oh george what have you said? really what have you said?
my dad, whose elder brother was called george, passed on very few life lessons to me. the one that stuck with me the most was one that happened as we were walking down towards the green gates of the racecourse estate. i think he had decided it was time to give me that speech about the birds and the bees. i am pretty sure most parents dread that moment when they have to give 'the talk'.
(as a digression i had my own experience of the fear of having to give 'the talk' back when i was a quasi step dad. i was bathing the boy, or more accurately i was preventing him from overfilling the bath and flooding the flat.
the boy: where do babies come from?
me: (gulp) well you know that me and your mummy are built differently. that me and you have a penis your mum has a vagina. (i am pretty sure that here i was beginning to grasp at the words to describe what happens next). well sometimes when a man (me) loves a woman (mummy) then the man stick his pen....
the boy: why does the water spiral down the plug hole?
attention deficit saves the day. to be honest i wasn't much better at explaining the water going down the plug hole either).
anyway back to the main event.
my dad was trying to kill two birds with the one stone: the talk and to ascertain if i had already been dipping my wick and if not well he had a plan.
part of the conversation involved him telling me that for my 16th birthday he knew a very nice and very experienced lady of the night who would show me a trick or nine. considering that most of the parental presents i got were socks and sensible pants this sounded like a winner to me.
he never really gave me 'the talk' what he did tell me was that he loved my mum and that she was as beautiful to him now as she was way back when, which even now as a jaded and cynical bloke i think of as being as good a definition of love as you are likely to get. he followed this up with the sage advice that when i was dating, courting or playing the field the important thing i had to remember was 'no really meant no'. if they say no, accept it, walk them home and wish them good night. when you get home have a handy shandy 'because, son, that is what your right hand is for/'
not quite what they would have told me if there had been sex education in school - but all in all words to live by, and i have. i may be crestfallen when a lady tells me 'no' (well normally it is 'are you out of your mind: never'), i may want to burst out in tears at the hurt and the rejection - but i am always secure in the knowledge that later i can have a wank.
allegedly julian assange doesn't have my self control.
to be honest i haven't really been following the whole wikileaks saga, and what little i have paid attention to has me thinking that this is less about truth and transparency and more about julian assange's love of publicity.
though i could be very wrong.
gorgeous george galloway, the respect mp, thinks that the charges are trumped up and it is all a reat big conspiracy to shut julian assange and wikileaks up. if you don't agree with him them you are just a supporter of the imperial powers and all they stand for.
got it.
simple.
george, julian and wikileaks on the side of the truth angels. they are the light to guide us from the gloom of lies.
usa, gb, william hague and anyone who dares to disagree with 3g and mr. assange (or believe he has a case to answer) are enemies of the light, they are the foul purveyors of lies and deceit, they are champions of the imperial colonialists who want to take truth cage it up send it to the bottom of the see where it will never be seen again - failing that truth will only be available as a weekly programme on bbc4.
listen i like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next man. i am a fan of david icke and make no bones about it. yet there is always a moment when a rant about how 'people are sheep (sheeple as they like to say) and the *ahem* wool is being pulled over out eyes and that they know the truth' when they suddenly demonstrate that they are so off the beaten track that perhaps most of what they have had to say isn't worth listening to.
gorgeous george was defending julian assange in one of his weekly internet broadcasts - sat behind a desk with a big arse microphone he looked like a cross between the king's speech and a racing commentator. some may have said that the moment came even before he started his defence of mr. assange when mr.. galloway berated anyone for thinking that he was an oratorical bully. how could he be such? it was not his fault that some people weren't as clever as he and so couldn't fully appreciate how right mr. galloway was. no it was then.
the bulk of what mr. galloway had to say was a spirited defence of what mr. assange and wikileaks had done and that because of their work they had become a clear and present danger to the powers that be: the usa and by dint of association great britain. this was why willaim hague was dancing to the tune of the american's.
mr. galloway is a skillful orator aided by a rich voice, an impressive vocabulary, passion and righteousness. it all combines to make a powerful package.
and if he had stopped in just the right place - if he had the conversation i had with my dad - perhaps we would be extolling him for once again speaking out against oppression and the potential crushing of the freedom of speech.
