Posts Tagged “celebrities”

Justin Bieber says a big FUCK YOU to women's rights

Today, in what can only be described as an ABORTION EXTRAVAGANZA, we bring to you not one, not two, but THREE news stories that should cause sighs of woe from all sensible (i.e. pro-choice) people.

First and most stupidly of all, is the worrying news that pre-teen hearthrob and Leftfield laughing stock Justin Bieber is ignorantly and vocally anti-choice. Not only is he against a woman’s right to choose what she does with her body & mental health because “it’s like, killing a baby yeah?”, he also has some very worrying views on rape too.

Speaking to Rolling Stone Magazine, J.Biebs said he didn’t agree with abortion, and was asked by the interviewer one of the obvious questions – “but what about in cases of rape?”

Instead of sticking to his bollocks “babykilling” line, The Biebs went further, saying “Um, well, I think that’s really sad, but everything happens for a reason. I don’t know how that would be a reason [to have an abortion].”

Bieber, listen up, or I’ll fucking abort you. Rape does not “happen for a reason”, other than the ‘reason’ that there are some disgusting men who make the choice to horrendously abuse women. Being raped is not a woman’s “fate”. The idea that “everything happens for a reason” is nonsense invented to try to force people in disadvantaged and oppressed positions to accept the abuse and discrimination that they face from privileged sections of society. Usually with some sort of religious undertone of “it’ll all work itself out when you get to heaven, so just accept your shit life and get on with it and don’t question authority”.

Women should be the only people allowed to judge whether they want to have a baby or get an abortion, and to make the vital decisions at this time regarding their physical and mental health. In an ideal world, that would be accepted as a matter of principle. However, it seems that Justin Bieber is so far behind in his social attitudes that he hasn’t yet even accepted the basic right of women who’ve been raped to not be forced to have a child that their rapist forced into their body without their consent, under violent and/or emotionally damaging circumstances. Even most right wing fuckwads generally make a wishy-washy type of exception for abortion in cases of rape, so it’s particularly disheartening to hear The Biebs hold that kind of backwards view. Get yourself a clue, Bieber.

I suppose some might say, Justin Bieber is only 17. It may sound excessive to judge the views of a stupit wee boy so harshly. However, two things are important to remember here – Justin Bieber is old enough to get a girl pregnant (and has many young girls flinging themselves at him daily, so it’s not unlikely), and therefore it’s time he grew up a bit and thought about the real issues at stake here before he opens his mouth to the media.

Secondly, Read the rest of this entry »

Comments 12 Comments »

Elton John and his partner David Furnish had their first child a few days ago -  baby Zachary was born to a surrogate mother on Christmas Day.

A new baby who is wanted, provided for and loved is always something to celebrate, and the congratulations from Elton’s celebrity and media pals have been flooding in. But those congratulations are nothing more than a piss in the ocean of criticism and revulsion that is being fired in the direction of the new fathers.

Well, I suppose there always ethical questions… is it right to create a new child through surrogacy, when so many already existing children are without a home or a family to love and provide for them? But plenty of heterosexual couples make babies via surrogacy or IVF, so there’s not much of a problem here. ..

And Elton John is a little old, at 63… but his partner is only 48. Men can naturally make babies well beyond either of these ages, and much older women in heterosexual relationships have babies with the help of science frequently, so no problems with that…

But… THEY’RE GAY. omg.

Daily Mail columnist Bel Mooney came out with the typical no-offense-but-I’m-about-to-say-something-really-offensive response

Let me immediately say that I don’t have any objection to a gay couple (male or female) becoming parents. Some people do — and assemble ­passionate and cogent arguments to make their case.
But I certainly do not believe that ­heterosexual couples have the ­monopoly on caring or being good ­parents. How could that be the case with so much ­evidence to the contrary?

…immediately followed by…

I wince to think of baby ­Zachary Jackson Levon ­Furnish-John coming home from school in four years’ time and asking David or Elton: ‘But who is my mummy?’

Um. Ok. Why is the automatic assumption that gay-parenting is made up of secrets and lies? The “who is my mummy” question is pretty similar to the “where do babies come from” question. And if a child’s questions are answered factually and with love, then no problems will occur.

The problems experienced by children of gay parents are not experienced because their parents are gay – but because of the reactions of the people around them to the fact that they have two mothers or fathers.

Zachary Furnish-John is 5 days old, and the process of fucking him up has already begun. Not by his parents. But by homophobes and people overwhelmed by hate and fear.

