Banner Rotate



Logo by Julian Spanos

Antitheistic. Long. Perplexing. Offensive. Whatever.

Warning: This blog does not cater to your whims. If you are offended, then I am not obliged to care. It ain't personal until otherwise stated.

Random Quotes

Monday, February 27, 2006

More political fun!

Yeah, and another awesome link courtesy of the Moxiegrrl.com blog.

Url worth visiting:
http://filmstripinternational.com/

Now, this is the kinda' shit that I enjoy. Really, this ain't a political contention; they could very well do a piece on Michael Moore. I just found it fuckin' hilarious while simultaneously having some pansy profess his undying contempt for me at the top of his lungs; good shit!

Once again, my gratitude goes to Moxiegrrrl's blog for highlighting the link.

Enjoy, you crazy fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade

Saturday, February 25, 2006

Violence against bitter differences -- Violence... AND bitter differences.


I was lurking about the bowels of the internet’s intellectual realm, a place that I’ve silently observed for over three-years now, but rarely ever spoken about; I speak of 'The Dark Forum,' if you lot aren’t aware, already. I have recently found that a centrist theme has become the common trend on this board, and I’ve quite literally, seen it culminate right before my very eyes, because I’ve honestly been following the group dynamic of this massive community for nearly six years now; three years being the latter half. I can’t say I blame them, either, but I was shocked to find them bickering over concepts where progressive thought was needed. I found certain Americans who were trying to come to terms with the notion of all-out genocide against the Islamic bracket, which was a bit much. However, I will add that I didn’t entirely blame them; hell, I even empathised, but with personal disgust.

Therefore, I decided to finally break my three-year long silence and voice some contentions, because that’s what I am: a fuckin’ contentious, contemptible prick! One such thread commanded a rather solid response, and one that I’d consider blog-worthy. You see, I toppled on the flavour of the month debate, a.k.a, controversy over the fuckin’ cartoons of Mohammed. Yeah, real cute! The debate branched out into a fuckin’ semantic bitchfest over the word violence. Idealists whined that it can’t be an integral part of the advanced and awesome human psyche, while pessimists contradicted their stance by conforming to the traditional and somewhat existentialist view of human nature and struggle; something that I often agree with in theory. As human beings, we do have awesome potential, but our individuality and selfishness has pretty much been exploited for the worse by our own egos and we have a whole history to back up such a negative outlook. I shall stop with the digression and move straight to my response, which first addressed the bickering about the word ‘violence’ and then my broken-record of a mantra against how conventional Moslem psychology is simply incompatible with the modern-day, humanistic school of thought that the secular west rightfully subscribes to.

Now, this point attached well to that thread, but it also attaches well to most of my own readers, some of whom I‘d consider idealists in their own respective capacities. Let us settle the case regarding violence, and face the fact that we’re all quivering about the same point, but actually under the dispute of semantics. Call it what you wan't; Dyshade's (a member) using 'violence' for its very conventional meaning, which means any act that is essentially violent. This isn't necessarily discounting, or adding to the intent or reasons behind the action, but merely referring to the description of the violent aspect of the most actions.

It's not an overstatement to say that there is no such thing as humanity without violence, because violence is part of the human condition from our evolutionary struggles all the way through to our still having to come to terms with the concept of civilisation and order. By this very proxy, the acts of aggression are essentially violent; whether they’re instrumental or hostile, they remain violent. Humans ace both forms, and are somewhat connoisseurs of the latter category; we are probably the only species prone to exuding truly spiteful aggression, otherwise dubbed 'hostile aggression' by most social psychologists.

You may call it whatever y'want, but point remains that the follies of greed, hostility, and individuality-bred conflict are essential pillars of the human psyche, and thus, a great argument used by the proponents for what they consider often-justified acts of violence. Only difference: most critical thinking idealists try to find solace and closure through justifying such acts and attempt to shift the fallout away from the word 'violence'. Unfortunately, they try to use justification as a conflated cover-up for all out omission, which is the disingenuous flaw at play. The justification for any act of violence can be as valid and essential as possible, but this still doesn’t discount anything from the actual, raw ‘violence’ of any given act--it doesn‘t negate the act itself.

Violence in itself can never be defeated. It's a tool, and is merely used by the winning side to methodically eliminate its opposition. There are also those that chose to abuse their own utility of violence. Therefore, the violence is not the concept being defeated and neither the desired concept of defeat; sometimes, a crude and violent ideology can be defeated with use of counter violence.

As for humans being the only one's with awareness. Well, this is merely our own spiritual arrogance at play; however, probably one with accurate basis. This still doesn't change the fact that we're probably the only species that are now the epitome of unnatural integration; we rarely adapt through accommodation, because we're busy manipulating our environment and assimilating at best. A higher state of awareness may command that we sort our ways, but apparently, it’s only perpetuating our own ability to coerce nature, thus far. Moreover, we seem to be utilising most of our higher thoughts and even spiritual humility to actually justify our crude acts, even abrogating our so-called moral compass in the process.




Returning to the nucleus of this topic:


I’m telling you lot this, right now! There is no fuckin’ compromise with these pretentious twats (the fundamentalist Moslems). None of it! No offence to this forum’s member base, because I am horrifically contempt ridden against the entire mire that is the Islamic culture. I need not digress with this personal and somewhat first hand hatred. Those who know my stance know it well; I despise the extremists like a malicious plague. At the same time, I feel that the pitiful and poverty ridden bulk of their populace are merely passive extremists who’re just unconscious puppets, waiting their ‘awakening.’ As for the so-called moderates, I think they’re wimps who can’t come to terms with the savage nature of their religious culture, and live in a paradox of contradictions while trying to get along with the rest of the world--utterly useless.



“Oh but do ya’ know any of ‘em?”


Inside out! Hell, I even know critically progressive Moslems, who’re about the only bracket of this creed’s populace that earn my respect. I keep them out of my aforementioned contempt; and no, I do not view them as Moslem’s, because their naturally progressive views contradict much of their religious norms, cultures and the fuckin’ Sharia doctrine! Ask one of ‘em about the Mohammed cartoon that's got the entire Islamic world in barbaric fits and they’ll be sure to have a good laugh.

It’s real simple, the holier than thou Moslems can ponder the following points:

- They’re culturally conditioned to persecute pagans.

- Their religious ethos encourages, and in some cases, commands the execution of apostates; so much for a one-sided freedom of faith.

- All they can do is present contradicting quotes from their books, as a worthless and pointless apology and exercise in futility that demonstrates the inconsistency of the book, and ideally reflects in the identity crisis suffered by its followers. 

If it is all about peace and asserting passive enlightenment, then how the fuck do these morons stand by the slew of religious laws that their theocracies preach so wholesomely? Are they even aware of how many innocents are being set up for life sentences for merely having disagreement with the tenets of their officious creed? They also claim that their extremist colleagues are right, but just going about matters the wrong way. So, is stoning innocent people for exercising their essential human volitions a ‘right’ thing? Are they just using the wrong type of stones?! For fuck's sake -- we're just grasping at straws now!

It’ really doesn’t matter; the core of their religious system is built on different blue prints. They don’t consider the sanctity of every individual, and thusly so, will never find remote compatibility with the rest of the world.


"Questioning facts is how one learns. Questioning the Koran, questioning the Bible. Questioning reasoning and motivations. Unless we brainstorm and look at some seemingly silly questions we will repeat our mistakes and learn nothing new." - Retorded By A Member

That is exactly what the controversial cartoon did on many levels; it questioned their reactionary nerve, and the results speak for themselves. That is what I psychotically devote myself to doing, and will someday end up executed by a terrorist state, or just smeared by the barbaric third-world Islamic public’s sick take on legitimate persecution. You wanna' drop the bomb? Sanction full genocide? I wouldn't agree in spirit, but then again, a few days back I thought it to be the only solution. Therefore, while I criticise the pro-Western extermists from loathing the entire eastern Islamic bloc to a degree of massive generalisation; I still don't quite blame them for harbouring such profound hatred against the said bloc.


Though the rhetorical question still haunts my conscience:


"Have you really degenerated to a point of justifying genocide, even if it means the demise of other humans in a divisive frenzy of friendly-fire for pro-western idealisms?" -- The question presented by my own conscience, and my own ego. However, for once, both realms are in agreement. How the fuck could that've ever happened?


As already stated elsewhere on the same forum. This must be the psychotic fringes of my ego, musing away, but I am actually in partial sympathy with this genocidal nerve that the fringe movements in the west have begun to develop. The notion isn't progressive by any margin; it's sick and a mark of humankind's pathetic desperation. Hell, it even implies threat to my own sanctity and idealisms since it's just as bad a position as most of the barbaric notions preached by doctrines like Islam and Old Testament Christianity; but I really see no other way in this current conflict of civilisations. Aye, I've gone bat shit crazy!

Whatever, I’ve already expressed volumes of political incorrectness on the matter. On the good side, I am still glad to know that The Dark Forum has its legion of progressive thinkers who will effectively cancel out my insanity of a contribution towards the human paradigm, as well its own element of trailer park trash ignoramus folk . On the other side, cynicism is at an all-time high, and I am just as guilty as the next bastard of perpetuating this counter-constructive thought cycle.

