UPDATED Bits & Pieces: China Mieville and Charles Stross related

Just a post of general news items appropriate to this blog,  a few tidbits… [Scroll down to the lowest part of the article for the Iain Banks relevant update]

Jew-hater China Mieville does not – shocka – change his spots. Remember I have written an extensive 11 article series on this hardcore anti-Semite (beginning here and ending here), and if you want to know how  liberal genre ‘Jewry’ (including Lavie Tidhar, Nir Yaniv, Felix Gilman, Rose Fox, Scott Edelman, Laura Anne Gilman, Charles Stross) and non-Jewry such as SFWA head honcho John Scalzi have uh ‘responded’ to that series (it’s a scandal in itself), this is the article to read.

SF Court Jew Charles Stross asks why are people so stupid, or as he was to rephrase it, not more intelligent than we are? This is the same Jew in Name Only who gave a thumbs up tweet to SF maven/critic and pro-Palestinian academic Paul Graham Raven’s uh tweeted blithe dismissal of my genre Holocaust Revisionism series. No kidding. No Raven had no idea what he was doing, Stross neither.

Here are the relevant tweets (from the Stross and Buckell article linked above):

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 ↑
Charles Stross
@cstross Charles Stross
@PaulGrahamRaven Yes, yes you have #conspiratorsareeverywhere #fnord

Disgusting, odious, obscene and incredibly, offensively stupid in equal measure, from both Graham Raven and Stross (who gives Graham Raven’s tweet a thumbs up). It’s also very anti-Semitic if you think about it, to dismiss as paranoid conspiracy claptrap, my series on Holocaust Revisionism, without reading a single sentence in that self-same series.

Then again, this is Stross (in the comments section to his own article, pasted below) on hardcore Jew-hater and moral relativist and liar supreme Noam Chomsky:

53:I have “The Corporation”. Other obligatory background reading? “No Logo” and “The Shock Doctrine” by Naomi Klein, “Defending Democracy” (and anything else) by Noam Chomsky, and “The Economist” every week.

And again, Stross further down in the comments section in response to somebody having heard that Chomsky was a “loon”:

77:Greg: Chomsky’s take on language and communications is out of favour and/or obsolescent these days, but that doesn’t qualify him as a “loon” unless you’re also going to dismiss Sigmund Freud as a “loon” because his variety of psychoanalysis has been superseded. (If he came up with an idea like that today he’d be a crank, but back then, it was pioneering work.) As for Chomsky’s political analysis … right or wrong, it would be very convenient for people with a vested interest in the current system if he could be discredited or dismissed. I tend to think that he’s wrong in places, but where he’s right he’s very right indeed, and in general he’s more right than wrong.

As I have pointed out here and here, Chomsky gave his support to the arming of Hezbollah, several months before those jihadist terrorists initiated the war with Israel in 2006. Then again Chomsky exposed himself as an insane Jew-hater decades ago. As I wrote (first link):

Chomsky stated in an interview here with Al Manar TV on 13 May 2006:

Hezbollah’s insistence on keeping its arms is justified… I think [Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan] Nasrallah has a reasoned argument and [a] persuasive argument that they [the arms] should be in the hands of Hezbollah as a deterrent to potential aggression, and there is plenty of background reasons for that. So until – I think his position [is] reporting it correctly and it seems to me [a] reasonable position, is that until there is a general political settlement in the region, [and] the threat of aggression and violence is reduced or eliminated, there has to be a deterrent, and the Lebanese army can’t be a deterrent.”

Never mind what lying slurs Chomsky writes about Israel and his whitewashing of Islamist tyranny (when not clearly supporting it), that’s a whole other thing… (his books are advertised on neo-Nazi websites, at white supremacist rallies and on Muslim extremist sites as well. Even the late Osama Bin Laden recommended him) Chomsky was exposed for his friendly associations with Holocaust Denying fascists in France like Serge Thion and Pierre Guillaume, but most notably Robert Faurisson. Faurissson is one of the most notorious Holocaust Deniers and anti-Semitic fascists in France. Chomsky wrote an approving preface to one of Faurisson’s books in which Faurisson was unambiguous on his Holocaust Denial and a lot more ugly anti-Semitism besides. In Chomsky’s glowing preface to the book, Chomsky wrote that he saw Faurisson as a “relatively apolitical liberal”. Chomsky wrote to Australian historian Bill Rubinstein (1980/1) justifying his association with Faurisson:

I see no anti-Semitic implications in denial of the existence of gas chambers, or even denial of the Holocaust…”  and “I see no hint of anti-Semitic implications in Faurisson’s work…”.

