Saturday, November 30, 2002

More idiocy from Hugh Mackay. We know that crazed yokels intend to kill Westerners for having a good time -- hell, they've already done so many times already -- and this gimp is having a go at John Howard for asking us to stay alert.

In his insipid attempt at satire, he berates the PM for asking us to be "calmly alarmed". So what does Hugh want us to do, not give a tinker's? Be calmly calm? Be alarmedly alarmed? Fuck, surely Howard couldn't have said nothing.

In his puerile, witless nitpicking Mackay resembles the always-cretinous Bob Brown. Recently Bob also condemned Howard for making a vague statement about a terrorist threat. This was unwise, the dull-eyed karri-fondler intoned, because when no attacks do occur it might cause a "cry wolf" syndrome and lead to complacency.

That might have some validity if there is no threat, yet clearly there is. But obviously the ever-tolerant and understanding Bob doesn't think so. Otherwise he wouldn't have invoked the cry wolf argument. So, if there's no threat, what's the problem with complacency?

That's what happens when you dance with bilbies for too long. You make no friggin' sense whatsoever.

Bob's latest folly is to say that Australia should now thoroughly investigate possible warnings and clues about the Bali bomb! Incredible.

Hey Bob! It happened shit-wit. It was horrible. We don't want it to happen again. That's why we should act aggressively and pre-emptively. Pour the bucks into nailing the bastards before they nail us. Not spend millions to sift through the ashes to try and find dodgy evidence of incompetence that you and your allies can use to hurl at the Government. (Anyway, what's all this seemingly anti-terrorist posturing, Bob? Don't you think we deserve these attacks anyway? Aren't they all our fault for being culturally insensitive capitalists?)

Fuck, why am I addressing this to Bob? He's not going to read it. It makes sense, something he has a pathological aversion to.

See what these fluffs do? They rile you so much you lose your cool. Eventually you end up as nutty as them.

I know! I'll head off to Newtown to shoot some ferals. That'll calm me down...
From the SMH: "A clearer picture is also emerging about the operations of JI in Australia, how it was funded and how it survived for as long as it did. While much of the initial focus since the September 11 attacks in the United States has been on Sydney, because of its many Muslims, the nucleus of JI was based in Perth."

In Perth, of course. Makes perfect sense. West Aussies are really nice and everything, but they're just way too tolerant. Any state that can elect Carmen Lawrence as Premier needs its friggin' head read.

Personally, I blame the sunshine. The joint is just too pleasant, the sky too blue, the lifestyle too easy-going and hedonistic. Because everything's really nice there -- particularly for the sushi-Stalinist middle classes and their retarded, bong-suckling sprogs -- they just don't understand how something really nasty like Islamo-fascism could develop. And when its adherents start recruiting under their very noses, the Perthites can't even spot it either! Why? Because "these people are ethnic, and they wear robes and stuff so they must be really nice".

I hope the Greenhouse Effect does kick in. With the climate in disarry, it'll bucket down in Perth all the time and the sunshine- starved sandgropers might friggin' wake up!
I found this incredible story via Bizarre Science.

The people of Zambia are starving, but heaps of food is being taken away from the country. The article states: "This relief effort in reverse follows the Zambian government's decision in August to ban the distribution of all genetically modified food."

But the West consumes heaps of GM food, so why not give it to the starving Africans? Well, no, that would be inappropriate. Greenies and other assorted fucktards have been campaigning against it so it must be evil. And when the pro-GM Seppos want to give it to the Zambians, ferndamentalists accuse them of exploiting suffering. Fuck! They're trying to end it!

Even if that accusation is true, and they are using the situation to their advantage, that's still not as despicable as actually blocking the relief effort (and facilitating its reverse) which is what the ferndamentalists have done. That is: exploiting suffering is nowhere near as bad as exacerbating it. (D'uh!)

This whole GM fear campaign is a friggin' joke. Genetic modification is what we've been doing for yonks anyway -- although much more slowly than now -- through selective crossing of crops etc. It's also what nature does, er, naturally through natural friggin' selection.

Even if every now and then a new plant or product does carry some risks, then surely it's better to take them when people are starving. Ferfucksake, feed the people first. Ask nitpicking, arbitrary questions about the food's acceptibility later.
Just a note to say that if anyone wants to have a squizz at my archives for this blog, they're here. (They're not at this address because that shifty fluff Derek Sapphire tampered with my blog settings. Bastard!)

Thursday, November 28, 2002

There are reports that some of the events in the Osbournes' reality TV show are staged.

Some events staged? They all are! See, performers and celebs are putting on a facade 24/7. Even when cameras aren't rolling or bulbs aren't flashing, they're imagining they are. These people sleep for a friggin' audience, ferfucksake. (Also, these traits are heritable, so the sprogs behave in exactly the same way.)
There's a really interesting post by Tim Blair in response to criticisms that he's gone all wet an' lefty by condemning Creepy Phil's Suicide Social Club. There are some good points there that I wholeheartedly agree with. I'd basically sum them up as: No man is an island, even when he's a carcass.

