An open thread where, at your weekend leisure, you can discuss anything you like.
{note from tigtog: yes, there was an ozblogistan outage for a few hours. Just one of those things.}
Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas
Larvatus Prodeo is an Australian group blog which discusses politics, sociology, culture, life, religion and science from a left of centre perspective. more»
» SUBSCRIBE to LP updates.
You know you want it…
http://youtu.be/xbsSeVr5NSI
This is the sort of thing that passes for marketing on KVOS TV (which I like to watch for the 1970′s comedy shows like Mary Tyler Moore and The Bob Newhart Show). American television has come a long way, baby….
Detained on 7.30 Island – the ABC’s integrity?
link
Can somebody at The Australian please give Chris Uhlmann a job -I think this piece is another job application.
I wish him well in the print media, such as it is. (Perhaps even Fairfax could help?)
Charter, anyone?
I dunno, Livewire, I’m inclined to agree with Uhlmann that this is a Labor Party policy failure (agree with you he belongs at Limited News, btw) – more the tail end of refugee policy failure, actually, when they’ve had the opportunity to tell the racists to piss off and adopt a humane approach which might help arrest the haemorrhage of votes to the Greens.
Someone should tell them they can’t out-arsehole the Libs, and trying to won’t get them the votes they’re chasing anyway.
My skin crawled when
Emperor PalpatinePhil Ruddock appeared in my TV last night – I’d hoped he’d had a stake driveb through his heart by now.Shit – [/strike] fail!
Livewire@3: yeah, he was going on along similar lines on 7:30 last night.
To be fair, the government is giving him plenty to work with.
But it wasn’t the only appalling effort on that show last week. Leigh Sales interviewed Bush-era deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage about the capture of Osama bin Laden. He said something along the lines of “Iraq was a distraction”.
Sales let this slide without further comment.
FFS, Armitage was a signatory to the 1998 PNAC letter (along with dickheads like Wolfowitz and Perle) to Clinton urging the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. He was there through all the key decisions. It was he who originally leaked Valerie Plame’s identity to Richard Novak, in an effort to silence a critic of the Iraq war.
I understand that he is no longer an active participant in politics and it may not be appropriate to give him the same kind of grilling you give somebody who is, but, geez, he was a participant at the time, not some academic analyst. Surely a follow-up along the lines of “so do you regret being part of the decision to focus on Iraq, then?” would have been appropriate.
The multiplicity of “narratives” woven into the killing of Osama bin Laden do not match the information that is leaking out from sources other than those of the US Administration.
My view is that this is a consequence of a series of cover stories, which do not make sense and keep changing. Even the mainstream media is noticing the dodgy spin coming from the White House.
However, there are enough “known knowns” to allow us a measure of forensic reconstruction/interpretation and from there an explanation for the bizzare contradictory stories the US is putting out.
So, let’s cut to the chase – everything points to the following:
1. OBL was kept as a virtual hostage in one room by the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in its safe house in Billal Town, Abbottabad
2. OBL was given up by ISI to the US by way of cashing in a poker chip, OR the US was tipped off by Pakistan’s rival intelligence group, MI (Military Intelligence)
3. OBL was executed with a shot to the back of the head, after he was taken to the ground floor of the house from the top floor
4. Much of the current disinformation campaign stems form the fact that a shot to the back of the skull of an unarmed man would be seen as unAmerican and would play badly during the upcoming campaign to re-elect President Obama
The reason I say that OBL was a virtual hostage of ISI is because as long as he was a figurehead of al Qaeda resident somewhere in the area, US Administration would stay interested and major funds could extorted from it. The graft which flows from US funding of Pakistan’s counter-terrorism efforts amounts to about a third if not more – see Washington Post June 25, 2008. Part of the money thus diverted may go back to the Taliban, and to al Qaeda in the region, to keep US in play and thus ready to keep up the payments – I see this as a form of pump-priming and an elegant round-robin that would amuse people like Musharraf.
Why was OBL coughed up now? Mr Merkel puts his finger on it in a previous post that it is re-election time for Obama, but also, concurrently, Washington is under pressure to rein in spending, and the hardheaded Gates pushed to give Pakistan an ultimatum to produce some results in exchange for the largesse. It is possible that MI ratted ISI out to the Yanks forcing ISI’s hand.
