Variations of this have been turning up as comment spam-
Breaking News from TIME WARNER NEWS: We work for big news companies own by the Evil Jews regime in America; We betray our boss and leak this important news to you: The mass genocide terrorist organization known as the illuminati (also known as the Bilderberg Group) used the H.A.A.R.P. weather weapon machine to wipe out an Elementary school in Moore, Oklahoma because that school didn’t want to house train the little children to worship the Devil.
Not quite a full house on conspiracy theory bingo- nothing about 9/11 or birth certificates- but they sure have managed to condense the crazy, haven’t they.
Apparently Evangelo-freak* Richard Carvath is a satirical creation. That is what he means when he says his website contains satirical content, isn’t it?
Today, Ricky is playing the role of clueless homophobe who thinks he’s clever because he’s using cheap cultural references rather than coming out and saying what he means. It’s a tired cliche, and several years out of date, so not one of his better characters.
Sephton for Manchester Central: Matt’ll Fix It for you
Now then, now then… Matthew Sephton, my erstwhile rival for Salford and Eccles (GE2010) is the Conservative Party candidate for the Manchester Central by-election to be held on 15th November.
If you’re a Manchester Central voter, Matt probably thinks he can fix it for you… you name it, from crime to unemployment to redefining marriage, Matthew Sephton is out to win your vote.
What’s the single most important thing every voter needs to know about Matthew Sephton?
IMO I’d say it’s the fact that he’s the leader of LGBTory – the Conservative Party’s affiliated group for homosexual-perverts.
Matthew’s a gayboy, and it seems to me that his main political passion is for pursuing ‘gay rights’ causes.
Do you wanna be in Matt’s Gang, Matt’s Gang, Matt’s Gang, do you wanna be in Matt’s Gang?
Oh, yeah?
Well, if you do wanna be in Matt’s Gang, be very clear that Matt’s gang is LGBTory. A vote for Matthew Sephton is a vote for the pervert-politics agenda exemplified by Stonewall.
Parents in Manchester Central should ask Matthew – a teacher – about his views on ‘sex education’ for little boys and girls. What kind of ‘educational’ pictures and videos does he approve of?
Voters should also ask Matthew why until recently he was banned from donating blood. What behaviour was it that Matthew engaged in with a man/men that caused him to be banned?
And voters should also ask Matthew about his views on redefining marriage.
Labour will win this by-election by a very comfortable margin, but for the record the candidates (source: Wikipedia) are: Lucy Powell (Labour); Matthew Sephton (Conservative); Marc Ramsbottom (Liberal Democrat); Chris Cassidy (UKIP); Peter Clifford (Communist League); Alex Davidson (Trade Unionist & Socialist); Lee Holmes (Peoples Democratic Party); Loz Kaye (Pirate); Eddy O’Sullivan (BNP); Clive Searle (Respect). Tom Dylan (Green Party) is also reported to be a candidate (source: MEN).
I haven’t bothered giving you a link to the original post, because Carvath has a habit of taking them down so his stupidity is only visible for brief periods at a time. It’s here as a record, in case anyone in the future is foolish enough to think he’s credible but sensible enough to do a search on his background.
Update I was right to not bother with a link- he took the post down whilst I was writing about it.
*Just trying out Dickie’s favourite tactic of sticking two words together to make some dumb attempt at a statement that’s really meaningless.
We were talking about the shooting of two Police officers in Mottram and I pondered, “I wonder who’ll be the first to say it’s all because we’re letting women do men’s jobs?” Then I thought a second or so longer and said, “I bet it’s Carvath.”
Richard Carvath has a habit of taking down his posts, particularly the more stupid ones, so, just in case it disappears, here’s a taster of what he wrote-
It disgusts me that Bone and Hughes were sent out to respond to a burglary. Look at the photo of Nicola Hughes above; she was a little girl who should never have been a police officer at all. What kind of a society are we that we send out such young, small women to investigate burglaries, patrol our streets and respond to violent criminals (most of whom are men much stronger and harder than they)? A sick society is what we are, sending the weak and vulnerable to do men’s work. Women doing our frontline policing is wrong not only for the sake of the women involved but also for society’s sake, because we are all less safe when we have women rather than men trying to protect us from violent criminals. The sad truth is that in a civilised society the female Fiona Bone and the female Nicola Hughes would still be with us, because if we were a civilised society we wouldn’t permit our women to engage in frontline policing at all.
