Wednesday, August 24, 2005
The Gullibility Test (It beats horoscopes anyway)
No... I'm not going to ask you "did you know that the word "gullible" is not in the dictionary?" This 'Gullibility Test' is a product of NewsTarget.com, that appears to be a website of a collection of facts and knowledge regarding modern day "myths" associated with health, medicine and technology. I use the term "myth" loosely here because what is considered a myth usually depends on how much you can be bothered to dig up the truth. Some questions are a bit American-oriented for a foreigner, but still should give a pretty good guess at where you stand as a citizen of humanity.
I was pretty impressed with the test results. Maybe it was because it wasn't telling me how I was going to have a bad day, or warn me of future dangers, and other vague/warped/ambiguous advice that applies to almost everybody else like my daily horoscope might say. But I think it's mostly because I thought it described me better than any horoscope could do. Well why wouldn't it? Do you really need a bunch of stars and planets to determine how you will be fucking up tomorrow?
Learner
As a Learner, you're smart enough to know better, yet you're still not fully informed about reality. Around 15% of the population are Learners. You have the critical thinking skills to be a truly free individual, but you haven't exercised them enough yet. From time to time, you're still manipulated by the powers that be, although you frequently learn from those mistakes and refuse to be exploited again. You buy things because they are practical, not because they're cool.
If you were in The Matrix, you would have taken the red pill, but you would still be in a state of mild disbelief about the nature of reality. You are essentially unplugged, but still untrained. With more knowledge, you could become a true free thinker.
Your architects: You have always been an independent thinker. You rebelled against your parents, schoolteachers and always chose to hang out with smart friends who weren't necessarily that popular to the "in" crowd. Increasingly, you shape your own world by deciding what actions to take based on your own internal drive rather than what society tells you is right.
Action steps: Learn more. Educate yourself through alternative media and cutting-edge books. Read the answers below to get started.
I don't think there's a single sentence in there I can disagree with. Except maybe the part about rebelling. I was more of a passive rebel who never really respected authority of teachers, mostly because they never respected their students either. I am pretty curious and maybe slightly disturbed albeit not surprised as to why 15% of the population scores around 70 on the scale. If the distribution of people's scores took the form of a gaussian curve, then I truly fear that the average score of the population lies much lower. Hopefully, the part about not hanging out with the "popular kids" will also be helpful in pointing out that I am not really antisocial by nature. I am simply just surrounded by idiots most of the time.
It's well worth reading the answers to the questions after taking the test. There are some pretty interesting topics there but I won't discuss them so as to not ruin the test for you should you choose to take it.
TAKE THE GULLIBILITY TEST.
I was pretty impressed with the test results. Maybe it was because it wasn't telling me how I was going to have a bad day, or warn me of future dangers, and other vague/warped/ambiguous advice that applies to almost everybody else like my daily horoscope might say. But I think it's mostly because I thought it described me better than any horoscope could do. Well why wouldn't it? Do you really need a bunch of stars and planets to determine how you will be fucking up tomorrow?
Learner
As a Learner, you're smart enough to know better, yet you're still not fully informed about reality. Around 15% of the population are Learners. You have the critical thinking skills to be a truly free individual, but you haven't exercised them enough yet. From time to time, you're still manipulated by the powers that be, although you frequently learn from those mistakes and refuse to be exploited again. You buy things because they are practical, not because they're cool.
If you were in The Matrix, you would have taken the red pill, but you would still be in a state of mild disbelief about the nature of reality. You are essentially unplugged, but still untrained. With more knowledge, you could become a true free thinker.
Your architects: You have always been an independent thinker. You rebelled against your parents, schoolteachers and always chose to hang out with smart friends who weren't necessarily that popular to the "in" crowd. Increasingly, you shape your own world by deciding what actions to take based on your own internal drive rather than what society tells you is right.
Action steps: Learn more. Educate yourself through alternative media and cutting-edge books. Read the answers below to get started.
I don't think there's a single sentence in there I can disagree with. Except maybe the part about rebelling. I was more of a passive rebel who never really respected authority of teachers, mostly because they never respected their students either. I am pretty curious and maybe slightly disturbed albeit not surprised as to why 15% of the population scores around 70 on the scale. If the distribution of people's scores took the form of a gaussian curve, then I truly fear that the average score of the population lies much lower. Hopefully, the part about not hanging out with the "popular kids" will also be helpful in pointing out that I am not really antisocial by nature. I am simply just surrounded by idiots most of the time.
It's well worth reading the answers to the questions after taking the test. There are some pretty interesting topics there but I won't discuss them so as to not ruin the test for you should you choose to take it.
TAKE THE GULLIBILITY TEST.
Why the soundtrack of the war in Iraq is rap.
Discovered at Knight Shift (the same guy who introduced me to Vox Day)
Why I couldn't bear to see every last idiot disappear
It doesn't take much creativity to piss people off if you are a nutcase, you just say what you think. It's easy. People who express their opinions frankly are often held in high esteem for "speaking their mind", in other words, not hiding their true feelings behind deceit. Of course, to others they can be seen as tactless, narrow minded or having a head full of rocks. There is an obvious distinction between being brave and too stupid to know the consequences when you speak your mind. And of course, if you are a warped bigot with a twisted interpretation of your own religion, what's on your mind is going to be something very very stupid. So thankyou Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition and the man who thinks God put George Bush in the Whitehouse, for speaking your mind. On his evangelical TV show this week, Robertson declared that the US administration should assasinate the president of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. While the methods may be a bit direct for many Republicans, I'm sure the sentiment is widely shared.
Now, in the twentieth century various US [and occasional British] governments have done their utmost to nip any Latin American democratic or social reform in the bud, with a multitude of interventions aiming to keep the various regimes within the sphere of influence first outlined in The Monroe Doctrine. Chavez is the latest example of a leader seeking economic independence, and since being elected in 1998 he has been subjected to propaganda campaigns, attempted coups and intimidation. The Bush administration positioned a warship in nearby waters, backed anti-government riots and demos and poured scorn on the result of a globally approved referendum held last year which kept Chavez in power. Chavez himself has said repeatedly that he fears assasination, which could be hysterical or could just be in keeping with the historical record. Meanwhile so-called "experts" lined up in the US media, among other things accusing him of supporting terrorism and seeking nuclear weapons [one of the commentators in question listed among his credentials: having a Venezuelan wife. Well, such a qualification clearly puts him at the front of the queue for pointing out what's what in Venezuela. The logic is flawless, especially if one believes that Prince Charles is an expert on racehorses].
The point of these ravings is that although Bush's cronies probably wont send Chavez some exploding cigars, his democratic regime is under pressure, and the pretexts given for undermining it are weak. US policy really hasn't changed since September 11, new justifications have merely emerged for their attempts to safeguard their position at the top of the pile. While Robertson was given a light slap on the wrists for his outburst [a hard slap around the face wouldn't go amiss] it is still worrying to think what will happen in Venezuela [not to mention Iran, Syria, Uzbekistan, now that the US has no military base there, and Nicaragua, should Daniel Ortega reemerge]. Assasination has been ruled out by various officials [no guarantee of course, but lets have fun and take them at their word] but that doesn't preclude a return to past tactics.
Due to my firm belief in free speech, and my vindictive need to pour piss on even the easiest of targets, I feel compelled to revisit one more past episode of the lunatic expressing himself. Anyone who has seen The Power of Nightmares will have seen Robertson come out with this little gem. If only I knew the context:
"I don't like Jesus Christ, who is my Lord and Savior, being dumped in a vat of urine by a homosexual, and then have my money to pay for it."
Ah, free speech. Robertson can use it to demand someone's death, I can use it to state that a gay three-legged monkey with a crack problem is probably closer to God than Pat Robertson.
Now, in the twentieth century various US [and occasional British] governments have done their utmost to nip any Latin American democratic or social reform in the bud, with a multitude of interventions aiming to keep the various regimes within the sphere of influence first outlined in The Monroe Doctrine. Chavez is the latest example of a leader seeking economic independence, and since being elected in 1998 he has been subjected to propaganda campaigns, attempted coups and intimidation. The Bush administration positioned a warship in nearby waters, backed anti-government riots and demos and poured scorn on the result of a globally approved referendum held last year which kept Chavez in power. Chavez himself has said repeatedly that he fears assasination, which could be hysterical or could just be in keeping with the historical record. Meanwhile so-called "experts" lined up in the US media, among other things accusing him of supporting terrorism and seeking nuclear weapons [one of the commentators in question listed among his credentials: having a Venezuelan wife. Well, such a qualification clearly puts him at the front of the queue for pointing out what's what in Venezuela. The logic is flawless, especially if one believes that Prince Charles is an expert on racehorses].