OBL would have been a form of insurance against US slipping the India dog of war against Pakistan, and as long as this symbolic threat remained in play, the major players in this gambit in Pakistan thought they could string it out. The threat to stop the flow of money may have led to the bargain: we’ll give you OBL for maintaining the funds and the keep-India-at-bay status quo. It’s an offer that Obama, facing a weakness in the polls for a perception he was “not being tough enough” on national security could not refuse.
The disinformation about the manner of OBL’s death and subsequent disposal of his corpse and the debacle that followed about photographs leads me to conclude that he was captured on the third floor, taken down to the ground floor and some 15 minutes later (according to the OBL’s daughter) then executed with a shot to the back of the head.
When the SEAL team rushed the third floor, in all probability knowing beforehand where he was, having been given this information by ISI, they found OBL cowering in bed.
If OBL was inclined to pick up a weapon he had plenty of opportunity to do so because the assault activity would have been heard by him for at least 10 minutes, with a large helicopter hovering right above his head while Team 6 rapelled down, one by one; contemporaneously, another helicopter crashed outside his window.
OBL as some sort of warrior was propaganda that suited both sides, for obvious reasons. Fact is that OBL was a financier and PR man. In real like OBL was a pussy and would have gone quietly with his hands up when told to do so by the assault team, and in shock, been totally co-operative, just like Saddam was, when unearthed in Tikrit.
OBL’s wife, who was with him, instinctively tried to come along and was shot in the thigh and passed out from loss of blood, probably from the femoral artery. This would account for all the blood in the photograph. A head wound would not produce this kind of bleeding.
While OBL was being taken downstairs, he was seen being led down by OBL’s 12-year-old daughter on the second floor. She gave an account of her version to events to Pakistan media afterwards.
On the ground floor, the SEALs team leader would have been communicating with the White House, asking instructions about what to do with OBL.
The White House took about 15-20 min to weigh up their options. Bringing OBL for a trial would have been a fantastic coup, like Eichmann for the Israelis. On the other hand, OBL in custody would be fraught with major potential dangers such as hostage taking of Americans, a far worse scenario than bombs going off in political terms for a re-election, as per Jimmy Carter. In the end the order came to “terminate with extreme prejudice”.
And this is where the second blunder error occurred (the first being the pilot error in dropping the chopper). OBL was executed in the back of the head. Once out of the heat of the battle, shooting someone while you look him in the eye is difficult, even for special forces. It may be that some minimum conversation took place and OBL crossed the line from target to human being.
It may also be that OBL was tied up and lying on the ground with his hands cuffed behind his back, face down and it would have been easier to shoot him in that position than turning him around face up or to standing him up. Under stress of time and the adrenalin of a raid, perhaps nobody considered the plethora of problems that would arise from that snap decision.
The two male witnesses to the execution downstairs also had to be eliminated – in photographs they are unarmed.
The OBL photo can’t be released for public consumption because the face would show it was an exit wound and not an entry wound. The exit wound from a high velocity carbine round is horrendous at such close range and in this case, a quarter of OBL’s face would have been blown away.
Sensitive readers may wish to skip this paragraph. A high velocity round used by special forces, the 5,56mm NATO round, fires a relatively small bullet pushed by a fairly large case of explosive propellant giving the projectile a velocity of about 1000 meters per second at the muzzle. This creates an entry wound that is small, about half a milimetre in diameter. The bullet is sharply pointed at the front broadening out to the base, so most of its weight is at the back. On hitting something hard, like the skull bone, the tremendous kinetic energy is transferred to the skull and the tissue. The bullet having lost its spin and being heavier at the back is now inclined to swap ends and the projectile starts tumbling end over end as it travels through the target’s head, working like a meat grinder to come out sideways or the back end through the face leaving a jagged exit wound, roughly rectangular in shape and many times the size of the entry wound as it takes bits of bone and tissue, including brain matter with it on the way out.
A photo would have unequivocally revealed that OBL was shot in the back of the head.
In another assassination orchestrated by the CIA, Che Guevara in Bolivia, the specific instructions were not to shoot him in the head but in the body from the front so that publicity photographs would be acceptable for public consumption.
David,
I will leave an appropriate debate about the refugee issue, for now, to others.
My comment is about the ABC, 7.30, and Uhlmann. Given what the ABC is supposed to do, and Uhlmann’s key role in interviewing the people responsible for such things, I don’t want to have to agree or disagree with him. I would like someone in those roles who can ask questions and discuss the facts and complexities. If I want to read something I plan to agree or disagree with, then let me do it elsewhere, not on my ABC.
