Pigdogfucker

I always thought he looked like a right wrong ‘un. Presumably Jim was part of the conspiracy too… it’s sad when your childhood idols fall down.

I really, really hate it when you wash your bedclothes only to discover, on removing them from the machine, that they’ve got detergent marks on them from where the tablet has failed to dissolve and get rinsed properly.

Not only is it a sign of a poor wash in general – but also, the only reason you’re washing your sheets in the first place is to remove the mysterious white stains…

From the amusing Catholic Church PR man love rat libel case:

But when she discovered a week later that she was pregnant with twins, he began to withdraw, the court heard.

I know that’s what Catholics are supposed to do, but I think the idea is that you do it before you get her pregnant…

I don’t understand Cathay Pacific’s actions in firing a pilot for doing a comedy fly-by when carrying a plane-load of cheering bigwigs on the plane’s maiden flight. Or at least, I don’t understand their actions in only firing the bloke after the story got onto the Internet.

Either you think this is an Terrible and Bad Thing That Should Never Be Allowed, in which case a) you’re a tool b) the chap should have been fired straight after the event rather than applauded and toasted by the managers on the plane; or you don’t, in which case sacking the chap is obviously a bit pointless and bizarre.

PR damage limitation? Perhaps, but I can’t see how this could have caused PR damage without the sacking – surely anyone in their right mind would rather fly on planes that did groovy stunts than not, given the choice…?

OK, so first of all – your Glitters and Huntleys are very bad people. And don’t get me wrong, had some despicable chap raped me as a child, that would have done me no good at all, in the “understated way of saying potentially mentalist, potentially suicidal” sense of “no good at all”.

However, by “some despicable chap raped me as a child”, I mean “some actual chap actually raped me as a child”. Not “some silly childhood ‘you can only go on the trampoline if you suck my balls thing. Or, moving on 10 years, an “I’m a daft teenage boy and a girl dragged me off to the bushes to screw me and I didn’t bother checking her ID” thing.

I just don’t get the whole thing. If Dave Bloggs, the frequent hypothetical bastard, were to rape a girl, that’d be dreadful and despicable. If Dave Bloggs were to have sex with an underage girl who invited him to have sex with her (like the girl that poor Callum Dimmock shagged), then that wouldn’t – at absolute worst, it’d be…

...no, actually, I’m having trouble ending that sentence. What is the sane sentence about a girl choosing to take a chap to bed with her that ends in “is so awful that the chap who she chose to go to bed with ought to go to jail for six years”?

Six years jail seems about right for crippling some poor sod by chucking a brick in his face, and probably lenient for, like, actually raping a kid. But the idea that there’s no such thing as a 12-year-old girl who’s more mature and sensible than a 19-year-old boy, or at least that they’re soooooooo different that the boy needs locked up with Chris Langham, flies in the face of all aspects of nature and sanity [*]

Anyway. Maybe I just don’t get the sheer awfulness of rape – but I’m deeply sceptical, because I can sure as hell say that offered the chance right now of being arse-raped or being given the level of non-sexual assault that would attrach the same sentence, I would absolutely and unequivocally opt for the rape. I mean, to get that kind of sentence you need to be permanently fucking mutilated…

Jesus, how could anyone in their right mind opt otherwise? Even given the option of being raped or being given the sentence for rape [**] is pretty fucking trivial – one is a hurty bum and a bruisedy ego; one is six years to life of being locked in a cage every fucking day and told what to do. OK, there’s a good pro-choice argument here – being compelled to be the cage is even worse still – but barring forced pregnancy, I can’t think of any kind of forced sex, no matter how degrading, that’s worse than spending a few years locked in jail…

Update: this post is grossly exaggerated drunken bollocks – see comments

[*] Traditionally, those are the approximate ages of marriage. Oooh, mysterious.

[**] Yes, assuming caught. Obviously, rapists should be caught. And we’re assuming here, implausibly, that it’s just a standard X years in prison, not X years in prison under special nasty torture as a rapisty-sex-deviant.

Yeah, ‘first they came for’, cliché, etc.

Nonetheless, while this chap is a despicable bastard, I’m still deeply uncomfortable with living in a country where he’s getting a long custodial sentence for asking a hooker to score him a young girl…

This is a great new trolling game someone has come up with: take one vaguely lefty site (here), one vaguely right-wing site, post extremely offensive comments on each purporting to be from the host of the other, then watch as the sparks ensue.

