Random Drivel from your Average Tosser

...with your host, Binty McShae - whether you like it or not!

Wednesday, November 30, 2005


What do you reckon to all this "one-minute's silence" crap that seems to have sidled it's way into modern life? Every other day someone somewhere seems to want us to stop doing what we're doing and reflect on the fragility of life. I'm not knocking the basic concept, but isn't enough enough?

I have no problem with the whole 11th November thing (which is, incidentally, a two-minute silence) as it is Armistice day, the anniversary of the end of the First World War and an opportunity to pay our respects to those who lost their lives in all wars (and on all sides). Despite the fact that very soon there will be no-one left who actually remembers the 1914-18 war 11am on the 11th day of the 11th month is symbolic, a time for people to come together as one and remember.

But now we seem to have so many minutes of silence for various occasions that we are in danger of losing the ability to speak at all - or, perhaps more realistically and importantly, of losing all meaning behind our silent reflection. Sports events are my personal bugbear - George Best's demise was a sad (albeit predictable) occurence, but I like to think that he would have preferred the one-minute of applause that preceded 3 of the games over the weekend to the silence offered by the others.

And now we have an Australian back-bencher requesting a minute's silence for convicted drug smuggler Nguyen Tuong Van when he is executed on Friday. I cannot even begin to explain how fucking wrong that is, despite the fact that I am on record as being against the death penalty. It just kind of cheapens the whole idea even more.

It's time we realised that instead of constantly reflecting on death we should be living life. Remembering the past and learning from it is hugely important - dwelling on it just stunts personal and sociological growth. That's my opinion - tell me yours....

Cheers m'dears!


Thursday, November 24, 2005

Hypocrisy abounds!

Australia and South East Asia has been all a-buzz recently with the trial of Nguyen Tuong Van, the Aussie heroin smuggler, in Singapore. In recent editions of the Daily Propoganda and on countless news-based websites there have been letters from Australians, half of whom are stating that "all of Australia" condemns the fact that Singapore intends to follow the letter of it's laws and execute the guy, the other half likewise declaring that "all of Australia" stands behind Singapore's sovereign right to follow it's own rules without interference.

Now, aside from showing a problem with basic mathematics in Australia, this issue has raised some points of contention. But before I go into them I must be honest about my personal feelings.... I am against Capital Punishment and always have been. That, incidentally, does not make me wishy-washy or 'too-forgiving'. I believe that punishment should be appropriate to the crime, as hard as is necessary, but with it should come the opportunity for remorse and a chance to change. And I believe that no-one has the right to take a life, not even in the "eye for an eye" context (constantly quoted by the religious right, despite the fact that it's appearances in the Old Testament, Exodus 21:23-25 and Leviticus 24:19-20, are superceded by Matthew 5:38-39 - look it up if you don't believe me). But this is not what I am intending to bang on about in this post.......

One point noted in pro-execution letters is the hypocrisy of many anti-execution Australians. Do they cry out at the injustice of it all when it isn't their countryman facing the noose? Of course fucking not! Very few people do. And of course there's the fact that Singapore is it's own nation and shouldn't dilute it's laws at the whim of it's neighbour. Y'know what? I actually agree with that one. Of course by that I partly mean that I think Singapore should come to it's senses of it's own accord, but that's not the only reason. If bigger nations bully smaller nations into accepting their values then all they do is cause resentment and eventual backlash... the US and it's allies are already experiencing that.

Of course this type of hypocrisy is not only visible in attitudes toward Singapore but also in those emanating from there. Recently it was reported that Singapore is looking at introducing laws to prosecute it's citizens for commiting offences against Singaporean law in other countries where the laws may be different. The case in particular refers to an island barely an hour away where the legal age limit for sex is as low as 14. Men from Singapore apparently travel over for the express purpose of screwing girls barely into puberty. I don't like the idea of it myself, but that is considered a suitable age in that state. It might perhaps be one thing if this was being done to protect the girls in question but the reason behind it seems to be more that these actions do not hold up to Singaporean 'moral standards and laws'. Hmmm... much like Capital Punishment appears not to hold up to current Australian laws and standards.

I cannot say how old someone should be before they have sex - I'm not even sure that 16 (UK limit) is old enough. I certainly wasn't fucking mature enough to handle it properly until way after then. But the point is how can Singapore prosecute someone for not breaking a law somewhere just because the Singaporean government thinks it 'should' be a law? How long before other countries try it? If I go to Amsterdam and smoke pot will I get arrested in the UK? If an American citizen crosses the road at a place where crossing isn't designated in the UK, will he get arrested for jay-walking on his return to the US? Will an Englishman who has returned from France get locked up because whilst there he drove on the right instead of the left? How fucked up do we want to make this......?