People like the wonderful citizens of the internet who said things like this:

Sick, sick, sick,  this is ridiculous, soon the world will be taken over by gay’s

obsene

SICK

Absolute sickening the morals of the gutter from a person of proven depravity

I shudder to think how the child will be brought up! A child needs a father and motherly upbringing not by two men who are both homosexual (the word gay has been butchered from it’s original pleasant meaning).
How can a homosexual man be a woman? How is the child going to feel when he starts to grown and see other children with a mother and a father? Seems to me that some people are more interested in the rights of homosexual couples than the right of a child, male or female, to have a mother and father ( for those with a simplistic and selfish mindset, that  is, father = male and mother = female, they are quite easy to tell apart).
I thought it was interesting that they made sure the child was a male. Does make you wonder what the real motive is. I know the laws of the Ukraine and I also know how you can get around those laws – Gruivna ($$$$$)

I pity this poor child in his later life.   What will happen when they get him in bed with  them.   Will they take turns in bathing him?.   It does not matter what education he receives he will end up a very backward adult.   How sick these people are who support this kind of action?   Very sick I should say.

disgusting

P AEDOPHILES

Very, very, very Sick !!

paedo rock, hang the sick f—–s. no child should be allowed to be within a mile of these unhealthy parasitic low life ****’s

Freaks should not be allowed to have children living with them end of

Its an absolute outrage.  Shame on the person who sold them the child you are as disgraceful as those two

A disgrace. They just want something to play with in their disgusting old age, why else would they specify a boy, having failed to buy one in the Ukraine. They should keep themselves to themselves and interbreed, and discover the thing we all know, that it’s not natural. As always, too many do gooders in this world who only want to appease.

Anyone who agrees with what these two perverts have done is as sick, twisted and disgusting as they are!!!

just another, MUST HAVE accessory, for this pair of poofters.

Its just sick and un-natural, end of..

SICK SICK SICK      another trainee for the gay society

I thought there were laws to protect children from freaks and weirdos.

Sick and very very wrong, what is this world coming to?

Sickening indulgent self righteous faggots -they both suck! -o sooooory no pun intended

Utter disgust at reading this. Another pair of mincers getting headlines for all the wrong reasons.

What I would like to know is why is it alright with the establishment for two perverts to rear a child but for the same child to sit on Father Christmas’s, knee is forbidden and before all the do-gooders jump up and down remember the only reason homosexuality was legalised was because of all the MP;s, Judges and Councillors who getting NAMED and SHAMED.

Forgive my ignorance but has either of these perverts had any input in the baby making process as in filling the turkey baster?

All from the comments on this article. At least they removed the one saying “he won’t need to be breastfed – he’ll be prostate milked”

Comments 7 Comments »

According to THIS article on DigitalSpy.co.uk, Daniel Radcliffe, A.K.A Harry Potter reveals that he has ‘lost faith’ in the Liberal Democrats in the wake of the tuition fees disaster caused by the coalition government.
It’s the fault of people like Radcliffe and other cunts in the public eye is that they can vote in whatever government they fucking want and they’ll be fine. It’s all the impressionable young folk who suffer when they realise that this seemingly ‘alt-y’ and ‘radical’ decisions to vote in a party who can talk the talk… but essentially can’t walk the walk.

The Liberal Democrats have not “let people down” but have spat in the faces of those who put their faith in them. The Lib Dems were deceptive in that they aimed their propaganda at young people, presenting themselves as THE party to be voting for in teenage/young rebellion. They in face, were planning all along to simply get in no matter what. They knew from the start that they’re gladly get on their knees for the Tories.
And a few things I’d like to say about Radcliffe himself. He was quoted in THIS article saying the following:

“If all the people who liked them voted for them you could change politics overnight and we could have a proper three-party system,” he explained.

Okay, spot the kid who hasn’t got a clue.
Yeah, that’s him. With the lightning bolt scar and the ugly glasses.
HEL-LOOOO? There’s MORE THAN three parties, Daniel – and what’s more, none of them are anywhere near proper. Don’t get me started on how much I cringed at “change politics”. Seriously, you don’t “change politics” by voting for a different shade of shite, ya muppet.
And see to be honest, see if you’ve spent your life quickly amassing enough money to build a castle out of bricks made of paper mache £100 notes, then you don’t have a place to speak for real, hard-working people.
My message to all students is that you really should stop listening to vapid starlets as they vomit their scripted opinions out at you. (Cause they’ve probably been paid to say it…)

And Daniel? You might be The Chosen One in the wizarding world, but here in the muggle world?
You’re an arsehole.

Comments No Comments »

Colin Firth was one of many high profile supporters that came out to back the Lib Dems prior to the election earlier this year.