And with the world as chockas as it is with pain, misery and murder, it's worth sticking up for life every now and then, I reckon. I've often thought committing suicide was a fine solution -- not for myself, of course; only for lefties, greenies and audiences that didn't laugh uproariously at all my gags -- but I would never say that this idea should be enshrined in law. Yep, get up and say offin' yourself is great, by all means. But don't ask our government to make this right official, accessible and claimable on Medicare.

It's kind of like the rootin' thing. Even though sex is not death (well, it is a little one -- or so the Frogs reckon) you can apply similar pro and con arguments to it. The right to die is similar to the right to thigh. (Sorry. It was there, I had to take it.) Mad rooting, though mostly benign, does have consequences for those other than the participants. Think, for instance, of the dutiful wife who's husband is happily shagging anything with a pulse behind her back, or the Quaker granny who's grand-daugher becomes a porn starlet determined to break the world man-juice smoothie-skolling record. I mean, crikey, ya gotta consider other people's feelings occasionally, at least.

I used to think: All sex is fine, as long as it's between consenting adults. Now, as I've learned a little about just how wacky people can get in the sack I've amended that to: All sex is fine, as long as it's between consenting adults who are alive, awake, and human.

So, regarding both big deaths and little ones: In the end, yes, people should be allowed to do with their bodies what they wish, but it must be within reason.

Put another way: It's impossible to police or prevent suicide, self-harm, or extremely wacky (but ultimately not illegal) sex acts. But that doesn't mean that we should encourage these things. If as a society we say, "Anything goes and fuck the consequences!" we'll end up in all kinds of strife.

That dippy Frog philosopher Rousseau once wrote: "Man is born free but everywhere he is in chains." He was only a quarter right. Quite often it's the chains that free us.

Wednesday, November 27, 2002

I've just found another rather, er, vivid expression from Urban Dictionary. It's "Map of Hawaii". "Mr Aloha" defines it as a slag term referring to "puddles of semen that resemble the island chain". Example: "I pulled out early and put a map of Hawaii on her stomach."

Just below it in the listing is "Map o' Tassie", which of course refers to the (usually) triangular female pubic region.

I wonder if anyone has used both in the same sentence? For instance: "Oh mate, me an' the missus had a top night. We played hide the sausage for bloody hours and then I pulled out an' left a big map of Hawaii all over her map o' Tassie!"

Which begs the next question: How long before the sex act itself becomes known as amateur cartography?

Another thought: I suspect that while the sentence imagined above may have been used occasionally by white-trash, red-necked, blue-collar slobs, it has never been used by any sensitive left-leaning swains. This is because the image of a US state obscuring an Australian one implies a kind of American imperialism. But if the map of Palestine were inserted in Hawaii's place, then it would be used as commonly as the phrase "Little Johnny Howard" in next to no time without a doubt!
Anyone who's read this blog will have realised that I really like words -- the more abrasive, colloquial and friggin' onomatopoeic the better. So, imagine my joy when I discovered a site that is chockas with e'm. Have a look here.

After ten seconds I found a pearler of a word: "Sacrilicious", which the submitter (someone called "kerspunk") has defined thus: Both SACRILEGIOUS (grossly irreverent toward what is held to be sacred) and at the same time DELICIOUS (extremely pleasing to the sense of taste). For example: "Upon eating a pancake that he believed to be God, the dimwitted man uttered 'Mmmm...sacrilicious'."

Expect my language to become even more colourful from now on.

Tuesday, November 26, 2002

I just felt the need to shit-can the bong-suckling capital of the world Fremantle again so I did a quick search on Google. I ended up with this page titled "Things to do in Perth and Fremantle". Looks normal enough. But check out the top left-hand corner. There's a little button reading "Places to Eat". Shouldn't that read: "Places to Eat At". Or have the athletic West Aussies become so humungous and hungry that they chow down on whole buildings now?
Ugh. Derek Sapphire's just posted a couple of photos. I think I'm gonna throw up.
I used to be pro-euthenasia. But now I'm not so sure. I'm starting to concur with the main arguments against it; that basically life is precious and that you should hang on if it's not too 'orrible, and that doctors shouldn't help hasten the death of the terminally ill, since it's a (fairly short) slippery slope towards taking the lives of people who aren't dying and/or don't want to -- people like deformed and severely retarded sproglets for instance. Shit, they may not be too bright, but they're still human. So, once you say that's okay, then it's another rhetorical hop, skip and jump towards offing your inconvenient political enemies as well.

Here's more info on this matter that gives me the chills: As the story states, this retired academic (still in robust health and with all marbles clearly still uncracked and in her possession) offed herself because she didn't want her quality of life to deteriorate. It was basically the "quit while you're ahead" rationale.