The point of these ravings is that although Bush's cronies probably wont send Chavez some exploding cigars, his democratic regime is under pressure, and the pretexts given for undermining it are weak. US policy really hasn't changed since September 11, new justifications have merely emerged for their attempts to safeguard their position at the top of the pile. While Robertson was given a light slap on the wrists for his outburst [a hard slap around the face wouldn't go amiss] it is still worrying to think what will happen in Venezuela [not to mention Iran, Syria, Uzbekistan, now that the US has no military base there, and Nicaragua, should Daniel Ortega reemerge]. Assasination has been ruled out by various officials [no guarantee of course, but lets have fun and take them at their word] but that doesn't preclude a return to past tactics.
Due to my firm belief in free speech, and my vindictive need to pour piss on even the easiest of targets, I feel compelled to revisit one more past episode of the lunatic expressing himself. Anyone who has seen The Power of Nightmares will have seen Robertson come out with this little gem. If only I knew the context:
"I don't like Jesus Christ, who is my Lord and Savior, being dumped in a vat of urine by a homosexual, and then have my money to pay for it."
Ah, free speech. Robertson can use it to demand someone's death, I can use it to state that a gay three-legged monkey with a crack problem is probably closer to God than Pat Robertson.
Monday, August 22, 2005
Disneyland with a DEATH PENALTY
What are some of the words that come to an oblivious caucasian mind when you tell them you are from 'Singapore'? Well, after correcting them first on their mistaken assumption that you are Chinese/Korean/Japanese/Cambodian/Thai/ whatsthatasiancountrycalledagain, one might think it's that country that's so clean. Or maybe it's that country that's so pretty. Or is it that place that doesn't allow chewing gum? Most westerners who know of this far eastern island that I've spoken to seem to know Singapore by hearing or reading about it somewhere or have visited there either on holiday or just passing through the airport. And most generally have a good impression of the island country. Well why shouldn't they? Singapore IS a very nice place to stay. You will see high-rise apartments that look like they were built just yesterday and a city centre that is filled with almost every up-market brand of product you can find in a western mall. Possibly even cheaper. When most people ask me about Singapore, I find myself boasting the clean and green streets, the low crime rate, and some even view the tough laws as a good thing for keeping the litter at bay, which I agree with as well. But once you actually start living there, things don't quite turn out the way you might have expected. Expatriats like Steve McDermott who runs the Singaporean political blogsite Singabloodypore would know better. Suddenly, Singapore is like that gorgeous girl you picked up at the bar one night and took home, only to find she has what you have. PS: Im not implying that's happened to me OK. CNN reports yet another article that would probably get them sued into bankcrupcy over there.
"SINGAPORE (Reuters) -- If one thinks of Singapore, safe but dull are likely to come to mind.
But the government is trying to cast off this image by building casinos and exotic venues to entertain tourists and lure lucrative business travelers as part of a plan to make the city-state the venue of choice for international conferences.
Last month, the International Olympic Committee meeting in Singapore, where London was chosen as host for the 2012 Olympics, received a few barbs for its televised finale. A British newspaper said the show scaled new heights of kitsch.
But the event, seen by about one billion people worldwide, highlighted its ability to stage big business gatherings.
Despite boasting one of the world's top-ranked airports and impressive convention entrees, industry experts say the country -- which bans the sale of chewing gum and Playboy magazine -- stumbles when it comes to the fun factor.
"Singapore has the image of being boring and authoritarian. For business travelers, it's like visiting your parents rather than going to somewhere fun," said Patrick Wilkerson, Regional Brand and Business Development Director of ad agency Leo Burnett."
Do you know what the difference between a popular person and an attention whore is? If you are familiar with social online networks such as Friendster, Hi5 or MySpace, then you've probably come across plenty of examples of the latter. You know who they are. The ones with there bloody mug in every one of their 58 photos in their profile. The ones with 578 online friends whom 500 have never met with in real life and just "added because you're cute". The ones who TyPe liKe ThiS aND tHiNk I aM sO f&*^ing HaRdCoRe. But above all else, the ones you want to put a bullet in because they are a waste of internet space and are only driving up the cost of webspace.
It's quite interesting to see Singapore through the eyes of westerners because more often than not, those that have lived there for a while tend to compare the political system with that of their home country. And this is when you pull off the sexy lingerie from that slutty "woman" and say 'oh shit'.... Because below all that plastic surgery, the expensive jewellery, the makeup (the tall skyscrapers, the landmarks, the cleanliness), Singapore still has a dick that reeks of authoritarianism and a so-called democracy.
"Once described as "Disneyland with a death penalty" by science fiction writer William Gibson, Singapore has taken steps in recent years to rectify its reputation for being bland, allowing bar-top dancing and street busking.
Singapore Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong told a gathering of conference operators last month the state was ready to "break the old mould" to become one of the world's top meeting places.
It is set to legalize casinos and is in the process of picking developers for two casinos worth an estimated $5 billion.
Singapore, which only lifted a ban on the risque U.S. television show "Sex and the City" last year, will also soon have its own branch of Paris's Crazy Horse cabaret, famous for its erotic nude dance performances.
"We're all human -- we would all like to attend events in places that have prestige or glamour," said Sophie LeRay, Managing Director of naseba, a Monaco-based events organizer.
But she added that Singapore's predictability is a strength in these uncertain times.
While neighboring Thailand and Indonesia have suffered militant attacks, the city-state has remained unscathed.
"Singapore's drawbacks are the usual cliches that you can't smoke, can't chew gum and you can't jaywalk here. But once people arrive here, these cliches disappear (unless you get caught)," she said."
To get one thing straight, I have nothing against building casinos, bar-top dancing or 'erotic nude dance performances' (is that just posh for saying lapdance?). In fact if anything, I am all for it. But don't be deceived. Singapore is well known to attribute significant proportions of its wealth to the tourism industry. It is desperate to sell itself as the 'best there is to offer' to the international community for both tourism and business. Which country doesn't want that really. But it is the ONLY reason why they are trying to "loosen up" and break this so-called fucking "mould". At the very core of the Singaporean identity, it is still one that is defined and contoured out of the fine lines of the law. People have a hard time finding their own voice in this socially engineered society. Self-censorship, mass media control by the government, and political intimidation still hide behind the faces of casinos, bar-top dancing and condom shops. So, coming back to the encounter between the average Singaporean and his western visitor, what does the Singaporean usually say of Singapore? The pretty buildings? How I was never mugged before? The clean streets? Somehow the people are rarely mentioned. The Singaporean spirit is somehow hard, difficult to define in terms of its people. Let's let the government speak for them, shall we? Here, take these chips and have a good time at the casino. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go petition the government to bring back the one dollar bill so I have something to use at the 'erotic nude dance performances'.
"i think singapore declared independence cos a certain someone wanted to start an elaborate money laundering business." - Hwee Yee @ SomethingSomething
"SINGAPORE (Reuters) -- If one thinks of Singapore, safe but dull are likely to come to mind.
But the government is trying to cast off this image by building casinos and exotic venues to entertain tourists and lure lucrative business travelers as part of a plan to make the city-state the venue of choice for international conferences.
Last month, the International Olympic Committee meeting in Singapore, where London was chosen as host for the 2012 Olympics, received a few barbs for its televised finale. A British newspaper said the show scaled new heights of kitsch.
But the event, seen by about one billion people worldwide, highlighted its ability to stage big business gatherings.
Despite boasting one of the world's top-ranked airports and impressive convention entrees, industry experts say the country -- which bans the sale of chewing gum and Playboy magazine -- stumbles when it comes to the fun factor.
"Singapore has the image of being boring and authoritarian. For business travelers, it's like visiting your parents rather than going to somewhere fun," said Patrick Wilkerson, Regional Brand and Business Development Director of ad agency Leo Burnett."