He has now confirmed that his no longer supports the party, saying:

I think it is profoundly disillusioning if you are a student who registered to vote simply because of what the Liberal Democrat were promising, and many, many did and simply because of what the Liberal Democrats had to say about tuition fees and things. It is one of the reasons I went in that direction.

As well as saying that the Liberal Democrats and their kowtowing to the Tories and the cuts agenda “made it difficult for us who thought progressive politics would be the way forward.”

And he’s right – it has been very difficult for people who invested all their hopes and dreams into a political party posing as progressive.

What we can learn from the recent behaviour of the Lib Dems (as well as the SNP in the Scottish Parliament, and Obama in the USA) is that politicians with progressive promises have never, and will never, make real change. They are too invested in our political system and the capitalist regime it props up, and is propped up by.

If we want things like free education, free healthcare, progressive taxation, free school meals, an end to nuclear weapons and all the other things we’ve been promised by politicians who promptly changed their minds after election over the years, we need to stop investing our hopes in our votes, and start taking action to make real change. System change.

We have the power.

Comments 1 Comment »

George gets defensive about how many people want him to stand

After lots of threatening to do it over the past 5 years, George Galloway looks set to finally stage a comeback attempt to Glasgow.

This weekend, his party, RESPECT, are discussing the possibility of setting up in Scotland. But before they’ve even had a chance to vote on it, George has as good as said he’s going to do it anyway, if not as RESPECT then as ‘George 4 Glasgow.’

When asked why he’s thinking of doing this, his justification has had two major points: “I am awesome” and that he’s against “separatism.” So we can expect him to run an inspired campaign about how much we need him waffling away in the Scottish Parliament, and against independence. Just check out his recent performance on Newsnight Scotland, where he managed to not mention a single socialist policy, talked about how he was a celebrity and the only piece of politics he did advocate was British unionism:

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments 34 Comments »

Sir Bob shows his radical credentials

The world has watched in horror as the outrageously corrupt BBC and Channel 4 has attempted to make the ludicrous claim that there are still problems in Africa.

Sensible people everywhere know that Africa is now a paradise thanks to the efforts of their saviour, multi-millionaire Saint Sir Bob Geldof the Wonderful.

Sir Bob has been on the defensive over the last few weeks, after several different investigations attacked his legacy of work against poverty.

First of all, a BBC World Service investigation received information from several former rebel leaders in Ethiopia that a portion of aid money raised by the Band Aid charity in the 80s was in fact diverted by rebels to buy weapons.

Now, Channel 4 is to screen a documentary next week that attacks His Holiness for distracting attention from the Make Poverty History campaign in 2005.

During the 80s, at the time of Band Aid, the Ethiopian national government was at war with a number of rebel forces in the countryside. Leaders of those rebels are now in power in Ethiopia. However, some former rebel leaders have since fallen out with their former comrade and current Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi. They told the BBC that the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) tricked aid workers into giving them money, by disguising themselves as merchants, as well as covering sacks of sand with sacks of food when taking aid cash.

Former TPLF leaders claim that they got $100 million this way, which was spent on weapons to overthrow the government. They also claim that they used front groups, such as the Relief Society of Tigray, to get cash. Band Aid’s own records show they gave $11 million to the society.

His Excellency Sir Geldof has been outraged by the claims, and has threatened to sue the BBC, demanding that the reporters who filed the story and their bosses should get the sack.

“Martin Plaut, [the World Service news and current affairs editor] Andrew Whitehead and Peter Horrocks should be fired. There should be an immediate investigation into what went wrong, steps should be taken to rectify the identified faults and the World Service must work very, very hard to re-establish its trust and hard-won reputation as the world broadcaster of excellence.”

It seems that, according, the His Most Generous Wonderous-ness Geldof, Band Aid should be completely above criticism. How

"Why don't people get that I'm fantastic?!"

dare anyone suggest that a major aid effort in a starving country beset by civil war could ever be affected by corruption?! As BBC journalist Rageh Omaar pointed out in the Guardian, the journalists behind this story were in Ethiopia in the 80s, received serious and credible information, and were right to go ahead with it. There should now be a full investigation. The Most Marvellous Geldof’s response? Omaar is “ridiculous.”

Geldof went on to make the laughable claim that:

“Not a single penny went on armaments. Not one. Not a pound; not a penny. Let me be clear on that. And I’ve also spoken to some of the others, including the Red Cross, who say it is absolute rubbish that any of their money could have possibly gone on arms.”

At this point he really does sound desperate. He could have argued that corruption wasn’t on the scale the story claimed. But to claim that “not a single penny” went astray? As this article on Pambazuka points out, every single aid effort to Africa suffers from corruption. In a continent afflicted by poverty, undemocratic governments and the interference of imperialism in their affairs, it’s impossible to have a completely clean and transparent aid process. In fact, much of the way that aid is given by the western capitalist powers makes things worse.