In defending it's own sovereignty whilst simultaneously challenging that of its neighbour Singapore proves that hypocrisy and double standards are alive and well... but then regimes in virtually all countries seem to have an air of 'Do as I say, not as I do"....

Cheer m'dears!

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

The Hitler Youth is alive and well.

I have sat here for two hours starting this entry over and over again. Words fail me. You see, it seems easy to rail against the small-minded bigotry of middle-aged white-supremacists because we seem so sure that they are collectively an ageing dinosaur, steadily dying out. With each generation the support for these views seems to grow thinner, and whilst we know that peace will never truly abound in our time we have hope for the future.

And then you come across Lamb and Lynx (pictured). I first saw them on a documentary a couple of years ago and I was shocked - not just by the two cute blonde haired moppets who were incongruosly spouting seperatist propoganda but also by my own naivety. I mean, where did I think the middle-aged bigots came from? For those not in the know this pair form the musical duo "Prussian Blue" (look up the term on google and you will see it's link to the gas chambers used in the holocaust), whose lyrics deal not just with the usual teen angst of fancying boys and the heart-warming odes to a loving family but also with spreading the 'truth' about keeping purity in the white race. With songs like the all-German "Weiss, Weiss, Weiss" (White, White, White) and disturbing lyrics like "Rudolph Hess, man of Peace; He wouldn't give up and he wouldn't cease; To give his loyalty to our Cause; Remember him and give a pause" these girls are the almost-acceptable face of racism.

Now thirteen years old they are entering a period of their life when they may cease repeating their parents words parrot-fashion and begin to explore their views and their ideology. What they will find is not the glorious world of white pride they sing about but something decidedly more murky, however they choose to view it. Maybe then they will come to understand that when they say that they are 'seperatists, not supremacists' the reality is that those two often amount to the same thing... why would you want to be seperate from something you didn't believe you were superior to? We can but hope that as they mature into adulthood this pair, and the countless other kids like them, will realise that this world should not be about building walls of segregation but about extending bridges of compassion.

Other posts I have written before have often been sharper-edged and littered with expletives because of the bile the subject matter engendered. But I find that I cannot get angry about these girls - not yet, anyway. Instead I am just overwhelmingly saddened by them... and sad for them.

Cheers m'dears!


Tuesday, November 22, 2005

The world is full of absolute twats....

....and not just the one on the right. Allow me to demonstrate:-

Twat 1 (a.k.a. "the 'in-denial' twat")

Mr Taro Aso, Japanese foreign minister, has gone on record to state that Japan's involvement in wars at the beginning of the 20th century (including the Second World War) purely amounted to 'self-defence'. I don't know a huge amount about Japanese military history but historical sources I have come across would disagree. Just to use one single example of this unusual take on 'self-defence' take a look at Pearl Harbour. Just a pre-emptive strike, was it? Mr Aso (I wonder if that's pronounced in the same way as a bad english impression of a Japanese person saying "arsehole"?) made his comments defending the Yushukan war memorial which depicts Japan as defending itself against Western colonialists. Hey, I ain't saying the west weren't bastards who fucked up a lot of countries but this claim is completely twattish. I mean, why not suggest Hitler only went to Poland to get his ball back?

Twat 2 (a.k.a. "the bull-shitting twat")

Surprise, surprise. Fresh from receiving a remarkably light sentence from the Bali court, where she had been appearing in Muslim dress, the model-cum-Islamic-'convert' Michelle Leslie buggered off to buy some stilettos and slip into somethinga little more comfortable (emphasis on the word 'little'... and possibly the word 'slip' too). Considering the bewildering predictability of this chain of events I can't even be fucked to comment any further.

Twat 3 (a.k.a. "the suicidal-yet-in-a-rather-amusing-way twat")

Sadrine Helene Sellies had a fear of flying, and so before boarding her flight she took sleeping pills, swallowed down with alcohol. She is apparently also a big-time sleepwalker, so when (whilst half asleep and simultaneously drugged up) she decided she needed a cigarrette her brain did not register a problem at all with opening the door to step outside..... in mid-flight. She was stopped by the flight attendants, which was lucky... because if she hadn't there probably wouldn't have been any survivors to tell us about her complete twattery. She get's my vote for the next Darwin awards, although I have to wonder whether she has ruined an important plot point for 'Lost'...?

