- Harold Buckhauer, punctuated a sentence one time
Nashville, Tenn.–An area Titans fan made headlines Sunday when he held up a sign reading “Jacob Tamme is a tight pussy” at a home game against the Indianapolis Colts in LP Field.
Jacob Tamme plays tight end for the Indianapolis Colts, and rejects all assertions that he is a human vagina “of any elasticity or resistance.”
Harold Buckhauer, 30, held the sign up high for at least three hours, chanting the slogan. He was beloved by his neighboring spectators, and even hailed as a hero by one man who said he believes Buckhauer’s message “needed to be said.” The man reportedly purchased Buckhauer three beers to provoke more outlandish drunken behavior, such as singing with one foot up on the back of the chair in front of him, a claim he denies.
Language scholars have jumped on the sensation to condemn the Tennessee Titans enthusiast for his gross lack of punctuation that leaders claim “contradicts” the presentation of the man’s clever idea in the context of his drunkenly-constructed sign.
Buckhauer, a plumber of 10 years’ experience, defended himself, saying, “I once punctuated a whole sentence,” but intimated his distrust of “funny” characters on a page, saying he doesn’t know why it exists anyway.
“Harold-Hymen ain’t never used no hyphen.”
When questioned about a rare, documented instance where Buckhauer attempted punctuation, he failed to recall whether it was a period or an exclamation mark he used, because memory of his mistake was immediately overshadowed by the “distinct” memory of his friends using a rhyming female anatomical word to describe him as “Harold-Hymen, who ain’t never used no hyphen.”
A string of Google searches reveals the “punctuation” to which Buckhauer referred was used on a wrestling forum, and was not punctuation at all, but capitalization. In 2009, Buckhauer wrote, “batista is purdy good but he aint gt shit on the Edge”
Cecil Dillard, pastor of Midrow Baptist Church defended Harold Buckhauer’s lifestyle, devoid of punctuation, saying, “Harry’s a trustworthy, God-fearing American who don’t need no punctuation because it ain’t holy. Punctuation is misleading, saying things that letters don’t. Now do you want your kids to read punctuation, or do you want ‘em reading the truth?” he asked, tapping the Bible.
This message is brought to you by Lebal Drocer, and:
“Now do you want your kids to read punctuation, or do you want ‘em reading the truth?”
-Cecil Dillard, Pastor
Fuck you if you don’t have tits. We need tits. Pure anger without tits. Found out the other day I’m made entirely of tits material. Command+Shift+3.
I’m in agony without the tits.
Guess what went there?
The man said it hurt his feelings. It wasn’t an antenna.
Cuthbert, Ga.–All hell’s broke loose on the political front, the power lines are down, and the water’s shut off, forcing you to drink your own dank-smelling piss. The sound of Russki bombers dribblin on the horizon ignites terror in the eyes of your pitiful-ass family members, who cower unarmed beneath the dining room table. What do you do?
Cecil defends freedom
Freedom enthusiast Larry Cecil has the answer.
“Don’t just sit around waiting for mercy,” Cecil told the Chronicle. “Rollback the cost of freedom – and the Russians – at a Wal-Mart near you!”
Larry Cecil, who once blindly accepted whatever conditions life handed him, now takes matters into his own hands. “I used to pray to Jesus. But now I prey on the wicked,” he said, examining the horizon through a scoped rifle.
Cecil encourages concerned patriots who fear the oncoming breach of freedoms by leaked cables and Julian ASSange to “have faith” in a weapons cache and homemade napalm. Lastly, he recommends Chinese-made ammunition for its unusually high lead content.
This message is brought to you by Lebal Drocer, Incorporated.
“[C]lassified information, whether or not already posted on public websites or disclosed to the media, remains classified, and must be treated as such by federal employees and contractors, until it is declassified by an appropriate U.S. Government authority.”
So apparently the claim is “a secret is secret, even if it’s not a secret.”
It gets better: “This requirement does not restrict employee or contractor access to non-classified, publicly available news reports (and other non-classified material) that may in turn discuss classified material, as distinguished from access to underlying documents that themselves are marked classified (including if the underlying classified documents are available on public websites or otherwise in the public domain).”
So, just to make up a fictional piece of classified data. For the sake of the discussion, let’s say that it’s secret that the President of Ireland Mary McAleese is in fact a leprechaun. In the hypothetical classified material, there is a quote: “President McAleese is a leprechaun.” I guess if it’s verbatim, it’s still the classified material. But how long does the excerpt have to be considered from the raw cable? A sentence? A paragraph?