In Carvath’s “civilised” society two Police officers would still be dead, because an unarmed man is just as vulnerable as an unarmed woman when faced with 10-16 shots and a grenade explosion. Unless, of course, Dick-world is controlled by patrols of Robocopish, heavily armed, God-fearing, hetero Cop heroes.
….Tim Montgomerie doesn’t have much to worry about. Montgomerie runs the ConservativeHome blog/website and is a key member of the Christian Conservative Fellowship. Despite such a dodgy pedigree he has come out to say that there is absolutely nothing wrong with gay marriage. In fact, it would be a good thing for society-
It is because I value marriage so much that I have come to believe it should be extended to gay people and not kept exclusive. Because it is so beneficial an institution it should be enlarged rather than fossilised.
The fossils are predictably upset by what is a fairly reasonable reading of the benefits of gay marriage. Richard Carvath- God’s self-appointed bigot in Salford- weighed in with his usual illogic (I’ve removed the link because the original post has been deleted and there’s no point sending you to an empty page. Luckily my RSS reader had it cached, so there’s a copy of it below).
Tim, understand that you are a traitor to Conservatism and, moreover, you are betraying Christ and mocking God in your support for the destruction of marriage and in your advocacy of evil perversion. You are in active rebellion against God; be very clear that in supporting the destruction of marriage you have chosen to place yourself at the right hand of Satan.
There’s never a coherent explanation of exactly how gay marriage is going to so completely and easily destroy “traditional” marriage when someone has one of these rants. Straight folk are still going to be allowed to wed. Those of us who aren’t pathetic bigots run the risk of going to more weddings- which’ll be a bit more expensive and tiring- but that’s the only way most of us are going to be affected.
[I have missed Carvath's uninformed bigotry since he took some sort of sabbatical. Hopefully now he's back to being a regular source of amusement.]
Update: Carvath has taken his post down. He does that a lot. Fortunately, my RSS reader has it cached-
Living a Lie: the Madness of Montgomerie
Over the last couple of years this blog has become a cult blog for mainstream British Conservatives. This blog’s popularity is partly down to the fact that I say what I say openly rather than anonymously, and partly because it is a platform which has given an online public voice to grassroots Conservatives’ offline views and discussions. Probably because I am an evangelical Christian – as well as a fellow conservative - I have to say I’ve been deluged by approaches from so many Conservatives in recent weeks in response to The Madness of Tim Montgomerie. Conservatives are appalled and horrified by Tim Montgomerie’s loss of the plot. I’ve been asked to write this blog on behalf of all genuine Conservatives – and evangelical Christians in particular – to urge Tim to come to his senses:
Dear Tim,
You identify yourself as a ‘Conservative’ and a ‘Christian’ and yet you support the destruction of marriage and endorse evil behaviour. On behalf of Christians and Conservatives throughout the UK, I must point out to you that you are not one of us.
We were horrified to read of Stonewall boss Ben Summerskill gloating over you when he said: “We’re delighted that, having heard the arguments, one of Britain’s most influential evangelical Christians is now able fully to support marriage for gay people without compromising his faith in any way.”
Tim, understand that you are a traitor to Conservatism and, moreover, you are betraying Christ and mocking God in your support for the destruction of marriage and in your advocacy of evil perversion. You are in active rebellion against God; be very clear that in supporting the destruction of marriage you have chosen to place yourself at the right hand of Satan.
Your support for the destruction of marriage is emphatically not God’s will; in seeking to destroy marriage you are doing the bidding of your real master Satan. Tim, you claim to be a Christian… but you are living a lie.
You were seduced away from the truth when you began to idolise your own status within the Conservative Party and put yourself and your career before God, before sound principle and before the best interests of the British people.
Have you any idea just how devastating the destruction of marriage will be if you get your evil way? Tim… Wake up! Repent!
