Wednesday, April 27, 2005


Traitors! Liars! Ugly People! Just How Far Will These Evil Liberals Go?

Asks Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter, one of America's leading idiots, has once again gone to extraordinary lengths to amuse us (via Balta).

Some people threw pies at her.

So she pressed charges.

OK so far?

But here's where the course of events becomes a mystery, wrapped in an enigma, tucked inside the inside left jacket pocket of a moron. As Ann says, "Democrat prosecutors somehow manage to get the charges dismissed". Murky stuff.

Ann, who is one the nation's foremost tossers, might have learned more about the conspiracy if she had bothered to attend court, or maybe even asked what happens when witnesses (such as herself) don't turn up.

I know it's hard. It's true that Liberals run everything and hate America, and everything you read anywhere is an MSM lie. (Evolution! Huh. Global Warming! See how many liberals there are in all branches of the sciences!) So probably it's best not to fight in their courts, where Liberal judges uphold a cult of death and pies.

Take your guns, head out to the hills, and wait for the call.

Footnote: Ann points out that the pie-throwers 'argued like liberals' (as well as 'throwing like girls' Ouch! That's gotta hurt). This is a particularly severe critique as it comes from one of the century's most meretricious intellects. As she said, "My pretty-girl allies stick out like a sore thumb amongst the corn-fed, no make-up, natural fiber, no-bra needing, sandal-wearing, hirsute, somewhat fragrant hippie-chick pie wagons they call 'women' at the Democratic National Convention."


Update: Ann has responded. Apparently the Liberal conspiracy goes deeper still. Hmm. Hard to predict what will happen next. I'll take a wild stab in the dark.. Maybe it will become apparent that her liberal enemies weren't lying quite so relentlessly as she implies, and she'll let the whole thing drop. Perhaps her instinctive knowledge of the rules of evidence will prove less than watertight. Who knows?

Next Issue: How some Liberals came into the house after Ann went out and switched the iron back on. And made her cheese go mouldy.

Monday, April 25, 2005


This is not a public document

so we won't talk about it.

OH. it seems that the Vatican, in the person of new pope Ratz, conspired to obstruct justice in cases of child sex abuse.

However, this particular piece of evidence was not a public document. So you're not to talk about it. Shut the fuck up, abuse victim.

Does anyone remember Maxine Carr, that dim-witted victim of the machinations of a cold-blooded criminal liar? I vaguely recall she did not get cheered around the world for her actions.

Ask yourself: What would a morally decent person do if they knew what Ratz knew? Set up a secret internal inquiry?

Tuesday, April 19, 2005


"They've Picked the Nazi!"

Cardinal Ratzinger is the new pope.

What a horrible choice. I hope that people leave the Church in droves. Make no mistake, the Catholic Church is now more than ever a far-right political organisation seeking to punch at the weight of a major nation-state on the world stage.

Remember - Ratzinger tried to get Kerry REFUSED COMMUNION and to determine the outcome of the US presidential election. Lest we be in any doubt, here's some wingnut theological analysis clarifying the imperative.

Update: Even Drudge is linking today to the story of Ratz's intervention in the US election.

In his typical impassioned, stylish manner, Sully is emphasing the overall point that Ratz is a political operator. (in various posts).

Monday, April 18, 2005



"We want to kill people", says NRA Spokesman.

Ted Nugent, well-known animal-executioner and world-wide icon for sad sadistic tossers, has spoken about the NRA's aims with unusual frankness at the organisation's annual convention:

"Remember the Alamo! Shoot 'em!" he screamed to applause. "To show you how radical I am, I want carjackers dead. I want rapists dead. I want burglars dead. I want child molesters dead. I want the bad guys dead. No court case. No parole. No early release. I want 'em dead. Get a gun and when they attack you, shoot 'em."

'No court case'. That's what these people really believe. Because sometimes you just know it when people are guilty, like these folks.

And remember, this is 'not an aberration in American race relations'.

It's a pity that 'The Nuge' didn't go into further detail. For example, are we allowed to cut their fingers off before we shoot them?


Ah, here we go


Otto Beat


I Saw This And Had To Have It

After about an hour of gamely attempting to post some diverting Tory posters, I've given up. Fucking Blogger. Even their problem page is down, owing to a problem they say. Go to this poster generator and make your own.

