Live Earth has to be the most fatuous fundraiser ever. Where is the money going?
Sorry if I sound like a heretic, but while I accept we shouldn't deliberately pollute and do our best to recycle our rubbish, I don't accept that 'climate change' is the biggest threat to the planet.
That would be global Islamist terrorism right now. Its stated intention is to kill us and destroy our way of life.
If rock singers and TV stars want to do something constructive, why don't they have a series of shows against jihad?
Madonna could kick it off in Iran, but the bare flesh and conical bras would have to go. Graham Norton could host the Kabul concert, though he might be lucky to get out without having a brick wall pushed on top of him.
I'm sure rappers like Puff Doggy would go down a storm with the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia, given their mutual enthusiasm for women's rights, homosexuality and drive-by executions.
Send the Spice Girls to Lahore. They'd look very fetching in designer burkas. The whole event could be beamed round the world by the BBC, being careful not to mention any connection between terrorism and Islam, perish the thought.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
'Most fatuous fundraiser ever'
Richard Littlejohn at the Daily Mail is on a roll. His latest target is Live Earth:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The latest development with all this save the planet talk is the suggestion now that Britons should like China limit families to having only one child.
The commie ideology is realy flowing out from the whole save the earth crap now, talk about Orwellian double think, we have just been swamped with immigrants under the guise that our birthrates had fallen too low.
What they fail to tell us about the one child per couple rule in China is that it only applies to Chinese families, ethnic minorities can have more due to them being under represented.
I remember when I was around 14 years old being told about the "population bomb" that was coming. Right.
Only a handful of mostly third-world countries have a fertility rate that ensures population growth. Most developed nations have a rate lower than 2.00, which indicates a shrinking, aging population.
OMG BRILLIANT.... I think I feel a blog post coming on...........
Post a Comment