Saturday, 30 December 2006


- "President George W Bush hailed the execution as "an important milestone" on the road to building an Iraqi democracy" CUNT

- "The British government does not support the use of the death penalty, in Iraq or anywhere else. We advocate an end to the death penalty worldwide, regardless of the individual or the crime.

"We have made our position very clear to the Iraqi authorities, but we respect their decision as that of a sovereign nation." CUNTS

- "France, which like the rest of its European partners advocates the universal abolition of capital punishment, notes the execution of Saddam Hussein on Saturday."

"That decision was made by the people and the sovereign authorities of Iraq." MERDE

We should make our position on the death penalty a little clearer:
It Is Wrong To Kill People.
End. Of. Story.
I don't care what he did.

Europe says this, but 'respects the decision of a sovereign country'.

Fuck me.

One; lets see how 'sovereign' the Iraqi government is without UK/US military support, and two; from Britain's point of view, we didn't exactly respect the decisions of this sovereign country when Saddam was it's leader. We don't respect the sovereign decisions of Iran either.

So, Saddam was a very bad person, possibly the worst sort. But if you celebrate his execution: YOU ARE A CUNT.

happy bastard new year.

I look over history, and too many times the response to killing has been more killing. It's a viscious circle.
There was this old idea of "an eye for an eye", but it's an old and barbaric idea. In fact even Christianity was supposed to have dropped that one - listen to me, American Christians - what Jesus said was not an addition to the Old Testament, it was a replacement. So if you will insist on following the bible, at least have the good grace to use the most up to date. The only thing I really respect in Christianity was the supposed unequivocal message of peace. And that's also why I have little respect for Religions as organisations - because they ignore their own fucking instructions, and go around killing and hating people. Tossers.
It's not always religion, either.
One current excuse for killing people is "democracy and freedom".
It's a SHIT excuse.
Killing is a part of neither idea, and I will say it again: You are a stupid fucking shit if you believe in killing people to create a better world. Only an ignorant, short-sighted, vindictive, viscious, inhumane bullshit excuse for a person would believe that.
But, I would never advocate killing such a person, as it would turn me into one.

Thursday, 28 December 2006

a winter's tale (what are mittens for?)

they look like a good idea, but are they? Imagine wearing mittens and...

Do you think a thousand monkeys, at a thousand keyboards, wearing mittens, would create the world's finest literature?

The answer, I'm afraid, is no.

Not a good idea. With mittens on.

Any other activities not suitable for mitten wearing accepted below:

Saturday, 23 December 2006

last post

A random review of the year....

This has been a busy year for many, and certainly one we will remember less and less as the seconds of 2007 tick by.
Here are some of the things we aren't likely to be bothered about once the hangover has gone.
In politics, the US republican party was decimated by some "pansy-ass french loving liberals", which goes someway to prove to the world that most Americans actually aren't "dumb-ass war loving conservatives". Hats off to you!
A particular highlight of this was Mr Ted Haggard, who managed to combine being a conservative evangelical Christian leader, with being a drug-and-prostitute-using gay-boy.
"Hey everybody, Jesus wants you to take crystal meth!"
Quite impressive. For some reason, American Christians thought that was contradictory.

Kofi Annan gave his final speech for the UN, and used the occasion to heavily criticise US foreign policy. Apparently "really angry" about his most profitable market being insulted, U2 singer Bono Vox, retaliated in an address from his evil headquarters, in which he called Mr Annan a "shit", before firing missiles into the UN headquarters.UN headquarters in NY, after U2's attack.

What else? Some good news? Evo Morales! The best combination of socialism and sweaters the world has ever seen.

"Legendary" boy band "take that", pictured below made a comeback with a new album.
The press interest was so small, that no newspapers commented on how the whole 70 minutes was filled with "the gay one" shouting Robbie Williams' name, and calling him a bum-face.