but he didn't stop.
nope george galloway ploughed right on, he even admitted that it would be controversial - i guess he didn't realise just how controversial it was. if only he had spoken to ken clarke.
in essence what george galloway wanted to say was the charges against mr. assange have been trumped up and have little basis in fact. if that was all he said he would have been on a winner.
but he didn't stop.
nope he carried on and pretty much said that these women were not raped by mr. assagne as they claimed to be. he continued that to call the (non-consensual, according to the victims) rape was to banish all meaning to the term.
in fact mr. assange may have base morals, he may be a cad, bounder and a rat, but all he is guilty of is poor sexual etiquette.
unsurprisingly this hasn't gone down well in some circles.
no need to worry mr. galloway knows that his critics are just pawns of the liberal elite. this is all about wikileaks morons. all about shutting wikileaks down.
while he might have been right his own outburst has now moved the story away from wikileaks and it has now become a bit about george galloway and it has become about rape. wikileaks almost fading into the background.
probably not been as helpful as mr. galloway hoped and expected it to be.
assuming that the conspiracy theories are right and the ultimate aim is to drop julian assange into a deep dark cell in the middle of the usa with no one ever being able to talk to him again that is an action that will not sit well with most of the usa's allies and will give them all cause to rethink their relationships with the usa (oh don't be so naive; i can hear mr. galloway saying).
yet as galloway has said this is about wikileaks. so is wikileaks julian assange and without him it just crumbles? doesn't that just make him the progressives version of rupert murdoch, and giving him too much power as to what to release and what not to release?
if wikileaks is more than julian assange then it won't matter if the american law enforcement agencies get their wicked way with him because wikileaks will go on and will go from strength to strength beccause more and more people will support it because of the martyrdom of julian assange.
or it may be as prosaic as julian assange needs to face the accusations and clear his name and then get on with his work at wikileaks and perhaps now he will keep away from the spotlight and let the truth find its own level.
no matter what the language is no means no.
it seems there are still a fair few men who have yet to realise this.
my dad, whose elder brother was called george, passed on very few life lessons to me. the one that stuck with me the most was one that happened as we were walking down towards the green gates of the racecourse estate. i think he had decided it was time to give me that speech about the birds and the bees. i am pretty sure most parents dread that moment when they have to give 'the talk'.
(as a digression i had my own experience of the fear of having to give 'the talk' back when i was a quasi step dad. i was bathing the boy, or more accurately i was preventing him from overfilling the bath and flooding the flat.
the boy: where do babies come from?
me: (gulp) well you know that me and your mummy are built differently. that me and you have a penis your mum has a vagina. (i am pretty sure that here i was beginning to grasp at the words to describe what happens next). well sometimes when a man (me) loves a woman (mummy) then the man stick his pen....
the boy: why does the water spiral down the plug hole?
attention deficit saves the day. to be honest i wasn't much better at explaining the water going down the plug hole either).
anyway back to the main event.
my dad was trying to kill two birds with the one stone: the talk and to ascertain if i had already been dipping my wick and if not well he had a plan.
part of the conversation involved him telling me that for my 16th birthday he knew a very nice and very experienced lady of the night who would show me a trick or nine. considering that most of the parental presents i got were socks and sensible pants this sounded like a winner to me.
he never really gave me 'the talk' what he did tell me was that he loved my mum and that she was as beautiful to him now as she was way back when, which even now as a jaded and cynical bloke i think of as being as good a definition of love as you are likely to get. he followed this up with the sage advice that when i was dating, courting or playing the field the important thing i had to remember was 'no really meant no'. if they say no, accept it, walk them home and wish them good night. when you get home have a handy shandy 'because, son, that is what your right hand is for/'
not quite what they would have told me if there had been sex education in school - but all in all words to live by, and i have. i may be crestfallen when a lady tells me 'no' (well normally it is 'are you out of your mind: never'), i may want to burst out in tears at the hurt and the rejection - but i am always secure in the knowledge that later i can have a wank.
allegedly julian assange doesn't have my self control.