Do you know what the difference between a popular person and an attention whore is? If you are familiar with social online networks such as Friendster, Hi5 or MySpace, then you've probably come across plenty of examples of the latter. You know who they are. The ones with there bloody mug in every one of their 58 photos in their profile. The ones with 578 online friends whom 500 have never met with in real life and just "added because you're cute". The ones who TyPe liKe ThiS aND tHiNk I aM sO f&*^ing HaRdCoRe. But above all else, the ones you want to put a bullet in because they are a waste of internet space and are only driving up the cost of webspace.
It's quite interesting to see Singapore through the eyes of westerners because more often than not, those that have lived there for a while tend to compare the political system with that of their home country. And this is when you pull off the sexy lingerie from that slutty "woman" and say 'oh shit'.... Because below all that plastic surgery, the expensive jewellery, the makeup (the tall skyscrapers, the landmarks, the cleanliness), Singapore still has a dick that reeks of authoritarianism and a so-called democracy.
"Once described as "Disneyland with a death penalty" by science fiction writer William Gibson, Singapore has taken steps in recent years to rectify its reputation for being bland, allowing bar-top dancing and street busking.
Singapore Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong told a gathering of conference operators last month the state was ready to "break the old mould" to become one of the world's top meeting places.
It is set to legalize casinos and is in the process of picking developers for two casinos worth an estimated $5 billion.
Singapore, which only lifted a ban on the risque U.S. television show "Sex and the City" last year, will also soon have its own branch of Paris's Crazy Horse cabaret, famous for its erotic nude dance performances.
"We're all human -- we would all like to attend events in places that have prestige or glamour," said Sophie LeRay, Managing Director of naseba, a Monaco-based events organizer.
But she added that Singapore's predictability is a strength in these uncertain times.
While neighboring Thailand and Indonesia have suffered militant attacks, the city-state has remained unscathed.
"Singapore's drawbacks are the usual cliches that you can't smoke, can't chew gum and you can't jaywalk here. But once people arrive here, these cliches disappear (unless you get caught)," she said."
To get one thing straight, I have nothing against building casinos, bar-top dancing or 'erotic nude dance performances' (is that just posh for saying lapdance?). In fact if anything, I am all for it. But don't be deceived. Singapore is well known to attribute significant proportions of its wealth to the tourism industry. It is desperate to sell itself as the 'best there is to offer' to the international community for both tourism and business. Which country doesn't want that really. But it is the ONLY reason why they are trying to "loosen up" and break this so-called fucking "mould". At the very core of the Singaporean identity, it is still one that is defined and contoured out of the fine lines of the law. People have a hard time finding their own voice in this socially engineered society. Self-censorship, mass media control by the government, and political intimidation still hide behind the faces of casinos, bar-top dancing and condom shops. So, coming back to the encounter between the average Singaporean and his western visitor, what does the Singaporean usually say of Singapore? The pretty buildings? How I was never mugged before? The clean streets? Somehow the people are rarely mentioned. The Singaporean spirit is somehow hard, difficult to define in terms of its people. Let's let the government speak for them, shall we? Here, take these chips and have a good time at the casino. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go petition the government to bring back the one dollar bill so I have something to use at the 'erotic nude dance performances'.
"i think singapore declared independence cos a certain someone wanted to start an elaborate money laundering business." - Hwee Yee @ SomethingSomething
Saturday, August 20, 2005
The tragic story of The Simpsons on Channel 4
There is a second important reason to celebrate the end of another series of Big Brother these days. The obvious one is that you no longer have to withstand the wretched sight of a group of halfwits staggering about and bitching about one another. The horrible atmosphere disperses. It almost feels like the air around the TV becomes a little cleaner. This aspect is well known and doesn't require too much whinging. Frankly, if you get your kicks from a half-woman half-walrus creature lodging a wine bottle up her crevice then you don't need terrestrial television shows, but some kind of specialist Godzilla/porn crossover best found on those weird webistes where there is "something for everybody." [That is NOT here]
The second reason, at least in theory, is that since the autumn of 2004 Channel 4, the best TV station in Britain by some distance [I hope they don't feel too flattered. Albert Speer was the best Nazi by some distance. The competition here is nothing to shout about] has begun to show The Simpsons. It bought the rights to the show in spring 2002, agreeing to pay seven times what previous broadcaster BBC 2 was paying. Most of us didn't take too much notice of this until spring 2004 when suddenly The Simpsons stopped appearing on the BBC, and a general atmosphere of doom and gloom set in.
When it re-emerged on C4, there were reasons to be grateful and a little pissed. Five evenings a week we were subjected to prehistoric Simpsons episodes, which are very dated and look very very poor in comparison to the newer series. Like some strict, patronising schoolteacher C4 would placate us on a Friday night with a new episode [old to those who have Sky, but fresh for the rest of us], as if to say "do your chores and on Friday you'll get a special reward." And so we would watch them re-visit Kamp Krusty, we'd sit through the spectacle of that damn dog of theirs going to finishing school once more and, lord help us, we would grin and bear the Halloween episodes, knowing that they weren't even that great the first time around. The weekly reward would be something sharp, surreal and vital, like the wonderful Run Lola Run-inspired Trilogy of Error.
This started to grate when the episodes on a Friday night where replaced by slightly older editions that the BBC2 crowd had all seen before. And it became a full on act of war when Big Brother planted its fat beer sodden arse all over our schedules. Why break the bank for The Simpsons when you can stick something on the air that involves the viewer paying money? Something that can be made at most people's houses for the price of a few cameras and a handfull of shit props like some cowboy gear. Now we did feel abused. Five manky shows a night, the only novel aspect being the irritating Pizza Hut commercials in between which I didn't even understand.
All of this came to an end yesterday when I sat in front of a Davina Mccall-less TV and realised how quiet everything was. The episode was a repeat, but new enough to put my mind at rest and laugh a little. But because of C4's stingy selection methods, I still don't know when I will next see one made after the year 2000. When you have something so good on your hands, treating it like this is a little perverse.
I suppose it would be worth responding to the Tescos jibe. I have never touched a value Valentines Card in my life. It looks far too classy for me. What I tend to do is fold a piece of paper in half and write I LOVE YOU FROM X on it. Cheap, to the point. And if you write the message in blood it will save you the bother of making one next year.
The second reason, at least in theory, is that since the autumn of 2004 Channel 4, the best TV station in Britain by some distance [I hope they don't feel too flattered. Albert Speer was the best Nazi by some distance. The competition here is nothing to shout about] has begun to show The Simpsons. It bought the rights to the show in spring 2002, agreeing to pay seven times what previous broadcaster BBC 2 was paying. Most of us didn't take too much notice of this until spring 2004 when suddenly The Simpsons stopped appearing on the BBC, and a general atmosphere of doom and gloom set in.
When it re-emerged on C4, there were reasons to be grateful and a little pissed. Five evenings a week we were subjected to prehistoric Simpsons episodes, which are very dated and look very very poor in comparison to the newer series. Like some strict, patronising schoolteacher C4 would placate us on a Friday night with a new episode [old to those who have Sky, but fresh for the rest of us], as if to say "do your chores and on Friday you'll get a special reward." And so we would watch them re-visit Kamp Krusty, we'd sit through the spectacle of that damn dog of theirs going to finishing school once more and, lord help us, we would grin and bear the Halloween episodes, knowing that they weren't even that great the first time around. The weekly reward would be something sharp, surreal and vital, like the wonderful Run Lola Run-inspired Trilogy of Error.
This started to grate when the episodes on a Friday night where replaced by slightly older editions that the BBC2 crowd had all seen before. And it became a full on act of war when Big Brother planted its fat beer sodden arse all over our schedules. Why break the bank for The Simpsons when you can stick something on the air that involves the viewer paying money? Something that can be made at most people's houses for the price of a few cameras and a handfull of shit props like some cowboy gear. Now we did feel abused. Five manky shows a night, the only novel aspect being the irritating Pizza Hut commercials in between which I didn't even understand.
All of this came to an end yesterday when I sat in front of a Davina Mccall-less TV and realised how quiet everything was. The episode was a repeat, but new enough to put my mind at rest and laugh a little. But because of C4's stingy selection methods, I still don't know when I will next see one made after the year 2000. When you have something so good on your hands, treating it like this is a little perverse.
I suppose it would be worth responding to the Tescos jibe. I have never touched a value Valentines Card in my life. It looks far too classy for me. What I tend to do is fold a piece of paper in half and write I LOVE YOU FROM X on it. Cheap, to the point. And if you write the message in blood it will save you the bother of making one next year.