...and he would’ve gotten away with it, if it wasn’t for my superb detection skills…

[update: Graeme Bird appears to have deleted both the original fake troll comment and my follow-ups. This makes him a Dull Man. I think the fake one said he was a worse cunt than Stormfront, although with rather dodgy spelling and grammar.]

As any fule kno, publishing controversial material in England, especially if it concerns evil litigious rich bastards, is unwise.

Many bloggers, me included, host their sites [*] in the US, on the grounds that Yank courts are generally a little bit saner about That Sort Of Thing (yes, I know it doesn’t legally protect me from a libel action in England, but any sue-er would need to demonstrate to an English court that the person they’d dragged into the dock was Mr PDF, which would be difficult without records from my US hosting company).

However, the experience of WikiLeaks suggests that American courts are almost as fucking rubbish as ours. It’s a (truly excellent – as with all freedom-of-information stuff, anyone who opposes it should be crucified and resurrected on an infinite torture cycle forever) site that allows whistleblowers to post for the perusal of the unwashed masses.

Some such documents concerned Nazi-gold-laundering Swiss cunts [**] Julius Baer. The crooks’ bank first issued a writ to WikiLeaks directly for ‘violation of trade secrets’ (oh noes! our sekrits is violateds!). But worse, while that case awaits trial, Julius Baer have served a writ on the doman registrar that manages the wikileaks.org domain banning them from, err, doing their job: instead, the domain points to nowhere.

...which is a bit depressing. On the plus side, there are an awful lot of mirrors where Wikileaks can be activated (also, awesomely, BBC News has a story that links directly to one of the mirrored sites – hooray for misplaced legal actions that massively increase the bad publicity for the fuckwits who bring them). Still, it’s just a shame that the one country that claims to be totally free-speeched up has let the world down on this one.

Relatedly, if you’ve not seen the Northern Rock information memorandum from last autumn, then Wikileaks still has a copy. In some ways, it was daft of NR and the government to try and restrict this one, given that it confirms the fact that the bank really does have a high-quality loans book that’s putting the taxpayer at more or less naff-all risk…

[*] or “site their hosts”, if you prefer

[**] ‘Nazi-gold-laundering Swiss cunts’ is used here as a general synonym for ‘Swiss’ – I have no knowledge of or interest in the question of whether Julius Baer itself laundered Nazi gold, but since Switzerland’s prosperity is based on taking a cut from every thief, fraudster and genocidaire going, it’s certainly profited indirectly from horrible suffering.

This guide is even more detailed and disturbing than Newman K Lin’s columns.

Highlight:

[the female dog] will cum fairly quickly and easily (this is why sex with animals is better than humans…).

As long as ignorant cunts talk this kind of shit:

Why is McDonald’s considering and even trialling Halal meat in a Christian country? I find this grossly inconsiderate to the majority of the English people who are Christian and would have issues with eating meat prepared in such a way

...I’m going to be on the side of the likes of Rowan Williams purely on an “enemy of my enemy” basis.

1) halal animals do not suffer any more than conventionally-killed animals. If you cut something’s throat with a sharp knife, it loses consciousness long before the pain from the throat wound cuts in;

2) if you give even the slightest flying fuck about animal welfare (rather than just about sticking it to the darkies), you won’t be eating at Maccy D’s anyway;

3) Jesus stated quite explicitly that Christians are not bound by dietary rules and are allowed to eat meat prepared along the lines of any other creed, Jewish or Roman. While Mohammed wasn’t about in Jesus’s day, given that halal is a toned-down version of kosher it seems unlikely that the lovey-dovey beardie chap would’ve been too grumpy about the whole thing.

If you’re a vegetarian [*], you’ve every right to criticise halal. If you only eat super-turbo-happy-meat and have got some in-depth scientific research which confirms that having your throat cut is much much worse than being shot in the head with a bolt gun, then you’ve some right to criticise halal. If you’re neither, you’ve every right to fuck off and die.

[*] perhaps “if you’re a vegetarian who doesn’t drink industrially-produced milk or eat industrially-produced cheese”: a free-range-but-halal-killed animal has a much better life and death than an industrially-farmed dairy cow.