Dan Slott screws up again
I don't think this was meant to be an April Fools joke, but even if it were, it wouldn't be funny. He wrote:
Sigh. Once again, he's apologizing for the product as though he were required to, and worse, he's insulting people he doesn't agree with. And he sure likes calling people he doesn't agree with "idiots", doesn't he. Truly disgusting. He hasn't even provided any explanation why it wouldn't be disrespectful to 9-11 families, or even to victims of honor murders.
Challenging question now: has he ever communicated with a]members of the 9-11 Families for a Safe & Strong America organization like Tim Sumner and Debra Burlingame, b]Israeli victims of terror and their relatives like Stephen Flatow, c]survivors of the bloodbath by Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, d]families of victims of the terrorist bombing in Boston and e]former Muslims like Brigitte Gabriel, Walid Shoebat and Bosch Fawstin? Has he ever asked them what they think?
Has ever even contributed to the funding of a memorial for victims of honor murders like Aqsa Parvez? Did he ever take part in protesting the mosque that almost got built at Ground Zero? Has he ever researched any of the verses in the Koran calling for jihad against infidels, like Sura 9:5, and also Sura 5:51, which demonizes Jews and Christians? Come to think of it, has he ever even offered somebody who went through such terrible incidents a hug and said "I love and care about you"? Not from what I can tell. And if he won't speak to them and ask what they all think, then I'm not sure why we're supposed to listen to Slott. He's already long proven himself as awful a speaker on politics as he is a writer. And for a man who says he's of Jewish background, he sure hasn't done much to prove he really honors it.
I would note that there's people out there shattered by the terrible experience of 9-11 who care about victims of Islamic honor murders. And there's former Muslims, survivors of Islamic upbringings out there, who care about victims of 9-11 too. What about Slott? Does he care about both groups?
Since we're on the subject, I should also note that Burlingame recently voiced offense at a movie called Non-stop, which did something hitherto thought impossible: it insulted 9-11 families. If survivors of 9-11 can comment on offensive movies, how long is it going to be before they start commenting on comic books with potentially offensive themes? How long before one shows up and voices distaste in a comic that whitewashes the very religion that encouraged violence against their beloved? Slott would do well to think about that, and not assume that because comics are all but under the radar, nobody will take notice. Just because it didn't happen today doesn't mean it won't happen tomorrow.
Once again, Slott's proven himself a major disappointment, by acting as apologist for other bad products in the comics medium, and using insulting language instead of civil discourse.
If you're a blogger who thinks the MS. MARVEL comic is in any way disrespectful to 9/11 families, please check to see if you're an idiot.
— Dan Slott (@DanSlott) March 31, 2014
Sigh. Once again, he's apologizing for the product as though he were required to, and worse, he's insulting people he doesn't agree with. And he sure likes calling people he doesn't agree with "idiots", doesn't he. Truly disgusting. He hasn't even provided any explanation why it wouldn't be disrespectful to 9-11 families, or even to victims of honor murders.
Challenging question now: has he ever communicated with a]members of the 9-11 Families for a Safe & Strong America organization like Tim Sumner and Debra Burlingame, b]Israeli victims of terror and their relatives like Stephen Flatow, c]survivors of the bloodbath by Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, d]families of victims of the terrorist bombing in Boston and e]former Muslims like Brigitte Gabriel, Walid Shoebat and Bosch Fawstin? Has he ever asked them what they think?
Has ever even contributed to the funding of a memorial for victims of honor murders like Aqsa Parvez? Did he ever take part in protesting the mosque that almost got built at Ground Zero? Has he ever researched any of the verses in the Koran calling for jihad against infidels, like Sura 9:5, and also Sura 5:51, which demonizes Jews and Christians? Come to think of it, has he ever even offered somebody who went through such terrible incidents a hug and said "I love and care about you"? Not from what I can tell. And if he won't speak to them and ask what they all think, then I'm not sure why we're supposed to listen to Slott. He's already long proven himself as awful a speaker on politics as he is a writer. And for a man who says he's of Jewish background, he sure hasn't done much to prove he really honors it.
I would note that there's people out there shattered by the terrible experience of 9-11 who care about victims of Islamic honor murders. And there's former Muslims, survivors of Islamic upbringings out there, who care about victims of 9-11 too. What about Slott? Does he care about both groups?
