Festive Left Friday Blogging: What’s nicer than Evo or Lula?

Why, what else…Evo AND Lula!

evo-lula-laff.jpg

Found at ABI today. Reposted for no reason other than that it’s a nice shot of them…and I like it.

Share this story:
Posted in All About Evo, Brazil is the Bomb!, Festive Left Friday Blogging | Comments Off on Festive Left Friday Blogging: What’s nicer than Evo or Lula?

Economics for Dummies: All you need to know about the G-8

g8-vise.jpg

Any questions?

Share this story:
Posted in Canadian Counterpunch, Economics for Dummies | Comments Off on Economics for Dummies: All you need to know about the G-8

Men Who Just Don’t Get It: Explaining birth control (sorta)

Guys, I love you all to bits, but damn, some of you are SO dense:

Please, PLEASE don’t be this dim when it comes to condoms, ‘kay?

(Meanwhile, here’s the lowdown on all the birth control methods “explained” above. Read and learn.)

Share this story:
Posted in Men Who Just Don't Get It, She Blinded Me With Science, Teh Heterostoopid, Uppity Wimmin | Comments Off on Men Who Just Don’t Get It: Explaining birth control (sorta)

Chavecito and the tweeter

chavecito-tweetie.jpg

From Cubadebate via Aporrea, a little newsy item:

Spokespersons for the Twitter social networking site, Laura Gómez and Jenna Dawn, “are delighted” that presidents, including Hugo Chávez with his @chavezcandanga, are opening accounts.

“Presidents in general, as in the case of Venezuela, generate a lot of traffic; we’re happy that President Hugo Chávez uses the platform.”

Dawn and Gómez were the two representatives of Twitter who participated in the first congress of the network in Latin America called “Hey, what are you tweeting? #140Mexico”, organized by El Universal de México. The conference played host to representatives of the Daily Newspapers Group of America.

The spokeswomen confirmed that Chávez, along with his counterparts Sebastián Piñera of Chile, Alvaro Uribe of Colombia, and Felipe Calderón, of Mexico, contacted them to verify their accounts.

In Venezuela, there were 3,839 Twitter accounts in January 2009. By December 31 of the same year, there were 225,807.

Translation mine.

And now there are way more than that. And Chavecito currently stands at how many followers?

chavecito-twitter-current.jpg

(I love his current tweet–it’s the local equivalent to “It’s raining, it’s pouring, the old man is snoring!” Only it’s an old woman and she’s in a cave. I bet it’s sung to the same tune, too.)

Compare that to Piñera:

pinera-tweeter.jpg

And El Narco:

uribe-tweeter.jpg

Heh.

I couldn’t find one for Calderón yet. I guess he’s not tweeting after all? Better get it in gear, Felipe, there are an awful lot of parodists out there impersonating you, and some are downright rude.

Share this story:
Posted in Chile Sin Queso, El NarcoPresidente, Huguito Chavecito, Mexican Standoffs | 1 Comment

Stupid Sex Tricks: Anti-choice–so easily pwned with a Sharpie

coulda-used-condom.jpg

Yep, that would have helped her a lot more than laying on a guilt trip about abortion after the fact. Or trying to guilt-trip her out of having one in the first place.

Share this story:
Posted in Fetus Fetishists, Men Who Just Don't Get It, Stupid Sex Tricks, The "Well, DUH!" Files | Comments Off on Stupid Sex Tricks: Anti-choice–so easily pwned with a Sharpie

The New Political Correctness: Rules to “live” by today!

political-correct-book.jpg

‘Afternoon all.

Here’s the latest list of all the current dos and don’ts you must obey in order not to be shunned, blackmailed, death-wished and gratuitously insulted by sanctimonious hypocrites today. Be sure to memorize this, as there will be a pop quiz later.

Ready?

Here we go:

1. You must draw Mohammed. In chalk. On a sidewalk, so people can walk all over him (which to Arabs and Muslims is the worst insult possible), thus demonstrating…what exactly? Oh, don’t question it–just do it in the name of Free Speech!

2. If challenged as to whether drawing Mohammed has any real point to it, other than gratuitously singling out others on the grounds of religious bigotry, you must clutch your pearls and grandiloquently declare that you are a rationalist atheist, and as such, cannot possibly be a religious bigot. You are an IRRELIGIOUS bigot, thankyouverymuch! And it is not only your right but your DUTY to be one, because if you’re not, They are going to come and take your right away from you! So stop questioning and draw Mohammed!

