Weird Al -Word Crimes by f39100013
Credit whe it's due "Weird Al's" still got it
the rantings of a reasonable person in an unreasonable world!
I'm not a fan of Alex Jones. I've tried to work out why: I've come to the conclusion it's not so much that he's wrong about everything, he isn't, no one is, but I think it's just I don't like people being lied to.
All his work seems to be about conning the gulable out of their hard earned cash for the enrichment of one A Jones.
And that's sad.
There are numerous examples of this. Probably the most blatant and sick is the adverts he runs selling his expensive quack medicine by telling his fans that America has the highest level of cancer in the world so they should divvy up and by his incredibly expensive and useless garbage to protect themselves against cancer.
The trouble is that America doesn't have the highest cancer rates in the world: it has the six highest level. It's still too high, as it is in every country, but that's not the point. Jones lies to make money. The fact that the US is a rich country who is aware of health issues and spends a fortune on health means that cancers that would be missed in other countries are picked up in the US meaning the actual rates of detected cancer are different to the actual rates of cancer. This is one of the main reasons why poorer and underdeveloped countries are low in the list of cancer rates. Poor countries don't have the health structure to catch cancer in their people so they die early and undiagnosed.
This is Jones using fear to make cash.
He is deeply sexist with his rants and rather sick fantasies of beating up a woman. His pathetic homophobia and obsession with gay people is plain nasty. There are stores of him getting people banned from TV if he doesn't like them, and him bullying people and being backed into a fight due to his attack on a vulnerable person but rather than fighting with fists like a man running for his gun and being smacked about and crying for his daddy, then getting his family in the FBI to go after the man who won the fight, see the below.
He's not a nice man.
However the other thing that gets my goat is the cynical way he uses patriotism to make money. Ad after ad in his programme, usually voiced by himself, tries to sell pricey crap by telling us that it is made by patriots, for patriots. His programme and rants are full with him telling us how patriotic he is (and brave, manly, sexy, powerful, deadly, brilliant, knows more than any lawyer, doctor, or anyone).
This recourse to patriotism is deeply seedy and it reminds me that false patriotism is the last resort of the rogue.
The thing that gets me is his exploitation of patriotism is actually the opposite of the lies he spills about the country he is supposed to be patriotic about. Every programme is full of how god awful America is. He pushes the meme that America is insane, genocidal, and evil. Jones takes the side of anyone America doesn't like.
Iran? Jones likes them and blames the US. Syria? America to blame. North Korea? America's the villain.
And the list goes on.
However Jones supports Russia and its attacks on the Ukraine. According to him it's all the fault of the US for using Ukraine or attack Russia to ....... Well I'm not entirely sure why but whatever it's all Americas fault.
Jones paints Russia as blameless and Putin as a brave beacon of brilliance.
The fact that Putin is corrupt, and Russia has a truly horrific record of murdering journalists and killing people who are in his way, is ingnored.
This is a dangerous strategy in my opinion. If you whip up your
cash cow sorry I mean audience by pushing the view that you are a über patriot and their leader and super American then is it a terribly good idea in constantly attack your country and side with the traditional enemy?
If there is an escalation or war between the US and Russia which I don't believe will ever happen by the way, and the patriotic public then what happens to Jones' audience? Would he survive being seen as a quisling in bed with their enemy?
Could his multimillion dollar empire survive the hit?
The fact is it is easy to laugh at the fat Jones and dismiss him as an idiot. That would do him a injustice. Fair enough he is fat and I worry about his health but he isn't stupid. He has made a fortune promoting a sellable fiction to a hungry audience.
He is however dangerous. His constant push of the idea that inoculations are part of a plot to kill us all means that people don't inoculate. The idea of a dastardly plot Jones promotes is picked up by religious extremists and used to stop inoculations all over the world and murder nurses and doctors. He is used as a respected expert in Pakistan and other counties to justify the attacks on medical staff and the stopping of children being protected from deadly disease.
Jones' words are geared to make him money but his conspiracies lead to thousands of children dying thousands of miles away.
It is no surprise that some of the most violent extremists have been proved to be fans of the plethora of Jones' conspiracies. I'm not necessarily blaming Jones just saying that the fiction he promotes fits into the insane paranoia the violent extremists follow.
The idea promoted by Jones is the inverse of the old adage of 'my country right or wrong'. To him his country is always wrong: send him all your money.
It would be nice to make money. But to make it in the way Jones does is despicable.
It is with surprise that I hear that the radical union leader Bob Crow has died at a shockingly early age of 52. To many he was a hate figure with his disruption and what they thought was his rank hypocrisy; to others he was great.
However today is not the day to dwell on such matters.
Today I can only offer my deepest sympathies to his family and friends for his tragically early death.
Crow was disgusting when he told the world that he hoped Margaret Thatcher rotted in hell in the day of her death. I, like most of us, have more class than that. Politics and power games are trumped by tragedy and death.
And so I give my sympathies to those who loved Bob Crow.
Several years ago I decided to read a Land Rover magazine. I don't actually have a Land Rover, or and 4x4 for that matter, however I like reading magazines on topics outside of my experiance. Indeed the weirder or odder the better. It's amazing what you learn if you take a chance. I love the fact that there are so many magazines and books of such a huge range of issues.
Anyway I was this magazine about Land Rovers. Part of this was the practical stuff about repairing or altering your prized off-roader, the best pieces of kit, routes, and so forth. However a big part was the aspirational articles which show the reader the dream.
