This has been a productive week here at Fuck Everything. I've come out for Hitler, for NAMBLA, for sex with underage girls, for fantasizing sexually about children, and in one instance, for Arnold Schwarzenegger. It'll be nice to add all that to my already impressive resume.
What will happen next? You'll just have to stay tuned to Fuck Everything for more of the same liberal shit in order to find out.
Friday, October 03, 2003
Those fuckers over at Megatokyo totally ripped me off. Yesterday, I was talking about the Mainichi and other Japanese news sources, and lo and behold, in Piro's rant today, he's talking about Japanese news sources, including the Mainichi. That's right, the ultra-popular webcomic stole an idea from a 'blog that virtually no one reads and even fewer people care about.
Yeah, I only wish that popular sites I enjoy reading were ripping me off.
Yeah, I only wish that popular sites I enjoy reading were ripping me off.
Yeah, we'll see. This wouldn't be the first time things have looked up only to go downhill once again.
Also, can someone explain the following quote:
"Good news is when we get gains of 100,000 or 200,000 -- [September's] number could very easily be revised to negative 57,000."
WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT MEAN!?!?!. How in the hell does a positive increase of 57,000 become a decrease of 57,000? I do not understand their math, mainly because it isn't math - it's just bullshit. Either 57,000 jobs were added or they weren't - how the fuck can that fact be "revised" so heavily? I take it that the 57K is not an absolute number, and is somehow relative. Otherwise, 57,000 could not become -57,000 based on what happens in other months. Or do they commonly go back and check their work, realizing they forgot to propagate a negative sign? I submit that these numbers, and any other numbers we get from analysts and economists, are total fucking nonsense. They don't even deserve partial credit for this crap.
Also, can someone explain the following quote:
"Good news is when we get gains of 100,000 or 200,000 -- [September's] number could very easily be revised to negative 57,000."
WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT MEAN!?!?!. How in the hell does a positive increase of 57,000 become a decrease of 57,000? I do not understand their math, mainly because it isn't math - it's just bullshit. Either 57,000 jobs were added or they weren't - how the fuck can that fact be "revised" so heavily? I take it that the 57K is not an absolute number, and is somehow relative. Otherwise, 57,000 could not become -57,000 based on what happens in other months. Or do they commonly go back and check their work, realizing they forgot to propagate a negative sign? I submit that these numbers, and any other numbers we get from analysts and economists, are total fucking nonsense. They don't even deserve partial credit for this crap.
Just before leaving the house today, I got an interesting e-mail. In it, someone said they liked my 'blog, and asked me to link to their site. Now, typically, when someone sends me an e-mail like this, they're looking to swap links. This person, however, seems to have no such interest, and was merely pandering for a link in the das 'blogs section so that, in their words, they can get more readers. What do I get in exchange? HTML code to remove the blog*spot banner ad without paying.
Now, on one hand, this is flattering. Someone actually thinks that my site is popular enough that they can get some decent hits off of it. Second, I respect someone who is willing to be honest about their intentions and who goes for what they want. On the other hand, this is a pretty shitty way to go about things. Asking if you can use me for hits while only offering in return a solution to something I never considered a problem (the banner ad)? It's a nice gesture, but there's not even an offer to link back to my shitty site. How big of a whore do you think I am?
Now, maybe this guy didn't realize he was being kind of an asshole about it, in which case I'm definitely being an asshole for posting about it. But since being an asshole is what Fuck Everything is all about, we trudge forward.
Now, on one hand, this is flattering. Someone actually thinks that my site is popular enough that they can get some decent hits off of it. Second, I respect someone who is willing to be honest about their intentions and who goes for what they want. On the other hand, this is a pretty shitty way to go about things. Asking if you can use me for hits while only offering in return a solution to something I never considered a problem (the banner ad)? It's a nice gesture, but there's not even an offer to link back to my shitty site. How big of a whore do you think I am?
Now, maybe this guy didn't realize he was being kind of an asshole about it, in which case I'm definitely being an asshole for posting about it. But since being an asshole is what Fuck Everything is all about, we trudge forward.
It's okay... Even if this is true, Arnold can just make it go away by saying he'll be "a champion for Jews."
Honestly, though, this is one time I will side with Arnold, and say that this probably is just a smear campaign against him. I sincerely doubt that he actually does approve of what Hitler did. I could be wrong, of course.
I don't care for this type of exploitation, despite the fact that I support those against Arnold. The reason why I find this offensive is because it's so incredibly cheap to say "He said good things about Hitler... He must be evil!" No, Arnold is not evil, just stupid.
Oddly enough, if Arnold actually said that "I admire him for being such a good public speaker and for his way of getting to the people and so on. But I didn't admire him for what he did with it," I have a little bit more respect for him. Why? Because that is a completely valid, grown-up statement. You know what? Hitler did do some impressive things in terms of rallying a nation and making himself a serious front-runner for world domination. The guy was organized and got shit done. In saying that, does it mean one approves of what Hitler did? Fuck no. To paraphrase Bill Maher, it is possible to hold two seemingly conflicting thoughts in your head and still be able to rationally reconcile them.
I most typically hear Hitler referred to as an "evil genius," which is the right statement to make. It acknowledges that someone can be intelligent, yet a huge fucked up asshole all at the same time. Understanding things like that is crucial - just like today, when we need to acknowledge that the terrorists who are trying to kill us are a bunch of smart fuckers, but they are still fuckers. We're in much better shape to combat the enemy if we're willing to first understand the enemy.
People have a hard time dealing with unpleasant truths such as this, because they're afraid that acknowledging those truths will make them sound like a 'Nazi lover' or 'terrorist sympathizer.' They also want everything to be absolute, because when things are just black and white it prevents a whole lot of having to think about tough issues, something Americans don't seem to care for.
"I am prepared to say that anyone who says they admire Hitler shocks the public conscience, because there's nothing about Hitler that warrants admiration, nothing at all." Well, that's offensive to me, because it's just a lame-ass, easy-way-out way of handling things. It's nothing but bullshit inflammatory rhetoric. Attack Arnold for what he is - a shitty choice for governor, and not for some out-of-context statement.
Honestly, though, this is one time I will side with Arnold, and say that this probably is just a smear campaign against him. I sincerely doubt that he actually does approve of what Hitler did. I could be wrong, of course.
I don't care for this type of exploitation, despite the fact that I support those against Arnold. The reason why I find this offensive is because it's so incredibly cheap to say "He said good things about Hitler... He must be evil!" No, Arnold is not evil, just stupid.
Oddly enough, if Arnold actually said that "I admire him for being such a good public speaker and for his way of getting to the people and so on. But I didn't admire him for what he did with it," I have a little bit more respect for him. Why? Because that is a completely valid, grown-up statement. You know what? Hitler did do some impressive things in terms of rallying a nation and making himself a serious front-runner for world domination. The guy was organized and got shit done. In saying that, does it mean one approves of what Hitler did? Fuck no. To paraphrase Bill Maher, it is possible to hold two seemingly conflicting thoughts in your head and still be able to rationally reconcile them.
I most typically hear Hitler referred to as an "evil genius," which is the right statement to make. It acknowledges that someone can be intelligent, yet a huge fucked up asshole all at the same time. Understanding things like that is crucial - just like today, when we need to acknowledge that the terrorists who are trying to kill us are a bunch of smart fuckers, but they are still fuckers. We're in much better shape to combat the enemy if we're willing to first understand the enemy.
People have a hard time dealing with unpleasant truths such as this, because they're afraid that acknowledging those truths will make them sound like a 'Nazi lover' or 'terrorist sympathizer.' They also want everything to be absolute, because when things are just black and white it prevents a whole lot of having to think about tough issues, something Americans don't seem to care for.
"I am prepared to say that anyone who says they admire Hitler shocks the public conscience, because there's nothing about Hitler that warrants admiration, nothing at all." Well, that's offensive to me, because it's just a lame-ass, easy-way-out way of handling things. It's nothing but bullshit inflammatory rhetoric. Attack Arnold for what he is - a shitty choice for governor, and not for some out-of-context statement.
Thursday, October 02, 2003
After figuring out who Frog Girl is last week, I decided to go and find out what manga Thigh-High Girl is from as well. She's from a series called Girls Bravo, and her name is either Meiki or Miharu or both. I was able to find chapter 1 of the first book from this place, but so far that's all I could dig up.
The story looks to fall into the genre I call TBMF - Total Bullshit Male Fantasy. It centers on Yukishi, a boy who is very short and is terrified of girls (I didn't identify with him at all, by the way). His fear of girls is so severe that he has this bad case of the measles that acts up whenever he's around girls.
When getting home one day, he accidentally walks in on his childhood friend/neighbor, Jinny, who is using his family's shower because hers is broken. Somehow he falls into the bath, which somehow ends up transporting him to a different world. A world that, surprise surprise, is populated mostly by women. In fact, this world has the magic ratio of 9:1 for females:males. Naturally, he is instantly an object of desire since penises are in short supply there. After meeting Meiki and finding out he's in another world, a good deal of the first chapter involves him running from all the man-craving women who want to jump his short, measled bones.
The chapter ends with Meiki and Yukishi getting transported back to his world, landing both of them in the bathtub with Jinny.
Naturally, Yukishi is not nervous at all around Meiki, and he doesn't even have his measles outbreaks, so there's the obvious setup for some sort of romance there. In typical TBMF fashion, there's also Jinny, setting up a nice love triangle. And of course, there's that whole world of nothing but eager poon awaiting him on the other side of his bathtub.
Looks like it could be one of those simple-minded yet too cute romantic comedies that I'm a sucker for. If only I can get ahold of more.
The story looks to fall into the genre I call TBMF - Total Bullshit Male Fantasy. It centers on Yukishi, a boy who is very short and is terrified of girls (I didn't identify with him at all, by the way). His fear of girls is so severe that he has this bad case of the measles that acts up whenever he's around girls.
When getting home one day, he accidentally walks in on his childhood friend/neighbor, Jinny, who is using his family's shower because hers is broken. Somehow he falls into the bath, which somehow ends up transporting him to a different world. A world that, surprise surprise, is populated mostly by women. In fact, this world has the magic ratio of 9:1 for females:males. Naturally, he is instantly an object of desire since penises are in short supply there. After meeting Meiki and finding out he's in another world, a good deal of the first chapter involves him running from all the man-craving women who want to jump his short, measled bones.
The chapter ends with Meiki and Yukishi getting transported back to his world, landing both of them in the bathtub with Jinny.
Naturally, Yukishi is not nervous at all around Meiki, and he doesn't even have his measles outbreaks, so there's the obvious setup for some sort of romance there. In typical TBMF fashion, there's also Jinny, setting up a nice love triangle. And of course, there's that whole world of nothing but eager poon awaiting him on the other side of his bathtub.
Looks like it could be one of those simple-minded yet too cute romantic comedies that I'm a sucker for. If only I can get ahold of more.
Yeah, I'm praying for the Pope. To fucking die already. No, not for the reasons you think. Well, not entirely.
Yes, the Pope is an old, ignorant man, but even I have some sympathy for the guy. I mean, he's fucking old and has bloody Parkinson's, and they force him to be Pope up until his last breath. Talk about barbaric. They should not force anyone as fucked up (in terms of health; they're all gonna be fucked up mentally) to continue doing all that shit until the very end.
