From The Vaults Of Stupidity

Call me ignorant, but I thought avoiding danger was a basic human instinct. If you see old footage of the Oklahoma City bombing - as shot from a nearby park - you see people running away when the blast happens.

This IS an instinct. Watch animals. Something happens they are unsure of. They will pause, look and assess the situation, and more often than not, run away.

Which is exactly what the people did in the bombing.

Watch footage of the buildings collapsing in the 9-11 attack, and you see civilians running away. Avoiding the danger.

Now watch footage from the Middle East, and particularly, Palestine. Civilians roam the streets where guns are being shot and bombs are going off. What are they? Mental?

On some footage I saw the other day, they were mingling in the street - children too. There was a blast of some kind. They all ducked then immediately stood back up, raised their arms in the air and cheered.

What kind of idiocy is that?

And then, if one of them gets killed, they blame Israel for targeting them.

Hey dork-heads, it's really easy to not get killed. Don't go where the shooting is taking place. Then you will live. Just F.Y.I. guys.

Oh. And parents. Keep your young'ns inside away from the flying bullets. They won't get hit then. Just more F.Y.I.

Of course, the leftist elite media never reports the Palestinian stupidity. They just report that Israel killed a Palestinian civilian. Trying to elicit some kind of sympathy for their cause, I guess.

Quick question: Why does Israel have to give up land so the Palestinians can have their own state, while Jordan with its huge population of Palestinians doesn't? How come the Palestinian's in Jordan aren't hassling the King of Jordan to cede land over to them?

Just more hypocrisy from the region.

Boy Undergoes Multiple Plastic Surgeries After Savage Dog Attack

Okay. So this young kid is playing in the front yard and the next door neighbor's dog jumps its fence and proceeds to attack him. I know what that is like because I was attacked by our new neighbor's German Shepard after it jumped a six foot high wooden fence.

What happened after the dog attacked me was, the neighbor contacted the police and asked them to take the dog away. They took it with the intention of retraining it as a police dog. However, no-one could get near it - even to feed it - and they literally had to shoot the dog.

The thing about the recent dog attack is that several days before, that same dog had also jumped the fence and attacked a little girl!

The second attack should NEVER have happened. After the first attack the dog's owners should have gotten rid of the dog. That's what a responsible dog owner would do. But no. They kept it. And a few days later it attacked another child. Only after that second attack did the local council take the dog away. The dog's owner didn't say "come and get it" the council acted on their authority and took it.

Sue. That's the word that springs to my mind. Sue the bastard for negligence, emotional trauma, all hospital bills and whatever else can be thought of.

Also, that neighbor had better leave the area. How can he ever walk down the street again having been irresponsible enough to keep a dog which was a proven child attacker, and which had already demonstrated it could jump the fence and attack outside of the property? He cannot have any "friendly" neighbors in that street.

All Washed Out And Nowhere To Go

There is a trend which does not yet appear to be abating. If anything, it seems to be getting worse. Although there are signs on the horizon the trend will be changing soon. Mayhaps it is a case of getting worse before getting better.

The trend in question is what I call "The Washed Out Look." It's where women straighten their hair, make it blondish, get a tan of some kind (real, tanning studio, chemical) and use light brownish colored makeup. Effectively removing all color from their face and looking as if they are washed out. (This trend has run rampant in England. Look at the English Sky News presenters for good examples.)

Light brownish eye-shadow, pale lipstick, no blush, no eyeliner, slight tanned face, blondish dead straight hair = washed out.

I know the trend is sheeple-based. Because anyone who can think knows that the washed out look is NOT a good look. And coupled with hipsters and a short top which highlights any pot belly, is most unattractive.

And that could be why the fashion world is encouraging this look. It is quite overrun by socialist types and femi-nazis. And they are against any form of beauty, it would seem. So what better way to implement their equal non-gender desires, than to get silly women to wear the most unattractive thing possible, which neutralizes the natural curves a woman has, and to also have them wear makeup which makes them look UNappealing.

The hope on the horizon lays with the relatively few girls who have come to their senses and know that lips with color, a bit of eye-shadow (even eye-shadow that matches the color of the blouse) and some blush, can make them look better and is better suited to attracting the opposite sex.

Now all we need is for this silly boy-haircut and dead-looking straight hair trend to go the way of the DoDo. Then we can get back to normal. Where girls look like girls.

Bastards

That's what convicted pedophile William Brown (52), a former Australian diplomat, yelled at the gallery and judges when he was sentenced to 13 years in jail for molesting two boys.

I say, "13 years is too short" and "what on earth gives him the right to call anyone a bastard!?"

This thing (you can't call pedophiles human) molested two boys. He has messed them up for the rest of their lives. And they will have to live with the despicable things he did to them. They won't get any parole from their sentence. And yet Brown thinks those who convicted him are bastards.

