Why not only support Helen Thomas but also help feed people?

Posted on April 24, 2008 
Filed Under politics | 14 Comments

Why not subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting and don't forget to check out some of the other articles.

Helen Thomas and Starving Child

So I watched that video with Helen Thomas asking that question. A very good and objective question. The kind of question many people would want her to ask. Also the kind of question that many “journalists” forget to add to their repertoire.
The answer she (and thus the American people) received was an insult to her (and the American people). An insult because somehow the spokeswoman assumed she wasn’t mentally sound enough to realize that she was being lied to.

Problem is that you don’t even have to be mentally sound to understand how an administration which effortlessly and purposely twists the truth is something that might as well do irreparable damage to the US.

Anyways.
All in all it’s perfectly understandable that one would want to stimulate the commendable actions of Helen Thomas.

But what is impossible to understand is the following:

In only a few hours time people pitched in more than a thousand dollars for flowers. All the while every 5 seconds a child dies from hunger. Imagine that. Hundreds of children have died during those few hours.

So I ask myself. Who needs those donations most? Helen Thomas (would would be quite happy with $ 100 worth of flowers I’m sure) or starving children?

I’m not saying that this opportunity shouldn’t be taken to send a message to the press. But I’m also saying that it might be interesting to not lose sight of reality.

Helen Thomas will do her job. Some people won’t even grow old enough to ever have a job.

Priorities anyone?

So here’s a few organizations to which you can donate money so hunger can be averted for at least a few people.

http://www.helpstophunger.org/makeadifference.asp
https://secure.ga4.org/01/GiveaGift/
http://www.stophungernow.org/donate.php
http://www.actionagainsthunger.org/

Someone on Reddit made the excellent suggestion to donate to an organization involved in helping victims of torture.

Here’s a suggestion:

http://www.amnesty.org/en/donate

EDIT; and another one:

http://www.cvt.org/main.php

I’m quite certain Mrs. Thomas would be IMMENSELY happy if she knew that her question not only got a lot of support, but also helped to feed people.

So here’s the Chipin page for Mrs. Thomas.

And here’s the address of her office in case you want to be 100% sure the flowers/gifts reach her:

McClatchy Washington Bureau
700 12th St. NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20005

Not that I think the guy who opened the ChipIn page is going to disappear, but you never know, right?

I’ve tried to contact the organizer of the ChipIn page but apparently I get a 404 on Reddit… Will try to do it in other ways.

Hope I haven’t given anyone ideas…

Posted on March 29, 2008 
Filed Under Strange World | Leave a Comment

first found on Digg
Apparently I wasn’t the only one (or was I) to have the idea to assault people over the Internet using their epilepsy.

Although my article suggested a larger scale attack the “hackers” (technically they didn’t hack anything) were pretty efficient. Sadly enough.

Remark:

The article suggests it was the work of Anonymous, who recently acquired quite a lot of publicity by staging Project Chanology. Anonymous wouldn’t have any reason to attack epileptic people. While for example Scientology would have at least some reason to attempt to discredit Anonymous (as they attempted in the past).

The 5 Cheesiest Speeches In Movie History

Posted on February 5, 2008 
Filed Under Media, movies | 3 Comments

Or how to make grown men shed a tear or two.

According to Urban Dictionary (is there any other one?):

Cheesy means “sentimental, maudlin, melodramatic, corny” and “Trying too hard, unsubtle, and inauthentic.”

5. Braveheart

An Australian dude playing a Scottish hero in an American movie…
Anyways. Deserves the top 5 spot thanks to the great music and the overly cheesy “But they’ll never take our freedom!” line.

4. Lord Of The Rings: Return Of The King

Who doesn’t know this one? It’s not only cheesy, but it’s also a damn good speech at the same time. Despite the lack of background and options for good cut-aways this one has perfect editing and rhythm.

3. Babylon 5: In The Beginning

Babylon 5 was an attempt at creating a truly epic sci-fi series. They used a lot of speeches to accomplish this. And it worked.
This speech is my personal favorite (tho it’s less cheesy than #1 and #2) simply because it makes humans look cool for once.
Star Trek with balls. Watch it and weep.

