My Thai bride says I have a big cock.
Sorry, I forgot my punctuation.
My Thai bride says, \”I have a big cock\”.
(shamelessly nicked from the Sickipedia)
The Editors (not the pretend-Kasabian band) are irritatingly good. Two sequential paragraphs, both full of utter, completely unrelated to each other, WIN:
The sad fact of American politics is that at least 35-40% of the electorate belongs in a mental institution, and there’s probably another 10-20% who are high-functioning retards. The Congressional numbers are no better. There’s no point in trying to make a deal with these people.
Also, I think the Obama death panels should be run like “American Idol”. Three sassy latte-sipping America-haters give their opinions on which grannies and babies die this week, and then the audience can place their votes by calling in to ACORN. The losers are allowed to survive for another week if they agree to have a Christian doctor forced at gunpoint to give them a sex change operation.
So Gary McKinnon\’s apparently off to a US jail forever for doing fuck all. Hurrah!
It\’s interesting – both on the NatWest case and this case, opinion seemed broadly divided between:
1) people who think it\’s possible to get a fair trial in the US
2) people who understand the US judicial system
Why\’s that? Well, the US judicial system has two features that come together to make fair trials for non-violent crime impossible: very very long sentences for trivial offences; and discounts for pleading guilty that can amount to cutting your sentence by 90%.
So in the UK, if you were accused of conning your employer out of a million quid, or of hacking the military\’s computers, you\’d be looking at a sentence of a few years maximum. Which would be fair, as you wouldn\’t actually have done anyone any real harm. A guilty plea would get you 1/3 off your final sentence – so if you\’re not guilty but there\’s some circumstantial evidence against you, or if you are technically guilty but think a jury would go your way, then it\’s still worth fighting.
In the US, you can be charged initially with counts that would leave you in jail for the rest of your natural. Remember, this is *for nicking a bit of cash*, or *for some not-super-complex hackery* – if you think that\’s fair and proportionate YOU ARE INSANE. But then, the kindly prosecutor-man will offer you a sentence which is only slightly longer than you\’d get in the UK, as long as you plead guilty to everything.
This effectively means that, if prosecuted for a non-violent criminal offence in the US (they can\’t get away with the same kind of sentencing discounts for violent crime, on the grounds that the long starting points there aren\’t totally insane), your only reasonable strategy is to plead guilty.
And that isn\’t a judicial system to which we should be sending people at all, never mind on the basis of nothing as per the current system.
I\’ve finally got around to reading Craig Murray\’s The Catholic Orangemen of Togo. Brief book review: it\’s fucking excellent; buy it; read it.
However, I don\’t quite understand Craig\’s, and indeed many other people\’s, obsession with \’mercenaries\’. For example:
For me, the really scary thing about [a video where private security company Aegis shot a civilian car in Iraq that drove through a checkpoint] is that it was the subject of a formal United States Army enquiry, which says that the incidents shown were \”within standard operating procedures\”, as laid down by the US Army, which in effect give Aegis the right to shoot up any car approaching them, in case it is a car bomb.
Aegis were working for the US Army. If Aegis hadn\’t been there, then Yank soldiers would have be there, operating to the same rulebook and shooting the same poor buggers who missed the checkpoint. It doesn\’t matter in the fucking slightest whether the chaps with guns shooting cars are scared American 21-year-olds or skint, retired-vet South African 45-year-olds, except to the extent that scared troops are more prone to make terrible mistakes than less-scared troops.
The problem is the fucking rulebook that says you can shoot a carload of civilians on suspicion – and suggesting the problem is down to the contractors who do the same bloody thing as the real army is a meaningless cop-out.
The photographer, Pericles Antoniou, 53, was on holiday in London with his family when, on 17 April, he was arrested in the London tube by police officers. Antoniou, as he described the event in a letter to the Greek ambassador in London, was on his way to visit the photo exhibition of Russian photographer and painter Rochenko when he started taking pictures of people in the London tube.
‘A lady complained about the fact that I was taking photos of her daughter,’ wrote Antoniou. ‘I apologized immediately, as the ethics and common practice of photographers dictates, I showed the lady the photos I had taken of her daughter, and I erased every photo which contained her.’
However, a man claiming to be the girl’s father pursued the Greek photographer and asked police officers to arrest him. Antoniou has since been charged under the Public Order Act of 1986, articles 5 and 6 for ‘public harassment,\’ and causing \’alarm or distress.’
