Hypocritical Lefty Luvvie Twitter Talibanistas

I shan't go on about Caitlin Moron, who apparently can make all the violent threats, homophobic and ableist jokes or other trolling comments because "context", apparently.

Today I saw someone tweet about Graham Lineham blocking them while he (Graham Lineham) was dishing out abuse. I read the tweets in question and there was no fucking "context" there at all. Lineham was just calling people cunts. Tonight I saw him concur with Frankie "I can dish it out but I'm a big frit girl's blouse when I get it" Boyle saying that if his block button killed people, it would be a nicer place.

(Just revel in the fact there for a moment that the man who made his career out of being offensive wants to kill people who he finds offensive. Jaw-dropping, isn't it?)

I'm sure I could go on (and on and ON) finding other examples of hypocritical lefty luvvie twitter talibanistas if I wanted to, but you get the point.

I'm not really sure how different this is from me calling for the heads of hypocritical lefty luvvie twitter talibanistas (HLLTT's) on pikes, but apparently, when I dish abuse out, it's vile, when HLLTT's do it, it's funny and, y'know, "context".

From my perspective, I don't have a problem with Lineham or Moran or anyone else being abusive in the name of being funny. What I do find unbearable is them smugly pontificating about "abuse" and "politeness" while they do exactly the same things they're describing as being unacceptable and even worse, their armies of cock-sucking windowlickers actually having the temerity to justify it.

Either it's acceptable or it's not, if Moron or Lineham or Boyle can do it, why can't I?

Nigella contretemps

Let me start this by saying that I don't know whether Nigella was assaulted by her husband. If he did, then I have absolutely no fucking time for him whatsoever and he deserves whatever's coming to him after due process.

I do not condone domestic violence, I despise anyone who picks on someone unable to defend themselves. I despise the mental abuse that accompanies the physical violence in these situations.

And yet, I have to say that I don't really think ANYONE has enough evidence based on the pictures to form an opinion.

Let me just say this: a Labour-supporting newspaper publishes a set of photos depicting someone who helped the Tories in an unflattering light. We don't know how many photos there are, the person who could have submitted only some of the photos or the paper could have chosen the photos to fit a certain narrative. The article is full of irrelevant bollocks, disparaging innuendo passing as comment and "onlookers said". The assaultee seems to have carried on living with the assaulter and seems perfectly happy. There have never even been rumours of marital

Based on the photos, the body language for an assault is entirely wrong. I've seen similar role-playing behaviour between consenting adults.

I'd have absolutely no trouble believing that Saatchi was a dom and that Nigella was a sub. And if you didn't know what goes on in the world of BDSM, you would quite likely freak out if you saw it being enacted in public. But the key difference between kink and domestic violence is the issue of consent. And if two consenting adults choose to do things that you or I find incomprehensible, does this mean that the police need to be involved?

So I'm not going to say that it's not assault, but I'm not immediately convinced that it is. I'm certainly not going to rush to judgment on the basis of those photos.

If it was a bit of hanky-panky, I'm bloody sure they both regret it; if it was assault, it's surely her decision to make something of it, or not.

I'm unsurprised that feminists have been jumping up and down about this, immediately calling it domestic violence, demanding police action and making snarky remarks about anybody with a contrary opinion.

However, I've been fucking horrified by "anarchists" calling for the police to get involved in the private affairs of a successful, powerful, adult woman. It's almost like they don't think she's capable of cutting his balls off with a deft twitch of a kitchen knife or, you know, going to the police herself.

The whole thing is profoundly depressing to me.

Update: I spoke to a professional domme about this. She says that the body language is not fully the language of someone who's enjoying it. But even she isn't sure that it's not a bit of roleplay. She thinks that Mr Saatchi may be a bit unpleasant. The jury is still out on what happened, but no matter what the truth is, it's none of our fucking business unless they choose to make it public.

Second update: Apparently Mr Saatchi is a cunt who has accepted a police caution for assault. So that's me told.

Third update: I believe a divorce is in the offing. So I was completely wrong.

