Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Greens issue BBQ-stopping directive for Australia Day

The Greens, being the malignant, tiny-minded totalitarians that we've all come to know and loathe, don't just get off on telling others how to live their lives in a political, economic sense. They feel the need to offer instructions about how they should relate to those close to them in personal contexts also.

Take this creepy directive from them regarding Australia Day:

Next Monday is Australia Day — which, for many Australians — means friends, family and BBQs. It also means the opportunity to have a conversation about climate change.

Will you pledge to have a climate conversation on January 26th?

Blech! Doesn't that just make your skin walk? The invasive arrogance of these creepy communards is just jaw dropping. Fancy thinking that the talk that goes on between friends and family in this social setting is their bloody business!

Sheesh. They'll be telling people how to take a shower next!  Oh wait ...

And they're not just gently nudging the conversation in the direction of a certain pet subject of theirs. They're telling their brainless acolytes exactly what to say, too.

We’ll give you everything you need—- a climate conversation guide, some updated facts and figures about climate impacts in your areas... even some climate drink stickers you can print out and stick on the guests’ glasses!

This reconfirms a coupla things: Firstly, greenies generally are just brainless followers. They don't do their own thinking. They just sit there passively waiting to get told what to say by the leaders of their stupid movement, mindlessly mouthing these warmist dogmas without question.

Secondly, their leaders have no respect for them at all.  They just see them as slave bots they can easily program to launch attacks at otherwise friendly get-togethers in backyards all across the nation. Socialist spammers is what they are!

Kinda makes sense that they think that the eeevil Rupert Murdoch is brainwashing the masses. Because they're doing it to their own retarded readership, they think everyone else must be using the same techniques of mind control.

Saturday, January 10, 2015

Hashtagging slacktivists have it both ways with #JeSuisCharlie

In these days of social media saturation, whenever something bloody awful happens in the world you can be sure it will spawn some silly trending hashtag. The recent Sydney siege in Martin Place gave rise to #Illridewithyou, which was a hollow promise made by countless slacktivists concerned more about the feelings of Muslims on public transport than the lives of hostages being held by a crazed Islamist in a Sydney cafe.

Now, as a result of another coupla crazed Islamists running amok in the most barbaric way imaginable in Paris, we have #JeSuisCharlie. I suppose it's an improvement on the last hashtag because it at least seems to side with irreverent freedom of expression over murderous, humorless totalitarianism.

But apart from the fact that these fervent tweeps and Facebookers are not truly risking anything by simply including a word with a little symbol in front of it in their updates, quite often they'll include caveats about how they're not condemning Islam at the same time. Basically, they're trying to have it both ways.

This is galling because it's insincere. And to use a hackneyed phrase, it merely confirms that the terrorists have won. That's because they've got everyone terrified -- which is obviously the whole bloody point of terrorism. And the more they win using terror, the more they'll use it.

Basically, there's a war going on in all multi-culti democracies. Sure, it's a war being waged by a relatively small number of barbarians against western civilization and what it stands for. But it's a war nonetheless. These pre-mediaeval thugs walk among us, and have no hesitation in slaughtering innocents. And their violence is driven by Islamic ideology as much as anything else.

So either you are for western freedom against Islamic totalitarianism, or you're against it. You must take a side. If you're for it, then go hard or go home. Going hard would be republishing the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, or at the very least pointing out the elephant in the room and saying that Islam is the problem here.

Hell, if Bible-bashers had murdered those heaping derision on their religion (and Jeez, it's not like there's any lack of that now is there!) then I (and pretty much everyone else) would say that Christianity was the problem, right? So, in the same way, in this case, Islam is the problem here.

And for the benefit of any Muslims (devout or otherwise) who are reading this: If you think that slaughtering people who mock the Prophet is justified, you should either lighten up and get a sense of humour or grow a hide. Failing that, you should really reconsider if you want to even live in a western democracy. Because, frankly, it's high time you realized you are not a special case, okay! Jews, Christians, Buddhists, and all the rest cop massive serves of derision daily. And while they almost always don't like it, often arc up about it and even occasionally try to silence the mockers, they don't go around killing people because they were made fun of.

And back to the hashtaggers and their ilk: Given that we are in a war, then if you want to surrender, fine. But don't roll over in appeasement and simultaneously claim to be bravely standing up to barbarism. That's just silly and anyone with a heart, a spine and mind knows it.