2. Armageddon

A father must more or less kill himself to save mankind before his ex-wife finds it in her heart to tell his son he’s the kid’s father. A amazing number of American flags and helicopters whooshing around everywhere. Portraying the French as… sheep farmers. It’s day all over the world.
Those are but 4 things that are pretty insane in this 2 minute clip.
But only Michael Bay, the amazing director of Armageddon, could still make our lips tremble and make us say “Oh gosh, ima gonna cry”. And he did. The cheesiest moment, in the cheesiest movie.
Oh gosh:

1. Independence Day

Am I mentally ill because I keep getting goosebumps every time I watch this speech?
I probably am. And I don’t mind it one bit because it’s a damn good speech.
“Mankind… that word should have new meaning for all of us now…”. *tear*
Pretty disgusting, isn’t it? The cheesiest speech in the history of mankind:

If NASA only were to send this up to space… Aliens would say “Yup, they’re insane, let’s not invade them”.

Honorable mentions:

By now it’s probably more than clear there’s a big difference between a cheesy and a good speech.
Here are two that are really good but didn’t cut it to make it in the cheesy list.

Babylon 5: In The Beginning

This one comes directly after #3 speech in the movie. How much tears to the people behind B5 think we, strong men, have? Because of that, and because of the mere fact that it’s not cheesy it’s not in the list. Still quite moving:

The Great Dictator

This is by far the best speech in the history of cinema. Why? Because of its genuine historical context and because of the person speeching. Charlie Chaplin believes in what he’s saying. And no matter your political views, you can not help to be moved by his words, his sentiments and his blind belief in the human ability for beauty and peace. Cheesy? No. Simply because it’s authentic and true.

An Open Letter To The American Voter

Posted on February 4, 2008 
Filed Under politics | Leave a Comment

“Dear American Voter,

Just like many (west) Europeans I have been brought up with the idea that the US is a great and to be respected nation. Mentioning the second world war (an episode that thanks to our elders is still quite in our collective memory) couldn’t pass without mentioning the US. Also people always had the utmost respect for the USA as a nation of ever evolving science. I myself am writing this on a computer which contains many American know how and the very Internet was largely an American invention.

If possible then many around the world have even warmer feelings towards the American people because of their relentless quest to expand the personal freedoms of the individual. Often one needs to simply look across the Atlantic to find an example on how it should be done.

American culture is also something we hold in high regard. Proof of that is that many speak reasonable to very good English simply because most things they see on TV (even if happens to be dubbed…) is from the US, with the UK and Australia following closely. And if not for the influence trough language then we stil have the overwhelming presence of American culture trough movies and music. So my generation is bound to be influenced.

Same goes for my parents and their parents.

So all things considered did we look up to the US? Most certainly!

Do we still?

…

Sometimes…

Over the years I have been forced to notice a growing antipathy towards the US. This sentiment clearly peaked in the past 7 years.

I will try to explain why using a few examples.

A few things that disturbs many people (tho far from all) people over here:

Also, there are things that make us genuinely surprised:

I’m not even saying the US is doing or did all that what is listed, but it’s a more or less general view on this side of the Atlantic.

So where the US used to be a bastion of freedom, free speech, science and prosperity it’s now something entirely different.

I know for a fact many of my countrymen think like that, and unlike how they prefer to think, they do it very nuanciated manner. Meaning that they do not put the blame on the American people and still have a great deal of respect for the USA’s achievements. Frankly if there’s any way of having some kind of sentiment of friendship between nations then I’m pretty sure many European nations are quite fond of the US and wish it no harm whatsoever.

One thing is certain, the idealized vision of the United States will most likely be gone forever. Perhaps this is for the better as true friendship, based on true assumptions, might arise.

Do not think we don’t understand your limitations. The United States is still a nation, with its own intrigues and policies to protect. That’s why I’m talking to the American Voter, not the government.

It’s not the American government who sacrificed himself on the beaches of Normandy. It’s not the American government who’s spending the most on charity in the world. It wasn’t even the American government who landed on the moon. It’s not the American government who fought racism and segregation in the United States. And it most certainly wasn’t the government who’s dying in Iraq right now.

These feats I mentioned can only be attributed to the American People. No government should claim these achievements.

Yes, many of those things were done and are being done to serve interests, fight political games and support powerful companies. But that doesn’t make the sacrifices any less. That doesn’t make the commitment of individual people any less.

