Scroll down for the update ‘UPDATED on February 11th’, now the lowest part of the article.
In an autonomic response to Lavie Tidhar’s tweeting (and Valente’s retweeting) on my ‘Cathy Valente and the genre thought police article‘ on the 31st December – I answer Tidhar here – popular British SF writer Charles Stross tweeted his soooo predictable asinine opinion.
I had actually planned one of these days to write an article on Stross. The reason is there has been some (just a little) clueless brain-dead ranting from him at his blog on the topic of the Middle-East and Israel. Some commentators at his blog have been guilty of some odious commentary in this respect and Stross has (albeit hardly always) given such ignorant, harebrained anti-Israel remarks the thumbs up. Nobody is going to call Stross (who is Jewish) a pro-Israel person, that’s for sure. Not in a million years. To be fair, Stross at least acknowledges the reality of Islamist tyranny, terror and the like in the Middle-East region. Well sometimes.
Stross is also tight with many of the Apex SF crew who I routinely mock. That includes Catherynne M Valente, former editor of Apex Magazine who has recently been the guest blogger at Stross’s blog. He is also mates with Lavie Tidhar. Tidhar needs no introduction to the readers of this blog. Stross entertained Apex author, Marxist SF writer and editor Nick Mamatas (who I have also clashed with) when the latter was visiting the UK last year.
So getting back to the matter at hand … these tweets of Stross’s that I critique below thus come as no surprise.
Firstly this was Lavie Tidhar’s harebrained tweet that got it all started:
@NMamatas is gay for Marx, @catvalente supports terrorism and I’m an anti-semite.Yes,my favourite loon is back in town!seasonoftheredwolf.wordpress.com/2011/12/31/int…
Once again my reply to Tidhar’s twit tweet is over here. It’s worth remarking that Tidhar’s obtuse lying and loopy distortions in his tweet (see my reply) doesn’t mean anything to Stross (any more than it does to Valente and gang). Naturally.
Here is Stross’s first tweet on my blog (in reply to Tidhar’s tweet above)
31 Dec Charles Stross @cstross
@lavietidhar @nmamatas @catvalente Is he trolling for lulz, or just off his meds? I’m finding it hard to tell …
Yawn. You don’t get it Stross. I knew you wouldn’t. You simply cannot. What I write grates violently against your moral and cultural relativist ideological brainwashing. Or to put it another way, you’re a moron. Oh wait, that’s an ad hominem. Oh well.
Then we have this tweet from Stross:
In reply to Catherynne Valente
31 Dec Charles Stross @cstross
@lavietidhar @nmamatas @catvalente I want to get on his shit-list. I’d be in good company.
Well you’re on it! Happy now Charles Stross? You’ll be in good company? Really? With Nick Mamatas? Stross the uh Jew considers Mamatas good company. The harshly anti-Israel pro-Palestinian communist Nick Mamatas is good company to the likes of Stross (and Tidhar). Naturally enough. The fact that Mamatas’s fav blogger in the whole world – R Seymour of Lenin’s Tomb – is a hardcore Jew-hater (a Hamas and Hezbollah supporter and George Galloway fan) doesn’t mean anything to Stross. It doesn’t mean anything to Mamatas neither. Tidhar and Valente likewise. Remember Stross is a Brit, he knows exactly who Galloway is – a HAMAS fundraiser and a Hezbollah and Taliban fan and an admirer of the late Saddam Hussein – documented in my Mamatas series (May-June 2011) and my China Mieville series for that matter. Whatever.
Wonder if Stross even begins to realize what my first article on Mamatas is about, or if he even cares? That’s a rhetorical question. Stross didn’t appear to notice nor care to notice the previous article at my blog, to the one he’s tweeting on (the Valente article). It concerns Mamatas after all (it’s distinct from the six article Nick Mamatas series). Maybe Stross can answer those questions I ask Mamatas at the bottom of the article, that Mamatas won’t answer or even acknowledge. Keeping mum. I asked Stross’s fellow ‘Jews’ Lavie Tidhar, Nir Yaniv and Laura Anne Gilman if they would answer those questions since Mamatas won’t. They opted out likewise. Why don’t you give it a go Stross?
“I want to get on his shit-list. I’d be in good company.”
Sheeeesh. That company includes Holocaust Revisionists you idiot. Like Tangent editor Dave Truesdale, James P Hogan and former JBU editor Sam Hidaka (strong circumstantial evidence for Holocaust Revisionism in the last case) and those sugarcoating their bigotry and lies. You didn’t know or you don’t care that you’d be in their company? I mean since I censure and mock you as I did them, albeit for entirely DIFFERENT REASONS. How come none of you uh Jews have diddly to say about the Holocaust Revisionism from genre pros that I have exposed at my blog? Why hasn’t there been an all Jewish issue of Apex Magazine in light of all this extreme Jew-hatred? Silence is consent you know. You people disgust me. Not a brain nor a backbone in the lot of you (that’s Stross, Gilman, Tidhar, Yaniv especially since they are the ‘Jews’).
