[tertiary degrees] gender based

Via Vox:

That's the U.S.A. I wonder what the situation is in the U.K.?

[loretta] and the struggle against reality

Judith: I do feel Reg, that any anti-imperialistic group like ours must reflect such a divergence of interest within its powerbase.

Reg: Agreed. Roger?

Roger: Yes, I think Judith's point of view is very valid, Reg, provided the movement never forgets that it is the unalienable right of every man...

Stan: Or woman.

Roger: ...or woman to rid himself...

Stan: Or herself.

Rogers: ...or herself...

Reg: Agreed.

Roger: Thank you, brother.

Stan: Or sister.

Roger: Or sister...where was I?

Reg: I think you'd finished.

Roger: Oh. Right.

Reg: Further more, it is the birthright of every man...

Stan: Or woman.

Reg: Why don't you shut up about women, Stan? You're putting us off.

Stan: Women have a perfect right to play a part in our movement, Reg.

Roger: Why are you always on about women, Stan?

Stan: I want to be one.

Reg: What?

Stan: I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me Loretta.

Reg: What?

Loretta: It's my right as a man.

Judith: Well, why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?

Loretta: I want to have babies.

Reg: You want to have babies?!

Loretta: It's every man's right to have babies if he wants them.

Reg: But...you can't have babies!

Loretta: Don't you oppress me!

Reg: I'm not oppressing you, Stan. You haven't got a womb. Where's the foetus going to gestate? Are you going to keep it in a box?

Loretta: Sniff.

Judith: Here, I've got an idea. Suppose you agree that he can't actually have babies, not having a womb, which is nobody's fault, not even the Romans', but that he can have the right to have babies.

Roger: Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babies, brother. Sister! Sorry.

Reg: What's the point?

Roger: What?

Reg: What's the point of fighting for his right to have babies, when he can't have babies?

Roger: It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.

Reg: Symbolic of his struggle against reality.

[heterophobia] family pride day in london tomorrow

Via North Northwester:

The Foreign Office is to risk the wrath of homophobic regimes worldwide by encouraging British ambassadors to do more to support gay communities.

Chris Bryant, the new Foreign Office minister, who is gay, has started writing personal letters of congratulations to British diplomats who show public support for gay rights. He is praising them for such support even if it draws anger from national governments or local homophobic groups.

Right. Let's start by listing the heterophobic regimes, those averse to the normal relations between two people, leading to a thing called the family which we once used to value. So, Britain and America are first cabs off the rank.

Let's then find heterofriendly regimes and send letters of congratulations to them for supporting the family unit. Think I'll start today, on FCO letterhead paper.

This ridiculous catchcry 'homophobic', put about by the gay mafia against anyone who opposes them - since when does being opposed to the political swamping of the social agenda by a one issue pressure group constitute homophobia? Live and let live, let the homosexuals do as they wish in private and good luck to them. Just don't block the streets of London and takeover the airwaves and internet please.

I don't want your garbage shoved down my throat.

[memorial] authorities whitewash calls for enquiry

Look at the one in the white cap. Now look to your right from his body and go down to the third railing. Notice anything strange? Did anyone see the vid? Trick question. There was no vid - only the one still.


Fine, have a memorial - a lovely gesture but if the authorities think it whitewashes the calls for an enquiry, then it does the opposite.

For a start, it still doesn't explain the photo above. It still doesn't explain any of the anomalies of Blair's movements or explain why a Brazilian electrician was murdered. It doesn't explain why CCTV suddenly dropped out at the crucial time, why the bombers could not have been where they were supposed to have been at those times, given the state of the trains and buses that day.

At a minimum, there are unanswered questions and they need to be answered for any closure to come to the victims' families. This memorial is sweet and kind and lovely - no arguments - but it doesn't answer any of the lingering questions. Rachel North might be perfectly satisfied but with due respect, many others aren't.

[internet provider] to find one the authorities can't touch

You'd expect it from China or Iran but what happens when it is used on us?

URUMQI, China (AFP) — Chinese authorities have confirmed they cut off Internet access in parts of Xinjiang's capital to prevent the violence from spreading, according to state media. The top Communist Party official in Urumqi, Li Zhi, confirmed reports from web users and human rights groups, saying officials stopped Internet access to reassert control.

"We cut Internet connection in some areas of Urumqi in order to quench the riot quickly and prevent violence from spreading to other places," Li was quoted as saying. He did not say when Internet access would be fully restored, the report said.
Chinese authorities keep a tight rein on the Internet and frequently block access to websites the government finds objectionable for political or moral reasons.

Despite efforts by Chinese officials to cut off the Internet and mobile phones, pictures, videos and updates from Urumqi poured into social-networking and image-sharing websites such as Twitter, YouTube and Flickr.

For those in the know about these things, is it possible to use a provider not in one's own country? For example, my host is in Britain and if Gordo's boys wanted to crack down on people like me 'to prevent unrest', could we use a provider they can't touch?

[green shoots] not likely, chamber of commerce

Bollocks

The British Chamber of Commerce is talking up the economy, no bad thing in principle when the policies in place are correct but the policies in place are far from correct. This is just a beat-up:

"It is absolutely vital that the improvement in business confidence is nurtured," said BCC director general David Frost.

There it is - the reason they're talking this bullsh. We've been committed to unbelievable debt, there is absolutely no sign of new businesses in any numbers or established businesses expanding, the tax codes snuff out economic life and everyone's groaning under the socialist yoke.

That's what's happening in Britain, along with a further contracting economy. Get the socialist yoke off Britain's neck, make the tax code attractive, rein in the council's greed in revenue raising from rents, re-establish the nexus between salaries and the costs of goods and services plus housing and vehicles, cutting out the bankers' credit factor and we might be up and running.

But for the BCC to just talk up the economy for no sound reason is further nurturing the disease. It's irresponsible and disingenuous self-delusion.