You are visitor 141625, a syphilis-carrying nude elven religious uncle
May 24, 2017

In The News

Seemingly random stuff from around the net!

The Matrix Reloaded banned in Egypt; Egyptonians miss out on opportunity to be mildly disappointed

A philosophical discussion
Sometimes we as a unified mass of free-yet-similarly-thinking people forget that those in some places in the world don't agree that watching Keanu Reeves bounce around with goofy CG is the most fun you can have without resorting to murder. Egypt is one such country, as they banned the Matrix Reloaded. When asked, the Captian of the Egyptian censorship committe straightened his fancy Censorship Cap, spun his shiny Censorship Cane, declared that the film raised too many philosophical questions, then clicked the heels of his Censorship Shoes together before flying into a wild blue yonder filled with fluffy clouds and airplanes.

A statement released by the Committee, no doubt written whimsily in Censorship Ink, said, "Despite the high technology and fabulous effects of the movie, it explicitly handles the issue of existence and creation, which are related to the three divine religions, which we all respect and believe in," and then saucily added that the film "tackles the issue of the creator and his creations, searching the origin of creation and the issue of compulsion and free will."

There's a whole lot to digest there, and I don't recommend attempting it unless you're specially trained in statement interpretation theory as I am or you'll fuck it up, slimjim. Notice that the first thing the Censorship Committee mentions is that the movie is totally radical, even going to far as to invoke the heavy-hitting and borderline homosexual adjective 'fabulous'. When something like this is found in the content of a statement by the Censorship Committee which has just banned said movie this is the public offical equivalent of, "I've seen it and you ain't gonna, so fuck you, Egyptian bitches." These people are pros. Secondly, they talk about how there's some stuff in the film which relates somehow to some nonspecific religions in some way, a strong statement which will ensure that filmmakers cut that shit out. Yes, they will cut the shit out of that shit. You see, filmmakers, the people of Egypt won't stand for philosophical discussion. In other countries you might get away with thinking about the meaning of it all and attempting to discover why we're here, but Egypt is so far ahead of the curve that it's not even a curve anymore. It's a parabola or a line or something shaped like a sex organ. You see, Egyptonians are well-edjucated and figured something out; everything about religion has already been written down! It's all there! Just think about all the time we've been wasting on religious discussion and philosophising, especially me!

A long time ago when Egypt was ruled by children and The Rock they knew enough to worship cats, an obvious choice given their ability to sleep for 23 hours and spend the remaining hour licking their own crotch with a leg in the air. And cats have some interesting tricks too.

That was a little trick of wordplay, I hope I haven't thrown my readers for a linguistic loop!

Anyway, when Charleton Heston told the mean old Pharoah to Let My People Go did that boy king cat worshipper listen? Of course not! And so Charleton's God visited seven deadly plagues upon him, but still he would not relent. And in the end who won World War 2? That's right: Egypt.

So in conclusion, it's not nice to watch things that run counter to the status quo, unless you're on the Censorship Committee in which case it's fine.

Oh, the movie was also banned for excessive violence, which, if you've seen the movie, is like giving the award for most realistic hooters to Carmen Electra.

India's health minister is A-Ok with AIDS!

Those silly gays!
Indian health minister Sushma Swaraj somehow made worldwide news by hugging some children. Granted, these particular children have the AIDS, but I'm still not 100% sure when hugging became newsworthy. For instance, I hugged local politician Gerald Kennedy recently, a lingering emotional grasp during which our pelvises never came into contact but they certainly threatened to. Indeed, it was all I could to to avoid sliding my hands down to grasp Gerald's firm yet yielding buttocks and bury my nose in his wool-covered shoulder. Fortunately that's some seriously gay shit and I ain't having it. Oh, Gerald....

Anyway, the idea was to show that AIDS isn't caught like a cold, something which is common knowledge here, however India lacks sophisticated technology such as Degrassi Junior High and Tom Hanks to teach them how you get AIDS: from malevolent gremlins with a chip on their shoulder. Unfortunately the demonstration probably would have gone better if Swarj hadn't looked off camera, mouthed, "What? They have AIDS??? FUCK!" and then proceeded to throw them into furniture before sitting on an emergency eye wash station. It really didn't help that she then started to bleed from all her orifices, grew a penis, had said penis sprot mulitple nasty sores, and then have her infected penis fall off and chase a mouse into the walls. All of that had nothing to do with AIDS, instead stemming from a bout of stigmata, but the damage was done.