See Werner Cohn’s essay, ‘Partners in Hate: Noam Chomsky and the Holocaust Deniers’ for the extensive details here. http://www.wernercohn.com/Chomsky.html

Also see the writings of W Rubinstein, Edward Alexander, Nadine Fresco and Rachel Neuwirth here.

Chomsky and his cult lie about the Faurisson affair as a freedom of speech issue to this day. Freedom of speech had nothing to do with it of course, it’s simply a disingenuous straw-man.

Chomsky also gave us these ‘gems’ (from http://www.paulbogdanor.com/chomsky/quotes.html):

The Jewish community here is deeply totalitarian. They do not want democracy, they do not want freedom.”
(Interview, Shmate: A Journal of Progressive Jewish Thought, Summer 1988)

Jews in the US are the most privileged and influential part of the population… privileged people want to make sure they have total control, not just 98% control. That’s why antisemitism is becoming an issue.”
(Variant, Scotland, Winter 2002)

There is plenty more where that came from.

As I wrote in the other relatively recent essay of mine re Chomsky:

To all intents and purposes therefore, Chomsky supports the destruction of Israel (by giving his explicit support to Hezbollah) and since the head of Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has himself openly advocated genocide of Jewry (not only the destruction of Israel!), Chomsky implies support for nothing less than jihadist terror and mass murder against Jewry worldwide.

So Chomsky gives support to jihadists determined and motivated on the project of ‘the holy killing’ of Chomsky’s Jewish tribe, Chomsky himself and his own family. This is what psychologists call negative identification. Noam C is manifestly a card carrying ‘Jewish’ member of  ‘we are all Hezbollah now’ and therefore clearly qualifies as insane.

Chomsky has also denied the Cambodian Khmer Rouge genocide, dismissing it as American propaganda in the late 1970s (when it was ongoing), endorsed the whitewashing of Serbian war crimes during the Yugoslav civil war and more… When called out on his outrageous and obscene statements, assertions, bluffs, politicking, dire polemics, distortions and whitewashing re the Faurisson affair, the Cambodian holocaust, the Serbian war crimes and a lot else besides; Chomsky simply and breezily lies and grossly misrepresents the facts ad nauseum. He knows he will get away with it easily enough; among the Chomsky cultists, Chomsky can do no wrong. Well if you are a Chomsky cultist…

Chomsky has no credibility on political matters period. The Faurisson affair (never mind what was to follow) alone discredits him entirely. His writings on linguistics are something else. That’s not what is at issue here.

Yet to Stross, Chomsky is more right than he is wrong! And Stross recommends his political output in toto (and a big part of Chomsky’s published political venom relates to Israel).

As Stross puts it, explicitly recommending:

Defending Democracy” (and anything else) by Noam Chomsky…

And this quip too re Chomsky:

“it would be very convenient for people with a vested interest in the current system if he could be discredited or dismissed…”

Stross is not talking about Chomsky’s theories on language and linguistics remember. “if he could be discredited or dismissed…”!! The Faurisson affair ALONE discredited Chomsky more than three decades ago, you dufus Stross. 

Stross also sings the praises of another anti-Semitic far Left Jew in the self-same comments section to the ‘Invaders from Mars‘ blog posting of Stross’s linked above, namely Canadian political activist and writer Naomi Klein.

Stross wrote there (pasted here once again):

53:I have “The Corporation”. Other obligatory background reading? “No Logo” and “The Shock Doctrine” by Naomi Klein, “Defending Democracy” (and anything else) by Noam Chomsky, and “The Economist” every week.