Otto Beat

Thursday, April 14, 2005


Men versus Old Boys

Mike Hussey is busy compiling a mountain of runs for Durham against Leicestershire. The first ton of the season has become the first double and, at the time of writing, he's still going.

Once again, the County season begins with tradition: the dominance of Australian overseas players more predictable than the rain.

Something else is worth noting: the Leicestershire opening attack. Phil 'Daffy' DeFreitas and Ottis Gibson played their last international matches 8 years ago and have a combined age of 75 (39 + 36). Elsewhere, Martin Bicknell is starting his 20th season for Surrey.

Hussey can't get near the Aussie squad, yet, alongside some other Aussies, he's one of the best bats on the English county circuit.

Here are the nation's best honing their skills against him. All slightly embarrassing don't you think?

Wednesday, April 13, 2005


Kill 'em All

Wisconsin votes to legalise cat-hunting

Legalise? They should make it mandatory. Obviously, I like those cute house cats (ie, individuals). However, I also like songbirds (in the sense of species). And at the moment, the fight's just not fair. If a pride of lions killed too many antelope, then their cubs wouldn't have enough to eat.

It is impossible for a domestic cat to eat 'too many' birds. They can keep killing until they're all gone, as happened in New Zealand where a single domestic cat killed an entire species of birds on an outlying island (the Stephens Island Wren).

Cats also kill other stuff. It is not proper or natural for a house cat to kill wild animals, although it has been scientifically proven that it is impossible to demonstrate this to a cat owner.

Apologies to Mr. Burroughs.

Monday, April 11, 2005


What the hell is Scientology anyway?

Mind Hack's description of his visit to one of their offices explains a lot. As creepy as any thriller.

Also see the comments section for a fascinating account of the Scientology franchise process: That's how those poky little office addresses come about (like in Birmingham near the back entrance to New Street).



Let's be absolutely clear about the views of the Pope and the Catholic Church: gay men and all women cannot be allowed to serve mass, because they are inferior to heterosexual men. But people who are recognised by all as having arranged a criminal paedophile conspiracy can and do. Today. And to ensure we understand, Cardinal Law has been asked to do this at one of the Church's most important churches, the St. Mary Major Basilica in Rome.

Friday, April 08, 2005


Last thoughts on the Pope

I guess you've been bombarded for days just like me. Exactly how many people did the BBC send over to Rome? (Radio4 and Radio5 reported live simultaneously). And how many times did they use this outside broadcast to report on feelings - the feeling of the crowd 'right now', the feelings they'd had, and feelings that were yet to be?

Ah well.

Too fucking many is all I can tell you.

So I cracked. And thought about the Pope. Andrew Sullivan expressed some of my thoughts, and I wrote to thank him. Here's what I wrote:

"Andrew -

Thanks for being the only person I've seen to tell the most vital truth about the Pope (in this post).

The Catholic Church operated as an international paedophile conspiracy under his management & with his acquiescence. I particularly admire the forthright way you compare this reality with the Catholic Church's demands of others, such as gay people.

It is well known that he Catholic Church moved priests around to avoid controversy rather than taking the only non-criminal, morally decent course of action; ie, telling the police & families everything they knew about every incident.

However, these events are often referred to as though they are part of history. They are not. The well-known case of Father Ayers, sent to Samoa by Catholic Church, who KNEW what he'd done to kids, but DIDN'T THINK IT SHOULD BOTHER TELLING THE SAMOANS, was in the 1990s.

This is only one lacuna in the horrid avalanche of fawning. People who are being told how he loved people and freedom should be reminded that, if they have ever used contraception so as to enjoy sex without conception or with reduced risk of disease, the Pope was against them. That he adjudged that a pre-teen child who'd been raped by her father had to carry the child. That he lied outright for years about whether condoms can prevent AIDS. (Why?).

Those who are told to be pleased or excited that the next pope might be a black man should be reminded that the next pope will not be gay man, or a woman.

Those who are told that the pope believed in Freedom because he opposed Communism should perhaps be instructed to read up on the history of southern Europe in the 20th Century, where blood-drenched fascists held power till the 1970s with the claim that they were fighting communism; and that the same thing happened in South America, where the 'fight against communism' was fought by state-sponsored sadism, mass murder, & rape by cattle-prods & dogs. To 'fight communism' is not to 'fight for Freedom'. You have to actually believe in Freedom for that.

