A Dangerous and Evil Man

Normally, when I or my co-bloggers encounter idiocy, irrationality in the face of evidence, or other, similar behaviour online, we accord its author with the ridicule and refutation that comes with the dubious honour of the title of Asshat of the Day.

Not in this case.

The more I read that has been written by this man, the more I am convinced that he is dangerous, heartless, conscienceless, and, if he isn't, in fact, clinically insane, evil. I will say this again - if he is not entirely out of his mind, he is an evil man, and I consider virtually everything he has done to be a detriment to mankind.

This man is Andreas Moritz.

Brought to my attention by Pharyngula, as so many are, he is, as is detailed in the story itself, a hypocrite, a woo-meister, and a snake oil salesman nonpareil. But that's not even half of it.

He is an AIDS denier. He is a homophobe (p. 339, and, in fact, most of the rest of the book) disguising himself as someone concerned for people's health. He is a con-artist, creating symptoms in healthy individuals. He thinks (and espouses the idea) that cancer is caused by negative thoughts. For this reason, he argues against chemotherapy. Or antiretroviral drugs. Or pharmaceuticals of any description. Oh, and it should go without saying that he's opposed to vaccinations.

His websites, books, and articles are a bizarre and horrifying blend of The Secret, Kellog's Sanitarium, folk remedies, snake oil, and what can only be described as blatant fraud. (For instance, his river rocks as healing implements, available for sale!)

I leave you, gentle readers, with this. I can't imagine how this man tricks people into thinking he's healing them. He makes me sick... and I've never even met the man in person.

Not Asshat of the Day, but simply, purely, a blight upon humanity.

Aftertouch: Orac weighs in.

Asshat of the Day - January 11th, 2010

Today's Asshat of the Day? Iris Robinson.

Regular readers (or those who know me) know that I have no problem with sex in general. Moreover, as long as there's consent, I do not object to anything two (or more) adults choose to do together. (Or even two or more minors.) To borrow from Spider Robinson, I don't object to anything consensual that doesn't involve "former people or former food".

So do I object on principle to Mrs. Robinson's (*snort*) sexual peccadilloes? No. I imagine her husband may even have known about them and simply stayed quiet. I do object to the potential abuse of an authority position, given that she was supposed to care for the boy.

I do object to the fact that she apparently appropriated public funds to pay for his affections - not that she paid someone for sex or intimacy, but that the money she used for this purpose wasn't her own.

But most of all, I object to hypocrisy. And that, she's got in spades.

She claims to be a "god fearing" woman, and has stated that she considers homosexuality "an abomination", after an attack was made on a gay man in her constituency. Moreover, she condemned child sexual abuse by saying "There can be no viler act, apart from homosexuality and sodomy, than sexually abusing innocent children." While she later claimed that, effectively, she wanted to say "even" in place of "apart from", this hardly mitigates the homophobic nature of her comments.

Her homophobia is based on her born-again Christian background (naturally)... which would also heartily condemn adultery. So, as we often must say to the born-again crowd: you can't have it both ways. Either condemn others, and adhere to your own rules, or keep your trap shut.

Hypocrite.

*Come on, her name is Mrs. Robinson.

Asshat of the Day - January 7th, 2010

Today's Asshat of the Day is a paired prize, since both recipients are interested in much the same stuff: Bono and a french governmental panel.

Let's start with Bono.

"A decade's worth of music file-sharing and swiping has made clear that the people it hurts are the creators — in this case, the young, fledgling songwriters who can't live off ticket and T-shirt sales like the least sympathetic among us." And he alleges that "rich service providers" are reaping "the lost receipts of the music business."

The musician claims the technology is available to track and prevent illegal downloading, noting efforts in China which limit its populace from freely accessing the internet.

Um. Words, failing me. First, no nation on the planet has had any luck curtailing filesharing. Your best bet is to go with the iTunes or Amazon download models and charge people on a per-song basis, while maintaining massive libraries in order to compete. Second... you're holding China up as a sparkling example of how the internet should be?

Next, the French:

How to help prop up the ailing music industry? Tax Google, suggests a new report commissioned by the French government.

The report, handed to Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand on Wednesday, says Google, Yahoo! and other Internet portals should be slapped with a new tax on their online ad revenues in France to fund the development of legal outlets for buying books, movies and especially music on the Internet.

...