No change there, then.

Oh, the twitter bad men

I read this and it made me think.

Basically it's a polemic against cowardly comedians who use their fans to troll and bash people they don't like on twitter. Well, I'm shocked.

My older readers will recall I had a similar run-in with similarly lunatic fanboys, so I have personal experience of this.

And look, it's not nice. I came within a hair's breadth of shutting down my blog, but I didn't.

I think the fact that these three "big name" arseholes have, so blatantly, used their tribes of followers to troll is pretty damning to them, but more damning to the people who, like zombie sheep, troll off to do the bidding of their heroes.

But for all that, I have a major, major, bone to pick with the author:

Twitter was a vital support network for her.

Er, no.

Twitter is not a vital support network for anyone. Twitter is an open platform for people to say things on and it's quite clearly a place where unpleasant and unkind things are often said. Choosing to use twitter as a support network means that you are also going to open yourself up to things that are not supportive and the consequences thereof.

Yes, it's ludicrous of Twitter to suspend the victim, but that's not the point. If you want to use a platform where this kind of thing can happen, you have to accept that it could all go wrong.

It's free. It's flaky. It's fucked up. If you can't deal with it, don't use it.

The professionally aggrieved

This bloke had a disagreement with his girlfriend. He went to the pub and stayed out all night while his girlfriend stayed home sobbed her eyes out.

Now click here.

Plausible?

Or was your first thought "This shirt excuses domestic violence"? Like twitter did?

The professionally aggrieved saw this shirt and immediately started seeding twitter with "Look at this shirt, it makes domestic violence into a joke". Now if you look at the shirt again, thinking about domestic violence, it also makes perfect sense.

But crucially, it would make sense in almost any relationship dispute, violent or not. The frame of mind you're in when you first see the shirt has a massive impact on how you take it.

Needless to say, of course, that TopMan have pulled the shirt.

Obo Elsewhere

Over at Anna Raccoon's Cuntry Club.

@LouiseMensch is a fucking idiot

I had an argument with a fellow twatterer about his MP. He said she was one of the good guys and wouldn't hear a bad word about her.

I, on the other hand, explicitly distrust anyone who goes into politics as being someone who thinks they know better than anyone else how we should live our lives. And if you climb the greasy pole far enough to actually become an MP, then you must be a mendacious, bullying cunt of the highest order.

And so it came to pass. First we had:

Northamptonshire Police advise me that much of their time and resources were wasted answering false alarms due to soc media rumours.

Then:

Twitter regularly down for maintenance, and if in a major national emergency police think Twitter and FB should take an hour off? So be it

(Firstly, Twitter doesn't fucking regularly go down for maintenance, you daft bint, it's a 24x7 operation that isn't supposed to go down AT ALL. Likewise Facebook.

Secondly, the only way you can stop access to Facebook and Twitter is to completely disable access to all websites. I'm not even sure this is technically possible. It would certainly destroy every online business in the UK.

Still think it's a good idea?)

Then:

I don't have a problem with a brief temporary shutdown of social media just as I don't have a problem with a brief road or rail closure.

See above.

Then:

If short, necessary and only used in an emergency, so what. We'd all survive if Twitter shut down for a short while during major riots.

How often are you expecting major riots, Louise? Are you privy to some information that us plebs aren't entitled to?

Anyway, there more stupid tweets about maintenance and stuff, and then we get this gem:

And really, stop w/ all the dramatics. Nobody is talking about "shutting down Twitter". It's about listening to police & a couple hours off.

So here we have it: one of the "good guys" in politics thinks it's absolutely fine that the police (the fucking POLICE!) should have the power to shut down everybody in the UK's access to social networking because of a few miscreants that they can't handle. Never mind that in doing so they'd have to cut everybody in the UK off from the web completely. Never mind that it would lay waste to every online business in the UK at the same time.

If that's what a "good" politician thinks, can you imagine what the rest of them think?

It's so true, scratch a politician, any politician and you'll find a closet fascist.