Friday, August 19, 2005
You cheap, cheap bastard.
When I saw this I thought of Mr Leech...
Tesco value valentine cards: Now in packs of 50!! Made from recycled (toilet) paper. Questionable fragrance included.
Because there's no better way to show your loved one that your relationship is strictly not materialistic. Every person who's been through university in England living the broke-ass student lifestyle will immediately recognise this nifty design from their trolley-filled tesco value foodstuffs. The label that tells you you're buying the cheapest crap you can dig out of the leftovers at the bottom of the cheapest stuff. I overheard a local radio DJ once saying:
" You know you're a student when beans on toast become a regular mealtime favourite and you start using a soap bar as shampoo."
UPDATE: I've been noticing quite a few anonymous 'spam' comments coming in today. To be honest, I never knew if spam existed in blogs. Maybe I'm just naive because the BOE has been a pretty quiet and private blog since it started. NO, I don't want to buy your photographs. NO I don't want to buy real estate. NO, I don't want your sports products. We aren't attention whores who plug comprehensive traffic meters into our blog but a glance at 'profile views' shows there's been quite a jump in traffic since I posted yesterday's article and the spam seems to have gotten on that boat of newcomers. Word verification is now on for commenting.
UP-UPDATE: I'm sorry guys....but if you are not seeing the title banner and other pictures that should be appearing, it's nothing wrong with your computer or internet connection. Due to the sudden traffic, BOE is a bit of a deer caught in the headlight. I'm experiencing technical problems never really anticipated. Images here are hosted by Geocities and until today, I never knew there was even a 'data transfer' limit of 3GB/month. Geocities has decided to block all data transfer for 1 hour after exceeding this limit. But this has happened the second time today (that I know of anyway). But don't worry... I will be working on alternative solutions to fix this so that you can once again see our "patriotic" banner and pretty pictures. Afterall, they DO make up half the substance of this blog to compensate for the rest of this gibberish some might call 'blogging'.
Tesco value valentine cards: Now in packs of 50!! Made from recycled (toilet) paper. Questionable fragrance included.
Because there's no better way to show your loved one that your relationship is strictly not materialistic. Every person who's been through university in England living the broke-ass student lifestyle will immediately recognise this nifty design from their trolley-filled tesco value foodstuffs. The label that tells you you're buying the cheapest crap you can dig out of the leftovers at the bottom of the cheapest stuff. I overheard a local radio DJ once saying:
" You know you're a student when beans on toast become a regular mealtime favourite and you start using a soap bar as shampoo."
UPDATE: I've been noticing quite a few anonymous 'spam' comments coming in today. To be honest, I never knew if spam existed in blogs. Maybe I'm just naive because the BOE has been a pretty quiet and private blog since it started. NO, I don't want to buy your photographs. NO I don't want to buy real estate. NO, I don't want your sports products. We aren't attention whores who plug comprehensive traffic meters into our blog but a glance at 'profile views' shows there's been quite a jump in traffic since I posted yesterday's article and the spam seems to have gotten on that boat of newcomers. Word verification is now on for commenting.
UP-UPDATE: I'm sorry guys....but if you are not seeing the title banner and other pictures that should be appearing, it's nothing wrong with your computer or internet connection. Due to the sudden traffic, BOE is a bit of a deer caught in the headlight. I'm experiencing technical problems never really anticipated. Images here are hosted by Geocities and until today, I never knew there was even a 'data transfer' limit of 3GB/month. Geocities has decided to block all data transfer for 1 hour after exceeding this limit. But this has happened the second time today (that I know of anyway). But don't worry... I will be working on alternative solutions to fix this so that you can once again see our "patriotic" banner and pretty pictures. Afterall, they DO make up half the substance of this blog to compensate for the rest of this gibberish some might call 'blogging'.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Just who IS Cindy Sheehan?
UPDATE: Mulch has decided to start up his own blog. Apparently "I" am to blame for this... even though technically all I said was "...do you have a blog or r ya just a reader?" Doesn't take much to motivate this guy...! Visit The Mulch Maker's Guide to the Galaxy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was posted by a commentator in response to an article at Media Outsider. The original topic involves Cindy Sheehan, the infamous mom protesting outside George W. Bush's holiday ranch where he is....taking a holiday. This is the biggest American-grown (or at least the commentator implies he is American) bashing I've heard in a quite a while...
Mulch: "1st off these supposed "terrorist", the ingenious creation of the neo-cons to kill darkies and encroach on US freedoms, the faceless nameless hidden in shadows forces that conspire to kill us (not from iraq mind you as they are secular), yet we will be fighting for 100 years according to cheney, dont have fox news. they dont have TVs, the sand filled shacks that they live in dont have cable, the scarce (contaminated) food and water is the main concern. they dont see this. what a great creation. an enemy we can niether see nor kill, so we can never win and always lose just one more freedom or child to the cause of "liberty"what a fucking jokejesus never said "kill the darkies." jesus said forgiveness was key you fucking hypocrites. read your bible and put down "art of war". or do you think we need to keep money pumping into the defense industry, the industry OWNED by the Bushes and the Bin Ladins and the carlysle groups.you are a bunch of sheep proudly feeding your children as cannon fodder. brag about how you'll sacrifice your kids to fatten goerge and his cronies wallets. show how smart you are. after all, if we werent oppressing and performing genocide on a people they wouldnt want to kill usread your history, not fox news you fucking fat ass sheep (yes US citizens are a majority of overweight greedy little pigs while people starve worldwide). we blame the US (not America by the way, you idiots dont even know America is 2 continents, NOT a country because all your brainwashed minds are capable of is parroting hannity and o riley and bush) because WE DID IT. The way of life Bush says hes protecting is unethical. the "fuel" for this way of life is poor peoples blood. we starve and kill people to keep us bloated and fat in our air conditioned SUVS. Read your fucking history you ignorant slovenly pigs!THINK! No WMDs. No Link betweein 9/11 and Iraq. Just oil, haliberton and a bush vendetta, and you sheep GLADLY pay your children. Its a good thing Jesus forgives you because the only word I can think of is unforgivable.good luck on your tour. maybe you can find a family of muslims crossing the road that your caravan can gleefully run over so you can feel like you are doing your part. and quit watching the fox crap, read history and THINK FOR YOURSELF. i dont think you would do what you do or think like you thought if you truly understood what was happening in the worldfunny, in iraq they call it nationalism, over here its PATRIOTISM. someone smart enough to understand and explain the difference? when we do it its good. when they do it , its bad. when they kill civilians, its terrorism, when we kill civilians, its "spreading freedom"funny how no one in the world sides with you unless george threatens them ("you're either with us or against us")that was a threat if you arent smart enuff to figure it out, and we are the only ones who ever dropped the bomb in anger. now go eat your "freedom fries" and choke on em-MULCH"
Curtis: "I think you covered all the approved talking points, Mulchie. Good job."