However, I think you let yourself down a bit by linking enthusiastically to the Derbyshire piece in National Review. As well as there being an element of racism in his portrayal of African Christianity, he kicks off with the terrible old church lie that Hitler was an atheist & a believer in Darwinian evolution and that this was somehow important in his world-view. This has been fully refuted. (Here's Michael Wong). Hitler was a creationist, a theist, and a Christian. Yes, he opposed the Church in Rome (despite the pact they signed together), but only because it was not German and so offended his nationalism. Yes, he had a crack-pot version of 'evolution', but, as it happened, it was not Darwinian evolution.

But anyway - thanks for lots of good reading over the years and I'm glad you appear not to have followed up on your plan to retire from the web.

- ape"

Thursday, April 07, 2005



Serious & Disorganised Climbdown on mega-blasphemy law

The Serious and Organised Crime bill has passed the Lords without the Religious Hatred provisions.

Well done to everyone who opposed it. Let's hope it doesn't come back.

Wednesday, April 06, 2005


Ever-expanding Nazis set to burst, Scientists warn

News today of the latest arrest of John Tyndall and Nick Griffin has inspired me to check up on the progress of the two organisations Tyndall founded (which have long since split), the National Front and the British National Party.

Fans of low-IQ neo-nazis will be pleased to hear that both organisations are the UK's 'fastest growing political party':

The National Front (see first line on their Google link)

The British National Party (see first line on their website).

If my memory serves me, both have been growing fast for some considerable time. Rather like the Church of Scientology, which has been the world's fastest growing religion for about 40 years. (Yeah right. You can hardly move for Operating Thetans locked in mortal combat with Xenu on my street).

The National Front and the BNP are no longer associated with each other. Many of us find it difficult to grasp all of the subtle variations amongst the massed legions of the far right. The NF's FAQ section rescues us from our ignorance. Including this tricky distinction:

A. No. While there are certain similarities there are many substantial differences. Most importantly the NF is a British political movement. "

It is often reported that the BNP (not the NF, those slow-readers describe themselves as a 'party of racial nationalism') has 'changed its image' and ceased to be a racist party. For example, here:

"His party (the BNP) has tried to moderate its policies and rhetoric in an effort to shake off its racist image and become more electable."

In 2001, BBC's 'Panorama' carried out a hidden camera sting to disprove this. However, it was hardly needed. I took a quick glance at their website's policy statements back then. They were overtly racist. Nothing's changed. Here's the official statement from the site, written by the BNP's dim-witted & prolix Uberfuhrer, Nick Griffin. Sample quotes:

"..while the BNP is not racist, it must not become multi-racist either. Our fundamental determination to secure a future for white children is restated, and an area of uncertainty is addressed and a position which is both principled and politically realistic is firmly established. We don’t hate anyone, especially the mixed race children who are the most tragic victims of enforced multi-racism, but that does not mean that we accept miscegenation as moral or normal."

Erm.. no. That is racist.

Note to BNP's image consultants: People who are 'not racist' do not have a policy on 'miscegenation'. They're not either for it or against it. They are unlikely to even use the word. They probably don't know what it means. OK?

Monday, April 04, 2005


A Lot Fucked Up, A Lot Still To Fuck Up

Okay, nothing remotely topical or satirical to see here, just harsh words for Blogger. It is bollocks, and I say that advisedly. Just glance down and check out that full stop at the start of the previous post. Rogue pixels? Separatist punctuation? No, just a full stop that the ape was compelled to type because Blogger sometimes simply doesn't understand carriage return at the start of a post. And why am I referring to myself in the third person? Well, I'm not, as should be obvious enough, except that, after several months, I have finally accepted that Blogger just will not grant me my Damascene moment and allow for a separate identity. I could go on, but I shan't.

So, whaddya reckon? Decision time is upon us. Will all our hard work be to naught if we abandon Blogger now and shack up with someone else? Or will the promise of change give birth to new hopes for British blogging? The question is put to tomorrow, when the ape gets back to work (and I leave it for a long time).

PS - I tried to post this yesterday, but Blogger wouldn't let me. I don't know why.

Otto It's The Beat--Be-AT

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?