Michael McEvil launches new organisation
international |
miscellaneous |
news report 
Monday September 21, 2009 10:45
by hell correspondent
Champion of hate stands up for workers' rights- evil workers
In his first political foray since the 2007 general election, Mr Michael McEvil, former attorney general and the man who is credited with destroying the Progressive Democrat Party, entered the debate on the lisbon Treaty by launching a new organisation- Evil People for lisbon.
In a statement, Mr McHorrible, who had returned from hell for the occasion, claimed that the debate on lisbon needed to be nuanced and not a “phony Punch and Judy show” between the two sides. A section of the population is being excluded from the debate, he said, the evil people.
"There needs to be a space for truly evil people, the racists, fascists, and those who have always rejected workers' rights, peace, and disarmament as genuine goals."
“There is nobody to represent the great majority of evil people” he said, "and political debate had not kept up", he said.
The former minister for evil declined to say, despite repeated questions, whether or not he was returning to political life. “I’m not talking about my hateful future. I came here in a personal capacity to talk about Europe as an evil person”. He was seeking “a real debate on Europe, and not a debate on other issues which are of far less interest to the Irish people, like the actual content of the treaty”.
Addressing a “Evil People for lisbon” meeting in the Shelbourne Hotel, Mr McBastard, a senior counsel, said the debate on lisbon had been ill-served because it had been dominated by people who were not him.
Mr McScumbag said he did not come to the issue “either as a Eurofederalist or as a Eurosceptic, but as a genuinely evil person”.
McNasty reminded the meeting that his last foray into referendums was the one to deny citizenship to children born in Ireland. "That was a really evil referendum, with long lasting evil effects". Hopefully lisbon will be as bad for the country as that one, he shouted.
The pro lisbon media promised to give massive publicity to his whimsical statements, while denying information on the actual content of the treaty to the voters.
Comments (9 of 9)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9.
I'm voting YES
I'm voting YES
I'm voting YES
We're voting YES
Ok so I understand you're sentiment (hard not to!) but this is the type of shallow contribution that leaves the left, the message and indeed indymedia without the necessary credibility.
Surely standards can be better than this muck?
The top article is okay , it reports on a real event in a pointed and satirical way, and if you read the newpaper reports of the meeting, it doesn't actually stray too far from the truth.
It's just reporting it using overstatement and a kind of wry humour that borders on being offensive, but actually gets in a few truths. The corporate media really are reporting on evermore ludicrous groups of this or that "for Lisbon", or even more pointedly "for Europe" and shying away from covering the true issues of the referendum. One can imagine a report of "Pet owners for Lisbon" or "DIY Enthusiasts for Europe" any day now. It's not too far fetched to imagine something like the one in the article, and it wouldn't be surprising to see something like this in the Phoenix or Private Eye.
As regards the images which have been added, well, Godwin's law applies - referring to Hitler or the Nazis in a discussion about anything except Hitler and the Nazis means you have lost the argument.
The crimes of Hitler are too great, the destruction of humanity during the Third Reich period plumbed such a depth, that comparing them to any contemporary dispute trivialises them and marks out the accuser as a fool (or a Tarantino fan, which is the same). As the Economist magazine has noted "a good rule in most discussions is that the first person to call the other a Nazi automatically loses the argument.".
If you look at the series of images, submitted purposefully in that order, it suggests that Hitler would ask us to vote yes if he were around (I believe this to be true); it suggests that Mussolini would ask us to vote yes if he were around (I believe this to be true); and it suggests that Stalin would ask us to vote yes if he were around (I believe this to be true, also). It also makes the claim that these "leaders" think of us as "bastards" (read "difficult to deal with people").
Next I use a different phrase to suggest that Ahern and his friend are "bastards" (read "difficult to deal with people"), thus subverting the previous images, and that, if Ahern wants a yes, perhaps that's a good enough reason to vote no.
93 per cent under Hitler, 89 per cent under Mussolini, 98 per cent under Stalin ( approximately )
Hitler had the Churches martialled on his side ( like Cowan ) ,
Mussoline always had the Vatican intellectuals to contend with,
Stalin had no Churches to worry about at all .
Pureile images - surely the standard of debate on this should be a bit higher?!
"the man who is credited with destroying the Progressive Democrat Party"
Whats so evil about that ?
Excellent images!! Nice to see some Humor in effect!
The use of Hitler is totally appropriate seeing as his political trajectory was the unification of Europe (albeit under Nazi rule).
The whole idea of Europe was to prevent another war between European nations &/or the rise of fascism. In this sense its quite ironic seeing far right parties blossom in European elections.
Its true that Hitler's (n Stalin n il duce's) Tyrannies were unique and awful, what about the US/UK/EU tyranny that is currently reigning??And Global capitalism in general??
Indymedia Ireland is a media collective. We are independent volunteer citizen journalists producing and distributing the authentic voices of the people. Indymedia Ireland is an open news project where anyone can post their own news, comment, videos or photos about Ireland or related matters.