Thursday, February 08, 2007

Dear Leader Comrade Generalissimo Kim Jong Il Is The Shining Sun And The Hope Of All Humankind Video Marathon

In the "USA" the lazy criminal capitalist dictator Bush the mental retard who is the worst fascist human rights abuser bereft of morals or humanity does not involve himslef in the planning design, and building of structures and dwellings. This is why the "USA" is an abject disgustingly desolate dire ugly field of ruins with anarchic street plans inspired by the masonic satanism of the capitalist clique of criminal overlord gang where the mothers throw their babies down wells and into rivers out of desperation, making the whole country a living hell bereft of human rights.

In the DPRK Dear Leader Comrade Generalissimo Kim Jong Il the brilliant statesman, political genius, prolific author, intellectual giant, prodigious humanist, musical virtuoso and invincible military commander, always inspired by the desire to reach the happiness and well-being of the people, planned the layout of streets and architecture of structures to build Pyongyang as a fitting living monument to the greatness of President Kim Il Sung to hand down the future generations.

Comrade Kim Jong Il guided the construction teaching the workers and builders the correct methods of building in the socialist manner that serve the people. Thus with the guidance of the Leader all buildings in Korea are built perfect.

Blessed are the Korean people to living in houses build by the flawless hand of the Leader himself! Leader Kim Jong Il is the Great Architect!

MANSE!

10 comments:

Dr. Fallon said...

Read more at:
http://rujournalism.blogspot.com/2007/02/sleight-of-mind.html

Sleight of Mind
I started noticing something was wrong with television almost immediately after I got into it. I started at NBC in June of 1982. Two years later, the Communications Act of 1984 had changed everything. Pushed through by the Reagan administration under FCC Chairman Mark Fowler (who said TV was in no more need of regulation than any other household appliance, because TV was just "a toaster with pictures"), this began the era of media deregulation. And the rest, as they say, is history.

Images become more important than words and ideas. Images sell air time. Ratings begin to matter. Extremely visual stories trump "boring" stories that might, however, actually affect us. And even when TV is covering newsworthy stories, the coverage is brief and lacks context, and the entire experience seems incoherent.

Today, news has become entertainment, entertainment has become news, and the viewer has become ignorant of the world around him.

Read more at:
http://rujournalism.blogspot.com/2007/02/sleight-of-mind.html

James Waterton said...

Ah, the good Doctor is publicising his oh-so-fascinating insights again.

Funny, I seem to recall during his last exhaustive campaign to get this site to remove his blog from Songun's blogroll, one of his principal complaints was that he didn't like "adolescents" visiting his blog via Songun. Okay, let's forget the fact that, despite the Doctor's alleged media expertise, he hasn't quite figured out how blogs work - that is, a blog owner has no influence over who links to him/her on other blogs, and nor should they be able to. Let's leave aside the fact that the Doctor's accusations of immaturity were made in an embarrassingly juvenile fashion - especially for a man of his many years.

Let's focus on the fact that back then, Dr Fallon claimed to not want the philistines of Songun sullying the precise diamond of truth that is "IN THE DARK" (capitalised - ooooh, dramatic!). Now he's actively spruiking for Songun readers to come and visit!

The good Doctor appears more than a little confused. So much for his membership of the "reality based community".

By the way, Doctor, this is hilarious! Get back on the meds, old fella.

Dr. Fallon said...

Ouch.

I guess I should feel stung. No less than the eminent James Waterton has insulted me. Well, at least I've been stung by a "highbrow," who has no latent (or is it blatant?) inferiority complex (http://itneededtobesaid.blogspot.com/2007/02/its-all-about-me.html).

Yes, tell me, Sir James, about hilarious.

Now, I've got a pill to take. Go back to your mirror.

James Waterton said...

It's called irony, Doctor. Didn't they teach you that at the community college?

Still, it's always amusing to be diagnosed with an inferiority complex by a man who plasters "Ph.D" over any available space and would probably have it tattooed to his forehead if it didn't interfere with his botox schedule.

James Waterton said...

And another thing - have you made a decision vis a vis my existence, Peter K. Fallon, Ph.D? And am I James Waterton or "James Waterton"? Just curious because my licence is due to expire soon and I'm not sure whether to add the scare quotes to my new one.

Dr. Fallon said...

Yes. Yes. Irony. Ah, I see.

