Time To Step Up

I hardly ever drink Coca-Cola anymore… no big reason, I just seem to have lost the taste for its battery-acid sweetness.

One of my biggest eye-openers was when I bought a Coke in the Cape Verde Islands back in 1986, and could hardly finish the can.  You see, I’d always thought that Coke was a universal flavor, no matter where you bought it.  Nu-uh.  The super-sweet formula of South African Coke was nothing like the Belgian (?) Coke sold on Ilha Do Sal (yes, the Coke was bottled in Brussels, according to the legend on the can).

Anyway, that was my first exposure to the battery-acid burn of regular Coca-Cola, and once I got used to it, I drank it as much as I had back in Seffrica… until I stopped.  Maybe it was the switch from cane sugar to corn sugar — there is a difference, and I can, or could tell it, even in blind taste tests back when I used to do such things.

Anyway, my Coke consumption is now about… I dunno, maybe a few cans a year, and usually only when I can’t think what else to drink.  We keep maybe a 6-pack in the house, mostly in case visitors might want some, and when it’s gone I don’t exactly rush to restock it in the garage fridge.

That may have to change.  You see, Coca-Cola is now apparently a Zionist drink, according to these fucking loons, who have resorted to damaging stores — even very popular ones — who sell the stuff.  All this because Coke has a distribution center on Israel’s West Bank, and the Pals think that the WB is theirs and Israel is The Great Invader / Colonizer or something, I can’t be bothered to keep up with whatever is riling them up these days.

Were I in charge of such things at Coca-Cola, I’d close the operation in the West Bank and move it to, I dunno, somewhere outside Tel Aviv — thus causing the Arab workers in the WB plant to lose their jobs along the way.  But that’s just me.

Take the time, however, to read the article linked, because unusually for the Daily Mail, it’s a sound piece of actual journalism as used to be commonplace but is no longer.

The British “Friends of al-Aqsa” organization is, like the American Council for Islamic Relations (CAIR), one of those festering pustules in Western society who, while being all about keeping relationships friendly with their host societies, are in fact nothing more than terrorsymps who, if they had their way, would impose Shari’a law in a heartbeat.

Wait a minute, Kim, I hear you say, calling them “terrorsymps” is a little harsh.

Really?  Attacking a store and its owner just for stocking Coca-Cola, and causing him to stop selling it — terrorism isn’t just blowing up buildings and flying airliners into skyscrapers, you know.  And this kind of thing happens everywhere — everywhere — when the Muslim population of country reaches even as little as 5% of the total.  (And Bradford, where the above bullshit happened, has a Muslim population which — forget that piddly 5% — is closer to 30% of the area’s total.  Small wonder that they can rampage around at will for the slightest excuse, such as a store having the temerity to sell Coca-Cola.)

Frankly, I’d have no problem at all with putting an asterisk in our own First Amendment which says in effect “except for Islam and its practitioners”.

But I can’t do that, of course, so I think I’ll just put on my yarmulka and go buy a case of Coke.  Because fuck ’em.

Not Red, Not Even Herrings

You need to read the report about the “pipe bombs” that were discovered outside both the DNC and RNC heaquarters buildings in Washington D.C. on Jan 6 2020.  The report exposes either incomparable incompetence by the FBI, or else a degree of indifference about the supposed bombs and their implications, which leads me to suggest the executive summary of the whole business.

There were no bombs, and the FBI knew they weren’t bombs.  The bomb-like devices were a plant to increase the supposed imminence of civil unrest and insurrection and feelings of paranoia and fear among members of Congress and the public on Jan 6.  And the FBI were absolutely complicit in, if not the actual creators of this entire charade.

Now you can read the article, and see if the above summary is refuted by anything therein.

Shootin’ Time

Try this little bit of fuckery on for size:

“I came out at the end of a funeral service. I saw the traffic warden there, and he got his little pad out to start ticketing us, and I said ‘you’ve got to be joking’. I said ‘we’re only going to be 10-15 minutes more, can you just go for a walk round the block?’ He said ‘no’. I said, ‘have a bit of compassion, this is a funeral.’ And he started remonstrating with me.”

And then when someone, overcome with grief, snaps and starts killing these pathetic little officials, it’s the gun’s fault.

 

See No Evil

In commenting on Florida’s proposed ban on social media for under-16s, Robert Shibley says this:

It would be wise for the big platforms to make it much easier for parents to regulate this stuff, because that’s far preferable to the law stepping in.

That’s a laudable suggestion, but unfortunately it doesn’t take into account the fact that getting kids hooked on their programs is the actual goal of the “big platforms”, simply to get eyeballs for their advertisers.  That any harm might occur to the owners of those eyeballs is to be ignored because First Amendment, dude.

I myself think that lowering the age of consent to 12 and the drinking age to 13 would probably do less harm to kids than does exposure to FaecesBook and the like.  What the hell:  if we’re going to trust kids not to do stuff that might harm them, let’s go all the way. [/Big Platforms]