Stay cool, fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade



“We need more cartoons! Yes, I'm being spiteful. However, they [The Islamic drama queens] should learn to look away or retreat to their private domain. Therein lies your problem: They [the Islamic fascists] treat the entire world like their private, theocratic domain. The apologists say that they don‘t impose their beliefs on others, but in reality, they do impose their religious expectations and values--such as superficial pride in 'prophethood' and god--on everyone everywhere. To say otherwise is fuckin' denial of reality at its most basic form. So y'know what, bring on the fuckin' piss christ, and bring on the cartoons! WE NEED MORE!" -- Closure.


Link to actual thread:

Friday, February 24, 2006

SUCKtarianism

100 die in Iraq sectarian violence” read the headline on CNN.com. I couldn’t have much else to say without subscribing to my newfound policy of separating my inflammatory banter from the actual, unadulterated outlook on the facts.

Excerpt from CNN.Com:
“Iraq's most powerful Sunni Muslim party quits talks to form a new government after at least 100 people were killed in reprisal attacks for the bombing of a revered Shiite mosque.”

Note: Another mugshot of dangerous stupidity; and a good reason as to why the right to bear arms should be restricted to only the intellectually sound. Photograph, also courtesy of CNN.com.

The short, yet antagonising breakdown:
Let’s savor the fuckin’ bitter essence of the photograph, above; we should fully explore the taste of human stupidity. This is exactly the kind of counter-progressive, reactionary, ‘giant, spiked, dildo-up-the-anus’ nerve that I wholesomely denigrate with every ounce of my contempt. However, every time I do this, some insect-like life form rears its filthy mug from under a rock or a giant fuckin’ guitar case to question my stance.

I tend to give people a burning rave, but I also offer a somewhat sound grounding to the contentions, and when that happens, the pretentious trump card comes into play. “Oh, but have you seen the beauty of the book, and the greatness of the prophet?” they ask, very eager to actually win me over with that finality that is nothing more than a fuckin’ opinion.

“Oh yeah! That really is a winning approach! Fuck! How could I have been so blind? The beauty and consistency of a boring dull book, and some assumptions about a ridiculously fabled being, rectifies the sheer stupidity in brawn form that we all see inside the excerpt that dominates the upper segment of this column. Suddenly, all the murdered innocents; the bigotry; the wanton destruction on a mass scale becomes valid, or better yet, irrelevant. Yeah, bullshit!” -- My immediately sarcastic response.

Seriously, these idiots must have one hell of a nerve to consider that subjective belief in the consistency of some book; or clearly engineered stories of prophet would actually make up for all the current bloodshed. These idiots are killing one another over their religious pride; they’re killing members of their own religious bracket, and attacking their own mosques now; can one get any fuckin’ stupider? We shouldn’t brand this violence as ‘sectarian,’ I decree that we refer to this brand of violence under the moniker of, ‘Sucktarian Violence.’ However, this isn’t just about SUCKtariansim and the stupefied human capacity; it’s also about the somewhat malicious culmination of reality that is a clear by-product of this very stupidity.

“Duh! Have you seen the book! It’s poetry! C’mon! The poetry makes it all okay!” -- The consistently annoying rebuttal from these annoying folks.

“Oh Yeah? Fuck you! Not in your life would anything justify and or otherwise rectify all these anti-ethnic, sectarian, racial, and just plain anti-humanitarian acts of violence. Not even if your book was actually an inspiring, poetic masterpiece!” -- My constant response.

Shame should befall those that supplement such factors into their debates. They should be tainted with the blood of all the innocents that have died thus far, and think about how they contradict themselves. Hell, the idiots won't even realise that they're being bathed in blood of human-made fatalities! They'd still continue perpetuating the mantra that praises the baseless consistency of their religious ethos.

“Y’know what, you bastards! The fact that you tout your bookish credibility and the subjective history of perfect prophet model, further denigrates the credibility of both entities when you look at the anti-humanitarian, bigotry ridden atrocities that have sprouted an ugly root from those very sources of so-called piety! FUCK YOU, if you rely on that old, pathetic and beaten down, riddled cliché of an argument as a crutch, any longer! I couldn’t give a fuck about books or historical entities! People are dying, and no pro-religious heritage proclamations are aiding in amending this mire! To the so-called apologists - You’ve just proven yourselves to be nothing more than a horde of pretentiously bound morons!” -- My closure for the day.

Stay cool, fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade

Link to actual article on CNN.Com:
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/23/iraq.main/index.html

Thursday, February 23, 2006

Humanist... Or existentialist?

I had another interesting meeting yesterday, especially with someone who had offered me free vodka. Unfortunately, I was too psychologically contrived to avail the awesome offer; this would prove to be a punishing folly, later on. As always, a conversation would ensue, and just ten minutes into my perspective; I’d find myself taking on the hefty task of a very critical grilling; sometimes, I just don’t fuckin’ comprehend.

Though the meeting did prove to be a much needed and somewhat radically relieving vent for me, I was a tad bit disappointed with how my host misconstrued my motives and point-of-view so fluidly. I mean, we got into talkin’ about how we feel about different places; thus, effectively opening the flood gates to my unparalleled contempt for theocracies and Islamic fascism. I explained to the lady, who had up until now, very generously pandered to my ego in every capacity possible, that amongst the few things that I can do, making scathing conjectures against anti-humanist fascism was one such factor that I personally relished. I explained to her that it is one those essential and somewhat sole acts; an act without which, I might as well end up lobotomised. I tried to articulate a simple and somewhat humble point that I gotta’ rant and bitch against such things, and that this is about the only remotely productive thing that I am ever able to do.

Now, we were engrossed in this critical, yet mechanically biased analysis of my attitude, and how I shouldn’t be callin’ myself a humanist because of my fuckin’ inability to be a humanitarian--politically correct. Yeah, bloody fuckin’ marvellous, ain’t it? This was the conversation where after a near two-year-period; I was dubbed an existentialist, once again. I tried to argue a sombre point for the sake of pure civility, but that didn’t help either, because it gave away my stance as one that was caving in; I was not pleased with the results. Finally, the fine lady went onto compare me, much like my Christian colleague, to most feeble extremists. Once again, though, I brought up the argument that there is no such thing as a conscious being that isn’t biased or passionate about something in some capacity or the other. Stop fuckin’ evaluating me on whether I hold a certain extremity/passion in my stance for a moment, and actually evaluate the premise to which I pledge allegiance--freedom of verbal and literary expression in the public domain, with full and solid acknowledgement of every individual's personal sanctity.

That was exactly the point that I desired to articulate across to the lady critic, who had now made me her personal philosophical dartboard. I will argue again until the fuckin’ day that I die! I am not gonna’ justify my politically incorrect tone, because I admit, I am coarse; I am foul; I am unyielding, even; I am not classy or sombre on many essential levels. Therefore, sue me all you want for lacking a cosmetic polish! However, I will also admit that I get a kick out of my quirky projection of reality, and I even invest a certain degree of pride in this because despite my excessive political incorrectness, I retain my commitment to that one ideal; I do not desecrate the physical, and or otherwise personal sanctity of another individual with my beliefs. This is why the public domain was distinguished from the private domain; in the public domain, you put up with other people’s personal quirks, and vice versa. If my opinion hurts, you are more than free to refute with an opinion of your own! You are more than fuckin’ free to ridicule me! You are free to turn away and retreat to the stability of your personal space; you are also free to ignore or just filter my incoherent gibberish. So the question does beg an answer: What’s the fuckin’ problem then?

I am committed to freedom of civil, moderately vocal, and literary expression in the public domain. This by no means gives me rights over oppressing the lives, beliefs or freedoms of others; this is by no means, stifling the similar liberties that belong to the other groups. I will make fun of religion, especially when provoked; I will exude bitter clichés against theocratic norms as one of my favourite pastimes; I will bitch about cheap, dehumanised cultures; oh, and I will damn well fight for a world where everyone else can have the same damned freedom. Call it existentialism, if you want, or call it humanism as I‘d like to humbly acknowledge; you cannot deny that despite the fact that my ideals may not necessarily entail the concept of respect, they irrefutably cherish the sanctity and fundamental personal liberties of every individual and the volitions they hold over their respective, personal sanctums.

“Oh Kade, you mad fucker, you suck! You’re fuckin’ mean! You’re raunchy! And you do not know respect. You’re nothing more than an antagonistic whore, who gets off on inflammatory conjectures.” -- Retort my endless lineage of critics.

“Guilty, as fuckin’ charged! And I am glad that you’re all free to say so! Though you do know that you’re wrong when you use the aforementioned critique to actually compare my hedonistic ass to these dehumanised fascists who use fear and loathing to shackle down the masses! If anything! I am the powerful opposite! I am a part of the fuckin’ antithesis!” -- Closure on the matter.

Humanist or existentialist? Sorry, but it’s not as if the two concepts aren’t compatible. Sure, probably not politically correct; but both of them can be one and the same; call it neo/hawk-humanism.

Stay cool, fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade -- “The humanist! No, the existentialist! Okay wait! The Hedonist! Now you can all rest happy knowing that I got a disparaging tag!”

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Divine teaser? Bahaha!

Man! My friend and I were talkin’ a day ago about how this one episode of Tom and Jerry screwed with our heads. Yes, we’d be talkin’ about that one in which Tom fucks up big time, and then dreams about ending up in hell for all the agony that he thwarted on annoyin’ lil’ Jerry. That whole idea of burning and hell and getting his ass kicked had an impact on some of us neurotic spanks amongst the viewing audience.