Ban Twitter!

Tory MPs, earlier

Call Me Dave has responded to the riots and violence in a way that any Fabian would approve of: he has called for the ability to shut down BBM and Twitter to prevent violence from happening.

This is despite the fact that in other countries, twitter and so on are considered (by fucking Call Me Dave!) to be good for democracy.

Typical fucking politician, cheering something that looks good when it happens to someone else, but quick to shut it down when he thinks it's bad for his proles.

This despite the fact that a zillion people used BBM and Twitter without fucking needing to riot.

Is there anything in iDave's fucking bullshit posturing and hypocrisy that would not be familiar to a student of New Labour? Of course not, they are all the fucking same, apart from the tie colour.

Thieves, cunts, bullies and fucking fascists. Hang the lot of them.

Post script: more appropriate response from the wonderful, infalling, completely trustworthy state.

Fucking cunts.

The invisible man on Twitter

"*"
- Oliver Letwin on Twitter

Clearly, Mr Letwin is a man of few words on twitter, although he recently said a mouthful elsewhere:

Oliver Letwin, the coalition's policy minister, has revealed the government's determination to instil "fear" among those working in the public sector, who he claimed had failed for the past 20 years to improve their productivity.

I really have no idea what he means.

Although at a recent social gathering, a Treasury civil servant tried to convince me that civil servants are not overpaid, by outlining the salary the Treasury's head of Child Poverty was likely to attract.

When I pointed out that in real terms, the UK not only has no actual poverty, but actually has no idea what poverty even looks like, I could see the rolling eyes. When I pointed out that the average person in Africa would regard the life of the meanest, poorest dole-bludger in a Glasgow tenement as a life of complete luxury and ease, the penny dropped.

The problem is not that there are not hard-working civil servants. I'm sure that if you looked around hard enough, you could find a handful. But even if you ignore the bureaucratic empire-building that goes on, with five people doing the work of two, there is still the fundamental problem of productivity. That the Treasury has a department, however small or large it may be, to deal with a problem that does not exist in reality, but only exists in the minds and tick-box targets of empire-building civil servants, simply indicates where a large part of the problem is.

My employer is a massive, bureaucratic monster. But even they don't employ a Department of Child Poverty. It's got nothing to do with the continued success of the business. (This despite my employer having a positively annoying number of diversity and inclusion fora and voluntary social outreach programs.)

But the Treasury gets money no matter what it does. And perversely, the more it fucks up and the more stupid ideas it has, the more of our money it can take.

In essence, for every hard-working civil servant (apparently 14-hours a day is a lot!) there are rooms full of dross, people who may mean well, who may have families to feed and all the rest, but in truth are just sucking up everyone else's money and resources and there are also entire departments that exist for no other reason than somebody with sufficient clout in the organisation wanted them to exist.

Letwin, architect of the coalition's plans to reform public services, told a meeting at the offices of a leading consultancy firm that the public sector had atrophied over the past two decades.

I think Letwin is wearing rosy specs here. The public sector has been atrophying since it was born.

In controversial comments angering teachers, nurses and doctors, he warned that it was only through "some real discipline and some fear" of job losses that excellence would be achieved in the public sector.

Ah, "teachers, nurses and doctors", the Holy Trinity of the left-leaning twat. Because of course, admin clerks and the rest don't really matter do they? But anger a teacher and WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHEEEEEELDREN? Not to mention the saintly, untouchable NHS!

So, every other civil servant, be told: you don't matter. Only teachers, nurses and doctors matter. Even the Guardian thinks the rest of you are scum**.

Letwin added that some of those running schools and hospitals would not survive the process and that it was an "inevitable and intended" consequence of government policy.

"You can't have room for innovation and the pressure for excellence without having some real discipline and some fear on the part of the providers that things may go wrong if they don't live up to the aims that society as a whole is demanding of them," he said.

And this is the nub of the argument, and probably the only time I'm going to agree with an MP.