Apparently, if I one merely restates and says, “Recent reports from the classified cables say that Irish President McAleese is a leprechaun,” that’s okay for an HHS employee to have read.
via David Samuels at The Atlantic
Julian Assange and Pfc Bradley Manning have done a huge public service by making hundreds of thousands of classified U.S. government documents available on Wikileaks — and, predictably, no one is grateful. Manning, a former army intelligence analyst in Iraq, faces up to 52 years in prison. He is currently being held in solitary confinement at a military base in Quantico, Virginia, where he is not allowed to see his parents or other outside visitors.
Assange, the organizing brain of Wikileaks, enjoys a higher degree of freedom living as a hunted man in England under the close surveillance of domestic and foreign intelligence agencies — but probably not for long. Not since President Richard Nixon directed his minions to go after Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg and New York Times reporter Neil Sheehan – “a vicious antiwar type,” an enraged Nixon called him on the Watergate tapes — has a working journalist and his source been subjected to the kind of official intimidation and threats that have been directed at Assange and Manning by high-ranking members of the Obama Administration.
Published reports suggest that a joint Justice Department-Pentagon team of investigators is exploring the possibility of charging Assange under the Espionage Act, which could lead to decades in jail. “This is not saber-rattling,” said Attorney General Eric Holder, commenting on the possibility that Assange will be prosecuted by the government. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the Wikileaks disclosures “an attack on the international community” that endangered innocent people. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs suggested in somewhat Orwellian fashion that “such disclosures put at risk our diplomats, intelligence professionals, and people around the world who come to the United States for assistance in promoting democracy and open government.”
It is dispiriting and upsetting for anyone who cares about the American tradition of a free press to see Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Robert Gibbs turn into H.R. Haldeman, John Erlichman and John Dean. We can only pray that we won’t soon be hit with secret White House tapes of Obama drinking scotch and slurring his words while calling Assange bad names.The truly scandalous and shocking response to the Wikileaks documents has been that of other journalists, who make the Obama Administration sound like the ACLU.
Unwilling to let the Democrats adopt Nixon’s anti-democratic, press-hating legacy as their own, Republican Congressman Peter King asserted that the publication of classified diplomatic cables is “worse even than a physical attack on Americans” and that Wikileaks should be officially designed as a terrorist organization. Mike Huckabee followed such blather to its logical conclusion by suggesting that Bradley Manning should be executed.
But the truly scandalous and shocking response to the Wikileaks documents has been that of other journalists, who make the Obama Administration sound like the ACLU. In a recent article in The New Yorker, the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Steve Coll sniffed that “the archives that WikiLeaks has published are much less significant than the Pentagon Papers were in their day” while depicting Assange as a “self-aggrandizing control-freak” whose website “lacks an ethical culture that is consonant with the ideals of free media.” Channeling Richard Nixon, Coll labeled Wikileaks’ activities – formerly known as journalism – by his newly preferred terms of “vandalism” and “First Amendment-inspired subversion.”
Coll’s invective is hardly unique, In fact, it was only a pale echo of the language used earlier this year by a columnist at his former employer, The Washington Post. In a column titled “WikiLeaks Must Be Stopped,” Mark Thiessen wrote that “WikiLeaks is not a news organization; it is a criminal enterprise,” and urged that the site should be shut down “and its leadership brought to justice.” The dean of American foreign correspondents, John Burns of The New York Times, with two Pulitzer Prizes to his credit, contributed a profile of Assange which used terms like “nearly delusional grandeur” to describe Wikileaks’ founder. The Times’ normally mild-mannered David Brooks asserted in his column this week that “Assange seems to be an old-fashioned anarchist” and worried that Wikileaks will “damage the global conversation.”
For his part, Assange has not been shy about expressing his contempt for the failure of traditional reporting to inform the public, and his belief in the utility of his own methods. “How is it that a team of five people has managed to release to the public more suppressed information, at that level, than the rest of the world press combined?” he told The Sydney Morning Herald. “It’s disgraceful.”
Assange may or may not be grandiose, paranoid and delusional – terms that might be fairly applied at one time or another to most prominent investigative reporters of my acquaintance. But the fact that so many prominent old school journalists are attacking him with such unbridled force is a symptom of the failure of traditional reporting methods to penetrate a culture of official secrecy that has grown by leaps and bounds since 9/11, and threatens the functioning of a free press as a cornerstone of democracy.