At least once he dies, he can finally get some rest and they can install a new ignorant guy to lead the wonderful institution that is the Catholic Church.
Yes, the Pope is an old, ignorant man, but even I have some sympathy for the guy. I mean, he's fucking old and has bloody Parkinson's, and they force him to be Pope up until his last breath. Talk about barbaric. They should not force anyone as fucked up (in terms of health; they're all gonna be fucked up mentally) to continue doing all that shit until the very end.
At least once he dies, he can finally get some rest and they can install a new ignorant guy to lead the wonderful institution that is the Catholic Church.
Apparently, I am the #1 source (according to Google) for "most offensive joke." Unfortunately, the link to offensive jokes from my April 22nd post on the subject is broken. So, I'll go ahead and add in a few of the most offensive jokes I've ever heard for anyone who comes looking in the future. I didn't make any of these up myself because I am neither this clever nor this sick (well, okay, maybe the sick part).
What's long and hard and fucks old people? Osteoporosis.
What's 18 inches long and makes women scream all night? Crib death.
My girlfriend accused me of being a pedophile the other day, and all I could do was look at her and say "That's an awful big word for an 11-year-old."
What's long and hard and fucks old people? Osteoporosis.
What's 18 inches long and makes women scream all night? Crib death.
My girlfriend accused me of being a pedophile the other day, and all I could do was look at her and say "That's an awful big word for an 11-year-old."
Masturbation euphemism of the week: processing your spent fuel rod.
Courtesy of this week's geek horoscopes over at BBSpot.
Courtesy of this week's geek horoscopes over at BBSpot.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. How much do you wanna bet that this will turn into a big "I told 'ya so!" for the administration, ignoring the fact that we were told of huge stockpiles of actual weapons exitsed, and that we needed to act because of them. Of course, over time "weapons of mass destruction" has morphed into "weapons of mass destruction programs."
I have a feeling that if weapons are found, it will happen around election time next year. Right around the time Osama and Saddam are arrested. Unless, of course, if they have to play those trump cards early to put out the fire of some other scandal.
Yes, I know I'm being a dumb-ass conspiracy theorist, but don't tell me you couldn't see things going down that way. Like remember when there was that whole shitstorm over the "16 words," and then they killed Uday and Qusay, and the "16 words" issue seemed to mostly go away, just like I predicted on July 22nd? Alright, it hasn't gone away entirely, but people really did seem to not care much about it after that.
I have a feeling that if weapons are found, it will happen around election time next year. Right around the time Osama and Saddam are arrested. Unless, of course, if they have to play those trump cards early to put out the fire of some other scandal.
Yes, I know I'm being a dumb-ass conspiracy theorist, but don't tell me you couldn't see things going down that way. Like remember when there was that whole shitstorm over the "16 words," and then they killed Uday and Qusay, and the "16 words" issue seemed to mostly go away, just like I predicted on July 22nd? Alright, it hasn't gone away entirely, but people really did seem to not care much about it after that.
You know, I don't care if Arnold was involved in orgies, or if he was/is a regular, every-day womanizer. However, if he's one of those sexual harassment/sexual assault type womanizers, I have definite issues with him. That's in addition to the issues I already have with him because as of yet, I've seen nothing that makes him a viable candidate for governor.
The problem is that for some reason, Arnold can be an asshole prick with no sort of coherent policy for anything, and he's still going to be governor (at this rate, at least). All he has to say is that "I'm going to be a champion for women" without backing it up in any sort of way, and it's magically fine for Californians. Same goes for any other issue. I'm still convinced that those dumb fuckers over there are just going to vote for him because he's famous.
I know that not all Californians are dumb fuckers (of course, if their drivers who show up in my state are any indication...), but there just might be enough of them to make Arnold governor, and that's fucking sad. If he gets elected, I'm going to really hope that California falls into the ocean, because they're going to fucking deserve it.
While we're on the subject of the recall, why is Arianna Huffington so hated? I've gotten lots of Google hits thanks to my mentioning and endorsement of Arianna, and lots of them come in the form of searches for "fuck arianna huffington." My guess is that they aren't looking for something sex-related, either. Then, I'm watching Leno last night, and he's talking about how Arianna dropped out, and there's a whole bunch of cheering. All I can figure is that people hate her because she's A) a woman who B) speaks with an accent but C) isn't a movie star and D) isn't a big fan of "politics as usual" who isn't afraid to say unpopular things. Again, I just think Californians are fucking morons.
The problem is that for some reason, Arnold can be an asshole prick with no sort of coherent policy for anything, and he's still going to be governor (at this rate, at least). All he has to say is that "I'm going to be a champion for women" without backing it up in any sort of way, and it's magically fine for Californians. Same goes for any other issue. I'm still convinced that those dumb fuckers over there are just going to vote for him because he's famous.
I know that not all Californians are dumb fuckers (of course, if their drivers who show up in my state are any indication...), but there just might be enough of them to make Arnold governor, and that's fucking sad. If he gets elected, I'm going to really hope that California falls into the ocean, because they're going to fucking deserve it.
While we're on the subject of the recall, why is Arianna Huffington so hated? I've gotten lots of Google hits thanks to my mentioning and endorsement of Arianna, and lots of them come in the form of searches for "fuck arianna huffington." My guess is that they aren't looking for something sex-related, either. Then, I'm watching Leno last night, and he's talking about how Arianna dropped out, and there's a whole bunch of cheering. All I can figure is that people hate her because she's A) a woman who B) speaks with an accent but C) isn't a movie star and D) isn't a big fan of "politics as usual" who isn't afraid to say unpopular things. Again, I just think Californians are fucking morons.
Yet another linker to say thanks to: Max over at The Big Electron (is that a Carlin reference?). He, along with the guy who has no life and the pissed off Canuck used my incoherent lolicon and NAMBLA rants as part of interesting discussions of their own, which is great. Here's to more of it in the future.
Just to clarify, the Mainichi Daily News (or Mainichi Shimbun as its known in Japanese) is a regular, daily newspaper over there, and not a tabloid. I think it's a well-respected paper, or at least it's well established since it's been around since the beginning of the Meiji era (circa 1870s). Its WaiWai pages are translations from other publications, and those other publications are weekly tabloid papers published in Japan.
The Mainichi has made me curious as to just how much influence American journalism has had on journalists around the world. When I read the Mainichi's front page, I usually see lots of stories about things like rape, abduction, murder, and other various crimes. It's pretty much the kind of sensationalistic journalism I expect to see here. When I look at the English version of other Japanese news sources, like The Asahi Shimbun or The Japan Times, I don't see as many of these kinds of stories. I wonder if the Mainichi has just picked up on this so-called shock-journalism, or if they just tailor their English page to that kind of reporting since they know so many Westerners will be reading it?
Just to clarify, the Mainichi Daily News (or Mainichi Shimbun as its known in Japanese) is a regular, daily newspaper over there, and not a tabloid. I think it's a well-respected paper, or at least it's well established since it's been around since the beginning of the Meiji era (circa 1870s). Its WaiWai pages are translations from other publications, and those other publications are weekly tabloid papers published in Japan.
The Mainichi has made me curious as to just how much influence American journalism has had on journalists around the world. When I read the Mainichi's front page, I usually see lots of stories about things like rape, abduction, murder, and other various crimes. It's pretty much the kind of sensationalistic journalism I expect to see here. When I look at the English version of other Japanese news sources, like The Asahi Shimbun or The Japan Times, I don't see as many of these kinds of stories. I wonder if the Mainichi has just picked up on this so-called shock-journalism, or if they just tailor their English page to that kind of reporting since they know so many Westerners will be reading it?
This here is just one reason as to why I could never be in the military. I simply could not do shit like this without at least questioning it.
The other reason why I couldn't be in the military, at least on the combat side of things, is because I'm a coward. I don't give a fuck what you have to say about that, I do not want to be coming home to my mother in a box, especially not for some bullshit war that we shouldn't be fighting. I'm just waiting for us to stir up some real shit, and for them to fire up a draft.
This is yet another thing that most likely makes me look "unpatriotic," which yet again, I don't give a shit about. I was thinking about this whole patriotism thing today, and how I'm not a "clasical" patriot. I think I've developed a new form of patriotsm, which I've come to call Quantum Patriotism. It's definitely less deterministic and more abstruse than the classical side, and it takes some more math to understand. However, it allows me to both hate and love this country at the same time without dissonance, so I'm happy with the system.
The other reason why I couldn't be in the military, at least on the combat side of things, is because I'm a coward. I don't give a fuck what you have to say about that, I do not want to be coming home to my mother in a box, especially not for some bullshit war that we shouldn't be fighting. I'm just waiting for us to stir up some real shit, and for them to fire up a draft.
This is yet another thing that most likely makes me look "unpatriotic," which yet again, I don't give a shit about. I was thinking about this whole patriotism thing today, and how I'm not a "clasical" patriot. I think I've developed a new form of patriotsm, which I've come to call Quantum Patriotism. It's definitely less deterministic and more abstruse than the classical side, and it takes some more math to understand. However, it allows me to both hate and love this country at the same time without dissonance, so I'm happy with the system.
Woo hoo! I knew all these years of not having a girlfriend would pay off.
"I once thought I had mono for an entire year, but as it turns out, I was just really bored."
"I once thought I had mono for an entire year, but as it turns out, I was just really bored."
Okay, so I'm going to try and calm things down today after yesterday's 'blog post hemorrhage. We'll start out with some big ups to 'bloggers who have recently been caught linking to Fuck Everything.
First up is Purv, and his self-titled release Purv.
Next, we have post-fluoxetine honda encephalitis, run by a guy who, and I may be wrong about this, has a thing for motorcycles.
Sit back as we rant with Bethany, a self-described bitch who has an opinion despite being a woman, which totally turns me on.
Finally, thanks to MISS UNDERPANTS' LAND O' HAPPY for the new front-page link. For anyone who's been reading Fuck Everything long enough (which is maybe one or two people, myself not included), Miss Underpants was the first 'blog that I knew of that ever linked to me, all thanks to my penchant for using the word 'fuck.'
First up is Purv, and his self-titled release Purv.
Next, we have post-fluoxetine honda encephalitis, run by a guy who, and I may be wrong about this, has a thing for motorcycles.
Sit back as we rant with Bethany, a self-described bitch who has an opinion despite being a woman, which totally turns me on.
Finally, thanks to MISS UNDERPANTS' LAND O' HAPPY for the new front-page link. For anyone who's been reading Fuck Everything long enough (which is maybe one or two people, myself not included), Miss Underpants was the first 'blog that I knew of that ever linked to me, all thanks to my penchant for using the word 'fuck.'
Wednesday, October 01, 2003
The week wouldn't be shit without some random crap from Japanese tabloids.
Here's an artist's life that I could get into.
So you mean to tell me that with all the time that I've wasted pretending to be a girl in IRC rooms, I could have been making money doing basically the same thing? Oh, and I will never get over that term "soup man."
Finally, something new to think about on our next sushi outing or when we order takeout.
Here's an artist's life that I could get into.
So you mean to tell me that with all the time that I've wasted pretending to be a girl in IRC rooms, I could have been making money doing basically the same thing? Oh, and I will never get over that term "soup man."
Finally, something new to think about on our next sushi outing or when we order takeout.