3. Furthermore, you are exempt from any actual consequences your silly actions (which you must characterize as “protest”) may reap, especially if they fall on the heads of others in a foreign country.

4. You must also disclaim responsibility if anyone challenges you on this one. Useful catchphrase: “See, what did I tell you? They ARE all fascists!” (Be sure to yell this one good and loud, so that they hear you over in Pakistan.)

5. You must ignore the fact that all of Islam does not, in fact, call for the death penalty on artists who draw Mohammed. Because if you did your homework on this one and realized that all Muslims are not alike in their beliefs, you’d be an accommodationist (that’s a PC word, kiddies, memorize it!) to Those People Who Are Trying To Force Their Religion On You.

6. Also, you would be a dhimmi. You don’t want to be one of those, do you? No, of course not…that would be the Worst Thing Ever for us free westerners. So just declare your independence and DRAW MOHAMMED, already. Remember, it’s your duty.

7. And, if female, don’t forget to further show your contempt by flashing your boobs, legs, or anything else that’s been deemed to cause earthquakes in Iran. Not doing so shows you are a humorless feminist and a bad sport. And you’ll get cancer of the uterus, which will eat a big hole through your bowels, and your cervix will fall out your ass.

8. And just ignore all the Christian fundies over here. After all, they only force their women to rat up their hair (the higher it is, the closer to God, etc.) and wear too much mascara (the greasy old-fashioned kind that runs when you sweat or cry, which they do as a matter of rote in their megachurches, preferably while throwing convulsions or speaking gibberish unto Jeebus). They don’t make them wear veils all over everything. Veils are a terribly threatening thing to western freedom!

9. Also, ignore Christian fundie terrorists. Especially those that profess admiration for Hitler. They don’t count as fascists or terrorists because they’re not brown and they don’t bow down five times a day in scary submission to Allah.

10. Never, EVER say “apartheid” and “Israel” in the same breath. If you do, that makes you a criminal against humanity. And terribly unfair to Israel. And an antisemite, particularly if you speak up on behalf of those other Semites, the Palestinians. And worst of all, it means you’re probably a Holocaust denier who deserves to get cancer and be run over by a double-decker bus at the same time.

11. If you’re queer, especially don’t violate #10 at a Pride Day parade. Especially not in Toronto. It’s only supposed to be a peaceful, non-political celebration of cheap beer and commercial tourism and musclemen wearing nothing but an artful cobweb of studded leather straps, capisce?

12. If you’re Jewish, violating #10 means you’re a self-hater and deserve to be shit-listed and cursed to death by some Kahanist greybeard or other. Preferably by stoning.

13. And don’t even ask what horrible punishments are in store for being queer, Jewish AND violating #10, all at the same time. You should be making babies for Israel, not criticizing it, you vile Sodomite!

14. Also, don’t ever mention that Hamas was once actively funded by Israel in order to undermine Yasser Arafat’s PLO. That would be heresy.

15. And not a word about those business dealings with South Africa during the apartheid era, either. Especially not the South African prime minister who was pro-Nazi during World War II (and interned for it), but was happily welcomed by Israel in the name of nuclear warhead sales and other common causes which are, of course, not mentionable here.

16. You must denounce Iran as a fascist menace at every opportunity you get. Preferably by misquoting Ahmadinejad. After all, he’s trying to make nukes.

17. And of course, when the subject of Israeli nukes arises, you must clam up and pretend there was no such thing. Ever.

18. AND that it was not being offered for sale to South Africa, of all places.

19. In fact, just ignore all the very real fascism that’s going down in Israel, or wherever you are.

20. And just shut up and DRAW MOHAMMED, and be thankful we still let you have free speech. Oak hay?

Share this story:
Posted in Do As I Say..., Fascism Without Swastikas, Newspeak is Nospeak | 1 Comment

Teh Heterostoopid: How NOT to find a new daddy for your son

milfy-mom-fail.jpg

Step 1: Join an online dating site for single parents.

Step 2: Upload a MILFy photo that shows everything but your face.

Step 3: Include kid in said photo.

Share this story:
Posted in Teh Heterostoopid | 2 Comments

This just in…hot off the tweeter…pttttttteeeep eep eep…

chavecito-homepage-tweet.jpg

Chavecito has a blog coming out, starting today. Here’s the link. Everybody update your blogrolls!