You’re in the company of China Mieville. My series on him (that you almost certainly have not read) is running concurrently in between these other articles that attracts your scorn and sniping, Charles Stross. Didn’t you notice? Don’t you care? Rhetorical question. So Stross since you have raised your head over the parapet and mouthed off, I ask the question I asked your fellow court Jews, do you or do you not consider Mieville to be anti-Semitic in light of my series on him? (make sure to read the articles you probably have not read before tweeting your answer) Yes or no? Your fellow SF Court Jews have gone into hiding on this front, won’t give me a straight answer.
Tidhar comes very close to toppling off, with his high-wire balancing act (I will have more to say on that in a future article). Still teetering… Won’t give me a straight answer at the end of the day. What about you Stross, you chicken too? Go ahead and tweet the answer (I’ll pick it up sooner or later). I reckon you are likewise just a yellow belly. It goes with the territory, the territory of being a Court Jew that is. I reckon you are all bluff Stross, you don’t have the courage of your Court Jew opinions. Go ahead, prove me wrong. Tweet a yes or no to the pertinent query of mine re Mieville and his prejudice.
Then we get this tweet from Stross:
Charles Stross @cstross
@catvalente @lavietidhar @nmamatas Has anyone sent him a copy of “Rule 34″? I think it’d push all his buttons. (Gay muslim protag …)
Stross plugging his novel there. You would think I was anti-gay and hated Muslims going by Stross’s tweet. Oh Stross thinks so. Well Stross can’t think. At all. I’m the one daring to mention the plight of homosexuals (lesbians in this case) and the female sex in the Muslim world. Valente the lesbian/bi feminist doesn’t want to know. Sheesh but these people are idiots. It’s frightening. The title of Charles Stross’s recent novel ‘Rule 34’ is an allusion to the meme ‘Rule 34 of the Internet’. Namely “If it exists, there is porn of it. No exceptions”.
How about my own Rule 40 (arb) of the Internet. Namely “if ‘new’ anti-Semitism is being promoted or endorsed on the Internet, there will always be a Court Jew to cover up for it, rationalize it, deny it or excuse it. No exceptions”.
This tweet of Stross’s above is in reply to the Nick Mamatas tweet – “just write something on the internet after linking to him, I got a six part series based on three words”.
That’s this six part series beginning here. Never mind Mamatas’s dishonesty, he didn’t get a six part series based on three words. Those three words were just the catalyst for my series and only my first article on Mamatas is ‘based on three words’. What were those three words and what was their context again? Hey Mamatas is keeping mum. Mocking Mamatas feels like kicking a dead dog. It’s just so easy to kick a dead dog I guess.
Notice though how the Jew Stross has no interest in even wanting to know about the Nick Mamatas series, their context and content. Mamatas dismissed my blog as ‘unintentionally very funny’ the same day I published the last article in my Holocaust Revisionism series, that had been running uninterrupted for near three weeks prior. Up to that point in time 80% of my blog articles pertained to that series on HOLOCAUST DENIAL. Stross is oblivious. As with Mamatas’s other Jewish mate Lavie Tidhar, Stross could care less. That’s certainly how it looks. Stross and Tidhar don’t want their house of cards falling down now. Just the slightest breeze and it all comes crashing down…
So then we get a tweet from SF writer Tobias Buckell (in reply to Stross’s tweets) re my blog. No surprises here neither. Cookie-cutter stuff. 100% predictable.
tobias buckell @tobiasbuckell 31 Dec
@cstross @lavietidhar @nmamatas @catvalente that’s some seriously whack shit
in reply to Charles Stross
Yaaawn. Guess nobody taught Buckell that evidence-free ad hominems do not a logical argument make. My ad hominems come with evidence see? That’s the BIG DIFFERENCE. Remember that “serious whack shit” bleat of Buckell’s is in response to the Catherynne M Valente & genre thought police article of mine.
I realize that the easy peasy to understand points I am making in that article cannot be comprehended by you Buckell. I know that. Namely that the effusive Islamophilia of the gay feminist Catherynne Valente (go ahead call me a bigot, it’s water off a ducks back coming from you and your mindless crew) is pathetic and absurd given Islam’s long legacy of misogyny and homophobia. Where are Muslim lesbians living in freedom, not facing persecution and even the risk of murder Buckell? Can you name the place? Saudi Arabia? Pakistan? Gaza? Egypt? Nigeria? I am not saying all Muslims are misogynistic or homophobic, just that these two prejudices are intrinsic to orthodox Islam (Sunni and Shi’ite) and its practice. A religion by the way of which you know less than nothing Buckell (just like Stross).
