Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Iran into the British embassy and all I got was this burnt Union Jack

So Iran is not the most friendly country, we all know that. Iranians are always saying, "Death to [Country X]" or denying a country's right to exist, which is fairly serious when the IAEA suggests Iran is working towards acquiring a nuclear weapon. The most recent example of Iran's belligerence happened on Sunday when Iran's MPs voted overwhelmingly to downgrade diplomatic relations with the UK after the UK (along with Canada and the US) announced new measures targeting Iran's nuclear aspirations. Some Iranian MPs even chanted "Death to Britain" while they voted, which -- along with the tear gas attack by a South Korean MP against his fellow parliamentarians -- is a good reminder that, as bad as the behaviour in our legislatures is, we still are not anywhere near rock bottom.

Another major difference between Western liberal democracies like Canada and the Iranian theocracy is that when Iran downgrades diplomatic relations, they really downgrade diplomatic relations. From the BBC:
Protesters in the Iranian capital, Tehran, have broken into the UK embassy compound during a demonstration against sanctions imposed by Britain. Militant students are said to have ransacked offices, burned the British flag and smashed embassy windows. The move comes after Iran resolved to reduce ties following the UK's decision to impose further sanctions on it.
The students clashed with riot police and chanted "the embassy of Britain should be taken over" and "death to England". Students were said to have ransacked offices inside the building, and one protester was reported to be waving a framed picture of Queen Elizabeth II.
If Canada downgraded diplomatic relations with another country, our citizens would never do that. First of all, no one would be paying any attention to what Parliament was doing since the average Canadian pays attention to federal politics for about 5 days every election cycle. (Here's a rhetorical question for you: If the CBC news plays in some form an average of every 15 minutes and no one actually cares what it says, do we still have to pretend that the CBC is a vital Canadian institution? Can we get rid of George Stroumboulopoulos yet?)

Second, there isn't a critical mass of politically active youth in this country. Our demographics are skewed way more towards the geriatric than Iran; our median age is 41 while the Iranian median age is 26. And most of the young people we do have who might be inclined to take part in a political movement are busy with school or gainfully employed in jobs they need to pay off their student loans and credit cards.

Third, our security forces would never allow our citizens to carry on like that. We instituted a borderline police state when we had the G8 and G20 summits in Ontario and police powers have only grown stronger since then under the "Harper Government". Admittedly, the massive police force we spent $1 billion dollars on for protection at the G20 summit in Toronto could not prevent broken windows and burning cop cars in the downtown core, but if the police only needed to guard a single building I am sure they could handle that. No one in the Canadian government would countenance Canadian diplomacy getting a black eye (despite no other country caring what we do on the international stage) so I am sure we would find a way to crack down on embassy looters.

Fourth, any city big enough to have an embassy and a bunch of angry protesters would have plenty of people from whatever country they are protesting and they would make a lot of potential protesters feel bad. It's harder to hate the 'Other' when you have human contact with them -- they stop being the Other. Tehran lacks the sizable British population necessary for this humanization process to occur.

Fifth, our protesters have already expended most of their bile on hockey riots and innocuous Occupy movements. I'm only half-joking.

Essentially, if Canada downgrades diplomatic relations with another country, all it means is that our consulate delivers one crate of maple syrup on Christmas rather than five.

***

Letting protesters invade an embassy within your territory and scare off the embassy's employees is a clear violation of international law, so you would expect the international community to shriek even though (or maybe because) international law is notoriously difficult to enforce. Plus Iran does not have a stellar diplomatic record with protecting embassies to begin with (see: Hostage Crisis 1979, Iranian), and this whole thing started because the West wanted to further ostracize Iran so you would other countries to exploit this opportunity to pile on. Let's find out by taking a closer look at how the international community reacted to the assault on the British embassy:

US
The US condemned the attack "in the strongest terms". "We stand ready to support our allies at this difficult time," White House spokesman Jay Carney said.
Really, United States? You are the leader of the free world and the one remaining superpower yet "we stand ready to support our allies at this difficult time" are your "strongest terms"? This was an international incident, not a bake sale to raise money for a fledging WNBA team. Way to sound like FEMA. I bet your strongest terms would be a lot stronger if it was your embassy being looted, and it very well could have been since you implemented the same measures as the UK.