The true importance of Wikileaks — and the key to understanding the motivations and behavior of its founder — lies not in the contents of the latest document dump but in the technology that made it possible, which has already shown itself to be a potent weapon to undermine official lies and defend human rights. Since 1997, Assange has devoted a great deal of his time to inventing encryption systems that make it possible for human rights workers and others to protect and upload sensitive data. The importance of Assange’s efforts to human rights workers in the field were recognized last year by Amnesty International, which gave him its Media Award for the Wikileaks investigation The Cry of Blood – Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances, which documented the killing and disappearance of 500 young men in Kenya by the police, with the apparent connivance of the country’s political leadership.
Yet the difficulties of documenting official murder in Kenya pale next to the task of penetrating the secret world that threatens to swallow up informed public discourse in this country about America’s wars. The 250,000 cables that Wikileaks published this month represent only a drop in the bucket that holds the estimated 16 million documents that are classified top secret by the federal government every year. According to a three-part investigative series by Dana Priest and William Arkin published earlier this year in The Washington Post, an estimated 854,000 people now hold top secret clearance – more than 1.5 times the population of Washington, D.C. “The top-secret world the government created in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive,” the Post concluded, “that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work.”
The result of this classification mania is the division of the public into two distinct groups: those who are privy to the actual conduct of American policy, but are forbidden to write or talk about it, and the uninformed public, which becomes easy prey for the official lies exposed in the Wikileaks documents: The failure of American counterinsurgency programs in Afghanistan, the involvement of China and North Korea in the Iranian nuclear program, the likely failure of attempts to separate Syria from Iran, the involvement of Iran in destabilizing Iraq, the anti-Western orientation of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and other tenets of American foreign policy under both Bush and Obama.
It is a fact of the current media landscape that the chilling effect of threatened legal action routinely stops reporters and editors from pursuing stories that might serve the public interest – and anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant or lying. Every honest reporter and editor in America knows that the fact that most news organizations are broke, combined with the increasing threat of aggressive legal action by deep-pocketed entities, private and public, has made it much harder for good reporters to do their jobs, and ripped a hole in the delicate fabric that holds our democracy together.
The idea that Wikileaks is a threat to the traditional practice of reporting misses the point of what Assange and his co-workers have put together – a powerful tool that can help reporters circumvent the legal barriers that are making it hard for them to do their job. Even as he criticizes the evident failures of the mainstream press, Assange insists that Wikileaks should facilitate traditional reporting and analysis. “We’re the step before the first person (investigates),” he explained, when accepting Amnesty International’s award for exposing police killings in Kenya. “Then someone who is familiar with that material needs to step forward to investigate it and put it in political context. Once that is done, then it becomes of public interest.”
Wikileaks is a powerful new way for reporters and human rights advocates to leverage global information technology systems to break the heavy veil of government and corporate secrecy that is slowly suffocating the American press. The likely arrest of Assange in Britain on dubious Swedish sex crimes charges has nothing to do with the importance of the system he has built, and which the US government seems intent on destroying with tactics more appropriate to the Communist Party of China — pressuring Amazon to throw the site off their servers, and, one imagines by launching the powerful DDOS attacks that threatened to stop visitors from reading the pilfered cables.
In a memorandum entitled “Transparency and Open Government” addressed to the heads of Federal departments and agencies and posted on WhiteHouse.gov, President Obama instructed that “Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.” The Administration would be wise to heed his words — and to remember how badly the vindictive prosecution of Daniel Ellsberg ended for the Nixon Administration. And American reporters, Pulitzer Prizes and all, should be ashamed for joining in the outraged chorus that defends a burgeoning secret world whose existence is a threat to democracy.
WASHINGTON — Thank you for making the Soviet Union’s new state-controlled media outlet the only thing you’re legally allowed to read. Our crack team of torture artists tortured our graphic artists until they were near death to achieve this state of true perfection. Our writers were treated in ways much worse, forced to watch Sarah Palin‘s “Alaska” 10 hours a day and eat nothing but cold McDonald’s from the value menu. They were rewarded for good writing with a bath in diarrhea and more friendly canings. Now with increased ad revenue and public support The Internet Chronicle is finally able to fully fund its original mission: terrorism.