Now, just today, I was watching the stupid tube, and realised that Creflo Dollar was ranting, and further realised that he was ranting against ‘bad habits,’ so I was naturally inclined to change the channel. At that very point, I thought about my friend; the fact that I had told him about one of my stories regarding the Bible; I then recalled the bit about our confessions regarding that episode of Tom and Jerry. Well, with the rather rambling chain of musings, I opted to change the channel, and ended up on Cartoon Network, and what do you know, I landed right on the climax of that very Tom and Jerry episode that played a pivotal part in forging some of me and my friend’s childhood psychological quirks.

I can just picture that Christian/Centrist colleague of mine, wondering, “Oh this guy’s so going to hell!” I bet he’d want to say, “Dude, you’re going to hell!” Damn, it would fuckin’ rock if he did. Yeah, yeah, don’t be getting’ any ideas, lil’ dude! I know! More poetic justice, eh? Or perhaps a lil’ bit of divine tease?

Well, whatever the fuck it was; the true answer is beyond me. I just found it be one of those, rather interesting coincidences and it was both surreal in a daunting manner, but later on became a matter of rather humerous jist. Now, people always get all spiritual with me about this, because they fall under the fuckin’ flawed perception that I am being spiritual! Well, news flash, ya’ crazy fucks! I AM NOT SPIRITUAL! If anything, all these lashings are a symptom of my intense insecurity with spirituality; I don’t claim to have spiritual answers… I just lean on what little humanistic outlook I can offer; and yes, recently I was schooled by another critical thinker who dubbed me an existentialist as opposed to being a humanist. Well, you can be both; that is, a humanist and an existentialist; they’re not two distinct and incompatible categories.

“I mean, after all, Tom certainly underwent both transitions in one fuckin’ episode!” -- My thoughts on that crazy episode, which are completely invalid because it is a fuckin’ cartoon!

Therefore, I will not contemplate the nature of this experience. Was it a divine teaser, or just a fuckin’ hilarious coincidence - couldn’t fuckin’ care about deciphering that fateful conundrum! And yes, that is exactly what it is, a fuckin’ blustered conundrum. There is no cut and dry physical and or otherwise reliable answer. As a result of this rather raunchy perspective on the matter, I will just chose to take it as a feeble event to humour my dull state of eros.

“Dude, you’re goin’ to hell!” -- Says the funny chuckling clown inside my head.
“BOOYAH!” -- My response.


Stay cool, fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Moment of vigour!

A crowd of approximately fifteen-thousand idiots help another demonstration at Trafalgar Square. Yeah, seriously, the sods are starting to kill the charm of the one city that I actually cared about on a personal level: London. Well, just to keep the facts as distinguished from my filthy banter, I shall refer you lot to the excerpt of the statement, along with a photograph.

Excerpt package from an article on CNN.com:
"How dare you insult the blessed Prophet Mohammed?" asked one placard. "Europe lacks respect for others" said another.


Note: Mugshot of sheer stupidity on a grand yet subhuman and unintelligent level, also courtesy of CNN.com.


I’ll keep this one real short:
Let’s start by distinguishing the two things from each other; lacking just respect, is far less damaging than lacking actual regard for the sanctity and life of another human being. The above excerpt is proof of just how different the fundamental makeup of a conventional Moslem’s conscience is, when put in comparison to that of a modern day individual's; one's hung up on superficial respect, while the other's concerned about actual human rights, respectively. The relatively god-fearin' Moslem community in general is engrossed in the act of whining about fuckin’ respect while some of its so-called religious peers are actually busy slaughtering people like goats and desecrating actual human life, or otherwise just turning a blind eye to the horrid acts while the rest of the world's outrage goes ignored. Seriously, someone get these demon babies a fuckin' pacifier!

Yes, truth of the matter is that we cannot get along. Our fundamental scopes on the world itself, differ greatly; while the Moslem twits give greater priority to a terror-driven respect for their religious pretentiousness; the rest of us real-world dwellers give greatest priority to the physical sanctity and rights of every individual.

“I would much rather take on the role of a disrespectful bastard than be a fuckin’ dehumanised whore, who thrives on the abuse and manipulation of actual human sanctity and life itself! In this case, I am fuckin’ proud of holding nothing short of bitter disrespect for this extreme bracket of the creed; they deserve nothing short of pure disrespect, the oversensitive pretentious whores!” -- Closure on the matter.

Stay cool, fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade

Link to actual article on CNN.com:
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/18/london.protest.ap/index.html

Saturday, February 18, 2006

Bastard of the day!

“Off to find the eternal twit who would fit into the long lineage of fucktard bigots! And just a minute into CNN we’ve found our waste of human reproduction essentials!” -- The blunt introduction.

Excerpt from CNN.Com.
Maulana Yousef Qureshi said he personally had offered to pay a bounty of 500,000 rupees ($8,400) during Friday prayers, and two of his congregation put up additional rewards of $1 million and one million rupees plus a car.

Ladies and gentlemen, our mother-fucking bastard of the day, Yousef Quershi.

“DUH ME NO LIKE! ME PRETENTIOUS MOMMY TOUCHER! ME MUST GET LIMP DICK HORNY WITH MURDER SANCTIONING! MURDER TURN ME ON!” -- Personal statement from the fascist bitch known to the world under the moniker of Maulana Yousef Qureshi, though Kade would much rather refer to him as ‘Motherfuckin’ Cocksucker!’

With people like Yousef Qureshi, taking up the natural oxygen of this planet, and moving around with a nutsack, we’re effectively allowing a plague to fester. As long as bigotry breeding whores like this fat lump of horse shit are allowed to consume the depleting quality oxygen of this planet, and actually move around with their reproductive organs intact, we’re allowing the rape of humanity as a whole to continue. This needs to stop! This bastard should be fuckin’ neutered without anaesthesia; his seed and legacy left to shrivel into a meaningless oblivion. I’ve finally realised unconditional and personal hate for someone who isn’t dead yet; this should be a healthy redistribution of my demonic contempt. This fuckin’ prick thinks he can hand out bounties? I’ll best the sodomite! He’ll be shitting out holy verses in faecal form after the slimy fragments of his meagre brain matter attempt to fathom the following proposition.

I hereby decree that an unorthodox bounty has been placed on Yousef Qureshi’s head; however, I want him to experience mortal agony, not death. I will pay anyone ten-grand (10,000) worth of US dollars if they kidnap this motherfucker and subject his religiously raunchy ass to my protocol of heathen torture. Kidnap this sordid twat; take him to a dark room; tie his fat ass down; put on some loud heavy metal music and beat his ribcage into a pile with a steel baseball bat. After the preliminaries are over, and yes, we just touched on the preliminaries; the aspiring bounty collectors should then gather an oil-truck’s worth of cow manure; also getting copy of the Koran, because it’ll serve as a linchpin with the dung in more ways than one.

For the main body and climax, the torturers should slap the motherfucker awake with the Koran, before reciting every line, every bit of the staunchly articulate Arabic phonetics found in that book. “Oh, but that might please him!” some of you must be thinking, but wrong; because with every line of the book, a whole tablespoon-full of cow shit should be jammed into this motherfucker’s mouth. Break his fuckin’ teeth in if he resists. He should be forced to swallow the excrement, cap his mouth and punch his fuckin’ oesophagus if you must, but get him to swallow each lump of the cow shit. Maintain this approach of Koranik line recital followed by spoon full of cow dung until one of the two run out, that is, the lines in the book, or the oil-truck’s worth of cow dung. That fundamentalist rut should experience his book in a whole new way, coupled with the taste of cow excretion.

“Hell yeah! I want this motherfucker so horribly conditioned, that every time he turns to look at a Koran, his jaw shivers with the associated taste of cow shit, effectively making the fuckin’ slob throw up his lungs and guts like some fuckin’ bulimia-ridden whore from a desolate fashion nightmare! That sick bastard shouldn’t be able to contain his fuckin’ entrails within the confines of his tubby ass whilst being in the presence of a Koran--that’s how traumatised his conditioning should be!” -- Objective of the torture bounty, and my own twisted take on behavioural therapy.

Upon interaction with phonetic stimuli of the Arabic nature, a portion of Yousef Qureshi’s unconscious thought process should read:
“Koranik recitation + me = Cow shit, INSIDE ME! = ICK! IT TASTE WORSE THAN ME! IT TASTE BAD! = DUH! ME WANT TO VOMIT!”

Yeah, I wanna’ enjoy the prospects of this religious fuck, choking on cow shit and then being reminded of it eternally, never being able to keep his stomach while in close range of his holy book, or even keeping his guts in place while being in the remote listening range of one of its Arabic maxims of doom. The fucker might not even know what most of it means, but his stomach will surely amplify the simple message of negative association. He should feel nauseous at the mention of the Koran; he should regurgitate a fuckin’ river of crud upon hearing just pure Arabic.

That bastard should be incapacitated due to malnourishment after enduring this disgustingly crafty torture therapy!

“You put a bounty on the heads of those that utilise free speech to their whims? I’ll stuff your fat ass with an omega bounty worth of cow shit! You cockeyed fuck!” -- My final thoughts for the officious, Motherfukin' Cocksucker.

Stay cool, fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade

Link to article containing the Motherfuckin’ Cocksucker’s contention: (Fat, wha? Fat, WHA?)
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/17/pakistan.cartoons/index.html

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Recreation Gone Bad

Edit (2015/12/29): The post wasn't displaying correctly for a good few years. As of this date, on the passing of our true lord and saviour of all things heavy metal, Lemmy Kilmister, this post has been fixed. Perhaps it's my mood on this dreary day -- although highly unlikely -- but it is interesting to note just how much humour I was capable for deriving from such toilet-level news back in the day. The more things change . . .