When you wonder what would happen if a conspiracy theorist were to come across a genuine conspiracy (or, at least, a crime committed by more than one person, which I think qualifies as a conspiracy), you know the result isn’t going to be anything like a Mel Gibson movie. You know it’s going to be more like this-
I have a go-to blog to keep track of conspiracy theories. Luckily for me the guy who runs it is also a Christian fundamentalist, creationist homophobe. So this one blog keeps me up to date on what’s incensing the intolerant and uninformed without having to follow any others.
Late last week he ran a story he’d picked up from another paranoia site called infowars, which I believe is considered some sort of nexus for this stuff. The story- well, the basic story- is that a British outfit called New Forests Company is working with the Ugandan government to evict farmers from land so it can be planted with trees which will be traded as carbon offsets by large polluters. The Ugandan Police or military, possibly with NFC’s knowledge and approval, were violent in their eviction tactics, leading to at least one death. To compound the heavy handed evictions, the farmers received little or no recompense and have been moved to land they can’t get as good a yield from.
This much of the story, at least, is backed up by Oxfam, who have started their own investigation.
This is unpleasant, another example of representatives of a developed nation corrupting, or taking advantage of the corruption of, a less developed nation for profit. It’s been the way throughout history, from the first explorers up to BP in Iran and Shell in the Ogoniland area of Nigeria. We should do something to draw attention to them, punish the perpetrators and get the dispossessed back their land.
Did the conspiracy theorists say any of this? Or suggest signing up to Oxfam’s Grow campaign to find out what you can do about it.
Of course they didn’t.
They layered a confection of a conspiracy theory onto it, inventing connections which aren’t there and obscuring the truth beneath their fantasies. This isn’t another example of corporate misbehaviour, they say. Instead it’s all about “mainstream media silence, climate change and humanitarian scams, neo-colonialism under the guise of protecting against climate change, land grabs, and UN and Big Pharma eugenicists working towards population reduction as part of a global regime”. This sewage of talking points they regurgitate, trying to force their pet hates into holes that aren’t even there, hides the real crime.
If these people who like to think of themselves as brave seekers of truth and revealers of corruption really were then they wouldn’t belittle genuine problems by including them in their fantasies. If they truly cared about the victims of this Ugandan land grab they’d stick to reporting the unpleasant truth rather than discarding it so they can repeat their unbelievable fantasies.
Ultimately, as I’ve said before, the rantings of conspiracy theorists distract from crimes that really have been committed and help no-one but the criminals whose escape they help to cover.
I haven’t written about the reactionary bigotsphere in a while. I only follow two, hand picked, reactionary bigots- following any more would be redundant as they all draw from the same uninformed prejudices and all express themselves in variations of the same self pitying whine. Neither of them has been all that busy lately and when they have they’ve just repeated the same boring nonsense as usual.
However, local reactionary bigot Richard Carvath- Salford’s one man lunatic fringe- did pop up last night to tell us what he has planned for the next few months. More of the same nonsense mostly, but also-
(4) An article to examine the underlying ethics and philosophy of my strategic and stylistic approach to political activism on the internet. Just why do I write [and generate other web content, e.g. lo-fi videos] in the way that I do? What are the motives behind the method? And what are the objectives? If I refer to ‘what I do that is distinctively me’ as ‘Carvathianism’ – what exactly is Carvathianism? Whilst most people quickly grasp what I stand for – for example, my pro-life stance – why do I manifest my agenda as I do? Carvathianism is essentially a socially conservative approach to engaging with a dumbed-down, pornographised, post-modern British society (and media, and so-called ‘intelligentsia’) by means of counter-intuitive techniques, humour and satire etc. There’s a sense in which what I do is a response to the challenge of communicating Christian socio-political themes to a largely ‘morally and spiritually illiterate’ mainstream audience through the maze of madness and irony that is our post-modern relativistic society. Why do I merge ‘traditional’ journalistic writing conventions with mind-bending (and moral-straightening) wit – with the occasional blunt instrument thrown in for good measure? What is the true depth of my academic engagement with the issues I address – and why present principles in an unorthodox, ‘middle-of-the-road-common-denominator’ manner? Why do I risk being dismissed as a dilettante or a fool because I often deliberately eschew arguing evidence of consequences with secular-humanists on their own terms; why do I sometimes refuse to play ball? Do I really believe that the fallacy of humanist first principles is so self-evident that the ‘evidence’ humanists hold dear on various issues is obviously non sequiter from the shine-through undeniable reality of absolute moral principles, and therefore logically it is unnecesary to engage in ‘reasoning the ridiculous’ with the Richard Dimkins crowd?………..i.e. do I really believe that the truths which underpin my stances are so self-evident and so unassailable that I can credibly stand my modus operandi largely upon the assertion of pure principle alone? When to use statistical and anecdotal evidence – and how? Why use sources sparingly (most of the time)?