Saturday, December 20, 2014

Michael James misses point on #Illridewithyou backlash

If you had any doubt that lefties are totally obsessed with their own infantile emotions to the exclusion of pretty much everything else that goes on in the world you should check out a recent article by the guy who created the first nauseatingly sanctimonious #Illridewithyou tweet on Twitter. It details his reaction to the recent furore over the lack of veracity of the story that so inspired him in the first place.

Michael James is a hand-wringing latte-slurper from Brisvegas. When he saw a saccharine Facebook post by former Greens candidate Rachael Jacobs about her offering to ride with a poor oppressed Muslim woman he tweeted the post without thinking.

Fitting so snugly into the smug anti-western narrative of slacktivist cuddlebunnies everywhere, it rapidly took on a life of its own on the social network. But afterwards, because Jacobs was shown to be a tad loose with the truth when it came to what really happened on that train, a social and mainstream media storm erupted.

It seems that, not surprisingly, poor Rachael was a tad shat off about this development. Who wouldn't be? Though he claims she's showed him no ill will, mortified Michael has tried to make amends in this article about how the whole silly saga raises issues about -- wait for it -- Facebook privacy!

The guy's self-obsessed sanctimony is just stunning, isn't it?

A crazed gunman takes a bunch of Australian citizens hostage and demands an Islamic State flag to be shown in the window. While the poor bastards are still trapped inside, fearing for their lives, James sets off a social media campaign presenting Muslims as the real victims!

Then when the story on which the whole crazy frenzy is based is shown to be mostly false and people vent their spleen at being had, he still doesn't get it. He thinks the issue is actually caring sharing Rachael's Gaia-given right not to be snarked at for makin' stuff up! (And he doesn't even take responsibility for what he did. If he wanted to keep the issue about what he did to Jacobs, why doesn't he do an article about friendship, and how some "friends" callously exploit each other for personal and professional gain and cheap media cool points?)

Gawd. Any sensible person would note the jaw-dropping wrong-headedness of the campaign to start with, then when the truth emerged, the ethical questionability of Jacobs at least partially concocting a story to make herself seem virtuous (even if it was meant for a selective audience, and not the squillions who ultimately latched onto it).

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Sydney siege selfie frenzy and #Illridewithyou two sides of same coin

With the Lindt Chocolat Cafe siege finally over, it's no wonder that the luvvies at their ABC and elsewhere, as well as many Muslim spokespeople all across Oz, are desperately trying to downplay the involvement of Islam in the horrific, lethal event. Some are even saying that it's hard to even classify it as terrorism; that Man Haron Monis was just some crazy individual who could have been a member of any religion.

Yeah, well, imagine if he were a Christian. Think how those who constantly claim that "Islam is a Religion of Peace" would have reacted then ...

But the Left are so consistently, er, inconsistent, aren't they? When it comes to jaw-dropping hypocrisy they are world class, no doubt about it.

And there was certainly much if it in the leftist reaction to the selfie frenzy occurring outside the siege's location in Martin Place itself. Of course this phenomenon was revolting. It was a grotesque display of narcissistic indifference to people who were trapped in the most terrifying situation imaginable -- and only metres away.

And many of those shaking their heads in disgust at this callous behaviour were also singing the praises of the #Illridewithyou movement:

No way. That, that is what sanctimonious arsehats playing with their iPhones do ... to make themselves feel morally virtuous. It was slacktivism pure and simple; a meaningless gesture that would almost certainly never be tested.

Really, how many Muslims would take those retweeting the hashtag up on these "offers"? My guess is a tiny, tiny minority. And you can imagine how many of the slacktivists would ultimately let their newfound transport besties down. Heaps, surely.

And consider who the gesture was aimed at reassuring: members of the religion that the terrorist so zealously associated himself with -- not the poor bastards kept at gunpoint against their will by him!

And remember that #Illridewithyou took off while those hostages were still in that situation. They were the real victims, not bloody Muslims!

But how much of a problem is abuse of Muslims on public transport anyway? Sure, it does occur, and is unacceptable. But it's hardly an epidemic by any measure.

So not only was #Illridewithyou a massive social media wank (or rather, twank); it was also a grotesque display of narcissistic indifference to human suffering -- not unlike the selfie frenzy that occurred simultaneously.