The plan “seemed inevitable to us, if we want to maintain a certain pluralism in the culture world” and prevent the “endless enrichment of two or three world players who will impose their cultural formatting on us,” Patrick Zelnik, a record producer who helped lead the mission, was quoted as telling Liberation newspaper.

Again, there are few words. Taxing Google to repay recording artists for the theft of their music is like taxing the Yellow Pages to pay the families of victims of gun violence - because, after all, the bad guys look up pawn shops in the Yellow Pages to buy their guns! Moreover, as Mark Mulligan, an opponent to the idea, commented:

“Where does it start and stop? The argument is that Google has culpability for declining music revenues because people start searches for illegal files often by Google,” said Mark Mulligan, vice president of Forrester Research. But “what about the computers? Because without the computers people wouldn't be able to download. And then what about the electricity that powers the computer?”

Culpability only extends so far. Jack Thompson was a particularly egregious example of that, back in the day - suing Sony for producing the game system on which someone played a game that might be associated with a subsequent crime. This is no different. It's a transparent tax-grab from the people with the deepest pockets, to subsidize an industry which needs to reinvent itself, not depend on legislation to protect it.

Additionally, the proponents of the idea seem to be concerned about the dilution of France's culture through downloaded music (the majority of which, I imagine, is coming from the US). I'm sorry, monsieurs, but taxing Google ain't gonna stop it. People can acquire the same stuff through legitimate means - or through clients like Kazaa, Limewire, and other file-sharing programs, the way they do right now.

For trying to put shackles on something that has no limbs, Bono and this french panel share the title of AotD.

Asshat of the Day - January 5th, 2010

It's a new year, and SamsonEffect has challenged me to post at least twice a week.

Let's see if I can manage it! Now, with that said, let's get on to our asshat of the day: PM Stephen Harper.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper says Canadians aren't really concerned about allegations that the government engaged in a cover-up over the abuse of Afghan detainees.

"I think polls have been pretty clear that that's not on the top of the radar of most Canadians," Harper said in an interview with CBC-TV correspondent Peter Mansbridge.

To borrow an internet meme:

It's not the top of the radar for most Canadians, is it, Mr. Harper? First of all, je suis canadien, and it's certainly a big point on my radar. (Granted, it's just one of the ways you're dragging our country's name through the mud, but it's a big one.)

But more than that, your concern with the detainee scandal is whether it's the top priority of Canadian citizens? Not, for example, the damage our soldiers' reputations will take. Not the damage our country's reputation will take. Not simple decency in obeying the international laws concerning prisoners of war and proving we're better than those who would seek to cow us by acts of terror. No, your concern is poll numbers.

Attempting to dictate our opinions to us, M. Harper, and in so doing further illustrating your own power-grubbing, heartless nature - that earns you the title of Asshat of the Day.

For further reading, check out Scott's DiaTribe on the subject.

We're Back!

After a long hiatus, the vitriol reserves are restocked, and we're set to go!

I probably flatter myself by thinking there are readers out there - but if there are, I apologize, and now return you to your regularly scheduled rants.

And Then There's THIS Asshole...

Straight up: I abhor racism, in all its forms. But there's a certain point where you get unmitigated wankery of the highest order in the effort of fighting racism, such as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, who see racism where it doesn't exist, and can very well be making racist comments themselves. Some refer to this as 'race-baiting' or have other interesting names for it, but no matter how you slice it, in my books, it's still racism. Today's Asshat is a man who has gone the route of Jackson and Sharpton. That man? Dallas County Police Commissioner John Wiley Price. Why? For taking offense to the term 'black hole'. Yes, apparently, 'black hole' is racist.

So here's the shakedown: Another commissioner, Kenneth Mayfield, made a comment that the central collections had become a black hole, saying that paperwork concerning traffic tickets had been getting lost in the office. Anyone with any idea what a black hole is would understand what he's saying. Commissioner Price, on the other hand, takes offence and corrects Mayfield, calling the office a 'white hole'.

It's at this point where I'd love to give Mr. Price a quick lesson in astrophysics, and I figure here is as good a place as any to do it. A black hole forms when a massive star goes supernova and the remaining 'corpse' of the star is so massive and so dense that at a certain distance from the object, escape velocity exceeds the speed of light (the Event Horizon). At that point, no object, including light, can escape the object's gravity (the 'hole' part), and all light is absorbed, making it appear black.