Way to go, Rush. Only Rush Limbaugh would "apologize" by saying "I must have been right about something." Gotta give Rush credit for sticking to his guns, and also gotta give him credit for being a stupid fucking asshole. Regardless of what Rush meant, it was a stupid thing to say.
It's pretty sad when a defensive end is calling you an idiot.
It's pretty sad when a defensive end is calling you an idiot.
No fucking shit. I don't even want to know what this "panel" costed the taxpayers. I guarantee you, they could have gotten off cheaper by funding a couple of online shopping trips for me, and I could have given them a lot of the same conclusions.
Okay, so I am not real thrilled with the NAMBLA and lolicon posts from earlier. I considered deleting them entirely, but since I've never done that even with some of my shittier posts, I decided to leave them. I'm not unhappy with the content, believe it or not, but I'm unimpressed with the piss-poor presentation.
What I wanted to say is essentially in there, I just did an awful job of tying it all together. First off, I think those posts probably sound horribly contradictory. Sex between men and "young boys" BAD, sex between men and "younger girls" SOMETIMES OK. The problem could have probably been rectified by clarifying what ages I'm talking about. With the "younger girls," I'm looking at like mid-teens on, and with "young boys," I'm talking about ages that people would definitely consider "children." Again, I'm not really doing a good job of defining things. It's kinda one of those "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it" kind of things.
In addition to being contradictory, I can see how the contradiction would look like a huge double standard. Furthermore, I could see where the NAMBLA rant in context of the lolicon rant might possibly be interpreted as homophobic. That definitely was not the intent. When I'm talking about men and those teenage girls, the same goes for men and teenage boys. Since the whole lolicon issue revolves around male/female relations, that's why the focus ended up there.
Also, I wanted to hit the fact that I get tired of groups like NAMBLA and pedophilia in general continually being linked with homosexuality, because that's a total bullshit link. I just couldn't find the right place to fit that in.
It probably didn't help that I did the posts back-to-back. If I were a good writer, which I am not, I probably could have effectively done them back to back and chalked it up to "technique." Technique was not in the muthafuckin' hiz-ouse today, however.
Hopefully that will clear things up, unless if by some miracle I was clear already. But probably not, in both cases.
What I wanted to say is essentially in there, I just did an awful job of tying it all together. First off, I think those posts probably sound horribly contradictory. Sex between men and "young boys" BAD, sex between men and "younger girls" SOMETIMES OK. The problem could have probably been rectified by clarifying what ages I'm talking about. With the "younger girls," I'm looking at like mid-teens on, and with "young boys," I'm talking about ages that people would definitely consider "children." Again, I'm not really doing a good job of defining things. It's kinda one of those "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it" kind of things.
In addition to being contradictory, I can see how the contradiction would look like a huge double standard. Furthermore, I could see where the NAMBLA rant in context of the lolicon rant might possibly be interpreted as homophobic. That definitely was not the intent. When I'm talking about men and those teenage girls, the same goes for men and teenage boys. Since the whole lolicon issue revolves around male/female relations, that's why the focus ended up there.
Also, I wanted to hit the fact that I get tired of groups like NAMBLA and pedophilia in general continually being linked with homosexuality, because that's a total bullshit link. I just couldn't find the right place to fit that in.
It probably didn't help that I did the posts back-to-back. If I were a good writer, which I am not, I probably could have effectively done them back to back and chalked it up to "technique." Technique was not in the muthafuckin' hiz-ouse today, however.
Hopefully that will clear things up, unless if by some miracle I was clear already. But probably not, in both cases.
This is laughable on so many fronts that it's almost not funny.
I was also thinking that the next time Chirac has a visit with Bush, Chirac should totally wear one of those "I fucked your wife" t-shirts. Yeah, that would so help reduce the tension between our countries.
I was also thinking that the next time Chirac has a visit with Bush, Chirac should totally wear one of those "I fucked your wife" t-shirts. Yeah, that would so help reduce the tension between our countries.
Well, I'm going to continue the sexual deviant theme, and talk about something that comes up quite a bit with my anime hobby: the Lolita Complex.
Just what the hell is a "Lolita Complex," or as the Japanese call it, lolicon? Well, it's hard to get a real definition. Some people think it's flat out pedophilia. I more generally liken it to older men who are sexually attracted to young girls, where "older" and "younger" are rather nebulous. This can be the very adult Humbert and his 12-year-old Lolita, this can be a 20-year old and a 10-year old, this can be a 30-year-old and a teenager.
This comes up in anime so much since the Japanese are rather famous for lolicon (hence, their own term for it). There are frequently many "youthfully portrayed" (as one friend puts it) girls in anime, but even though it still creeps people out, it's much more accepted over there. Oftentimes you'll have female characters who are supposedly more adult (late teens, early twenties), even though they look like they're much, much younger. Like Ichigo from Onegai Teacher and Onegai Twins. She's supposed to be 21, but she was in a "standstill" for 6 years which leaves us being told she "looks" like she's 15, when in fact she actually looks like she's 12. Sometimes they don't make this much of an effort, like with Chiyo-chan in Azumanga Daioh, who's 10 but in high school.
We had a quick debate one night as to who was more lolicon, Ichigo or Chiyo-chan. I say Chiyo-chan, even though she is presented in a completely innocent, non-sexual way. Clearly, a 10-year-old in high school is just inappropriate. Also, I think the subtle manner in which the character is portrayed makes the situation that much dirtier: it allows guys to indulge in their lolicon fantasies without feeling bad about it. Or, at least, it allows them to more effectively hide it from others. "I'm not fantasizing about her like that! I mean, look at how non-sexual the character's presentation is!" Sorta getting off track here, but you can see what life is like with my friends and me.
For a lot of people, I think there is just an automatic negative response to the thought of older guys with younger girls. However, I think this kind of fantasy should be more accepted. I know it's not gonna happen, but christ people, lighten up. It's just a well-known fact that many men are turned on by younger girls. I know people don't want to hear it, but that's just how it is. Sometimes the fantasy is disturbing, but it is still fantasy. The cycle is even more cruel as younger girls and women often go for older men (raise your hand, ladies, if you'd fuck Sean Connery).
Honestly, where the hell is the harm in fantasy? There's nothing wrong with fantasizing about or lusting after younger girls, just don't fuck girls who are too young. Besides, isn't it better to be having them fantasizing about someone younger or lusting after those anime characters instead of actually acting on those fantasies?
Fantasy often does become reality, and when it does, what is "too young"? Well, the laws have definitions for this, but I don't know if I always agree with those laws. Yeah, I know, I'm working myself into some real trouble here. Just bear with me, then criticize once you see how screwed up I am.
Everyone matures at a different rate, and if a teenage girl of reasonable maturity consents to sex with an older guy, where is the harm in that? Yeah, you can argue that the older man's experience and age can be used in a subtle yet coercive fashion, keeping it from being true consent. On the other hand, a lot of girls aren't fucking stupid, either. They have sexual desires as well, but we always seem to want to ignore or flat-out stifle that and think they're always daddy's little girl. For Christ's sake, those raging hormones are what the teenage years are all about, for both boys and girls. Doesn't mean that it always leads to the best choices, but it seems like it's made out to be even worse because we're so afraid of anything sex related.
I'm not trying to advocate a free-for-all on sex with younger girls, just a more realistic and healthy approach. Furthermore, I'm certainly not trying to apologize for men who take advantage of and/or sexually abuse younger girls.
I still haven't answered the question of "how young is too young, no matter what?" I want to say that things need to be taken on a case by case basis, but I know that's not a practical way to handle things as a matter of law. Of course, when we're talking the lower ranges like 13 and under, we can draw some clearer lines. If nothing else, though, I really object to the term "statutory rape." If you forcibly have sex with someone, it's just plain rape, and you don't need the qualifier of "statutory" because it's already a heinous enough crime. Of course, there's always the question of what true consent is, and if yes really means yes. I guess I'm not really helping myself out here.
This comes back to part of the NAMBLA debate. Does fantasy incite action? Sometimes yes, and sometimes no. It's really up to the individual as to how far they take it, but I definitely don't think you should be condemned until you take it to the point of inappropriate action. It's just in many men's nature to have naughty thoughts about girls younger than them. Whatever the case, good luck putting an end to fantasy.
I'm sure there's no secret at this point that I've got a lolita complex myself, given away by my schoolgirl uniform fetish mentioned in posts past, as well as this entire fucking post. I'm not embarrassed to say that I can look at a teenage girl and say that she's hot. There are plenty (but not all) of those "youthfully portrayed" anime characters who I find, um, stimulating. That doesn't mean I'm going to do anything about any of it, though, other than keep up the fantasies. Same goes for other guys. Some guys will do something about it, and in some cases, that's not so horrid. We just automatically want to think that the guy is some dirty older pervert (which he is) and the girl is just some innocent bystander (sometimes she is, sometimes she isn't). And of course, just because a guy finds interest in younger girls doesn't mean he exclusively thinks about younger women. It's all part of the wonderful world of maleness.
Whatever the case can we at least stop being so bloody uptight about it all? The attraction between older men/younger women is just a fact of life. As always, comments are encouraged (especially from women, if there are any left after this) to tell me whether I'm onto something, or if I'm just a sick fuck who's full of shit. I suspect I may get more of the latter.
Just what the hell is a "Lolita Complex," or as the Japanese call it, lolicon? Well, it's hard to get a real definition. Some people think it's flat out pedophilia. I more generally liken it to older men who are sexually attracted to young girls, where "older" and "younger" are rather nebulous. This can be the very adult Humbert and his 12-year-old Lolita, this can be a 20-year old and a 10-year old, this can be a 30-year-old and a teenager.
This comes up in anime so much since the Japanese are rather famous for lolicon (hence, their own term for it). There are frequently many "youthfully portrayed" (as one friend puts it) girls in anime, but even though it still creeps people out, it's much more accepted over there. Oftentimes you'll have female characters who are supposedly more adult (late teens, early twenties), even though they look like they're much, much younger. Like Ichigo from Onegai Teacher and Onegai Twins. She's supposed to be 21, but she was in a "standstill" for 6 years which leaves us being told she "looks" like she's 15, when in fact she actually looks like she's 12. Sometimes they don't make this much of an effort, like with Chiyo-chan in Azumanga Daioh, who's 10 but in high school.
We had a quick debate one night as to who was more lolicon, Ichigo or Chiyo-chan. I say Chiyo-chan, even though she is presented in a completely innocent, non-sexual way. Clearly, a 10-year-old in high school is just inappropriate. Also, I think the subtle manner in which the character is portrayed makes the situation that much dirtier: it allows guys to indulge in their lolicon fantasies without feeling bad about it. Or, at least, it allows them to more effectively hide it from others. "I'm not fantasizing about her like that! I mean, look at how non-sexual the character's presentation is!" Sorta getting off track here, but you can see what life is like with my friends and me.
For a lot of people, I think there is just an automatic negative response to the thought of older guys with younger girls. However, I think this kind of fantasy should be more accepted. I know it's not gonna happen, but christ people, lighten up. It's just a well-known fact that many men are turned on by younger girls. I know people don't want to hear it, but that's just how it is. Sometimes the fantasy is disturbing, but it is still fantasy. The cycle is even more cruel as younger girls and women often go for older men (raise your hand, ladies, if you'd fuck Sean Connery).