I learnt that the only world-leading British companies sell arms and drugs: Britain "we get you fucked up, then we fuck you up".

And then Tony Blair goes around telling the world how dangerous Iran is, "aren't they naughty, lets single them out as baddies, because then they'll change their bad ways"... while at the same time, deciding to renew Britain's nuclear weapons, and selling billions of pounds worth of fighter jets to Saudi Arabia.
I'm confused. I thought Iran was the democracy, and Saudi Arabia the monarchy. What sort of messages are we sending out here?

Back to the important world of celebrity.. I know we all recognised a little of ourselves in Mel Gibson, with his drink fuelled anti-semitic rant. I may be a nice liberal person at heart, but give me a beer, and I start actually trying to burn "the Jews". It's just a natural response to alcohol, anti-semitism. You might think it makes you feel dizzy, fall over, even vomit on occasion; but no, what it actually does is turn you into a right wing conservative fascist.
A real fuckwit:

Does anyone really believe that the "disease" of alcoholism is an excuse for this type of behaviour? Who really changes that much? When I'm drunk, I'd quite like to punch Bono, for example... but I also feel that way when I'm sober. So I have this feeling that Mr Gibson is actually anti-semitic at heart, it's just when he's drunk he forgets that it's offensive and wrong. Alcohol just exposes him as the dick head that he is.

And James Brown has died... "take it to the bridge".

...that was written with little thought, and I know much more important things have happened... oops.
..some things I appreciated in 2006...
Leonid Tsypkin "Summer in Baden Baden"
Zero db "bongos bleeps and basslines"
Battles "BEP/EPC"
Jimi Edgar "color strip"
Phoenix Wright: Ace Attourney! (nintendo ds)

Friday, 22 December 2006

happy christmas, don't drink too much, you might end up like this, especially if you live with girls who dress "up"...

Losers! Crap attempt!

She´s well qualified in International Relations, as she´s a concert pianist (as someone else wrote once). So Ms Rice has reassured the world, and Americuh that the "investment" in Iraq has been "worth it". The doubters will understand this when "(Iraq) emerges as a country that is a stabilising factor, you will have a very different kind of Middle East."
I have to point out that the investment she´s talking about includes the "investment" of having American and Iraqi people killed.
...aaanyway, how is Iraq going to become a beacon of stability?
What with the much talked about "change of direction" in US policy, and James Baker´s Iraq report, I was interested to know what new solutions we´d be looking at...
It´s a revolution.
The solution?
20,000 more soldiers.

That´s it.

Oh, and the Pentagon needs an extra $100 billion (for both Iraq and "Afganistan", wherever that is).
So throw soldiers and money at it...

I´m hearing alot of scepticism, and criticism, of these simple ideas, but, you know, you have to TRUST the people in charge!
Noone would spend $100 billion unless they were sure it was worth it!
Would you? You´s have to be a complete idiot to waste that kind of money!
You think more soldiers, in a country where their very presence causes tension and violence, will make the situation worse?
It won´t!
So that´s it then, no need to worry at all, everything will be just fine.

I was going to do some research on what you could do with $100 billion, instead of using it for war, but to be honest I couldn´t be bothered.

I´m sure you could buy lots of, lets say, flowers, socks, chocolate, sellotape and olive oil. All good things. You could buy at least 3 of these.

Tuesday, 19 December 2006

forking fork music

Here's a part of the reason I enjoy not living in England:

A survey has been made of "young professionals in London", about theiir eating habits: Food Survey

"Today's survey, carried out among 200 young professionals in London this year, shows that nearly three-quarters (71%) will not order dishes or drinks if they think there is a risk that they might mispronounce the name."
So, firstly, many people are too proud to be seen making a mistake (though I understand this a little re-my Spanish or lack of). That's a little silly, we're only talking about food... next:

"During business lunches, 65% of young professionals questioned have made food or wine choices based upon their desire to impress others rather than what they actually want."
This is what frightens me. Behaviour like this is essentially teenage, dressed up in snobbery.
It paints a picture of "young professionals" running around after status symbols, criticising wrong choices of others, while being constantly scared they have made a "social error" themselves. Who'd want to live like that?
The story goes that, unlike the 1970s, you can finally get "good food" in Britain (you always could, at home)... and yet apparently people can't enjoy it fully. How sad. Eating out in Britain's too much of an "event" anyway - there is snobbishness from top to bottom.
(Except Mcdonalds, which is shit from top to bottom.)