to be honest i haven't really been following the whole wikileaks saga, and what little i have paid attention to has me thinking that this is less about truth and transparency and more about julian assange's love of publicity.
though i could be very wrong.
gorgeous george galloway, the respect mp, thinks that the charges are trumped up and it is all a reat big conspiracy to shut julian assange and wikileaks up. if you don't agree with him them you are just a supporter of the imperial powers and all they stand for.
got it.
simple.
george, julian and wikileaks on the side of the truth angels. they are the light to guide us from the gloom of lies.
usa, gb, william hague and anyone who dares to disagree with 3g and mr. assange (or believe he has a case to answer) are enemies of the light, they are the foul purveyors of lies and deceit, they are champions of the imperial colonialists who want to take truth cage it up send it to the bottom of the see where it will never be seen again - failing that truth will only be available as a weekly programme on bbc4.
listen i like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next man. i am a fan of david icke and make no bones about it. yet there is always a moment when a rant about how 'people are sheep (sheeple as they like to say) and the *ahem* wool is being pulled over out eyes and that they know the truth' when they suddenly demonstrate that they are so off the beaten track that perhaps most of what they have had to say isn't worth listening to.
gorgeous george was defending julian assange in one of his weekly internet broadcasts - sat behind a desk with a big arse microphone he looked like a cross between the king's speech and a racing commentator. some may have said that the moment came even before he started his defence of mr. assange when mr.. galloway berated anyone for thinking that he was an oratorical bully. how could he be such? it was not his fault that some people weren't as clever as he and so couldn't fully appreciate how right mr. galloway was. no it was then.
the bulk of what mr. galloway had to say was a spirited defence of what mr. assange and wikileaks had done and that because of their work they had become a clear and present danger to the powers that be: the usa and by dint of association great britain. this was why willaim hague was dancing to the tune of the american's.
mr. galloway is a skillful orator aided by a rich voice, an impressive vocabulary, passion and righteousness. it all combines to make a powerful package.
and if he had stopped in just the right place - if he had the conversation i had with my dad - perhaps we would be extolling him for once again speaking out against oppression and the potential crushing of the freedom of speech.
but he didn't stop.
nope george galloway ploughed right on, he even admitted that it would be controversial - i guess he didn't realise just how controversial it was. if only he had spoken to ken clarke.
in essence what george galloway wanted to say was the charges against mr. assange have been trumped up and have little basis in fact. if that was all he said he would have been on a winner.
but he didn't stop.
nope he carried on and pretty much said that these women were not raped by mr. assagne as they claimed to be. he continued that to call the (non-consensual, according to the victims) rape was to banish all meaning to the term.
in fact mr. assange may have base morals, he may be a cad, bounder and a rat, but all he is guilty of is poor sexual etiquette.
unsurprisingly this hasn't gone down well in some circles.
no need to worry mr. galloway knows that his critics are just pawns of the liberal elite. this is all about wikileaks morons. all about shutting wikileaks down.
while he might have been right his own outburst has now moved the story away from wikileaks and it has now become a bit about george galloway and it has become about rape. wikileaks almost fading into the background.
probably not been as helpful as mr. galloway hoped and expected it to be.
assuming that the conspiracy theories are right and the ultimate aim is to drop julian assange into a deep dark cell in the middle of the usa with no one ever being able to talk to him again that is an action that will not sit well with most of the usa's allies and will give them all cause to rethink their relationships with the usa (oh don't be so naive; i can hear mr. galloway saying).
yet as galloway has said this is about wikileaks. so is wikileaks julian assange and without him it just crumbles? doesn't that just make him the progressives version of rupert murdoch, and giving him too much power as to what to release and what not to release?
if wikileaks is more than julian assange then it won't matter if the american law enforcement agencies get their wicked way with him because wikileaks will go on and will go from strength to strength beccause more and more people will support it because of the martyrdom of julian assange.
or it may be as prosaic as julian assange needs to face the accusations and clear his name and then get on with his work at wikileaks and perhaps now he will keep away from the spotlight and let the truth find its own level.
no matter what the language is no means no.
it seems there are still a fair few men who have yet to realise this.
No comments:
Post a Comment