Sometimes I just need to rant. Be afraid, you are my captive audience.
The nasty, kitten-mangling biarch who was selling “gothic kittens” with piercings has been ordered to stand trial.
Her lawyer reckons state law says nothing about piercing cats or docking their tails. It probably doesn’t explicitly prohibit poking red-hot poker up the rectums of kitten-mangling biarches, either. But I’m guessing it would be frowned upon.
Let’s hope they chuck the book at her.
The protest are mounting against the new law that will be inflicted upon us from next week but are the politicians listening?
And more to the point, do they care?
The drama is all over “Section 92a”, a proposed amendment to our copyright law that’s scheduled to become a happening thing from February 28.
This ridiculous piece of legislation says internet service providers “must adopt and reasonably implement a policy that provides for termination” of accounts used by anyone deemed a “repeat infringer”.
Now here’s the best bit: Those “repeat offenders” who much be “terminated” don’t necessarily have to actually be convicted of a crime, nothing has to be proved. Just accused.
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Net providers are going to be lumbered with the job of policing the whole thing, an unenviable task.
While I agree with the need to stamp out copyright violations via illegal downloading of movies and music, pirated programs, image theft or any other method, I don’t think this is the way to go about it.
What happens if Telecom, Vodafone or Slingshot don’t stop someone? Will they be given a penalty for not enforcing the law? Or how about if they terminate the account of someone who wasn’t breaching copyright? Someone with money and a good lawyer?
For once, I actually feel sorry for the like of Telecom. ISPs are going to be in an incredibly messy spot with this one.
British actor Stephen Fry has joined in the protest, bringing international attention to our plight. He’s raised the issue on his Twitter page and has blacked out his profile image as part of the Creative Freedom blackout protest.
If you want join in the blackout, sign the petition or simly learn more, click on that blackout link above.
Sydney Morning Herald foodie columnist Simon Thomsen has written an interesting piece on all flavours of vegetarians.
He says he’s not sure why they are so indignant and aggressive but suspects it could be diet-related.
I find it hard to disagree with him, I’ve known a lot of veges over the years and just two of them weren’t obnoxious about it.
Oooh, I can hear the sound of thousands of indignant veges out there, grumbling into their wheat-grass juice and waggling their celery sticks in anger.
But it’s true, the majority of vegetarians are so much like reformed smokers: so irritatingly self-righteous that it’s unlikely they’ll ever be capable of getting any not-yet-reformed types to listen to their message.
I know back when I was a smoker, the snide remarks of non-smoker just made me feel more inclined to light up. And reformed smokers were the worst.
Eventually, I quit because I wanted to, not because some sanctimonious git pressured me into it.
The same goes for eating meat, or any animal products. For five years, I didn’t eat meat. That was my choice. Now I do … I enjoy cow, it tastes good. That is also my choice.
And while we’re on the subject of veges:
The proverbial brown stuff has started to hit the fan for America’s Olympics golden boy, Michael Phelps.
Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ll probably be aware of the photos that popped up in Brit tabloid News of the World, showing him having a toke on a bong.
Shock, horror, a 23-year-old who partakes of a social bong-hit.
Now he’s been suspended by USA Swimming for three months and has been dumped from a sponsorship deal with Kellogg’s.
I still say it’s a whole lot of fuss over nothing. Give the kid a break. It’s not like it was a performance-enhancing drug, if anything it’s the opposite.
It’s not like he some drug-crazed nutjob creating havoc. No, he’s a young guy who decided to crank up the bong.
Sure, given he’s such a role model for young people, perhaps it wasn’t one of the better choices he’s made in his young life. However, that’s a big part of what being young is all about: making mistakes and learning from them.
And let’s face it, there are plenty of other young “role models” out there making much bigger mistakes but being forgiven by their managers, families and fans.
I chose to boycott the last Olympic Games because they were held in China. Now perhaps it’s time for me to boycott Kellogg’s.
Ah well, I was getting a bit bored with the Tropical Just Right, anyway.
This time the headline screams: Teen accused of sex assaults in Facebook scam.
Ooooh, very exciting and dramatic. Turns out some 18-year-old conned classmates into doing dodgy stuff.
An 18-year-old US student is accused of posing as a girl on Facebook, tricking at least 31 male classmates into sending him naked photos of themselves and then blackmailing some for sex acts …
Anthony Stancl, of New Berlin, west of Milwaukee, was charged on Wednesday with five counts of child enticement, two counts of second-degree sexual assault of a child, two counts of third-degree sexual assault, possession of child pornography, repeated sexual assault of the same child and making a bomb threat.
While there’s no denying the guy sounds like an A-grade ass-wipe, it’s also worth pointing out that the “victims” were all willing participants at the start.
Good lesson here fellas, that hot chick you think you’re chatting to online could be anyone … a classmate, your next door neighbour, a truck driver named Bubba … anyone.