[Talk to them like they are little children, red wolf. I know I know. Yet they – the loony Left – still don’t get it no matter how patient one is with them. I don’t write this for their benefit. That would be utter madness. They understand nothing.]
I also realize that the easy peasy to understand point I am making about the glaring lack of an all Jewish issue of Apex Magazine under the editorial reins of Valente is likewise lost on you Buckell. That’s because there is sooo much anti-Semitism within the professional genre community. I have documented a fair bit of this Judenhass at my blog. Such anti-Semitism includes Holocaust Revisionism from genre pros. What was the catalyst for the special all Arab/Muslim issue of Apex Mag again Buckell? (the issue that Valente is most proud of) Valente and the Apex crew (Tidhar included) have it appears a de facto hear-no-evil see-no-evil approach to the indisputable Jew-hatred in the professional genre community. SILENCE IS CONSENT remember.
Charles Stross and Tobias Buckell, anti-Semites don’t like my blog neither. Did that not occur to you, or do think it nothing to be concerned about?
No I wouldn’t expect a coherent answer from the likes of Stross and Buckell (and the Apex SF crew as a whole). That’s not possible. Going by Buckell’s tweet ‘seriously whack shit’ (and Stross’s tweets likewise for that matter), nobody would know what on earth I was actually writing about. I mean I could be writing about calling for the excavation of the lost ruins of Atlantis under Antarctica, the invasion of China, bombing the Martians, endorsing some David Icke conspiracy on alien lizards in the White House feeding on human sacrifices, bringing back eugenics or remaking Heaven’s Gate going by Stross’s and Buckell’s fact-free tweets. Simply lame.
UPDATED on February 11th
As I write right up above: No I wouldn’t expect a coherent answer from the likes of Stross and Buckell (and the Apex SF crew as a whole). That’s not possible.
Indeed I didn’t get coherent tweets at all. Not one. Safe bet.
So here are the pertinent tweets in response to the above from Tobias Buckell and Charles Stross himself (and Paul Graham Raven):
First this one from Buckell:
» tobiasbuckell tobiasbuckell
@ @cstross someone’s off their meds
You know I could respond to this kind of thing in my sleep because I can see it coming from ten miles off. Same old same old. Stuuuuck record. You’re a writer Buckell, can’t you be a little more original, I mean even for twitter? I have already pre-empted this kind of evidence-free ad hominem for the super lame and laughable response that it is up above.
Then also yesterday February 10th (9 pm London time roughly) Stross adds his voice:
cstross Charles Stross
He hates me too! Whoopee! seasonoftheredwolf.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/sf-…
What a devastating response to myself Stross. Totally destroys the points I make in my article on you. Uh no not really. For the record I don’t hate you, I think you are just pathetic and incredibly obtuse. Stross – as he only can do – just keeps digging deeper the hole that he’s made for himself, even as he is oblivious to it. So to my brief allusions pointing out the uncomfortable facts, the content and context of my Nick Mamatas articles (and the questions I raise in this respect), along with the extensive and exhaustive series of mine on China Mieville’s rabid anti-Semitism and my query in this regard – do you Charles Stross consider Mieville anti-Semitic or not? – we get this reply from Stross: ‘He hates me too! Whoopee!‘
Then these replies to Stross’s tweet from Paul Graham Raven:
Paul Graham Raven
PaulGrahamRaven Paul Graham Raven
@cstross I’d make the “I’m in good company” gag, but WE ALL KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN THEN
Looking at his extensive blogroll, it includes (aside from Buckell and Stross) the PC genre Thought Police Leftists K Tempest Bradford and China Mieville (whose extreme and rabid anti-Semitism I have exhaustively documented).
Paul Graham Raven: I’d make the “I’m in good company” gag, but WE ALL KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN THEN
I guess you just did make the ‘I’m in good company gag’, no? What will happen then, dufus? Oh I point out that you are in the company of Nick Mamatas, China Mieville (along with all the Court Jews including your mate Charles Stross), and you go ‘yeah that’s good company’, right? (well you’ve already done it really) Okaaaay. Naturally what I actually write about Mamatas and Mieville doesn’t mean a thing, straight through the holes in Graham Raven’s head. Along with everything else such as the moral and cultural relativism of the Genre Thought Police, inclusive of the latter’s woeful sweeping of (often rabid) anti-Semitism under the carpet. Silence is consent, or not?
Then this tweet from Raven and the reply from Stross:
PaulGrahamRaven Paul Graham Raven
@cstross Of course I have now exposed myself as part of the Totally Extant and Not Made Up Genre-Fic Holocaust Revisionism Cabal, haven’t I?
in reply to ↑
@cstross Charles Stross
@PaulGrahamRaven Yes, yes you have #conspiratorsareeverywhere #fnord
There are two extremely pathetic aspects to Raven’s tweet and Stross’s reply.