Subtitle: A hearty laugh about sheer inexplicability!

Man, I heard the news, and I can’t believe I didn’t delve into it long enough to formulate an opinion!

We were busy bitching back and forth about religion, and having to endure a fuckin' Islamic theocracy and nation full of idiots. And oh, fuck! I mean, I read some shit about Cheney shooting someone and automatically thought to myself, “Oh, yeah, sounds like something he’d do! So yeah! Back to the topic, I think you're a book thumping prick!” And with that, we were back to ignoring the news, and bickering amongst ourselves.

Damn, I was a fool not to investigate this rather hilarious fuck-up. Some people just take their feeble recreation, too seriously for their own health; or in this case, the health of their hunting colleague.



Well, I can’t do it any more justice than the following clip; Jon Stewart rocks! Man, the following clip could bleed your gut dry!

Link: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/02/13.html#a7149

Bahahahahaha!

Fuckin’ hell! Could such a notion even be conceived? FUCK! Nevertheless, I shouldn’t be making a mockery out of an otherwise very serious scenario, which blew into capricious proportions. After all, what would we liberal wimps know about the psychological side effects of having to endure the robust feat of hunting wingless dodos err, quails! Such a task requires rigorous training of the eye, and takes a great toll on the visual perception of the given individuals; studies have been done in the area. C’mon! It’s known that delusive and otherwise schizophrenic folk tend to hallucinate, and thus picture non-existent visual entities during moments of perceptual stress. To use a completely “made up” hypothetical example - a given individual, hallucinating the false presence of a quail, which would effectively obscure the actual presence of a fully-grown seventy-eight-year-old man!

Delusions can be a bitch! Oh, but wait, this isn’t an utterly stupid, or otherwise psychotic individual that we’re talking about, are we? But it is Cheney!

There’s no fuckin’ way that any expression could remotely capture the distinct absurdity of this ordeal.

“Nice going, Cheney… Ya’ never seize to amaze!” -- Final Thoughts
To the rest of you lot, enjoy! Have a good laugh! I know I did.

Stay cool, and don’t shoot your buddies in the face, you crazy fuckers!

Cheers,
Kade

Monday, February 13, 2006

Socialism vs. Free Market - Part INFINITY!

Another day, and yet another articulation of a subplot of watching an American liberal butt heads with a pro-free market centrist. Hey, the centrist stated himself that he doesn’t like to be lumped into the category of Republican, holistically; I don’t blame him.

It was a good debate; it showed that civil arguments can also take place, and the two bastards actually settled the matter on a respectful acknowledgement of their disagreement.

Interestingly enough, myself and another individual who were caught up in between the talk, ended up taking on the brunt of the criticism. It was fuckin’ hilarious, because one minute, we were being viewed as a bunch of fuckin’ staunch conservatives; the other moment, we were being thought of as some kind of obscure liberals.

The socialist, who described himself as a ‘Zealot Progressive,’ expressed the desire for his nation to fall under the rule of a true socialist leader. Well, I was warm enough to avoid blunt critique this time round, so I decided to sugar coat the response by claiming that I’d like to believe in such an ideal. However, before I could get to the meat of my response, the other spectator decided to complete what I was gonna’ say. He said that a fuckin’ angel would be needed at the helm of such authority, and that did pretty much sum up my point: one would still have to rely on an exceptionally linear and righteous frame of mind, which is a modern-day myth.

The centrist jumped at the comment, praising the critic for his accurate but rather blunt rhetoric. He reiterated the same point and claimed that it would be an impossible scenario, and that ‘Free Market’ is an actual solution, and one with viable prospects. This time I was the first to respond, but once again, the other, sharper knife in the drawer beat me to the follow-up. He added that a free market would allow the corporation(s) to gain monopoly control, and take economic well-being of the suffering individuals ala ‘small guys,’ hostage. Need I even mention the socialist’s reaction to that comment? Of course, he was once again in full agreement.
So where did this place the two of us? That being myself and this other ominous critic, whom I shall refer to as ‘The Critic.’ I wasn’t against any of the ideas per se, but rather, the fundamental essence of a relatively corruption prone human psychology, and thus my wary faith in the longevity of these systems as far as the prosperity of the lil’ guys was concerned, because a -human- psychology would still be controlling the helm of either of the machines/systems.

“Kade, you nihilistic bastard!” some might be exclaiming at this point, and I couldn’t give a fuck. Seriously, use whatever term you must use; I am merely remaining dedicated to my pessimistic opinion on the general human mindset, especially that which is product of a power dynamic. Material success, control and power are notorious for getting into the heads of many, and our own unconscious is divinely infamous for coming up with all forms of personal rationalisations in order to come to terms with our own follies; the human conscience is a bleeding shell of something that could never assert itself from the start. Of course, I am no fool either; I am making a grand generalisation, and wouldn’t necessarily disqualify the possibility of some strong exceptions to this general point of view. However, my overall perspective on the matter remains consistently negative; I don’t believe any system could work with an actual human psyche at its helm, period.

“Apples and oranges, you psychotic twit! Corporations are different!” -- Argue some of the capitalism gurus!

Correct, it is a different concept; but that’s the point, I am not basing my pessimism on a system, or similarity of system per se. My contention rides on the idea of one constant in all conceived systems: the general profile of a materialistic human psychology, manipulating the system from its nucleus. You see, when the centrist so eagerly reinforced the critic's rebuttal for the socialist, being that an angel would be required at the helm; the centrist effectively shot down his own concept of free and prospering corporations, just as well. After all, despite the basic differences, you’d still have to gamble a great deal on the upper tier of most of these corporations, which means more angels would be required at the helm. So yeah, popular psychology is quite beautiful, seeing as it pretty much shoots down both points with the same argument, and effectively demonstrates the underlying folly that can turn both philosophies into a cold agenda: the typically greedy mindset of the modern-day humans.

This is not to say that I condemn either one of the systems per se, I think in theory, they’re fine. It’s just that factoring in an entirely sporadic and somewhat greedy human nature into the trifle, greatly changes the complexion of the whole ordeal.

“Give me proof that you’ve got an angelic leader, and I’ll follow a socialist! For that matter, give me a guarantee that all corporate CEOs and their cronies are angels, and I’ll consider free market, global salvation! You see, my problem is with the people, not the system! I ain’t trustin’ a sentient human! Because I am THAT damn cynical!” -- Final thoughts.

Just drop it and realise that dissolution is absolute, and that partial stability should be cherished for all that it is worth; you never know when that glass will go completely empty. And for fuck‘s sake, just drop the whole wrestling feud between the socialist ideal and the free market philosophy. Systems don't screw people, people screw people, and their respective systems.

Stay gree… err, cool, fuckers!

Cheers,
Kade

Sunday, February 12, 2006

Struck a reactionary nerve!

Subtitle: The humanist (ala Satanist inc.), the philosopher, and their reactionary Koranik!

Man! My days just keep getting better and better. Just recently, I had a mere meeting with an old friend; hell, it was just a small session to kill time; watch the replay of WWE’s Royal Rumble, which was another bucket of my vomit altogether. Anyhow, while we alleviated the sullen effect of watching wrestling through a somewhat wacky round of Mario Kart on the Nintendo DS, another colleague of mine decided to make his presense known. Yeah, he’s a valuable colleague, but of course, he comes with a wholesome abundance of religious views.

Now for the sake of the argument, I’ll refer to my first friend, the one who came over to play video games and watch wrestling, as the Philosopher because of his somewhat passive ‘agnostic’ view of religion; the other dude, I’ll refer to as the Koranik; a title that best ascribes to his religious bondage with the so-called progressive Islam, but primarily taking only from the book and not the extreme religious doctrines. Yeah, the philosopher, the Satanist, and the Moslem--three fuckin’ monkeys in a barrel--joy!

It was interesting, however. We talked, and talked, and talked some more, until one of my somewhat taunting rhetorical comments managed to sizzle past the sarcasm protection on the Moslem. Suddenly, my antireligious stance was being questioned, while the Philosopher tried to sustain some order with a perpetual stream of critical logic. As always, I couldn’t resist making, what then appeared to be a harmless mockery of the extremist-Moslem reaction to the caricature of Mohammed; our religious guest was very humble, but did chose to assert himself.

This would not be the actual crux of matters, as the discussion would soon move from a consensus on how stupid the reaction was, into blatant questioning of faith; my own included. Of course, offering a cut and dry answer was another issue, so my constant barrage of grey answers was hardly serving towards quelling the ordeal. The philosopher found himself in a similar conundrum; but the funny part is that when we placed the so-called Moslem in the same position, his own answers didn’t quite correlate with the traditional tenets of Islam. Therefore, we chose to, and under friendly terms, dub the young man a Koranik, which was my way of saying, “I acknowledge the sincerity of your faith; but I also acknowledge that you’re not practising the norm per se!” Hey, what the fuck did you bastards expect? I mean the guy said it himself - the extreme reaction to the cartoons was childish; he also happened to believe that the traditional tenets of Islam were certainly outdated, and no longer relevant to the ways of modern times.