Share this story:
Posted in Huguito Chavecito | 2 Comments

Yes, Israel has nukes. Yes, it’s an apartheid state. And no, it has no shame.

Surprising revelations, surprisingly revealed by the UK Guardian:

Secret South African documents reveal that Israel offered to sell nuclear warheads to the apartheid regime, providing the first official documentary evidence of the state’s possession of nuclear weapons.

The “top secret” minutes of meetings between senior officials from the two countries in 1975 show that South Africa’s defence minister, PW Botha, asked for the warheads and Shimon Peres, then Israel’s defence minister and now its president, responded by offering them “in three sizes”. The two men also signed a broad-ranging agreement governing military ties between the two countries that included a clause declaring that “the very existence of this agreement” was to remain secret.

The documents, uncovered by an American academic, Sasha Polakow-Suransky, in research for a book on the close relationship between the two countries, provide evidence that Israel has nuclear weapons despite its policy of “ambiguity” in neither confirming nor denying their existence.

The Israeli authorities tried to stop South Africa’s post-apartheid government declassifying the documents at Polakow-Suransky’s request and the revelations will be an embarrassment, particularly as this week’s nuclear non-proliferation talks in New York focus on the Middle East.

They will also undermine Israel’s attempts to suggest that, if it has nuclear weapons, it is a “responsible” power that would not misuse them, whereas countries such as Iran cannot be trusted.

I predict that Professor Polakow-Suransky will be getting a lot of hate mail. Truth-tellers often do. Just look what happened to Mordechai Vanunu, who revealed the truth two decades ago. He got taken back to jail today, in an instance of very convenient timing. No doubt he’ll be duly silenced as part of the conditions of his latest incarceration. But it won’t do any good; the cat is already out of the bag (even the Federation of American Scientists is aware of the Israeli nuke program), and the Guardian report only confirms what’s already long been known:

South African documents show that the apartheid-era military wanted the missiles as a deterrent and for potential strikes against neighbouring states.

The documents show both sides met on 31 March 1975. Polakow-Suransky writes in his book published in the US this week, The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s secret alliance with apartheid South Africa. At the talks Israeli officials “formally offered to sell South Africa some of the nuclear-capable Jericho missiles in its arsenal”.

Among those attending the meeting was the South African military chief of staff, Lieutenant General RF Armstrong. He immediately drew up a memo in which he laid out the benefits of South Africa obtaining the Jericho missiles but only if they were fitted with nuclear weapons.

The memo, marked “top secret” and dated the same day as the meeting with the Israelis, has previously been revealed but its context was not fully understood because it was not known to be directly linked to the Israeli offer on the same day and that it was the basis for a direct request to Israel. In it, Armstrong writes: “In considering the merits of a weapon system such as the one being offered, certain assumptions have been made: a) That the missiles will be armed with nuclear warheads manufactured in RSA (Republic of South Africa) or acquired elsewhere.”

But South Africa was years from being able to build atomic weapons. A little more than two months later, on 4 June, Peres and Botha met in Zurich. By then the Jericho project had the codename Chalet.

The top secret minutes of the meeting record that: “Minister Botha expressed interest in a limited number of units of Chalet subject to the correct payload being available.” The document then records: “Minister Peres said the correct payload was available in three sizes. Minister Botha expressed his appreciation and said that he would ask for advice.” The “three sizes” are believed to refer to the conventional, chemical and nuclear weapons.

The use of a euphemism, the “correct payload”, reflects Israeli sensitivity over the nuclear issue and would not have been used had it been referring to conventional weapons. It can also only have meant nuclear warheads as Armstrong’s memorandum makes clear South Africa was interested in the Jericho missiles solely as a means of delivering nuclear weapons.

In addition, the only payload the South Africans would have needed to obtain from Israel was nuclear. The South Africans were capable of putting together other warheads.

Botha did not go ahead with the deal in part because of the cost. In addition, any deal would have to have had final approval by Israel’s prime minister and it is uncertain it would have been forthcoming.

South Africa eventually built its own nuclear bombs, albeit possibly with Israeli assistance. But the collaboration on military technology only grew over the following years. South Africa also provided much of the yellowcake uranium that Israel required to develop its weapons.

Emphasis added.

