The internet world is aflame in the past few days with the very welcome news that bunches of money-hoarding bastards continuing to fuck over the poor have failed in their attempt to conceal their poor-fucking behaviour. Hearty congratulations all round, and particularly to Guido Fawkes and Wikileaks for fighting the good fight, prompted by The Guardian's well-aimed article advising us that they couldn't talk to us about anything any more.
But what is utterly pointless, narcissistic and just plain wrong, is the usual horde of internet fanboys who queue up to take the credit for anything online. Apparently the whole thing was the combined effort of the absurdly-named blogosphere. "A little bit of web 2.0 history in the making methinks" says one anonymous commenter, who is obviously a complete cunt. I mean a complete "chump". But no it wasn't, it was fucking Twitter wot won it. "Within hours [of being posted by the noisy but minority audience on Twitter], the gagging order had been dropped". A clear demonstration of cause and effect by the professors over at Times Online.
News and information is online now. It doesn't make you special that you posted the same thing as everyone else on your favourite website.
Next, I assume, the faddish and temporarily-popular private website Facebook will be jockeying for position as the saviour of freedom of speech and faux-democractic values. Or Myspace perhaps. Actually, no, Myspace isn't fashionable any more, isn't? If you fuckers stopped preening your feathers in the endless pursuit of self-promotion, maybe you'd actually be able to achieve something approaching your unfounded and ridiculous claims. Pipe dreams, I know.
Learn how to pick fights: know your enemy
It's a good moment for a break from political ranting for a video series. This week: how to pick your fight.
For starters, don't assume that because someone looks like an easy target, they aren't going to knock your teeth out. Like these drunken idiots who pick on two men in drag. Unfortunately for them, they were two cage fighters on a fancy dress night. Cue thugs hitting the floor:
And don't assume that because you have numbers on your side, you're going to win. And road rage is dumb. Something like 6 guys take a pop at this fellah, and they all end up on the ground:
You may hate shows like Cops, but you gotta love dramatic voice-over guy. Anyhow, this is a nice demonstration of why you need to think before you start mouthing off at people:
But of course, the best thing to do is avoid a fight altogether. Particularly if you're calling out a kickboxing champion. And one with a classy way with words:
For starters, don't assume that because someone looks like an easy target, they aren't going to knock your teeth out. Like these drunken idiots who pick on two men in drag. Unfortunately for them, they were two cage fighters on a fancy dress night. Cue thugs hitting the floor:
And don't assume that because you have numbers on your side, you're going to win. And road rage is dumb. Something like 6 guys take a pop at this fellah, and they all end up on the ground:
You may hate shows like Cops, but you gotta love dramatic voice-over guy. Anyhow, this is a nice demonstration of why you need to think before you start mouthing off at people:
But of course, the best thing to do is avoid a fight altogether. Particularly if you're calling out a kickboxing champion. And one with a classy way with words:
Politicians are a superior race of people
It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry at some of the antics of the current government. The latest is man-hating lunatic Harriet Harman, who allegedly "crashed [her] car while on mobile and drove off without leaving details". Bad enough, of course, but the ever-charming Harman is accused of winding down her window and saying to the victim "I’m Harriet Harman- you know where you can get hold of me". Presumably the political equivalent of "don't you know who I am?". Although personally, I find it closer to "I'm the Bishop of Southwark. It's what I do".
The underlying feeling is clear: Harman is not going to waste her time dealing with some prole who stupidly parked their car in her way. Because she has important business to do. The business of fucking over anyone who doesn't share her misguided moral and social values.
It speaks volumes about the social attitudes of the UK government that a minister could have published these words on family roles:
Why not do away with the women and children too? But of course, Harman is a special breed of woman; one that wears a kevlar vest to tour her own constituency and an architect of the Equality Bill which takes the staggeringly stupid approach of promoting inequality in order to achieve...well, equality.
And let's not forget Harman's role in attempting a blatant cover-up of the MP's expenses scandal. She advocated exempting expenses from Freedom of Information requests, instead proving a summary under 26 headings. She was quite specific about the number of headings. If she'd thrown in a pie chart or two, maybe I could have been persuaded.
Of course, Harman's day to day rule is more prosaic; lying about statistics to support her personal views (with the aim of turning those views into policies) and taking dodgy "donations".
Yeah, Ms Harman is a different breed, alright.
The underlying feeling is clear: Harman is not going to waste her time dealing with some prole who stupidly parked their car in her way. Because she has important business to do. The business of fucking over anyone who doesn't share her misguided moral and social values.
It speaks volumes about the social attitudes of the UK government that a minister could have published these words on family roles:
"...it cannot be assumed that men are bound to be an asset to family life or that the presence of fathers in families is necessarily a means to social cohesion"
Why not do away with the women and children too? But of course, Harman is a special breed of woman; one that wears a kevlar vest to tour her own constituency and an architect of the Equality Bill which takes the staggeringly stupid approach of promoting inequality in order to achieve...well, equality.
And let's not forget Harman's role in attempting a blatant cover-up of the MP's expenses scandal. She advocated exempting expenses from Freedom of Information requests, instead proving a summary under 26 headings. She was quite specific about the number of headings. If she'd thrown in a pie chart or two, maybe I could have been persuaded.
Of course, Harman's day to day rule is more prosaic; lying about statistics to support her personal views (with the aim of turning those views into policies) and taking dodgy "donations".
Yeah, Ms Harman is a different breed, alright.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