So waiters, like some shop assistants, can have an aura of superiority over their customers, which intimidates a bit I suppose;
You would NEVER want to be seen looking stupid in front of a waiter! Ooh no! Social suicide!

My hope is, that as this was a survey of only 200 hundred people, the survey company accidently chose 200 inbred-public-school-aristocrats who fell into jobs in Law firms or something. I do hope it wasn't "real" people....

Monday, 18 December 2006

the fucking bomb

Last week, I wrote about an idea for world peace, similar to the ideas that Miss World contestants probably have...
... and I got called a "complete moron" (which we have discovered does not mean "Moorish").
Anyway, some other Californians have had a different idea for world peace - please read about it here:
Click Me!

erm... ok... now I don't have any problems with orgasms in particular, if people have orgasms, that's probably a good thing for them. But I'm not CONVINCED that what people think when they have an orgasm affects the world.
But I'm open minded(...), so I thought, "what if they are right?"
This led me to two ideas:
1: If orgasms can create peace, why not take people into war zones to have sex? Then everyone will stop fighting. Like a kind of "fucking bomb".

2: There are already lots of people having orgasms, all the time, and if orgasms affect the world, what are people thinking about when they have orgasms today?
If orgasms have this power, then it follows that people are thinking about destroying the environment, war, disease, and shit TV while they are having sex!
Really?! I obviously don't know "people" as well I thought I did.

Donna Sheehan thinks "it's time to try something new". Maybe she should try something new; like not being a complete idiot?
Perhaps if everyone tried really hard at the same time to not be a complete idiot, we could......

Now that really is wishful thinking.

on a lighter note; here's a new video by the best Swedish cross-dressing jazz group in the world...

Saturday, 16 December 2006

Paranoid Maniacs, and how to repeat yourself like a drunk

If we have to wait to make judgements.. maybe next time we'll wait before we bomb another country that's not actually a threat to us?
Afganistan wasn't. The government wasn't strong enough then on now to control everyone within it. (concerning terrorists within, please read on)
Iraq wasn't, what we had was a weakened dictator, with a poor military, not a regional, and certainly not a world, threat.
I was reminded of the 1980s war against Grenada: Somehow the US government convinced people this little country was a threat! It was ridiculous, like all US activity in South America (and also very sad - people died).

What I would like to see from a world superpower is less enthusiasm for brute force.
Maybe sometimes you have "to fight fire with fire" - but VERY rarely! Like Wouter says, we's usually use water or foam. Fighting Hitler's regime was necessary, he was very powerful and threatening.

Iraq, Iran, Venezuela... they're just not a major threat to the US. If they are a threat to their neighbours, well that's their neighbours' problem. You can't use the excuse of terrorism, which disgusting as it is still causes much less harm than war, to send your military to a country you don't like.
Again, I'll use the parallel of Northern Ireland. At no point, to rid us of a terrorist organisation which regularly attacked mainland Britain, did the British Government bomb the civillian population of Northern Ireland.
It would have been ineffective (breeding hate), and morally reprehensible to punish the population at large for a tiny minority's actions. (and one which US groups were funding, you fuckers!)
The peace process there is still ongoing, and it will taka a generation of hard work to build trust and goodwill so peace stays. It looks like that will happen.

