Log My Blog
Bg Image
Home | Advanced Search | Add Blog | Our Friends | Top 10 | New Blogs | Our Blog
Bg Image

Log My Blog BLOG!

The trouble with RWDB’s

April 12, 2010 at 5:19 pm by Chris

The release of that video by WikiLeaks that shows two Routers journalists being killed by an Apache gunship has seriously stirred up the blogosphere. The Right Wing Death Beast’s (RWDB) are on the defence with the lefties on the attack.

The response of some on the right has been extreme and in some cases laughable. Some on the right seem to believe that they have the right to offend as well. This is a snippet of a comment left on An Onymous Lefty. Splatterbottom was responding to Jeremy Sear’s article that dared to criticise the US Army’s rules of engagement.

“…If it isn’t perfection it doesn’t count, except where you are talking about ‘progressive’ issues. Then he will have his lips vacuum sealed to the great green sphincter, gargling the torrent of shit as it distends his bloated belly. Shit he somehow mistakes for brainfood. This post is a classic example. – Splatterbottom ”

Here is my response. I was angry and I didn’t really think before posting.

That’s the problem with you right wing fucks. You think the most disgusting revolting things and then have the nerve to type them and stick them up on the net for the world to see. You are a sick fuck. What would your mother think?

And then you have the nerve to crap on about morals and decency. I’m not sure you know what you believe. You just want to piss people off – constantly giving a contrary opinion even if what the person is saying makes perfect sense.

I am not attacking your freedom of speech you have every right to say what you do and I would fight for your right to do so. But do you have to lower the discussion to this level?

And if you have such a problem with what Jeremy has to say WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU HERE?

Yes, I was a bit self-righteous. And I have to apologise to Voltaire for borrowing that freedom of speech line. I can be revolting too and have been. But when somebody is trying to have civilised discussion surely it is common decency to keep the discussion on a civilised level. I am sure Splatterbottom thought what he wrote was hilarious and it was creative, but sometimes it is best to keep this sort of thing to yourself.

RWDB’s have a long history of saying rude, inappropriate, revolting things at the totally wrong time. I’ve been called all sorts of things most of them expressed in that eloquently repulsive way displayed in the quote above.

I’ve been banned, threatened, made an item of ridicule and had it suggested that all lefties should be lined up against the wall and shot. In every case the only thing I did wrong was express an opinion that was contrary to the post author’s opinion.

And then they go and talk about morals and freedom of speech. Hypocrisy! Do RWDB sign some sort of Hypocritic oath?

In the US the RWDB’s went berserk in 2008 when the US Supreme Court upheld the right of habeas corpus for Guantánamo Bay detainees. Habeas Corpus is a basic human right designed to stop people spending their entire lives in jail without trial. It is a foundation of the rule of law believed in by the signers of the declaration of Independence and the writers of the US Constitution.

So essentially these RWDB were shitting all over the constitution they profess to love wholeheartedly.

And if you disagree with me try arguing with Benjamin Franklin:

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Vampires Do Exist!

April 8, 2010 at 2:49 pm by Chris

Those two people who tried to sneak the body of their dead 91-year-old grandfather out of England reminded me of something.

You know those vampires who advertise funeral plans on morning TV? They try to play on the heartstrings of sensitive retired people, selling them funeral insurance that they don’t really need. “Imagine if you suddenly died,” they say.

Think of this practically. Why do you need to think of your death? There is absolutely no reason to in everyday life. If you were dead you aren’t going to care what happens to your corpse. Death is a pretty common thing, your family is going to get over it and they will pay for the funeral just like every other family. A funeral is the family’s responsibility not the person who has died. How can you be responsible for something when you are dead?

You would assume that most people with a job and a family would have life insurance. If you have life insurance why the hell would you need funeral insurance? This question is answered in these vampiric adverts, “Oh, I knew Bill’s life insurance wasn’t going to pay out for ages and I had all these bills to pay…” It is obvious to me what is going on here. It is the same companies who do life insurance and funeral insurance. They have contrived things in such a way that life insurance does not pay out for ages meaning that you need funeral insurance as well. This is so obviously a scam and somebody needs to put a stop to it.

Hundreds of years ago there was probably a reason for life insurance taking ages to pay out. But in this day and age information travels instantaneously – there is absolutely no reason in the world, except in circumstances of foul play or criminal misconduct, for life insurance to take so long to pay out.

All this proves one thing: vampires do exist!

The graph goes up not down

January 16, 2010 at 3:35 pm by Chris

Andrew Bolt continues to use a certain graph to confirm his hypothesis that there is no such thing as global warming.
UAH_LT_1979_thru_Nov_09
Much to the great frustration and amusement of many people who are far more knowledgeable than me the graph does not show what Andrew Bolt believes it does.

Even blind Freddy can see the overall trend of this graph is positive. I would use this graph as proof of global warming. Using it as proof against global warming is frankly… bizarre to say the least.

