Nut Control

I think it would be wiser to make sure the army and the police never side against the people, by making sure they keep in touch with the difference between right and wrong, than it would be to make sure that the people are legally allowed to arm themselves to such an extent that they are capable of defeating the army and/or the police in any given dispute.

I think the latter idea is complete lunacy.

I think the "right to bear arms" is a trick played on the people by those that rule them - it is an illusory freedom, an access to an illusory means of self defence. They give the common man each access to the "ultimate" means of self defense, but the situation must be dire indeed for us ever to resort to it. We never do, do we? Except one at a time, going out "in a blaze of glory"(not). In the meantime, they buy almost unlimited room for themselves to abuse our weakness. And our weakness is our lack of organisation against tyranny.

That's the psy-op they've played on America - the common man thinks "whatever they do to me, as long as they don't take away my gun, I am still a whole man who is free." Bullshit! Once a peaceful person is forced to pick up a gun in order to defend their peaceful and honest lifestyle from attacks made against it by their very own government, then the battle is already 9/10ths lost.

Today we get told which direction the economy is headed. What happened to our right to have a say in how things are going to be? We're at the mercy of the plutocrats and their technicians.

Oh, but at least we're still allowed to own a gun - that's something isn't it?

Love Story

Every time I reached out to take one of your chocolates - one of your metaphorical chocolates from the box you were holding out for me to take from - you slapped the lid down on my fingers.

It wasn't even funny the first time.

The second time you did it the pain was excruciating, partly due to the immediate tangible loss I felt, but mostly due to the fact that I knew I would never be able to reach out to take one of your chocolates again. And I wasn't at all sure that you were aware, as you slammed the lid down on my fingers for the second time, that there would be no third time.

Here is a hint for you - shot out into cyber-space, but a hint for you no less: Your only chance left with me would be to come to me and press one of those chocolates of yours into the palm of my hand (a wrapped one, perhaps), and whisper something heart-felt and decidedly remorseful into my ear.

Continuing to do a tapdance while with out-stretched arms holding your box of chocolates under my nose, well, it has not worked thus far, and I can't see that it is likely to work in the future.

Because I don't trust you any more. See?

What kind of fucked-up idiot has to do what you did for a first and second time, let alone fully expect there to be a third and fourth time?


And now there you stand, with a tired old picked-at (it weren't me - we both know that for sure!) box of chocolates in your outstretched hands. It gives me no joy - not the kind of joy that I have ever actively sought, at least - to see you like this.

You Sirry Iriot

I saw her the other day, walking out of a lift.

She looked like she was having an epiphany, she walked almost as if she were floating.

But the focus of her eyes gave it away - she was looking out the window.

As best as I can figure, she was looking out the window at a doctor's shiny new BMW.

While she was doing this, I saw her and thought she was having some sort of epiphany.

You silly silly mole.

U R So Lost

OK, seriously, I was walking along a street when this young foreign woman approached me (Swedish perhaps) and asked if I knew where number 318 of the street we were on was. I spent the next 60 seconds discussing the ins and outs of the possibilities with her - whether it was up or down the street, what angle the moon currently was in the sky, what colour socks she wore to little school, etc, when finally I asked her what shop it was she was after. "Apple" something-or-other was the name of it. And what did it sell? GPS equipment.

I'd walked 10 paces away from her before the irony of it dawned upon me...

Oh Heck

It's Valentine's day, and here's me with my name and everything...

Well I'd have called myself "amouroplier" if I was that kind of boy.

How Strange.

"Protector of the free world deserves better..."

"Anti-Americanism has a long pedigree, but that only makes it more irrational, writes Janet Albrechtsen"

So there I was, writing a few comments at Janet's blog at The Australian. And I go back to it a few hours later and her essay is no longer where it was when I first came upon it. So I go to her blog page, but it doesn't display the current essay in question. When I do finally find the essay in question, in the "Opinion" section now - and this is the strange bit - the entire comments section is missing. There were 67 or so comments (I think) when I entered mine, and now they are gone.

Could it possibly have been something I said?

What exactly did I say?

Well she was calling the US the most benign empire the world has ever seen, so I said something like "You think the US is benign, with 1.5 million dead Iraqis over the last 15 years and Iraq polluted forever by depleted uranium? You f**king idiot." So they just could have said "Oops, sorry, no swearing Sir" and dispensed with that one.

And then while reading the other comments - I couldn't bear to read all of her essay - it became clear that the fact that the US saved us from Hitler was one of the points she was making. So my second comment was to do with the fact that Prescott Bush - George W's grandpappy - did business with the Nazis throughout the 1930's, and well into WWII itself, when the US government finally stopped him. If you want strange, that is strange. How on earth does the son and grandson of a man who traded with the Nazis until he was stopped (under threat of prosecution) each in turn become Preznit of the US of A? I'd have thought a draft-dodging flag-burning grandpappy would have been a better lineage to have claim to, but obviously not. Have all of those Holocaust museums, memorials and movies been for nothing, I wonder?