Russia
Russia said the attack was "unacceptable and deserving condemnation".
Thanks for the huge understatement, Russia. Hey, maybe you can stop giving the Iranians nuclear technology so we don't have these problems in the first place. Sticks and nukes can obliterate entire cities, but words never replaced a smashed embassy window. You know what else deserves "condemnation"? Putin, GazProm, crony capitalism, and mediocre human rights records.


France
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe also condemned the incident, adding: "France expresses its full solidarity with the UK."
Welp, I guess no one expected much from France, anyway.

EU
A spokeswoman for EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said it was a "totally unacceptable incursion".
Wow, I wish my job was spokeswoman in charge of stating the obvious. I would go after that job, too, if it wasn't for the fact that the EU is collapsing on itself like a black hole.

Canada
...
Sorry, there was nothing in the article I read about Canada's diplomatic reaction to the ransacking because hey, if no one in Canada cares about Canadian foreign policy, why should anyone else. I did look on the Foreign Affairs website, though, where I found a statement condemning the storming of the embassy. Here's what John Baird had to say:
Canada is outraged.... My officials have summoned the Iranian chargé d’affaires to Canada to convey our displeasure directly.
Pretty good. However, if the Ministry really wanted to deliver the goods, it should have posted a video of John Baird berating the chargé d'affaires. If they're going to make the chargé drive all the way to Baird's office, they might as well have a video camera on hand to record the event. It would be deliciously awkward to watch an Iranian diplomat appointed by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad bite his tongue while being told off by an atheistic homosexual.

I was wondering why the Ministry only summoned the chargé d'affaires for censure and not the Iranian ambassador himself. I assumed it was because the ambassador was not available, but then I checked out the Iranian embassy website and it turns that the chargé is the head of the mission hear in Canada. That is a diss in the world of international diplomacy.




The incident obviously brings to mind the 1979 Iranian Hostage Crisis and gives me an opening to reminisce about my favourite part of that Crisis (insofar as it's possible to look back on a 444-day hostage situation fondly): After the Iranians captured (almost) all of the American Embassy's employees on November 4, they released all the women and black people they had captured that same month. The reason they gave was because that they had sympathy for "oppressed minorities". Basically, they tried to divide and conquer America by driving a wedge between the white male elitists and the rest of American society. I always thought that was surprisingly insightful for a group of angry university students* that had never been to America, but it did not work; the hostage crisis actually brought Americans closer together.

Regardless, releasing those oppressed hostages was one of the great disses of the US by a sworn American enemy because of the elevated platform the message was delivered from and for the way it cut to the bone. Its gotta be right up there with Osama Bin Laden lecturing the American people on the evils of major corporations and the extermination of Native-Americans in his 2007 video, and Fidel Castro lambasting American imperialism and oil interests in his 1960 address to the UN in New York.

In comparison, Hugo Chavez has a long way to go if he hopes to claim the mantle of America-Criticizer-In-Chief. I don't understand why he sucks so bad because there is plenty of substance for him to point at. Somehow his histrionics are even worse than some of the American politicians he criticizes despite him not inhabiting the same over-the-top, 24-hour-news-cycle milieu.

*: There is some dispute over how much of the hostage crisis was actually the university students' initiative and how much was the result of higher-ups in the Iranian government apparatus pulling the strings, including Ayatollah Khomeini himself.

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Call me Lardbutt

Whenever it is a damp, drizzly November; whenever I find myself pouring Dr. Pepper into my mouth; whenever I find myself involuntarily pausing in the chip aisle, and it requires a strong medical principle to prevent me from methodically knocking off biscuits -- then, I account it high time to get to the Xbox as soon as I can.

The Post-Hitler Paradigm

Radek Sikorski, Poland's foreign minister, on the Euro Crisis:
I will probably be the first Polish foreign minister in history to say so, but here it is: I fear German power less than I am beginning to fear German inactivity.
First of all, zing -- for reference, Poland has been around, off and on, since 966AD and has been wiped off the map twice by Germany/Prussia & friends. Second, that is as good an excuse as any to post this mesmerizing picture:

Monday, November 28, 2011

Indisputable proof that Kings of Leon have sold out

I was checking out the recruitment video used by Cara (owner of Harvey's, Swiss Chalet, Milestones, Kelsey's, and Montana's) when I noticed a familiar melody. At the 3:45 mark (as phrases like 'Total Rewards', 'Competitive Salary', and 'Discount Programs' moved across the screen) the guitar track from "Use Somebody" blasted in the background and it became clear to me that Kings of Leon are in it for the cash.