But not only that, he doesn't think he did anything wrong. He denies he molested them - but - admits having sex with them. As if a young boy of ten is mature enough to consent to having a fully grown man do XXXX to him.

What makes me extra mad is, the Australian Federal Police had their eye on him for years. And the first accusations of him molesting children came nearly 20 years ago! But they didn't have enough evidence to convict him back then.

Well, now they got the sick-fuck. Good riddance. And what's more, since his conviction, he has hung himself in his jail cell. If you ask me, he got off easy. His sentence had ended. The same cannot be said of those he brutalized.

Good For Nothing &#$%@

Dear oh dear. Here we go. Terrorists murdering innocent U.S. civilians and trying to justify it by claiming it is in response to the treatment of the Iraqi enemy combatants.

I don't see how badly treating someone who had been trying to kill you, can be equal to chopping the head off of an innocent citizen of the same country of those doing the mistreating. But then again, I am not a terrorist and I don't have a goal.

What goal could they have? It's the Israel/Palestine tit-for-tat thing. And ultimately, what they want is for such an outrage that wanton slaughter takes place in revenge - because that is what they try to do.

They think, if I kill one of yours and claim it as a tit-for-tat thing, hopefully it will drive you so mad you will come in with all barrels blasting. This will kill many innocents. Enrage all our Arab and Muslim brothers. And a full-scale all out war will ensue.

They may claim it is for something done to one of theirs. But that just goes to show they cannot be pleased. Because it is always for something.

Get out of Saudi Arabia - the most holy Arab/Muslim grounds - or we blow you up. Get out of Iraq or we blow you up. You mistreated someone so we chop off your head. How dare you say something bad about someone who is telling all Muslims to kill you - we now have to blow you up.

Obviously there is no common sense in their argument. Which leaves only what they truly want... all out war in a full-on scale.

If you believe in Nostradamus, you will know he talks about a Third World War and that it will basically be between Islam and the West. Is that what we have now? Is there a war going on between Islam and the rest of the world? With that war sometimes taking on physical fighting in a-typical war fashion (guns, bombs, etc.), and sometimes more subtle as Islam spreads throughout the world of its own accord as people become disenfranchised with the Christian churches and their heads.

For instance, there are already some documented locations within Western Democracies where Islamic "Sharia Law" can be implemented instead of the laws of that country. If that is not a slow infiltration of turning a country into one governed by Islamic laws then I don't know what is. It always happens in little steps. First it is Sharia for certain things, until it is Islam law for everything under the guise of religious freedom.

Perhaps the unfortunate thing about this is, it isn't really about Islam verses the rest of us. It is really about those at the head of Islam in certain locations in which Islam is governed strictly, wanting more power. And using the religion as a tool to gain that increased power.

The distinction needs to be made and understood, lest we lump all people of a certain religion together.

The Saudi Wahabis are ultimately behind the whole rotten lot. Their brand of Islam is a repressive brand. Transgression being dealt with harshly - such as the beheadings of criminals every Friday night after Friday evening prayers at the local main Mosque.

The beheading of an American civilian is an indication it was a Saudi terrorist group who carried out the deed. Because beheadings are Saudi Wahabi standard operating procedures.

Just as there are different brands of Christianity - Catholic, Protestant, Anglican, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, and so on - there are different brands of Islam. Like Christianity, not all brands of Islam are the same.

You have the scumbag Wahabi brand of Saudi Arabia. The Shia brand of Iran and the Ayatollahs. With a religious hierarchy much like a Christian church - priests, archbishops, cardinals, etc. And then there is the free-ranging Sunni brand without any religious head.

Of the three, Wahabi Islam is the worst. Even having religious policemen who walk around making sure there is no transgression going on. Make sure your shapeless black tent isn't an inch to short showing a tiny bit of ankle, or having too short sleeves showing too much arm. Hitting transgressors with canes. Others who physically remove (cut out) or cover over with black ink pens, anything of objection within imported print media and other material - such as coloring in the skin of a scantily clad girl on a CD cover. Outlawing toys such as Barbie because it will corrupt young girls.

The Wahabis are the enemy, not Islam as a whole. We need to grasp this important definition. And further understand it is the leaders of Wahabi Islam who we need to remove, and who we need to stop funding.

We can stop the funding by not buying any more oil from Saudi Arabia - it's the oil money which has allowed their brand of Islam to be spread to places such as Afghanistan. We can stop buying their oil by finding our own. And that should be much easier seeing as oil is not a fossil fuel but occurs naturally - as outlined in a previous entry which can be read here.

Without the millions of dollars from oil, the Wahabis will have a tougher time foisting their brand if Islam onto other people.