But wait, there is hope!

Amongst the chaos of twats like these appears the dim but heartening light of people with a healthy sense of realism mixed with a dash of wit... cue Mr Ozzy Osbourne, quoted this week as saying "I don't smoke, drink or take drugs anymore. But knowing my luck, a bird will crap on me and I'll get bird flu on the way home"

Many thanks, Ozzy, for restoring my faith in human kind......

Cheers m'dears!

Labels: , , ,

Monday, November 21, 2005

Continental identity crisis

Some news organisations have been asking questions recently about whether Europe will ever manage to give up all it's national identities and create one European identity, inclusive not just of all native Europeans but also of immigrants to Europe. This is, undoubtedly, in response to the riots in France recently which have been proven to NOT be about religion (so people can stop using the word 'Jihad' every other sentence) but about social issues and the hardships endured by ethnic minorities. But the question I ask is should nations give up their identities at all?

I for one have no intention of giving up my national identity. It has played a part in defining me, but is not the be-all-and-end-all of me. Yes, I am a European. Put me in a non-European country and that will show in my different takes on situations. But I am also a Briton. Put me anywhere else in Europe and the same applies. In fact, within Britain I am also from one of the four smaller kingdoms, another differing factor. And when it boils down to it the county and town I am from can show me to be different. But it's these differences that play a part in making us all unique, and I for one celebrate them.

This does NOT make me racist or xenophobic. I love visiting other countries and experiencing other cultures, but if we are forced to lose our national identities then will we have a Europe where we are all the same? Will we lose those things that make us interesting to each other? And if citizens of this new Europe are to have only a European identity will we be forcing those immigrants who have made Europe their home to ditch their own history and culture too, thereby losing the richness their diversity can bring?

Here is the keen difference between patriotism and xenophobia - a true patriot will love his / her country, but not unconditionally. They will recognise the faults of their society and strive to rectify them. They should also embrace those from other cultures who wish to live in their land - I mean, what a compliment that is! Xenophobes, on the other hand, often blindly see their own country and way of life as 'the best in the world' and shoot down anyone who dares to question it If there is a fault in the xenophobe's country you can bet it's the fault of those 'damned immigrants'. And the last thing they would want is a 'johnny-foreigner' living next door. Where it gets confusing is that the word 'Patriot' is often claimed and proclaimed the loudest by the xenophobes.........

I am a patriot. There is much to love about the land I am from. But there is also much to despise, and I do that as a patriot too. I know my country is not 'the best in the world', but I would like it to try to be the best it can.

And finally, we should all remember that much of the progress made by human kind since year dot was inspired by the meetings of cultures, the ideas that were spawned by the coming together of people from different backgrounds and with different takes on things. Being unique is the one thing we all have going for us!

Cheers m'dears!

Wow - managed a whole post without swearing once! Fucking amazing!

Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, November 20, 2005

The best things in life are free! But, alas, the Press is not.

After yesterday's posting I was in some random chatroom and got into a bit of a barney with some guy from the US. I tell you this not because me having an ether-scrap is unusual but because it kind of follows directly on from what I was saying in that last post.

I was having a reasonably pleasant game of poker online (in a non-money situation... I'm way too crap to actually bet!) and just talking bollocks with my fellow players when one did the usual boring "age / sex / location" thing, a sure sign of someone with nothing interesting to actually start a conversation with. Feeling in a generous mood I obliged, and although I told him that I was 73 days old and asexual I actually opted for truth on the third question. And his response? Well, aside from not batting an eyelid at the first two answers he responded to my location being Sinless City by saying "Oh, all the press there is Government controlled isn't it".

He was right of course, but my initial response was one of mild indignation. "The press here?", I replied. "Have you watched Fox News recently?". Cue lots of patriotic flag waving and general fucking hysteria from not just that one guy but half the bloody table. But during the course of the argument I found myself getting wound up less by the ignorami and more by the fact that I could not think of any news organisation which is truly trustworthy.

When I used to live on the Rainy Isle I rarely bothered with newspapers, except for doing the odd crossword or sudoku. I used to get one middle-class right-wing tabloid rag from time to time, just so I could vent my spleen at the suppresive shit written by the bigotted cunts, but if I wanted news I always took to Auntie Beeb.... okay, still not completely independent and influence free, but at least you got the feeling that they tried - or at least you did until Blair's spin machine castrated them after the David Kelly suicide.

