That's possible, right? If his performance was good enough to earn him $12.5 million, why not 60? But maybe he wasn't That good and had hard time getting an FDS (Fuck Default Swap). A $60 million fuck is a Big Fuck to insure you know. I think we should keep an open mind and accept that this exact same thought might have also crossed Susanne Klatten's body and mind before she reported him to the police. I thus propose a Gigolo training and evaluation center whereby all aspiring Gigolos can get tested to learn their true worth before they make unrealistic demands and end up in jail. The difficulty will be stuffing the center, a lot of female volunteers will be needed. Any women NOT willing to sign up for this? Please make your wish known here :))
http://www.thinkaloo.com
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Who fooled who here?
If Susanne Klatten is worth $13.2 billion, shouldn't Sgarbi have asked for at least $1 billion? That's about 10% when the tip at a restaurant in the US is normally between 15-20%. With the global economic crisis in full swing, I'd say $2-$3 billion would have been the right amount. The $60 million seemed suspiciously low and probably that's why the short-cut heiress reported him to the police. Something wasn't making sense. $60 million? Come on people get serious, this is a Real economic crisis to be blackmailing at the low end!! What kind of example do we set for our children, the Somali pirates and others here? Seriously now don't You think...
http://www.thinkaloo.com
http://www.thinkaloo.com
Gigolo Millionaire
Having grown up in the Swiss slums a married man will do anything to escape the harshness of his life. Married with three children he leaves his family to work as special representative in crisis zones in India. When all the poverty and dirt of Mumbai won't be enough to bring him redemption, Sgarbi will seek love. Pure, romantic, untainted love. His fortunes change when he meets Susanne Klatten, a generous $13.2 billion sexless blonde who falls victim to Sgarbi's most innocent instincts and his new passion for photography. Be sure to see this $60 million epic film production directed by life itself. Critics say it'll definitely change your views on the cost of love, romance and amateur photography. Coming soon to a theater near You! :)
PS: All proceeds go to the BMW Special Trust Fund for the Redevelopment of Swiss slums. Let no kid go through what Sgarbi had to go through...
http://www.thinkaloo.com
PS: All proceeds go to the BMW Special Trust Fund for the Redevelopment of Swiss slums. Let no kid go through what Sgarbi had to go through...
http://www.thinkaloo.com
Does the Truth Syrup exist? What's the Truth?
Here's my worldview on this. I don't think it does because it would have driven Hollywood out of business. Imagine a world of action movies where there is no torture, no violence and no pain during interrogation. Can you imagine Kiefer Sutherland in 24 dressed in a kitchen apron preparing truth-syrup psychoactive cookies to be served with tea and coffee at CTU? It takes all the fun away.
The truth about a pain-free maple-sweet truth syrup is that it doesn't exist because it would lead to a wonderful world in real life and to a very boring one in the movies. To tell you the truth, the only syrup that exists is the Fake Syrup which forces honest people to lie all the time. It's real, fun and tastes better. I just had some this morning and as you can still read I have been enjoying my(honest)self lying around :)
So what's the truth about the syrup then? The best we can have so far is Lie To Me scientists that can get to the truth by detecting when you lie. No cookies, no syrup but no telling the truth either. Just a Tim Roth wireless lie detector that requires no torture, no violence and no physical pain during interrogation. Is that change we can believe in?
When I take a look at what's happening with the state of the world right now I find it hard to believe we can clean our mess without pain, violence or torture. It's not that I can't believe in the power of the truth syrup, it's just that when I do it's always after I had a few sips of the fake one. Wanna have some? :))
http://www.thinkaloo.com
The truth about a pain-free maple-sweet truth syrup is that it doesn't exist because it would lead to a wonderful world in real life and to a very boring one in the movies. To tell you the truth, the only syrup that exists is the Fake Syrup which forces honest people to lie all the time. It's real, fun and tastes better. I just had some this morning and as you can still read I have been enjoying my(honest)self lying around :)
So what's the truth about the syrup then? The best we can have so far is Lie To Me scientists that can get to the truth by detecting when you lie. No cookies, no syrup but no telling the truth either. Just a Tim Roth wireless lie detector that requires no torture, no violence and no physical pain during interrogation. Is that change we can believe in?