Carvathianism? Can anyone pretend to have a grand philosophy just by sticking some suffixes onto their surname? I claim Pattinsonism. I’ll define it later. I’d go the whole, Carvathian, hog, but Pattinsonian used to be my user name on Hotmail.
It goes beyond being a word soup to become a word sludge which says nothing of any substance. There’s mention of humour and satire, but Carvath is only funny in the “we’re laughing at you, not with you” way and, unless he’s Chris Morris’ latest and most bizarre creation, I detect no satire.
I think Carvathianism, based upon the second half of the sludge, comes down to admitting that he can’t provide evidence to support any of his claims (because reality is on the side of “secular-humanists”) but he’s convinced that doesn’t matter because the version of God that exists only inside his head has told him what the “Truth” really is.
It’s all quite dumb, and reading it makes your head hurt. Under the right circumstances trying to follow the looping, folding and tearing illogic of it all might bring on some sort of transcendental experience. However, the bit which made me laugh most was later on, and much shorter.
Marriage is on my agenda.
I feel a little bad every time I mock Carvath. Not because he makes it all too easy, but because there’s obviously something wrong with him. He’s delusional, and the delusions are getting greater. If any of his family are reading this I’d ask them to intervene and get him some help before he becomes more of a risk to himself and others.
So an American pastor with the same name as the short Welsh one from Monty Python, whose childish attention seeking ways included threats to burn the Koran, was invited to Britain by a bunch of racist idiots. The Government has decided not to let him in, and instantly given him even more of the publicity he craves than he’d have received if he had turned up.
The preacher and the neanderthals who’ve invited him over have tiny constituencies. In his church of the poisoned mind the man who isn’t a Python preaches to fewer than 50 people. The reactionaries who wooed him “expected about 100 people to attend events [...], including about 30 members [of the group]“. Those are tiny numbers. In my time I’ve organised, and helped to organise, events which have had attendances many times those numbers- where’s my national news coverage? They’re just courting controversy to get coverage, and it’s worked. We shouldn’t ignore them ,but we should give them the amount of attention they deserve- something along the lines of a shrug and turning away.
Of course, by writing about this so I can make my point, I have become another person who’s giving the preacher and his English friends more attention than they deserve. Hopefully by refraining from using their names in teh post I have mitigated that a little.
Halal meat is meat from animals which have been slaughtered and ritually sacrificed to Satan* in accordance with islamic practice.
I don’t do Satan meat!
[* The god of the followers of Mohammed as presented in the Koran and known as 'Allah' is not the one true God YHWH but is actually Satan.]
Yes, it’s Richard Carvath, Salford funny mentalist, being an uninformed bigot again.
I’d sign a petition calling for the stunning of all animals before they’re slaughtered- effectively banning the objectionable part of halal and kosher butchery, but not their right to pray to their chosen version of God over the dead animal- but it seems that everyone who puts one up forgets about the Jewish practice and is concentrating on being anti-Islam not pro-animal rights.
I used to analyse data for a living. It’s fascinating to take a whole load of numbers, postcodes and geodemographic data (in my case) and come up with something meaningful, particularly if it makes a pretty map or graphic. I haven’t done any hardcore number crunching for years, and sometimes I miss it. What I did this morning hardly counts, but it was a little bit of fun.