Probably, as with Paul Kelly, next week Janet will write something new and the current post, including comments, will go back on display in her blog archive where precisely no one will see it.

Journalist-Blogger Rule Number 3: If you get called out, hide all evidence of it until it is yesterday's news.

Update: A few hours later, we now can find a page which displays the current blog entry with comments displayed also, but the comments have started at zero again. The 60 or 70 that were there when I made my first comments have disappeared, and of course my comments aren't displayed either.

Update 2: Hooray! My second attempt to post a comment was successful! Unfortunately, an hour after mine was posted - comment at 1.12pm (page 1) - there were fully 30 more comments which followed, so I don't think many people will be reading my comment...Strange how so many comments could follow mine, in just an hour, when it's still so difficult to actually navigate to the page which allows for comments.

Update 3: It all becomes clear now - due to "technical problems" JA's blog had to be "rebuilt," resulting in the loss of the first 100 comments. JA even made a special reply to my 1.12pm comment. The use of depleted uranium munitions in Iraq was a "strategic error" according to JA. Funny, to me it looks like the chosen strategy, not a strategic error. And even though JA is aware that a war in Iraq beginning in 2003 was always going to be a long and dirty war, according to her the mistake was not in beginning the war, but in Bush seducing people into thinking that the war might be quick and clean.

This lady has balls where she should have brains!

Janet Albrechtsen, you are a fucking idiot!

Final update, hopefully - the day after: Nobody can accuse Janet of not doing the hard yards. Her Bush-praise article was prominent on The Australian's website for a few hours on end the day after it was initially posted. But where is it now? Hidden again, just like Paul Kelly's was - you have to go to the bottom of the first page of her blog (which displays an out-of-date post, not the most recent one) to find it in a list of "recent" and "popular" blog entries. Strangely, she has been very prolific in the last 24 hours. She's made no less than 5 new entries in a single day, when, from what I can tell, she normally only makes 5 entries per month. (Edit: Actually, she's also borrowed other people's posts to include in her list of popular and recent blog entries - the end result being the same, her 2 day old post is very well hidden in cyberspace).

Journalist-Blogger Rule Number 5: You can make embarrassing issues disappear into the past by creating the illusion of time having passed - just add more haystack to the needle - this will serve to quarantine the offending item.

How annoying

I popped by The Australian's website yesterday, poked around a little, and made a comment at editor Paul Kelly's blog. Went back later to look at my comment in all its glory - number 85 or more it would have been - and Kelly for some reason has deleted his entire post! His post of 14/12/06 is missing, and as of today the latest post displayed is from 5/12/06. As I say - how annoying!

Kelly was going on about how - to paraphrase - the future Rudd federal government is going to have to change its attitude from one of pandering to its constituents, to instead a focus on pro-market reforms. Howard apparently has dropped the ball on "pro-market reforms." But what struck me was the assumption made that opposition leader Rudd will be the next to govern.

So I said to him, I said "So we hear it straight from the horse's mouth - or from the chief strapper actually - Rudd will be IN at the next election. It's good to know what the future holds in store for us. Thanks Paul!"

Now, with that comment, I can't help but feel that I completely made the man my bitch (please don't take offense ladies - I'm having a guy moment - all for the greater good). And I must confess that I harbour the notion that he may have deleted the whole post because of comments like the one I made.

But that's not the end of it. If Kelly deleted that post due to embarassment, the embarassment as I see it wasn't merely due to an oversight or simple error on his part - it was due to the exposure of the real nature of his relationship to power. Tickets on myself, I know, but he is the chief strapper, and we're all so fucking dumb around here - stupid and dumb and compromised - we can't bring ourselved to see it as it is. He, on any given day, wields as much power as the PM does. And we've all been so pre-occupied with getting ahead or getting off that we hardly noticed that they stopped teaching kids how to think critically a long while ago, that we're one of those kids that never learnt how to think. And the shit the Paul Kellys of this world get away with, on their own behalf, and on behalf of their masters!

You, Paul Kelly, editor of The Australian newspaper, are on notice: You are a piece of shit, and I know you to be a piece of shit. I have your number, and whenever I get the inclination, I'm gonna peel you like the over-priced banana you are. You'd be well advised to take early retirement actually, coz things are gonna get messy for the likes of you in the very near future if you choose to hang around.

And I hope there are many more days like this in the future, where the evidence indicates that someone who isn't filling your pockets with money has made you their bitch. Bitch.


