04.30.03
Posted in Uncategorized at 5:21 pm by
Fear and lack of control
Isn’t it funny, that despite our technological, scientific, philosophical and medical advances, that as a people, we’re still like a medieval mob running around in a panic because that comet must mean the end of the world?
Once we are not in control of a situation we turn into hysterical panickers. The SARS ‘epidemic’ is a classic case. A community festival in Dingle has dis-invited a harmless Chinese poetess from their upcoming event because of SARS. She’s from Shanghai – no where near the SARS outbreak and as she’s only one person could easily be screened. But the festival chairman…a DOCTOR…said he couldn’t live with the pressure.
But its just one symptom. People who use mobile phones protesting about mobile phone transmitters. People who protest against dumps and then buy all their vegetables on plastic trays wrapped in more plastic. People who panic about disease but feed their kids junk or people who panic about crime but let their children sit in the car without a seat belt. If a person has a choice in a matter, they will take incredible risks very casually. But they’ll like awake a night fretting about diseases that there is absolutely no proof they will ever get, be it from pylons or Chinese people.
Permalink
04.24.03
Posted in Uncategorized at 3:31 pm by
Why the Americans really are the bad guys
Some people like to sneer at crazy left wingers when the point out that America is nothing but an international bully with a bigger stick than anyone else. Their international credibility stems from their willingness to use brute force, even if illegal, to get their way. Queries as to the location of the WMD in Iraq which so far have failed to appear are deflected.
But here is the truth. America is the only country which has ever actually used a nuclear weapon. Hiroshima might have been excusable and I buy the line about it shortening WW2 but Nagasaki was totally unnecessary.
They’ve pulled out of the ABM Treaty and just in case you thought that was over a technicality, check out this story….they are re-starting their nuclear weapons programme after a break of 14 years. If they can do it, then what arguments are we supposed to using against North Korea, Pakistan and India?
Permalink
04.23.03
Posted in Uncategorized at 3:08 pm by
Al Pacino
I think Al is wonderful. Here is a great article about him from Sunday’s New York Times. Apart from being accurate, I think its really well written.
Permalink
04.16.03
Posted in Uncategorized at 2:55 pm by
Cool Ad
This is genius. It has only 1 second of computer animation, and the rest simply
involved enormous patience and 606 takes.
Permalink
04.15.03
Posted in Uncategorized at 5:04 pm by
Trinny and Susannah – shallow or fabulous?
Trinny Woodall and Susannah Constantine host a fashion programme called “What not to Wear“. In each programme they take a member of the public, nominated by friends, and analyse and rebuild that person’s wardrobe. They are posh, ascerbic and pretty brutal in their criticism and most recently have been attacked by Carol Vorderman.
The most common criticism is that they are snobs who criticise ordinary members of the public about their clothes and humiliate them on television. I think this is unfair. Firstly, their style of programme is unique. Every other fashion programme concentrates on latest fashions and doing hair and make-overs. The clothes are modelled by, well, models, and its all about sourcing and prices. What not to Wear on the other hand picks a woman with serious and common body ‘flaws’. The kind that most people have…short legs, no waist, big arse, no arse, big tits, no tits etc. Then they teach the person rules about what clothes make them look terrible and what clothes improve them. By the end of each programme they have transformed their target (styled ‘victim’ by critics) and provided invaluable advice for the thousands of women viewers who have the exact same problem.
Secondly, whilst one can accuse them of being shallow, the fact is that clothes and confidence are inextricably linked. Most of the women they deal with hate their bodies, see no redeeming features in themselves, despise buying clothes (which let’s face it we have to do), and have a real lack of confidence. In this week’s episode where they help Jo Brand and Sophie Raworth find outfits for the BAFTAs, both women hate going to award ceremonies. Jo never goes, even if she’s won an award! Sophie sneaks in the back door to avoid the photographers. Apart from pointing out the obvious flaws in the women’s bodies, Trinny and Susannah also bring their attention to their good bits and usually have to persuade the targets that they do have flattering parts of their bodies which should be shown off. In all cases they dramatically improve the women and the smiles at the end tell the story. Jo Brand was ecstatic after her walk up the carpet. And Sophie managed to get through what she considered a terrifying occasion with grace and elegance. So its a positive thing. And where’s the harm in that? Persuading people that clothes are important? But they are!
And let’s face it, there are a lot of women out there with a lot of money who are a disgrace. Maybe they should listen to the girls instead of complaining. Would you look at this?
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized at 3:10 pm by
Ironic Blog
Recommended reading. The blog that says nothing and is nevertheless hilarious.
Permalink
04.07.03
Posted in Uncategorized at 1:20 pm by
New York Times falls victim to crappy war journalism
The New York Times joins the ranks of the pathetic news outlets in the US. Their treatment of the ‘friendly fire’ incident yesterday illustrates their poor judgement. Here’s their story.
Here are the flaws in this piece of reportage.
1. This article is placed 27th on their full listing of international headlines. The top headlines are all concerned with the victories in Baghdad and Basra and the likely format of post-Saddam government. The only reason I found the article was because I deliberately went looking for it.
2. Note how many quotes are from wounded Kurds insisting that they do not blame the Americans.
3. They say that one American was wounded when the live BBC reports conclusively stated that American soldiers were killed.
4. They neglect to mention that the BBC translator was one of those killed.
5. Finally, and most insultingly, they give one short quote from John Simpson, the BBC World Affairs Editor, pointing out how US soldiers treated the wounded. It neglects to mention the following quotes he also provided in his report:
“So there are Americans dead. It was an American plane that dropped the bomb right beside us – I saw it land about 10 feet, 12 feet away I think.
“This is just a scene from hell here. All the vehicles on fire. There are bodies burning around me, there are bodies lying around, there are bits of bodies on the ground. This is a really bad own goal by the Americans.
“We don’t really know how many Americans are dead. There is ammunition exploding in fact from some of these cars. A very senior member of the Kurdish Republic’s government who also may have been injured.”
If you want the full report, here it is.
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized at 12:46 pm by
Fox News can’t contain its bias
Here’s a good story illustrating why so many Americans support the war. They are getting their information from allegedly unbiased media outlets like Fox.
Permalink
04.03.03
Posted in Uncategorized at 3:42 pm by
Israel’s Influence on American Foreign Policy
From today’s New York Times. A military researcher in the Israeli army brags about the best way to invade cities and trash them. Sick.
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized at 3:00 pm by
The brother points out Moore’s flaw
The brother, Kevin, has a letter in today’s Times. Makes a good point.
Madam, – In his appropriately dated tribute to himself, Michael Moore (April 1st) carefully omits any mention of his own part in the election of George W. Bush. On the one hand, he notes the role of 3,000 apparently erroneous votes for Pat Buchanan in Florida in swinging that state for Bush, but is silent about the pivotal role of votes for Ralph Nader in that and other states in achieving the same outcome. And amongst the most prominent campaigners for Ralph Nader? Step forward, Michael Moore. Moore thinks that he followed “my conscience and my heart” with his Oscarspeech. But in November 2000, he followed nothing but his ego. He might want to consider a few more Masses. – Yours, etc., Kevin Carey
Explanation of mass reference here.
Permalink
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »