Poetic justice: as placed in opposition to those that would destroy a persons right to make their own choices.

Those who wish to stop other people from having sex and make moves towards that objective, be it through legislature or simple physical force are in my eyes every bit as bad as those who force others to have sex i.e. rapists. As far as I am concerned these to actions are essentially the same thing, it is the blatant and brutal removal of a persons freedom to choose [a thread] that runs through both actions and by that argument through any other action that seeks to takes away a persons choice on any matter relating to their body and affecting no one else’s. For instance forcing someone to continue with a pregnancy that they would wish to abort and I suppose although it is a less likely course of action forcing someone to terminate a pregnancy that they would have otherwise have kept. For rapists, be they the type that prevents or the type that forces, the crime is the same the punishment also. For a start, they should be prevented from ever having sex themselves and secondly sex should be forced on them in the same way that they would force it on others or forcibly [or otherwise] take it away from others. For those that would prevent someone’s desired course of action with relation to their pregnancy then the punishment would be on one hand to prevent the person from ever having a child of their own and at the same time through the use perhaps of electrical stimulation and mechanical apparatus the person should be forced through the pain both of pregnancy and child birth the exact number of times that there are people that they would have forced to continue with their pregnancy. For those who would force the use of a drug on someone or prevent someone from using their drug of choice, choice being an important word here, they should for a start have the drugs forced on them and secondly have any drug that they might use, be it alcohol or pain killers taken away from them. The point of al of this being to take away their choice in exactly the same way they have taken away others, the only way such justice could be circumvented is for the criminal to prove that his or her crime was the result of a chemical, societal, neurological or cultural imbalance that can be done away with by the use of therapy and/or some other course of treatment, my punishments may be harsh but I do after all believe in the idea of rehabilitation.
A persons right to make choices that only directly affect themselves is absolute, there could be many perfectly rational reasons why one would feel the need to kill someone for instance preventing someone from moving down a course of action that would directly and perhaps negatively affect you but there could never be any rational reason why one should be able to take away a persons right to choose, it is one could well imagine these right and these alone that separate civilisation from savagery.

Have you noticed...........

that in 'Futurama' none of the stereotypically jewish characters are actually jewish [Zoidberg, Leela's parents] where as in Matt Groening other more popular series,
'The Simpsons' none of the steriotypically jewish characters are not jewish.

Places on the bus: The child

When you are a child, say from 1 or 2 to 11 or 12 years of age, you instinctively wish to go up stairs and sit at the very front of the bus, this is for 2 reasons firstly you have an instictive interest in the outside world as you know so little about it and this gives you the best view in the bus, and secondly it gives you a feeling of power as this is the same position that the driver sits in and with you're childish imagination you imagine perhaps that it is you driving the bus.

next: the teenager.

Recipe number something something.

Last night I had a cheese omelet with lettuce and Pringles sprinkled inside [Pringles are a type of crisp, the ones I used were sour cream and onion flavored]. What I did was this I fried the egg until the base of it was quite brown then I put in the cheese [it was Red licester] then I sprinkled some crunched up Pringles into it and then I put a bit of chopped up lettuce into it. By this time the cheese was quite melted so I folded it and left it frying on a low light for a while [about ten seconds] and then dished it up onto the plate. Unfortunately I forgot to dry the greece of so it was to greasy and I also put to much cheese in and the pan I used was a bit small so the egg ended up being to thick and I ended up not being quite able to finish it. As it turned out this wasn't so much an experimental recipe as a learning experience. I learned that lettuce tastes really nice when its fried and thus my next omelet will just have lettuce in it and I learned that sprinkling pringles into an egg will make it taste to salty and thus next tim Id o such a thing I'll make a cheese omelet with un-salted crisps sprinkled into it.

War in Israel, [why is it that in this font atleast capital i's look just like normal l's, how the bright shmuck that came up with that idea]

The war in Israel has just turned official, Hamas are now the legitimate, democratically elected government of the Palestinian territories. They don't have a military wing, they have an army. They're not terrorists or para-militarys, they're something worse, a government. When they bomb Israeli targets, its not terrorism, its war. And when the Israelis bomb beaches and kill civilians Hamas now have a legal right, perhaps even a responsibility to strike back. Now perhaps because of the actions of Israel, when Hamas kills civilians they can call it collateral damage instead of terrorism. Business as usual for most governments.

Recommended.

go to

www.fiendicide.tk

when you do, tell them i sent you.

ow my head, or as comic book guy from the simpsons would say 'worst, headache ever!'.

ow my head,
it hurts like I have a really tight,
and really heavy helmet on, I feel as though if I were to move my head to fast, the weight would break my neck.
I feel the hand of god on me and he's squeezing real hard.

No cookies

Sorry for not posting on here yesterday, but the computer insisted that it would not work untill it had some cookies, I tried inserting some chocolate chip ones but this didn't seem to go down to well with library staff and so I just left it at that. However, allthough it is working slowly today the computer has allowed me to axcess blogger and thus I asume that the library staff have fed it some cookies in the correct manner, in any case, onwards and upwards.

Bush bashes gays, I bash Bush [no intended innuendo]

President suspect George Bush has recently decided that he's going to placate his socially conservative Christian base by once again attempting to ban gay marriage, or if you're a supporter of this bill, define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. This has been labeled by many commentators as nothing more than a token gesture as it is claimed that Bush knows it is doomed to fail I however think that it is most probable that Bush knows nothing about nothing about nothing. In any case the aurgument for this bill is that marriage is mankinds oldest established concept [or words to that affect] , and this may well be true [allthough i think that it isn't] but then slavery was and is also a very longly established action within society it in fact still goes on today, in some parts of the world, but its longetivity is no reason to big it up, it is no reason not to wipe it of the face of the planet. I am not equating marriage with slavery [allthough some who have gone through it may dissagree] but actually marriage does have some simmilaritys to slavery. Historically marriage represented the ownership of the women by the man, [proof of this is found in the fact that untill reletively recent the couple would be refered to as man and wife the implication being that allthough the husband remains a man the women is now simply a wife] and the ownership of the man and the woman by the state or local lord [proof of this is found in the fact that if one wanteed to get maried then it used to be that one would have to ask for the permission of the local lord who had the power to refuse you, this is not dissimilar to the modern practice of marriage registration i.e. any marriage that is not registered is not considered to be legal]. the Bushes and there supporters claim that this is not about bashing gays it is simply about protecting the institution of marriage but this is not met out in the second major reason that they have given to prove the neccesity of this bill and that is that marriage must be protected because it has all of these benifits, I won't bother listing them but suffice it to say that any benifit derived from a marriage is down to the two people involved with the marriage and not the institution of marriage itself, in any case if this bill had nothing to do with bashing gays then the bill supporters would not by implication be suggesting that these benifits should or indeed must be kept away from gay people.

Bush is an idiot if he thinks this will work, or maybe he's not an idiot cos he knows it won't, or maybe he's an idiot because he knows it will work. In an America were a womens [long fought for] right to control what happens in her own body, is being rappidly being eroded, nothing can be taken for granted.

go here

http://farkleberries.blogspot.com/

Today in today.

The omen remake is being released today, the sixth day of the sixth mounth of the sixth aka 666 mark of the beast, unfortunately for these film makers it has been discovered in the earliest translations of the new testament that the actual number of the beast is 616 meaning they would have had to release the film in january to get the numbers to match up correctly.
However, whatever the numbers no ammount of superstition can prevent me from not seeing this film. The fact of the matter is that it did not need to be made, there is nothing wrong with the original movie, it can't be improved on, it as simple as that. The only reason why anyone in their right and good mind, would want to remake it is so they could then go on to remake the sequals to it, which first time round really weren't that good and certainly could be improved on. Therefore if they do go on to remake those as well then I will most deffinetly go to see them or atleast rent them on DVD later on.

New phrase. [what is this the 3rd i've put on here the 4th maybe? well whatever]

Smash the granny out of it.
Essentially equal in meaning to the phrase beat the shit out of it.
Example of usage:
"I smashed the granny out of it" or "you got the granny smashed out of you".

Kindly provided without permission by Mark Andrew Jones.
He's not on blogger he's just some guy I know.

Bad habits.

Among my bad habits are picking my nose, biting my finger nails [i actually bite them from one side to the other so actually i'm really just trimming them] and, reading on the toilet; all of which are quite if not very common, but i've recently noticed a new one that i'm not so sure about. Waving the curser around and clicking on the little moving globe thingy and the increasing bar thingum that shows you how much time you have left for something to load up or something like that, in the [perhaps] mistaken belief that it will cause it to do so more quickly when in fact because you are giving the computer more information to deal with it is considerably more likely to slow it down further. The two things i'm not sure about are for a start how common is this practice and secondly, i'm often quite convinced that it does in fact speed up the process but how can that be.

Another thing,
why is it the lucinda grande and georgia font types are completely identical?
Also should blogger make more fonts available?

One thing i just can't stand, or, What i've got a bug up my arse about today.

I really can't stand it when you click on the next blog button, and you end up coming to a blog that doesn't have that button. I mean come on, who the hell does something like that! The only reason I can think of why someone would do that is because they are incredibly selfish and they really, really dislike the idea, that another blog may derive some traffic from theirs. I bet they think that if they stop people from continuing travelling down the 'next blog road' and will just decide to stay there instead of angilly going back to the last blog they were on, clicking it again and hoping it doesn't send them to the same blog [which is what i usually do].

