Dan Slott keeps floating around in a bubble
Who else but Slott could possibly be the worst cheerleader/apologist for Marvel's publicity stunt with a Muslim protagonist? Here's a few tweets where he blabbers on while refusing to acknowledge reality:
For heaven's sake, isn't it obvious to him, after 9-11, the Beltway Sniper, the murders committed by Nidal Hasan and the Boston jihadists that those who could be particularly angry are the victims of crimes committed in the name of the religion? Even people who've researched history better than he has, including subjects like Medz Yeghern, the 1929 Hebron massacre, Haj-Amin el-Husseini's collaboration with the nazis, the Islamic slavemongering in north Africa, and rapes committed by Muslims in Europe, could feel horrified that an ideology innocent people were attacked by is being rewarded with an uncritical representation.
In fact, did it ever occur to Slott that jihadists could feel a form of satisfaction from what Marvel's doing now, even if they have no interest in reading the stories themselves? Is that what he wants? I've got a hunch he's well aware what religion the Boston jihadists practiced, yet he continues to sail around in his bubble, unwilling to look at hard facts about belief systems nor do any research. Of all the current contributors to Marvel and DC, he's one of the worst, most disrespectful of them.
Anytime I read a blog entry from someone who is ANGRY Marvel's creating a Muslim American super hero, it makes me realize why we need one.
— Dan Slott (@DanSlott) November 15, 2013
"SpiderMan writer, we 'need' Muslim superhero b/c it makes ppl angry. So making Muslims Happy-post 9/11 is Marvel's job?" Wow. Ok-- (1 of 2)
— Dan Slott (@DanSlott) November 15, 2013
I'll be more specific: We need her because it makes misinformed people angry & because heroes should reflect the good in ALL of us. (2 of 2)
— Dan Slott (@DanSlott) November 15, 2013
@nicksebundy Flip it. WHY NOT let comic book readers who are Muslim know that there's going to be a heroic character in the Marvel U that's-
— Dan Slott (@DanSlott) November 16, 2013
@nicksebundy -like them? Who does that hurt? And why does THAT make people "mad"?
— Dan Slott (@DanSlott) November 16, 2013
For heaven's sake, isn't it obvious to him, after 9-11, the Beltway Sniper, the murders committed by Nidal Hasan and the Boston jihadists that those who could be particularly angry are the victims of crimes committed in the name of the religion? Even people who've researched history better than he has, including subjects like Medz Yeghern, the 1929 Hebron massacre, Haj-Amin el-Husseini's collaboration with the nazis, the Islamic slavemongering in north Africa, and rapes committed by Muslims in Europe, could feel horrified that an ideology innocent people were attacked by is being rewarded with an uncritical representation.
In fact, did it ever occur to Slott that jihadists could feel a form of satisfaction from what Marvel's doing now, even if they have no interest in reading the stories themselves? Is that what he wants? I've got a hunch he's well aware what religion the Boston jihadists practiced, yet he continues to sail around in his bubble, unwilling to look at hard facts about belief systems nor do any research. Of all the current contributors to Marvel and DC, he's one of the worst, most disrespectful of them.
Labels: islam and jihad, marvel comics, moonbat writers, politics
Let's just point out everything Slott says about having a Muslim superheroine presented in a good light also applies to having a Caucasian male conservative, Southern Baptist superhero presented the same way. Then ask how many of those we see in comics?
Watch the left-wing head explode in response.
Posted by
The Drizzt |
4:04 PM
Man, I should tweet just that, Drizzt!
Posted by
Hube |
4:26 AM
Go ahead. I'm sure they have a few profane insults they were saving to throw at you on a rainy day. ;-)
Posted by
The Drizzt |
2:36 PM
Well-said, Drizzt! I've posed similar questions to progressives before. Their heads explode.
Posted by
Anonymous |
9:23 PM