You can just picture the family who\’d do that, can\’t you? Neckless, tattooed Millwall fan for a dad; screeching chain-smoking harpy for a mum; paranoid that WEIRD FOREIGN PEEEEEDOS are out to get their grossly obese, barely sentient daughter. \”Ya caaan\’t take her fackin\’ picture, it\’s against our bleedin\’ \’uman rights, ya bubble caaant…\’. If they lived in Portsmouth, there\’d be half a dozen paediatricians buried under their patio.
Although, it\’s a shame Mr Antoniou is just an innocent foreign tourist and not a murdering paedophile. Given that little Waynetta will doubtless knock out dozens of equally appalling sproglings starting at the age of 12, a bit of preemptive burial-in-shallow-grave would be by far the best outcome for society…
What\’s crooked? Misrepresenting a scientist in a quote? Maybe not. Misrepresenting a scientist in a quote and refusing to correct your article? Maybe not even that? So, what, then…?
How\’s about misrepresenting a scientist in a quote, refusing to correct your article, refusing to publish his refutation on the letters page, and refusing to even publish his comment on the online article? Fuck yeah!
That\’s serious terrifying, lying nonsense. Not in a trivial fashion, but in a spreading-myths-about-one-of-the-most-important-things-threatening-the-world fashion. It\’s the point where the prospect of legal action against people for telling outrageous and malicious lies actually comes into play… [*]
[*] if you\’re a freedom-of-speecher who believes in the abolition of all libel laws, fine; I disagree with you but you\’re not an idiot. If you don\’t, in a world where you\’re allowed to do this kind of shit, but not to call wealthy well-lawyered thieving rapist crook Alisher Usmanov a thieving rapist crook, there is no freedom of speech.
Excellently, Channel 4 is getting the Iranian president, Mr I\’m A Dinner Jacket, to present its Alternative Christmas Message.
Now, we all know Mr Jacket is a loony. So opinions on the matter will be split broadly into \’people who know Mr Jacket is a loony but think it\’s fucking hilarious\’, \’people who know Mr Jacket is a loony but don\’t give a fuck either way\’, and \’utter cunts who\’ll get wound up by Channel 4 giving a PLATFORM!!! to this EVIL!!! HOLOCAUST DENYING!!! ANTISEMITIC!!!…etc\’.
The Guardian piece linked above has a nice selection of the final group, exemplified by:
Incredible that they wouldn\’t dream of George Bush (senior or junior) giving the address (thank goodness) so why go to this ridiculous extreme? A religious bigot from a hardline theocracy broadcasting on UK television, full of views that would destroy the very framework that allows such a channel to exist….Pim Fortuyn, you are sorely missed.
That particular comment has two excellent additional traits. One is the current right-wing bigot fad of pretending the reason they hate the darkies is because the darkies represent a threat to liberalism, exemplified precisely by Mr Fortuyn [*]; and the other is the implicit recognition that GWB is pretty much as bad as Mr Jacket…
[*] murdered by a secular white loony, lest we forget.
Update: somewhat disappointingly, the speech was nicey-nicey C-of-E moderate religiousness, rather than foam-flecked calls for the destruction of Israel and worldwide Islamic revolution. It\’s almost as if the US government\’s attempts to demonise Iran and its rulers ahead of their attempted war were ridiculous exaggerated bollocks, or something…
Republicans, given the kind of power the Democrats are about to accrue, would maybe take away your right to get a completely totally naked chick to grind on your lap in a publicly licensed bar. The Democrats will do their damnedest to take away your right to speak.
Democrat win. Also, who the hell would be able to /speak/ in such a context? I have no desire to support their voodoo multitasking skillz.
Alaska in Winter are a great band, named after the dullest concept imaginable. So if you\’re a 17-year-old girl growing up in said dull location, with a religious conservative fundie-loon mum, and who\’s doubtless been told birth control is Teh Evils, then getting up the duff is not that surprising.
This is where America, to me as a sane person, becomes a completely non-comprehensible place. In the UK, plenty of dim teenage girls with witless parents sprog up – but assuming you didn\’t grow up in a gutter, you\’ll probably bother using johnnies in the first place, and will certainly get an abortion otherwise. In Yankland, girls whose parents *aren\’t* circus freaks actually have kids when they\’re still kids – even if their mum\’s the second-highest-profile female politician in the land…
(indeed, thinking about it, if Bristol Palin *did* do the only sensible thing available, and unfucked her life through the means of basic harmless surgery, then that\’d probably be the thing that sank McCain\’s campaign. Dammit, America is a despicable hole filled with despicable bastards…)