Mulch: "hmmm, curtis, you give me a 12 word response that consists of over 16% of bill orileys words verbatum. well, ill give you a little more to chew on, hopefully there is enough medicine to cure yousomeone told me that you consider urself libertarian. as far as I know, libertarians most BASIC premise is "dont tell me how to mow my lawn, i won't tell you how to mow yours"i am most comfortable with that philosophy over any other, but to blindly believe all you are told with no facts?i must stress FACTSseems war, ie "imposing our will" is not very libertarian. is the word hypocrite the one im looking for?no thats not the word.its like you never bothered to read 1984, or didnt understand the significancemaybe theres another word that appliesits like you know nothing about psychology, or the subtleties of marketingsee, bush calls it the "save our forest act" he then allows the timber industry to go logging into nationaly PROTECTED forests. yup state parks, designed to keep the timber industry away. why call it save our forest when he cuts it down? to save it from fire of course, cuz u cant burn down what isnt there. or how about the "clean water act" in which the same levels of toxic mercury are allowed to stand for an additional 10 YEARS!!!! hmmm. how does allowing a toxin to stay at sustained levels for 10 additional years make clean water?or the "no child left behind." I know several teachers in several states who are agonizing about what this has done to their schools, but they don't know whats really going on huh? they aren't DC insiders or Fox news hosts.there is a reason some people refer to this as orwellian. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwellian with apologies to Mr Orwell for his name illustrating the point i made about nationalism vs patriotism)read the FACTS, apply logic, and stop listening to ur damn "talking points" for guidenceyou're not a soldier anymore curtis, ur allowed to think for yourself. i know at times it can be hard and scary, but you CAN do it now.i saw 2 interviews with bush, one from 2001, and one from 2005 where he was asked about global warming. his answer was the same both times, that we need to look at the science before we do anything about it http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/page.cfm?pageID=13207000 scientists signed this statement. SEVEN THOUSAND. (count to 7,000 to understand that number). the following paragraph only showing a fraction of the corruption and manipulation of the truth"Highly qualified scientists have been dropped from advisory committees dealing with childhood lead poisoning, environmental and reproductive health, and drug abuse, while individuals associated with or working for industries subject to regulation have been appointed to these bodies." http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/page.cfm?pageID=1335 are these 7000 scientists–Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors, and university chairs and presidents all getting their talking points from Michael Moore too?how many scientists have endorsed bush? is it > or greater than 7,000? do the math and quit baa-ing the company line! remember, ALL sheep eventually get fleeced.how many experts does it take to counter the word of your new god, greenback george?meanwhile in those 4 years he invaded 2 countries, 1 on the basis of WMD mobile labs from a single source named "curveball" (how orwellian read http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19831-2005Apr1.html , and no Michael Moore didnt write the article) and a forged uranium document, he found enough proof and science in that time about sending our boys to their deaths (no mention of the darkies), but 7000 highly educated scientists cant be trusted to tell the truth about science.its marketing at its finest, say 1 thing do another repeatedly. lie with ur folksy drawl and people believe u, make sure a flag is in every camera shot and say the words "security" "liberty" and "freedom" until your weakened sheep are drooling in their own laps with the correct warm and fuzzy response. Since i got my "talking points" right, maybe you have heard this one:"He who trades liberty for security deserves neither and will lose both."think about that next time the patriot act wants to sneak and peak citizens to keep us safeoh yeah, thomas jefferson said that.and um, i saw interviews with condoleeza and colin in summer 2001, BOTH saying saddam didnt have WMDs and couldnt even attack his neighbors, much less the good ole boys in the USA. why do you think they were so "sure" he had wmds? musta really pissed them off when they found out he destroyed them years ago. would it have angered you to know that even if they were found, that the Chemical and biological weapons Rummy personally gave Saddam, that their lifespan would have made them 100% useless?Ooops, must be Michael Moore who took the photo. A simple image google of "rumsfeld saddam" will, erm, provide logic proven FACTS, a concept that you have been conditioned to repel from as FACTS dont make you feel all warm and fuzzyand now tonights "talking points" your "talking points" curtosy of fox news and friends, are cliff notes to the world. unfortunatly, your cliff notes not only skip over some important details such as facts and logic, but they are WRONG. sometimes, if you are smart enough, you can actually THINK FOR YOURSELF, but please do so responsibly. you need more then cliff notes in life and death decisions. would you be ok knowing the guy flying the airplane you are riding in got through flight school on cliff notes?i guess watching invasions live on tv is the new great reality show. the thrill of geraldo possibly getting his nuts blown off on live tv makes people clamor for more war to fuel it. yes, I am speculating that this illness is a direct result of finding entertainment in misery. the line has been blurred. go after violent video games, but show people blown to peices on live tv and we will pile on the ratings and accept just about anything spoon fed from rush, orielly, hannity, wolfowitz, rumsfeld, bush, and cheney. its a sickness people, wake up from your stuper, get healed and fix the source of the problem.the first step is addmitting you have a problem. after you do that, we can fix it, together, as united states. but as long as we are collectively in denial, there is only 1 way we can go. i want to be proud of where im from, BUT RIGHT NOW im ashamed, and i have good reason to be. as a representative government, every damn missle that lands has my name on it from my tax dollarsi have logic and a conscience, and its hard to sleep at night with blood on my hands. i want my country to be the great good they pretend to be. I dont hate the 2 continents known as "America". I dont even hate the united states. but the people are not only becoming dangerously apathetic to reality, they are ignoring it COMPLETELY for this magic land where a simple failed businessman with a C average in college and from a well connected and wealthy family says one thing and does the opposite and we are all left with a warm happy feeling after the laugh track ends (excpet of course for the dead people and their media whore "flip flopping" moms, i mean "the loved one")your right wing media attack dogs have got this all wrong. its not about cindy. its not about casey. it is the simple folks like me demanding an explanation for this lunacy. she represents me. she represents me, and you. and everyone else he lied to and killed. its time to pay the piper for his sins, if only he would come out of hiding and face the musici didnt have a "loved one" die in iraq, but I want to know why we are there too. so do many more people nationwide that your attack dogs are galvanizing into action. as bush hides in his ranch afraid to leave the comfort of his book on the History of Salt and face a grieving mother ( http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/12393945.htm ), hes not ignoring her in his cozy little vacation hideaway, hes ignoring us. he wont tell her why her kid died, he wont tell the rest of us why he has done what he has done.and btw, im a christian, you tell me one time jesus killed someone. you tell me one time when jesus endorsed the death penalty. you tell me one time jesus backed a war. you can't.periodDoes your "angelic christian" leader, who studies scripture actually know better then christ?how orwellian."
Read full article and comments at Media Outsider.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was posted by a commentator in response to an article at Media Outsider. The original topic involves Cindy Sheehan, the infamous mom protesting outside George W. Bush's holiday ranch where he is....taking a holiday. This is the biggest American-grown (or at least the commentator implies he is American) bashing I've heard in a quite a while...
Mulch: "1st off these supposed "terrorist", the ingenious creation of the neo-cons to kill darkies and encroach on US freedoms, the faceless nameless hidden in shadows forces that conspire to kill us (not from iraq mind you as they are secular), yet we will be fighting for 100 years according to cheney, dont have fox news. they dont have TVs, the sand filled shacks that they live in dont have cable, the scarce (contaminated) food and water is the main concern. they dont see this. what a great creation. an enemy we can niether see nor kill, so we can never win and always lose just one more freedom or child to the cause of "liberty"what a fucking jokejesus never said "kill the darkies." jesus said forgiveness was key you fucking hypocrites. read your bible and put down "art of war". or do you think we need to keep money pumping into the defense industry, the industry OWNED by the Bushes and the Bin Ladins and the carlysle groups.you are a bunch of sheep proudly feeding your children as cannon fodder. brag about how you'll sacrifice your kids to fatten goerge and his cronies wallets. show how smart you are. after all, if we werent oppressing and performing genocide on a people they wouldnt want to kill usread your history, not fox news you fucking fat ass sheep (yes US citizens are a majority of overweight greedy little pigs while people starve worldwide). we blame the US (not America by the way, you idiots dont even know America is 2 continents, NOT a country because all your brainwashed minds are capable of is parroting hannity and o riley and bush) because WE DID IT. The way of life Bush says hes protecting is unethical. the "fuel" for this way of life is poor peoples blood. we starve and kill people to keep us bloated and fat in our air conditioned SUVS. Read your fucking history you ignorant slovenly pigs!THINK! No WMDs. No Link betweein 9/11 and Iraq. Just oil, haliberton and a bush vendetta, and you sheep GLADLY pay your children. Its a good thing Jesus forgives you because the only word I can think of is unforgivable.good luck on your tour. maybe you can find a family of muslims crossing the road that your caravan can gleefully run over so you can feel like you are doing your part. and quit watching the fox crap, read history and THINK FOR YOURSELF. i dont think you would do what you do or think like you thought if you truly understood what was happening in the worldfunny, in iraq they call it nationalism, over here its PATRIOTISM. someone smart enough to understand and explain the difference? when we do it its good. when they do it , its bad. when they kill civilians, its terrorism, when we kill civilians, its "spreading freedom"funny how no one in the world sides with you unless george threatens them ("you're either with us or against us")that was a threat if you arent smart enuff to figure it out, and we are the only ones who ever dropped the bomb in anger. now go eat your "freedom fries" and choke on em-MULCH"
Curtis: "I think you covered all the approved talking points, Mulchie. Good job."
