Sunday, June 12, 2011

Smell Media: No point in arguing anymore

Condemnation of Racism Turn out Racist Flavored?

In april the newly elected parliamenter from the True Finns made some unfortunate comments about africans, using the word "neekeri" which is the old-finnish for african, not the finnish for nigger; about minarets and some other issues. F

I may touch on what I think about his words in a post later on, but point is, Hakkarainen was then disciplined by the party chief, and the True Finns issued statements,

(Which are nothing like "Immigrants need to assimilate", given by the immigrant loving greens, the True Finns have a lot to learn about manipulating language),

But then;
The True Finns Party's declaration in late May condemning racism was partially
aimed at themselves, says professor of constitutional law Tuomas Ojanen of
the University of Helsinki.
Because again some very sensitive people got offended, they had to correct course in some way, and they did it by issuing a statement that they are not racist (to which I agree, btw.. the word racist right not is thrown around so much that it has the same meaning as "you are an orange")

The statement penned by MP Jussi Halla-Aho would prohibit the positive aspects
of special treatment as well as racism.
If you cannot negatively discriminate, you should not be able to positively discriminate, as if you positively discriminate, like some of the kumbayya singers suggest, you are actually negatively discriminating against the others. Try teaching it to the bird brained.

So True Finns said, no racism.


Should settle the issue?

“The issue here is reaching true equality between people. We’re trying to
improve the conditions of people who are in a weaker position due to
discrimination and put them on an equal footing with us,” Professor Ojanen
says, defining positive special treatment.

What is false equality?

Foreigners have 10% unemployment. Discrimination

Finns have 10% unemployment. Lazy Finns.

Who defines weaker position?

What defines true equality?

Man these arguments that mean nothing, the non existent meaning can be changed at the whim of the accuser (accusing, that is the only thing they are good at).

You have opportunities for free school, you drop out.
You are provided jobs you choose to go on welfare.


Here is equality: Spend the money on people who actually want to study and work.

I am in fumes about this "true equality" bullshit that I cannot explain the phrase I got in my head.

On the search of "True Equality" where "True" is not defined, cannot be defined, society is the biggest loser, and the members of the society go down with that.

Some people feel good about themselves and can strot around thumping their chests, while the society is going down like Titanic.

According to Ojanen, the kind of special treatment condemned by the True
Finns’ declaration is upheld by the Finnish constitution, as well as
international human rights agreements. It is also known as affirmative
Affirmative action is discriminatory action against the unaffirmed, which usually happens to be the natives, or the ones more suitable/deserving for a job/benefit/position/housing are are rejected because of some quota.

It is the farce of human rights. It is forcefully taking rights from deserving and giving them to the ones affirmed by the current political agenda.

It is oppression, as it is written in the dictionary.

“It comes with very strict constraints and is also temporary. For example,
when women’s position at the workplace has improved, then it [special
treatment regarding women] should end,” the professor explains.

Man, I wish this disaster of humanist sciencing would stop here but it continues:

He wonders also why the True Finns condemned only discrimination on the basis
of ethnic origin, religion, language and culture.

“Why focus on these, but ignore the generally condemned discrimination on the
basis of gender or age? I think there are some racist undertones apparent
there,” Ojanen says.

They were bloody condemning the racist speech one of their members gave.

Maybe they should also condemn discrimination based on height, weight, BMI, jeans size, hair color, eye color, eye lash thickness, the direction the dick is hanging?

This can't be serious...

But it is serious. Let's look at it again:

True Finns:

"We condemn any discrimination on the basis of ethnic origin, religion, and culture"

The humanists:

"They did not condemn discrimination based on sex and age. See, we told you they are racists"

Ojanen suspects that many of the True Finns members who signed the declaration
did not comprehend the full meaning its creator, the outspoken academic and
blogger Halla-Aho, put into it.
Eeeeeevil-Halla-Aho... The poster child of satan.

Crime: Making the insensitive uncomfortable  Pissing off the intolerant

“But the one who penned this declaration was driving at a very specific idea,”
Ojanen suggests.
Well, it does look like Mr.O himself is deliberately trying to drive to a very specific idea.
While having the assumption that when a political party is making a statement, they should not be driving towards a specific idea? Ehm.. Why is it called a statement?

And these people are given the task of defining "True Equality"...

This piece of news once again proves to me that discussing with the intellectuals of the PC affiliation is a futile attempt in creating some good in this world.

Using their tactics like scare mongering, ad hominem attacking, twisting facts and manipulating language among other techniques and directly speaking to the society while bypassing the PC crowd is the only way left.

As it has been shown here and in other times, they are neither interested in facts, nor in what you say. So, neither should you pay respect to what is being said by them. The only reason to listen to them is to use their words against them; if the words do not get silenced by the roar of the massive avalanche of facts that is inevitable.

1 comment:

  1. AnonymousJune 22, 2011

    Ojanen represents the direction that the University of Helsinki is trying to set for their lawyers, leftist "sollen" ideologues who use Derrida and other postmodernist bs to cloak the fact that what they are doing has in fact fuck all to do with the law; meanwhile, actual study of what the law is (sein), is marginalised as "unscientific". Sigh.