All remained civil until we got into a somewhat disoriented argument about the consistency of texts; specifically the so-called “unaltered” status of Koran. I mean, c’mon, man, it’s a given fact that the fundamental drive to the insecure ego of a pretentious Moslem, extremist or otherwise, is their commitment to the belief that their holy book is the -only- pure book left on the face of this planet. These people probably find solace in this belief, which is about the only thing going for them. A relatively conventional Moslem considers the Koran’s unaltered purity, to be an irrefutable fact of nature; this is their scientific premise. Unfortunately, this neurosis effectively robs them of the ability to realise that underneath this blinding naivety, their so-called stock of faith is invested in a mere opinion--a popular opinion at best. Of course, when I say popular opinion, I mean popular within a very esoteric paradigm--the Islamic paradigm.

Now, I wasn’t inclined towards the notion to fuckin’ argue this one, because I am not living in a world where being a canon-whore is about the only past-time one can find; besides, I suck at being a canon-preacher. On the other hand, I did have to bring up the fact that with most ‘metaphysical’ claims, there’s always a whole slew of studies that support the claim, but with that support, there’s almost an equal and opposite contradictory slew of studies and educated opinions. There is no such thing as a perfectly neutral study, because most studies are driven by the goal to justify a certain point of view (Yes, this would be a poor generalisation, but it is somewhat... accurate). Yes, many have declared the Koran to be a mathematical marvel; many have even dubbed it the most perfect piece of literary work, impossible to recreate. Unfortunately, I wasn’t going to sit back and accept that claim as the bottom line; I had to also mention that with those so-called supporting ‘claims’ there are also relatively well honed ‘counter claims,’ which also carry weight. Furthermore, I reiterated my own statement by adding that these retorts, albeit educated ones, were still ‘claims.’

“*Sighs*…here we go,” -- The proverbial voice inside the head of the philosopher.
“Oh, shit, man! Now you’ve done it!” -- Said the voice inside my head.
“NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! IT IS FACT! IT IS FACT!” -- The mantra that would soon follow.
“Kade, shut up… you fool! don’t respond!” -- The philosopher secretly murmurs under his breath.
“There’s a lot of people who offer somewhat calculated claims for and against that logic, which is about the only ongoing fact!” -- My unwise, but correct response.
“No, you idiot!” -- The philosopher’s final thoughts before intervention would become constant.

At this point, all rational rapport had gone out the window; every time I stated that these so-called ‘facts’ were just partisan claims, and had their equal opposites, it would be like as though I had driven a knife through the Koranik's abdomen; and with every reiteration, I was turning that knife. His reactions weren’t subtle, so it wasn’t hard to realise that he was in fact, feeling scathed by mere verbal claims of facts that challenge the literary architecture of his somewhat flawed beliefs. It proved to me now that even within the community of progressive Islamic thinkers, there’s still too much of a reactionary element. The guy even went onto talk about how the literary works are by ‘fact,’ the most poetic and beautiful executions in history. Now, once again, I was forced to respond, by dissecting and distinguishing the two prongs of his argument. First he argued mathematical/scientific architecture, then he argued poetic beauty; the latter of these two ‘claims’ isn’t even something that can be empirically measured or evaluated. I explained how the so called ‘poetic’ beauty is not any scientific equation's call, and can only be evaluated by the subjective interpretation of each individual that interacts with the given piece of work. No math equation can determine poetic perfection, and that’s that! Y'know, an immeasurable emotional response that is evoked.

“One man’s wine!--Another man’s poison!” -- I say, and I know I didn’t get that phrase right, so fuck you!

My critique of the second part of his rant, which was effectively simplifying two very distinct prongs in his own argument, didn’t go over too well either, because apparently, he was still too engulfed in the activity of touting his primal phrase, which went something like, “NO! NO! NO! NO! IT IS FACT!” all this whilst chopping one of his hands with the other. The physical reaction... the chopping; the fluctuating tone; the throat lumps, man, they got me thinking! I do feel sorry for how badly and abusively this lot of people are beaten into their beliefs; they completely lack the skin or confidence to face disagreement; so much for the spiritual fortitude.

I mean, I didn’t exactly contradict the appendix of supporting claims made by this Koranik bloke; however, I did stand by the conviction that nothing is the bottom line, especially when equally credible refuting thesis comes to light. Over and above all, another question was thumping in the back of my mind, one that would affirm a point that I had made ages ago during one of my rants against a conservative Islamic article. If one were to ignore the fact these are nothing more than speculated claims; if one were to believe that the Koran were some ultra perfect book, and poetic work of art, then the question does beg for an answer... Why are its followers probably at odds with virtually everything, down to defiling their own virtues in light of more zealous protocols taking greater priority? If it is -that- damn perfect, why are most of its followers caught up in customary bondage; suffering; violence, or other dismays? Before I could even organise the rhetoric in my dyslexia-ridden mind, I heard the following phrase, which felt like true poetry in motion!

“Alright! Fine, it’s perfect… So what?” said the philosopher as the room fell into a damp silence, defied only with my faint cynical snickering, reverberating from the corner of the chamber.

Y’know, what, fuckers - that one line alone is more mathematical and poetic beauty than any number of profound philosophical mantras. It’s simple, it’s short! It sounds great, it feels great! It just kicks ass! And what do you know? It’s probably a very potent rhetorical question. Ponder this one, and as always, continue pondering!

Stay cool, fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade

Friday, February 10, 2006

Separating the nuggets from the diarrhoea!

My recent plethora of outbursts against the Islamic-right certainly had some theological minds boggling on my case. Some thinkers attempted to ponder the depths of my psychosis; meanwhile, others pondered the thought of which level of hell I’ll be going to, and how quickly I could be united with my eternal outcome, which would in their beliefs, be nothing short of hell. Of course, I too have had some musings of my own in relation to the matter, but before I could present those, I had to ask some of these book thumpers about my real standing. Has there been a point where I have actually defiled the nurturing virtues of any of these 'holy' books? Have I? I don't think so. Hell, I don’t even discourage people from embracing a new faith, regardless of its implications; of course, my opinions are another matter, but that’s a freedom that I must exploit, and the subtle manipulation is undeniable--life itself is a manipulation. However, something must be seriously wrong with this picture; perhaps everyone‘s mind track is too contrived? I’d agree!

Particularly, in the recent past, I had some interaction with an old friend of mine; this guy isn’t perfect, but his intense distinction is forged through a venue of quirks and of course, his unparalleled prowess to annoy the fuckin’ hell outta’ me to the point that I could spit blood clots! Yes siree! This person could push my buttons; he could push buttons that I never imagined existed on me. Now, my general stance and anti-religious outbursts had an impact on this dude, and he was hurt by my ‘generalisation’ of Islam. Yeah, well, buddy; it is a general monolith, y’know? They do generally behave alike, and that is what the religion does to them: it unifies them into one--gives them a group identity. However, I can accept the argument that such a point of view is only relevant to a basic perspective, and does not hold much accuracy when scrutiny comes into play--it‘s of little value when an advanced and in depth analysis is required. Fine, I accept! I over generalise! Therefore, I dedicate this column to rectifying that little mire, and this is the only time that I’ll consciously rectify something! So, fuck anyone who might be laughing and taking this down!

I heard what the dude had to say; I even heard what many of his sources and supporting comrades had to say about their ‘beliefs’. Now, I wasn’t unfair on ‘em! I took everything with a pinch of salt, and considered their stance on post-modern humanism, etc. I was pleasantly reassured that these guys are not nearly the same crap that I am used to seeing and despising; they couldn’t care much for the Mohammed cartoon for one fact. They were repulsed by the caricature, but that was about it; they didn’t condone any kind of physical reaction and were content just calling it a ‘childish act’. According to these folk, there is no such banter in the Koran that forbids doodling any of the ‘holy prophets.’

“Well, what do ya’ know? They’re normal, progressive people after all!” -- Kade’s pleasant surprise.

Oh, no, but I wasn’t going to sell out so quickly! See, I had these people defend their claims, and this is where the true dichotomy arose once again. Oddly enough, the principles that drove their points of view, were not Islamic, but in fact, ‘Koranic.’ “Oh, Kade! You dumb, dyslexic fucker! They’re the same thing!” some of you might be retorting just about now, but I disagree. I was effectively convinced by the front shown by these progressive Koran readers that many of their beliefs actually contradict the Sharia school-of-thought, which is pivotal in the Islamic world, more so than the book. In fact, their views were so sound because they only take what’s in the Koran, and then build up on it, which actually pits them against many of the archaic bullshit that has been created through this shit-ass doctrine that goes by the title of ‘Sharia.’

“Give us our dues, man! We’re good progressive folk! Praise our creed!” -- Argue the imaginary caricatures of these so-called progressives inside the depressed recesses of my mind.

Unfortunately, I am not going to praise the creed that everyone thinks I am about to; fuck no! The creed still remains the concoction of what the majority of the fuck buckets project it as, and it shall remain that way until that majority erode into a feeble minority. I effectively declare a division in my points of view, because I don’t view these two groups as the same. I continue to righteously despise the first group, which is a mix of extremes and moderates, who’re basically whoring to the same bill of humanistic oppression; on the other hand, the second group I respect as progressive thinkers who actually keep the true essence of religion their top priority: The virtues. “What the fuck, man! Kade, you stupid dolt! What are you trying to get away with now?” you ask, and I’ll tell you. I still hold the same view about the general, stagnant, third world Islam, as I do about most third world beliefs. On the other hand, the progressives who claim to be of the same religion, but can only and solely use their holy book as their defence, I view as tolerable ‘Koraniks!’ Yeah, cool title eh? It’s pronounced “Choranics!” I think it’s got a nice ring to it, but I digress. Let’s get back on topic here, shall we? Progressive thought is good, and so I will honour those that actually have progressive fruits to offer, because it’s really not that hard and can be pretty darn obvious. The Koraniks are a cool bunch; their Islamic siblings on the other hand, can munch on the big one, that is, if they’re not already doing so by proxy of their unrivalled stupidity and linear-mindedness.