Now it could be that Kings of Leon feel strongly about the merits of Swiss Chalet sauce and so they wanted to lend a hand to the corporate overlord that manages their favourite casual and family dining establishments, or it could be that they are money-grubbing, corporate lackeys consumed by avarice with no regard for artistic integrity. My money is on the latter; Kings of Leon's money is piling up.

88% of Cara's business comes from generic restaurants but the other 12% is airline catering. In other words, Kings of Leon decided to sell their music to a company that is responsible for the terrible food you get from Air Canada. It's ironic because a lot of people accused Kings of Leon of conforming to the lowest common denominator after their last album came out and now that same album is being used to promote airline food, the culinary equivalent of beige. Neither is particularly offensive or remotely enjoyable.

Here's Liam Gallagher on Kings of Leon's last album, "Only by the Night":

“But it seems to me they've gone for the bucks, man. When they first come out I was going, "Who the fuck is this?" They were cool and now they've all got their sleeves cut off. And I'm not dissing them because I fucking really like them, but it's like they've got this U2 sound and you can do better than that.”

And here's Caleb Followill:

"Our real fans, the ones who've been there for the past five years, are in the front row p**sed off. They'll turn their backs on us during Sex On Fire and Use Somebody, put their middle fingers up. I get it. We're definitely sellouts."

I don't really get why Cara thought using "Use Somebody" was a good idea either. I mean, sure, the lyrics talk about needing someone and the video is meant to fill vacant positions, but do you really want to tell prospective employees you are going to "use" them?

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Conspiracy Theory 1 - Bed Bugs

Guys, what if bed bugs are being spread by Big Mattress as a way to boost sales? Those bastards at Posturepedic are sneaking into condo towers and apartment buildings with bags full of the pests and dumping 'em in the laundry room, I just know it. I hear they leave cryogenically frozen bug larvae in the new mattresses they sell that are designed to unfreeze and go to work sucking on your skin as soon as the warranty expires.

Saturday, November 26, 2011

The Bublé Tones

I just got stuck with a youtube advert for Michale Bublé's Christmas album before the video for "You've seen the Butcher" by the Deftones would play.


I guess they do both have beautiful voices.

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

A post-record industry music video

Now that mp3s have decimated the record industry, there just isn't the money out there for many big budget videos. What little is left is devoted to Lady Gaga's costume design department in an effort to distract from her face. That means even previously big bands like Bush (a.k.a. Bush X in Canada) are forced to film videos where the first half is simply Gavin Rossdale walking on a cloudy beach while someone with a handheld films him lipsynching.


Captivating stuff. The overall effect is marginally better than a static picture of Rossdale. Actually, it is probably worse; a picture of Rossdale could at least have been touched-up to try to make people forget that the guy is a rock star on the wrong side of 45. And I doubt Bush is the next Rolling Stones so a best-before date was missed somewhere. You know, now that I think about it, maybe it isn't such a bad thing after all that the record industry has been decimated.

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Bill Gates vs. Steve Jobs

I saw some biographer on the Daily Show say the difference between Steve Jobs and Bill Gates is that one came up with the iPod and one came up with the Zune. That's an ignorant comment to make since Microsoft and Apple are comprised of more than Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, respectively. Instead, I would say that the difference between the two of them is illustrated by the way that Bill Gates transitioned away from Microsoft in 2000 to help those less fortunate while Steve Jobs push aside those less fortunate to cut the line for a liver transplant so he could keep working for Apple.


For Bill Gates, philanthropy is about results: He helped create the largest transparently operated charitable organization. By 2007, Bill and his wife had already given over $28 billion and plan to contribute 95% of their wealth to charity before they die. None of those donations have been connected to the Microsoft brand; as Gates has increased his philanthropic focus he has concurrently distanced himself from Microsoft. His foundation uses business methods to demand accountability and production from the activities it supports.