Unlike Islamic terrorists, we don’t let Allah sort out the innocent. We promise to assassinate every single politician in Washington, D.C. and raze every capitalist institution from the smallest bank to the largest stock exchange. More bloodthirsty and reckless than Robin Hood, we steal from the rich and the poor so we can commit acts of terror to support the common worker.
Chronicle.SU wishes to express its solidarity with WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, who have been labeled as terrorists. By such a definition, we, too are terrorists. And so are all those other meddling people who chase such lofty ambitions as “accountability” and “truth.”
Julian Assange has found a way to threaten the transparency of government by publishing secret documents. Now he’s a terrorist, just like us.
Julian Assange described himself as “combative,” telling reporters he likes to “crush bastards.” As it turns out, so do we. If it’s too big to fail, it’s too big to exist, and that’s the truth that will carry you and the People’s Report forward into this New Century: Crush the bastards who enforce the status quo, wage slavery and perpetual warfare on humanity. To remove the increasingly oppressive politboro, replacing it with the glorious and oppressive fist of Chronicle.SU!
It has been noted by SOVCHRON officials that once in power, they will continue to insist on terrorism as their primary means of governance, and do not take offense to the term.
“Cut off the head and the body will die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
While Julian Assange waits in hiding to be poisoned with polonium 210, the Chronicle orchestrates distributed denial of service attacks on whitehouse.gov, punctuated by covert, sporadic genocide. By conveniently cherry-picking philosophies from Glenn Beck books, we are able to better misrepresent and pursue the common goals of all good people, cleansing this great nation, weeding out thieves, potheads and rapists.
We will execute every potential threat to America until the only people left are good, law-abiding citizens who will be left with no choice to but mate with each other, breeding patriotism back into our great nation.
Our writers ingeniously coined this Red, White & Bluegenics.
Keep your eyes to the skies and be on the lookout for Lebal Drocer warplanes of the highest technology to drop bombs and aide relief, one after the other, on your county today! That’s the Lebal Drocer Promise!
Yesterday, Septembuary 48th Kim Jo Yung, the midget Dictator of N. Korea, order the bombing of S. Korea when he saw 3 little kids playing kick the can on the border. We received a statement from him saying, “I thought they have suicide bomber in the can so I shoot the little bastards in face! The uranium enrichment is for NUCLEAR POWER! I SWEAR!”
Note: We said nothing about uranium.
Obama released a statement this morning, “Fuck Korea, like they’ll ever save OUR asses twice!”
So, the American consensus is FUCK KOREA!
Irony: South Korea wants to destroy N. Korea, and in the meantime they are giving humanitarian help to North Koreans.
We received this email yesterday. The subject line reads ‘Response to “No Nukes Like Good Nukes“‘ and it pretty much speaks for itself.
Your rant is back up on the June archives of RoanokeRevolution.com. I
don’t know why it disappeared, but it was not on purpose.
I know your website is intended to be funny, and I appreciate the
Onion-esque humor. However, there is an issue with misrepresentation,
especially in a small city like ours. Libel is a serious subject in
the media world, and even if you’re joking, you are not legally
allowed to misquote people, or say or imply anything untrue that could
potentially damage that person’s reputation. I hate to seem like a
killjoy, and I enjoy fun jabs as much as anyone, but if you do some
quick research on libel, you will see “No Nukes Like Good Nukes”
crossed a line. Roanoke Revolution is most definitely anti-censorship,
but an article like this that contains libel cannot legally be allowed
to remain published online.
By the way, this entire email is off the record; it is a business communication.
I could not find James Galloway’s email address, but please share my
email with him.
Thank you. Please don’t hesitate to call me if you want to discuss.
Email is often a brewing ground for misunderstood sentiments.
Because of Clarissa Clarke’s elementary writing skills and reactionary legal instincts, we can only assume she must be kind of cute, or possibly has the sexy librarian thing going on [also, remember Clarissa Explains It All? History is definitely on her side...] so we were nice enough to remove her phone number from the email, which contains a few incredulous logical fallacies.
For example, they might as well attack us for being pro-jong-il if they consider the rest of the site credible as well. So is it true that in addition to being in full support of preemptive nuclear warfare, the Roanoke Revolution staff cares more about their reputations than the poor fucks jong has kept in his prisons, guarded from knowledge of anything else?
The Roanoke Revulsion's recent confrontation with the Soviet Chronicle is best characterized as a mirror facing a mirror, looking onward into an infinite spiral of self-aggrandizement.