Ceci n’est pas un blog.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice once said that there is a Middle Eastern country that is determined to develop nuclear weapons, is the “central banker for terrorism” in the Middle East and a block to democracy. You might think you know the answer, but it’s not Iraq. You see, having decided to pull out in 2007, the US and UK needs a new reason to stay in the area. And since the same arguments worked like a charm last time, why not use the same ones but switch country? Yes! Let’s go to Iran!

And on a related note, a recent Gallup poll reveals that more than half of the American population agrees with the statement “God created man exactly how the Bible describes it”.

Must-read over at Adbusters about the shape of things in the world, especially America.

Here’s a great post over at the Annalog about so-called “muslim violence”. A comment on the same article on Newsvine neatly sums it up:

“They aren’t burning down embassies because of a cartoon, they are burning down embassies because we’ve shit on them and this was the straw that broke the camel’s back.”

On a related note, Kofi Annan hit the spot today with this quote:

“Let me say that, honestly, I do not understand why any newspaper will publish the cartoons today. It is insensitive, it is offensive, it is provocative, and they should see what has happened around the world. This does not mean that I am against freedom of speech, or freedom of the press. Yes, I am for that, but as I have indicated in the past, freedom of speech is not a license. It does entail exercising responsibility and judgment, and quite honestly I cannot understand why any editor will publish cartoons at this time which inflames, and pours oil on the fire.”

Couldn’t have said it better myself. Maybe that’s why he’s the Secretary General, and not me.

Well, I guess you all have heard about the beef about the cartoons that Jyllands-Posten published by this time. Swedish newspaper Expressen reports that Norwegian bloggers have started a protest, reprinting the Mohammed cartoons to show their support for “free speech”. A whopping “16 or 17 bloggers” have joined the protest so far. The Moslem world is surely cowering in fear after this demonstration of force and determination.

I’m convinced that the Norwegian bloggers would of course support pictures like this one and this one too, so I’ve decided to join their cause and reprint one of the cartoons:

If you don’t live in Sweden, you probably missed one of the funniest media stories since Pretzelgate. The chairman of the Swedish Socialist Party’s Youth Organization was arrested Saturday night for public intoxication, and is also charged for assault and resisting arrest.

This story has so many elements of fun in it that it’s very hard to convey them all – it has kept tears running down my cheek since Sunday noon – but I thought I just had to share it with the small part of the English-speaking part of the world that reads these pages (and a very small part it is).

• To begin with, the chairman in question weighs in at around 200-220 pounds, and is an ex-member of the Swedish national rugby team.
• Did I mention it’s a she?
• The bouncers that she fought (three of them) was quoted as saying “I never seen a girl throwing punches like that.” She allegedly threw some racial slurs too.
• Not only did she fight the guards, she also took on a patrol of police officers that came to answer the disturbancy call from the bouncers. Them, she called “dickheads”.
• Having been arrested for public intoxication and resisting arrest, she fought some jail guards when they tried to put her in her cell. They were “dickheads” too.
• Amazingly enough: after this ruckus all she had to show at the press conference the day after was a contusion on her cheek and some scratch mark on her lower arms. Of course, her lawyer claims she was a victim of flagrant unnecessary violence from the bouncers.

To top it all off, her press secretary did a marvelous job too. So good he deserves a list of his own:

• First, he was present at the bar – and managed to get ejected from the bar a mere quarter of an hour before the chairman herself.
• After witnessing the arrest of his boss, he waved his Member of Parliament ID card at the bouncers, shouting “You don’t know who you’re messing with!”
• Then he hinted that the place might lose its alcohol license.
• When that failed, he threatened to bring the issue up with the Swedish Secretary of Justice.
• Realizing that all of the above had failed to impress the bouncers, he decided to use his spider press sense and notify media about what had happened. While this is a sensible strategy from a PR viewpoint – not only does it signal honesty, it also allows you to get the first spin on a story – it might be even more sensible to
• wait a few minutes so the media you summoned doesn’t get pics of your boss in the back of a police car, and
• hand the issue over to someone else, more sober, so the paparazzi taking the mug shot of your boss in the police car doesn’t call you “plastered” in the media the day after.

Stay tuned for follow-ups.

Neo – det liberala samhällsmagasinet is a new Swedish glossy magazine. They promise a “liberal quality magazine about politics, society and future”. Their target group is “actively interested people that craves new knowledge, better arguments, to be acknowledged and challenged.” All in all a good initiative, but as always when people claim to be liberal, you can almost always expect they’re not. I guess we’ll have to see where they end up.

They certainly aren’t off to a great start, though. Recently, the editor-in-chief described the gist of the magazine as “Liberty and progress, creamy cappuccino and half-bound books”. Excuse me for being grumpy, but I fail to see what the fuck basic human liberties and fundamental principles have to do with types of hot beverage or how you package and format media.

See, in Sweden we’re ruled by a socialist party since 70 years or something. The right wing parties (conservatives, “liberals”, christian democrats, centrists) are known as a group as “the bourgeoisie parties” – that’s how domesticized they are. Imagine going up in a debate against the ruling left wing coalition that pioneered governmental health care, and starting out by embracing the fact that you’re the bourgeoise.

Of course, the evil socialists know this, and miss no opportunity to point out right-wing sympathizers that are better off socially and materialistically – hence being perfect examples of bourgoisie. Furthermore, right-wingers make no effort to move away from this common nominator. The opposition even speaks of the “bourgeoisie parties” or about a “bourgeoisie coalition”. Naturally, this makes it even easier for socialists to depict true liberals as baby-eaters. We’re all just in it for the profit, see. As everywhere else, they’re also keen on calling true liberals “neo-liberals”, to connect us as much as possible to neo-nazis and new, strange, bad, scary ideologies in general. (BTW, big congrats on the name decision.)

You can see where I’m headed with this. If you want to start up a new ideological paper, pointing out that it’s posh doesn’t exactly help your case – quite the opposite. And not surprisingly, depicting their political paper as creamy cappuccino raised quite a ruckus.

But instead of doing a double-back, insisting that material values doesn’t have anything to do with liberal values, some fucking twat named Peter Wennberg is allowed editorial space to further their argument on this matter. Example quotes:

“Only the bourgeoisie prioritizes spiritual values. The lower class, or rather they who sympathisizes with it, can only afford function.”
“To be bourgeoisie is to strive for quality of life. (…) Quality of life can stem from both material and immaterial factors, but the experience in itself is spiritual.”

This from the same publication that claims to “…stand up for democracy, the participation of the individual, human freedom and rights, pluralism, the civic society, enterprise and educations. We like free markets and free people. We believe in the reason and creativity of man.”

Sorry, but if I was the editor of that magazine, I wouldn’t be able to keep a straight face.

In my world, liberalism is about the absolute freedom and integrity of a human being.

In your world, bourgeoisie is about looking down on people that don’t spend money on other stuff than function.

Fine, so be it, but never, never, ever take the word “liberal” in your mouth again, you sorry ignorant asshat.