The truth of the matter is that whatever you want to know about, whatever shit is going on out there, you have to find it out for yourself. Don't just swallow the pill that the propoganda machine feeds you... the media outlets are all, without exception, owned by companies and individuals with a vested interest in not telling you the exact truth. And the bitter side of that is it includes publications and programming that you or I may personally agree with most of the time. It is too easy for us to buy the newspaper that suits our own politics and nod in agreement with what it has to say, but it is of far more value to complement that with something that spouts a rival opinion. At least it can make you think, force you to defend what you believe in.

And of course we can now find out what goes on through the wider outlet of the net. As Brewski has said in his blog, we need to unlearn - remove what we have been told is true and explore to find our own truths. When we were about 13 if we had to write an essay we would probably get quotes exhaustively from one or two books. Would you do the same writing as an adult? If you did you'd probably not do very well. Put the feelers out - digest it all, evaluate it all. Hell, I may still disagree with your opinion at the end of it all, but at least it is yours and not that of Rupert Murdoch and his ilk.....

The fucker beat me at poker too.....

Oh, and incidentally... the poker hand above was, unfortunately, not mine. Ye gads, no! (sob)

Cheers m'dears!

Labels: , ,

Saturday, November 19, 2005

A Nazi case of double standards....

So, what would you do if I told you the Holocaust never happened? Relax, I'm not the kind of fuckwit to ever say that, but if I did what would you do? In the case of the Austrian authorities they would arrest me, as right-wing British historian David Irving (that's him pictured) recently found out.

Now, before you jump for joy at the incarceration of this loon (he once stated that the slaughter of six-million Jews had not even been known by Hitler) think on this. Isn't the repression of Freedom of Speech fascism in it's own right? Whether we agree with the twat or not, isn't he entitled to his opinion? Are not the laws that have made Holocaust denial a crime in Austria since 1989 a little fucked-up?

Irving had been invited by students in Vienna to talk on the relationship between Joel Brand and Rezsö Kasztner (the Jewish leaders in wartime Budapest) and SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Karl Adolf Eichmann, and his lecture would almost certainly have insisted it was the Jews who sold each other out and their fate was really nothing to do with the Nazi command. Okay, so this could be construed as possibly worrying - teaching a new generation in a pro-Nazi fashion - but when you take into account Irving's utter crassness and sheer twattery (quote: "I say quite tastelessly, in fact, that more women died on the back seat of Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than ever died in a gas chamber in Auschwitz.") then surely the only thing he can seriously be a threat to is any legitimacy that the far right have.

The question is then - exactly how much freedom should speech be allowed? During the last UK elections a Student Union invited all the candidates in their area to do a Q & A session at their school. Of course, once the media got hold of this the Headteacher retracted the invite to the far right BNP candidate. Is this right? I personally deplore their fucked-up ideology, but shouldn't those students been given the chance to make their own decision? The result of banning that contact simply meant that the students were only exposed to the watered-down and more family-friendly mailshot, when they could instead have been able to ask the candidate more probing questions that could have exposed the wolf under the sheeps clothing.

Perhaps most worryingly for the online community was recent events in Singapore, where three youngsters were taken to court for posting racist remarks on their blogs. Should the authorities have taken that course of action, removing the blogs, or should the boys have been allowed to continue and suffer the backlash that they were already receiving? Censoring what they say doesn't change the fact that it is what some people think - in fact, censorship often strengthens the beliefs it tries to suppress. And having curtailed those boys activities, where does it stop? Because, let's face it, in many countries what I write on this page and what many of the other bloggers I visit write would be considered unsuitable.

Tell me what you think.... I'm genuinely interested.

Cheers m'dears

"There are so many Auschwitz survivors going around, in fact the number increases as the years go past, which is biologically very odd to say the least. Because I'm going to form an Association of Auschwitz survivors, survivors of the Holocaust and other liars, or the ASSHOLS."
As said by that cunt David Irving again!

Labels: , , ,

Friday, November 18, 2005

Sex and Sinless City

Okay, so I was reading the local propoganda broadsheet this morning when I came across an article on a sex-festival. "What the fuck?" I said out loud, to the obvious amusement of the schoolkids on the seat behind me on the bus (and to the glare of the old git opposite). Okay, so this city isn't really 'Sinless' - there is an entire shopping centre which becomes it's own red light district at night, for Christ's sake! - it just often feels like it's supposed to be. But for there to be a festival all about making beasts with two backs here, and during daylight hours... that, my friends, is not usual!

