TRIGGER WARNING: this post contains references to liberal intolerance, hypocritical butthurt and complete faggotry. Sensitive readers are warned.


For those of you who don't watch my Facebook wall (Probably a good thing), it's a war zone.  In the last week there've been defenses of the A10, attacks on the A10, jokes about the A10, a Christ On The Cross dress up doll, jokes about Muslim suicide bombers, about feminists, about conservatives, about anarchists, vegetarians, cops and starving children.

Now, humor is both a coping mechanism and a means of maintaining attention on an issue.  This is why Mel Brooks, for example, puts Hitler jokes into almost every movie.  Joking about issues can reduce their emotional impact, help us cope, while keeping us aware of the issue.

This is something most people know instinctively. Some have to be taught.

But a handful of people, who can be of any political or cultural affiliation, completely lose their shit.

Thus it was with this picture: 



This picture offended one Jim Long, who friended me about two days ago. 

Just so we're clear which Jim Long it is, here's his FB ID:

Jim came into the thread and posted this:



Jim Long

November 2 at 10:50pm



As a FDNY firefighter I will never forget the horrors I've seen that day and to have an scumbag like you make light of the tragic events show what kind of character you have. I am unfollowing you Michael Z. Williamson.


Now, assuming Jim actually served on Sep 11, (he's a bit pudgy for the firefighters I know, but I don't know the NYFD guidelines) he has my respect FOR THAT ACTION.  I am not required to do so, but I do so, voluntarily. Doing so does not create an obligation on my part to respect any other action he may take in his life.

My response was, "Okay, bye."  Then others of us had a subthread discussion about how all the other humor above was fine, but this particular joke itched his anus.  I suppose I could not post anything that offended anyone, but that would be everything.

I could talk at this point at what Sep 11 meant to me, but the offended pussy will never get it, so we'll just note that I was serving military at the time, activated and deployed later in response, and had friends and family in close proximity to both the NY and Pentagon attacks, and move on.

 Now, here's how a man would have handled this offendedness:

Had he actually wanted to talk about his feelings, he could have attempted, in public or message, to have a discussion about it. We all could have learned something more about the event or our society from this. It would have been productive. Jim did not do this, because Jim is a moral coward.

He could have just ignored the post and moved on to something equally offensive but not relevant to him personally. Hypocritical, but people can be. Jim is more than hypocritical and a moral coward.

He could have just unfriended or blocked me and moved on with his life. But in addition to being a moral coward, Jim insists everyone else live by his rules.

So, Jim chose the Past Full Retard All The Way To Turnip Limpwristed Faggot and Triggered Liberal Outrage response of publicly telling me what a horrible person I am (wrong) and that he knows exactly what kind of person I am (Wrong, and I'm a complex person, as we all are).

Now, I cannot prove that two minutes later he reported his butthurt and full diaper to Facebook mods, but shortly after that, I was banned from posting for 30 days, and the post was removed.

So let's look at it again:  THIS WAS ON MY WALL.  The man asked for my contact, came into my internet living room, publicly complained about the party, then left and called the cops.

Now, I get complaints from time to time, and complaints like this invariably come from some liberal pussy (as opposed to liberals who are not pussies, whom I enjoy talking to and learn from) who wants the world to be as they envision it, and no dissent is allowed. (This isn't actually liberal.  It's passive-aggressive fascist.)(I'm also friends with real fascists to counter the real communists I'm friends with. I wouldn't want to live in their utopiae, nor they in mine, but we can learn from each other.  But I digress.)

So I contacted him in private. I told him he was a pussy, as face to face as I was able to get.

He responded: Wrong on both accounts. Loser.

I guess your feeling a little guilty you need to private message me bullshit.


Guilty? No, retard, it was the only way I had of contacting you, after you shit your panties and whined to the overworked drones at Fecesbook that YOU WERE OFFENDED!!!

Nobody gives a shit if you're offended, pussy.  Grow the fuck up.  I get offended, usually by the existence of liberal pussies (who can't spell to boot) such as yourself, a dozen times a day.  My response varies. If I think I can have a logical disagreement with someone, I do. Otherwise, the steps above outline how to deal with such things.

And I always love being called a loser.  I have a loving family, have raised kids who impress people, enough disposable income to pursue my hobby of an arms race with Bermuda, and a following and readership that runs up to a half million people who pay money specifically to read my stuff (and others who get it second hand).  I've got medals for helping save lives, and for helping take the war directly to the enemy. Interesting definition of a "loser," but since I don't know what his criteria are, I'm going to chalk it up to more passive aggressive "liberal" bullying intended to make me comply with his wishes.

But, since Jim finds my posting of a joke I find funny in my own forum to be so offensive it must be stopped, I am encouraging everyone with access to post it on my wall as often as possible for the duration of this ban. Or anything else offensive. 

You may choose to be more direct and post it on his wall. I am not requesting you do so, but I note he felt free to dictate how my wall looks.  It would be symmetrical for the same to happen in reverse.

Keep in mind your post will probably be reported by some "tolerant" "liberal," removed, and you may be banned from posting on Facebook for a duration between 12 hours and 30 days--it's entirely at the whim of the overworked drones at Fecesbook, who are forced to deal with butthurt little bitches all day long.

BTW, Jim, are you aware that reports by butthurt pussies take time to process, and have repeatedly caused the monitors to miss reports of actual crimes and suicide, where outside intervention might actually help someone? But hey, you were OFFENDED!  That's what's important here, you narcissistic little pussy.

People like you make me wish Sep 11 actually happened. (That was sarcasm, btw)

UPDATE:  It appears, after someone perused his info, that he may be a poser. Imagine that--stolen valor from NYFD. Rather low, I think: 


Congrats. I have to hand it to you. It takes dedication to focus so exclusively on my Fecesbook wall you can catch things to be offended by, like this image I posted:


Or, you know, you could just go to the Humorless Pussy Little Bitch section of Fecesbook.

But that's nothing. You were dedicated enough to scroll back through an ENTIRE FUCKING YEAR of comments, not posts, to find something even older to get offended at. One that used "faggot" in its correct usage referring to a bundle of sticks, and even used the format of "A faggot (a bundle of sticks) of wood."  Thus proving that the Fecesbook monitors are retarded as you are obsessive.

Of course, that 12 hour ban was subsumed by the 30 day ban for the image above.

Not to rest on your laurels, you then went back to about the TWO YEAR MARK to find yet another comment to be offended about.

Now you're getting creepy.

Seriously, have you nothing better to do?

You went through possibly 50,000 comments.  You COULD have been researching how to cure a terrible disease.  You could have been creating great art.  If you were worth anything at all as a human being, that is. Since you're clearly not, you could have been masturbating to My Little Pony bondage porn.

Nope. You have nothing better to do with your life than read tens of thousands of my comments trying what, exactly? I have three backup IDs, and any number of people who'll post on my behalf.

You are truly the most worthless piece of shit the human race has ever produced. There's nothing I need to do in response to you. You've long since done it to yourself.

And may God continue to wipe his ass with you.

A statue of a man in underwear, outside on the grounds.

From the article:

Others at the exclusive 2,400 student all-female private liberal arts institution are not buying any defense of the work.

Please, tell us all about the suffering and and repression you experienced in the The Hamptons.

“While it appears that this statue of a nearly naked, older white man with outstretched arms is an art installation, it does not provide our community with any of the value that art is traditionally intended to add,” wrote student Zoe Magid in the petition. The statue had “become a source of apprehension, fear, and triggering thoughts regarding sexual assault for many members of our campus community,” reads Magid’s petition.

[Citation needed]  That's a fairly authoritarian statement there. What are your credentials or qualifications to stand in judgment? As far as "Triggering," yes, that's a real issue. But guess what?  There are ACTUAL MEN in the real world.  Someday, you'll have to interact with them.  And while there's a legal term "Statutory rape," let me reassure you it has nothing to do with statues becoming incubi and molesting rich college chicks.

