Please Send Me Stuff

If you have articles, information, thoughts you want to share just send it to me at Please keep your articles brief, not more than 1000 words or just use bullet points. If you have pictures to go with the articles, that is even better. Towards an excellent Malaysia.

Saturday, February 24, 2018

Minimum Intelligence, Minimum Common Sense, Minimum Decency Required For Civilised Dialogue.

The brain dead are now debating about FGM - Female Genital Mutilation. It is a reminder that among us walk the stupid and the mentally retarded. Yes they still walk among us. 

Why not debate the pros and cons of  "walking with a stick stuck up your ass?"  Isnt that a more useful subject of debate? 

Or what about debating the beneficial or non beneficial effects of clamping your nuts with a large metal clip ?


Retarded people have upheld and still uphold stupid and barbaric beliefs for which they have no rhyme or reason. It is just something they inherited from their stupid fathers and even more stupid grandfathers. 

In some barbaric societies that existed up to the late 20th century, women whose husbands died had part of a finger cut off. Parts of other fingers were also cut off if their children had also died.  I recall watching a documentary program on TV where this woman had a few of her fingers cut off. She had lost her husband and some of her children to disease.   

You DO NOT enter into a any kind of intelligent discourse or discussion with retarded people who believe such nonsense. This is uncivilised, barbaric behaviour.  You cannot dignify this type of barbarism with any kind of polite engagement. 

Same with the old idea that a widow should throw herself into the funeral pyre of her dead husband.  You absolutely DO NOT say, 'Ok guys, lets sit down and discuss the pros and cos of doing this shall we?'  You just put an immediate stop to this type of retarded behaviour. Which is what the British did.

This is also why I do not engage with the "religious people". 
This is why I call them retards.

Do you have a PhD in religion? 
Then you must be a very big retard. 
What a waste of your life. 
What a waste of life. Period.

Talking about useless things for which you have absolutely no proof, no evidence nor even requiring any measure of common sense. 

How can you engage in useful or meaningful discussion with people whose whole life revolves around a rock solid belief in "my imaginary pet flying unicorn is better than your imaginary pet flying unicorn"

Show some proof - you mental ass-holes.

"I kill you" is not an answer. It is not an option at all.

 To discuss you must use brains. 
No brains no discussion.

In my view you will be doing human intelligence, the idea of civilisation, the concept of discourse a great dis-service if you even contemplate sitting down with these people to discuss their imaginary pet flying unicorns.  

You should not and cannot dignify such retarded thinking with any kind of conversation. Just tell them to go and jump in the sea.

Like the people who believe in "spirituality". 
What exactly do you mean by spirituality? 
Every one has their own completely different version of "spirituality". 

Spirituality is eminently arguable. Some people say that vibrations from simply repeating certain sounds in your mouth (also known as chanting) brings out a  spirituality. 

Others say the sounds from certain man-made objects (musical instruments, metallic objects etc) also opens up to "spirituality". 

Other people say it is "a spiritual moment" to focus on a point "somewhere in infinity" accompanied by chanting, singing hymns, recitations etc. (Now this is from many religions, and not anyone particular religion ok).  

So spirituality is arguable. 
Everyone has their own version of spirituality.
Actually you cannot even begin to talk about spirituality.  
There is absolutely no logic or evidence for spirituality.

Maybe some fellow will argue (or he can argue) that releasing gases from his arse can be defined as a spiritual moment. Who the hell are you to say otherwise?  

Another fellow can say that since his version of spirituality is an "omnipresent condition",  his spirituality can even be found inside his neighbor's cat's arse. Who the hell are you to argue otherwise?  Anything is possible. 

Because there are no rules, no parameters, no definitons and most importantly NO EVIDENCE. NO SCIENCE. NO LOGIC. It is just endless, useless and time wasting argument.  And it begats NOTHING. The output is ZERO.