Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Thursday, January 05, 2012
Sunday, January 01, 2012
Mike is a good friend of mine, so are some people he has mentioned in part two of his review of 2011, and who certainly won't like Mike's incisive observations. In those specific cases I cannot but be impartial.
Apart from that, Mike and I do not always agree on everything - how could we?
What I fully share with Mike, however, is his almost visceral aversion against BS. Thus, when we see something we don't like for BS reasons, we open our mouths rather than keep silent in order to be "Messrs. Nice Guys".
We are not "politically correct", and as far as I am concerned, I despise this new form of diplomacy which is often aimed at converting plain, smelly BS into some sort of odorless bull crap.
Some will say (I know who they will be.... :-): "Why do these guys feel they have to pick on other shark defenders? Why can't they just be tolerant and focus on the 'larger' issues?" Simple - because as in all other human activities, including organzations with common interests such as movie star fan clubs, there are always diverging opinions that should be questioned, debated, criticized.
A critical mind cannot be equated with being negative or destructive which is something I hear once in a while from some of the hypocritical shark "conservationists" out there.
In extreme cases I get reprimanded in the most subtle of ways.
As, for instance, by a youngster who found it appropriate to call me "a seemingly bored mother fucker" who should get a life rather than bad-mouthing other people who DO THINGS, like his newly found friend, shark pornographer extraordinaire ABC4, and other such professional and ad honorem "Shark Angels"... :-)
Anyway, enjoy Mike's blog. In literary terms it is an award winning piece of writing, as are all his postings. I would rank Mike, along with his choice of Patric Douglas, as the best 2011 shark blog writer, by far.