise for all who wish to write. And you come across people who are absolutely unintelligible because of the way they write or flatly contradict themselves. Sometimes in a mindboggling manner! Like for example; you read people arguing about a subject with confidence, blaming and attacking others, and then  suddenly, one day, they admit they never had any idea what the concept was they were arguing against, and think it’s completely reasonable to state they never knew what they were talking about in the first place.

Or, and this ties up with The Truth, they willfully misunderstand you because they don’t like to look in a dark place. Especially when religion comes into play: any truth which as a side-effect critices religion cannot be true. But if it is evidently true then what? Well, I found out: They completely ignore the nasty inhumane facts you wrote down, and start attacking you. And when you keep reminding them about what you wrote, they will eventually become silent, or twist your words, and invent another reason why you mentioned some inconvenient facts and crimes against humanity, and attack you on that. It hold a certain kind of fascination. I cannot find out if this bizarre, unfeeling and unlogic twisting of ones words is done by design, out of a sense of self-preservation, or if it is the mindless automatic response instilled by religious indoctrination.

You cannot have a meaningful discussion with people wearing blinders.

Does not compute

Which brings me to ”Does not compute”. You can put your thoughts into simple, baby language. You cannot conceive how anybody on the planet who speaks the same language cannot understand them, but if your words clash with their mental programming they still will not understand them.
This is truly fascinating. Language isn’t as clear as we think. We can be misunderstood for

  • not being precise enough,
  • for using words which have a different content in another part of the world,
  • or when we are upset we misread,
  • or because the other person doesn’t like the concept implied in our words and so willfully misunderstands them,
  • or there seems to be a certain way human brains can get programmed and then no concept, however simply stated, which contradicts that programming, will get into that brain.

Depicting the prophet Mohammed

23 04 2010

Manuscript in the Metropolitan collection

So, in deference to the joy, art, freedom supressing, dreary, dull, intolerant and homicidal fanatics of Islam, (a minority, by all accounts, but supported by the majority of muslims who will not stop them or hinder them in any way) the exhibition about Islamic art in the metropolitan museum in New york has removed all items which show the prophet Mohammed.
That is cowardly, and irresponsible and also falsifying history.
‘Cause I have news for you: Islamic artists have depicted Mohammed in art since the very beginning, and where ever muslims had books or art made.

Yes, this may come as a surprise, but there have been times when islamic countries actually had books printed, artists painting, musicians composing, and poets writing. And as Islamic countries were mostly muslim a lot of all this artistic effort went towards Islamic subjects, including depicting the prophet Mohammed.
Now of course Mohammed has been depicted for hundreds of years in Europe, but, as the artworks show, for even longer in Islamic countries, and by Muslims.

Now the reasons the muslims want to erase this fact from history (as they erase everything else they don’t like from history, including for example ancient Buddah statues) is that they want to claim that everybody, especially western cartoonists, must and should be murdered for doing so because the prophet must never, and has never been, depicted in paint.

Yeah right.

Enjoy a small selection of Islamic art depicting the prophet Mohammed:

Mohammed leaving for the battle of Badr

Mohammed in heaven with pretty women

Mohammed giving a sermon

Mohammed and Jibril

Young Mohammed recognised by the monk Bahira

Solving the dispute at the kaaba

witnessing a beheading

Surrender of the Banu Nadir

The prophet and his companions

Nineteenth centure Algerian postcard

Nineteenth century book illustration

Contemporary mural

Portrait of Imam Ali, modern

Now of course the modern maniacs and art-haters have their ancestors in the past too, which results in weird depictions of Mohammed with his face veiled. Some were painted this way, but many of those paintings had the face scratched out much later, and either left empty, or a veil painted across.
I don’t know, but that feels rather insulting to me…

What I find interesting is that many of the paintings of Mohammed, and family, companions, show them with an aureole, or their heads in flames. Just like Christian saints or the Holy Spirit.
I always find these kind of cross-cultural-, and in this case cross-religious details very interesting.

17th century Iran

Mohammed splitting the moon

Mohammed and family members


22 04 2010

So let me think, I am confused by people being insulted, and to be frank I am insulted myself and this Gordian knot of insults is just confusing.
Let’s try to unravel it.