“But the graph shows the world has got cooler since 2001…” Anyone that did statistics at high school would know to look at the trend not at the peaks and troughs.

In the sport of diving they remove by the highest and lowest scores for determining the average in an effort to eliminate bias. I’m not saying the peaks and troughs should be ignored, but when viewing the graph people should understand that there is a natural variance from year to year and just like biased judges they will be far higher or lower than average.

Recently Andrew Bolt has been caught fudging the figures and blatantly misrepresenting the data. He needs to be held to account just like any journalist would be for peddling lies, but instead he continually gets held up as a representation of the conservative viewpoint.

I would find this funny if it wasn’t such a serious issue. Anyway, I will make sure I keep my calculator handy in case I run into Andrew Bolt.

Ouch!

January 14, 2010 at 2:31 pm by Chris

Yesterday, I went to the family doctor for a checkup and some scripts. On the way out I asked the doctor if the swine flu vaccine will be combined with the seasonal flu vaccine, when it comes out later this year. He said he didn’t think so, but he was reminded that my brother and I haven’t had the swine flu vaccine and we had to go back into his office and get the jab.

So an innocent question backfires in such a way that I have to have an injection – typical.

That night I was telling a friend of mine about the unfortunate incident and I got into a discussion about whether vaccinations do more harm than good.

Obviously I believe in vaccinations, but there is a lot of so-called evidence suggesting that vaccination, in particular the combined measles mumps rubella (MMR) vaccine, could result in disabilities such as autism and even attention deficit disorder.

All this started in 1998 from a now discredited study of 12 children originally published in the British medical journal The Lancet that found that the MMR vaccine could be responsible for giving autism to children. It was later discovered that the author of the study was receiving funding from lawyers involved in a lawsuit against the manufacturers of the MMR vaccine.

Many British parents panicked and started failing to immunise their children causing a measles epidemic years later.

So far science has been unable to prove a link. My personal opinion is that there is no link. Even if there is something to the link it must be very tenuous for a not to be picked up. An un vaccinated child is still many times more likely to suffer death or disease than the one in 1 million chance of being disabled by the vaccine.

Many vaccination opponents will point to their children and say they have never been sick even though they haven’t been vaccinated. The only reason why these children do not get sick is because they are protected by all the children around them who are vaccinated – this is called herd immunity. The only reason vaccination opponents have a viable choice not to vaccinate their children is because the majority of the population is vaccinated.

Vaccination definitely makes the world a better place. Before vaccination parents could expect to lose more than 50% of their children to disease. People also forget the polio epidemic that would render people totally paralysed, almost like a type of muscular dystrophy you could catch. Luckily this disease is almost eliminated due to mass vaccination programmes. If enough people fail to immunise their children some of these epidemics could return.

Don’t let a bunch of discredited science stop you from doing what is best for your child.

Wikipedia, Insurance and Vampires

December 14, 2009 at 8:13 pm by Chris

There are a few things that pissed me off over the weekend.

I was thinking about donating some money to Wikipedia. They have that line graph that shows how many more millions of dollars they need on a banner ad at the top of the page. But then they started using guilt to induce people to give money, by changing that banner ad from the graph to a pleading, “I couldn’t ignore that banner at the top of the site any more… I use Wikipedia far too often to ignore the need!”

As if we need another fucking thing to feel guilty about. Starving kids in Africa, Australia’s treatment of asylum seekers, global warming, not having life insurance, not having funeral insurance, not having income insurance, not having health insurance the list goes on and on. And now Wikipedia decides to jump on the guilt train.

I believe I know why vampires are very popular at the moment. Vampirism is a surprisingly large part of our culture. What do you think those insurance ads are about? They make you feel guilty about something you don’t even need to think about. You fall under their spell they sink their teeth into your neck and suck all your money out.

What I want to know is how do the actors who do the, “imagine if you suddenly died,” ads sleep at night? I bet they go for the Nazi death camp guard excuse – “I’m only doing my job.” What really disturbs me is people that have lost someone close recently, every time they watch commercial television they are reminded of the death at every single ad break. It’s soul destroying. Its emotional and economic vampirism.

Why would you bother watching commercial TV if it hurts? And then the networks complain about people watching content they’ve downloaded legally.

Has anyone got examples of vampirism that doesn’t involve sucking blood? If so I’d love to hear about it in the comments.

What Next From The Denialists?

December 2, 2009 at 3:53 pm by Chris

Global warming deniers do seem to get a lot of airtime a lot more than they probably deserve.

Over time I believe more and more people are becoming convinced that global warming is a fact. The Black Saturday fires no doubt convinced many Australians of the fact of global warming. We see glaziers around the world shrinking and Greenland actually turning green.