Honestly, where the hell is the harm in fantasy? There's nothing wrong with fantasizing about or lusting after younger girls, just don't fuck girls who are too young. Besides, isn't it better to be having them fantasizing about someone younger or lusting after those anime characters instead of actually acting on those fantasies?
Fantasy often does become reality, and when it does, what is "too young"? Well, the laws have definitions for this, but I don't know if I always agree with those laws. Yeah, I know, I'm working myself into some real trouble here. Just bear with me, then criticize once you see how screwed up I am.
Everyone matures at a different rate, and if a teenage girl of reasonable maturity consents to sex with an older guy, where is the harm in that? Yeah, you can argue that the older man's experience and age can be used in a subtle yet coercive fashion, keeping it from being true consent. On the other hand, a lot of girls aren't fucking stupid, either. They have sexual desires as well, but we always seem to want to ignore or flat-out stifle that and think they're always daddy's little girl. For Christ's sake, those raging hormones are what the teenage years are all about, for both boys and girls. Doesn't mean that it always leads to the best choices, but it seems like it's made out to be even worse because we're so afraid of anything sex related.
I'm not trying to advocate a free-for-all on sex with younger girls, just a more realistic and healthy approach. Furthermore, I'm certainly not trying to apologize for men who take advantage of and/or sexually abuse younger girls.
I still haven't answered the question of "how young is too young, no matter what?" I want to say that things need to be taken on a case by case basis, but I know that's not a practical way to handle things as a matter of law. Of course, when we're talking the lower ranges like 13 and under, we can draw some clearer lines. If nothing else, though, I really object to the term "statutory rape." If you forcibly have sex with someone, it's just plain rape, and you don't need the qualifier of "statutory" because it's already a heinous enough crime. Of course, there's always the question of what true consent is, and if yes really means yes. I guess I'm not really helping myself out here.
This comes back to part of the NAMBLA debate. Does fantasy incite action? Sometimes yes, and sometimes no. It's really up to the individual as to how far they take it, but I definitely don't think you should be condemned until you take it to the point of inappropriate action. It's just in many men's nature to have naughty thoughts about girls younger than them. Whatever the case, good luck putting an end to fantasy.
I'm sure there's no secret at this point that I've got a lolita complex myself, given away by my schoolgirl uniform fetish mentioned in posts past, as well as this entire fucking post. I'm not embarrassed to say that I can look at a teenage girl and say that she's hot. There are plenty (but not all) of those "youthfully portrayed" anime characters who I find, um, stimulating. That doesn't mean I'm going to do anything about any of it, though, other than keep up the fantasies. Same goes for other guys. Some guys will do something about it, and in some cases, that's not so horrid. We just automatically want to think that the guy is some dirty older pervert (which he is) and the girl is just some innocent bystander (sometimes she is, sometimes she isn't). And of course, just because a guy finds interest in younger girls doesn't mean he exclusively thinks about younger women. It's all part of the wonderful world of maleness.
Whatever the case can we at least stop being so bloody uptight about it all? The attraction between older men/younger women is just a fact of life. As always, comments are encouraged (especially from women, if there are any left after this) to tell me whether I'm onto something, or if I'm just a sick fuck who's full of shit. I suspect I may get more of the latter.
I started reading PervScan today, which is basically a 'blog of sex-related news. The first post I read was one about how Amazon is in hot water for selling NAMBLA's official magazine. Ahhh, NAMBLA... A group near and dear to my heart. Or, as I prefer to think of them, Pedophile Assholes. What these pricks should really be calling themselves is Little Boy Fucker's Anonymous. Except for the fact that they're not anonymous, because everyone knows who they are and what they're for.
For anyone unfamiliar with how low humanity can be, NAMBLA is the North American Man/Boy Love Association. If you're thinking I made this up, don't feel bad. I had feelings of incredulity myself the first time I heard about them. But they are real, and they are sick.
It's no secret what these guys are up to and into: promotion of sexual relations between adult men and young boys. Again, people we refer to as pedophiles, or in some cases, Catholic Priests.
How do they get away with this bullshit? Why aren't they just arrested? Well, apparently, these guys are good at what they do, if even a U.S. senate committee doesn't consider them criminal (this, however, coming from a bunch of criminals known for protecting other criminals).
Unfortunately, the debate over NAMBLA is actually very tough, even though it seems like a no-brainer at first. I mean, we fucking know what the deal with these guys is. They want to fuck little boys, and oftentimes, they do. As we all know, however, that's not a solid legal foundation, at least not until the fucking part takes place. As an organization, they aren't criminal, at least not provably so at this point. Individual members, yes, are very criminal, but that isn't enough.
From what I gather, as an organization, this is just a group of men who get together to discuss fucking male children. It's not illegal to discuss this, anymore than it's illegal for the KKK to meet and discuss killing blacks and Jews. All of this is repugnant to the rest of us, but it isn't illegal to just talk about things. Free speech, after all.
This is where I really have a hard time, because it leads me to think that nothing should be done to NAMBLA from an organizational standpoint. It is protected speech, no matter how heinous the subject matter is. I have no problem with people who have fucked up sexual desires and fantasies, because I know I have my own share of sick fantasies, and so does everyone else (sexual or otherwise). As such, we've really got no right to judge and condemn what goes on in other people's heads. The problem is when desire and fantasy manifest themselves into real actions, which looks to often be the case for these NAMBLA assholes. These are the scary people; not the ones with sick ideas, but the ones who don't know right from wrong (or just don't care) and who take those ideas beyond talk and fantasy.
From here, the free speech issue becomes whether or not merely talking about something incites people to commit criminal acts. Honestly, I don't think that's the only cause of atrocious behavior. I think it can definitely serve as a catalyst, but when someone commits an act like sexual assault, I just think there is something miswired in their brains that leads them to commit these criminal acts, and that is the real root cause. The acts they perpetrate are ones which they are going to perpetrate at some point or other whether the catalyst arrives or not. Still, though, I can't help but say that this group is just encouraging things like the case of Jeffrey Curley, a story so awful that it produces a visceral reaction in me. Again, though, and god damn it, discussion and encouragement are not enough to get these guys off the streets and into jail where they can face rape of their own. And again, you don't deserve prison and rape just for thinking about something. Bloody hell.
This may seem somewhat contradictory to what I was saying about condemning other cultures for "barbaric" practices. If you think it's wrong, you should do something about it, right? Well, actions like stoning are just that - actions. I have no problems with what goes on in someone else's head, no matter how sick I think it may be, until those thoughts lead them to do something in real life. Yeah, sometimes those thoughts do lead to actions, but not always.
Also, if NAMBLA's magazine is just a showcase of "cute boys," is that much different from a lot of other shit we see? Think of all the "hot teen stars" we see in revealing clothing paraded around on magazine cover after magazine cover. Britney Fucking Spears, for Christ's sake. Thongs for 10-year-olds at Abercrombie. All of society is doing fucked up shit along the same lines.
Mainstream media and society, however, are not publishing things like "Rape and Escape." Does that cross the line of "clear and present danger"? I think you can make that case, assuming that this is actually a NAMBLA publication. By the same token, I'm sure you can make the case, once again, because of protected speech. You would have to prove that "Rape and Escape" directly leads to physical and psychological harm. So far, though, that's the only solid legal argument I can make, and it's not much. Otherwise, until they take some sort of action, there's nothing that can be done.
There is just no easy answer, and there are no clear lines to be drawn. Like always, I cannot come to a solid conclusion. But I just cannot let go of the fact that we know what these guys are about, and there's nothing we can do until it's too late. At the same time, I want to see principles like free speech upheld. I started this rant thinking to myself, "Fuck the ACLU for defending these assholes," and now I'm like, "Well, fuck, they are doing their job to uphold the guarantees of the Constitution." But, again, I come back to the fact that these guys are promoting sex with children, and the only possible true aim of that could be for members to then go out and do just that.
You know, why don't those fucking Christian fundamentalists do us all a favor and start bombing NAMBLA meetings instead of abortion clinics? You know, finally put their fervent energy to good use? At least the babies that get aborted won't grow up to be molested by these NAMBLA fucks.
Okay, it's time to stop. I don't think there's any coherency in this post; it's nothing but back and forth. Bottom line, NAMBLA: sick fucks, but can't do anything until they've actually done something. Until it can be proven that they have criminal intent (and I don't mean the shitty Law and Order Series), we're just going to have to live with it. Until they actually commit sexual assault, that is. Once they've done that, then I can make my feelings very clear: we should just kill the asshole, or put him into prison where he'll be raped, then killed.
And yes, I am just waiting to get more and more hits from pedophiles doing Google searches. That's my thanks for trying to hit the hard issues and for going after the sick fucks.
For anyone unfamiliar with how low humanity can be, NAMBLA is the North American Man/Boy Love Association. If you're thinking I made this up, don't feel bad. I had feelings of incredulity myself the first time I heard about them. But they are real, and they are sick.
It's no secret what these guys are up to and into: promotion of sexual relations between adult men and young boys. Again, people we refer to as pedophiles, or in some cases, Catholic Priests.
How do they get away with this bullshit? Why aren't they just arrested? Well, apparently, these guys are good at what they do, if even a U.S. senate committee doesn't consider them criminal (this, however, coming from a bunch of criminals known for protecting other criminals).
Unfortunately, the debate over NAMBLA is actually very tough, even though it seems like a no-brainer at first. I mean, we fucking know what the deal with these guys is. They want to fuck little boys, and oftentimes, they do. As we all know, however, that's not a solid legal foundation, at least not until the fucking part takes place. As an organization, they aren't criminal, at least not provably so at this point. Individual members, yes, are very criminal, but that isn't enough.
From what I gather, as an organization, this is just a group of men who get together to discuss fucking male children. It's not illegal to discuss this, anymore than it's illegal for the KKK to meet and discuss killing blacks and Jews. All of this is repugnant to the rest of us, but it isn't illegal to just talk about things. Free speech, after all.
This is where I really have a hard time, because it leads me to think that nothing should be done to NAMBLA from an organizational standpoint. It is protected speech, no matter how heinous the subject matter is. I have no problem with people who have fucked up sexual desires and fantasies, because I know I have my own share of sick fantasies, and so does everyone else (sexual or otherwise). As such, we've really got no right to judge and condemn what goes on in other people's heads. The problem is when desire and fantasy manifest themselves into real actions, which looks to often be the case for these NAMBLA assholes. These are the scary people; not the ones with sick ideas, but the ones who don't know right from wrong (or just don't care) and who take those ideas beyond talk and fantasy.
From here, the free speech issue becomes whether or not merely talking about something incites people to commit criminal acts. Honestly, I don't think that's the only cause of atrocious behavior. I think it can definitely serve as a catalyst, but when someone commits an act like sexual assault, I just think there is something miswired in their brains that leads them to commit these criminal acts, and that is the real root cause. The acts they perpetrate are ones which they are going to perpetrate at some point or other whether the catalyst arrives or not. Still, though, I can't help but say that this group is just encouraging things like the case of Jeffrey Curley, a story so awful that it produces a visceral reaction in me. Again, though, and god damn it, discussion and encouragement are not enough to get these guys off the streets and into jail where they can face rape of their own. And again, you don't deserve prison and rape just for thinking about something. Bloody hell.