Update: Ah! His post hasn't been deleted - it is merely very well hidden! You must click to view his December 5 post, then click on his name, and this will give you a page which displays evidence that there is a post made on December 14. Simply click on that, and you may read Paul Kelly's latest blog entry. Funny how the steady stream of comments come to a sudden halt a few hours after my 12.08pm 15/12 comment. Nice to think I may have been one of the straws which broke this camlet's back.

Pity that the editor of Australia's only national daily newspaper sees fit to hide in cyberspace when the going gets tough.

The self-parking Lexus.

[I'm sorry blog - I just retracted up my libido from you and left you standing here like a shag on a cyber-rock, didn't I?

I'm sorry.

Here is a second-hand gift, a small gesture, to begin to make amends:]



I like a dose of libertarian thought every now and then, I think it does me good, but it's amazing how often I'll end up diametrically opposed to it! And also, an apology - I think I had too much time on my hands today...

Quote:

This [the self-parking Lexus] is exactly the type of thing mankind should be putting his efforts into: things which lift mankind out of the mud and up to the stars and beyond.

I can see what you're getting at, but I think this is a really bad example of what you're getting at. To me, a self-parking car only reminds me that some people just shouldn't be getting behind a wheel. And that the people who die of starvation/lack of medicine must be truly wicked people if God sees fit to provide for other less-wicked people self-parking cars instead of providing them with food and/or medicine. Or else God is a bastard. Or else we are bastards.


Quote:

But it's these very [Malthusian, misanthropic, sadistic and power-mad] ruling elites who have used their control over the vital worldview-molding sectors of society, e.g., the schools, the media, etc., to indoctrinate the masses from birth with precisely this kind of anti-human, self-destructive, suicidal Weltanschauung: whereby so many people regard their own species as, in effect, something akin to a cancer or disease upon the planet. If one's goal is to keep mankind enslaved, to enslave him further, and to cull his numbers at one's whim, then having the masses adopt such an inverted, grotesque philosophy would be of great assistance.

I think the Lexus is grotesque. That's not to say that I wouldn't at some level dearly like to possess a Lexus of my very own. Indeed it would not be inappropriate to use the term "lust" to describe a feeling I get when confronted physically with a Lexus, and with the possibility of possessing a Lexus of my very own. But the truth is there is more life, more intelligence, more that is worthy of respect and admiration and devotion, in a handfull of mud than there is in a Lexus - even in one that parks itself. And I mean this quite literally.

What is grotesque is the way the elites have turned a simple practical problem - human transportation requirements, and desires - into a planet threatening enterprise, making a profit on it at every turn, and also, to top it off, they've turned the individual units of human transportation into fetish objects.

It's not our species that is cancer-like, it's the ecological impact of the lifestyle of the Lexus and Huyundai owners that are providing the cancer-like symptoms. Heavy industry is fucking up our planet (and cars have fucked up our settlement patterns), but worse than that, the mentality that gave us heavy industry, if left to continue on its way, will continue to find new ways to destroy/contaminate/otherwise-fuck-up the very thing that made humans the brilliant creatures that they are to begin with - the natural earth. Hundreds of thousands of years of living with the mud and the bugs and the plants and the animals and the sun and the wind and the rain and each other, and surviving, is what made us what we are. A few hundred years with a complicated division of labour and more than ever we continue to think we're God's gift to this place and it is God's gift to us. And that the things we create are some kind of sign of our appreciation for God's generosity. And here we are sailing at full speed towards a 6 metre rise in sea levels within the next 100 years. What more needs to be said?

I can easily draw a thick black line between me with my modern conveniences, and the Lexus' of this world. I don't wan't to drag others down! I don't want to stop them from achieving excellence! I just want to stop them trashing the planet and trampling over other people's lives on their journey to excellence! This is anti-human, self-destructive, and suicidal? No, I don't think so - the Lexus is those things.

The ruling elites have used their control over education and the media to create a wage-slave civilisation. The Lexus (or choose your brand) is an epitome of excellence of this wage-slave civilisation. They are of the same cloth. If "one's goal is to keep mankind enslaved, to enslave him further, and to cull his numbers at one's whim," then just keep the wage-slaves lusting after the Lexus! Did you hear the new model parks itself?! Keep them entralled by the ever receding vision of a technological utopia. Fuck top-soil! We'll genetically engineer our way out of that one! We're brilliant, don'tcha know? And nanotechnology is gonna turn the world on its head! I read it in New Scientist last week!

Meanwhile the ruling elites, who have all but made the human world what it now is, are indeed Malthusian, but we don't need them to help us add two and two together - the cold hard facts of reality are suggesting to us that a Malthusian scenario is on the cards for the human family. The answers are out there - the over-developed countries have a shrinking population "problem." There's all the proof you need that Malthus doesn't necessarily apply. And the only thing we know almost for certain is that the "ruling elites" ain't gonna do shit.