Looks like those two seemingly strange bedfellows are not so unlikely a pair after all. They were scratching each other’s backs rather nicely. Apartheid South Africa providing yellowcake uranium so Apartheid Israel could supply warheads. It stands to reason that they would have such a dandy reciprocal relationship: Israel was (and still is) cracking down on its internal Arab population, trying to starve it out; South Africa did the same to its blacks. Israel wields the nuclear menace over its Arab neighbors; South Africa was hoping to do the same with its black neighbors. The two are far more similar than they are different when it comes to both domestic and foreign policy.

And of course, there’s always this:

apartheid-wall-will-fall.jpg

Ceci n’est pas un mur d’apartheid. Ceci n’est pas un grand prison.

And if you believe that’s not an apartheid wall, enclosing the world’s largest existing prison camp, I’ve got some lovely oceanfront property in Saskatchewan that I’ll sell you for a song.

PS to all the hasbara trolls writing me from the safety of London, England and other places totally out of touch with reality:

not-my-job.jpg

Take note that anything you try to spam here, including false “facts” and charmingly futile death wishes for me, will be deleted and reported to your ISP, so that you will learn not to abuse your online privileges in future. Good day, and get fucked.

Share this story:
Posted in Angry Pacifist Speaks Her Mind, Do As I Say..., Fascism Without Swastikas, Guns, Guns, Guns, Isn't That Illegal?, Morticia! You Spoke French!, Schadenfreude, She Blinded Me With Science | 2 Comments

G-20 summit: Fascism, heads up!

warning-fascism.jpg

Courtesy Toronto Media Co-op, a harbinger of nasty things to come at the G-20 summit:

Toronto – The RCMP-led Integrated Security Unit (ISU) of the G20 is refusing to rule out the use of Agent Provocateurs to get protesters to commit illegal acts, the Toronto Media Co-op has learned.

During a G20 forum on April 30th held by Toronto City Councilors, Constable George Tucker, a member of the G20 planning team responsible for Public Affairs, Communications & Corporate Relations, was asked if Agent Provocateurs would be used.

He responded: “I’m not at liberty to discuss security issues in an open format”.

Translation: Yes, we’re going to use provocs. But we’re gonna be coy and ask the media to hold up the mask for us.

And here’s why that would be:

Gary Davidson, a retired RCMP officer who was active in VIP security, says they are illegal, although he does not think the RCMP uses them: “I cannot speak for other police forces [such as Toronto Police Services, the Ontario Provincial Police, etc.] but I can say that although the RCMP probably would have plain clothed police mixed in with the crowd, the RCMP has never used provocateurs. Basically, they hope all the protesters just go away. To the best of my knowledge, the use of Agent Provocateurs is illegal in Canada and that the RCMP would not and has not engaged in such practice,” he explained in an e-mail.

Illegal in Canada, but it’s been used here before. I’ve blogged previously on this; seems that Québec police have quite blatantly broken this law. It’s hard to plant a bunch of burly cops among some scrawny little anarchists, non?

And oh yeah, it’s been done at OTHER G-20 summits, too. Most recently in London. It’s something of a pattern at any summits starting with the letter G!

During a phone interview with the Media Co-op, Constable Meghan Gray with the TPS G20 Planning Team responsible for Public Affairs, Communications & Community Relations, was also asked directly whether Agent Provocateurs would be used.

Toronto Media Co-op: Can you confirm or deny that you will be using agent provocateurs? Do you think they are illegal?

Meaghan Gray: “Like [my co-worker], George Tucker, those are operational issues, I can’t speak to that.”

TMC: “A source from the RCMP has told me their use is illegal. Are you saying you can’t rule out an illegal activity will be used?”

Gray: “Well…I’d have to ask someone else about that….I’ll get somebody to get back to you.”

Gray responded via e-mail 2 hours later.

“I have spoken with my colleagues on the Public Affairs Team and as I
stated, with respect to your questions regarding Agents Provocateurs, the
 Integrated Security Unit for the G8-G20 Summits will not discuss
 operational details,” she wrote.

Though Gray stated that “all police efforts will be lawful”, this is not the first time that an ISU for a summit has been asked about Agent Provocateurs. Nor is it the first time they have refused to respond.

“Lawful”, but not legal?

Coyness: Also a fascist strategy. Toronto G-20 protesters, consider this your heads-up. Watch out for guys who look like they have regular access to a gym and steroids, ‘kay?

Share this story:
Posted in Cops Behaving Badly, Fascism Without Swastikas, Newspeak is Nospeak | 1 Comment