Religious-idiot Richard Carvath did some primary school maths and was awfully pleased with the result. In the last 5 years 80,000 people have entered into civil partnerships. If the population of the UK is 60 million then you just divide one by the other and multiply by 100 to find that a mere 0.13% of the British population is interested in civil partnership! This is so small that it really means that nobody is interested! Civil partnership is irrelevant so we should stop doing them! (We’ll pass over Carvath’s usual bleating about how civil partnerships are destroying the institution of marriage. I don’t think he can comprehend that it can’t be both insignificant and a clear and present danger at the same time.)
Of course, that number is meaningless. For a start,around 19% of the country’s population is aged under 16. Take them out of the numbers and you have an adult population of around 48.6 million. Do the maths again and now 0.16% of the adult population is in a civil partnership. Still a tiny proportion, you might say, but this is still a flawed number. Most of the population aren’t gay- the majority of people would qualify for a “normal” marriage.
Carvath has insisted that only 1% of people are homosexual, a more commonly held figure is 10%. So between 1.65% and 16.5% of those eligible have taken up civil partnerships since they were introduced. How many heterosexual marriages have there been in that same period?
Well the Office of National Statistics says there were 232,990 marriages in England and Wales in 2008. Perhaps the Scots don’t get married. Rounding that up to 250,000 to give the straights a chance, that’s half a million people getting married every year, 2.5 million married people within five years. Between 5.2% and 5.72% of the straight adult population has got married within the last 5 years. If homosexuals are really as tiny a minority as Carvath likes to think then the numbers actually show that they’re over three times more likely to get civil partnered than straights are to get married. More realistic figures give marriage the threefold advantage over civil partnership.
What has my data mining proved? Mostly that if you want meaningful statistics you have to do a little bit of work establishing context etc.. It’s not clear whether Carvath was behaving like a tabloid- working out the worst looking number and assuming his audience are too dumb and gullible to question it or spot the logical flaws- or he really thought he was doing some clever analysis. I’m normally a charitable chap, but experience tells me that the latter is more likely than the former, not that either speak well for the man.
During the election I subscribed to a load of political blogs’ RSS feeds. After it I unsubscribed from most of them. Foolishly, I revisited the two most obnoxious of them again recently.
Richard Carvath stood as an independent candidate in Salford and Eccles, the seat retained by Hazel Blears and polled 384 votes. He claims, loudly and repeatedly, that he would have done better if the media, the big parties and homosexual-perverts hadn’t conspired against him. Homosexual-perverts is a favourite phrase of Carvath’s. He can’t just say homosexual, it has to be homosexual-pervert. He may have read somewhere that you can reinforce your message by using your preferred phrases regularly until the reader starts thinking in them as well. But he’s gone overboard- the Carvath blog is overloaded with them, every sentence employs a piece of similar wordplay, all of it of a level which should embarrass anyone over the age of ten. Homosexual-perverts abound, homophobic registrars who refuse to perform Civil Pervertships are conscientious objectors honoured with the title of Decents. I’ve seen him use the phrase Guardian-perverts as well, and it should be obvious who Barack Obortion is. I’m sure he thinks it’s all very clever, witty even, but it just looks like the ever less coherent ramblings of someone with serious mental problems.
Carvath is on a mission from God, the voice in his head. He recently had a nasty accident whilst climbing, breaking several bones and damaging his back. If it had happened to any of his growing list of homosexual-pervert enemies (which is anyone who points out how nasty his beliefs are) he would no doubt be crowing about how God had punished them for their sins. Because it happened to him it’s somehow a form of blessing and all part of his invisible friend’s holy plan. I can only hope he gets better mentally at some point as well as physically.
Real Street is the blog of Stewart Cowan, a Scottish evangelical christian who has yet to meet a conspiracy theory he doesn’t like. Recent favourites include a bus advert which is going to turn us all into Muslims and how trying to cut down homophobic bullying in schools is secretly a plan to legalise gay paedophilia. Cowan doesn’t mangle language as much as Carvath, but he does like to grasp at anything which he feels supports his prejudices whilst dismissing all evidence against them. The Daily Mail and conspiracy loving tabloids are right and anyone answering him with facts and basing their replies upon reality is obviously deluded.
