Tag: rants

Happy post-Australia-Day/Hangover Day!
So, one of my friends that I follow on Twitter alerted to me to this photo posted on the Vegemite Facebook page. If you can read the caption, this guy/bogan/fucktard - Ryan Scheibel - asks them “Why are you supporting terrorists?” - clearly he’s angry at the Halal Authority mark on the Vegemite bottle.
Going to his Facebook page, I also noticed he signed this petition for the end of “discrimination” on Christians when it comes to eating Halal food.
I’m not a Muslim. However, even I find this person a fucking idiot.
Mainly because you can simply go on Wikipedia to find out what Halal food is. According to said Wikipedia page, Halal food is anything that they are allowed to eat or drink.
The mark on the Vegemite bottle is to tell Muslims that they can indeed eat Vegemite without going against their religious code. It is not supporting terrorism, nor being discriminatory to Christians. (Also, how the fuck is it discriminatory to Christians?)
Also, see that logo below the Halal mark? That’s the Kosher certification mark. It’s like the Halal mark, but for Jewish people. It tells Jewish people that they too can Vegemite and not go against their religious code.
Some people are just so stupid.

Happy post-Australia-Day/Hangover Day!

So, one of my friends that I follow on Twitter alerted to me to this photo posted on the Vegemite Facebook page. If you can read the caption, this guy/bogan/fucktard - Ryan Scheibel - asks them “Why are you supporting terrorists?” - clearly he’s angry at the Halal Authority mark on the Vegemite bottle.

Going to his Facebook page, I also noticed he signed this petition for the end of “discrimination” on Christians when it comes to eating Halal food.

I’m not a Muslim. However, even I find this person a fucking idiot.

Mainly because you can simply go on Wikipedia to find out what Halal food is. According to said Wikipedia page, Halal food is anything that they are allowed to eat or drink.

The mark on the Vegemite bottle is to tell Muslims that they can indeed eat Vegemite without going against their religious code. It is not supporting terrorism, nor being discriminatory to Christians. (Also, how the fuck is it discriminatory to Christians?)

Also, see that logo below the Halal mark? That’s the Kosher certification mark. It’s like the Halal mark, but for Jewish people. It tells Jewish people that they too can Vegemite and not go against their religious code.

Some people are just so stupid.

captainmoonshoes:

I got in trouble for saying that I don’t want to vote for either Kevin Rudd or Tony Abbott, and for having literally no idea how to vote or what the political policies are. Thanks mum, I really learnt a lot from this conversation.

Just tell her one thing, and vote the other. It’s not like she’s ever going to find out anyway - private ballot.

Plus, I do hate it when people ask “Who are you going to vote for?”. You either have an agenda or you’re not interested in politics when you’re asking people that question. There’s a reason why it is a private ballot - to make sure these people don’t try and influence your vote.

Piers Akerman knows nothing about foreign policy (and why we should attempt a UNSC bid)

While prime ministerial special envoy Joanna Hewitt and UN ambassador Gary Quinlan were designated as observers to the Non-Aligned Summit in Tehran, their presence in the rogue state along with representatives from the world’s more reprehensible nations including North Korea, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Cuba and Ecuador, put us in extremely bad company.

Further, dispatching two senior representatives to a nation in which we already had an ambassador perfectly capable of observing the non-aligned nations’ summit gives the world the impression that, despite all the sanctions we may apply to Iranian officials, we will still deal with them at the highest level.

You can obviously tell I have a distaste for this man - mainly because Piers is an idiot. However, Akerman knows nothing about international relations. The fact that we shouldn’t observe a meeting that had North Korea, Zimbabwe, Cuba and Ecuador is laughable. Should we cut up our UN membership because those countries are also there? Should we stop participating in the Olympics because North Korea is there, and so is the big and scary Iran? Of course not.

First off, we were invited (so was Russia, Switzerland and Turkey) to attend a meeting with two-thirds of the UN membershipin a conference. Why is this important? We were the only ‘western’ power there invited. Second, our neighbours are also members of this organisation - including PNG and Indonesia. By not attending, it could hamper our relations because it shows ignorance and could be seen as a move in response to America’s displeasure - which has hampered our relationship in the past with the Asia-Pacific region.