You didn't REALLY mean that "it's all about you." And you don't REALLY Google yourself to see how many hundreds of thousands of pages your name produces (and I'm sure YOU are the only "James Waterton" anyone on Google might be interested in). And that "highbrow" remark, like your artificial and transparent attempt to sound intelligent, was irony.

No, "James Waterton," they didn't teach me that at the community college (Nassau Community College on Long Island, NY), nor at New York Institute of Technology, nor at New York University. Thank you for lowering yourself to my humble level and explaining it to me.

Now, I have a Botox treatment to take. Go back to your mirror.

James Waterton said...

Artless, Doctor, truly artless! I expected better from you. You should have rolled with that "community college" punch. Instead, your huffy recitation of your academic credentials has

a) demonstrated that I scored a direct hit on your intellectual ego

b) further underscored my point that it is indeed you who is the vain one, which makes your recurring "go back to your mirror" jibe sound even weaker - and even more amusing

Regarding my post "It's All About Me", I could go through it point-by-point, explaining each point of irony for those with underwhelming reading comprehension abilities. However, explaining humour - especially not particularly complicated humour - is an awfully tedious task. All I'll say is that if you took the post completely at face value, then you are a simpleton, sir.

Dr. Fallon said...

"James Waterton," you are now also an art critic!!! Is there no end to your talents. Certainly not, you say!!!

I roll with what punches I choose to roll. I am not in the least uncomfortable with my "intellectual ego" (whatever that ambiguous construction might mean -- how would that be different from, er, my ego?). No, actually, I'm kind of calling you out?

There are my cards. They're on the table. As I've pointed out to many who do not have the intellectual integrity to argue with my points and so instead engage ad hominem attacks, my life is an open book.

How about you? Done anything lately? ANYTHING? It might actually help your credibility if you had any sort of experience (aside from composing "highbrow" comments -- occasionally -- on an obscure website and "Googling" yourself to see if anyone noticed).

it is indeed you who is the vain one, which makes your recurring "go back to your mirror" jibe sound even weaker - and even more amusing

Methinks "James Waterton" doth protest too much. As you point out, I am elderly, I need Botox, I'm on my "meds," etc., etc., etc. I'm only too willing to plead guilty to all of the above. I'll go even further -- my wife is the only person on earth who thinks I'm attractive, and that includes me.

So I'll leave it to whatever few dolts (I'm not fooling myself, and I won't be Googling myself later) read this (so-called) "blog" to make the judgment about egotism. So save your breath if you're trying to influence me.

Oh, and "James Waterton," if you have to spend a lot of time explaining your humor, you really have two choices: 1] you can attack all the feeble minded ninnies who can't soar intellectually to the lofty heights your humor reaches; or 2] admit to yourself that you're not funny.

Now, I have a triple by-pass to undergo. Go back to your mirror, "sir."

James Waterton said...

I am not in the least uncomfortable with my "intellectual ego" (whatever that ambiguous construction might mean -- how would that be different from, er, my ego?). No, actually, I'm kind of calling you out?

Call away, Doctor. You "calling me out" is about as menacing as being mauled by a sheep.

instead engage ad hominem attacks

You see, Doc, you might have some credibility on this score if you yourself hadn't engaged in plenty of nasty ad hominem action yourself. Remember all those comments you deleted earlier? Guess what, old boy? I do. And even now you make few points worth responding to because you're so busy playing the man! I call hypocrite on you, sir!

How about you? Done anything lately? ANYTHING? It might actually help your credibility if you had any sort of experience

Well, here's another area where your credibility falls down. You wouldn't have the FIRST CLUE as to what I do or what I've done. You're just assuming. Have a good look through my blog or my pieces on Samizdata. I leave a few clues in both of those sites. I reveal as much of myself to the blogosphere as you do via my writing. You're just too lazy to find out for yourself, and instead you assume. Doesn't say much about your intellectual curiosity, Doc. Hope that construction isn't too ambiguous for you.

if you have to spend a lot of time explaining your humor

Well, you see, I seldom do because those I associate with aren't dim-witted. Most would get the rather obvious point of my post "It's All About Me" - that I am a blogosphere nobody and I'm making fun of that fact. Certainly those who left comments at that post understood the ironic device I used - buttressing my claim that "it's all about me" with evidence that clearly illustrates my obscurity. There you go, Doc. Have the shingles fallen from your eyes yet?

I'll go even further -- my wife is the only person on earth who thinks I'm attractive, and that includes me.