As more information comes to light about Nadya Suleman, the mother of the octuplets born in Los Angeles, the more I think the woman is an A-grade idiot.
And a selfish one at that.
So now we know she already had six kids at home aged between 2 and 7, including twins.
Okay you might say, some people just want big families. Sure, I can buy that, I’m one of eight kids myself. Not all born in one hit like that though, because let’s face it, us humans aren’t meant to have litters. That’s why we have just the two boobies, not six or eight.
Then there’s the fact that she’s single. But that happens all the time. Hell, I was a single parent for a while there myself. Not 14 times, mind you.
Oh, and she’s unemployed. Of course. Hell, when would you find time to work between conceiving all those kids? Besides, what better gift could you give your parents than living in their home with your 14 kids and no money?
Oh yes, that’s the other thing, she lives with her parents.
And now the mother of the year has hired publicists and is busy trying to decide which media outlet will get the first interview and first look at her babies.
And I’m sure it will all be for a tidy wee sum.
It’s an absolute tragedy for the family of Aussie girl Gemma Thoms that she died from a drug overdose at the Big Day Out in Perth. But how the hell can supposedly intelligent people blame the cops for this?
According to a news report, witnesses reckon Gemma saw police officers searching people for drugs as they entered the festival on Saturday so took several ecstasy tablets before she went in.
Not long after that she passed out and was rushed off to hospital but sadly, she died overnight.
There’s no denying it’s sad: for her friend, her family, the medical staff, the festival organisers. Yes, it’s sad all round.
However, several comments on a Facebook page set up to remember Gemma are pointing the finger squarely at the cops, claiming their enthusiasm in cracking down on young drug-users caused Gemma’s death and suggesting they should turn a blind eye. One comment reported in the WA Today story says:
Nobody forced her to take the pills, but to not see this coming is pure ignorance. Busting someone with 5 pills at a concert does NOTHING to contribute to the wellbeing and safety of society.
Really? So ensuring you people are safe does nothing to contribute to the wellbeing and safety of society? What a knob.A follow-up story has the police commissioner saying no, the cops aren’t responsible. And he shouldn’t even have to make that statement, it goes without saying. However, sadly, today’s society is quick to pin the blame on authority figures when things turn to custard.
Iit’s the same “I’m not to blame” attitude that has seen police officers here in New Zealand wear the blame when some idiot commits an offence then leads the police on a high-speed chase. If anything goes wrong, it’s the twat who committed the crime at fault, not the cops. They are simply doing their job.
Ditto the Halatau Naitoko, the young guy who died in the motorway shooting. It was an absolutely horrible thing to happen. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time, and was killed by a bullet from a police gun during a shootout with someone committing a crime, someone who was shooting as well.
Yes, it was nothing short of a tragedy that this young man, an innocent bystander, died. But the blame for his death lies squarely with the man later arrested by police, the man who prompted the armed offenders’ squad callout in the first place.
(This is the Online column, written for The Southland Times)
Suicide isn’t a topic many of us want to discuss but the death of a United States teen last week has made it a hotly debated topic online and there have been calls for censorship of the internet.
However, short of putting in place the type of controls China has inflicted on its citizens, censoring the internet is pretty much impossible.
Abraham Biggs, a 19-year-old from Florida, took a lethal cocktail of drugs, then went online to talk about it on his blog and broadcast his death via his webcam.
University of Miami School of Medicine director of child and adolescent psychiatry Jon Shaw says having access to that blog and webcam most likely encouraged the teen to take his own life.
Dr Shaw believes it wouldn’t have happened without the online audience and that the webcam provided the psychological distance that let other bloggers forget basic human decency and instead taunt, and even encourage, the teenager to go ahead with his plans.
Sadly, this isn’t the first suicide to be broadcast on the internet, and I suppose it probably won’t be the last.
In another case, Kevin Whitrick, a 42-year-old Briton, was logged on to a so-called “insult” chat room on the well-known Paltalk chat program, with his webcam broadcasting to the world, when he placed a rope around a ceiling joist and around his neck, then stepped off a chair. Some of the chat participants egged him on while others tried desperately to find his address. Eventually, the police were called but Mr Whitrick did not survive.
In any suicide, family and friends are left with unanswered questions and wondering if there was anything they could have done to stop it. Usually, the answer is no. However, in these online suicides other internet users have sat back and watched, not offering to help and sometimes even encouraging the victim.
As much as the internet offers us the freedom to explore and learn about a seemingly endless array of topics, it brings with it some dangers that we must acknowledge.
Perhaps instead of pointing the finger at the internet we need to look at the moral shortcomings of those who took part in taunting these victims, or those who stood back and did nothing when they saw what was happening.
The internet does have its dangers, but it’s not as dangerous as a society that doesn’t care.