Also, it’s nice to show off an independent foreign policy. Regardless what Mr. Abbott or Mr. Akerman thinks, we are an independents tate - we should be following an independent agenda. Yes, those ideas can be similar ideas from our ‘big friends’ (US and UK); but in a century where we are seeing power shift from a unipolar world with the US in charge to potentially a multipolar world again, it is in Australia’s interest to be aligned differently.

And if it means displeasing America, so be it. They are already powerful, surely they cannot be that hurt by us going to an event such as the Non-Aligned Movement.

But what is this Non-Aligned Movement. The name pretty much suggests it all - it was a group of countries that declared that they were not aligned with the Soviets, nor the Americans. That said, you have countries like Cuba who was backed by the Soviets - which sort of defeats the purpose of the Non-Aligned Movement. The movement is not a powerful voting bloc (since members usually are aligned now to different blocs, like ASEAN or the Group of 77) - it was to promote the idea of peace.

Now, since the Cold War has ended, it hasn’t properly redefined itself in this current world.

Yes, the bid may be excessive - why the hell are we bidding for a UN Security Council seat? The best quote I’ve seen as a good reason why are we doing this is: “For Australia, winning is about seeking to advance the national interest by having more influence on events from which, in a globalised world, the country is even less immune.”

Australia, as a middle power, has always used the idea of multilateralism to achieve goals. We created the idea of the Australia Group - a group that controls the export of chemicals so not to spread the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons. There’s also the Cairns Group we formed with some agricultural exporting countries to push for the removal of protectionist policies. Its main success so far has been to put agriculture onto the agenda during the Uruguay Round of WTO negotiations, leading to an agreement.

The United Nations has also been the primary vehicle for our humanitarian efforts. We are the twelfth-largest contributor to the UN, support all of its organisations (especially humanitarian) and have been involved with all peacekeeping operations. Having a seat in the UN Security Council lets us be more involved in the UN - and even having a voice in future peacekeeping efforts.

Of course we are at a disadvantage - not only because we can’t rely on blocs or we came to this late; but because the UNSC seats usually are given to smaller countries in order to balance out the big five. We also have a perception of being simply American’s lackie - a perception that grew after years of struggling who we are: we are in the Asia Pacific, not next to Europe or America.

But of course, this might be an advantage - we can balance both our western culture and our Asian geographical position.

That is a fine line to thread - because it’s very easy for us to fall in with our culture.

I’m sort of annoyed… actually, fucking furious, at many people saying we shouldn’t bid for this. We should bid for this. We must pursue a (somewhat) independent agenda unless we want to be pariah around the world for simply being a ‘yes’-man for America and if we want to remain a middle power in the world.

Seriously, how the f**k did he become a judge!? (also, why the UN is never going to invade the US)

"He (Obama) is going to try to hand over the sovereignty of the United States to the UN. What’s going to happen when that happens? I’m thinking worst case scenario - civil unrest, civil disobedience, civil war maybe."

That quote comes from a Texas judge named Tom Head. And he said that to a local Fox station (not Fox News, they are different entities). He also added that taxes needed to be raised so they could prepare for a ‘civil war’.

Seriously? Again, this is why we need to have some sort of basic knowledge of the world’s political system.

Okay, will the United States be ever invaded by the United Nations? No. It won’t. Ever. Simply put, the United Nations’ Security Council is the only body within the UN to authorise the use of force - by states (though states can ignore it, as the primary actor in international politics is the STATE) and by the United Nations. And guess who has veto power in the United Nations? The United States.

Yes, one conspiracy theory could say that the United States could simply not veto it. But guess what, Russia and China could possibly also veto it. Why? Well, look at Syria. And Libya in 2011. Russia and China are reluctant to have the UN send forces in any conflict inside a state - because it has wider implications. If they allow this case to happen, then this could allow the UN to intervene in China or Russia in terms of internal unrest.