In Iraq (also Palestine and Lebanon), whatever the evils of the indigenous governments, they are not the ones who destroy the cities and countries, and kill civillians en masse.
With the heavy handed "solution" of war, the US/UK in Iraq, and Israel in Palestine(or what would be) and Lebanon, are creating hatred which will cause problems for years.
And for what? Because "we thought they were a threat". Well it turned out they weren't. Nobody really thought they were. If Iraq was a threat, well perhaps Syria or Iran might have thought about going to war first?
What, unfortunately, some people in the US have not learnt is that pre-emptive war is misguided, dangerous and wrong.

To give up some weapons would be suicide, eh?

You are a paranoid maniac if you believe that:

Why would another country attack the US? For territory? No, there are no arguements over that.
Would they attack you because they "hate freedom"? That's a fucking stupid arguement. Noone hates freedom, and Bush is a facetious shit to suggest it. If the US had no nukes, would France invade? There's no reason! There's no reason for other countries either.
However, some terrorists and perhaps countries, though I don't know of any, might threaten the US now, because they are scared of the US. They have good reason.

If the most powerful nation on earth can only exist by threatening the rest with terrible violent power, well frankly I hate America too. Luckily, not all US administrations are like this, and I hope the next one tries to make peace with the world instead of bullying it.

Friday, 15 December 2006

whatcha doing on our turf, punk?


"bollocks! You've got 'em, mister! I want 'em too!"


"but you let Kim get them, I wanna play too!"


"Piss off! try and stop me!"


"oh, shit. OK, I promise to stop, ok?"


"er, well, you know, we don't have too much money, and we need to improve our social welfare and stuff...."


Thursday, 14 December 2006

Where are they!? Fuck!

So, the government says there was no conspiracy to murder Diana?
What does that mean?
I think for all the conspiracy theorists out there, it means this:
If there was "no conspiracy", then there must've been a conspiracy! She must've been murdered!

Conspiracy theorists think these things... because they are stupid.

disco cooking (or fuck realpolitik)

"Anyway, my final point is it is a lot easier to complain about how someone else does it than it is to actually fix the problem at hand. If you can't bring anything constructive to the conversation than maybe you should spend your energies thinking about what would be constructive as opposed to wasting all of them complaining and accusing others of being morally corrupt. Just a thought."

Here's one.. instead of complaining about these countries pursuing Nuclear Weapons, and threatening them with sanctions, or even war... Why don't we do something positive? It's easy... come on! Let's go into the disco kitchen!

Discoriggall's recipe for increasing world peace:

Step one: Begin a real process of decomissioning your own nuclear arsenal, thus removing a rational for other countries who feel threatened by you, or just want to join the club, to want such weapons.

Step two: You've finished! That was easy!

But for dessert, here's a really sweet dish that always impresses guests at my dinner parties.

Step one: All the money you're not spending on nuclear missiles... even for a tiny little place like Britain, that's 26 BILLION POUNDS... and spend it on feeding and clothing the poor, supplying clean drinking water and education for all.

Step two: feel good about yourself - you've just stopped millions of children dying, and terrorists hating you!

Now wouldn't THAT be better than keeping the means to destroy people completely? (point for the "realists" out there, you still have the means to destroy people almost completely, remember, just not the nuclear option)

Someone will say I'm being idealist... there must've been a time when if I suggested we'd have the ability to blow the globe into little pieces, you'd've called me crazy. And you'd be right. It is crazy, what we are doing, or allowing to happen, when it's so simple to do things a whole lot better.

And tastier.

Wednesday, 13 December 2006

and now for something completely different

Beards in Fashion

So, apparently beards are the new black, or something. Bit of a bastard, as I like not shaving, but I don´t like being in fashion. What a conundrum. I need an unshaved look that says "I´m not trying to be cool" :)
Maybe I need a personal stylist like Vikkktoria bekkkham.

cool cabbage, yesterday.

Tuesday, 12 December 2006


Iran Threat

So Mr Blair says it´s a threat.