Mulch: "hmmm, curtis, you give me a 12 word response that consists of over 16% of bill orileys words verbatum. well, ill give you a little more to chew on, hopefully there is enough medicine to cure yousomeone told me that you consider urself libertarian. as far as I know, libertarians most BASIC premise is "dont tell me how to mow my lawn, i won't tell you how to mow yours"i am most comfortable with that philosophy over any other, but to blindly believe all you are told with no facts?i must stress FACTSseems war, ie "imposing our will" is not very libertarian. is the word hypocrite the one im looking for?no thats not the word.its like you never bothered to read 1984, or didnt understand the significancemaybe theres another word that appliesits like you know nothing about psychology, or the subtleties of marketingsee, bush calls it the "save our forest act" he then allows the timber industry to go logging into nationaly PROTECTED forests. yup state parks, designed to keep the timber industry away. why call it save our forest when he cuts it down? to save it from fire of course, cuz u cant burn down what isnt there. or how about the "clean water act" in which the same levels of toxic mercury are allowed to stand for an additional 10 YEARS!!!! hmmm. how does allowing a toxin to stay at sustained levels for 10 additional years make clean water?or the "no child left behind." I know several teachers in several states who are agonizing about what this has done to their schools, but they don't know whats really going on huh? they aren't DC insiders or Fox news hosts.there is a reason some people refer to this as orwellian. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwellian with apologies to Mr Orwell for his name illustrating the point i made about nationalism vs patriotism)read the FACTS, apply logic, and stop listening to ur damn "talking points" for guidenceyou're not a soldier anymore curtis, ur allowed to think for yourself. i know at times it can be hard and scary, but you CAN do it now.i saw 2 interviews with bush, one from 2001, and one from 2005 where he was asked about global warming. his answer was the same both times, that we need to look at the science before we do anything about it http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/page.cfm?pageID=13207000 scientists signed this statement. SEVEN THOUSAND. (count to 7,000 to understand that number). the following paragraph only showing a fraction of the corruption and manipulation of the truth"Highly qualified scientists have been dropped from advisory committees dealing with childhood lead poisoning, environmental and reproductive health, and drug abuse, while individuals associated with or working for industries subject to regulation have been appointed to these bodies." http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/page.cfm?pageID=1335 are these 7000 scientists–Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors, and university chairs and presidents all getting their talking points from Michael Moore too?how many scientists have endorsed bush? is it > or greater than 7,000? do the math and quit baa-ing the company line! remember, ALL sheep eventually get fleeced.how many experts does it take to counter the word of your new god, greenback george?meanwhile in those 4 years he invaded 2 countries, 1 on the basis of WMD mobile labs from a single source named "curveball" (how orwellian read http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19831-2005Apr1.html , and no Michael Moore didnt write the article) and a forged uranium document, he found enough proof and science in that time about sending our boys to their deaths (no mention of the darkies), but 7000 highly educated scientists cant be trusted to tell the truth about science.its marketing at its finest, say 1 thing do another repeatedly. lie with ur folksy drawl and people believe u, make sure a flag is in every camera shot and say the words "security" "liberty" and "freedom" until your weakened sheep are drooling in their own laps with the correct warm and fuzzy response. Since i got my "talking points" right, maybe you have heard this one:"He who trades liberty for security deserves neither and will lose both."think about that next time the patriot act wants to sneak and peak citizens to keep us safeoh yeah, thomas jefferson said that.and um, i saw interviews with condoleeza and colin in summer 2001, BOTH saying saddam didnt have WMDs and couldnt even attack his neighbors, much less the good ole boys in the USA. why do you think they were so "sure" he had wmds? musta really pissed them off when they found out he destroyed them years ago. would it have angered you to know that even if they were found, that the Chemical and biological weapons Rummy personally gave Saddam, that their lifespan would have made them 100% useless?Ooops, must be Michael Moore who took the photo. A simple image google of "rumsfeld saddam" will, erm, provide logic proven FACTS, a concept that you have been conditioned to repel from as FACTS dont make you feel all warm and fuzzyand now tonights "talking points" your "talking points" curtosy of fox news and friends, are cliff notes to the world. unfortunatly, your cliff notes not only skip over some important details such as facts and logic, but they are WRONG. sometimes, if you are smart enough, you can actually THINK FOR YOURSELF, but please do so responsibly. you need more then cliff notes in life and death decisions. would you be ok knowing the guy flying the airplane you are riding in got through flight school on cliff notes?i guess watching invasions live on tv is the new great reality show. the thrill of geraldo possibly getting his nuts blown off on live tv makes people clamor for more war to fuel it. yes, I am speculating that this illness is a direct result of finding entertainment in misery. the line has been blurred. go after violent video games, but show people blown to peices on live tv and we will pile on the ratings and accept just about anything spoon fed from rush, orielly, hannity, wolfowitz, rumsfeld, bush, and cheney. its a sickness people, wake up from your stuper, get healed and fix the source of the problem.the first step is addmitting you have a problem. after you do that, we can fix it, together, as united states. but as long as we are collectively in denial, there is only 1 way we can go. i want to be proud of where im from, BUT RIGHT NOW im ashamed, and i have good reason to be. as a representative government, every damn missle that lands has my name on it from my tax dollarsi have logic and a conscience, and its hard to sleep at night with blood on my hands. i want my country to be the great good they pretend to be. I dont hate the 2 continents known as "America". I dont even hate the united states. but the people are not only becoming dangerously apathetic to reality, they are ignoring it COMPLETELY for this magic land where a simple failed businessman with a C average in college and from a well connected and wealthy family says one thing and does the opposite and we are all left with a warm happy feeling after the laugh track ends (excpet of course for the dead people and their media whore "flip flopping" moms, i mean "the loved one")your right wing media attack dogs have got this all wrong. its not about cindy. its not about casey. it is the simple folks like me demanding an explanation for this lunacy. she represents me. she represents me, and you. and everyone else he lied to and killed. its time to pay the piper for his sins, if only he would come out of hiding and face the musici didnt have a "loved one" die in iraq, but I want to know why we are there too. so do many more people nationwide that your attack dogs are galvanizing into action. as bush hides in his ranch afraid to leave the comfort of his book on the History of Salt and face a grieving mother ( http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/12393945.htm ), hes not ignoring her in his cozy little vacation hideaway, hes ignoring us. he wont tell her why her kid died, he wont tell the rest of us why he has done what he has done.and btw, im a christian, you tell me one time jesus killed someone. you tell me one time when jesus endorsed the death penalty. you tell me one time jesus backed a war. you can't.periodDoes your "angelic christian" leader, who studies scripture actually know better then christ?how orwellian."
Read full article and comments at Media Outsider.
Thursday, August 11, 2005
Slander, the Ann Coulter way
And so I spring back into action, provoked by something which is actually so small and insignificant that I will later kick myself. Yes, I have feet, I'm only a pretend leech, duh. But then, I used to think Ann Coulter was only a pretend right-winger. I'm not joking. What smarter tactic could there be to embarass America's right wing than to have some liberal in disguise pretend to share their politics, while simultaneously spouting crap. To a wounded and now disabled Vietnam war veteran she once said: "People like you caused us to lose that war."
But no, she's not a liberal conspiracy to cause America's right to self destruct, rather a latter day Eva Braun with a very big mouth. Convenient. Most of the time she uses it to keep her feet warm. She is also author of Slander, an example of a wonderful innovation: The Self-Refuting book. That's right. She saves you the trouble of disagreeing with her by disagreeing with herself. At the beginning she whines that American liberals [anybody left of Reagan, basically] can't argue, but only know how to launch ad hominem attacks. Feeling compelled to teach the world that only a prize fool would resort to name-calling, she goes on to slime everyone from the Clintons, to Larry Flynt to Gerald Ford with such insults. It's a real tour de force, for those who find Beavis and Butthead sophisticated anyway. The rest of us can only marvel as logic, facts and reasoning are cast aside. That's right, I read it ALL. That was back in January, when I was slightly bored. Since then, I've had no intention of reading the follow up, Treason, which I have to assume is just her moaning about treason and then saying treasonous things.
Such cretins are there for the attention, and unfortunately she gets it, much to the disdain of liberals, Democrats and old-style pre-Reaganite Republicans. At times like this it is necessary to heed the advice of our learned parents. Have you ever been told, when pestered by a bully, to "ignore them and the'll go away"? Well, it applies to circus freaks too. The most self-destructive thing anybody could do is get wound up by a woman who even manages to disagree with herself. And the void she leaves would greatly benefit political discourse, rescuing it from the depths of name-calling and distortion.