Though, I might add Head is right in one aspect - a UN peacekeeping force can be called in during civil unrest, disobedience and civil war; and that only occurs when the country asks for assistance. However, if you’re a first world country such as the United States, you’re not likely to get a peacekeeping force.

10k to mean you’re “the most beautiful”? Only on Facebook

Note: I’m not going to mention the actual page or give a link for it because I personally believe it is a horrendous concept to do such a thing, and will damage a person’s self esteem if they don’t get the likes required. For the purposes of this little rant, I’m replacing the name of the page with StupidCo.

1OO likes = UGLY
25O likes = OKAY
5OO likes = PRETTY
1OOO likes = BEAUTIFUL
1OOOO likes = MOST BEAUTIFUL
1OOOOO likes = OUT OF THIS WORLD

That comes directly from a photo one of my friends on Facebook liked. It from a page called StupidCo, it proclaims to be a ‘beauty contest’ for teenagers and basically asks them to, well, post pictures of themselves and get people to rate them. And you get the ranking like before.

The image that was liked by this particular friend was basically a girl wearing a bikini in a suggestive pose. Clicking on the page to see this monstrosity would reveal many others - all teenagers - all ‘parading’ themselves to the world for likes. Males who would be shirtless, or lifting up a shirt, showing off their six packs; females wearing bikinis.

You know the whole world is going to end when these vain people will take over the world.

To be fair, there are some who don’t do this.

But the very nature of this ‘contest’ is to find attractive people.

A girl who wasn’t wearing a bikini has at the time of writing 1,750 likes. The girl my friend liked, who was wearing a bikini, has 20,500 likes and counting. The same goes for guys - you get more likes if you’re showing muscles and basically become the wet dream for gay guys, and teenage girls who think Justin Bieber and One Direction are ‘music’.

I feel sick in my stomach right now.

It is wrong in so many levels and I deeply fear the negative consequences of this Facebook page. In the land of the teenagers, simply being ‘not attractive’ can make you an outcast. I don’t think there is nothing wrong by being ‘sexy’ or ‘attractive’, I do find it offensive that you are being ‘ranked’ on your attractiveness by people on Facebook, and being humiliated because you don’t get enough ‘likes’ to satisfy your own image of yourself.

The people who created StupidCo should be ashamed of themselves.

A response to an ACL commenter

Turns out, the ACL is pissed off that Sunrise has decided to back marriage. So, what did they do? Decided to launch a campaign to get them to backflip. Will it work? Let’s look at “One Million Moms” and its campaign to get US retailer JCPenny to drop Ellen DeGeneres as a spokesperson. That failed miserably.

Since I need a break from studying, I decided to go and inflict pain on myself by reading some comments of their post. Here’s one I would like to respond to (I’ve retracted their name - but hey, you people are smart. You can basically do a page search and find it.

Dear Sunrise Team,

Just wanted to let you know that I think your little equality stunt is a joke.
Where did you get the figures that the majority of Australian support same-sex marriage ? Considering that there were thousands of emails sent to parliament from people saying they DON’T want marriage to be redefined I’m interested to know where you get your facts from. Until there is a national referendum on this subject no one knows what most Australian really think.
Why are you pandering to 4% of the population, and why should we rewrite what marriage means to satisfy the whinging of that 4%? There is no discrimination here, the European Court of Human Rights has said this last March that marriage is NOT a human right. No one has the right to marry, a father and daughter cannot marry, a brother and sister cannot marry and they are the opposite sex.
Crying that this is a human right is rubbish, if your human rights are taken away you would be suffering, starving, homeless or tortured. And considering that most same sex attracted people are middle class, working folk who are we kidding when the human rights cry is heard. I bet people living in refugee camps in third world countries would laugh at such a claim.
Do you understand that if same sex marriage is made law children down to Kindergarten will be taught about it, this is what has happened in other places where same sex marriage has come into law. Parents have been refused notice of when such subjects are being taught and they are not allowed to opt their children out of these classes. If you want to talk about rights there are some to discuss, a parents right to teach their children what and when they feel the child is ready. And lets not forget a child’s right to have an innocent childhood not having to be taught from the age of 5 about adult topics way beyond their years. Or their right to have a parent of each gender, Melissa how would you have felt at 12 getting your first period and only having 2 men to talk to about it ? Yes I know all children don’t have both parents but let’s admit that it is the best situation for a child to have isn’t it. It’s been that way since the beginning of time so there must be some wisdom and truth behind it.
Not that I ever watch your show because I think it’s drivel but I will also no longer be watching Channel 7 anymore if this stunt goes ahead. And I will boycott your partners Purina, Accor Hotels, The Coffee Club, Myer and Jetstar.