This may seem somewhat contradictory to what I was saying about condemning other cultures for "barbaric" practices. If you think it's wrong, you should do something about it, right? Well, actions like stoning are just that - actions. I have no problems with what goes on in someone else's head, no matter how sick I think it may be, until those thoughts lead them to do something in real life. Yeah, sometimes those thoughts do lead to actions, but not always.
Also, if NAMBLA's magazine is just a showcase of "cute boys," is that much different from a lot of other shit we see? Think of all the "hot teen stars" we see in revealing clothing paraded around on magazine cover after magazine cover. Britney Fucking Spears, for Christ's sake. Thongs for 10-year-olds at Abercrombie. All of society is doing fucked up shit along the same lines.
Mainstream media and society, however, are not publishing things like "Rape and Escape." Does that cross the line of "clear and present danger"? I think you can make that case, assuming that this is actually a NAMBLA publication. By the same token, I'm sure you can make the case, once again, because of protected speech. You would have to prove that "Rape and Escape" directly leads to physical and psychological harm. So far, though, that's the only solid legal argument I can make, and it's not much. Otherwise, until they take some sort of action, there's nothing that can be done.
There is just no easy answer, and there are no clear lines to be drawn. Like always, I cannot come to a solid conclusion. But I just cannot let go of the fact that we know what these guys are about, and there's nothing we can do until it's too late. At the same time, I want to see principles like free speech upheld. I started this rant thinking to myself, "Fuck the ACLU for defending these assholes," and now I'm like, "Well, fuck, they are doing their job to uphold the guarantees of the Constitution." But, again, I come back to the fact that these guys are promoting sex with children, and the only possible true aim of that could be for members to then go out and do just that.
You know, why don't those fucking Christian fundamentalists do us all a favor and start bombing NAMBLA meetings instead of abortion clinics? You know, finally put their fervent energy to good use? At least the babies that get aborted won't grow up to be molested by these NAMBLA fucks.
Okay, it's time to stop. I don't think there's any coherency in this post; it's nothing but back and forth. Bottom line, NAMBLA: sick fucks, but can't do anything until they've actually done something. Until it can be proven that they have criminal intent (and I don't mean the shitty Law and Order Series), we're just going to have to live with it. Until they actually commit sexual assault, that is. Once they've done that, then I can make my feelings very clear: we should just kill the asshole, or put him into prison where he'll be raped, then killed.
And yes, I am just waiting to get more and more hits from pedophiles doing Google searches. That's my thanks for trying to hit the hard issues and for going after the sick fucks.
So there's a big story going down that I've been avoiding talking about. Yeah, it's the whole issue over the supposed White House leak that named a CIA operative, who just happened to be the wife of a former ambassador who came out against the Bush Administration's claims about Iraq trying to buy uranium from Niger.
I've been avoiding ranting about the issue because I knew that right away I was going to assume that something dirty is going down, and that I'm going to read nothing but a bunch of bullshit and lies that are going to piss me off. Well, after reading a post on the issue over at |now candy|, I realized that the bullshit is well past critical mass and it's time to get back into form.
Like I said, I'm just prone to think that when shit happens, the Bush Administration (BA) is up to no good. I can't help it. I naturally have a difficult time trusting people, and the BA has given me nothing but reasons to continue with that policy. This matter is no different.
But how the fuck could someone not be suspicious about what's going on here? I mean, c'mon. Joseph Wilson was sent to Niger to investigate what was later proved to be a false claim, one which Bush used in his State of the Union. This guy helped prove that the claim was bullshit. Well, from what I recall, he went to Niger to meet with someone who claimed to be able to support the uranium claims, but as it turned out, the contact was a rather untrustworthy character (I could be wrong, however). Also, there was the whole deal over the forged documents which "showed" that Iraq purchased or tried to purchase uranium. Long story short, the Iraq/Niger uranium connection was bogus. In addition to being a part of demonstrating all this, Wilson came out vocally in saying that Bush's claims were false.
Magically, it's this guy's wife who is exposed as a CIA operative. Who else would have the motivation to do something like that besides the BA? Furthermore, who would have the connections to even know that she worked for the CIA?
More magic, and people in the media claim that their source of information on Wilson's wife came from within the BA. Of course, the media could be lying, but it sounds like a decent number of people are making this claim. I guess it all comes down to who you believe.
Still, the fact of the matter is, a serious infraction has occurred, in which the wife of a vocal critic of Bush's Iraq policy has been exposed to be working for the CIA. Again, I ask, who would be motivated to do commit such an egregious offense? I know it's a pretty simplistic route to take, but it does make a lot of sense: if the BA was the source of the leak, they were clearly sending out a message to anyone who might fuck with them.
Who the hell was the source of the leak, anyway? Lots of fingers are being pointed at Karl Rove. Again, no proof, just speculation. Valid speculation nonetheless, because everyone knows that Karl Rove has his hands in everything. When I talk about Bush, his policies, or what he's up to, I'm really just using "Bush" as shorthand for a group of people, which prominently includes Rove. It is easily conceivable that Rove and other high-ranking White House officials either orchestrated this whole affair, or at least had some involvement in or knowledge of it.
Naturally, the investigation into this will go nowhere. Bush "welcomes" the probe, because it's being run by the Justice Department at this point, and he knows that Justice will never serve up justice if any of Bush's people are at fault. I'm real sure Asscroft is going to work hard to investigate, accuse, indict, and convict if indeed anyone at the White House is responsible for this whole affair. When the Justice Department tells the White House and the CIA to start preserving documents, that's just the signal for "start destroying evidence now."
The only way to get to the bottom of things would be for an independent investigation to take place, one not under the auspices of Asscroft's Justice Department. My guess is that it either won't happen, or the independent probe will be as effective as the September 11th Commission that really got to the bottom of things. We'll see how things go.
I've been avoiding ranting about the issue because I knew that right away I was going to assume that something dirty is going down, and that I'm going to read nothing but a bunch of bullshit and lies that are going to piss me off. Well, after reading a post on the issue over at |now candy|, I realized that the bullshit is well past critical mass and it's time to get back into form.
Like I said, I'm just prone to think that when shit happens, the Bush Administration (BA) is up to no good. I can't help it. I naturally have a difficult time trusting people, and the BA has given me nothing but reasons to continue with that policy. This matter is no different.
But how the fuck could someone not be suspicious about what's going on here? I mean, c'mon. Joseph Wilson was sent to Niger to investigate what was later proved to be a false claim, one which Bush used in his State of the Union. This guy helped prove that the claim was bullshit. Well, from what I recall, he went to Niger to meet with someone who claimed to be able to support the uranium claims, but as it turned out, the contact was a rather untrustworthy character (I could be wrong, however). Also, there was the whole deal over the forged documents which "showed" that Iraq purchased or tried to purchase uranium. Long story short, the Iraq/Niger uranium connection was bogus. In addition to being a part of demonstrating all this, Wilson came out vocally in saying that Bush's claims were false.
Magically, it's this guy's wife who is exposed as a CIA operative. Who else would have the motivation to do something like that besides the BA? Furthermore, who would have the connections to even know that she worked for the CIA?
More magic, and people in the media claim that their source of information on Wilson's wife came from within the BA. Of course, the media could be lying, but it sounds like a decent number of people are making this claim. I guess it all comes down to who you believe.
Still, the fact of the matter is, a serious infraction has occurred, in which the wife of a vocal critic of Bush's Iraq policy has been exposed to be working for the CIA. Again, I ask, who would be motivated to do commit such an egregious offense? I know it's a pretty simplistic route to take, but it does make a lot of sense: if the BA was the source of the leak, they were clearly sending out a message to anyone who might fuck with them.
Who the hell was the source of the leak, anyway? Lots of fingers are being pointed at Karl Rove. Again, no proof, just speculation. Valid speculation nonetheless, because everyone knows that Karl Rove has his hands in everything. When I talk about Bush, his policies, or what he's up to, I'm really just using "Bush" as shorthand for a group of people, which prominently includes Rove. It is easily conceivable that Rove and other high-ranking White House officials either orchestrated this whole affair, or at least had some involvement in or knowledge of it.
Naturally, the investigation into this will go nowhere. Bush "welcomes" the probe, because it's being run by the Justice Department at this point, and he knows that Justice will never serve up justice if any of Bush's people are at fault. I'm real sure Asscroft is going to work hard to investigate, accuse, indict, and convict if indeed anyone at the White House is responsible for this whole affair. When the Justice Department tells the White House and the CIA to start preserving documents, that's just the signal for "start destroying evidence now."
The only way to get to the bottom of things would be for an independent investigation to take place, one not under the auspices of Asscroft's Justice Department. My guess is that it either won't happen, or the independent probe will be as effective as the September 11th Commission that really got to the bottom of things. We'll see how things go.
More visits from Disney today. It's probably their lawyers, just looking for everything they can to fuck me since I used their company name once (well, like three times now). Or, as possibly implied by that e-mail yesterday for Disney DVDs, they're just looking for a way to cram Disney stuff down my throat.
I am so fucked.
I am so fucked.
As it turns out, my suspicions were correct and those bogus comments that had a URL and popped up a window were what helped bring the commenting system down for awhile. The comment caused a porn site to be popped up, then it tried to install some kind of dialer.
I know that I got those comments deleted fairly quickly: I left work, and they weren't there right before I left, got home ~1 hour later, they were there, and I deleted them immediately.
Since this was the issue, as opposed to something like the guy who runs the service had his machine hacked into, there's no real impetus for me to change commenting systems. Something like this could happen on any commenter, I believe, if someone makes a post with a URL that pops up a porn site and tries to install something. I'm not sure how it automatically popped up that porn site, though, but I'm no web expert. Also, since the site then tried to install a program, I don't see how the fuck that installation would take place unless if the user somehow confirmed it. If nothing else, you'd think web browsers would have some kind of setting for "do not run arbitrary executables without asking."
So, if something like this happens again, the best I can do is just remain vigilant and try and get shit like that out of there ASAP if it happens again. Since my OCD requires me to be constantly monitoring e-mail (where I'm notified right away of new comments), I should be able to handle things fairly quickly, unless of course if I'm asleep. In which case, install a pop-up blocker of some sort! Believe me, you'll be doing yourself a favor, and not just for when you visit Fuck Everything.
I know that I got those comments deleted fairly quickly: I left work, and they weren't there right before I left, got home ~1 hour later, they were there, and I deleted them immediately.
Since this was the issue, as opposed to something like the guy who runs the service had his machine hacked into, there's no real impetus for me to change commenting systems. Something like this could happen on any commenter, I believe, if someone makes a post with a URL that pops up a porn site and tries to install something. I'm not sure how it automatically popped up that porn site, though, but I'm no web expert. Also, since the site then tried to install a program, I don't see how the fuck that installation would take place unless if the user somehow confirmed it. If nothing else, you'd think web browsers would have some kind of setting for "do not run arbitrary executables without asking."
So, if something like this happens again, the best I can do is just remain vigilant and try and get shit like that out of there ASAP if it happens again. Since my OCD requires me to be constantly monitoring e-mail (where I'm notified right away of new comments), I should be able to handle things fairly quickly, unless of course if I'm asleep. In which case, install a pop-up blocker of some sort! Believe me, you'll be doing yourself a favor, and not just for when you visit Fuck Everything.