It is because of this history that I can still trust the American People to do the right thing.

It’s is not my place to tell you how to vote. It is my place however, as a friend, that I am forced to plead with you, The American Voter, to think very carefully. Cast aside your grudges, fears and perhaps even hate. Try to truly embrace what still makes millions think fondly of you: your love for true freedom and the real truth.

Perhaps you feel like you have little options in the upcoming primaries and Presidential elections. Perhaps you are right. But then try to minimize the damage. Because not only the future of the United States depends on your vote.

With the utmost regard,
your friend,

The Rest Of the World”

This was an honest attempt to explain how and why the view of the US changed in many parts of the world. And what is expected of the American voter. I didn’t explain my personal opinion. In stead I tried to find a common middle ground combining rational and somewhat less rational arguments to paint a larger picture. Despite my honest search for a global viewpoint I’m afraid I had to resort to a Western-European persona, simply because this frame of reference is closest to my own. However, in the past I have noticed that the same ideas are often shared by many peoples around the world. Don’t be surprised if the writer of the letter seems quite naive. This was to make the point more obvious and easier to digest. I’ve tried to find the average level of education/being informed for the person writing the letter. It is as much a voicing of actually existing opinions (which are actually, like I said, being held by many people) as it is a social experiment.

How much Internet attention are candidates REALLY getting?

Posted on February 2, 2008 
Filed Under politics | Leave a Comment

More so than in any previous election the current race for the white house has spawned an awful lot of Internet buzz. So I was wondering, how many verifiable attention did each of the remaining candidates actually get? I knowingly decided not to rely on Google results as they’re only a way of telling how many times each candidate has been mentioned and not how many people noticed them having been talked about. It’s not because I’m being named on 15 million sites that I reached an audience apart from the creators of the sites, right?

Also, there’s a difference between a deeper interest in the campaign (subscribing and/or exploring the whole channel) and just clicking a Digg link while not even watching the entire video. Channel views can be considered to be a rough inclination of the deeper interest for the candidate.

I’m going to cut the foreplay and let the figures speak for themselves.

Candidate Channel Subscriptions Channel Views

Democratic Party
Hillary Clinton

9,068

1,290,290
Mike Gravel

4,180

849,436
Barack Obama

21,453

11,798,533

Republican Party
Mike Huckabee

3,771

441,524
John McCain

2,417

584,417
Ron Paul

47,525

6,793,801
Mitt Romney

4,182

981,887

Obama has nearly ten times as much channel views as his runner-up, Hillary Clinton, who’s “only” 450,000 views ahead of Mike Gravel. The total Channel Views of all the candidates combined don’t even add up to Barack Obama’s whopping 11 million views.

In the Republican Party Ron Paul has a clear lead on his contenders in terms of Channel views and Ron Paul even gets the award for the most Channel Subscriptions of all the candidates… Actually more than all of their Subscriptions combined. A rough conclusion of this fact might say that Paul certainly has the largest group of devoted followers on YouTube.

Sorry for the ugly charts, but I’m too lazy to make nicer ones. No, I’m not in the mood to decipher the Google Chart API.

One more set of numbers.

Candidate # of Videos Views/Video (approx.)

Democratic Party
Hillary Clinton

237

5,444
Mike Gravel

89

9,544
Barack Obama

580

20,342

Republican Party
Mike Huckabee

180

2,452
John McCain

161

3,629
Ron Paul

120

56,615
Mitt Romney

692

1418

Ron Paul gets one hell of a lot of viewers for each of his videos. And Mitt Romney clearly proves that having a lot of them doesn’t guarantee a lot of attention.

For your viewing pleasure:

Candidate Most Popular Video
 Times Viewed

Democratic Party
Hillary Clinton

clicky

645,203
Mike Gravel

clicky

279,889
Barack Obama

clicky

888,199

Republican Party
Mike Huckabee

clicky

1,450,094
John McCain

clicky

306,752
Ron Paul

clicky

887,989
Mitt Romney

clicky

472,391

In my next article (coming in the next few days) I’m going to attempt to understand the REAL WORLD consequences of the Internet campaigns. Stay tuned.

Next Page →

Free Web Hosting