I don’t know about second rest days.  (Tomorrow, it’s squats!)

Reblogged from Gym-Talk



Or they just sign up for the military. (Which I think they can do whilst they still have to ask to use the loo, no?)

Reblogged from #WABMF

Having failed to discover weapons of mass destruction, Washington shifted its propaganda to “establishing democracy.” That flatly refutes their earlier claim that the “only question” was whether Saddam would disarm. But with a sufficiently obedient intellectual class, and loyal media, the farce can proceed untroubled. To evaluate the new propaganda claim, a rational person would ask how those who know proclaim their “yearning for democracy” have in fact acted, and act today, when their interests are at stake. I will not run through the record, but those who are interested in evaluating these claims should certainly do so. They will discover that “democracy” is tolerated, but only when it is a “top-down form of democracy” in which elites who collaborate with US business and state interests retain control — I happen to be quoting from one of the leading authorities on Latin American democracy, who writes as an insider, having served in the “democracy enhancement” programs of the Reagan administration, which devastated Central America, and left a trail of horror in the Middle East and southern Africa as well. Furthermore, the same policies are pursued today, without the slightest change. Is the US bringing democracy to Uzbekistan? Or to Equatorial Guinea, also ruled by a monster comparable to Saddam Hussein, but warmly welcomed by the Bush White House because he sits on a very large pool of oil.

Reblogged from Noam Chomsky Quotes



The British government wants to prevent us from being able to see porn on the internet without telling our phone companies that we want to see it because they think it rots our teeth and our minds more than cigarettes or the disgusting amount of alcohol most people seem to drink.  But then, sometimes you don’t need ‘porn’—there’s the underwear sections in catalogs or now online!   

Reblogged from NSFW Humor


Oh Vienna.
#vienna #wien (at Volksgarten)

Ein der Gründe, warum ich Wien liebe. Ein Sommertag, und der Volksgarten ist doch fast leer. Danke, wedontrentpigs, für ein schönes Bild.

Reblogged from we don't rent pigs!

Can anyone recommend any yummy restaurants in Amsterdam?


Dave and I wanna go out for a really nice dinner one of the days we are there, rather than go to our usuals!

There’s a restaurant on Spuistraat called Luden.  Food is pretty good, atmosphere nice.  The game salad starter is to die for.

Reblogged from Mineraltea



Poor Overall!

Reblogged from Pleated Jeans

My letter to @newswatchbbc as the BBC appears to favour marriage inequality

—Just an update, as of 27 February, I’ve yet to have even an acknowledgment from the BBC.  That’s listening to your licence payers.


Dear Newswatch

Over the past weeks, the BBC has become a source of anti-gay propaganda in the United Kingdom as the Government drafts and calls for a free vote in Parliament on the equalisation of marriage.  Two of these instances have been most notable over the holiday season.  However, there is also an underlying issue in language.

The BBC addresses the issue of marriage equality as ‘same-sex marriage’ or ‘gay marriage’ and not as marriage equality.  This suggests that, from the outset, the BBC is approaching marriage equality by ‘othering’ the gay community and thus suggesting that ‘gay’ marriage is somehow different to ‘straight’ marriage.  If the BBC were to phrase their headlines in terms of equality, the UK’s primary news source would be in a better position to treat the question from all points of view in their articles.

This is the major stumbling block we encounter as a closer reading is made of recent BBC news pieces.  On Christmas Day, the primary news on the BBC’s website and a major segment on the BBC News channel was dedicated to the Archbishop of Westminster’s illogical and vitriolic statement about marriage equality.  The archbishop was not countered online or on television by statements from any other organisation, religious or not.

In contrast, when the BBC reports on a step towards equality or a statement in favour thereof by a government minister or a religious organisation, mention is always made of counter arguments.  If the Unitarians were to make (another) statement in favour of equality, note would have to be made of the Church of England’s position against it.  If Teresa May stands at the dispatch box to support her party’s position, mention will be made of an MP who is set to vote ‘nay’ as well as a clear redaction of the position held by religious institutions.  When an article is about an MP who stands against marriage equality, a litany of names of politicians who support it will be given in a single sentence without describing what they support.  Thus, equal weight is given to both sides when the main thrust of the article is in support of marriage equality but this is not at all the case when it is against.  In fact, one article proclaimed in its headline the PM’s support of equal marriage yet the text was slanted to explaining the position of the opposition. 

Today, the BBC has had as its top news a statement from a High Court judge, drawn from The Times, asking why so much time has been spent discussing a minority issue.  Supporters of marriage equality may well ask why a vote need be had at all.  If it is a minority issue, why do I need to ask for a government to vote on my marriage when they need not vote on Coleridge LJ’s?  In the article, no mention is made of Liberty’s stance on marriage equality nor does it appear they were asked to comment.  When reporting the news, does the BBC not ask Stonewall to comment on what someone has said, if it is considered newsworthy to report what a single High Court judge has written in a newspaper?

The BBC has recently suffered a severe blow to its credibility in the fiasco over Jimmy Saville.  Now they are beginning to stand out as a news outlet with an agenda prejudiced against the GLBT community.  BBC licence payers expect balanced news without overt support of the church (as seen in a news report directly before Christmas) or slanted against a selected group.  To avoid ending up with another shuffle at the top, the BBC must once again be reminded to seek comments from all sides when presenting the news.  If they do not, they are no better than the horrors of news reporting which can be seen in the United States.  That sort of bias has no place on the public broadcaster.


Happy Christmas!  God Jul! Glædelig Jul!  Feliz Natal!  ¡Feliz Navidad!  Buon Natale!  Frohe Weihnachten!  Vrolijke Kerstmis!



“And the cuckoo was a beautiful bird.”

Susan Kay, from Phantom (thanks, marubia)

(And the elephant was a graceful one.  Sorry.  I couldn’t resist.)

Reblogged from The final sentence.