But if she topped herself at 79, then why not 59? And if 59, why not 39, etc? Crikey, if we're not careful it'll become trendy like yo-yos were at high school and bloody everyone'll be doin' it.

Before doing the deed she penned a note saying that Dr Phil Nitschke inspired her to take her own life. What, inspired? Shouldn't that have been expired? (There's a song parody here, based on that Leo Sayer hit of yore: "You make me feel like dying. I wanna throw my life away... etc.")

Gawd, what weird charisma Creepy Phil must have! He convinces healthy people to wanna stop breathing. Ladies, if this guy ever approaches you at a bar, just don't let him buy you a drink, alright!

Monday, November 25, 2002

Want more lefty-bashing? Try this site. Has some great observations you can use to really get up the noses of the squitterati.
Regarding an earlier post about a controversial skin-flick that was shot on a sleepy Seppolian campus: I said they should have renamed the muff-movie Carnal Knowledge. Snobby cinephiles among you might be thinking, "That's the title of a mainstream film made decades ago. Hence the pun is unoriginal, and therefore unamusing."

Yeah, I know, smartypantses. But the two stars, Anne Margaret and Jack Nicholson didn't nude up and go the rodfest (well, at least not on screen, anyway). So it doesn't really count. The gag's still worth a smug chuckle, or a wry snort, I reckon.

Memo to the porn producers: Next fillum you shoot in an institute of higher learning (lower yearning?) you should include a kinky knee-trembler-in-the-dunny scene. Then you can call it Uni Sex Toilet.

(Sorry, that was shockin'. But I'll include it because it's very much in accordance with the whole ballsily anarchic, devil-may-care spirit of blogging.)

Publish and be damned!
This is unbelievable. Now the feminists in the West are cracking the shits with the Miss World competition!

Let's have a look at this.

Right, now the Muslim fundies in Nigeria go spacko over a friggin' beauty comp, provoking riots which result in hundreds of deaths. Okay, so what does that reveal? Does it reveal that the organisers and competing babes are bad and wrong and that the open adulation of feminine grace is an evil which cannot be tolerated and justifies acts of extreme violence? Or does it reveal that the vengeful fundies are the ones we should be worried about? Gee, it's a tricky one to call. But I think I'll go with the second answer.

Therefore, do we say (as some of the ranters did before becoming killers), "down with beauty!"? Or do we say, "No, down with the fucktards who chant 'down with beauty!'"? Again, tough call, but I'm gonna choose number two once more.

So now, if you're a feisty feminist chick who claims to be devoted to emancipating women and affirming their sexual power, who do you blame for the whole bloody disaster? The people who believe female beauty is evil, or the people who believe female beauty is tops? This time, I'd say, go for number one. But what do the (purportedly) pro-women sheilas do? They choose number two, of course.

Haranguing the organisers (and the spunky contestants) on their return is like what the Christian fundies do in blaming Eve and her apple for all that subsequent sin and shit. It's proof positive that sacred cows like Germs Greer and that piss-weak punster with the shit-eating grin Kathy Lette are not only retarded beyond belief; they're also seriously twisted misogynists.
In this SMH story on multi-culti in Oz, the director of the Centre for Cultural Research at the University of Western Sydney says: "I think multiculturalism makes people happier in some ways despite the fact some say it means people become more insular, culturally speaking. By giving people the opportunity to hold onto their language and cultural practices, it actually prepares them much more for integration as well."

What friggin' psycho-babble. That's like saying that flat-Earthism prepares people for a science degree; that telling adolescents that their bodies are evil prepares them for a fulfilling sex life.

There's no unity in diversity; only diversity in diversity, and eventually balkanisation. (Which is not to say everyone has to be the same; just that we should all share a few central beliefs like, er, stealing things is bad, murder is wrong, and women shouldn't be treated as second class citizens who need to have their faces covered. You know, just basic shit that more and more people just can't seem to get their heads around.)

Sunday, November 24, 2002

Here's a story about a "bad sex in writing" award. I could win the one for bad sex in reality, I reckon.
The squitterati continues to claim that PC doesn't really exist; that it is all a massive lie by some vast right-wing conspiracy. Yet shit like this keeps happening.
I'll see if I can score above a five on this blog hotness-ometer
A porn fillum shot on a leafy American campus with fresh-faced frat boys schtupping up a storm is destined to make big bucks because of the controversy it's created. The masterpiece is titled Campus Invasion. Not that memorable. How's Carnal Knowledge as an alternative?
Here's a good piece on media bias by Andrew Sullivan. He argues that Pomgolian TV is extremely one-sided, unlike in Seppolia. I wonder what he'd think of the ABC here. Gawd, it makes the Beeb look like the very definition of diversity and balance.
Crikey. Imagine what's gonna happen when they finally get porn on cable TV?
If Ben Affleck is the "sexiest man alive", then who's the sexiest man dead?