These articles are about people taking their meticulously tweaked Land Rovers and take them to remote foreign climes and actually drive off-road and have real adventures. Most people who have Land Rovers or Range Rovers and the like don't push them to the limit, the writers do and push their incredible vehicles and themselves to the limit.
If I was going to be serious I could bore on at length on the wider anthropological and social aspects of people visiting other cultures and people off the beaten tracks.
But I won't.
However I was reading this multi-issue article about a man and his wife who prepared their Land Rover and shipped it to the Middle East and spent months driving through the remote places, huge sand dunes, and having a great time interacting with people many of whom had never seen a a Western white person.
The whole tone of the article was light and fun. These people where living the dream. Spread over months the article was slavered with amazing photos of the smiling couple, their beloved Land Rover, smiling locals, and some amazing countryside.
And after two months of happy reminiscences there was a throwaway paragraph at the very end.
This briefest of paragraphs said something like, and this is me paraphrasing,
'Oh and then going down a steep dune the Land Rover rolled. It was totally trashed and we had to scrap it, which was tragic. My wife had her arm out of the window and had it amputated when the car rolled. It was a great trip apart from that'
And then it ended.
I just thought that this minor point was the important point of the trip. The trauma and agony and disablement of a active young woman summed to merit more than a aside.
Strange how the minor point is the most important I real life if not a story.
The diver Tom Daley has revealed that he is in a relationship with a man. Firstly it needs to be said that I'm pleased he has found happiness. I hope we all find happiness. But also I don't care if he's gay.
I should probably say that I thought he was gay anyway so it isn't a shock. I don't mean because I thought him effeminate, or camp, or any negative stereotype, it's just that I was sure he'd come out ages ago.
Now if he wants to make his sexuality public then I'm fine with it. I am not happy if he felt he needed to make the announcement to stop others outing him. I've seen that happen in the past, mostly by radical gay rights groups, and disagree with them vehemently. A persons sexuality and the choice to tell the public or not should never be forced.
I don't think many people care if people are gay or not. In a way this is a good thing as ignorance and irrational hatred comes when people feel angry about such private things. I suppose this is good.
The only thing I will say that I think using the announcement to plug his godawful tv programme is a tad tacky.
But hay oh good luck to him and his partner.
That nasty piece of work that is the ex-labour minister and MP Denis MacShane has finally come clean and admitted that he is a thieving piece of scum who stole £13,000. He was VERY lucky that he didn't get charged with pinching £125,000, but then again MPs are treated with kid gloves.
Not only is he a thief he is arrogant, bullying, and exactly the type of person we don't want as an MP.
Now I'm sure he'll get a minor slap and if he goes to clink he will be out in days in marked contrast to any other non-MP thief who would have the book thrown at them, but it is good news that he gets his comeuppance. It's just a shame he will retain his vast pension and will find many who will throw money at him to help in their lobbying, or that the other parliamentary thieves still remain.
But just today let's enjoy this little justice.
Denis MacShane is a thieving piece of scum.
I don't like the way in which people use attacks on politicians families to destroy people. A person's family should be safe from political attack.
There are exceptions to this common decency however. For example if a close relative was a rapist, murderer, bank robber, or whatnot, then they should not be so protected. However the main exception is if the politician makes personal political capital out if said relative. A perfect example of this is Chris Huhne who issued election literature emblazoned with photos of his family and giving the message that marriage was the greatest thing in his life at the same time he was screwing around.
In this case the media had the right to talk about his family. The labour MP who employed his son who went around stealing from others in parliament should not have been able to stop the press mentions his son's crimes.
And the same goes for Ed Mikiband. Now his father Raplf was a public figure being a Marxist academic of note and a major figure in the Labour Party, though didn't become a member until late in life as they weren't radical enough for his tastes. But it's more than that; Ed has made repeated use us his father's ghost in his very many speeches talking about his father and specifically telling the world that hhis father's politics were a great influence on his own.
It is Ed who made his father a justified source of journalistic enquiry. The Daily Mail has done just that.
For Ed to whine about the press for examining his father and what his politics is is either disingenuous or base politics.
If these reports lied about Ralph then that would be wrong. But the DM didn't. They used his own works and diarys to tell the readers about him. They didn't lie or misquote they simply presented his own words.
For Ed and the left to shreak and wail about this is pathetic. The same people, and specifically Ed, have been proved to be involved in lying about opponents families to destroy them. More than that the left do use the families of others to attack people. Indeed one only has to look at the visceral delight when Margaret Thatcher died to see how awful some of the lefty can be.
And yet the same nasty pieces of work come over all trembling flower when a paper tells the truth about one of their own.
The thing is the way in which Ed seeks to control the press, steal privately owned land, centralise control of the market to himself is redolent of the Marxist idiology of his father. His father's politics are thus a legitimate source of debate.
If the press weren't treating Ed with kid gloves they would investigate his grandfather: he was a Pole who was a war hero fighting in the Polish-Soviet war. Fair enough he was a traitor who fought with the Russians agianst his own country but you cannot have everything. And he gets worse, after he moves to the UK he makes his money looting bombed out homes.
So he was a nice man.
No one mentions him. Nor do they mention the fact that Ed's father, a man who wanted violent takeover of Britain, played the tax system to give his £5 million pound home to his sons without paying any tax: it seems he thought taxes were only for scum not the left wing grandees such as himself.
My final thoughts on this storm in the teacup is this: do you really want to elect a man to be PM who when people print something that is true about him whines like a slapped bitch? How would such a weak and shallow man deal with other leaders and the real world?
Ed is making himself look like a weak, childish, joke.
That's. It good or attractive.