As people shift from the sceptical camp only the more extreme deniers are left over -there are some people who will never be convinced. Some people see conspiracies around every corner. They don’t trust the governments, scientists, corporations or any kind of organization. Generally they are called the black helicopter people. Many of these people are fearful of the creation of a new world order or world government. This is an umbrella conspiracy theory built on the foundation of thousands of other conspiracy theories.

The other great conspiracy theory is of course that global warming is a myth. Lord Christopher Monckton former adviser to Margaret Thatcher has developed a unique method of fusion, unfortunately it is not the kind that could save the world.

Lord Monckton has fused the two greatest conspiracy theories ever into one unified theory. Did you know that the Copenhagen climate change treaty will create a global Communist government? The treaty will supersede the constitution of every country that signs it. Don’t ask me how this is possible. The Lisbon Treaty that created the current European Union constitution took years and years for every country to sign it. Every individual country needed to have a referendum.

Constitutions generally have defence mechanisms against sweeping changes such as signing over sovereignty. A referendum needs to be held for changes to a constitution and referendums are notoriously difficult to achieve agreement on.

Where do these denialists come from and why do they have so much power? On many news shows there is a desire to present balanced information (or appear to). On topics where there is a scientific consensus such as global warming it would be difficult to find people that are able to argue for the negative in a scientific way. Instead news shows grope for pundits such as Andrew Bolt and Lord Monckton who have no scientific training. The problem is both sets of arguments are presented as being equal, for those watching it is difficult to know what to believe.

In this environment extreme views seem proliferate with those who can shout the loudest or is more extreme than anyone else gets the attention.

Anyway, here is the video that inspired this post:

A Blog War is Fought

November 19, 2009 at 3:42 pm by Nick Fryer

A rather brutal battle has recently erupted in the long-running blog war between the crikey Bloggs and Andrew Bolt.

I Love a good blog war particularly when they get nasty. Andrew Bolt like most loony right-wingers has a particularly thin-skin when it comes to anyone questioning his crazy theories.

The current battle started with Andrew Bolt’s November 17 post “ABC hires the man who bashed Howard with a stick” in which he whingers bitterly about the appointment of crikey editor Jonathan Green to ABCs online opinion section. His whining has got to be seen to be believed. He goes on to complain about crikey writers and commenters who have victimised him. One of his most amusing complaints was how one of the writers of crikey urged that bolt be “sodomised with a calculator”.

Crikey politics writer Possum Comitatus fired the second salvo and scored a direct hit with an hysterically funny article “Peak Wingnut” which will simply serve to stir Bolt up further. It was a champagne moment and will go down in blogging folklore. You must read this article.

A third salvo was fired by fellow crikey writer Tobias Ziegler who “cleared up a few things” highlighting the hypocrisy of Andrew Bolt’s arguments another direct hit was scored. Whilst not as funny as Possums perfectly executed victimisation is equally satisfying and definitely worth a read.

I will be following this war closely and am eagerly waiting for the next engagement.

Rupert picks a fight with the Internet!

October 15, 2009 at 2:20 pm by Chris

Many bloggers have no doubt heard about Rupert Murdoch’s swipe at Google, Wikipedia and blog sites over theft of news articles. He believes that free online websites should not quote news articles without paying for them. To some people this may sound fair, but I think if Mr. Murdoch goes through with this plan to try and make blogs and news aggregators pay for quoted content it will seriously damage his business.

Rupert Murdoch is forgetting that almost every single time one of his precious news articles is quoted there is a link showing where the article came from. 99% of bloggers quote a small part and then link back to the article that inspired their story. There are not many bloggers who will quote an entire article and if they do that is stealing. Fair use provisions in copyright law in most countries mean that it is legal to quote a small part of a copyrighted article as long as you say where you got it from.

By taking a swipe at Google he is also on the wrong track. Seldom does Google News contain an entire article. Google News collects the most popular articles and then provides numerous links to a wide variety of similar articles. I never visit the website of the Sydney Morning Herald or the Washington Post I get sent there by Google News. These sites probably wouldn’t get half the visitors they do without the Google search engine and news site.

Wikipedia does cop a lot of flak from academics and those in the media. Wikipedia does seem to be updated very quickly, but it is not a news site. Users of Wikipedia are not allowed to copy articles word for word and if they do the piece is quickly taken down. An absolute defence against plagiarism has always been to write what you have taken in from a particular article in your own words. Wikipedia articles also link to the source material.

I believe Rupert may be upset about the slow death of traditional media. It is sad when a newspaper dies, but I believe there is no reason why newspapers cannot transform themselves for a new age. It is possible to make money online and if the Murdochs embrace their entrepreneurial spirit their empire will not crumble. If Rupert picks a fight with the Internet, that is kind of like fighting the ocean or the weather – it is not a fight a man can win.


Home | Advanced Search | Add Blog | Our Friends | Top 10 | New Blogs | Our Blog

Powered by WordPress© 2009 Log My Blog