Note: Yes, I have separated the cream from the milk, or in sad and mean spirit, the turd from the diarrhoea. Yes, yes, I know! It’s not nice! And the title was just a cheap dig! Don’t take it seriously.

In closing, I’ll also add that I know I made a folly by stating that holy books should be burned, because classic literature should be treated as classic! I apologise! I guess these books aren’t half-bad, and in the view of a rightful, thoughtful, and critical mind, they could certainly bear positive fruit. Therefore, what we should be burning, are dumb-ass doctrines and bills that are forged by malicious and/or otherwise pathetic interpretations of that same text; no one should determine how a piece of literary thought should mean to you, other than you, yourself. Burn the fucking bills of oppression, and for once, leave the books alone for each reader to analyse; let them actually interact with the literature and find their spiritual calling through it, rather than impose bills on them that’ll determine how and how not to perceive. These people who impose bills and conventional religious dogmas are nothing more than rapists of the perception, THE SORDID PERCEPTION FUCKERS! Follow the way of the progressives, and you might not even be placed against your book of faith; and what do you know, perhaps you might even get along with an otherwise incompatible world of differences by overcoming those differences through civil acknowledgement.

“These perception fuckers are the folly of it all! Who gave them the right to determine the essence of the literature, and then impose it on others? And then that in turn gives a bad rep to the books when it comes to the eyes of us detached agnostics! We just see the general idiots make global chaos and further pronounce their theological and philosophical myopia! Stupid fucks!” -- Kade’s current train of thought.

“Oh Kade, you’re getting philosophical again. It is nice to see you belch out less contempt, and actually expel something positive, for once!” -- Sincere critics.

“I still think you should fuck off, so… FUCK OFF!” -- Kade’s response.

Stay cool, fuckers!

Cheers,
Kade

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Foot in mouth!

Yeah, if the phantoms out there recall, some months ago, I unloaded a bout of really heavy shots at Zachary Phillip Wylde’s character; I even denigrated his role as an artist. I now post to make some needed amends, and I am not all too happy about them; I also know that this is coming in late, but I just heard his latest work by force, and am now forced to detract some of my comments. I am such a fuckin’ hypocrite! Bahaha… No, that’s not funny.

Link to the original bash session:
http://kadestorm.blogspot.com/2005/09/slobfest.html

Recently, I was delving into my archive of videos and got to realise some of Wylde’s masterpieces from earlier on in his career, and his uncanny natural knack for musical creativity struck me, once again. Yes, I watched that one video from the MTV head bangers ball, where he performed an acoustic-only song with southern blues vocals, the song known as “Machinegun Man”. The performance blew me away to say least, that bastard really owned the spotlight with that song, and it went on to demonstrate Wylde’s own versatility, though the reminiscing did not stop there.

I went on to watch the other videos, and even some of his recent metal mammoths that we all know as the Black Label Society music tracks; yeah, yeah, I took on the oath to boycott his works; however, I just had to attain some form of closure on my perception. Fuckin’ hell! This guy is good! Moreover, his versatility and impact are truly undeniable; the man deserves good credit and we owe it to him. I myself, felt like goin' on a pissin' rage after experiencing that entire trip of Black Label goodness!

Unfortunately, I was once again struck by Wylde’s off-stage comments; his rather anal conjectures, even his raunchy incoherence. After factoring the entire poetry in motion that is his music, into his deluded and traumatically obnoxious contentions, I was once again faced with an ugly muddle; I now was in a pissin' mood; I just wanted to piss on his head! Perhaps stimulate some growth in the cereberal cortex?

Yeah! You’re a great musician, dude! But somewhat like the Machinegun Man; your best friend is your dick, which you use to process your thoughts, seeing as your brain has bailed out on ya’! Much like the majority of your intelligent demographic of Stoned Drunk Mother fuckers (fans).

Woah’ shit! What do you know, I actually segued from a sincere amend, right back to my uncompromising insolence, beautiful, or deceitful? No really, it is something to ponder: Was this transition from regret back into contempt, an intentional ploy? Or was it really sporadic poetry, which just happened to be smoothly delivered? Frankly, I couldn’t give fuck.

“Back to square -fuckin’- one!” -- Kade’s conundrum over Zakk Wylde.

Stay cool, fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade

Saturday, February 04, 2006

Digging my own grave!

I’ve allowed the satirical pleasures to sink in; I then let ‘em subside; y’know, the joy that I sought from slamming the entire Moslem commune in general for its dramatic sensitivity over a mere cartoon image of their prophet. It’s just sickening having to hear about these superficial shmucks, but it’s worse and haunting having to feel threatened by their religious neurosis. I also realised that watching their anti-western reaction was actually pretty fuckin’ aggravating, but you don’t see me actually threatening their physical well-being from any angle. I have come to terms with a certain reality though, because the rather quirky scathes that I make are in fact turning into a liability. The battle lines were drawn with the publicity over this cartoon, and I instantly realised that the culture of secularity and true freeom that I was devoted to, was now facing a threatening challenge from the Islamic paradigm, the violent fleck of religious fascism.

Today, I’ve realised that I am starting to grow tired of merely hiding behind a vague blog; these are solid opinions, and ones that also contain a very remote perspective as opposed to being skewed towards a given norm. Over and above all, they are my rants, and I am not the least bit ashamed about them; hell, I am fuckin’ proud! However, I feel threatened about truly exposing this perspective under an insurmountable fear of being literally terminated in a vile manner. You see, carrying on from my last post, I will reiterate the point that I am standing really close to this Islamic flame of bigotry; soon, this fire might just engulf me for my extremely liberal views--I jest you not when I make such claims.

I am not just articulating another contemptuous rant, folks; I am acknowledging a threat, and for real. I could very well end up dead in the coming days, or coming years, because the moment these comments are detected by the relevant folk--the Islamists. The moment links are made and it is realised that a super secularist heathen is achieving his catharsis by denouncing and debasing their dogma from the underground of their own backyard, they will light their torches, and a new-millennium witch-hunt shall begin. To be honest, it's already been happening in every capacity. Worst yet, I’ve also realised that despite my extremely liberal upbringing; American grooming, and alternative façade, I actually have no safe secular haven for retreat - no such thing exists. Globalisation means that any of us can become a target of religious or ideological bigotry, irrespective of the laws of the land. Neo Nazis and Religious Extremists do not abide by such boundaries, and in fact, thrive under the culture of aggression and violence. Many states these days are rules under full or partial theocracy, which could legally sanction the demise of individuals like myself or others of similar mindset under 'blasphemy laws'; what a fucking joke! Laws designed to protect the integrity of a fucking fairytale! I will most likely end up getting turned to a head less carcass at the hands of the religious-faction of estranged and savagely backward public.

Many of these youngsters in America, many of my real-life friends and their younger siblings rant about how life is full of possibilities. I myself tout a similar philosophy; cherish it all and exploit life to the fullest! However, I hope that reading this will also make any of the western readers realise that there are many essential freedoms that they take for granted; I myself used to take these for granted under the security of growing up abroad as a diplomat’s child. Being above all laws, amigos! Now I realise that my mid-western American accent; nasty demeanour, and worse yet--ultra liberal opinions could end up costing me my own life, and I truly have no choice outside of this paradigm. Not whilst I live in the real world!

Therefore, in closing, I would like you all to know that you shouldn’t take your freedoms for granted. This is not saying that some of you should abandon your faith or something because it is this very freedom that has allowed so many religions to co-exist without one malicious side having an iron-fisted control over the others. Pay homage to this freedom, protect this freedom, and remember that there are others like you, albeit, very few. Also, keep in mind that some of them might not always have any other choice; I am included in that mire.

“Kade, you’re a miserable bastard!” you say, but I digress; this isn’t about being 'angsty' because I am probably going to end up dead for my opinions. Clearly, I don’t consider a life outside of basic choice and liberty; it might as well end if one cannot have basic freedom to express and thus, ‘live.’ You're nothing more than a whore if you don't have a substantial degree of autonomy over the course of your existence. Therefore, I will not stop posting shit like this; I am fucking proud of it! My American teachers taught me the beauty of speaking my mind; my British tutors taught me the value of civil liberties; my multinational peers from America to China always made me crave a secular and non-esoteric society. I pride myself on speaking my mind, without necessarily violating the physical well-being of another; I am committed to that premise. Now, in case if I do end up decapitated, pushing up daises; or just dead; remember me for my literary belching! Remember that I remained convicted to that principle of civil liberty! The same, imperfect, but humanistic ideal that made countries like America so fuckin’ great.

“I could be perceived as being worse than Salman Rushdie, or perhaps a wannabe, which is utter bullshit! I greatly respect the man, and that is all that matters. My words are more than enough to drive an Islamic agenda towards sanctioning my death sentence! Well y‘know what? My faith is the secular culture, be it western or be it northern, or eastern. . . whatever! And no death threat is going to change that, but neither will my aggression conserve my own chances at life.” -- It’ll probably remain my final statement.

Perhaps, I've dug myself into my own grave; on the other hand, perhaps, I am just caught up in the concatenating nature of the theoretical framework that drives such insecurity--perhaps I am just over analysing my whole ordeal. I am possibly projecting into a scenario that'll never happen; I'll probably survive to expell even greater amounts of retorts, fused with a literary contempt that always serves as my own spin. Whatever maybe the case and outcome, I would just like to reaffirm the notion that I stand by the essence of my contentions!