I compete in my job. I have to impress my manager just to keep my job. I have to compete with the people in my team, I have to show willing, I have to excel to show I deserve my bonus. There is always some or other headcount reduction (or other cost reduction) program going on. But because I'm doing my job well and making the difference, I'm not worried about losing my job.

I would do it anyway, because it's not just the technology that excites me, I like making a difference and making problems go away. But if I was going to collect the same salary whether I bust a gut or not and I knew I'd never lose my job, I'm pretty sure there would be days where I would pull a sickie or get hammered the night before and sit in the office playing Freecell. And who knows, it might get to be addictive and maybe I'd stop working altogether, become a Wally in Dilbert-speak.

But along with the carrot of job satisfaction is the fact that I'm a parent with a kid to feed and my job is not guaranteed for life.

"If you have diversity of provision and personal choice and power, some providers will be better and some worse. Inevitably, some will not, whether it's because they can't attract the patient or the pupil, for example, or because they can't get results and hence can't get paid. Some will not survive. It is an inevitable and intended consequence of what we are talking about."

I really can't see why lefties are up in a froth over this. Do they really believe that if someone is a shit doctor and patients don't want to see them, they should get paid (and presumably still be doctors as well)? If someone is a useless teacher, would you want them teaching your kids?

Of course you fucking don't. So why the hell are you pretending that any of this is controversial?

*@oliverletwin hasn't tweeted yet.

**This is a joke. I think.

Has your twitter account been hacked?

If I've sent you to this post, let me first start off by saying you're a cunt. You've clearly clicked on a link and given authority to a dodgy application without thinking what you're doing. So you're a cunt.

When people point this out, you will invariably rush back to Twitter and change your password, because not only are you a cunt, but you're a stupid cunt. Stupid because changing your password will do nothing to stop someone accessing your twitter because Twitter has an authorisation mechanism that persists beyond password changes. But that won't mean anything to you, because you're a stupid cunt.

So instead, here's how you actually fix it (in "new" twitter):

1. Log in to your Twitter webpage
2. On the top right of your page will be your name. Click on it.
3. Choose "Settings" from the menu that appears.
4. Click on Applications.
5. Click the "Revoke Access" on all applications you don't use all the time. It's quite possible that the naughty application will be the first in the list, but not a given.

In "old" Twitter:

1. Log in to your Twitter webpage
2. Click "Settings".
3. Click on Applications.
4. Click the "Revoke Access" on all applications you don't use all the time. It's quite possible that the naughty application will be the first in the list, but not a given.

The problem should now be gone.

PS You're still a cunt.

Yah! Boo! Sucks!

Jesus, watching any kind of political debate on Twitter really makes me want to commit violence. I'm not even sure what program is on, oh, apparently it was Newsnight. But just compare these tweets:

Nick Boles terrific on #Newsnight reminding Harriet high horse Harman of Brown's links with News Intl -- Tim Montgomerie, Tory

vs.

The #Tories really ought not let Nick Boles speak for them in public. @HarrietHarman easily knocking down his angry rants. -- PeterL_77, Labourite

Really? Is that the standard of political discourse among educated, grown up people who are really interested in politics? "My guy is saying it best! Your woman is an idiot!*" "No, my woman is saying it best! Your guy is an idiot!**"

Can none of you understand that your partisan, uncritical, blind loyalty to your party is what gifts lobby fodder scum decades at the trough? It is why politicians get away with things that their party is ostensibly totally opposed to.

"My party, right or wrong" is the validation of every bad idea, every cruel policy, every innocent killed abroad, that politicians want. It is the thing that destroys the very limited value of democracy.

The next time any politician does something wrong, ask yourself: "What is more important: my principles or my party?" And if you can't honestly say that it's your principles, then you need to know that one of the gravest, most insidious heaps of rotten decay in the body politic looks at you in the mirror each day.

*Technically, this is actually true.

**Technically, this is also true.

So, once again *I* am somehow the cunt

So, apparently blood transfusion is to be privatised. Cue lefty twitter cockwafts claiming that they will no longer donate blood to save their fellow human beings after decades of doing so, because someone will profit from it.