Just another point of view for you to consider.

xxx

Dear Ms XXX,

You seem to like to rewrite history and statistics. You note that only 4% of the population seem to be supporting same-sex marriage, but that is factually incorrect. In actual fact, a large percentage happen to support it. A Daily Telegraph online poll notes 7/10 Australians support same-sex marriage. If you want something a bit more scientific, then we can point to The Age/Nielsen poll that shows 57 percent of Australians support the move - and last time I checked, 57 percent is a majority.

You also note “Considering that there were thousands of emails sent to parliament from people saying they DON’T want marriage to be redefined”. I would love to see that proven by actual statistics, but alas I can’t find any. The nearest I could is an online survey done by the Parliament of Australia - and guess what, the responses show an overwhelming support for same sex marriage. The results show 177,663 supporting same sex marriage, and 98,164 not supporting.

But hey, don’t worry about the facts, right?

You also note it’s not a human right - it’s not discrimination. Yes, you are correct in saying that the European Court of Human Rights reject a claim of two lesbians who claimed that their human rights were violated. The relevant article looked at was Article 12, which states: “Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right.”

However, saying it is not a human right is not true and possibly a bigoted viewpoint, Ms XXX. Reading this post by Adam Wagner, a barrister who specialises in “public law, human rights and medical law”, he notes that “…the decision in Schalk and Kopf clearly supports the view that the European Convention could include a right for homosexuals to marry.” It has not ruled out that it is NOT a human right as you clearly point out in your comment, in fact apparently it has left it open. The decision basically left it up to states to legislate and to decide.

Also, I do find your comment “And considering that most same sex attracted people are middle class, working folk who are we kidding when the human rights cry is heard” also a bit insensitive. Scratch that, a lot insensitive. Homosexual people can come from anywhere - there are homosexuals in the bush, there are homosexuals in Africa, and there are homosexuals in the city. It is NOT based on what class you happen to be in.

In fact, I might remind you that in many countries in Africa, homosexuality is punishable by life in prison or death. Homosexuals also face discrimination. While you may believe marriage is not a human right, equality under the law is.

But apparently, this is all for the children. You note that it it will be shoved down our kids throats and taught to our kindergartens. Last time I checked, kindergartens don’t deal with issues about terrorism, war, police and government corruption, democracy, how to vote, the political system in Australia or the United States, why the economy is going down the toilet, the carbon tax, religious beliefs, or even why Optus sucks as a mobile operator. It is there to teach children basic math and literacy skills. Not to teach political ideologies, religious beliefs or societal topics. Just basic math and literacy skills.

And under that, if we don’t teach same sex marriage, then you shouldn’t be forcing children to go to religious classes. It should be OPT IN not OPT OUT. If you’re going to a Catholic or religious school, I understand the need to teach religion since you are a religious school. I don’t see the need why a public school automatically assumes that everyone who doesn’t opt out is Christian and have to be put in this class.

Plus, knowing how I treated Religion in Year 7-10, it was pretty much a bludge subject.

You note “Melissa how would you have felt at 12 getting your first period and only having 2 men to talk to about it?” Is that really an issue? I’m sure that they will try and explain it the best way they can, or even simply ask another female like their aunt or grandmother to help them with it. You’re just now grasping at straws.

