All posts by Richard

A new life begins

Hatebreed is metal with attitude. (All true metal is metal with attitude!)

Destroy everything (x 3)
So a new life can begin

Destroy everything (x 3)
Rebuild and start again
Again

The lyrics to this song make me think of Genesis 6. (YMMV.)

The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” (NIV)

Are your Facebook friends demonically possessed?

terminator3

Are your Facebook friends demonically possessed?

Here’s one way to find out.

Comment on your Facebook friend’s status and start up a conversation. Part way through the conversation, say

You know what you need, Facebook friend? An exorcism!
http://blog.eternalvigilance.me/2012/05/objectivism-is-a-form-of-demonic-possession/

If you get a a volley of comments like this in response

YOU know What YOU need Goode.. !00 pounds of knickled plated ass fuck delivered on your Mommas fist …then hard way! Go away and cry till Im ready to deal with your pimply ass…bitch!

Yep…Im angry….piss off and cry about that…

Piss off ass hole…

Bad time

You know what You need asshole…? Someone to take you on your fascist filth….fuck off and die…..cunt!

You are gone…go molest kids else where.

followed by unfriending and deletion of the entire conversation, then it is likely that your (former) Facebook friend is demonically possessed.

[Facebook friend’s real name redacted.]

Fatal attraction

153539659_460x230

Today the government banned the sale of NIB (neodymium-iron-boron) magnets.

Ban on the sale of high powered magnet sets

Consumer Affairs Minister Simon Bridges has announced a ban on the sale of sets of small high powered magnets that have caused serious injuries in New Zealand and at least one reported death in Australia.

“These magnets are harmless to play with but if swallowed can cause serious internal damage that can require major surgery,” says Mr Bridges.

If two or more of these magnets are ingested they can become joined up in the digestive system and the pressure they exert can cause serious inflammation and ulceration. Left untreated, this can quickly lead to major tissue damage, perforations and potentially infection sepsis and death.

“Because of their strength, older children have been known to use these magnets as mock jewellery, such as mouth or tongue studs. Young children swallow them out of natural curiosity.

“As a result children have been seriously harmed overseas, including many hospitalisations in the United States and Australia and the death of an 18-month-old in Queensland. In December a New Zealand toddler was admitted to Auckland’s Starship Hospital after ingesting some of the magnets. Officials are aware of at least two other serious cases here involving hospitalisation and surgery.

“Though these magnets tend to be marketed at adults as office toys and many brands carry strict safety warnings, it is clear from the cases here and overseas that they pose too great a risk to children.”

The Unsafe Goods Notice for these small powerful magnets will mean that from tomorrow no one will be allowed to import or sell these magnets in New Zealand. The notice is issued under section 31 of the Fair Trading Act 1986 and will be enforced by the New Zealand Customs Service at the border and the Commerce Commission in the marketplace.

Bridges reassures us.

The action I have taken will only apply to the sales of these magnets for personal or domestic use. This ban will not affect the use of this type of magnet in schools and universities for teaching purposes nor would it affect any industrial or commercial use of these magnets.

Sure.

Imagine the sinking feeling in your stomach, caused not by ingestion of NIB magnets, but by receipt of a letter from the New Zealand Customs Service telling you that they have seized your magnets, and will destroy them, if you do not provide evidence that you imported them for non-personal use.

Your day in court

Your rights

You have the right to see all evidence they have against you before your trial – ask for ‘full disclosure’ of ALL the evidence they have. Make them work for a conviction, don’t hand it to them. What you do in court depends on whether you are a Dumb Lamb, a Stubborn Mule, or a Roaring Lion!

funny-sheep-md

The Dumb Lamb meekly offers their throat to the butcher’s knife, mindlessly going where directed and doing like the police say and pleads “guilty” to get it over and done with. It’s you that’s getting done, while the police get a nice easy conviction.

11119

The Stubborn Mule resists every step of the way, making the police and court work for a conviction. First appearance: enter “no plea” and seek legal advice. Second Appearance: “No plea” again. Say you refuse to recognise the charge, because you don’t think you’ve committed a crime.

Third Appearance: this is your chance to tell the judge exactly why you think the law stinks, in the politest possible way. The penalty for the Mule is not going to be more than for the Lamb, and often will be less, but you cost the system heaps and kept your self-respect.

2528944-32598-angry-lion

The Roaring Lion is proud, and staunch with it. The Lion goes through the court process in the same way as the Mule, but takes non-cooperation that stage further. They tell the judge that they will not pay a fine, or do PD. If the court is determined to punish them, it will have to send them to jail, putting strain on an already full up prison system. The more we clog up their system, the less it will be able to cope.

Good luck, Michelle!

Is Harry Binswanger going insane?

Harry Binswanger is a rare breed of man—he’s both a philosopher and an Objectivist!

Qua philosopher, he wrote his doctoral dissertation in the philosophy of biology, later published as The Biological Basis of Teleological Concepts.

Qua Objectivist, he takes credit for compiling the Ayn Rand Lexicon.

His latest piece on the current gun control debate in the U.S. is a gem. His point is a simple one, viz., With Gun Control, Cost Benefit Analysis Is Amoral.

Here’s a key excerpt.

The government may use force only against an objective threat of force. Only that constitutes retaliation.