What's important here was the intent. Few polictians outside of Gerald Kennedy have the gumption to teach lessons via touching and hugging. One need look no further than California's new Governor, Adam Swansonetter, to see a shining example of this. This is a man who, in the course of a brief and consistently hilarious recall campaign never once offered hugs as a solution. Instead he offered to make use of his killer cyborg abilities to solve killer cyborg-centric problems, but I feel that that kind of single-minded approach isn't going to get hugs for the unhugged. But that's enough of my personal politics for now.

On the subject of hugging children in a public forum, ECG DOT COM would like to unequivicaly state that Ted Danson is not a politician or a child molestor, so please stop the persecution.

For the love of God give Steinbach some liquor!

The latest model vehicle from Steinbach!
This one strikes a little close to my heart-shapped region as the town of Steinbach is an hour or two from my home town. Mind you, I had no idea that it was full of Amish or whatever because they've apparently had a ban on booze in public places all along. Who knew!

Recently they had their fifth referendum to legalize alcohol in restaurants, and booze finally won! Booze always wins. An irate Eliott Ness was quoted as saying, "What? What's a Steinbach? Now where the hell is my whore at?"

When I first heard that Steinbach was a dry community I was a little shocked. It must be understood that Steinbach is an amazingly tiny place. In Winnipeg they're mostly known for their car dealership commercials, which purport that "It's Worth The Trip to Steinbach" and then the ads fill out the details with, "Steinbach auto dealers." After a childhood of seeing those ads imagine my surprise when I finally did go there and saw a whole lot of barns and a carriage. It was like saying, "Thanks for making the trip! Look at our fine wagon!" Damn you, Steinbach.

Anyway, In this land of misleading commercials and barn-raisings I don't know how they managed to keep away from the drink for so long. This seems especially odd when you consider that everybody else in Manitoba is massively drunk all the damn time, except for long time ECG DOT COM reader Armaegis, who's big on crack. I just don't see these people riding around on their donkeys, chewing tobacco, rustling wild sheep and then returning home to enjoy a... Sprite. That's no way for rustic small town folk to live!

The article mentions that thirsty Steinbachians would drive up to Winnipeg to enjoy an adult beverage with their meal. Driving TO Winnipeg for a night of entertainment? That's just sad.

Wacky headline yields wacky fruit

Best served with a side of onions and mushrooms
Sometimes, at first glance, news headlines appear to be totally outrageous, but upon closer inspection they turn out to be completely mundane. I place the blame for this squarely on the shoulders of news editors who, lacking costumed clowns like Spider-Man to regularly whine about, instead must get their jollies by putting extra zip into the copy.

Every once in a while though the headline is actually an accurate reflection of a zany article. The BBC recently ran just such an article entitled Over-heating puts babies at risk. I don't know about you, but just typing that out made my bow tie spin around, sounding much like a slide whistle! If you think anything like me, and that's for the courts to decide, the first thing this title brings to mind is thoughts of babies in microwaves slowly rotating and stewing in their own baby juices. And for the first time in my life that's actually pertinent to something!

The article isn't about not microwaving babies, although it doesn't really rule it out, either. The gist of it is that you shouldn't let your babies get too hot. The recommendation is to keep a thermonmeter with the baby and to feel it's skin occasionally. Oddly enough, despite not being about cooking babies that is a pretty accurate description of how you roast a chicken.

Sure enough the thrust of the article is that bad parents are overheating their babies, which makes the meat tougher and lowers the market price. Ok, the article doesn't mention selling babies for mass consumption, but this is a British news source and those guys are really subtle.

Once the article establishes the key piece about not baking your young it then goes through some safety steps that were obvious even before the previous BBC baby safety article, Babies are not footballs, even in American football. For instance, "if a baby is sweating, then they are too hot." That's the kind of in-depth journalism you don't see on this side of the pond, folks!

In a further act of mass fact-exposing, statistics showed that four out of ten parents thought their home was cooler than it actually was, while two in ten corrtly guessed the temperature within two degrees. For you non-math folk out there that means four out of ten parents thought it was warmer than it actually was, meaning that even now there must be a similar epidemic of parents putting their babies in freezers. Stop the fucking madness!

Back to articles

Return to index