Of course, in Britain we are far too smart to have such a figure. That's what you think. Melanie Phillips, the ultimate old biddie windbag from hell, who defends any crime committed by the government of Isreal using the tiresome "anti-semitism" defence. And her favourite insult these days [applied to those opposing the war on Iraq and opposing the nomination of John Bolton, among other things] is "self-hating". So, to disagree with her trenchant analysis is to hate oneself. I can only assume there is some kind of Melanie Phillips mask for sale which one wears in these situations. I don't own one, so must resort to curling my face up like a petrified raisin that is pissed off that it's glory days as a grape are over. Recently she stated, and can we get serious for a moment, that the family of Jean Charles de Menezes, the poor Brazilian shot dead a few weeks ago by police, those attending a peace vigil to honour him, are merely "market[ing]" him as"the latest martyr for the self-haters of the free world." mmm, twisted.
Like Ann Coulter, only a fool would get their knickers in a twist over this silly trout. Only a complete idiot would waste time writing about her, only a petty moron would..., wait, just a second
Memo, kick self
hard
But no, she's not a liberal conspiracy to cause America's right to self destruct, rather a latter day Eva Braun with a very big mouth. Convenient. Most of the time she uses it to keep her feet warm. She is also author of Slander, an example of a wonderful innovation: The Self-Refuting book. That's right. She saves you the trouble of disagreeing with her by disagreeing with herself. At the beginning she whines that American liberals [anybody left of Reagan, basically] can't argue, but only know how to launch ad hominem attacks. Feeling compelled to teach the world that only a prize fool would resort to name-calling, she goes on to slime everyone from the Clintons, to Larry Flynt to Gerald Ford with such insults. It's a real tour de force, for those who find Beavis and Butthead sophisticated anyway. The rest of us can only marvel as logic, facts and reasoning are cast aside. That's right, I read it ALL. That was back in January, when I was slightly bored. Since then, I've had no intention of reading the follow up, Treason, which I have to assume is just her moaning about treason and then saying treasonous things.
Such cretins are there for the attention, and unfortunately she gets it, much to the disdain of liberals, Democrats and old-style pre-Reaganite Republicans. At times like this it is necessary to heed the advice of our learned parents. Have you ever been told, when pestered by a bully, to "ignore them and the'll go away"? Well, it applies to circus freaks too. The most self-destructive thing anybody could do is get wound up by a woman who even manages to disagree with herself. And the void she leaves would greatly benefit political discourse, rescuing it from the depths of name-calling and distortion.
Of course, in Britain we are far too smart to have such a figure. That's what you think. Melanie Phillips, the ultimate old biddie windbag from hell, who defends any crime committed by the government of Isreal using the tiresome "anti-semitism" defence. And her favourite insult these days [applied to those opposing the war on Iraq and opposing the nomination of John Bolton, among other things] is "self-hating". So, to disagree with her trenchant analysis is to hate oneself. I can only assume there is some kind of Melanie Phillips mask for sale which one wears in these situations. I don't own one, so must resort to curling my face up like a petrified raisin that is pissed off that it's glory days as a grape are over. Recently she stated, and can we get serious for a moment, that the family of Jean Charles de Menezes, the poor Brazilian shot dead a few weeks ago by police, those attending a peace vigil to honour him, are merely "market[ing]" him as"the latest martyr for the self-haters of the free world." mmm, twisted.
Like Ann Coulter, only a fool would get their knickers in a twist over this silly trout. Only a complete idiot would waste time writing about her, only a petty moron would..., wait, just a second
Memo, kick self
hard
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
Why women's rights are wrong
Finally, a man, Vox Day, has braved the mass media with his anti-feminist views. As futile as I think it would be to argue his points with a woman, it's always nice to see someone serve it to the women on a nice platter with a good portion of facts and figures. Absolutely NOTHING can beat the information that statistics reveal. Truth is the essence represented by numbers. But maybe this is man's greatest strength and flaw at the same time. Everyone knows a man typically will not win an arguement with a woman. We are handicapped when it comes to arguing. Because men have a NEED to make SENSE. Women on the other hand will raise their paw and extend their claws while hissing taunts at you, call you names that you thought only existed in kindergarden, and will go at it just for their own sadistic pleasure until you give up. You'll see I'm not far off at this forum where Vox Day's original column at World Net Daily was posted.
"The guy who wrote this is an idiot. A complete idiot. It would take many, many pages to describe how idiotic every single one of his claims are.....The guy who wrote this is an idiot. A complete idiot. It would take many, many pages to describe how idiotic every single one of his claims are."
"As soon as I see a study from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics that says women cause real wage discrepancy, then maybe I'll pay attention. This person is saying the two have a direct relationship...a cause and effect relationship. I'm sure if he did a little bit more research, he'd find that there might be, oh, about a million other factors that cause it. Wasting time talking about this article gives it more attention than it deserves. There is no reasoning with somebody who is ignorant enough to buy what the guy has to offer.Read books. Lots of 'em. That's all I can say. " - King Margeret (commentator on Why Women's Rights Are Wrong forum thread)
You see, like most men would do, Vox has carefully done his homework, for the most part anyway. Facts and statements are supported by valid references. His anti-feminist blog cooly discusses the impact of feminism on American and European society. Meanwhile, not a single woman has stepped up to the challenge of providing any findings from their own research. No no, I think I will call him an idiot instead and would write pages and pages about how idiotic he is except I won't. Uhh yeah, you could write 'idiot' over and over again for 90 pages straight and it still wouldn't mean a thing if you dont have a statistical NUMBER to show for. It's easy to see how these types of critics often talk out of their ass.
"The thing that amuses me about liberal positions is that they are so prone to recommending impossible solutions to deal with easily averted problems. Faced with the problem of millions of women choosing to murder their unborn daughters, they'll advocate changing 6,000 years of Chinese culture. Right, good luck with that." - Vox Day article
Interestingly, Vox claims that there are women who are against feminist views. In his blog, you can check out a couple of emails he received, by women who share his views, and those who don't. Even Grandma seemed to have some interesting points of view. A simpler time, not neccessarily the perfect time, when men and women respected each other for their roles in life. The typical man's goal in life was to raise a family, bring in a good income to support it and care for them. But as Vox points out, the typical modern woman's ideal world is "nothing but trashy romance novels, unfattening gourmet food, robots who look like Brad Pitt and George Clooney equipped with adjustable-speed vibrating genitalia and none of those mean, brutish beings called men." Don't even try arguing with that! You know it's true... those selfish bitches. The dangerously falling birth rate could only mean that we as a modern society are stupid enough to jeopardise our own future.
"Actually, I've received more emails of support from women than I have opposing emails, let alone hate mail. In fact, the only thing that was even close was Proud Liberal's little essay, and that was downright friendly compared to some I've received in the past.My theory is that the numbers were too scary for the feminists to mess with. You know what Barbie says. Math is hard!" - Vox on fan/hate-mail.
I came across Ann Coulter about a week ago when I saw this on a T-shirt website:
"The guy who wrote this is an idiot. A complete idiot. It would take many, many pages to describe how idiotic every single one of his claims are.....The guy who wrote this is an idiot. A complete idiot. It would take many, many pages to describe how idiotic every single one of his claims are."
"As soon as I see a study from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics that says women cause real wage discrepancy, then maybe I'll pay attention. This person is saying the two have a direct relationship...a cause and effect relationship. I'm sure if he did a little bit more research, he'd find that there might be, oh, about a million other factors that cause it. Wasting time talking about this article gives it more attention than it deserves. There is no reasoning with somebody who is ignorant enough to buy what the guy has to offer.Read books. Lots of 'em. That's all I can say. " - King Margeret (commentator on Why Women's Rights Are Wrong forum thread)
You see, like most men would do, Vox has carefully done his homework, for the most part anyway. Facts and statements are supported by valid references. His anti-feminist blog cooly discusses the impact of feminism on American and European society. Meanwhile, not a single woman has stepped up to the challenge of providing any findings from their own research. No no, I think I will call him an idiot instead and would write pages and pages about how idiotic he is except I won't. Uhh yeah, you could write 'idiot' over and over again for 90 pages straight and it still wouldn't mean a thing if you dont have a statistical NUMBER to show for. It's easy to see how these types of critics often talk out of their ass.