“I go to a women’s college so that I’m part of an inclusive and supportive community, not one that supports male artists and statues of naked men instead of women,” wrote student Raeesah Kabir on the Davis Museum Facebook page.

"Inclusive."  You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

Seriously, did you fail 3rd grade English? "Inclusive.  To include, encompass."  What you want is "Exclusive.  To exclude, ostracize."  So, real colleges are supposed to embrace the artistic, literary and verbal diarrhea of types like you, but you should be exempt from returning the favor?  How about, "No"? Does "No" work for you?  No?  Tough shit.  To be fair, the college is described as "Exclusive."  I guess she forgot to read the pamphlet.  If she can read.  I'll be fair.  I'll assume basic literacy is required for a degree in Haberdashery Studies.

“I think art’s intention is to confront, but not assault, and people can see this as assaulting,” Wellesley senior Annie Wang told the Boston Globe.

Actually, you don't think, and that's the first part of the problem.  But I notice how you couch it.  "People can see this as assaulting."  So, you don't personally, but others MIGHT. What if others MIGHT view unburqa'd women as assaulting?  Or do only your opinions matter?

“Wellesley is a place where we’re supposed to feel safe. I think place and a context matters, and I don’t think this is the place to put it.”

So, you're afraid of a completely inanimate object?  Does Mumsy still check under your bed for monsters before you go to sleep?  Grow up.

Others defended the work. “I find it disturbing, but in a good way,” Wellesley English professor Sarah Wall-Randell told the Globe. “I think it’s meant to be off-putting – it’s a schlumpy guy in underpants in an all-women environment.”

Well, good. At least one of their professors has a brain.  But it doesn't seem her intellect is rubbing off on the spoiled white upper middle class princesses in their imagined victimhood.

Matelli described his artistic philosophy ahead of the controversy. “I’m fascinated with that moment when you become aware of a perceptual shift in your environment, so what was a seemingly real-life experience becomes a complicated art experience. That approach to art is really powerful.”

I get it.  He has, in fact, drawn attention to their plight.  Perhaps they should go back home and stay out of the real world until they're ready to handle it.  

I wrote this last year, but it was a little late to be relevant.  Well, it is again:

"ZOMG! Sandy Hook was a conspiracy!"

Okay, I will try logic before a ball bat.  Here goes:

Utterly Idiotic Insane Nutjob Tantrum #1:  "No one actually died at Sandy Hook!"

If someone faked 26 people dying in your town, don't you think a few people would say, "Huh…I've never heard of any of them.  Did you know any of them, son?"  A few…or a few hundred.

UIINT #2: "See, the FB tribute page to this teacher is dated THREE DAYS earlier in this screen cap!"

1:  FB glitches, as anyone who's used it will tell you.

B} People change names on their page to get a bunch of followers to spam later, and because it's "clever" to screw with idiots.  Someone even demonstrated this by backdating a forum post to a year before the event.

III] Why would anyone setting this up make a mistake like that?  Wouldn't they double check?  After all, this is a conspiracy so competent they've got dozens of people who have all played their part so well.
d)  In fact, why would you bother setting up a page at all, when someone else will certainly put up a tribute page?  And why on FB specifically, not a dedicated website?

V| Since there are plenty of computer experts who CAN find out who did this and when, it would be stupid. 

F. Why would they do so ahead of time?  Wait until a few hours later.  There's no rush.

Seven~  Why should I believe your claim is real?  Photoshop, anyone?  It's not like it's a birth certificate or something.

Hey, you could ask who set it up and see if that person actually lives in town and is real.  Eh?

UIINT #3:  "There was only one ambulance there!"

At what time?  Says who?  So what?  "We need an ambulance."  If they knew to send 26, THAT would be evidence of something.  Sending one just proves there was only one in that general area who got the call at that time.  How many came later?  THINK.

UIINT #4: "This guy in this video looks like some other guy in some other video!"

So what?  There's an entire internet meme based on this.

UIINT #5:  "See, this guy is laughing before he's crying!"