Simple enough nomenclature, right? Apparently not. Admittedly I'm a space geek, so I have some trouble grokking how he doesn't know what a black hole is or think it's racist, but spinning it around and using white hole? Never mind that white holes are still purely theoretical, does he not see the irony in what he's saying? It appears to me that he's doing exactly what he got upset about. He's upset about the term 'black' being used in negative contexts, so he decides to use 'white' in such a context. This implementation of weapons-grade stupid is how Price earns his Asshat of the Day tag.

It doesn't help my temper that the Judge, Thomas Jones, demanded an apology from Mayfield as well, but hey, you get two asshats for the price of one tonight!

(Apologies for the video, in particular, the comments section; I'd have loved to find a video without racist dipshittery in the comments section, but it's Youtube. Comments there are a bottomless pit filled to the brim with weapons-grade stupid.)

Make Her Go Insane... Like a Tumour in Her Brain...

Basically, I'm talking about living la vida Shona. Shona Holmes, that is.

Originally, I didn't consider Mrs. Holmes to be AotD material - and I still don't, but she's certainly headed in that direction.

For those who are unaware, Shona Holmes is a Hamilton resident who suffered from what's known as a Rathe's Cleft Cyst. It is a cyst that occurs in nearly a third of all individuals, but asymptomatically; usually, it's only uncovered incidentally in an autopsy. In a very small percentage of cases, the cyst grows (filling with fluid, not multiplying cells, as would be the case in a tumour), and can put pressure on the visual centre of the brain as well as the pituitary gland, causing headaches and hormone troubles, as well as visual disturbances or reduction in quality of vision. These symptoms, in virtually all recorded cases of symptomatic cysts, go away once the cyst is drained or surgically removed.

Originally, I didn't think that Mrs. Holmes was a candidate for the title, because it seemed to me that she was a gullible woman being taken advantage of by right-wing american political movements for their own purposes.

Then, on As It Happens, she claimed that a doctor at the Mayo Clinic told her that if she didn't receive surgery for the "tumour", she was going to die.

"Well, alright," I said to myself, "Some money-grubbing fear-mongering doctor at the Mayo Clinic lied to her to get her panicking and grab her money. Not really her fault she was scared. Still stupid, but not her fault."

But she decided to sue OHIP, and that suit is backed by the Canadian Constitution Federation.

She has been told, time and time again, that what she had was not life threatening, that it could have been treated in Canada, and that a lawsuit against OHIP simply does damage to a system she's already criticizing, thus making things harder for everyone else. She is willfully cooperating with people who vilify our health system and attack Obama's attempts to reform American healthcare in a positive way.

If she's not an AotD just yet... she's certainly gunning for a position.

Blaspheme-o-riffic!

Yes, I know it's been a while. Yes, I know I'm a bad blogger. (Bad blogger! Bad!)

In contrite apology, I offer this comic penned by Jen McCreig of Blag Hag (soon to be appearing in a blogroll near you!) It is almost deliciously blasphemous. And funny. ROTFL funny, in fact.

(Real post tomorrow, I promise.)

Every Now and Then...

...I dip into the comments section of a CBC.ca article. And then I remember why I don't do that more often.

The article: Vancouver charges ahead with electric-car plug-ins.

It makes me happy, if a bit disappointed at the scope of the operation - 20% of new development? 20%, scaling up to 100% over the next ten years, maybe, and including retrofitting existing apartments/condos. The electric car is the perfect urban vehicle - quiet, no emissions, and limited range isn't a deal-breaker. Anything that can be done to encourage its adoption is a good thing. (Plus, think of the number of streetcorners that can be reclaimed from gas stations!)

And then we get to the comments. First, this gem, from "MaryRedcord":

Yet another example of a Canadian special interest group of latte sucking yuppie wimps that has taken over and obtained access to government policy. As a result of this each stall will cost $2000 eh. Think again. Do the freaking math folks. Those are after tax dollars. In addition the cost will be added to your mortgage. Your real cost will be about $5000 a stall which is stupid beyond belief. People will likely pay for the charges via their credit cards pushing the costs even higher. Eventually a cost will be reached which exceeds the cost of gasoline. Oh and stand by for a taxpayers paid incentive for electric cars. That will add more cost to you as it will go onto the deficit.

The fix is easy. Keep the special interest groups away from government policy making. Oh and you can bet the instructions will be in at least three or four languages too. Anybody heard of an extension cord? You can buy one at crappy tire for about $20.

You betcha!
Dumbkoffs!