Monday, December 15, 2014

Jokey #SydneySiege tweets are stupid, nihilistic

The siege in Sydney's Martin Place is still unfolding. As I write this a few people have managed to escape. Hopefully the rest will get out unharmed.

I've been keeping up to date on Twitter. And what's interesting is how callous and stupid many of the tweets are. Because the terrifying event is occurring in the Lindt store there, some of the more cynical tweeps are making jokes about chocolate.

Take this from what appears to be the real Mohammed Junaid Thorne:

Others in a similar vein:

And thankfully some common sense:

UPDATE: But even that very reasonable exhortation provokes mindless abuse from the trolls. Amazing.

UPDATE: And still the "jokes" keep coming, all of them as lame as they are revolting.

Take this guy's offering. Well, at least he seems to have some idea of just how pathetic and nauseating it is ...

Thursday, December 4, 2014

Bill Shorten's 7.30 Report performance slammed on Twitter

Here in Perth we get everything three hours later than Sydney and Melbourne. So by logging into Twitter I'll often read a lot of emotive feedback about TV current affairs shows and the like as they're being broadcast in the east, then watch them afterwards when they're broadcast here. This inverted "snark before the cause" process can be quite interesting.

Needless to say, I don't pay much attention to the lefties on Twitter. Being shamelessly, brainlessly partisan, they are sure to be outraged by pretty much anything a conservative says. And they're always desperately trying to create a lot of momentum with their puerile whining so their fellow travellers in the ABC and Fairfax can report on this "social media reaction" as if it's some sort of organic, genuine example of the electorate's take on things.

Conservatives, being generally more rational and restrained, won't snipe at a Labor or Greens pollie unless he truly deserves it. Take Bill Shorten's cringeworthy 7.30 Report interview last night, for example.

This was panned widely on Twitter, and with good reason. He offered absolutely nothing of substance, and was clearly uncomfortable throughout.

Leigh Sales did a fine job of hounding him to give genuine answers to her questions about the tough decisions he would no doubt have to make if he becomes PM. But he just wasn't forthcoming. He was clearly trying to weasel his way into the gig by saying there'll be no pain, only gain for all concerned. Shorten will no doubt employ this tactic for as long as he possibly can, the jellyback.

Sales herself was becoming quite frustrated with him and the whole process reminded me of that jaw-dropping train wreck of an interview between Wassim Doureihi and Emma Alberici on Lateline.

Sure, Shorten wasn't implicitly defending anything as ugly as Doureihi was. But it was nonetheless extremely unedifying to watch. And it says heaps about him that he came across so poorly when even a fellow leftie from their ABC was asking the questions.

Monday, November 24, 2014

Q and A panellist James Cromwell is a vegan activist

We all know that their ABC's flagship weekly jawfest Q and A tilts heavily to the Left. It's also a given that artists in general tend to be petulant pinkos. That's why the show so often includes actors, singers, comedians and the like.

There are many reasons for the general, er, left-leaningness of arty wankers. In major part it's the result utopian socialism's relentless march through the institutions. As a result most people in film, theatre, etc, think that you can only be truly creative if you're a doctrinaire commie! Any half way intelligent analysis will confirm that this doesn't necessarily follow.

That said, I can't blame it all on bolshie brainwashing. I do think there is some self-selection going on. Creativity does require self-indulgence, after all. And that suggests emotional immaturity. As we all know, lefties suffer from that particular psychological affliction big time. So there is a bit of overlap there.

Back back to Q and A: Accomplished actor James Cromwell is on the show tonight. Even though he's a grizzled old bloke, like most of his ilk he does have the mind of a spoiled child. He's had a long history of progressive activism, including support for terrorist group the Black Panthers.

After converting to veganism some years ago he's been doing lots of, er, pro-bonobo work for those loopy losers at PETA. And he engages in silly, sanctimonious stunts from time to time. Coupla years back, for example, he burst into a uni board meeting to protest against "cat torture".

Seems kinda odd given that cats aren't actually vegans ... Hell, if he wanted to be truly consistent, shouldn't he have berated the moggies themselves for their callous treatment of mice and other defenceless little critters?

Clearly, common sense is not Cromwell's strong suit. Which is one of the reasons he was selected for inclusion in tonight's Q and A episode, no doubt.