You have a wife? Thought you said you were gay in one of those earlier comments you deleted. That was a quick lifestyle change. Tread carefully, Doc! Any more contradictions and I'll start doubting the veracity of the cards you've been laying on the table.

Toodle pip!

Dr. Fallon said...

Call away, Doctor. You "calling me out" is about as menacing as being mauled by a sheep.

You are soooooo insecure, Maartin Waterton. Why would my "calling you out," be a menace? Do you see the world as somehow menacing? Is your existence so agonistic that a poker allusion -- made by a person who is, in fact, as gentle as a lamb -- becomes an act of war?

You see, Doc, you might have some credibility on this score if you yourself hadn't engaged in plenty of nasty ad hominem action yourself.

Your ignorance of logic and rhetoric really precludes your use of such arguments. But I know enough to realize that that won't stop you.

You see, an ad hominem is an ad hominem only when it is used to attack a speaker when one is unable meaningfully to rebut his argument. You, and others of your ilk, have NEVER commented meaningfully on a single argument I've put forward.

Instead, you've just made snide little comments. Well, in YOUR/ mind (frightening thought), that may constitute rhetoric. In the real world, that's called childishness.

But your real point: that I engage in ad hominem attacks.

I have never tried to. I always try to meet argument with counter argument. If someone has ever offered me an argument and I replied with an insult, I would like to know, I would like to see it, hear it, or read it, and I will apologize.

But if someone is not putting forward an argument, and is instead "smack talking," hey, you're damned right: I'll "smack-talk" right back. Those, it is important to point out, are NOT ad hominem attacks.

If you want to argue or debate with me, Maartin Waterton, you'll find me a ready correspondent. If you want to hurl childish insults, I'm ready too. The difference between us is that I'm having fun. You're whole life seems to depend on it. You should really talk to someone about that.

You wouldn't have the FIRST CLUE as to what I do or what I've done. You're just assuming. Have a good look through my blog or my pieces on Samizdata. I leave a few clues in both of those sites. I reveal as much of myself to the blogosphere as you do via my writing. You're just too lazy to find out for yourself, and instead you assume. Doesn't say much about your intellectual curiosity, Doc. Hope that construction isn't too ambiguous for you.

(My, you're defensive.)

Well, it's as clear as any statement can be that doesn't actually say anything. I will simply infer that I was justified in my initial judgment: you have done nothing, seen nothing, struggled with nothing, believed in nothing that has made any sort of meaningful difference in the world. Saddest of all, you've never even failed at anything because you've never actually tried. A first step would be just to be open, to come to terms with whoever you are, to publicly proclaim "I am James Waterton. For better or for worse, here's what I've done in my life."

Then you might stop resenting other people and lose all that hostility. And move on.

I can say, quite honestly, that I'd love to hear about your experiences. I hope they are more than the sum of your postings (which I'm sure are wonderful indeed). My hours on Earth are too precious to read your truly profound musings on the world (irony), at least based on what I know of you. I chuckle at how you can claim, almost in the same breath, that you are not suffering from some enormous affliction of your ego, and that, because I have not read your oh-so-important posts I somehow lack "intellectual curiosity." It would be deliciously funny...if it weren't so sad...for you.

Well, you see, I seldom do (explain my humor) because those I associate with aren't dim-witted.

Hard to believe. I would think it might be a pre-requisite.

But really, Maartin Waterton, you're being incredibly disingenuous. You write about yourself. You talk about yourself. You Google yourself. You "it's all about me" yourself. You "highbrow" yourself. As the old New Yorker comic put it, "But enough about me. Let's talk about you. What do YOU think about me?"

Honestly, James Maartin, are "those you associate with" allowed to talk about anything but you?

You have a wife? Thought you said you were gay in one of those earlier comments you deleted.

Would it be a contradiction if I were both married and gay? Are you a bigot as well?

Any more contradictions and I'll start doubting the veracity of the cards you've been laying on the table.

Maartin James, life is full of contradictions. Anyone with intellectual curiosity recognizes, questions, and -- at the very least -- attempts to move closer to understanding them.

Whether you choose to believe the cards I've laid on the table or "doubt their veracity" is entirely up to you. The fact is, they are there, and you choose to lurk in the shadows. People can judge my credibility by a significant and public "paper trail."

You choose to hide yours. It's your choice. But as long as you lurk IN THE DARK, don't expect me (or anyone) to put much faith in your word. And as long as you answer argument with insult, don't feign righteous indignation when the insults fly back in your face.

Have a nice day!!!
;-)