“Long live the progressive! For that matter, long live the American way of liberty!” -- Kade’s only -firm- belief.

Stay cool, fuckers!

Cheers,
Kade

Friday, February 03, 2006

Pretentious drama queens!

Once again, all hell breaks lose because generally, the Moslem world is lactating giant splinters of glass from the tight confines of its collective nipples. Yes, the shit hit the fan amongst the realm of the uptight, who’ve clenched their asses so long in the name of religious posing, that their grand children will not have any tailbones to begin with. You all know what this is about, don’t you? The fuckin’ cartoon published in a Danish newspaper, in which the Islamic prophet, Mohammad’s face was depicted in a rather disparaging and satirically funny manner. The offensive soared to new heights when a Jordanian newspaper published the same pictures to explain the controversy, only to spark more controversy. Why all the frustration? Well, this logic of course, goes against the essential tenets of Islam, which could be considered a bloody version of a pretentious drama queen’s codebook; they’re not supposed to publish the visage of the prophet, all in lieu of an ancient protocol to prevent idolatry (CNN International).

“Oh fuck! They published the picture of the prophet! Ouch! Now they‘ll make statues, and every Moslem brain will just explode with the blood of a thousand innocents!” - Sarcastic ‘Mad Man’ Kade.

This gut wrenching reaction is proof that on a general level, the Islamic world is bonded with being pretentious to a point that they now have a sore stick, jabbed up their ass over a fuckin' political CARTOON! Then they claim to be tolerant individuals; this is supposed to be freedom? I would like to pass a decree to donate towards removing this sore stick out of the collective Moslem-Mire's ass! C'mon! The media always takes shots! They took 'em on the Christians; you bastards even had your fun with the Jews. What made you lot think that you were exempt from the beautiful procedure of satirical mockery?

“Oh, but Kade, this goes against their essential beliefs! It's denigrating to their culture!” some might argue, and then I’ll regretfully respond by announcing that the modern world is royally fucked, based on that premise; if it offends them, they're free to respond back rather than murder, and pillage. Sorry, but if this is offensive to the essential crux of Islam--if this mere opinion and non-physical or spiritually altering attempt at spite is harmful to these religious twits, which it actually is! Then it’s established by proxy of reactionary nerve, in stone, that Islam cannot get along with the western ideal of humanistic democracy, freedom, and secular prosperity.

Freedom of expression is fine, and ideally suited; it’s better to imply insult in verbiage and literary works rather than actually annihilating other beliefs, or oppressing them under an iron dogma. I enjoy people mocking religion; I even enjoy the religious world mocking the heathen bracket, provided that the humour is delivered porperly. Unfortunately, for eastern moderates to claim that suck mockery only reinforces the negative perception that the Moslem world holds of the west, is utter bullshit; it even affirms their subtle contempt against western liberties. They claim that this will give the extremists a fact to tout infront of the wild sheep, to convince other Moslems of how little so-called respect the west has for their faith. Y'know what, they shouldn't be learning about a pile of shit doctrine known as the 'Sharia', but rather, learning about getting along, and restricting their fascism to their personal property. These spanks should be told that despite how the world feels, and despite the expressions it makes regarding their religion, such acts don't take anything away from their personal faith and practice, no matter how unintelligent. Hell, western media has poked fun at all sorts of things; it was a mere fuckin’ cartoon! No matter how you slice it, this is proof that the belief system of Islam is fundamentally in conflict with freedom of expression. This is bullshit, and they know that their essential and very cosmetically pathetic tenets are in fact not compatible with free expression. The international reaction, which has basically been bordering on vile death threats, affirms their malicious incompatibility with freedom.

Controversy is constant; opinions are opinions, and without being offensive or pleasing, they’re merely recitations. This is the point; we’re living in a world where opinions are also expected to be regulated by the extreme right, which is sad and pathetic. This is bullshit, man, and we all know it! Opinions do offend, and they do spark a response! Fortunately, they’ve done better at allowing cultural growth (conflict as well), but at least allowed freedom to expunge a non-physical expression; it works in a civil world! This isn’t perfect, but this freedom is the ideal option, because opinions will incite outrage, passion etc. This concept is better than people slaughtering one another, and obliterating actual human existence in the name of pretentious bondage. A person pissing on a holy book, which isn’t always a nice thing, does not equate to the notion of stripping another person of his or her right to belief. “If it hurts, look the fuck away! Until and unless it's taking place inside your inner sanctum!” I say, because you don’t have to watch it! We’re free to control what we expose ourselves to, and that is a responsibility taken for granted by most of the rightists in this world. Pick what you want, and reject what you don’t rather than altering the rest of our freedoms, you bastards! The Islamic world, generally, is at the forefront of this bullshit, because they cannot stand someone directing verbal or literary flack in their direction, pathetic twats! If the images hurt these bastards so much; if watching this shit makes them get horrific thoughts of their prophet appearing on Ren and Stimpy, then they can easily look away, or better yet, plunge nasty pitchfork into the depths of their eye sockets! It wouldn't matter, they suffer from general myopia anyway.

“Gimme that picture! I’d like to post it up! I wanna' piss of Mohammad's retarded lil' minions!” - Kade’s request regarding that cartoon about Mohammad.


Yes, a mere cartoon, which is denigrating in nature, does not in anyway alter the history of this prophet. A history that these fuckin’ nimrods are so fanatically committed to preserving; they’ve reached new degrees of psychosis in their afflicting bondage with following the physical protocol to a miserable degree. Challenge the sanctity of their faith in mere opinion, and generally, they’ll threaten you; bully you; sanction your demise even; of course, all this will be justified through a bland recitation of an archaic custom, which has no place in a civil world of free expression.

“Someone get this truck-sized stick out of the ass of the general Moslem world! They must really believe that this cartoon might be turning their prophet into a giant grenade!” - Mad Man’s truly sane thought.

Therefore, I shall just reiterate my point that this chaos that has been ensuing over the denigrating pictures of Mohammad, the Islamic prophet, once again proves that Islamic tradition is disgustingly pretentious, and is a filthy jism tainting the visage of true spirituality. This is almost a horrific, cult-like obsession and uptight shrewdness serving to stifle freedom of expression; this is wrong! Furthermore, if they say that such animosity and angst are justifiable because of the essential and pretentious bondage induced by the tenets of their religious ethos, then they’ve just proven that they’re in direct conflict with the democratic freedoms of the western paradigm.

“Hell, that was Jordan! People, Jordan! A secular state with lots of Moslems! This is proof that the general Moslem mindset is royally uptight! Despite being a secular state, freedom is a sham for the most part!” -- Mad rant.

In the western world, you have media and artists, constantly denigrating religion, and then religious folk denigrate back; point remains that neither of them resorts to barbaric oppression. On the other hand, in the eastern paradigm, hell ensues over such issues; the livelihood and well-being of many secularists is actually on the line over these events. When people challenge their beliefs, you have virtually state sanctioned murder! Does not the western base realise this difference? If the law doesn't impale you, the people most certainly will! Both ways - we're all fucked. Now can the world dig that?

An excerpt from CNN.com’s coverage:
In Paris, the daily newspaper France Soir fired its managing editor after it republished the caricatures Wednesday, and in Pakistan protesters marched chanting "Death to Denmark" and "Death to France."


“You don’t want a mad, psycho paki on your case! DUMB PANSISTANIES!... Death to all religiuous pretentiousness!” -- A sober thought.

In the spirit of my extreme commitment to 'civil liberties' and freedom of expression, I would also seriously condemn this overly sensitive stance on the part of the Islamic paradigm; it was sickening having to watch these esoteric fucks, chant death on all forms of civil liberties. Seriously, long live the American culture and spirit; because it is a religion on its own, and one that any progressive minded individual should be committed to! Freedom of civil expression enables individuals to direct non-harmful forms of verbal or literary dissent; of course, the people are free to respond back in a similar manner, without desecrating the physical being of the source, a civility that challenges the staunch nerve of every myopic Moslem. The Islamists take that whole indecency to another level of belligerent threats, and usually physical annihilation--they thrive on intimidation and have proven through the outrage over this recent matter, just how much of a dichotomy they create when trying to co-exist with the rest of the world.

“You’re free to insult them in opinion; and they’re free to do the same to you! Just back the fuck off, and don’t TOUCH! Keep it restricted to opinions.” -- Kade’s recommendation.

Let us all collectively clench our bowels; perhaps the pressure will cause that massive heavenly log to finally blow out of the anus of the Islamic world, and allow its pending bowel movements their due ‘release’. Perhaps then, the world can completely move into the truly secular and non-pretentious mode of spirituality; y’know, a world where writing off someone as a round piece of mule shit, doesn’t actually turn that person, in form and spirit, into a round piece of mule shit! Where opinions are actually allowed, and belligerency only reserved for the psychotic belligerents. Yes, nothing like a dying hope for a world where opinions remain offensive retorts, and nothing physically and spiritually harmful; this is of course, a lot cause with the plaguing 'wahabist' tradition of Islam.

FREEDOM, DAMN IT! Moreover, long live secularity; fuck, it isn’t even alive. You people have no idea how close I am standing to this malicious, and dauntingly monolithic flame of religious bigotry; oddly enough, I never chose this setup to begin with--I am one-of-a-kind for the authenticity of my unique circumstances. "What the fuck, Kade... You're gettin' personal with us?" some might wonder; no I am not. The point is that some of you are fortunate to live and breathe within the security of that western ideal; make that your religion and cherish it with solemn devotion.