Since we're on the subject, I should also note that Burlingame recently voiced offense at a movie called Non-stop, which did something hitherto thought impossible: it insulted 9-11 families. If survivors of 9-11 can comment on offensive movies, how long is it going to be before they start commenting on comic books with potentially offensive themes? How long before one shows up and voices distaste in a comic that whitewashes the very religion that encouraged violence against their beloved? Slott would do well to think about that, and not assume that because comics are all but under the radar, nobody will take notice. Just because it didn't happen today doesn't mean it won't happen tomorrow.
Once again, Slott's proven himself a major disappointment, by acting as apologist for other bad products in the comics medium, and using insulting language instead of civil discourse.
Labels: islam and jihad, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, politics, terrorism, violence
Given the (deservedly) low sales of comic books these days, I would say that Ms. Marvel is probably under the radar. Then again, it might get noticed, because of the way the MSM gush over every PC comic as if it were a literary masterpiece. So people (including 9-11 families) might hear of it from some fawning USA Today article or something.
It might be best to just ignore it instead of protesting it, though. Controversy = free publicity, and could even help sales, as some customers might buy it just to see what the fuss is about. As it is, it will likely be cancelled soon, because of low (even by today's standards) sales, anyway.
"Non-Stop" is a treasonous POS. If this kind of political correctness had existed during WWII, we would all be speaking German or Japanese by now.
And Dan Slott is a shmuck.
Posted by
Anonymous |
4:33 PM
Slott also tweeted a "reminder" to any blogger who thinks all Muslims are terrorists that they're not. Gee, thanks for the social studies lesson.
I'd be a lot more inclined to listen to (and take seriously) guys like Slott if they practiced what they preach across the board. Considering how much he and his peers denigrate conservative Americans and their beliefs on social media, why should anyone care about his "reminders" regarding any other group?
Posted by
Hube |
6:13 AM
Agree. It's a double standard. "Not all Muslims are terrorists." Well, not all Gulf War veterans are psychotic serial killers, not all Christians are narrow-minded bigots, not all farmers are inbred halfwits, and not all blue collar workers are illiterate troglodytes. But you wouldn't know that from the way those groups are usually portrayed in comic books and movies.
Posted by
Anonymous |
8:23 AM
Slott continues to prove what an idiot he really is. And his followers are nothing but mindless drones, who fall in line with liberal groupthink, if their replies to his Tweet are any indication.
I don't think anyone implied that all Muslims were terrorists in this case, but of course, like all progressives, Slott and his drone-like followers always leap at the opportunity to call people "racist" for speaking out against radical Islam.
And good points, Tom. I agree completely about the double standard. It's funny how those stereotypes are considered "good" by progressives. It's just like how the majority of gun owners are not psychotic, trigger-happy mass murderers, but stereotyping is considered okay by progressives as long as it's aimed at the "right" targets.
Posted by
Anonymous |
8:34 PM
Political correctness is all about target selection, not fairness or sensitivity.
And maybe not all Muslims are terrorists, but not all Muslims are peaceable moderates, either. 9-11, the Pan Am bombing, the TWA hijacking, the Achille Lauro hijacking, the Khobar Towers bombing...none of that was done by American soldiers or veterans, Fox News, the Koch brothers, or radio talk show hosts.
In the late 1940's, after WWII, a sort of early version of political correctness emerged. Germany was needed as an ally against the Soviet Union in the Cold War, so Americans began to sweep WWII and the Holocaust under the rug. Even when people criticized the Nazis, they tried to emphasize that they were only talking about "the Nazis," not "the Germans." In the movie "Judgment at Nuremberg," an Army JAG officer (Richard Widmark) is prosecuting war criminals, but there is political pressure to drop the whole thing. Widmark disgustedly snarls, "Haven't you heard? There was never any such thing as Nazis. The Eskimos started the war and tortured Jews to death. It wasn't the Germans, it was those damn Eskimos."
Posted by
Anonymous |
12:49 PM
This is a recent Dan Slott twist of logic:
https://twitter.com/DanSlott/status/465874843485749248
He clearly does not even know what traditional values means.
Posted by
Anonymous |
7:06 AM
And the reason that the Middle East was never ravaged like Germany and its allies in both World Wars, even before the majority of humans decided that blowing each other to bits only keeps things stagnant, is...?
Posted by
Drag |
6:11 PM