So why should they be interesting in causing trouble in Iraq?

Because a free Iraq - and remember, Iraq is basically between Ayatollah controlled Iran and Wahabi controlled Saudi Arabia - could cause the people of Saudi Arabia to also want electoral freedom and the right to choose their leaders. And as politics goes, people vote for those who will give them what they want. And they will thus vote for someone who will remove the eons of repressive control.

The incumbent powers that be don't want to give up what they have and will fight to keep it. Hence, Saudi Arabia has a vested interest in stopping Iraq from becoming a democratic country.

The war on terror is really a war on the leaders of Wahabi Islam.

Addendum: I've just learnt a few more disturbing details of the beheading. Namely, it was done with a long knife. After the terrorists read some stuff out they push him forward, grabbed his head and held it back and started to hack through his neck while yelling "Alah is Great". He began screaming and fighting. It took three goes with the knife to silence him. Then two more goes to completely sever his head.

Apart from the obvious sickeningness of it all, I hope it will urge any other people who are being taken to fight their ass off to prevent the kidnapping. I hope lessons will be learnt like those of 9/11 - don't go quietly. Their end goal has changed from one of ransom to one of killing. And just like passengers have taken down suspect people on flights since 9/11, I hope others in the midst of being kidnapped will fight with all their might. Fight as if their life depended on it, because their life will depend on it. And I hope they will all begin to carry weapons on their person. And to use those weapons.

Whoopie Bloody Do

I'm fed up. Fed up with the rigmarole made over this girl from Tasmania who is going to be marrying the crown-prince of Denmark.

Of all the things going on in the world, our illustrious elite media has decided to feed us this drivel. Who she is, who her family is, how she beat her husband in a yacht race, ad nauseum. On the news. On the current affairs shows. On the news updates.

She's like Chicken Man... she's everywhere she's everywhere.

So she won the husband lottery. Why do I need to know? How will it effect my life or the life of anyone other than her family? So what if her husband will become king of Denmark one day. So what if she will be the incubator for an heir and a spare so the family can keep their precious Royal line as the ruling royals.

As I said of NASA... what have they done for me lately? What have the Denmark royals done for me - ever?

I don't understand the big deal. A man. A woman. They are getting married. Happens everyday all over the world. The only exception is that this man and woman won't ever have to lift a finger to do anything, they will sponge of the government for the rest of their days. Just like any "dole bludger." The only difference being, they won't have to put in regular "I've been looking for work" forms to get their sit-down money.

Oh sure. They'll have to go to some ribbon cutting events and that. But that doesn't really justify a life of Riley at the expense of the Denmark citizens.

By what right are these people "royal"?

A few hundred years ago some warlord conquered Saudi Arabia. Now his line are the Saudi "royal" family.

Is that how it was with the Denmark Royals? Are they conquerors from way back when before time began, who up and called themselves "Royals"? How does one become a royal? Who was the first Denmark Royal and by what right are they royal?

It seems to me that Royals are little more than human ornaments. Being human, like the rest of us, they don't deserve any better treatment than any other person. Even less so considering they are not value-adders to society. As ornaments, they are useless. And are, in fact, a drain on the system.

Like the dinosaur, the Royals have had their day. It's time to put these useless ornaments in the closet and redirect the funds they leech out of the system, to more important use.

Of course, my wife disagrees with me and is totally enchanted by the whole thing - the hopeless romantic that she is.

How To Deal With Telemarketers

Sales calls. I get loads of them. Because I am an entrepreneur with several businesses. Usually it's a call trying to sell me a phone service or a vacation or advertising.

Lately, I've been getting calls asking me to take part in a short survey of some kind. And these calls are coming from India. I can hear the Indian accent in the caller's voice. Plus, there is the give away sign of time delay which anyone who makes international phone calls knows about.

I've recently implemented an anti-telemarketer technique because of these Indian callers. You see, they just won't shut up. They just keep reading from their script regardless of what you say. So here is how I now deal with ALL telemarketers...

I say, "Would you hang on just a sec", gently put the phone down and go about my business. Half a minute later I quietly pick the phone up and the telemarketer is gone.

In the case of the Indian's asking me to do a survey I say, "Sure, just hang on a sec" and put the phone down.

I've even put the phone down and started typing on the keyboard - which I'm sure they heard. But in telemarketing time is money, and they don't want to waste time waiting for me.

I believe my number is also now added to some kind of list of people not to call. Because since putting this technique into action, the number of telemarketing calls has declined drastically.

Oils Ain't Oils

When I was at school I was taught that oil comes from vast areas of rainforest that somehow got covered over with a bunch of dirt, and over time the forests kind of fermented and became oil.

And coal was formed when other forests were likewise covered over with dirt. BUT this time there was some heat and pressure and it made all the wood and stuff become coal rock.