What this I can never remember) says is bad, holocaust denial is crazy, and it´s never good to call for a country to be destroyed... but beyond rhetoric, this country can´t threaten anyone much.

The Iranian president Ahm..etc is a small fish in the International community, and all this attention makes him look strong at home. The only regional power that has WMDs, and regularly attacks neighbours, oppresses people and threatens others, is Israel.

So it is Iran which feels threatened, not Israel. However, governments of both countries are helped by acting as if the opposite were true: Israel threatened, and Iran scary. It´s rubbish.

And to criticise Israel is not anti-semitic; it´s the government I don´t like.

I have exactly the same respect for Jewish beliefs as I do for other religions, like Christianity and Islam: They´re all bullshit, and you´d have to be a complete idiot to believe any of it. Really. Get a brain. Seriously!

Ahmadinejad! It just won´t stay in my head.

Monday, 11 December 2006

in addition to that

..and apparently, according to bald non - personality conservative politician ian duncan smith (no capitals required), the rise of non-married co-habiting couples with children is a major cause of society's problems. Apologies for the long sentence.
This is backward stupid prejudice AGAIN...
There may be problems with crime everywhere - but this is not 'cause of single mothers, unmarried couples, or whatever.
How it is politicians repeatedly stand up, apparently without irony, and claim the problems of the world can be blamed on these things is incredible... they should be shot, probably. This ridiculous stupidity is much more likely to be a major cause of grief in society, and we'd be better off without people who think there's only one good way to live your life: they are not a great number, though they make a lot of noise. Get rid of them, and the rest of us can carrry on, getting by however we want to.
argh... and "shit" I meant to leave this in drafts this morning.. not publish..

polly toynbee talks about the same subject, but with more research: return to terra firma

Sunday, 10 December 2006

Disco Family Values/hot off the press

Again, I'm reading that to stop society disintegrating (It is? Fuck! Run away!), we need to go back to "family values".

Often, this means English Victorian family values.

Ah yes. Victorian Family Values. Like, make children work down coal mines, let husbands have official mistresses, wear top hats.
Did I mention corporal punishment? Oh, and a woman's place is in the kitchen, unless she's the Queen, and she can't vote, either, because it's not lady-like to know about politics.

Ladies should know about embroidery, cute animals, dancing, etcetera.

So that's Victorian Family values: Do we want them? Will they stop the disintegration of society?

Or, as Nietsze put it, are they a bunch of shit?
Will crime drop, people start going to church (apparently that's a good thing), women stop voting, children stop taking crack, if we; start hitting children; put them to work; oppress women; and encourag men to be unfaithful??
"Lazy working class scum, as conservatives call them."

What sort of idiots would promote Victorian family values? I have some ideas of which idiots, but I'm sure I don't need to spell it out... there are plenty everywhere.

Newsflash! General Augustus Pinochet, viscious dictator of Chile, has died, aged 91.

Good. I hope it wasn't too fast.

Friday, 8 December 2006

Integrate or Die!

essential values?

Another reason to think Tony Blair's a nob.

Radical Islamic terrorists aren't radical Islamic terrorists because they're not integrated - it's because they're fucked up psychotics. If they drank tea and played cricket - they'd still be psychos.

What about the BNP (English rascist party)? They should fucking integrate too. And the super rich - they barely take part in society, and don't tolerate being taxed much. Fucking integrate you bastards!

If tolerance is one of our essential values - everyone who reads the Daily Mail or the Sun, or the Daily Telegraph: Pack your bags, and fack orff! Bunch of white conservative intolerant wankers!

If you think Al-Qaida is an intolerant organisation, please read the Daily Mail, and tell me it's not stuffed so full of hatred, paranoia and bile it makes you want to kill. It's a bible of illogical, intolerant bullshit. And it would tell you it's very British.