Oh, and a big shout out to my late night friends who are at "work" (they know who they are, and this is one of them). According to the latest stats, you guys now account for more visits to my site than me.
Hey, what are some alternatives to "shout out"? I hate sounding like I'm on TR-fucking-L.
Hey, what are some alternatives to "shout out"? I hate sounding like I'm on TR-fucking-L.
Tuesday, September 30, 2003
Here's an update on the "progress" in Afghanistan, coming from someone who probably knows a thing or two about foreign relations.
Comments are (obviously) back. Of course, now I'm nervous about this shit happening again. I hope no one experienced any problems, and I would hate for people to experience problems in the future (besides the normal suffering that goes with reading this shit) or feel nervous using comments at all.
I'm thinking about switching systems yet again, but that's gonna suck, because I don't know how easy (if even possible) it would be to migrate already existing comments. Also, since BlogSpeak is run by a guy who's doing this on his own time, and when he switched servers a few weeks back, I donated a little to help out the effort. It wasn't a ton, of course, but I did chip in something, so I'd hate to ditch the system now. I'm always looking for free shit, so the one time I pay something, I'd like to get some use out of it. Of course, just because I switch doesn't mean that there won't always be potential issues, since there is no practical 100% safe point when it comes to computer security.
Another thing I've been toying with is setting up a message board. Again, I'm only gonna give money if I think it's worthwhile (namely, like someone doing it as a hobby), so I'm looking for something cheap, it not free. Anyone out there know of any free message board hosting, or had any good experiences with setting up their own message boards?
I'm thinking about switching systems yet again, but that's gonna suck, because I don't know how easy (if even possible) it would be to migrate already existing comments. Also, since BlogSpeak is run by a guy who's doing this on his own time, and when he switched servers a few weeks back, I donated a little to help out the effort. It wasn't a ton, of course, but I did chip in something, so I'd hate to ditch the system now. I'm always looking for free shit, so the one time I pay something, I'd like to get some use out of it. Of course, just because I switch doesn't mean that there won't always be potential issues, since there is no practical 100% safe point when it comes to computer security.
Another thing I've been toying with is setting up a message board. Again, I'm only gonna give money if I think it's worthwhile (namely, like someone doing it as a hobby), so I'm looking for something cheap, it not free. Anyone out there know of any free message board hosting, or had any good experiences with setting up their own message boards?
MIT has started a program called OpenCourseWare, where they make entire courses (notes, syllabi, assignments, exams, etc.) available online. They've fired things up with around 500 courses online right now, ranging from engineering to liberal arts. I was disappointed, however, to see that there was no category for "creative writing." I have it on authority that this is an actual major at MIT, made up entirely for this one stupid kid who was there only because he was a legacy.
Someone (or maybe a couple of someones) from disney.com visited Fuck Everything. Depending on just where at Disney they work, this site may have been quite different from what they're used to seeing at work.
At first, I thought they may have gotten here because of my Anti-Disneyland comment (which is originally attributed to this guy, who is actually better at finding shit online than I am). As it turns out, one of the disney.com visits was yet another leech from lovefury. I was expecting the cease-and-desist orders at any moment. Well, I'm still kinda expecting it.
Fuck, as I'm writing this, I got some spam from buy.com advertising Disney DVDs. I think I'm fucked.
At first, I thought they may have gotten here because of my Anti-Disneyland comment (which is originally attributed to this guy, who is actually better at finding shit online than I am). As it turns out, one of the disney.com visits was yet another leech from lovefury. I was expecting the cease-and-desist orders at any moment. Well, I'm still kinda expecting it.
Fuck, as I'm writing this, I got some spam from buy.com advertising Disney DVDs. I think I'm fucked.
I remember an article in SI couple of years ago where they played out a fantasy world series between the BoSox and the Cubs (Cubs won in 7), and this year there's a chance that might happen. Yeah, a remote chance, but somehow the Sox and the Cubs are pennant and potential World Series contenders this year.
Can you imagine what would happen if both teams made it to the series? There'd be suicide pacts, and both cities would go up in flames once the series ended, regardless of outcome. But man oh man, would it be great.
Other than that scenario, I don't really care what happens to the Sox, but it'd be beyond everything if the Cubs finally won after a 95 year drought. I wouldn't even care that us Cub fans wouldn't be "special" anymore.
Can you imagine what would happen if both teams made it to the series? There'd be suicide pacts, and both cities would go up in flames once the series ended, regardless of outcome. But man oh man, would it be great.
Other than that scenario, I don't really care what happens to the Sox, but it'd be beyond everything if the Cubs finally won after a 95 year drought. I wouldn't even care that us Cub fans wouldn't be "special" anymore.
You see what I was saying a couple of weeks back about kids being tough?
Seriously, how the fuck did this happen?
Seriously, how the fuck did this happen?
While we're on the subject on viruses and other computer malfeasance, I saw this posted over at Xset a couple of weeks back. It's free antivirus software, which might be worth a look if you don't have any running. I haven't tested it out yet since it's for Windows, and I rarely use Windows (and I'm not trying to be a Linux asshole here, although I have been known to do that... and I'll admit that when I do boot Windows, I get lazy and don't check for viruses and other shit very often).
If you know of any other good software like this, post a comment about it. Oh, wait. Fuck.
If you know of any other good software like this, post a comment about it. Oh, wait. Fuck.
Okay, so I just got word that somehow a virus (and/or spyware) was being propagated through my commenting system, BlogSpeak. I sincerely hope no one was adversely effected, and I disabled comments as soon as I got word, which wasn't until today. Details are sketchy, but from the sounds of it, if anyone picked up the cirus, they would know. Yesterday, I did get several comments that were causing a pop-up window to appear. I deleted those ASAP, but I don't know if those were related or not. I will pass along more info as it becomes available.
There's the old maxim that "there's nothing quite like the first time." Well, one of those special "first times" for me was the first time I read The Onion. What, you thought I was gonna tell you some awful sex story from my past? Ha ha, keep in mind who you're dealing with. Actually, this leads to some sex stories, but none of mine.
I can only remember two things: the McDonald's article where they talked about the good ol' days when the food chain was into "hardcore shit like the McLean Deluxe" and the Savage Love sex advice column.
That installment of Savage Love has become legendary, and I managed to track it down here. Anyone familiar with Savage Love knows what to expect, but for anyone unfamiliar, it's a no-holds-barred sex advice column that doesn't care if you're offended, and as such, doesn't pull its punches.
I can only remember two things: the McDonald's article where they talked about the good ol' days when the food chain was into "hardcore shit like the McLean Deluxe" and the Savage Love sex advice column.
That installment of Savage Love has become legendary, and I managed to track it down here. Anyone familiar with Savage Love knows what to expect, but for anyone unfamiliar, it's a no-holds-barred sex advice column that doesn't care if you're offended, and as such, doesn't pull its punches.
Monday, September 29, 2003
I couldn't find the Chobits volume 8 which has the box and Chi figure that's fucking exclusive to Borders and Waldenbooks a couple of days ago, but here it is. They don't have a street date on the page, but I could have sworn Tokyopop's page said Oct. 7th.
According to Anime News Network, Square Enix is planning on making a Final Fantasy VII CG movie. A few details and links to some images can be found here, but I wanna see some pictures of Tifa, goddammit.
Well, despite what the Judge of Nottingham had to say about it, the do-not-call list is going into effect in two days... Sorta.
Woo hoo! Maybe it's time to start going after older women. Yeah, except for the fact that it would be weird bringing home someone close in age to my parents. On the other hand, my mother might have someone new to go shopping with. I'm going to stop now before this gets super creepy.
Jay has made good on his threats to start ranting again, and the 'net is a better place for it. His post today entitled "Sept. 11 begins to get clearer and clearer" has some things I agree with, and some things I disagree with. I was originally just going to respond in his guestbook, but I decided to be a prick and just turn his topic into a rant of my own. Nothing but quality here.
I think my credentials for being against the US pushing its beliefs and values on others is pretty well established. It's immoral, and if nothing else, impractical as it just creates more enemies for us and causes instability around the world.
That being said, however, just because something is "different," or tradition, or rule of law doesn't mean that it isn't still wrong. We live in a PC world that tells us to accept everything, but I don't think that means that we should just let people get away with harsh shit just because it's different without at least saying something about it. I know this is coming from my biased Western perspective, but having things like equality for women is just the right way to go, and I can't let people off the hook just because of religion.
Religion, of course, is what so much of this stems from. I was thinking about it today, and I realized that religion ruins more lives than... Anything. Not really a new fact, just one of those things that really strikes you when you actually articulate it.
I realize this is very dangerous territory to say that people should be willing to stand up for what they think is "moral", because that's what allows Christian fundamentalists to feel justified doing things like killing abortion doctors. There is no easy answer to the debate.
Still, though, can anyone who's had the opportunity to live in a free society (well, free for now, more or less) say that things like equality of the sexes isn't a good thing? Can any of us honestly say that these things aren't progress? Yes, of course, it's biased, because this is what we know and what we have lived with, but it's the best we can do in terms of objectivity.
I also agree that feminists often do take things too far, they can be hypocritical, and they can behave like fascists. All the while, lots of men are pigs. Those guys who are castrated for rape or molestation fucking deserve it, and I wouldn't mind seeing harsher, more barbaric punishments for those crimes here. Men get tons of shit - lots of it deserved, some of it undeserved. But you know what? Women and other minorities have faced tons more shit over the years, having faced awful discrimination which hasn't completely disappeared. People aren't up in arms over men being punished harshly because men have always had it so fucking good. While we're at it, relax white guys. The white male patriarchy isn't in danger of disappearing anytime soon. Let's cut the others some much deserved slack, but not so much that it becomes abused. It's time to start taking these changes in society like a man.
So what's the answer? I don't know. On one hand, I don't feel like we have any business dictating to other countries how to behave. Part of the problem is that even though I feel some people are right in their criticisms of others, they don't handle it in a very reasonable fashion. Anytime we go after someone else, it is with the condescending tone of "We're better because we're America." Some of the things that people like feminists are pushing for are the right things to do, but they go about it in the worst way possible. How can we work for what is right and for progress, while at the same time not being such fucking pricks about it? It's probably impossible, because we will most likely never have the credibility we need. However, we could probably start by at least acting more evolved if we're going to be telling people we're so evolved. Oh, then there's the fact that it's really hard to define what is truly "right" and "progressive" and to get everyone to agree on that.
On the other hand, I'm not ashamed to stand up and say that things like genital mutilation are just fucking wrong, and they are barbaric. Keep in mind that things flow both ways; these other countries consider us equally decadent and hell-bound for the things we do. Granted, they don't have the military might of the US to enforce what they want to enforce, but NOW doesn't exactly have its own air force to go and stop stonings and mutilations, either. In the end, we don't have right to tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean we can't form and express our opinions on the matter. Again, the door swings both ways.
Wouldn't it be neat if there was a supreme being to sort all this out for us? Well, there isn't. Or if there is, he is clearly not fucking helping. So we're on our own, and we're not doing a stellar job thus far.
I clearly have no answers on how to solve this conundrum, and I had better punt here before this really unravels.