In particular, the government may not descend to the evil of preventive law. The government cannot treat men as guilty until they have proven themselves to be, for the moment, innocent. No law can require the individual to prove that he won’t violate another’s rights, in the absence of evidence that he is going to.

But this is precisely what gun control laws do. Gun control laws use force against the individual in the absence of any specific evidence that he is about to commit a crime.

But he’s recently reported as saying this on his private list.

one thing that the law should return to doing is locking away the dangerously insane. The libertarian Thomas Szaz was instrumental in the movement begun in the late 60s to dump crazies back on the streets. He bears heavy guilt for many of these Newtown-type atrocities.

Isn’t locking away people deemed to be insane the very same evil of preventive law that Binswanger rails against in his Forbes article published only a week later? It seems that Binswanger has arrived at a contradiction.

To arrive at a contradiction is to confess an error in one’s thinking; to maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one’s mind and to evict oneself from the realm of reality.

Binswanger’s gone insane. He should be locked up, for the public good.

[Cross-posted to SOLO.]

Thou shalt not quack

quackers

The following is an op-ed by former (?) television newsreader and interviewer Lindsay Perigo, originally published online at http://www.solopassion.com/node/7876. But don’t read it there, and don’t read it here, either. Read it on Stuff Nation, where, in just a couple of days, Perigo’s piece has attracted 490 comments (last time I checked). Nice one, Linz!

Kiwi accent killing the news

I wonder how many television viewers there are like me for whom watching the six o’clock news on TVNZ or TV3 was until recently a staple of their daily routine, but who now repair to online sources for their news because the network bulletins have become unwatchable – or more precisely, unlistenable?

An army of airheads has been let loose on the airwaves who have no business being anywhere near a microphone sounding the way they do. They don’t speak, they quack.

Many newsreaders and most reporters on flagship news bulletins now sound like panicked ducks at the start of the shooting season.

Their employers, far from being alarmed by the situation and sending their uneducated charges off for remedial speech training, embrace the barbarian triumph as a victory for the authentic Kiwi accent. It is nothing of the sort.

The quacking epidemic spawned by TVNZ and TV3 is now a national plague and an international joke, an unseemly blight on a nation claiming to be civilised.

In recent times, high-profile commentators Karl du Fresne, Sir Robert Jones, Deborah Coddington and Janet Wilson (herself a former television reporter) have rung alarm bells about it.

The newsreaders’ quacking, droning, grunting and mumbling are our worst form of noise pollution.

Their “yeah-no,” “you-know,” “like, like,” “awesome,” “cool,” “wodevva,” and so on are the bane of coherent conversation. Their mangled vowels and muddied consonants make swine sound educated.

They are clueless about the distinction between “children” and “choowdren,” “Wellington” and “Wawwington,” “vulnerable” and “vunrable,” “the six o’clock news” and “the sucks o’clock news,” “showers” and “showwwwwwaz,” “known” and “knowen,” “well” and “wow,” “health” and “howth,” “New Zealand” and “New Zilland”.

The locus of their emissions is not the mouth, but the nose. Their assault on the English language is a [N]ational scandal. Theirs is not an accent; it is a disease.

In their childlike glottal stops (“thuh office”), their selective emphasis that is 100 per cent wrong (hitting conjunctions and prepositions —”Woow arroyv UN Wawwington ET sucks o’clock”), their spluttering nasality, their dim-witted droning and silly sing-song, their inability to scan ahead and phrase intelligently, our reporters are stuck at the level of an infant.

It may be that they are not truly “airheads”, but they certainly seem like airheads with such retarded speech patterns.

No, one is not demanding they speak like the Queen, but is it too much to ask that they sound like educated adults?

All that attention to how they look, and none whatsoever to how they sound! (Except when articulating Maori words. If it’s good enough for Maori, why not English?)

One of my pupils, a budding TV actor barely in his 20s, confessed that he was in deathly fear of being made to sound “posh.”

Sounding “posh,” he believed, would activate Tall Poppy Syndrome, be “uncool” and jeopardise his career.

By “posh” he evidently meant “plummy, like Sam Neill,” whose career doesn’t seem to have suffered for it.

I pointed to the impeccably Kiwi rugby commentary duo of Grant Nisbett and Tony Johnson both of whom speak clearly and well without sounding remotely “plummy.”

And what about the beautifully-spoken Sir Paul Holmes? Or Eric Young and Alistair Wilkinson on Sky?

What does it matter, the barbarians’ cheerleaders will ask, as long as we get the gist of what they’re saying? Dominion Post columnist Karl du Fresne answered this as follows:

‘‘I have heard it argued that none of this matters as long as we can understand what people are saying, to which my response is twofold. First, it’s physically painful to listen to some of these awful voices torturing the language; and second, it’s getting to the point where we can’t understand them. It’s only a matter of time before we’ll need subtitles on the TV news bulletins to explain what some female journalists and newsreaders are saying.’’

A New Zealand in which quacking is as universal as it’s threatening to become will intellectually bankrupt us. Its democracy will be a travesty of freedom as vapid voters who routinely quack inanities such as “Yeah, no, I’m like, oh my god, that’s so totally awesome” will thus mindlessly endorse the most unconscionable bribes offered by the most unscrupulous politicians.

Not only being able to watch the news again, but also freedom and civilisation themselves, are at stake.

[Reproduced without permission. Whatever.]