The vehemence of Geldof’s denial has the opposite effect from the one he intended: it leaves you wondering what it is he’s so desperate to hide.

Meanwhile, in a separate programme, More 4 are screening a documentary called Starsuckers next week which will attack Geldof’s role in the G8 protests in 2005.

At the time, a major coalition of charities, campaign groups and churches came together in the Make Poverty History coalition. This demanded debt relief for third world countries and more aid from rich ones. It organised a mass march through the centre of Edinburgh, all dressed in white. At the time the SSP and SSY took part, but instead of white, we dressed in red, to symbolise our desire to Make Capitalism History. We argued that the structure of the international economy was geared to do nothing else but increase inequality and keep poor countries poor. An appeal to the G8 leaders meeting in Scotland was useless, they must be attacked and defeated.

SSP marching against the G8

However, even this charity campaign was too radical for the All Knowing Genius Geldof, who organised Live Aid, a massive celebrity mutual masturbation fest, were stars both young and has-been got together for a concert where they told the world how great they were.

Starsuckers claims that Geldof hijacked the Make Poverty History campaign for his own ends. After the summit, it became clear that G8 leaders were going to do sweet FA to help third world countries, and that all the talk of progress had just been rhetoric for the cameras. But Geldof said he gave the global political elite “10 out of 10″ for commitments on aid, and “8 out of 10″ for debt relief. He later said the 8 score should be upgraded to 10 out of 10. In the process he showed just how much he himself was part of the PR machine defending the corrupt imperialist governments of the west.

The ever furious Geldof has penned a 6,000 word letter attacking Starsuckers and attempting to defend his rapidly-vanishing legacy. The theme underlying all this outrage is that clearly Geldof is pretty sensitive to allegations that show him up for what he is: a completely useless celebrity attention seeker. A man who wanted to do good, but has been completely compromised by working hand-in-glove with the powerful forces actually responsible for third world poverty.

He attacked anti-poverty campaigners as “wankers dressed as clowns”, and said Make Poverty History was “a bit lame and almost entirely ineffectual. . .boring, futile and adolescent.” Again, he says he’s contacted his lawyers.

On the other hand, according to his letter, Live Aid had an acute political vision of the world economic situation and the realistic prospect of ending under-development throughout the global south. Just listen to this piece of stunning analysis from Geldof:

“Richard [Curtis] and Bono came to me and said do another gig. I said you fucking do it if you’re so eager. Bono said he’d play with McCartney and they’d open the gig with “It was 20 years ago today” – a reference to Live Aid. I wanted to see that. Precisely that rock n roll moment I wanted to see, so I said ok. That’s why I did it. Pathetic but y’know …”

Yes Bob, we do know.

The fact of the matter is, the protests against the G8 weren’t as successful as some of the previous mobilisations against international capitalist summits, like the Battle of Seattle. A lot of this was to do with the political confusion-were we against the summit, or asking the leaders to do something for us? Despite the best efforts of the SSP and others, Make Poverty History’s campaign contributed a lot towards stopping a more radical, anti-capitalist approach.

But Geldof knows exactly what side of the power divide he comes down on. In his letter he writes:

“Like it or not the agents of change in our world are the politicians. Otherwise you’re always outside the tent pissing in. They stay inside their tent pissing back out at you. This is futile. My solution is to get inside the tent and piss in there.”

"When we get inside the tent can we piss on each other again?"

Whilst Geldof and the G8 leaders engage in bizarre watersports, those of us who actually know what they’re talking about can unpick what he’s said here. The only way to get any change is to rely on the same global elite who are responsible for creating the situation as it stands, claims Geldof. But rich countries are rich precisely because they have looted Africa and the rest of the third world for centuries now, and it’s still going on. Those people and movements who’ve tried to stand up to this have faced ferocious attacks from the west and their corrupt allies. The G8 leaders will NEVER solve poverty in Africa, because they are responsible for it.

The way forward for poor countries is demonstrated by the handful of examples where the people have won and the government stands up to the rich world. Today, Venezuela and Cuba, which have revolutionary governments supported by the mass of the people, are able to provide world class health and education to their people, and do not suffer from famine as countries like Ethiopia do. The people of these countries, and their allies here, are the real agents of change, not rich politicians.

As for us in Scotland, it’s clear that sitting around watching wanker celebrities on telly is going to change nothing. We have a responsibility to help people in the third world. The best way we can do that is by fighting for socialism here, and trying to take down our own corrupt governments responsible for so much suffering across the globe.

Comments 5 Comments »