Yes.  People in shock often want to pretend nothing is wrong ("Denial" stage of grief).  They do it at funerals, before surgery, when injured, during loss.  Any health care professional will tell you this…if you believe in health care professionals.  If not, we may have found part of your problem.

As to "Getting into character," people in duress want to appear affable and friendly.  It would be a shame if the doc let them die on the table.  It would be terrible if the detective didn't devote a hundred hours to recovering their stuff. 

Age 18, in the ER, I was cracking jokes while they peeled my burned hands like gloves.  Obviously, I wasn't really in pain, right?

And yes, people get excited and nervous about being on TV (having been on national networks a dozen times, I know this) and can react oddly.

Does this person match up with a real person?  Is that person the father of a child?

If not, why aren't the REAL parents, and friends, and relatives, and neighbors, and acquaintances, screaming fucking murder?

If there is no such dead child, why aren't the friends, neighbors, classmates, all going, "Huh?  WHO????"

It does not make ANY kind of sense for an "actor" to be doing it.  Nor would it make sense for that smiling footage to be shot, much less released, unless it was completely innocent.

He may have been too shocky to do anything, and had to TRY to look upset, because he knows it's expected.

Or maybe he hated the little brat his wife burdened him with and is happy.  Unlikely?  More likely than being an "Actor" of a child who doesn't exist, or replacing a parent who does.

UIINT #6:  "They interviewed one of the kids, but they didn't ask him for a detailed breakdown of the incident!"

You know what, you're right.  They should totally have waterboarded that kid to get you the answers you want.  Fuck his shock, loss and terror. THIS IS ABOUT THE TRUTH!

UIINT #7:  "FEMA/DHS had ROLE PLAYERS in the area for an exercise.  What do you think of THAT?"

I think I know of at least two groups of same within 100 miles of me, just based on community information.  Regardless of the legion of problems both agencies have, they do actually get paid to study scenarios and practice, not just post drivel on Facebook.  Sorry, was that close to home?

UIINT #8:  "These two/three/four cops all gave slightly different accounts!"

So, like typical eyewitnesses, then?

If they all read from the same script, THEN I'd be concerned.

UIINT #9:  "Why haven't we seen all the video/audio/reports?"

Compiling information for an incident like this takes weeks.  Once it's done, there will be a copy available through FOIA.  Though since you're not going to believe it anyway, why do you care?

UIINT #10:  "We already know they set this guy up to kill!"

Waaaaaait, whaaaattttt?  Based on what information do we "know" this?  Who is "they"? How would they "Set him up"?  And if you really believe there are groups of people in this country who'd do that for some kind of political point, you should already have gone and shot them, even if it means sacrificing yourself, to save others.  PS:  please don't.

UIINT #11: "Isn't the timing suspicious?"

For what?  Politicians will always exploit an event for political gain.  When is a non-suspicious time for a killing spree?  Or a good time?

UIINT #12:  "What about the bus driver who dropped 6 kids off somewhere else?" (or something.  I really stopped listening by then.)

If someone was doing something stupid or questionable at that moment, as people often do, they'd DEFINITELY be in denial and damage control.

New stuff:

UIINT #13:  "Isn't it suspicious that no one survived?"

Other than the survivors you mean?

UUINT #14:  "Isn't it suspicious that they demolished the school immediately afterward to hide the evidence?"

In October 2013, a year later, after the FBI, the police, several other agencies went through it, and the school board and city council took a vote and agreed to pay $57 million for a new school?  And all those actors, and fake parents,, there must be 3000 people in this conspiracy. Who knew the 0bama administration was so competent?  Oh, wait:  They didn't get any relevant new gun control out of this.  Oops.


What really happened:  Some mentally ill individual, with poor grasp of reality, decided the only way to relieve his own pain was to kill a bunch of others for some reason that makes sense only to someone mentally ill in that fashion.  May God, if he exists, have mercy on all their souls.

Not convinced?  Then please go commit seppuku with a chainsaw. 

You are free to comment as you wish, as always.  I won't be wasting my time reading any conspiracy crap, so any "See this proof!!!!" BS will be ignored.  Have fun.