"The thing that amuses me about liberal positions is that they are so prone to recommending impossible solutions to deal with easily averted problems. Faced with the problem of millions of women choosing to murder their unborn daughters, they'll advocate changing 6,000 years of Chinese culture. Right, good luck with that." - Vox Day article
Interestingly, Vox claims that there are women who are against feminist views. In his blog, you can check out a couple of emails he received, by women who share his views, and those who don't. Even Grandma seemed to have some interesting points of view. A simpler time, not neccessarily the perfect time, when men and women respected each other for their roles in life. The typical man's goal in life was to raise a family, bring in a good income to support it and care for them. But as Vox points out, the typical modern woman's ideal world is "nothing but trashy romance novels, unfattening gourmet food, robots who look like Brad Pitt and George Clooney equipped with adjustable-speed vibrating genitalia and none of those mean, brutish beings called men." Don't even try arguing with that! You know it's true... those selfish bitches. The dangerously falling birth rate could only mean that we as a modern society are stupid enough to jeopardise our own future.
"Actually, I've received more emails of support from women than I have opposing emails, let alone hate mail. In fact, the only thing that was even close was Proud Liberal's little essay, and that was downright friendly compared to some I've received in the past.My theory is that the numbers were too scary for the feminists to mess with. You know what Barbie says. Math is hard!" - Vox on fan/hate-mail.
I came across Ann Coulter about a week ago when I saw this on a T-shirt website:
Picture from ThoseShirts.com
I'd invite her into my cosy living room and offer her a nice warm cup of shutthefuckup, but unfortunately I'm all out of teabags. Ann Coulter is probably one of the most violent bitches out there that needs to get put in her place. But I digress.
"But the greatest evil of women's rights is demographic. Europe's demise is all but assured, thanks to them, as women's individual choices taken in the collective have stricken European society and brought on successive waves of feminist-friendly Islamic immigration by reducing Europe's birth rates far below replacement levels. And women's-rights advocates are now finding themselves in an ironic intellectual bind, as the onset of sex selection technology has them arguing that while a woman has a right to choose abortion, she can only do so for approved reasons.
This is because scientists are estimating that there are 100 million women missing from India and China and as the technology becomes cheaper and more widespread, this rate of loss is increasing. A U.N. official named Khalid Malik has warned that at present birth rates, with only 826 girls born per 1,000 boys, China will be missing 60 million more women within a decade. And in India, when a family already has two girls, a third pregnancy results in 78 percent of unborn girl babies being aborted.
The women of America would do well to consider whether their much-cherished gains of the right to vote, work, murder and freely fornicate are worth destroying marriage, children, civilized Western society and little girls. They can at least console themselves with the thought that, in the long run, it doesn't matter what they do, because the women's-rights ideology is an evolutionary dead end, and it is increasingly apparent that societies embracing it will not survive.
In the end, it's not that hard to understand. A little girl who is not born will never vote, work or raise a little girl of her own." - Vox Day column at World Net Daily.
Discovered at The Knight Shift.
Sunday, August 07, 2005
RIP Robin Cook
LONDON, England (CNN) -- Robin Cook, the Foreign Secretary for the first four years of Tony Blair's Labour government in Britain and the man who damagingly resigned on the eve of the war in Iraq, died of a heart attack while hill-walking in Scotland at the start of Britain's parliamentary holidays. He was 59.
He told a hushed House of Commons in March 2003: "The reality is that Britain is being asked to embark on a war without agreement in any of the leading international bodies in which we are a leading power. Not NATO. Not the EU. And now not the Security Council."
He also made this prescient prediction: "Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood use of the term."
Lawmakers on the government backbenches broke all the British parliamentary rules by applauding his speech.
After that he became a regular contributor to British media as well as continuing to voice his criticisms in the House of Commons.
Like this intervention in October, 2003: "Parliament was asked to vote for war on an assurance that weapons of mass destruction existed.
But although Cook was praised as an analytical thinker and was a leading left winger in his party few believed he could ever have been its leader.
Something of a loner, he didn't have either the physical stature or the clubbability to carry him all the way.
Rest in peace Mr Cook. I shall miss your guest appearances on Have I Got News For You, or one of Jimmy Carr's show, whatever he's calling it these days...
He told a hushed House of Commons in March 2003: "The reality is that Britain is being asked to embark on a war without agreement in any of the leading international bodies in which we are a leading power. Not NATO. Not the EU. And now not the Security Council."
He also made this prescient prediction: "Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood use of the term."
Lawmakers on the government backbenches broke all the British parliamentary rules by applauding his speech.
After that he became a regular contributor to British media as well as continuing to voice his criticisms in the House of Commons.
Like this intervention in October, 2003: "Parliament was asked to vote for war on an assurance that weapons of mass destruction existed.
But although Cook was praised as an analytical thinker and was a leading left winger in his party few believed he could ever have been its leader.
Something of a loner, he didn't have either the physical stature or the clubbability to carry him all the way.
Rest in peace Mr Cook. I shall miss your guest appearances on Have I Got News For You, or one of Jimmy Carr's show, whatever he's calling it these days...
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Would you like the ShCity chicken, ShCity pork or the ShCity beef?
You can't blame people who find Matt Stone and Trey Parker's South Park distasteful. Afterall, they've portrayed every single stereotype in America (note: not American stereotype) in the most extreme possible sense. You can easily turn any joke on South Park, or Team America, into something offensive to a particular group of people even without it being obvious at first. I read a comment by someone once who said how Michael Moore blowing himself up on Team America was a 'fat joke' i.e. offensive to fat people. In that particular scene at the Team America HQ, Michael Moore infiltrates the base as a suicide bomber and blows himself up, apparently with sticks of "sausages" attached to his body (Matt & Trey improvised a lot of the props)...which are suppose to be sticks of dynamite.... I guess. Maybe these 'fat' critics saw red sticks and hallucinated sausages instead. I dunno.
Mayor of South Park: "...And so we want you to design and build a Great Wall all around the city."
[pause]
City Wok owner: "I don't build wall. I just own operate City Wok."
Kyle's dad: "We just think that you're the best person to put up a wall. We're sure you've got it in your blood."
Owner: "Oh I get it... Just because I Chinese you think I build wall! That bullsh*t! I'm not stereotype ok?? Just because I Chinese don't mean I go round building wall! I'm just a normal person like all you! I eat rice and drive a'really slow just like the rest of you! I'm not a stereotype!"
Mr Tuong Lu Kim, owner of City Wok, that also doubles as the city's cheapest airline City Airlines with the flip of a signboard, isAmerica's South Park's stereotypical Chinese immigrant. Mr Tuong's wife, Wing, also makes an appearance in one episode as a Chinese immigrant trying to make it to American Idol with her 'unique' rendition of pop classics from Abba, the Beatles, Andrew Lloyd Webber etc. If you've seen this episode, then you probably know Wing is actually a REAL person. A real immigrant who migrated to New Zealand and actually lent her voice on that episode. Desperate rising celebrity? Or just the coolest Chinese immigrant in American history???
Mayor of South Park: "...And so we want you to design and build a Great Wall all around the city."
[pause]
City Wok owner: "I don't build wall. I just own operate City Wok."
Kyle's dad: "We just think that you're the best person to put up a wall. We're sure you've got it in your blood."
Owner: "Oh I get it... Just because I Chinese you think I build wall! That bullsh*t! I'm not stereotype ok?? Just because I Chinese don't mean I go round building wall! I'm just a normal person like all you! I eat rice and drive a'really slow just like the rest of you! I'm not a stereotype!"
Mr Tuong Lu Kim, owner of City Wok, that also doubles as the city's cheapest airline City Airlines with the flip of a signboard, is
Pictures from Wikipedia
There's more to reality than just Wing. Out of curiousity, I did a Google search and... and yes. There is even a real life Sh-City Wok franchise. Thankfully they have a sense of humour not to sue Matt and Trey. And then even more interesting enough, I found Mr Garrison's eerily similar invention 'IT', which he created as the 'faster,cheaper' alternative to air travel, although the operation and driving of the vehicle is more or less the equivalent of screwing yourself...literally.
Left: Really cheap vehicle, or really expensive sex toy?
Right: Euphoria travelling at 90mph.
I know.....wtf right?