You also admit that you don’t even WATCH the program. You complain because the ACL is telling you to complain. “I will also no longer be watching Channel 7 anymore if this stunt goes ahead.” Unless you happen to be one of the few Australians who determines the ratings, they don’t really care.

"And I will boycott your partners Purina, Accor Hotels, The Coffee Club, Myer and Jetstar."

You’re only one of probably 30 people. And trust me, you’ll forget that you’re boycotting Myer or Purina.

Marriage is about love, devotion and exclusivity between two people. Plus, the definition of marriage has changed so many times before. Marriage used to be something for power, not love. Marriage used to be racially charged - you were stigmatised if you married a coloured person.

Please at least read up on facts before you spout your hate speech.

Thanks,

Terence H.
A person.

A message to every young person out there…

… PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STOP RAPING THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!

I am sick to death of the use of ‘tht’ and the lack of apostrophes among other despicable kinds of crap that you use on Facebook. You have plenty of characters to use - unlike Twitter or SMS - so you can write the name Adolph Blaine Charles David Earl Frederick Gerald Hubert Irvin John Kenneth Lloyd Martin Nero Oliver Paul Quincy Randolph Sherman Thomas Uncas Victor William Xerxes Yancy Zeus Wolfe­schlegelstein­hausenberger­dorffvoraltern­waren­gewissenhaft­schaferswessen­schafewaren­wohlgepflege­und­sorgfaltigkeit­beschutzen­von­angreifen­durch­ihrraubgierigfeinde­welche­voraltern­zwolftausend­jahres­vorandieerscheinen­wander­ersteer­dem­enschderraumschiff­gebrauchlicht­als­sein­ursprung­von­kraftgestart­sein­lange­fahrt­hinzwischen­sternartigraum­auf­der­suchenach­diestern­welche­gehabt­bewohnbar­planeten­kreise­drehen­sich­und­wohin­der­neurasse­von­verstandigmen­schlichkeit­konnte­fortplanzen­und­sicher­freuen­anlebens­langlich­freude­und­ruhe­mit­nicht­ein­furcht­vor­angreifen­von­anderer­intelligent­geschopfs­von­hinzwischen­sternartigraum, Senior.

That name is 746 letters long (excluding 28 spaces and two punctuation marks). Surely, if Facebook allows you to post that name, you can use the proper spelling of that rather than ‘tht’ or other kinds of crap I have seen.

And you wonder why you’re failing in English? It’s because you write crap like this with god-awful spelling and grammar.

For #KONY2012 - What happens in 2013?

The following was a piece written on TECHGEEK.com.au. It’s being crossposted here just for a sake of portfolio pieces. Comments should be directed to the TECHGEEK.com.au post (if you want me to respond to anything, or even to your potential trolling).

"This year, 2012, is the year that we can finally fulfill it… But time is running out. To level with you, this movie expires on December 31, 2012" - Jason Russell

On April 20, supporters of the campaign to the KONY 2012 campaign will be putting up posters supporting their cause and actively try and get their voice heard to politicians to do something. Being an awful pessimistic cynic, however, I ponder the question – what will happen in 2013? What happens if they are unsuccessful, or successful in their goals?

Let’s be hypothetical and say that in the end – Joseph Kony is arrested somewhere in 2012. Let’s say that the African Union’s plan to send 5000 international troops to the area where the LRA and Joseph Kony are supposed to be located and were able to capture him. If that happens – then Invisible Children will have started a new paradigm of social activism – where an emotive documentary (which distorts facts to suit its purpose) is able to capture the hearts of the young to be more active in politics.

However, in my opinion, this will turn out to be a negative consequence. To be well informed, you have to take all sides of a particular issue and come to some conclusion. Take for instance, the issue of globalisation – it is excellent for us in terms of rapid, instant communication but we have seen that a housing crash could result in a tremendous economic issue in both Europe and in the United States. I’ll let you make your own opinions of globalisation.

(And yes, I am a politics nerd – especially global politics.)