I always had a problem with those concepts. I couldn't understand how trees and other vegetation could turn into oil as claimed. Specially, when considering there are vast oil fields. These tree forests had to be thick. Real thick. So thick and lush there wouldn't have been any room for light to penetrate anything - which would make them not so thick and lush after all.

It just didn't add up to me. Rotting trees becoming oil. Dead trees under pressure becoming coal rock.

And my puzzlement was added to when I was given a bottle of oil as it comes right up out of the ground. My uncle was high up in the oil rigs business and one thing led to another and I got a bottle of unrefined unprocessed oil (sauce bottle size) direct as it came up at 90 degrees Celsius.

The odd thing about that oil was that it got lumpy. It didn't stay a liquid. It solidified. Hardened. I never understood why. But thought it was odd.

Recently, I've discovered a theory which satisfies my doubts and makes more sense than "trees rotted and become oil". The theory basically puts forth the idea that oil did not become made when trees got covered over with dirt BUT it already existed! Just like other things on this planet seem to already exist. AND, that the oil wells are constantly being refilled from deeper within the Earth.

To help prove his point, the scientist who has put forth this theory has drilled into granite and found oil! There were never any trees growing under granite rocks, so the oil must have been there first.

He also analyzed the organisms found within the oil. And found them to vary depending upon how deep they extracted the oil - and thus how hot the oil was. He found organisms living in the appropriate heat bands within the oil.

He further puts forth that coal is basically solidified oil. And this makes sense to me as the oil I had solidified over time right in the bottle.

Running oil is basically the same color as coal. Both burn. It makes sense that oil cooled down and solidified into coal over time. (And scientists already know that oil solidifies.)

And to add extra credence to the concept, no-one can show any evidence of transition. Which is to say, no-one can point to a find where trees are not yet coal, or not yet oil as the old theory claims. Surely, if rotting trees became oil someone would have found a transition field. But no. They either find oil or no oil. They never find "nearly oil" or "nearly coal".

Other evidence to support his concept is the recent announcement of the Saudi oil fields having more oil than first thought. Their estimate has been upgraded from something like 260 billion barrels to 1.26 trillion barrels!!!

Also, the oil dudes in Iraq have expressed how they need to let some of the oil fields "rest" before taking them back up to capacity. Surely "resting" an oil field lets it refill, does it not.

Also, that helium gas is found in oils fields. Animals and plants do not store helium gas within the cells. So thus cannot release said gas as decomposing fermentation takes place. And as helium is an element, it is not as if the plant turns into helium. Thus, helium must come from elsewhere. Why not pushed out of the porous rock as the oil travels through? Makes sense.

What does all this mean?

It means we ain't likely going to run out of oil for a long long time, if ever. With the current oil wells being bigger than previously thought, the tired ones refilling and new finds taking place in locations where conventional theory suggests there shouldn't be any oil, we should be quite all right to drive around in our gas-burning SUVs. Add to this the increased efficiency of modern cars. And it could take many hundreds of years to even dent our oil, if at all.

To read more of this rather interesting theory which makes complete sense, go here.

Pierce This

Maybe I'm getting old or something. I just do not understand the fascination with getting a hole put through the skin in your face and then a piece of metal inserted through that hole. Same applies for getting a hole put through your tongue and then a piece of metal inserted through that hole.

With tongue piercing, I don't understand it doubly because once done the person can't talk properly. With a block of metal through the tongue I can understand why they can't talk. But I can't understand the desire to do it.

Those who get a hole put under their bottom lip, now have a drain hole in their mouth. Never again can they hold liquid without it dribbling out the hole. Never again can they puff their cheeks up. They have to keep the chunk of metal inserted least they dribble. What posses a person to do that?

Through the nose. Surely it must feel like a booger there all the time. And if it doesn't, it interferes with airflow. And that can't be a good thing.

Through the eyebrow. Great, get a bunch done, put rings through the holes and you've got somewhere to hang a very small curtain rod. But why do it? Any of it?

It's non-conforming personal expression?

Can't really be that because they are all doing it. If they are all doing it, they are thus conforming. Unless, it's conforming with each other and non-conforming when compared to the people they are trying hard to show their non-conforming to. But then my head spins trying to figure that one out.

I wonder what these "hole in the face with a piece of metal in it" people are going to be doing when they are sixty and seventy? HA... they'll be putting the chunks of metal in a glass jar next to the bed along with their dentures.

How does one mentally go about getting holed? Do they wake up one morning and think, "I'm going to get a big bloody hole put in my face today, and then have a bit of metal inserted through the hole. Yeah." Is that what goes through their mind?

I just don't get it. And I guess I'll just never understand the draw and attraction of getting a hole put in your face.