Firstly, I don’t group either of you with Holocaust Revisionists. I wrote above in allusion to that (bold and caps lock in the original):
You didn’t know or you don’t care that you’d be in their company? I mean since I censure and mock you as I did them, albeit for entirely DIFFERENT REASONS.
So I make it clear that merely because I mock and criticize Stross, I am not grouping him with Holocaust Revisionists (ie employing a false guilt by association argument). I even typed the words “albeit for entirely different reasons” in bold and the very words “different reasons” in bold and CAPS LOCK to emphasize this very point! So I emphasize the point that I am NOT censuring Stross for the same reasons that I do Holocaust Revisionists – by stating this in plain English and doing so in bold text and the use of caps lock! Naturally it makes no difference to the likes of Stross and P G Raven who breezily misrepresent the facts here with such insouciance, the better to prop up their sandcastles.
I KNEW though that inspite of making it very clear that I was NOT censuring Stross for the same reasons I deride genre Holocaust Revisionists, I would still get a tweet or two in reply implying that I did so. This is what I mean when I write further up how totally predictable my antagonists are.
Secondly, Raven and then Stross insist on digging ever deeper the holes they have made for themselves via obscenely stupid tweets…
Paul Graham Raven:
exposed myself as part of the Totally Extant and Not Made Up Genre-Fic Holocaust Revisionism Cabal, haven’t I?
Stross replies: Yes, yes you have #conspiratorsareeverywhere #fnord
What on earth? Of course since their uh argument is logically bankrupt, Raven and Stross resort to the evidence-free slur of accusing me of being a conspiracy whacko. This kind of baseless slur almost always goes hand in hand with the ‘he’s loco and off his meds’ slur. What conspiracy is that, Raven and Stross? Who do I think is behind this uh conspiracy that I am apparently dedicated to exposing exactly? Give us the names, why don’t you? Naturally one couldn’t get a coherent answer from these two since their pathetic and incoherent ad hominems are without the tiniest shred of plausibility (and even reason or sense).
Totally Extant and Not Made Up Genre-Fic Holocaust Revisionism Cabal
Come again?? This transparently feeble attempt to imply I’m some kind of paranoid conspiracy theorist (on top of the false accusation that I’m associating Stross with Holocaust Revisionists) is also simply odious. The only acknowledgement of my Holocaust Revisionism series by these two is NOT to condemn the actual Holocaust Revisionists themselves, you know Tangent editor Dave Truesdale in the main, but to use THAT SERIES against me (and in a way that is harebrained beyond my ability to articulate)! Of course they can only do so in an illogical and extremely offensive fashion. I mean it’s a series about ACTUAL HOLOCAUST REVISIONISM.
I hope there are some readers who recognize the gross insensitivity and offensiveness of this off-hand tweet of Paul Graham Raven’s that Stross endorses:
Totally Extant and Not Made Up Genre-Fic Holocaust Revisionism Cabal
Proves my point on the indifference and willful blindness to anti-Semitism (and extreme anti-Semitism at that) among the PC genre Left. In this case the Holocaust Revisionism of a (conservative) genre pro such as Dave Truesdale – that I have exposed – who has otherwise been routinely mocked by genre Leftists, is NOT EVEN ON THE RADAR. This disdain to even acknowledge indisputable Judenhass from a notable CONSERVATIVE genre pro comes shining through here. It’s the guy – the Red Wolf – exposing Holocaust Revisionism who is the one to earn contemptuous scorn from the like of Stross and Graham Raven.
And even worse, Graham Raven and Stross pathetically and woefully attempt to smear me (as a whacko paranoid conspiracy nutter) by using the Holocaust Revisionism series of mine as a polemical prop! Galling, offensive and simply obtuse. Beyond lame. Actually it’s horribly anti-Semitic if you think about it, to dismiss without a second thought and without reading a single paragraph in that relevant series, my exposé of Holocaust Revisionism from genre pros, as nothing but paranoid nuttery on my part.
So to my query to Stross further up (never mind the Nick Mamatas stuff), namely:
…do you or do you not consider Mieville to be anti-Semitic in light of my series on him? (make sure to read the articles you probably have not read before tweeting your answer) Yes or no? Your fellow SF Court Jews have gone into hiding on this front, won’t give me a straight answer.
Charles Stross’s response is basically this: He hates me too! Whoopee!
Like Tidhar, Gilman and Yaniv, his fellow SF Court Jews, Stross does not answer the question. I just get lame evasions, evidence-free name-calling and baseless and laughable accusations of being a paranoid conspiracy weirdo. Well when your ‘argument’ is morally and logically bankrupt, lame and ridiculous slanders are all one has.