And sadly, not everyone will be reading up on both sides of an issue. A simple Google search, or a link posted on Twitter and Facebook will be enough to satisfy our judgement on an issue. We can look at the very KONY 2012 video highlighting this very example on how fast our judgement has already been made up. It spread quickly from friend to friend to friend – all of them trusting that as if it were gospel.

But, as Foreign Policy noted (among other discrepancies):

It would be great to get rid of Kony.  He and his forces have left a path of abductions and mass murder in their wake for over 20 years.  But let’s get two things straight: 1) Joseph Kony is not in Uganda and hasn’t been for 6 years; 2) the LRA now numbers at most in the hundreds, and while it is still causing immense suffering, it is unclear how millions of well-meaning but misinformed people are going to help deal with the more complicated reality.

That’s the beauty of slacktivism. It doesn’t require much – like a video, retweet, donate money and get a T-shirt. It is perfect for a teenager and for an organisation like Invisible Children since it literally mean that you’ll get people committing for a few weeks, just enough to get your cause out there in the media. And they’ll not check it up online, or get the full understanding of fact. Your video is just enough fact for them.

If you think a teenager will read a website like Foreign Policy (unless they are total political nerds who spend every Monday night watching Q&A religiously), then think again. They’re more interested in One Direction, The Vampire Diaries or participating in muscle worship with Jersey Shore-like bodybuilders. Also, on that note, STOP DOING IT! I do not need my Facebook wall flooded with such crap that makes me question your sexuality.

Back on topic, we’ve examined what happens if Kony 2012 succeeds – but what happens if it fails?

I could say that people would feel heartbroken, no longer trusting any charity and simply be cynical to any cause. But that would be a lie.

Most likely, Invisible Children will be pushed out of the spotlight. The Kony issue will no longer be of great importance and everyone will feel indifferent. It no longer becomes a hotbed issue for the youth, unlike same-sex marriage or climate change. This also has a consequence in that, if Joseph Kony is eventually captured, killed or pronounced dead by natural causes, Invisible Children will get little credit or a passing mention.

Invisible Children should be congratulated for making a campaign that brings an issue up in the spotlight. But their rhetoric has put high expectations on itself to deliver – and realistically will not happen within the very short time frame they are trying to push.

On April 20, we will finally see if Invisible Children and the KONY 2012 campaign is sustainable enough to pressure governments. On that day, we will see if it has enough strength it has for the rest of 2012. If not, then all of this is just a moot point – it simply failed to be memorable, unlike other viral content on YouTube.

Dear Tumblr….

… please fix your freaking Themes section of your site. You do not, nor need not, put a big slab of themes on one page. Have you heard of pagination? It does exist. You do not need to put over 100 themes and decide to make my computer slower because you simply can’t be fucked to put some stupid next or previous links.

It’s not that hard.

Even WordPress had some fucking pagination in its themes section.

So please, break the pages up. Because, I do not want to go to a spammy-looking, advertising-ridden website just to find themes that I may like to put on my Tumblr log.

Oh, and while you’re at it - could you also put in options to show only free or paid themes, and put in tags. It would be helpful to actually narrow the themes down to a few.

Wait what? Optus, I have to help you with your crappy 3G coverage?

The following is a repost from TECHGEEK.com.au. You can view the original article here - with all the videos, images and stuff.

The Optus 3G Home Zone – the new way in order to help solve its mobile woes. So what is it? Well, it’s a device that creates a semi-mobile phone tower so your mobile device can use it to make calls or receive 3G data. As a long-time Optus customer, I just have one gripe with it, a very big gripe with it. It’s the fact that I have to pay extra for it just for five bars of 3G data.

Read More

Copy and paste? Hell no.

Okay, welcome back. I’ve been told by one of my trusty friends that there is a new site in New Zealand, called Techpod. However, my first visit to the site revealed to me how much time I put in original content and how I mandate that it has to be all original, or at least attribute sources when quoting and images. Yes, they have reviews, but most of their content seems to be a simple copy and paste job from press releases or corporate blogs.

Read More