So. No calculations, assumption of persecution/conspiracy by "latte-sucking yuppie wimps" (presumably real men drive carbon-spewing trucks), implied pie-in-the-sky assumptions that the price of gasoline will remain fixed, hint at bigotry (languages), total lack of knowledge regarding electric car power consumption/charging rate (extension cord) and an insult, in passing, to a proudly Canadian institution whose products have always served me well. Did I miss anything?

Oh yeah. Hint of Palin worship.

Next on the docket, we have the arrogantly-named "BCHimself":

As we all dance around the "May Pole" celebrating the newest of electrical marvels does anyone realize that BC has the "easy" potential to produce hydro electricity at virtually "no cost" to you & I.
We have so many rivers and large volumes of water in the province why are we not producing more electricity from these sources , then issue the hydro electricity to those that want to charge their vehicle batteries "free of charge" ?
The mental migets that are in Victoria and Ottawa by the drones is simply amazing !

Now, aside from this man's abuse of "quotation marks"... what, does he think that hydroelectric dams and generators are free? Perhaps we've been doing it all wrong; clearly, all we have to do is plug the grid into the rivers. All this mucking about with dams, and that's all there was to it this whole time. Boy, do we feel stupid. By the bye, BCHimself - "mental midgets"? Glass houses and stones, boy.

Who's next? "wallycat" contributes:

Plug ins for the street people to recharge their cell phones, I pods, and most importantly to plug in their electric blankets on the cool evenings.

In apartment building and condominium parking lots? In Vancouver? There are easier places for homeless people to get electricity - especially given that part of the reason these charging stations are going to be more expensive than your conventional wall socket is that they will be high-capacity electrical sockets, akin to that which powers an electric stove; not a standard "plug in the phone" socket. Sorry, next contestant?

Ah. "IronMaiden" wins the "not contributing to the conversation" award with this bit of inspired prose:

If we could make a battery powerfull(sic) the power the space shuttle that would be great.

"Hassel99" provides us with the expected "long tailpipe" argument, along with "anything short of perfection is unacceptable":

Keep in mind most of our electrcity(sic) comes from still comes from fossile(sic) fuels and every time the province trys(sic) to promote "green" Energy "run of rivers, there is major public resistance by the same people who want to use electric cars, its a vicuous(sic) cycle.

Figure out how to power everything cleanly first before you dramaticly(sic) increase our need for said power.

Charming.

"Otto2010" doesn't realize why the charging stations would cost as much as the article indicates:

Again I ask the question; Who then pays for the electricity they use to charge their electric cars? When I go to the gas station, I pay for my own gas. It seems to me that if these people get to plug their cars into common property (strata payed) outlets, then the other tenants/owners in the buildings will be paying for their electricity as well. Why should they get free "Fuel" just because they decided to buy electric?

Well, me boyo, part of that cost is for separate metering. For just that reason. Next?

From "Tyee.Mike":

I think this is a great plan, lets put plug-ins everywhere so people can plug in their electric cars FOR FREE. Ya thats it it will be just like gas cars, where you park someone always leaves you with 5-10 litres of gas so you can fill up.

I guess impark and the various parking companies will give you all that power for free right. We should power up the parking meters too. Just hand out the 'fuel' for those people who are wealthy enough to afford an electric car.

Maybe some additional planning could be done before jumping on the electric bandwagon. There are a lot of questions before forcing developers to add the cost of these installations to their buildings.

Guess what, Mike? The folks doing the legislature here? They're smarter than you. If you could figure that out, you can bet they already have. Next!

Our last contender (because I'm tired of reading them) is "DavidSt. Denis", who, like so many others, wishes to broadcast his ignorance online:

As for the electric car, it just doesnt appear to be feasible to operate. I can see stalled vehicles in Metro Vancouver all over the place. And as for long journeys by highway - forget it! No logistics to ever be able to support them and they travel way to slow for highway/freeway speeds.

Lessee. First, just 'cause the fuel changes doesn't mean that drivers won't keep an eye on the tank. Are there stalled ICE cars all over Vancouver? No? Then shut it. Now, the second point is almost coherent - there are not, in fact, too many places that have charging outlets for electric cars. But if you're willing to make a trip of it, it's not actually a problem. With a 300km range, you'll get to wherever you're going, and if you stop for lunch, you might be able to plug into a conventional outlet to charge up. The speed comment, though; that one is just too big a lie to let slide.

Wow

I'm speechless. I know this blog is supposed to be about vitriol, but sometimes you have to make room for passion.

Kudos, Dr. Myers.