Government can't go around telling society what it's values are - we have some things in common, most of us (for example most people think Tony Blair's a dick), but there's also a lot of divergance. Not just on religious grounds, either. I have as little in common with a terrorist as I do with Tony Blair.

He says everyone should have respect for Britain, if they live there. Well I am British, and I have very little respect for it. Why should I? I don't give a crap about being British. I can't be proud of something I had no part of - and I just happened to be born there. Not my fault, being born, and nothing should be expected from me.

If Tony Blair wants people to have respect for Britain, perhaps he could start off by having some respect for people - not just ignoring them, or believing he knows better than them. He says the July 7th bombings brought multiculturism into sharp relief. Because he's a cunt. If he'd had repsect for British people, he would've stayed out of Iraq, and there would've been fewer reasons for a bunch of psychos to think they were justified in killing innocent people.

But no, it had nothing to do with Iraq, the government assures us, it's because "the muslims" aren't integrating properly. This kind of reasoning is idiotic, how anyone could believe it is beyond me.

So in conclusion; telling people to integrate's just going to piss people off more, and make them feel more victimised than they already do. And Tony Blair should resign as soon as possible, before he destroys us all.

Thursday, 7 December 2006

that xylophone stuff

Life on Mars?
Life on Mars? Oooh, how exciting.

What does it mean?

They suspect that there's water there? That'll be useful, we need water - haven't got much.

We're not alone?

I know! Why don't we spend billions of (insert currency here) to visit??

We can say hello. Have a drink.

And that will be great, real useful. We should definitely do this before we sort out our own problems.

Monday, 4 December 2006

a reply, and tired "I give up".

look. it's not meant all to be taken seriously... it's spleen venting, not reasoned arguement. I've seen some genuinely offensive blogs before, written by people who seem to hate everything that exists outside their conservative lives. When I'm writing, sometimes I'm being silly, like today, and sometimes I'm being serious (read my blog called "gay badness" to see how much I dislike prejudice).
I find the world today is filling up with groups who need protection from everything, even "offence". If you choose a certain lifestyle, I think it can be fairly made fun of - this doesn't extend to things like race or sexuality, as people can't choose these things. But you choose to believe in something, choose your politics, and to an extent choose how fit/fat you are. You are right that I'm cruel about fat people, and I shouldn't be. But I will never stop being rude about religion, politicians, conservatism, spiritualists, and other nutters who believe in nonsense.

I love flying extended dub

I used to love travelling, almost more than arriving. Then I went on a plane. The first 2 journeys I enjoyed, but then it started to go down hill.
So today.
I arrive an hour early at Stanstead, everything´s fine. Then I meet the security queues, and am surrounded by meat-heads carrying their copies of the Sun and being generally loud. The queue; long and slow, new regulations blah blah blah. No liquids in bags. When I got on the plane I realised I´d accidently brought some ink cartridges in my hand luggage. Well, isn´t that liquid? Anyway, the bored x-ray machine operator aparently did´t notice.
Shoes off, then on, because once someone once failed to bomb a plane using a shoe bomb. I´m glad he didn´t try a pants bomb, as that would be a right pain.
The queue did give me some light relief, as a big guy who was trying to take a 20 kilo suitcase as hand luggage got stopped and told to go and check it in... he got really angry and started shouting "Fffuucking Stanstead!" at the staff in a Dutch accent. Funny.
I managed to get to the gate in time, and onto the plane, with my liquid ink, and the flight was almost not annoying at all, until we landed.
Then the in flight speakers played a trumpet fanfare, to announce that we, on a Ryan Air Flight, were early/ontime, and wasn´t that great!? The little publicity recording finished with recorded cheering and clapping. Fuckers.
The Bus journey from Girona ruined everything completely. I sat on the bus as it filled up with people, then the people stopped arriving, leaving about 5 free seats. Suddenly, the sunlight was blocked out, and we were submerged in shadow, and the bus began to shake... as a huge fat man squeezed himself through the door.
As soon as I saw him, I knew he´d fucking sit next to me, I don´t know why, I just don´t know how to give off "stay away from me!!" vibes.
Why would I want to do that? Because public transport has limited space, and someone built like a Zeppelin will make my journey uncomfortable! Was he a "good person"? I don't care! I'd been up since before sunrise, and didn't really want to spend an hour and a half more in darkness.
So I spent the next hour and a half squished into half a seat, against the window. Either Buses should be bigger, doors shout be small enough so fat people CAN´T get in, or he should´ve been put in the luggage hold.