Sanctions.

There has for last few years been a great deal of talk about academic boycotts against Israel and I have always felt that they were simply token gestures that say “you know what, we don’t like what you’re doing here” in such a manner that the targeted party must take notice but not in such a manner that it does any actual damage to them. They are boycotts not sanctions they do no real harm and yet the word racist has recently started to be bandied about. This is at a time when sanctions have been levelled against the Palestinian people on the basis that they have voted in the wrong government a government that refuses to recognise a country that also refuses to recognise them and yet has no such sanctions against them. You can argue all you like about the relative hypocrisy of this but what one can not argue about is the fact that men woman and children are dying because there hospitals have no money for medicine or anything else for that matter the fact of the matter is that these sanctions are killing. If suggesting a boycott against Israeli academics is racist and in some ways it may well be, then what new word must we invent to describe the barbarity of these sanctions?

Words

People it seems have tendency towards a confusion by which they come to believe that the word synonymous means ‘the same as’ clearly that is not the case, synonymous means similar in meaning or something thereabouts it doesn’t mean ‘the same as’ or ‘alternative to’ the fact of the matter is that different words, no matter how similar to each other they may be have different meanings. The way by which this confusion arises is that it is very difficult to describe exactly how or in what manner one word has a different meaning to another without making recourse to that words synonyms. There is I believe a solution to this problem perhaps even a number of solutions.

For instance say, this word is like that word only it’s a bit colder in feel, or its more cerebrally based. For example ‘intelligent’ has a more cerebral base to it whereas ‘clever’ has a more practical base. Also one could think about the derivation of the word, think of what culture it comes from and of what concepts that culture had and which it didn’t have, say that this word comes from there and that it does not within its self have this or that concept, or one could simply say this has a more Greek feel to it whereas that is more french. This is of course something that one could not do with other languages such as french or Greek as they has very few if any words within them that come from other languages and cultures.

One other method by which this confusion arises is that people rarely learn words by having them explained to them, you learn mostly from hearing words and seeing what circumstances they are used in. Thus the final method by which this confusion could be averted is by reforming our various cultures in such a way as to make so that you would learn mainly by having words explained to you and only secondarily by hearing their usage in the outside world. The only problem with this is that it would slow down the learning process and thus slow down the rate of innovation within society, however it may also make it into a much more intelligent and thoughtful society more capable of solving its problems and those of the greater world, so perhaps the extra time and money spent on education would be worth it in the long term, which leaves only three questions.

How long will it hold up the education process?

How much more money would thus have to be spent on it?

And,

Can such an amount be affordable to society?

Dick n Dom must die.

For those of us lucky enough to have not heard of them, Dick and Dom are a British, children’s entertainment double act, most famous for an insipid piece of shit show named ‘Dick n Dom in Da Bungalow’ [or something similar to that], and beyond that, they are famous or perhaps infamous for their, ‘hilarious’ prank of going into places such as opera halls and libraries [and shopping precincts as well] and attempting to get people to scream out at the top of their lungs, the word bogies. Now I may admit that it is mildly amusing on a conceptual level, if a bit unimaginative, the point being that one goes into a place where one is not meant to make any noise at all, and not only do you shout, but you shout out a vaguely rude word. So yes I understand the concept, and I understand why it should be atleast vaguely funny, but in practice on the other hand it’s just plain annoying. There have been several occasions when I was sitting in my local library, and a bunch of flee ridden feral children come running in and start screaming bogies, and I can tell you absolutely no one laughs, at the dirty little mites, so I know from personal experience that its not at all funny. Interestingly on the most recent occasion of this happening I did actually laugh, but not at what the kids were doing but at the fact that when they screamed bogies someone shouted out “someone give them a tissue!”

just something i've noticed.

I've noticed recently that there has been a great increase of the number of video blogs being posted on here and its not that i don't like them I just think that i prefer to read something than to here someone talk about it cos i think that when you sit down and start to write you consider what you're saying more and thus there is a greater chance of it being good on the other hand the appalingly bad and uninspired quality of my recent posts on here are proof that this is not allways the case.

secrets of the da blogspot code?

Have any of you ever noticed that the collections of letters that come up in word verification often seem to be similar to certain words, or they seem as if they are words or should be words?
Perhaps someone is trying to send us a message? if this is the case then they should know that there are eisier and more direct ways to send such messages, i mean havn't they ever heard of coding secret messages into religious paintings i mean come on.

and in other news

Why is it that any collection common symbols [such as !£$%^&*] allways seems to look like a trail of expletives, is this perhaps something that has been conditioned into us by comic books and the like or is it actually something implicit in the symbols themselves. On the other hand perhaps this perception is something particular to me as many things are and other people such as you're selves do not know what the hell i'm going on about.