When I pointed out that this means you think a human life is less important than objecting to the profit motive, I got blocked. Apparently, you should only be altruistic if your funding model is adhered to. Never mind how many people may die because of your petty, arrogant attitude.

There's cunts, fucking cunts, and then there's this. Your political persuasion is more important than someone else's life.

Jesus.

Twatstorm

Oh dear:

I wholeheartedly endorse managed anorexia, as to be fat or even not thin is to fail life.

Needless to say, the pitchforks are already out, and people who really fucking ought to know better, are giving it large.

This is a very straightforward thing: Mr Kenneth Tong is a complete fucking cunt. But you know, he's entitled to his opinion that thin girls are where it's at, and he's just as entitled to fucking stupid opinions about medical issues as say, homeopaths.

Just like no-one with any fucking sense tries to cure cancer with an ultra-diluted placebo, no one with any fucking sense is going to take diet tips from a ornamental twat. And if you're stupid enough to do either, well, then, you've fucking earned the consequences, haven't you? He's not fucking holding a gun against any fucker's head and forcing them to become anorexic, is he?

By all means, slag him off, call him a cunt, and point out his monumental stupidity.

But for Christ's sake, don't try to shut him up. Because there is already enough stupid bansturbatory cuntery around.

Just in case it gets pulled ...

... when the author realises he's being a complete fucking tool, I'm ripping and posting this:

Right Wing Extremist Spies on Climate Campers with British Army Equipment

Nick Martian | 21.08.2010 17:24 | Climate Chaos | Ecology | Workers' Movements | Liverpool | World

There appears to have been a deadly serious game of cat and mouse going on between environmental activists, a local Scottish journalist, and the right wing extremist who has been threatening violence against the Camp for Climate Action in Edinburgh.

Boasting that he is a professional soldier recently returned from fighting in Afghanistan where he says he killed Muslims for reading Islamic literature, and now posting his threats on Twitter under the name “wearethebritish” the extremist claims to have been using British Army military surveillance equipment to spy on the climate campers.

He is believed to be a member of the English Defence League, a right wing organisation that targets Muslim groups and he has been posting messages of hatred against the climate camp to other members of the EDL.

Local journalist Jono Warren who posts on Twitter as “nmec” was alerted by LutherBlissetts, one of the climate camp activists, to the fact that the Camp for Climate Action was being threatened:

LutherBlissetts @nmec - wearethebritish says he has gun metal Aston, lives one hour away from climate camp and intends to pay 'scruffy squatters' a visit
@nmec has EDL @wearethebritish turned up to Climate Camp yet?
Nmec @LutherBlissetts Not that I'm aware of.

The wearethebritish spy however was apparently not far away from the climate camp also posting his Twitter messages:
wearethebritish Sitting in car somewhere in Edinburgh - laptop on 3G - have extremists from climate camp under close observation - dull people haven't noticed
Drove to edinburgh to put climate camp under close observation total anti climax – utter non-entities – complete #fail
@ShugNiggurath have been watching them up close - rag tag bunch of hysterical useful fools – climate camp carbon footprint very high

wearethebritish @PoliticalFun check out @LutherBlissetts - he's 'alerted' some kid with a camera to my proximity and dull boy hasn't even seen me
PoliticalFun @wearethebritish I've just found the tweet, hilarious!
You take the guy out of the military but you just can't get the military out of the guy! What surveillance equipment you got?
Are you hunting?
wearethebritish @PoliticalFun "What surveillance equipment you got?" - because they are so pre-occupied with their obsession all I need is a Mk 1 Eyeball