Cowan has a couple of tame commenters who’ll up the frothing at the mouth quotient when necessary. English Viking hates foreigners who come over here to work and improve their, and our, lot. Ancient Danes and Norwegians who popped over for a little recreational raping and stealing are obviously okay, though. Len wants you to know the Truth and accept God, because science, reality and not hating people just because they’re different is obviously the work of Satan.
The natural response to the likes of Carvath and Cowan is this-
But in the long run that’s just a waste of time. They enjoy being wrong, and feel that having all the flaws of their arguments pointed out somehow proves their case. It’s far better to ignore them or point out elsewhere just how stupid they’re being today.
Which is what I know I should do, and what I shall try to do, but I’m not making any promises that I won’t pop over there occasionally and slap them on their own blogs.
Australia’s government seems to be going through some sort of moral panic at the moment. This press release from the Australian Sex Party details new and dumb restrictions on the content of adult material. Depictions of female ejaculation are to be banned, presumably because someone- like Queen Victoria and lesbians- doesn’t believe it really happens. (TMI, but I’m confident I’ve seen it in real life. Not as spectacular as porn would have you believe, but definitely not urine and something more than mere lubrication.)
Another, even dumber, crackdown is on models with smaller breasts. The Sex Party asserts that material featuring models with A cups is being restricted because, somehow, it’ll excite paedophiles.
I just read 25, 000 Years of Erotic Freedom by Alan Moore, which is basically a long essay on the history of smut with ample illustrations and gorgeous packaging. One of his conclusions is that the state of the eortic arts in the English speaking world (actualy he just calls out Britain and the US, but I think we can add Australia now) is so awful precisely because of the efforts our governments make to restrict discussion of sex.
There’s too much low quality, demeaning and insulting (to both sexes) porn out there, and it’s not because there’s too much freedom. It’s because many of the people who would create interesting, challenging, life affirming, sex positive and gorgeous work are scared off by the threats of censorship and worse. By saying that one aspect of women’s sexual experience is too vile to be discussed and that a particular body type (a body type I prefer- I’m Not Safe For Australia) shouldn’t be seen, Australia’s government are doing great harm and little, if any, good.
Right. I’m off to draw a page of comic art which may be illegal in Australia.
I’m a bit behind the curve when it comes to commenting on the proposed Digital Economy Bill (here’s one professional writer’s opinion, and here’s another’s). Frankly, the fact that Peter Mandelson is in any way connected to it should be enough to convince you it’s going to be awful.
Sign this petition on the Number 10 website to register your disapproval. It only relates to the proposal to cut people off from the internet for no good reason and without the necessity of evidence.
I’l try to investigate it all more thorouighly, but I don’t know if I want to be depressed and angered that much.
Perhaps Wilson and Melanie Philips are conducting parallel experiments in just how moronic they can make their opinion pieces and still get published. The flaw in their methodology is that they’re writing for the Daily Mail, a “newspaper” with a policy of champion ignorance amongst the middle classes.
If Wilson continues in this vein it won’t be long before he’s writing about how pixies can save the economy and the dangers of immigrant trolls living under our motorway bridges and decimating the English goat population.
Carrey, and even moreso his girlfriend Jenny McCarthy, are the celebrity faces of America’s growing anti-vaccination movement, which claims there’s a connection between childhood vaccinations and autism despite there being absolutely no evidence for it. The publicity they get opens the door for conmen selling ineffective, and often dangerous, autism treatments. It also leads worried parents to opt out of getting their children jabs, which not only puts their offspring at risk but also those of others. Amy Wallace took a look at the problem for Wired. As with anyone who shows up pseudo-science these days she’s already received threats and been the victim of half arsed character assassination attempts.
I’d call for a boycott of Carrey’s films, but he’s pretty much guaranteed it already by appearing in such total crap. The Grinch wants to kill your children. Pass it on.
People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn’t have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless.
From something called Investors’ Business Daily, which has now removed the line after so many people pointed out how stupid it was.
by Alan Moore, which is basically a long essay on the history of smut with ample illustrations and gorgeous packaging. One of his conclusions is that the state of the eortic arts in the English speaking world (actualy he just calls out Britain and the US, but I think we can add Australia now) is so awful precisely because of the efforts our governments make to restrict discussion of sex.
Highly commented posts