Whilst Klein may have valid things to say about the horrors of crony capitalism (maybe yes, maybe no. At best Klein can only be superficial. At best); Klein let the cat out of the bag re her odious Jewish self-loathing ages ago. Note how (details at the link) according to this feminist, it is Israel that is the misogynistic state in the Middle-East!! Apparently it’s not the Arab nations of the Middle-East and north Africa, where Sharia law rules officially or de facto in many places. You know honour killings, arranged marriages, legal wife-beating, enforcement of the full body burqa, lack of equivalence for females before the law. What of the genital mutilations of young girls, rampant in Egypt for example? Well no comment. Klein has also given her support to the Boycott Divestment movement against Israel, which is horribly and indisputably anti-Semitic. So of course has China Mieville (see links further up).

Klein has also sung the praises of Hezbollah supporter and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist, Australian far Left journalist John Pilger. Anybody so inclined can look it up. Klein has recommended reading everything he has written. Well of course she would.

Neither Klein nor Chomsky are taken remotely seriously by anybody with any deeper knowledge of international affairs and political conflicts and economic chaos. They are taken seriously by know-nothing pseudo-intellectual college undergrads caught in black and white non-thinking and fashionable moral and cultural relativism, and partial enough to fashionable new anti-Semitism. Oh and middle-aged liberals/communists/anarchists who never learn anything substantial about the world, remaining at the intellectual and mental level of teenagers. And that’s the kindest thing I can say about any fans of Klein and Chomsky over the age of 25. Stross included.

It’s also worth remarking that Stross has University of Michigan history prof Juan Cole in his recommended reading blogroll (Juan Cole: Informed comment). Cole is horribly anti-Semitic and has given the thumbs up to the Walt and Mearsheimer thesis, that the Joooooooos pushed America into invading Iraq in 2003, because the Joooooos are both nefarious and all-powerful manipulators of the mighty US of A. Don’t you know?

Chomsky, Klein, Cole – duplicitous, moral relativist Jew-haters the lot of them. Stross it would appear ‘thinks’ otherwise. Stross recommends their uh political output after all.

Then again, Stross is big mates (and a co-author) with far Leftist fellow Jew In Name Only Cory Doctorow. When it comes to setting new lows in stupidity and know-nothingness, Doctorow arguably takes the cake. Well admittedly Doctorow has a lot of competition for the useful idiot prize in the genre community, from his fellow ‘Jews’ and gentiles alike.

Why are people so stupid, Stross? Pot to kettle…

UPDATED April 10th 2013

Just a newsworthy pieces to add…

So Charles Stross is at least consistent. In light of the sad news of writer Iain Banks publicly revealing that he has inoperable gall bladder cancer and probably has less than a year to live, Charles Stross had this to say at his blog on April 4th:

No. Words.

By Charlie Stross

Iain Banks diagnosed with cancer. (Stage IV, inoperable, months to live.)

I first met Iain about 25 years ago. I am not only an unabashed fan; I consider him an object of emulation, one of the celestial lights I steer my own course by. He’s also a very nice guy when you get to know him, if a little bit difficult to buy a pint for. This news has me about as personally upset as you might expect. Cancer: just fuck off, OK?

So why would I have issue with that? I don’t really. I wouldn’t wish cancer on my worst enemy, anti-Semites like Iain Banks included. The point though is that Iain Banks is horribly anti-Semitic, as I have pointed out at this very blog; and Stross can’t be bothered to mention this ‘teeny weeny fact’, that is not so teeny weeny at all if you think about it. It would appear in fact that the ‘Jewish’ Stross doesn’t consider Banks anti-Semitic at all, not in the slightest; even though the latter supports the hardcore anti-Semitism that is the BDS Movement against Israel. Indeed Banks decides that the most important thing to let the world know about himself, after the public announcement of his inoperable cancer, is that he still hates the Jews oh sorry I mean Israel (that by one of those incredible coincidences just happens to be the sovereign Jewish state).

Any genre Jewish person with a conscience and a working radar re anti-Semitism, that is somebody who would be genuinely sorrowful about anybody suffering from cancer, Banks included; but recognizing Banks for the extreme anti-Semite that he is, would probably choose not to say anything at all about Banks’s plight, the fact that he is dying and suffering terribly in the process. I only mention it here because Stross mentions it without making allusion to the latter’s vicious ‘new style’ Judenhass. Maybe Stross just doesn’t consider the hardcore Jew-hatred that is BDS against the Jew among the nations, remotely anti-Semitic… I mean what else is one supposed to surmise?

This entry was posted in Anti-Semitism, Politics - General, Science Fiction and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.