Glad to be back, after all that, anyway.

Sunday, 3 December 2006


after years of meaning to, I finally visited the Hawksmoor church in Spitalfields, after reading the novel "Hawksmoor" by Peter Ackroyd.
Impressive, I thought. my big little brother's watching Lost, and I don't understand anything... then it got a bit gruesome, so I've had to run off and hide... I am rubbish!

Friday, 1 December 2006

bad shopping

It's not 'cause of Boner, I promise, but I have a problem with 'red' products.
Firstly, if you want to give money to charity, do so. It's A Good Thing.
However, it is much less of A Good Thing to spend $199 on an ipod (PRODUCT) RED for yourself, with $10 going to charity. Why did you buy the ipod? Because you wanted to save people in Africa? Don't lie. And moreover, do you think you needed an ipod MORE than people in Africa need not to have AIDs?
Mars. Now sponsored by (PRODUCT) RED.

I buy things for me, I am not perfect by any means.
(PRODUCT) RED has a further (MAJOR) PROBLEM. Red. RED. Not only are you choosing to give a small percentage of money you spend on yourself, but you are saying..

You fucking asshole. Can't you do good without expecting the admiration of others for it? You're not getting my admiration for giving $10 dollars to Africa, then swanning around like you're some kind of holier than thou martyr. Fuck off.
"Africa", in the eyes of Boner and others, is a simple problem. They're poor - lets give them money. Simple! Yay!

NO TIME is given to ask "why are they poor"?

Western companies take oil, diamonds and many other raw products out of Africa using African labour, and profit hugely from them. Often this helps to support corrupt governments too. Western companies also sell weapons to these countries, to help Africans shoot eachother, if they so wish. Great.

Charity is a good thing, I repeat, but it is not as simple as Bonehead would have you believe. I have read a lot of African political writing, from the 1950s onwards, that has argues that the west should stop interfering in Africa, that this is slowing or reversing development.

Better than buying a bright red ipod might be to boycott, and do so publically, any companies that make money from Africa. This tactic worked in the 1980s, apparently, to help the South African apartheid regime collapse, perhaps the capitalist/world trade (whatever) regime that damages people's lives might be changed too...

(PRODUCT)RED charity alone is like giving someone chocolate, while letting someone else chop their legs off.

They (RED) say:"(RED) was created by Bono and Bobby Shriver, Chairman of DATA to raise awareness and money for The Global Fund by teaming up with the world's most iconic brands to produce (PRODUCT)RED branded products. A percentage of each (PRODUCT)RED product sold is given to The Global Fund. The money helps women and children affected by HIV/AIDS in Africa.

What's the meaning of the parentheses or brackets? Well, we call them "the embrace." Each company that becomes (RED) places its logo in this embrace and is then elevated to the power of red. Thus the name -- (PRODUCT)RED.

You, the consumer, can take your purchase to the power of (RED) simply by upgrading your choice. Thus the proposition: (YOU)RED. Be embraced, take your own fine self to the power of (RED). What better way to become a good-looking samaritan?!"

It makes me so angry. Even "elevated" to the power of (ANGRY).

In other news, I read that plasma screen TVs consume FIVE TIMES as much electricity as traditional cathode ray TVs. That makes them the new 4x4s, ladies and gentlemen: bought by insecure unsociable selfish thoughtless bastards everywhere.
Just don't, mmmkay?