I think my credentials for being against the US pushing its beliefs and values on others is pretty well established. It's immoral, and if nothing else, impractical as it just creates more enemies for us and causes instability around the world.
That being said, however, just because something is "different," or tradition, or rule of law doesn't mean that it isn't still wrong. We live in a PC world that tells us to accept everything, but I don't think that means that we should just let people get away with harsh shit just because it's different without at least saying something about it. I know this is coming from my biased Western perspective, but having things like equality for women is just the right way to go, and I can't let people off the hook just because of religion.
Religion, of course, is what so much of this stems from. I was thinking about it today, and I realized that religion ruins more lives than... Anything. Not really a new fact, just one of those things that really strikes you when you actually articulate it.
I realize this is very dangerous territory to say that people should be willing to stand up for what they think is "moral", because that's what allows Christian fundamentalists to feel justified doing things like killing abortion doctors. There is no easy answer to the debate.
Still, though, can anyone who's had the opportunity to live in a free society (well, free for now, more or less) say that things like equality of the sexes isn't a good thing? Can any of us honestly say that these things aren't progress? Yes, of course, it's biased, because this is what we know and what we have lived with, but it's the best we can do in terms of objectivity.
I also agree that feminists often do take things too far, they can be hypocritical, and they can behave like fascists. All the while, lots of men are pigs. Those guys who are castrated for rape or molestation fucking deserve it, and I wouldn't mind seeing harsher, more barbaric punishments for those crimes here. Men get tons of shit - lots of it deserved, some of it undeserved. But you know what? Women and other minorities have faced tons more shit over the years, having faced awful discrimination which hasn't completely disappeared. People aren't up in arms over men being punished harshly because men have always had it so fucking good. While we're at it, relax white guys. The white male patriarchy isn't in danger of disappearing anytime soon. Let's cut the others some much deserved slack, but not so much that it becomes abused. It's time to start taking these changes in society like a man.
So what's the answer? I don't know. On one hand, I don't feel like we have any business dictating to other countries how to behave. Part of the problem is that even though I feel some people are right in their criticisms of others, they don't handle it in a very reasonable fashion. Anytime we go after someone else, it is with the condescending tone of "We're better because we're America." Some of the things that people like feminists are pushing for are the right things to do, but they go about it in the worst way possible. How can we work for what is right and for progress, while at the same time not being such fucking pricks about it? It's probably impossible, because we will most likely never have the credibility we need. However, we could probably start by at least acting more evolved if we're going to be telling people we're so evolved. Oh, then there's the fact that it's really hard to define what is truly "right" and "progressive" and to get everyone to agree on that.
On the other hand, I'm not ashamed to stand up and say that things like genital mutilation are just fucking wrong, and they are barbaric. Keep in mind that things flow both ways; these other countries consider us equally decadent and hell-bound for the things we do. Granted, they don't have the military might of the US to enforce what they want to enforce, but NOW doesn't exactly have its own air force to go and stop stonings and mutilations, either. In the end, we don't have right to tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean we can't form and express our opinions on the matter. Again, the door swings both ways.
Wouldn't it be neat if there was a supreme being to sort all this out for us? Well, there isn't. Or if there is, he is clearly not fucking helping. So we're on our own, and we're not doing a stellar job thus far.
I clearly have no answers on how to solve this conundrum, and I had better punt here before this really unravels.
You know things are bad between Bush and Chirac when Georgie sends that bitch Laura after the Frenchman.
While we're on the subject, fuck Laura Bush. And not in that happy fun way, either.
While we're on the subject, fuck Laura Bush. And not in that happy fun way, either.
There are lots of maybes in there, Mr. Safire.
Yeah, there's still a chance that WMD may be found. Just because we haven't located them yet doesn't mean they aren't there, but just because we haven't located them yet doesn't mean they are. Keep in mind that even I am surprised as hell that we haven't found anything. Despite having been against the war, I thought Saddam had some shit - I just wasn't convinced that he would try to use his weapons, or if he tried, I didn't think he'd be very successful.
Is Saddam the bloodiest tyrant in the past generation? Safire could be right, but it seems like there have been a few other assholes running around in the last 20 years or so that could lay claim to the title.
Safire brings to light the fact that, yeah, the media does just report on all of the bad shit going on over there, and doesn't show any of the positive advances. However, regardless of what good we may be doing, that doesn't just make all the bad go away, and it doesn't wash away the $87 billion first installment for reconstruction (on top of what we've paid already in tems of life, money, and resources), with no clue as to how much more will be necessary in the future.
We should be "secretly hoping our coalition sticks around to make the country governable"? Well, that's up to us, since we are the "coalition."
Again, despite having been against going in, I agree that we can't just leave. Now that we're there, we have to stick it out. But is there some better way besides $87 billion? And do we really have the balls to see this through? Keep in mind Afghanistan, which we were supposed to be rebuilding not too long ago. Yeah, we're still there, but we're spending $1 billion a year on Afghanistan right now, and $1 billion a week in Iraq. From what I understand, Afghanistan is still quite a mess - Kabul is improved, but that seems to be about it. Of course, Afghanistan doesn't have the world's second largest oil reserves.
While we're on the subject, I'm sure there are some people out there screaming "It's not about oil! We're not there to take their oil!" Yeah, no shit we're not going to take it, but just about everything we do in the Middle East is in some way or other related to oil (hell, maybe everything we do is oil related). We couldn't just take full control of the oil fields and their profits, because that would look bad. But don't think we won't profit in one way or another by having a heavy influence over the flow of oil in Iraq.
If nothing else, can we quit trying to push this as a war of necessity, and that "the world is safer today"? There's really no way to prove that we're safer, especially with the spike in terrorism that we're seeing inside Iraq. How is that a victory in the war on terror? Keep in mind that Iraq being a hotbed of terrorism is probably just the beginning - just wait until we start seeing the repercussions outside of Iraq's borders.
No, this was a war of choice. A war of choice designed to meet the aims of PNAC, who long before September 11th decided that Saddam needed to be removed. Now that many of the signers of that letter to Bill Jeff are in power, they have done just that. Even if WMDs are unearthed, I don't think they're going to be anywhere near as numerous as we were told. Saddam did not have the capabilities Bush and his gang used to sell this war.
Like always, what's done is done. We need to move forward, while not forgetting about the people we've pledged to help. Furthermore, we need to take some real steps to enlist the help of our allies in reconstruction. With the animosity Bush has built up, though, I'm not convinced that's possible while Bush is still in office. We need to get our shit together, otherwise Iraq may degenerate into something even worse than what it was during the days of Saddam.
Taking action in Iraq was not necessary to ensure our security before the war, but it is now.
Yeah, there's still a chance that WMD may be found. Just because we haven't located them yet doesn't mean they aren't there, but just because we haven't located them yet doesn't mean they are. Keep in mind that even I am surprised as hell that we haven't found anything. Despite having been against the war, I thought Saddam had some shit - I just wasn't convinced that he would try to use his weapons, or if he tried, I didn't think he'd be very successful.
Is Saddam the bloodiest tyrant in the past generation? Safire could be right, but it seems like there have been a few other assholes running around in the last 20 years or so that could lay claim to the title.
Safire brings to light the fact that, yeah, the media does just report on all of the bad shit going on over there, and doesn't show any of the positive advances. However, regardless of what good we may be doing, that doesn't just make all the bad go away, and it doesn't wash away the $87 billion first installment for reconstruction (on top of what we've paid already in tems of life, money, and resources), with no clue as to how much more will be necessary in the future.
We should be "secretly hoping our coalition sticks around to make the country governable"? Well, that's up to us, since we are the "coalition."
Again, despite having been against going in, I agree that we can't just leave. Now that we're there, we have to stick it out. But is there some better way besides $87 billion? And do we really have the balls to see this through? Keep in mind Afghanistan, which we were supposed to be rebuilding not too long ago. Yeah, we're still there, but we're spending $1 billion a year on Afghanistan right now, and $1 billion a week in Iraq. From what I understand, Afghanistan is still quite a mess - Kabul is improved, but that seems to be about it. Of course, Afghanistan doesn't have the world's second largest oil reserves.
While we're on the subject, I'm sure there are some people out there screaming "It's not about oil! We're not there to take their oil!" Yeah, no shit we're not going to take it, but just about everything we do in the Middle East is in some way or other related to oil (hell, maybe everything we do is oil related). We couldn't just take full control of the oil fields and their profits, because that would look bad. But don't think we won't profit in one way or another by having a heavy influence over the flow of oil in Iraq.
If nothing else, can we quit trying to push this as a war of necessity, and that "the world is safer today"? There's really no way to prove that we're safer, especially with the spike in terrorism that we're seeing inside Iraq. How is that a victory in the war on terror? Keep in mind that Iraq being a hotbed of terrorism is probably just the beginning - just wait until we start seeing the repercussions outside of Iraq's borders.
No, this was a war of choice. A war of choice designed to meet the aims of PNAC, who long before September 11th decided that Saddam needed to be removed. Now that many of the signers of that letter to Bill Jeff are in power, they have done just that. Even if WMDs are unearthed, I don't think they're going to be anywhere near as numerous as we were told. Saddam did not have the capabilities Bush and his gang used to sell this war.
Like always, what's done is done. We need to move forward, while not forgetting about the people we've pledged to help. Furthermore, we need to take some real steps to enlist the help of our allies in reconstruction. With the animosity Bush has built up, though, I'm not convinced that's possible while Bush is still in office. We need to get our shit together, otherwise Iraq may degenerate into something even worse than what it was during the days of Saddam.
Taking action in Iraq was not necessary to ensure our security before the war, but it is now.
Here's an interesting site if you're feeling... saucy: Sex Confessional.com. As you may have guessed, it's a site where people to submit their sex confessions. All sorts of categories, so probably something for everyone. Also, and not like I need to tell you this, but this link is TBA (to be avoided) while at work, no kids, blah blah blah.
I'm still buying ADV Monthly, despite the fact that Megami kicks the ass out of it (and indeed, kicks the ass out of everything in print media ever). Despite the anime focus of the magazine, the September issue proved useful for just about anything but anime. Okay, except for the shitty fan art, which is still my favorite part.
This month introduced me to some cute Japanese pop stars. Why must you tempt me with your plaid skirts and knee-high socks?!
Next, and something everyone may enjoy, is a video series called Kung Faux. Old kung foo films cut down to 30-minute installments, with voice work re-done by hip-hop artists and skateboarders, with video game and comic shit thrown in for good measure. I haven't looked at any clips yet thanks to fucking dialup, but will check those out within a day or two at work.
This month introduced me to some cute Japanese pop stars. Why must you tempt me with your plaid skirts and knee-high socks?!
Next, and something everyone may enjoy, is a video series called Kung Faux. Old kung foo films cut down to 30-minute installments, with voice work re-done by hip-hop artists and skateboarders, with video game and comic shit thrown in for good measure. I haven't looked at any clips yet thanks to fucking dialup, but will check those out within a day or two at work.
Sunday, September 28, 2003
So despite having loved the original and having had the disc for a decent while now, I finally decided to bust out Volume 1 of Gate Keepers 21 tonight. For anyone who cares, there aren't any spoilers in here, just some general observations.