- In order to truly, and justifiably hate something; you must come to terms with the ugly, inner-visage of that given ‘something’!
- Flemming Rose; the man has my fuckin' respect!
- Christopher Hitchens; a man who I nominate for position of supreme deity.

Stay cool, fuckers.

Cheers,
Kade

For sound, and full politically correct story, visit:
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/02/cartoons.wrap/index.html

Thursday, February 02, 2006

Leave their shirts on!

[Starting drivel]
Okay, land of the free! Let’s sample some of that freedom, shall we? “Oh, oh, Kade! Watch it, you psychotic bastard!” some might already be whimpering, muddled in the deep pitch of fear as I merely sit back and laugh due my own lack of competence, considering that my conscience has been effectively hijacked by an inexplicable brand of outrage, bordering on stark-raving disbelief. So to those of you that might wanna’ school me hard for merely nit picking on something that is very relevant, but also something that I find a little sad, and depressingly funny, all I have to say is a kind, casual, and insincere, “fuck you!” Don’t take it all too seriously; just piss off and laugh, fuckers.

It is a given fact, which has motivated much controversy, that certain opinions are not welcomed in modern America; not in times when common sense must be abrogated in the name of a counter-productive, and essentially cosmetic united front. One cannot always get away with a merely disparaging opinion about international affairs, without having the same critique amplified into an aggressively negative interpretation, intentionally channelled in the direction of the one group of individuals who’d evoke sympathy and moral support from all corners of the great nation: the military. Criticising the fundamental elements of a war; or its direction, are automatically assumed as negative, and demoralising flack being fired at the men and women that fight to protect the nation’s well being.

I have a friend, who has a friend in the American military. Now this committed man of the proud military, rightfully so, is more than ready to do his job, but even his opinions aren’t exactly skewed in favour of the current American regime--the guy himself did not approve of the bases for the second war; should this be treated as outright treason? No, people, these are merely opinions, and shouldn’t be treated as the third degree. Hardly anyone’s actually taunted the work ethic or the diligence of the military in general. Critiquing the bases for the war does not reflect on the credibility and standing of the army folk. Making scathing conjecture about the reasons behind a conflict doesn’t challenge the capabilities or efforts of the soldiers. It is merely a fuckin’ opinion, and that’s that! Y‘know that little expression of profound thought that defines us on a deeper level, and even offers us distinction from the rest of our human peers? Since when did this turn into fuel for political manipulation and propaganda? Well since the era of enlightenment, from whence it began to actually challenge all political corners, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

Let’s just call a spade a spade, and admit the fact that since negative comments give the administration a ‘doody,’ they decide to re-project such opinions as demoralising slanders at the military. Before you know it, the mean, and often critically correct ‘doody heads’ are now suddenly being irrationally portrayed as enemies of all good will for merely questioning, offering some worthwhile rhetoric, even. The shit has hit the eternal throne! Damn! Is it not the job of a thinking, conscious and composed individual to also keep his/her eyes open to the follies, even if they stem from the actions of one of his/her own people? Fuck no, critical thinking is now a sin; the ability to offer harmless variety in the slew of monolithic opinions is a sin, strictly reserved for the ‘heathen scum’.

- “Doody head? What the fuck, man, are you twelve-years-old? Just call ‘em nasty proponents of dissent!”
- “Fine! The nasty proponents of tru…”
- “DISSENT!”
- “GAAH! DISSENT! DISSENT! NASTY PROPONENTS OF DISSENT!”
- “Good!”

Now it is no state secret how Bush and his cronies feel about people wearing contentious t-shirts. So much so that sporting any kind of apparel that could be ‘interpreted’ as a demoralising gesture towards the army, or truthfully, the administration’s own ego during their less than eloquent political addresses, can result in a nasty boot out. Therefore, basically, wearing a shirt that might criticise government’s reasoning ala, expressing an opinion, can in fact, get one booted out of range. These wouldn’t exactly be the pillars of freedom and rights to expression, even within civil limits; last time I checked, shirt’s don’t physically attack people. Whatever though, most of the sold-out cronies will adamantly refute such a claim, if not downplay its spirit, and they’re free to. Of course, I’ll also take a slice of that freedom to tell ‘em that their perception is stupefying. This is not freedom, this is bordering on dogmatic censorship; if a contentious t-shirt hurts you, then you have serious psychological issues, bubba!


[The actual incident.]
Recently, something rather interesting happened in this land, which was built on the legacy of freedom and emancipation of authentic opinion from the crux of blind-eyed conformity. “Oh, oh, oh, did a shirt-wielding, dissent freak get kicked out?” some might question, and I’ll take a moment to laugh. Fuck no, that’s ancient news now. Hell, keep it up a few more years, and we could consider stifling freedom of expression a legitimate tradition--an integral part of the ethos (If this is the ethos, however, then FUCK THE ETHOS!). The recent event that we speak of is the very recent ‘State Of Da Union’ address, straight from the unpolished puppet, err, Mr. President.

You see, a certain woman was targeted by the security during President Bush’s address, which by the way, has quite a few liberal minded American’s frightened--I think he’s mastering his own craft of mortifying people. Return next regime for, “War on mortification.” Alright, alright, horseshit a side! Anti-War protestor, Cindy Sheenan found her self on the wrong side of a bully session, as she was booted out of the event for wearing a t-shirt, the contents of which fit the Bush-regime’s twisted take on dissent. Yes, this was rather sad; but who cares, right? In the real world, leaders cannot be questioned, for their capability to offer answers to tough questions should never be challenged. “But mister, what about freedom of speech?” some kids might ask, and all I have to say to that is that it’s all bullshit. If these children want to comprehend this reality, they should go open up a bedtime storybook, because these days, this so-called ‘freedom’ is about as real as any bedtime fable; perhaps a solace can be sought in such sad realisation.

However, another solace was had by most of us, as mere ‘slip’ in security resulted in the booting of another woman. Interestingly enough, this was none other than Beverly Young, the wife of US-Republican Representative, Bill Young.

“Aaaaaaaahahahaha! Poetic justice is on a roll these days!” - The Mad Man (Kade).

Not just that, Ms. Beverly Young was a staunch republican supporter, known for her passionate support for the US-led war in Iraq; hell, she was wearing a ‘support the troops’ t-shirt. Chief Terrance Garner of the US Capitol Police admitted that neither of the women should’ve been booted (CNN International); intelligent utility of political correctness for you lot. Well, for the first time, I don’t find myself outraged at another show of poor bipartisanship; at least they didn’t favour any one of the shirts. C‘mon, this funny little snippet on Cnn.com has to hold a progressive implication. We can forget about freedom of speech; both shirts were booted for that. However, at least both got the boot!

“We oppress your freedom to express! But now we don’t favour… err, make any exceptions! If you wear shirt with words! You’re out! Land of the free - maybe not! Land of the fair - yes, now that’s semantically accurate! We boot you all out!”

Unfortunately, the favouritism kicked in, as Ms. Sheenan was officially arrested for unlawful conduct--boldly questioning, while Ms. Young was just kicked out. Oh, well, that was a short-lived thrill. What the fuck was so unlawful about being able to utilise even a minute fraction of one's own conscience is really anyone's guess; I am pissed though.

This is sad and pathetic, but also carries an underlying humour, because a crony was caught in the same mess that their opposing counterparts often seem to find themselves in for the greater part. Of course, realising that humour also goes on to imply an even further sense of pathetic boredom and sadness, but it’s really out of the bounds of common sense and rational hands. Therefore, I just chose to enjoy the laugh!


[Closing smites!]
Oh, by the way, would we care to take a guess at what the Ms. Cindy Sheenan, the Anti-War protestant’s shirt read? Sure, let’s analyse an excerpt, straight from cnn.com.


Excerpt from CNN.com:
‘Anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan wore a shirt with the message "2,245 Dead. How many more?" -- a reference to the number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq.’ - CNN.com.

“Shame on her, really, shame on her! To have the audacity to sport clothing that not only states a mildly outdated statistical fact, but also offers follow-up rhetoric. For fuck’s sake! You can’t paraphrase the truth, and add cynical rhetoric to that; it is right… errr, wrong! Oh the bleeding agony! Maliciously challenging truth! The nerve!” - Vile sarcasm from the evil machine (Kade)!

I know, I know; the official statement from Capitol Police Chief still reads that neither of them should’ve been kicked out (CNN.com). However, the fact remains that they were driven out on bad spirit; namely Cindy Sheenan. Hell, Sheenan’s own recollection of the event implies a conscious bad spirit, and intentional segregation because of her political stance (CNN International, TV).

Perhaps the cronies should save their challenged cerebral reserves for real issues, rather than focussing their resources on cosmetic protocol, designed for taking down shirts, which has now bumbled to the degree of taking down one of their own; that was just pathetic--funny, but pathetic.

“Leave both their shirts on, man! The words won’t hurt you.” - Kade’s counterfeit two cents!

Yeah, go freedom! Oh, wait... one of 'em was arrested. Hmm, not quite there. Well, I’ve got one better… Go cynicism, because satirical pleasure strikes once again from the hypocrisy of an entire organisation.

Stay cool, you crazy fuckers!

Cheers,
Kade

CNN International - Full Story of the event:
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/01/sheehan.arrest/index.html