When I take a look at what's happening with the state of the world right now I find it hard to believe we can clean our mess without pain, violence or torture. It's not that I can't believe in the power of the truth syrup, it's just that when I do it's always after I had a few sips of the fake one. Wanna have some? :))
http://www.thinkaloo.com
How to keep the unemployed busy
Obama is talking of a new Green Economy and governments all over the world spend billions of dollars to spur economic growth. What if all unemployed people were immediately hired to work part-time to clean up the environment? Restore polluted sites, clean up beaches and cities from litter, install renewable energy infrastructure.
They would be paid for their work on top of the unemployment benefit and use their spare time to look for another job. It's better than no work at all and the government can hire them right away.
http://www.thinkaloo.com
They would be paid for their work on top of the unemployment benefit and use their spare time to look for another job. It's better than no work at all and the government can hire them right away.
http://www.thinkaloo.com
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Waterboarded 183 times? My Guinness!
What a colossal admission of failure for torture efficiency no matter how you look at it. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in a month? No, that's not inefficient. No, it's not a miracle that this guy survived to confess whatever he confessed at the end. No, it doesn't matter that the Central Inefficiency Agency discredits torture intelligence. 1-8-3 times?? Give Me a break!
I'm curious what else the recently declassified memos say. Did it ever occur to anyone that the subject might die before confessing anything? Could that be the reason why millions of uninsured Americans allege that prisoners in Guantanamo received better medical treatment in a month than they do in a lifetime? Since the allegation is not true as the terrorists captured do not number millions and the uninsured don't get treatment anyway, did we really need the CIA to give us reasons to believe it could be?
Ok, maybe after count 68 the torture was repeated to extract pleasure or revenge. 183-68=115 times, excluding 69 for a kit-kat that leaves us at 114 times that waterboarding could have been repeated for sadistic reasons. The US doesn't torture people. So true. That's because it likes to torture people??
Whichever way you look at it, 183 times in a month just waterboarding is sick and irrational. Dick Cheney argues that it was justified because valuable information was received. Waterboard me once and I'll buy that...But for all we know, Osama Bin Laden is still alive and not captured and the Taliban seem poised to take over Pakistan! Waterboard me twice...hello?
Fortunately, Obama felt compelled to explicitly ban the practice. Europeans can now, once again, contemplate the US in personal pronoun terms, even though we may never be able to pronounce it that way.
I am looking at the photos of the guy before and after water-boarding. He doesn't look at his best before the interrogation but look at the photo of him that gets published in the media after the interrogation. He's a sketch!
If Obama felt compelled to publish the secret memo showing how number-irrational the CIA was, then it makes sense why he had to ban torture altogether. Think of all the aspiring die-hard terrorists around the world receiving the news that it took the 9/11 mastermind 183 times of waterboarding to break him.
As if Osama-Bin-Laden was not enough of a hero icon to the die-hard Muslims now they get a true martyr to look up to. All it takes is one clever mullah to promise 1 extra virgin in heaven every time waterboarding doesn't break the martyr. 72 virgins in heaven for attempting to blow yourself up plus 183 if you martyr it out like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed did, that's 255 virgins, a nice big royal harem in heaven!!
Obama had no choice but to ban the practice otherwise thousands more would rush to sign up to break the record.
Honestly, I wish Obama had banned the practice without revealing the details. It makes the CIA look weak and unintelligent, it makes this guy appear as a martyr and it makes me sick to think that the practice was not legally considered torture at the time and now it is. But none of that upsets me more than the fact that it's not President McCain publishing the memos and discrediting the Republican Dick.
For all we know, Obama might have published the details because he might have been personally disgusted by it. For all we don't know, is that 183 is the official number...
