23.12.2008 - 2:39 p.m.

I like the internet for many reasons, the best is that it didn't exist until i was old enough to appreciate it, therefore giving it the status, via the wonderful and widely abused anthropic principle, that it was made specifically for me, thankyouverymuch.

The other thing i, and probably most people like, is just lurking in a wider environment ("whadya doing?" "just lurkin" "seen anyfing nice?" "nah, it's all rubbish") and nosing around, following a white rabbit of hyperlinks and user groups, dipping in and out of flikr, facebook and blog sites, just looking at the whole mess of humanity laid out, with just a temporary file and another unit on a hit counter as evidence. Anyone who really wants to find out who visited their site can look at address logs or use their mighty geek powers to trace back to the source, but why bother, we're all used to people drifting in and out of our 'personal' domain in cspace, we've grown accustomed to it in a short period of time. For the millenials, they've never known anything different (bless 'em) and will happily spew every sordid detail of their lives into blogs and myspace accounts, "look at the fun i'm having" "aren't i well connected in a great social setting" "someone please validate my existence"

This is great until they apply for a job
"we see, miss scott, that you recently drank a half bottle of bacardi, hurled in a cab and shagged some sailors, what do you think you could bring from your personal experiences to this role we have at Allied Boring Legal Insurance ?"
"ummm, i'm a people person and have these great qualifications from college"
"i see from my notes that you also once peed in a police car, in the context of asset risk and pension fund management, do you think this would help you to fit in ?"
"ummmmmm"

Now that every person in the USA and a few over here, regularly get their internet history screened by the CIA, NSA, comcast, massive multinational newsgroups etc, "there's really no point in all you young people out there remaining anonymous, come on now, start using your real names and it'll make our screening much easier, besides you must only be hiding if you've got something to hide"

This sort of wanky ejectum you'd expect to hear from a republican, bottom-feeding political type with delusions of paranoia trying to make himself heard in the big, fetid pond that is washington scene. To clarify, by 'bottom-feeding' i mean 'State Representative' and by 'delusions of paranoia' i mean 'former newspaper publisher'

What a tosser, a bill to force people to use their real names in cspace ? you're clearly very stupid and have been used by people with 'interests' in this area to introduce a bill that will later be ratified by the back door, at midnight, in the dark. No normal person with experience of the big bad world would consider something as unworkable and unenforceable, you clearly have been living in a box for the last ten years, take a bow Steve Hartgen you big blue twat.

I had a look for his picture to mock on the intarwubs but he's strangely absent, for someone advocating openness you'd at least expect him to do as he says we should, oh, i forgot he's a republican, 'do as i say, not as i do'

I was in a store today and the girl on checkout had a badge which read "i speak polish" but written in english, is this a result of costcutting on behalf of the store "our badge printer/maker says it costs extra to print in any font other than westernised english" or stupidity "our manager who authorised it thought it was ok and he makes firm decisions" (reads as: he never considered the logical conclusion of an unhelpful help sign, but will always soldier on bluster loudly to the bitter end of a wrong decision)"

Some lucky soldiers in afghanistan recently cremated 237 tonnes of hash seized from the talibanana "a victory in the war on drugs" cried the politic machine "$400 million up in smoke, they'll be counting their pennies now for AK47 ammunition, this could be the break we need" meanwhile canadian soldiers report large fields of plants 10 feet tall, no doubt they'll burn them too, i'd offer to burn my way through it one spliff at a time....

Luckily it turns out that the taliban don't need drug money any more, through the power of evolution they've found it's more lucrative to take the money directly from the governments they're fighting (well a couple of steps removed, but that's all), this saves all that trafficking nonsense and allows we the taxpayer to directly fund the war against the war against terror. Great, now we're all funding terrorism, we're just lucky that no politician can see further than his next back-hander to follow the logical and oft dreamt about conclusion of placing the whole mass population under arrest and into work camps.

I thought i'd keep it simple :

our tax cash >> government >> military >> private military contractors >> taliban

To keep army bases supplied in afghanistan you need a shit load of supplies, some would say 'a metric shitload' of supplies, but the military can't cover huge convoys of supplies with their limited resources so they contract out the job of moving supplies to private contractors. Private contractors don't want to get shot up any more than the military, so they buy safe passage through afghanistan with bribes, and that money ends up fundin' der terrorisms. It's the cycle of stupidity, played out as it's always been played out.

Speaking of which, name the country which wants to dominate the world by any means necessary, tick the boxes to see if your country qualifies:

[] history of meddling in foreign politics
[] history of monetary bullying
[] history of military dodginess ( see above )
[] history of oppressing people for political ends
[] sponsoring of fake global organisations to achieve all the above
[] sponsoring of global corporate cartels to achieve all the above

Enter the name of your country:__________________________

I found a quote from the now ratified Resolution 59/202 The Right to Food "...food should not be used as an instrument of political or economic pressure..." We can all agree that to hold a nation hostage through the use of food aid to give starvation rights over that population is a bad thing, if you agree to give food aid then do it because you said yes, to do it just to maintain control for the sake of control is a little bit shitty.

Luckily the resolution was ratified with 184 out of the possible 185 votes, would you like to see if the one country that voted against the resolution matches up with your answer above ?

God Bless teh United States of Terror

Motto - "we'll bring you all down, any way we can"

I feel safer all ready