PoliticalFun @wearethebritish are you sitting there taunting them?
wearethebritish @PoliticalFun "are you sitting there taunting them?" - lol, no, they aren't worthy of action - mostly spoilt middle class kids - nobodies
AlJahom @wearethebritish a muck-spreader fully of slurry would be perfect for them. @PoliticalFun
wearethebritish @PoliticalFun @AlJahom climate camp comes with its own self-contained dung heap - a walking squawking steaming midden of irrelevance
wearethebritish @PoliticalFun guys a twat isn't he - these guys think they are so dangerous, so radical, so 'underground' .... the world is lol'ing at them

wearethebritish @ShugNiggurath oh yes - plenty of methane coming out of both ends - truth is that climate camp is a toothless figure of fun and ridicule
wearethebritish come on tweeps - let's all gather round to point and lol at the spoilt little rich kids of climate camp
Tamsin53 @wearethebritish agree some of the anarchy people come from middle class well off families - just thinking of the Redgrave family
wearethebritish @Tamsin53 climate camps kiddies are a laughing stock - multi-billion RBS won't take any notice of them, even Police are openly lol'ing at them

wearethebritish so far climate camp is an absolute failure but then a few spoilt middle class kids were never going to make a dent in a multi-billion corp
The people of Edinburgh couldn't care less about climate camp 'activists' they know RBS is good for their city & soon climate camp will leave
Overweight students should diet not riot - not that soft-skinned spoilt little tubby munchkins are any good at rioting either climate camp
Templar1128 @wearethebritish yes the farmer should use the tractors to push the layabouts off his land.. bet they're claiming benefits though..

LutherBlissetts @wearethebritish climate is changing. precession & glaciation cycle beyond our control yet effects of anthropic change not beyond our control
wearethebritish @LutherBlissetts afternoon sherlock - too bad we didn't meet - maybe next time sonny
@Political_Fun my twittercrush hates me...... isn't it fun
CynaraeStMary @wearethebritish Who could hate you?

Political_Fun @AlJahom Eh? Who's beans I want to know who @wearethebritish has a lefty crush on??
wearethebritish @Political_Fun it's the climate camp chic ....
wearethebritish @AmeliaGregory why? well a) I like her name, I once dated an Amelia from Kenya (Happy Valley type) b) She has guts & drive c) She hates me
wearethebritish all the chics now checking out my twittercrush
wearethebritish @AmeliaGregory we're talking about you ....
@AmeliaGregory I'm just round the corner from Jenners if you want to meet me for afternoon tea & buns!

The right wing extremist who calls himself “wearethebritish” and who has been posting threats of violence against the Camp for Climate Action seems to have spent the afternoon spying on the climate camp, avoiding being seen by the journalist he knew was looking for him, and posting his unpleasant messages on Twitter.

Maybe he is just the cowardly clown that he appears to be but threatening to burn down the climate camp and using British Army surveillance equipment to spy on the climate campers is probably illegal, and the fact is that a lot of people are now taking this man and the rest of the members of his group very seriously, just in case they might be as dangerous and murderous as they claim to be.

Nick Martian
e-mail: earthaidcampaign@gmail.com

the following 14 comments

storm in a fucking teacup

21.08.2010 18:07

So some EDLer got his knickers in a twist about climate camp, went to have a look and then slagged it off to his mates.. so what? That ain't news, at least not on my planet..

As for surveillance equipment, did you actually *read* what the guy said?!? A 'Mk1 Eyeball'.

It's a joke. It means he's using his /eyes/ to spy on them.

Sigh.

ugh

---

what a load of bollox

21.08.2010 18:21

title says it all

joie

---

The author has made an embarrassing idiot of himself

21.08.2010 18:31

Lol. What a muppet. Im going to wipe my arse with Mk1 Toilet paper because i just shat myself laughing

corporal jones

---

Dear imc admins

21.08.2010 19:24

Please could we have indymedia back. Thank you.

Sick of numpty's

---

EDL Media??

21.08.2010 20:14

Let's rename this site EDL Media from now I mean for fuck's sake...I bet if someone from the EDL farted it will be reported here IN CAPITAL LETTERS tommorow. If a group of EDL grunts were battered somwhere, someplace in the country then yeah it's fucking awesome but don't report and on every single thing that they do as they enjoy all the publicity.