Of course, as I read further into the article the Sinless City I have come to know started to show. Unlike counterparts in other parts of the world this is not to be all about dildo's and sado-masochist toys (one display has been banned because the dildo's were "dangerously oversized" and "could cause injury to users"), but will also house stands for roughly 200 medical and lifestyle organisations (in most cases here 'lifestyle' means 'religious'). Okay, that is all good and I applaud the sensible and responsible nature of the organisers but the fact that there are only 12 booths displaying and selling the arguably more 'fun' aspects of sex kind of begs the question, are they really going to attract the 60,000 people they need to break even? Add to that the age limit being imposed: under 21 year olds can attend but only for the part where they talk about sex and social responsibility. Seems weird when they have to do National Service in their late teens and get trained to kill people. Hey, we trust you to use a gun but not your cocks..... But this was not what really got my goatee.........

The fact that this exhibition has anything to do with sex has already got folks wetting their pants in indignation. A spokesman for the police was quoted in the article saying that it "must not promote objectionable behaviours or lifestyles, such as sado-masochism, bestiality, homosexuality, paedophilia, and promiscuity". What an absolute fucking cunt. Look, I absolutley agree with the comment about paedophilia, and on bestaility - neither of which are usually about sex, more about power and the child / animal usually has fucking little option in the matter. They are bang out of order, 100%, but sado-masochism? Not my bag, but some people are into it and consent to it willingly. Promiscuity? If we're all fucking everyone else then who gives a shit, as long as we do it responsibly (and there are 200 organisations willing to help with that at the exhibition!!). And homosexuality? Well, that one really fucks me right off!

I am not gay, never have been, but have plenty of friends who are and the ones that are my age in particular usually have the most loving stable relationships out of anyone I know. An objectionable lifestyle? I'll concede that the police spokesman is entitled to his own opinion but I bet if I spent a few days with him I'd find a few things about his lifestyle that I also find objectionable. And to lump it in with paedophilia is complete fucking lunacy, ill-informed and frankly bigotted. It's attitudes like his that turned me right off religion as a teen. So thank you, Mister Police Spokesman.........

........I bet you are just sexually frustrated and could use a damn good buggering!

Oh, and incidentally, the toy in the picture is not mine. Ye gads, no!

Cheers m'dears!

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, November 17, 2005

Everything has to begin somewhere...

Actually, that's probably utter bollocks. But the point I'm labouring over is that this blog has to start somewhere. Which is perhaps proving a little more difficult than anticipated. Lucky for me that no fucker is likely to turn up to read this first post, if anyone bothers with any of my posts at all. anyhow, enough procrastination....

I am one of those annoying bastards who thinks too much and as a result talks immense amounts of crap, often (but not exclusively) when my good pal alcohol is exerting her influence over me. I have been known to rant about anything and everything, vehemently spew vitriol in the direction of any bastards whom I disagree with, and generally act like an obstinate old wanker who is absolutely certain that he is always right. And those are just my best qualities.... Hence my decision to try and bring some cohesion to the mess that is myself by clearly laying down these rantings in a blog. Except now that I am here (and Lady Booze is sadly not) I am all of a sudden at a loss for what to write.

So let me begin just by moaning about feet... just for a second. I hate the fuckers. I understand their purpose and appreciate them doing their job, but that doesn't change the fact that they are truly the most ugly part of the human body. Even the penis (an unattractive appendage if ever there was one) has to take a backseat to feet. And yet living in Sinless City where the climate is consistently pleasant I am constantly surrounded by people in fucking sandals! The strappy heeled shoes the girls wear are bad enough, even if they are adorning nicely pedicured feet, but the sandals? And then the mother of all horrors, the bastard flip-flops! (Thongs, if you're American [apologies - it's Aussies who call them thongs!]). Because this is a city and not a nice white sanded beach (where I can just about cope with it all) those toes, pedicured or not, become blackened by the dirt and calloused by the hard pound on concrete and look like utter shite. It genuinely makes me feel like vomming, most particularly when people are slipping their shoes on and off in cafes and bars............

And there you go. To think I was worrying that I didn't know what to write for my debut. If there is perchance anyone who bothered reading about my perverted foot anti-fetish please do leave a comment. I mean, you've taken 5 minutes from your oh-so-hectic life to read this shit so you obviously have nothing better to do.....

And incidentally, that picture is not me. Ye gads, no!

Cheers m'dears!

Labels: , ,