What a Sick Dick, Cheney!
http://www.thinkaloo.com
I'm curious what else the recently declassified memos say. Did it ever occur to anyone that the subject might die before confessing anything? Could that be the reason why millions of uninsured Americans allege that prisoners in Guantanamo received better medical treatment in a month than they do in a lifetime? Since the allegation is not true as the terrorists captured do not number millions and the uninsured don't get treatment anyway, did we really need the CIA to give us reasons to believe it could be?
Ok, maybe after count 68 the torture was repeated to extract pleasure or revenge. 183-68=115 times, excluding 69 for a kit-kat that leaves us at 114 times that waterboarding could have been repeated for sadistic reasons. The US doesn't torture people. So true. That's because it likes to torture people??
Whichever way you look at it, 183 times in a month just waterboarding is sick and irrational. Dick Cheney argues that it was justified because valuable information was received. Waterboard me once and I'll buy that...But for all we know, Osama Bin Laden is still alive and not captured and the Taliban seem poised to take over Pakistan! Waterboard me twice...hello?
Fortunately, Obama felt compelled to explicitly ban the practice. Europeans can now, once again, contemplate the US in personal pronoun terms, even though we may never be able to pronounce it that way.
I am looking at the photos of the guy before and after water-boarding. He doesn't look at his best before the interrogation but look at the photo of him that gets published in the media after the interrogation. He's a sketch!
If Obama felt compelled to publish the secret memo showing how number-irrational the CIA was, then it makes sense why he had to ban torture altogether. Think of all the aspiring die-hard terrorists around the world receiving the news that it took the 9/11 mastermind 183 times of waterboarding to break him.
As if Osama-Bin-Laden was not enough of a hero icon to the die-hard Muslims now they get a true martyr to look up to. All it takes is one clever mullah to promise 1 extra virgin in heaven every time waterboarding doesn't break the martyr. 72 virgins in heaven for attempting to blow yourself up plus 183 if you martyr it out like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed did, that's 255 virgins, a nice big royal harem in heaven!!
Obama had no choice but to ban the practice otherwise thousands more would rush to sign up to break the record.
Honestly, I wish Obama had banned the practice without revealing the details. It makes the CIA look weak and unintelligent, it makes this guy appear as a martyr and it makes me sick to think that the practice was not legally considered torture at the time and now it is. But none of that upsets me more than the fact that it's not President McCain publishing the memos and discrediting the Republican Dick.
For all we know, Obama might have published the details because he might have been personally disgusted by it. For all we don't know, is that 183 is the official number...
What a Sick Dick, Cheney!
http://www.thinkaloo.com
Single Currency
I have wondered many times what the meaning of the existence of multiple currencies? I think a single currency could have a lot of benefits like reducing the cost of economic transactions and making the pricing of good and services more effective. Also, it would end the currency speculation and the effects of it and would boost the economic activity among various countries.
71% of respondents in the poll would like to have a single currency.
I would like to have a single language before I had a single currency. The benefits to the world economy would be even larger than if you only had a single currency. More trade, more travel, more understanding, more cooperation. So if I had to choose between a single currency and a single language, I'd rather have a single language. A single language would inevitably lead to a single currency as the world would become one in terms of how people think. A single currency without a single language means the world can trade better than if it had multiple currencies but it doesn't become one. So what I want to say is that under a single currency the world improves, under a single language the world becomes one. Within this context, which would You rather have?
http://www.thinkaloo.com
71% of respondents in the poll would like to have a single currency.
I would like to have a single language before I had a single currency. The benefits to the world economy would be even larger than if you only had a single currency. More trade, more travel, more understanding, more cooperation. So if I had to choose between a single currency and a single language, I'd rather have a single language. A single language would inevitably lead to a single currency as the world would become one in terms of how people think. A single currency without a single language means the world can trade better than if it had multiple currencies but it doesn't become one. So what I want to say is that under a single currency the world improves, under a single language the world becomes one. Within this context, which would You rather have?
http://www.thinkaloo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