A while ago an English teacher in Somalia had her class name the class teddy bear. The children decided on ”Mohammed”. All nice and honkydory you would think.

Because calling a teddybear ”Mohammed” is in some bizarre way insulting to muslims, (mohammed is such a popular name in Islam because the prophet had that name) the teacher then was arrested, and the adherents of the religion of peace wanted to chop her head off! For the ”crime” which her students committed! They were the ones who chose the most popular name, Mohammed, for the teddybear! How insanely stupid can you get?

But then Theo van Gogh got shot down in the street by some mentally disturbed insulted muslim because he made a movie about the bad treatment of women in Islam. Which is true, so the insults should be felt. But because of the bad treatment of women in Islam, not because a short movie is pointing them out.

And then we had the Danish newspaper which posted some rather unfunny cartoons about mohammed and of course those artists had to be given the death threats as well for being insulting to muslims.

Because in Islamic countries making fun of Jesus in cartoons is ok, but the rest of the world making a cartoon about Mohammed is insulting!!! And should be punishable by death!

And now ”South Park” has been making an episode where they made fun of all religions, and had all religious inventors featured: Jesus, Buddah, and amongst many others, Mohammed. Now of course they had a problem. They  didn’t want to be shot by some cowardly weak-headed religious maniac, for making  a cartoon featuring mohammed for that might insult some muslims. And they could not leave him out for various reasons, but I bet that would also have been insulting to some muslims as well. I suppose they could have had him clad in abaya and niqab to hide his face, but I’m sure that would also be insulting to some muslims.
So they chose to have him disguised as a teddybear.
Which turned out to be insulting to some muslims.

The insulted troglodytes adherents of the ”Religion of Peace” went through the trouble to research the addresses of the makers of South Park, post them on the internet, tell everybody how insulting they are and, (of course), call upon other muslims (don’t have the mental derangement  guts to do it themselves) to murder the makers of South Park.
As that is the only answer this contingent of Muslims is capable of in their diminished mental capacities.

I am insulted by this infringement of free speech. For sooo many reasons.
Here are three:

  1. The cartoons about Christianity and Jews printed in Muslim papers beat in tastelessness (and insult potential) everything ever produced in the western world (except by the Nazis). So I don’t see where they think they can gain the right to be insulted by a very few mild and in the case of South Park definitely funny pointers towards their religious adherents (not the founder: this joke is adressed to the insane murderous group of muslims, and maybe the silent majority who stand by and let murder happen in the name of Islam.).
    You don’t have the right to be insulted.
  2. You may, on whatever spurious grounds, curtail freedom of speech, thought and cartoons in your own dominion, but you have no right to dictate what other people do in their own countries. Especially when you are happy to use their freedoms when it suits you.
  3. When you have reaches a certain age, a certain maturity, (beyond the age of two) you don’t solve disagreements with violence, let alone murdering everybody who disagrees with you.
    These minds are of a simplicity, a crudity, a stupidity, a violence which makes me wonder if the earlier hominids have really become extinct… Surely these muslims prove there are pockets in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia etc. where some very early missing link in human evolution apparently still lives, and thrives, and now has managed to find it’s way onto the internet?

And while writing this down I notice how hypocritical all this stupid insultedness and violence is.
Is hypocrisy the cornerstone of Islam?
Have these insulted primitive idiots ever read what their prophet has to say about hypocrisy?
We know they can read, otherwise they would not have been able to put up calls for arbitrary murder on the internet. Pity they don’t use their newly acquired skills to actually read their own religious book.
The first admonition Mohammed and the muslims got from god is the first being ignored.

Ok, I worked it out: the Gordian knot of insults has been unravelled.

Keeping quiet and let a couple of under developed humanids from the land which time forgot dictate what we can or cannot say, what we can or cannot draw, what we can or cannot publish, is not an option.
My religion is freedom.
Freedom of speech, freedom of Art. freedom of publishing, freedom of media, freedom of (or from) religion, freedom, freedom, freedom.

Any attempt to curtail my, or other people’s  freedom, is highly insulting to me!