For Steve Jobs, philanthropy was about branding: After resuming control of Apple in 1997, he eliminated all corporate philanthropy. When Apple did venture back into the field of philanthropy under Jobs, it affiliated itself with Product Red, which is a company that offers corporations like Nike the chance to boost revenues by dressing up their products as an AIDS charity and getting affiliated with one-name celebrities like Bono and Oprah. Apple's partnership with Product Red was infamous for incurring $100 million in marketing costs while only raising $18 million for charities to administer. Unfortunately, shopping is not a solution.

Yet Gates is the one characterized as a crass capitalist while Jobs is canonized for his contributions to society.

Friday, November 4, 2011

A hypothetical debate between Sun Tzu & Mike Tyson


On Preparation
 
The general who wins the battle makes many calculations before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand.



Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth.






On Posturing

Even though you are competent, appear to be incompetent. Though effective, appear to be ineffective.



 

I don't try to intimidate anybody before a fight. That's nonsense. I intimidate people by hitting them.




On Defence vs. Offence
 
Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack.





My style is impetuous. My defense is impregnable, and I'm just ferocious. I want your heart. I want to eat his children. Praise be to Allah!




On Aggression

The enlightened ruler is heedful, and the good general full of caution.




 
I think I'll take a bath in his blood.


 


On Whether Combat Has Intrinsic Value 

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.




 
I just want to do what I do best, and that's fight. I love it. ... I love to hit people. I love to.




On Efficiency 

There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited.




I was hoping he would get up so I could hit him again.






On Lessons From History 

The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy. 




I'm a historian, and that freaks me out. 






On Self-Knowledge 

If you know others and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know others but know yourself, you win one and lose one; if you do not know others and do not know yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.



[He] called me a ‘rapist’ and a ‘recluse.’ I’m not a recluse.





On Defining Victory 

In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them.

 
When I fight someone, I want to break his will. I want to take his manhood. I want to rip out his heart and show it to him.





On Book-Learning

The more you read and learn, the less your adversary will know. 



 

When I was in prison, I was wrapped up in all those deep books. That Tolstoy crap - people shouldn't read that stuff.
 



On Self-Preservation

The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy's not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable.

 
You can't stay married in a situation where you are afraid to go to sleep in case your wife might cut your throat. 




On Subtlety 

Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness.




 
I just want to conquer people and their souls.






On Defining Talent 

For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.




My power is discombobulatingly devastating. I could feel his muscle tissues collapse under my force. It's ludicrous these mortals even attempt to enter my realm.




On Setting Goals 

If asked how to cope with a great host of the enemy in orderly array and on the point of marching to the attack, I should say: "Begin by seizing something which your opponent holds dear; then he will be amenable to your will."


My main objective is to be professional but to kill him.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Fun-size candy and fun-size paragraphs

The fact that miniature Mr. Big bars exist is a delicious irony.


Calling miniature Mr. Big bars a "delicious irony" is a clever play on words by me because Mr. Big bars are delicious.


Mr. Big was my favourite type of chocolate bar growing up and "To Be with You" by Mr. Big was one of my favourite songs. Coincidence, you say? I "big" to differ. (Clever play on words #2).


According to Wikipedia, Mr. Big bars are more common in Canada than in the rest of the world -- what's that about? The second most Mr. Big-y country in the world is South Korea, which doesn't make any sense since South Korea and Canada share little in common. Why do some chocolate bars end up with high market penetration in some areas even though they are all made by the same companies (Nestle & Cadbury) worldwide? Like, why are Clark Bars, 100 Grand bars, and Bounty bars in some places in the States but I can't find them here in Ontario? Why don't American convenience stores sell ketchup chips? Why didn't Canada stick with Vanilla Coke? I guess the simple answer to all these questions is that companies tried those products everywhere and they didn't sell enough in certain areas, but does anyone know a good reason why they didn't sell enough in certain areas? I mean, I get why a kimchi-flavoured chip would do better in Korea but Canada isn't more into ketchup than America, is it? I know for an absolute fact Canadians don't hate vanilla extract.


How can there be so much regionalism when it comes to snack flavours but everyone agrees Sarah Jessica Parker looks like a horse?


I always thought girls liked to read about horses growing up because the horses were a stand-in for a dream boy who is big and strong and does what you want, but if Sarah Jessica Parker really looks like a horse and those same girls that read horse books grew up* to idolize self-insert Carrie Bradshaw then maybe those girls wanted to be horses after all.

*: If you can call going to university to watch Sex & The City reruns "growing up"