Volume 1 contains the first three episodes, which I enjoyed. The animation is sharper and crisper, which looked good to me. The show is darker than the original, both in terms of the artwork and the mood of the show. Despite the differences in appearances, the show is definitely Gatekeepers thanks to the character designs of Keiji Goto (who, among other things, worked on the original and Nadesico). Oh, and there's a 5.1 Japanese sound track, which is fucking great and needs to be done all the time with other shows. Fuck that 5.1 dub shit, or, while we're on the subject, dubs period.
21 doesn't quite have the "fun" feel of the original, which isn't a bad thing per se; it's just different in that it's more serious. That's not to say that there isn't some good comedy in there, however, because there is. There are some definite tie-ins to the original series, as well as some inside stuff that you're just not going to get or fully enjoy without having seen at least some of the original.
I'm looking forward to getting the rest of the series, which I'll probably be doing this week when I go to pick up a couple of other discs, including the long fucking overdue last disc of Kare Kano (His and Her Circumstances for you non-pretentious types).
If nothing else, Gatekeepers 21 has shown me that it's time to get a new cell phone, because the one I have is crap.
Volume 1 contains the first three episodes, which I enjoyed. The animation is sharper and crisper, which looked good to me. The show is darker than the original, both in terms of the artwork and the mood of the show. Despite the differences in appearances, the show is definitely Gatekeepers thanks to the character designs of Keiji Goto (who, among other things, worked on the original and Nadesico). Oh, and there's a 5.1 Japanese sound track, which is fucking great and needs to be done all the time with other shows. Fuck that 5.1 dub shit, or, while we're on the subject, dubs period.
21 doesn't quite have the "fun" feel of the original, which isn't a bad thing per se; it's just different in that it's more serious. That's not to say that there isn't some good comedy in there, however, because there is. There are some definite tie-ins to the original series, as well as some inside stuff that you're just not going to get or fully enjoy without having seen at least some of the original.
I'm looking forward to getting the rest of the series, which I'll probably be doing this week when I go to pick up a couple of other discs, including the long fucking overdue last disc of Kare Kano (His and Her Circumstances for you non-pretentious types).
If nothing else, Gatekeepers 21 has shown me that it's time to get a new cell phone, because the one I have is crap.
I don't know, do you think Americans are really 'embarassed' by Dubya? I know I certainly am, and I definitely feel that others should be as well. However, I am far from convinced that I am in any way representative of mainstream thought (in fact, I really hope I'm not... nothing more boring than 'mainstream').
Also, am I the only one who hears Dr. Evil's voice in my head anytime someone uses a "laser" metaphor?
Also, am I the only one who hears Dr. Evil's voice in my head anytime someone uses a "laser" metaphor?
Ask, and ye shall receive. A couple of days ago I wondered out loud as to what the hell had happened to the guy running Marcellus Wallace's Bloody Gitch. Well, it looks like he has returned to the land of 'blogging. Welcome back, Jay.
The struggle to get the do-not-call list into effect continues.
The whole first amendment grounds thing doesn't make sense, because he couples it with the fact that charities and non-profits aren't impacted by the no-call list. So is he saying that if the first amendment rights of charities and non-profits were effected by the list, it would be OK? Restricting first amendment rights is just fine so long as it applies to everyone? Bringing in the first amendment is just a bullshit tactic since Judge Nottingham isn't using it in a logical fashion.
I'll agree that when you look at the fact that some organizations are exempt from the list, it is unfair to telemarketers. However, I think the people have spoken in that they want telemarketing calls stopped, and aren't all that concerned about the charities and non-profit side. It's much more unfair for 50 million people to have to put up with harassment that they've explicitly asked to have stopped. While we're on the subject of special treatment for charities and non-profit organizations, we already have a long history of this. Just look at the tax-exempt status that the church gets.
Congress is siding with the American people and not with special interests. This is a historic opportunity to see the system actually work for a change, and it's time to get this list into effect.
The whole first amendment grounds thing doesn't make sense, because he couples it with the fact that charities and non-profits aren't impacted by the no-call list. So is he saying that if the first amendment rights of charities and non-profits were effected by the list, it would be OK? Restricting first amendment rights is just fine so long as it applies to everyone? Bringing in the first amendment is just a bullshit tactic since Judge Nottingham isn't using it in a logical fashion.
I'll agree that when you look at the fact that some organizations are exempt from the list, it is unfair to telemarketers. However, I think the people have spoken in that they want telemarketing calls stopped, and aren't all that concerned about the charities and non-profit side. It's much more unfair for 50 million people to have to put up with harassment that they've explicitly asked to have stopped. While we're on the subject of special treatment for charities and non-profit organizations, we already have a long history of this. Just look at the tax-exempt status that the church gets.
Congress is siding with the American people and not with special interests. This is a historic opportunity to see the system actually work for a change, and it's time to get this list into effect.
The latest on the energy bill currently in the works. Among a shitload of other things, it includes provisions to allow for oil drilling in the Alaskan Arctic.
Here's a fucked up story centered around a family that sounds like a real bastion of enlightenment.
Some quotes to nitpick:
"You have to look into people's hearts." Yeah, like your cold, black heart, using these people as "poster children" to push further your political aims?
"My mother-in-law has been trying to break our family up since the very beginning." And can you blame her?
"When we saw this land and decided it would be our home, I didn't know what the National Park Service was." Yeah, right.
Say what you want about the federal government, tree-hugging hippies, and people living off the land, but that is one fucked up family right there. Any old guy who has made a career out of 16-year-old brides and has 15 children living on a religious zealot compound in the wilderness scares the piss out of me.
Some quotes to nitpick:
"You have to look into people's hearts." Yeah, like your cold, black heart, using these people as "poster children" to push further your political aims?
"My mother-in-law has been trying to break our family up since the very beginning." And can you blame her?
"When we saw this land and decided it would be our home, I didn't know what the National Park Service was." Yeah, right.
Say what you want about the federal government, tree-hugging hippies, and people living off the land, but that is one fucked up family right there. Any old guy who has made a career out of 16-year-old brides and has 15 children living on a religious zealot compound in the wilderness scares the piss out of me.
Okay, so I think this brings the total number of times someone in mainstream media has mentioned PNAC to four.
Some weeks back, a commenter referred to the Times as a joke. Well, I wouldn't go that far. Yeah, the Times is most definitely mainstream media, and there's not really anyone in mainstream media who I would call stellar. Also, I'm not exactly a conniseur of news, as you may have noticed with frequent links to CNN (although my CNN links are more intended to get the word out on events, as opposed to showcasing great reporting). The thing I like about the NYT is that they have some decent OP-ED columnists who are not only willing to criticize the Administration, but they're doing it in the highly visible forum of the Times' editorial page.
Of course, the columnists I'm so fond of like Dowd and Krugman share many of the same opinions as I do, so I'm obviously biased. Of course, there's no reason why I should have to justify liking someone's writing based partly on the fact that I agree with them.
Some weeks back, a commenter referred to the Times as a joke. Well, I wouldn't go that far. Yeah, the Times is most definitely mainstream media, and there's not really anyone in mainstream media who I would call stellar. Also, I'm not exactly a conniseur of news, as you may have noticed with frequent links to CNN (although my CNN links are more intended to get the word out on events, as opposed to showcasing great reporting). The thing I like about the NYT is that they have some decent OP-ED columnists who are not only willing to criticize the Administration, but they're doing it in the highly visible forum of the Times' editorial page.
Of course, the columnists I'm so fond of like Dowd and Krugman share many of the same opinions as I do, so I'm obviously biased. Of course, there's no reason why I should have to justify liking someone's writing based partly on the fact that I agree with them.
I found this posted over at On topic except when I'm not!, and decided to throw my two cents in.
‹cheapshots and quickies›
A Caucasian club? You've got to be kidding me. We already have a Caucasian club. It's called America.
"I'm trying to break racial barriers." By erecting barriers?
They're drafting a constitution for the club? Yeah, it'll be written up just as soon as Lisa finishes her book, entitled Mein Kampf Mit Gewichtverlust (My Struggle With Weight Loss).
‹/cheapshots and quickies›
Okay, here's what's wrong with this "Caucasian club" bullshit. Sad that I have to spell it our for you, Lisa, you dumb little bitch, as well as your even dumber mother (who should know better, since she's an adult) and probably equally dumb principal (again, a supposed adult).
You see, when blacks, or Latinos, or Asians form clubs, it's different from when whites form clubs. Why is it different? Because these are minority groups who have dealt with a lot of bullshit from whites, for starters. Minorities form groups so that they can more easily come together with people of a similar heritage. When a Black Student Union forms or a Latinos Unidos congregates, it's not sending out the message of "Whites not allowed," it's sending out the message of "Individuals of similar heritage unite." When whites get together and create special whites-only clubs, it sends out a blatant message of "No non-whites allowed." There isn't always symmetry in equality.
Furthermore, you don't need a special club for whites because there are already so many fucking white people out there already in this country. Oh, and as one of the interviewees pointed out, studying your "white heritage" isn't exactly going to yield a lot of proud moments. Well, I guess that's a matter of perspective. I'm sure some people feel pride in thinking about their ancestors spreading infectious diseases to Native Americans and taking their land and then killing Mexicans to take more land all while enslaving blacks to work on that land and working Asians to death to create railroads to connect those conquered lands. Just to name some examples from American history.
Finally, I've found that oftentimes when someone has to fly the flag of "I'm not a racist," they're usually a racist.
For fuck's sake, white people. Get over yourselves, and start realizing that your actions have implications and undertones that other people are going to pick up on.
‹cheapshots and quickies›
A Caucasian club? You've got to be kidding me. We already have a Caucasian club. It's called America.
"I'm trying to break racial barriers." By erecting barriers?
They're drafting a constitution for the club? Yeah, it'll be written up just as soon as Lisa finishes her book, entitled Mein Kampf Mit Gewichtverlust (My Struggle With Weight Loss).
‹/cheapshots and quickies›
Okay, here's what's wrong with this "Caucasian club" bullshit. Sad that I have to spell it our for you, Lisa, you dumb little bitch, as well as your even dumber mother (who should know better, since she's an adult) and probably equally dumb principal (again, a supposed adult).
You see, when blacks, or Latinos, or Asians form clubs, it's different from when whites form clubs. Why is it different? Because these are minority groups who have dealt with a lot of bullshit from whites, for starters. Minorities form groups so that they can more easily come together with people of a similar heritage. When a Black Student Union forms or a Latinos Unidos congregates, it's not sending out the message of "Whites not allowed," it's sending out the message of "Individuals of similar heritage unite." When whites get together and create special whites-only clubs, it sends out a blatant message of "No non-whites allowed." There isn't always symmetry in equality.
Furthermore, you don't need a special club for whites because there are already so many fucking white people out there already in this country. Oh, and as one of the interviewees pointed out, studying your "white heritage" isn't exactly going to yield a lot of proud moments. Well, I guess that's a matter of perspective. I'm sure some people feel pride in thinking about their ancestors spreading infectious diseases to Native Americans and taking their land and then killing Mexicans to take more land all while enslaving blacks to work on that land and working Asians to death to create railroads to connect those conquered lands. Just to name some examples from American history.
Finally, I've found that oftentimes when someone has to fly the flag of "I'm not a racist," they're usually a racist.
For fuck's sake, white people. Get over yourselves, and start realizing that your actions have implications and undertones that other people are going to pick up on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