Ginger Militant

---

there could be a massacre at climate camp

21.08.2010 21:56

A Mk1 Eyeball is actually the code name for a top secret british army electronic surveillance device capable of spying on the enemy from long range providing sharp clear images which can guide weapons to their target.
It is highly illegal for this equipment to be taken and used except in war zones because it can be connected to the latest weaponry which can wipe out large numbers of people in a split second.

General Disaster and Major Catastrophe

---

No it doesn't

21.08.2010 22:54

Stop trying to worm out of it. The article is a fabrication of paranonia and stupidity and you know it.

Mk1 Eyeball has and always has meant to use your normal sight.
Google it

muppet

---

shouldn't this be on facebook or something? He's prob not even edl [sdl]

21.08.2010 22:58

This is rubbish can indy hide it?

anon

---

the working class can kiss my arse

21.08.2010 23:22

the soldiers. . police.. journalists.. and all the rest of the working class peasants dont know their place
pip pip!
tally ho!

drippy little posh fucks

---

Is there more to this than meets the eye?

21.08.2010 23:59

This could all be far more dangerous than it seems.
"Gun metal Aston" is army slang for secret top of the range sniper rifles similar to the weapons used by James Bond.

General Disaster and Major Catastrophe

---

Climate campers should not be risking their lives like this

22.08.2010 00:04

The fascist EDL extremist is threatening to come back to the climate camp on Monday.
He should be reported to the police and the media should be asked to help provide the campers with as much protection as possible otherwise this could turn into a tragedy.

Nick Martian

---

@ Nick Martian - calm down man

22.08.2010 02:30

did you not read the tweet where he says "they aren't worthy of action", hes not going to attack the camp; calm down, have a cup of tea, smoke a spliff, take a valium, whatever it takes. Just dont go calling the police onto climate camp, its not very anarchist at all.

Joe Lee

---

Chill

22.08.2010 09:45

Someone break out the emergency supplies & give Nick Martin a chill pill.

please don't get in tiss over this non issue that should just amuse.

Bunny
Homepage: http://imcscotland.org/

---

Go back to Mars

22.08.2010 11:54

Nick Martian should be banned from the SCC before his blubbing floods the camp. Nick, you have embarrassed yourself, and you are an embarrassment to the SCC and to IM.

Gud

I think the only thing I can add to that is a) pwned, mega-super-ultra-to-the-power-of-infinity pwned, pwned beyond anything 4chan could dream of; and b) a Mk 1 eyeball is not fucking military equipment, you fucking retard!

Update: Check out his hysterical twatter feed.

True story (for @Mid_WifeCrisis )

I was chatting to a mate of mine several years ago. He was a really nice guy, but also one of those thrusting, City types who made money in the murk of "financial services". He lived in the better part of town, extraordinarily pretty wife, collection of matching his and hers convertibles, etc, etc.

One day while we were sitting by the pool drinking Chablis, his wife told me about the first time she'd introduced him to her mother. Apparently, after dinner he was so lubricated that when he kissed her mother goodbye, he slipped her some tongue.

Fortunately, she says, her mother was so broad-minded that she never said anything. Having subsequently seen her mother, I can see how you'd make that kind of mistake, but I'm not sure I'd do it in front of the woman I was dating.

The dangers of masturbation

Since I've been wanking myself into a coma lately, I've noticed that my eye-hand coordination is all over the shop: typos and missed words galore.

I don't really know what to do.

Twatter exhaustion

I find myself spending more and more time on twitter and commenting on other people's stuff than writing my own. It's frustrating, because I keep on coming across things that merit a blog post, but once I've tweeted about them or commented elsewhere, I have lost the urge to blog about it.

Any ideas?

In simple words (for @joshuwahwah )

This caught my eye on twitter:

RT @joshuwahwah How on earth can Cameron promise to cut paperwork for GP's, when he has put them in charge of budgets? #fail

My response was something disparaging, to which I got an equally disparaging response.

