Sunday, 24 April 2016

Klaatu barada nikto!

The following is the unedited version of an exposé currently featured in the 19th revised edition of Malleus Maleficus'  [title withheld] *** (see below): If you wish to report intrusiveness or inaccuracies, please email  To make a formal complaint under IPSO rules please contact IPSO directly at .  

      The chairman of the current session was the agnostic A.C. Grayling, a fully grown but philosophically adolescent man who was not so much godless as clueless. A leonine countenance, the demeanour of a mouse, it appeared he was wearing rouge. Which was perhaps as close as he has ever come to the actual ratification of an ideology he had long approved in public: that "we should educate ourselves in order to make noble use of our leisure time". Most types of lunacy are conditional, needless to say. 
 Having created God largely from his own imaginings, the author of a ‘secular Bible’ immediately went on to deny Him. It’s Monty Python’s idea of God, but there was no mistaking the measure of the man’s ambition: “to be a source of insight and inspiration, consolation and guidance, for the task of living.” 
           “Klaatu barada nikto!”[1] said the alien sitting next to me.
          The  most sympathetic aspect of  Grayling’s godlessness was the barely concealed reluctance with which he delivered it: “My whole nature utterly revolts at the idea that there is any Being in the Universe superior to myself,” he said  - according to a lip-reading expert – “heed no one but me!” More alarming have been allegations that it was he who instigated the rumour that Richard Dawkins wished to rationalise the world and be its Messiah.
"God is an atheist!"
Dawkins’s own crusade,  meanwhile, continued to maintain that the concept of God as a governing principle was the work of the Devil. And the first time he spoke in tongues,[2] I shut my eyes and thought “Yep, Richard, you betcha, the chief cause of our troubles today is that folks have lost faith in the Devil.” But in a new twist on atheist ideology, Dawkins also declared himself to be “a cultural Christian and an Atheist for Jesus.” So there you have it,  the Crucifixion was a set-up, but it’s what Jesus would have wanted.
          Grayling then  declared, with the hint of self-importance displayed by all true apostles that no one could repudiate “the three of us” – Jesus, presumably,  Dawkins and himself. Extreme in all things, he also gave God three minutes to prove His existence -  part of new standard for atheist authentication - before handing the chair to a skinny alien who was no doubt having second thoughts about the issues of the day. Aliens, as you may know, are people with very particular skills, but no great capacity for long linear arguments, and the question remains whether superior galactic communities would have either the time or the tolerance for a pair of professional narcissists who have done more for the revival of outdated religious superstitions than any other two individuals since Ron 
Hubbard and an extra-terrestrial called Xenu. 
          Or perhaps aliens have a rationale to which terrestrials are blind.  They were different, at any rate, I’ll say that. Unlike the sons of secular Jesus, they were not, of course, descended from the apes. Some of their ancestors, apparently, originated from the vicinity of  Beta CVn, a sun-like star that lies twenty-six light years away in the constellation Canes Venatici, but transferred into the Solar System about  75 million years ago due to an over-population problem in the Galactic Federation - not to mention ‘disillusionment’, a terrible new anxiety afflicting Thetans.[3]
          They were caramel-coloured and rather self-contained, suggesting genetic differences might be involved. Small, skinny, goatlike creatures with tiny, tri-hoofed feet. Somewhat like  the clamorous, dwarfish Nicola Sturgeon, if you get the drift, the unrecognizable heir of those geniuses of the Scottish Enlightenment Adam Smith and David Hume; an exceptionally favoured group with an IQ of between 3% and 9% above average  - and not just because Nicola is at pains not to rule out future claims to Antarctica if only Scots vote for independence. Clearly the result of ‘intelligent design, rather than the said IQ.
Let me also note that  anyone with an IQ below 170 –including, incidentally, Albert Einstein - is considered mentally retarded on Beta CVn. And I’m not the first person to have noticed that Richard Dawkins’ intellectual gratification is an absurd,  clownish pursuit of Twitter, in addition to loopy philippics against  Xtians, virgins, winged horses, elitism, democracy, lemon juice, and how to get a cheer etc., when not actually quoting himself. So the progressive thinker becomes a bigoted and reactionary lecturer for 12-year-olds. Believe me – I know the type. At the end of the day, the great seducer is nothing more than a dirty old man. Nor is he the only
one.[4] Truth be told, some of the aliens appeared distinctly uncomfortable amid those most contemptible if not uncommon individuals in human society: the shameless dopamine addict. To say nothing of the common run of grinning, bling-bedecked homo sapiens, still carrying their AK-47s. They were “baffled”, an official said later, by a  planet where “weapons outnumber people,” and where watching humans kill humans on a high-definition 3D flatscreen is one of the most fun things you can do on a rainy weekend.

[2] Camilla Long: “…a nibbly little voice.”
[3] With expensive Botox-therapy, they may turn into ‘operating Thetans’, like Tom Cruise,  a higher form of being.
[4] As Lord Rees, president of the Royal Society, suggested, “the inherent intellectual limitations of humanity mean we may never resolve questions such as the existence of parallel universes” in which Dawkins, by some trick with time,  may merely be a small-time con man, with no record of his terrestrial renown.

One civil case still pending,  *** is available on Amazon! 


Anna O.H. said...

Oh yes, I have always thought Dawkins divine, not even requiring the use of a lavatory... LOL

Damian D.S. said...

Whoa, this is serious! A classic Catch 22: action begets reaction. Time has gone by but not Dawkins' adolescent approach LOL