Rather than leading to a typically childish string of insults ("you child" - "you mong" - "imbecile" - "twat" - "fascist" - "cunt" ...) I thought I'd explain to someone who is obviously a bit of a simpleton that it is entirely possible for someone to do less paperwork and take responsibility for budgets, if the budgets require less paperwork than they were doing originally.

Having said all that, I disagree entirely with the NHS and state provision of healthcare and broadly agree with this post from the LPUK if you have to have state provision of healthcare.

HoT 200 reset!

All counts have been zeroed, so please, if you're on twitter, vote for me and take the smile off @JackOfKent's fucking face.

Eyebrow-raising tweets of our time

@rogthornhill @obotheclown DK was awesome yesterday evening, v powerful @devilskitchen

-- bella gerens

Mongnitive Dissonance

@obotheclown i think you severely doubt your own position, this is why you act the big johnny big bollocks on your site. I pity you.

-- The Master of Cognitive Dissonance

Ahem. I think it's fair to say that I don't doubt my position in the slightest. I'm not the one arguing for the state to have a monopoly on violence to act upon me to fund the things I believe in, while simultaneously telling them to fuck off when they try to extend that power to things I don't believe in. My position is much clearer, simpler and more coherent: I don't believe the state should do anything or even exist. I believe that if the false crutch of the state was removed, people would also benefit from a personal development of greater responsibility and ownership of their own problems. I also believe that as a consequence of the removal of state, people would find much a) better and b) cheaper ways of looking after those who had genuine need.

However, I absolutely and fully accept that as things stand today, the state has too much mindshare for this to happen. Most people don't even want to think about politics, let alone challenge the status quo. And even among the people who can even be arsed to think about politics, like bloggers, most people don't want to think the difficult, fundamental issues through, which is why we have bloggers like Tom Harris and Iain Dale and Guido becoming popular: they say things that appeal to people's tribal loyalties or prejudices, not things that make people think.

Even (or especially!) among people who profess themselves to be libertarians or "social liberals", there is an uncrossable chasm between those who have gone back to basics and started again and those who think things could be made better working in the current political framework. And those very people who want "liberty" in the current political framework are the most vociferous opponents of any form of anarchy.

Every time I talk to Sunny Hundal or John Demetriou, I get dismissed for the ludicrosity* of my ideas. With both of them, there are personal slurs and straw man attacks a-plenty. I think these are the people who are actually the least sure of their ground: they have a specific set of freedoms that they deem to be mandatory and self-evident, and when confronted with the idea that someone else might have a different set of freedoms or a superset of freedoms that goes beyond their own, they are too frightened to contemplate what that means to their value system to engage rationally with the idea.

So Sunny goes on about my "tin-foil hat", despite the fact that I've written here about the tolerance of Libertarianism attracting froot loops and gun nuts and how I don't like it, he immediately tars me with the "froot loop and gun nut" brush. He takes my complaints about the welfare system as "spin" to "hide my racist desire for less immigration", etc.

John bangs on about my "mad, loony AnCap arse". And that's when he's not trying, laughably, to troll me in general.

Neither of them has any kind of rational explanation for why their particular set of freedoms is more important or sensible than a) each other or b) mine.

As to the Johnny Big Bollocks thing: am I the one who writes things like: "And just in case you were in any doubt, Mr Boatang and I are indeed Demi-Gods of the Libertarian blogging world, and yes, everything that we utter is sacred - each word a literary gem worth ensnaring and putting on the world jewel market for mega bucks" (to pluck one random sample out of the air)? Or am I the one who gives his fiercest critics permanent pride of place on the front page of my blog?

Am I the one who proclaims my worth in a verbose paean of self-praise (complete with a suitably humble picture) or am I the one who thinks no-one gives a shit about my personal history?

And am I the one who has a mate on call who can be guaranteed to back my every word with a "yeah, right on, man, stick it to him" or am I the one who has to convince everyone who backs me with the compulsion of my argument?

In other words, John, in the case of this particular tweet (and many others) you might be indulging in the tiniest bit of projection.

*I may have made this up.