Robert, I agree, the problems are with 7.30 not just Uhlmann. One might hope that Leigh Sales could do better when he (and that sort of attitude) is gone, and perhaps with a bit of better leadership, if, like, the ABC could get back to what its supposed to be doing.
OK, Livewire – here are the facts:
Fact: The Coalition used Manus Island as part of it’s refugee processing and the end result was very low numbers of boat arrivals and asylum seekers in detention centers.
Fact: The ALP continuosly criticised the Coaltion for using Manus Island.
Fact: Julia Gillard has a string of quotes about oppositon to using Manus Island. See the Australian’s Cut & Paste section today – almost the definition of being hoist on your own petard.
Fact: Since the ALP Government removed TPVs there has been a massive increase in boat arrivals and the Detention Centres are overfull and the Governemnt appears to have little control within in them.
Fact: The Minister was not even told that a homemade bomb had been found.
Fact: The East Timor proposal was a Monty Python Dead Parrot from the moment it left the PM’s lips. An almost complete failure of both foreign relations and immigration policy development.
Fact: The ALP is now looking to open Manus Island Detention Centre which it previously criticised.
Here is an opinion: The ALP are a bunch of screaming hypocrits if they reopen Manus Island, let alone Nuaru. Backbenchers and Ministers know that their policy of ceasing the use of TPVs is a catastrophic failure of policy. They also know that they are bleeding voters to the right and left of them because they tried to ignore human nature when removing TPVs. They also know that unless something changes this will just compound the already disasterous policy outcomes situation they are currently in.
What is your opinion about the facts above?
This is going to turn into a monster thread so I’ll get in early and then get out.
To do the job properly the ALP Minority Government should admit that it’s all too hard, and withdraw Australia from the Refugee Convention. Stop pussy footing around and let the world know we are not “a compassionate country”. Rather we’re a bunch of frightened xenophobes who refuse to follow the “Judeo Christian” example of the Good Samaritan.
That should see Labor in government for the next millenium or so. Particularly if we get the Navy to sink a few of the boats.
/rant
Razor @8
Only about half your ‘facts’ are correct. You are correct that the ALP and Gillard are hypocritical on Asylum Seekers and that the East Timor solution was never going to happen. But you are incorrect about the effects of TPVs and Mandatory detention on numbers of boats.
Possum has a very persuasive article on ‘Push vs. Pull’ factors in regard to Asylum Seekers.
In short ‘Pull’ factors (i.e. the liberality or illiberality of Australian Asylum Seeker policy e.g The existence/abolition of TPVs) has a tiny effect on asylum seeker flows. What determines refugess flows are ‘Push’ factors war in home countries.
Very large of Tunisians and Libyans are currently turning up in Italy whereas those figures were relitively small. Italy did not change its Asylum Seeker policies.
As Possum says
So TPVs do not materially affect refugess flows and are irrelevant to refugess arrivals where there is an overseas war.
Manus Island having a detention centre does not affect refugees flows.
The Pacific Solution did not affect the number of people attempting to come to Australia.
The presence of war in home countries is the dominating factor in refugee flows.
Australian policy-makers have little influence on the presence of overseas wars, except as we participate in them such as in Iraq and Afghanistan and hence create the very refugees flows you despise and wrongly attribute to the lack of TPVs.
What’s your opinion on Possum’s analysis ?
The only way we can materially reduce the number of asylum seekers where there is war overseas is to withdraw from the UN Convention On Refugees.
Until the Lib/Nats propose that their incitement to distrust and fear refugees and to rhetorically demand ‘stop the boats’ shown them to be cynical manipulators of racist for political purposes, which is worse than being a sincere and open racist.
The ALP, while attempting to accommodate the xenophobic sentiment of Australian voters through this costly and farcical system of mandatory detention (remember 90% end up getting in) have at least the redeeming feature of refusing to actually whip up, encourage and endorse the said Xenophobia.
Their turn about on Manos Island is indeed hypocritical, the East Timor ‘solution’ was amatuerish and silly.
But unlike the Lib/Nats they do not encourage racism and xenophobia.
And unlike the Lib/Nats they do not lie to Australia about the effects of TPV and Mandatory Detention on refugee flows, such lies faithfully and uncritically regurgitated by you Razor.
So at the moment the ALP represent a far less evil package on refugees than the Lib/Nats.
The Greens, as usual, are far more principled than either of the major parties on this issue.
Zoot – I have been saying we should withdraw from the UN’s Refugee Convention because it is an outdated and ineffectual document that does not reflect current reality.
Your other dashingly witty remarks aren’t worth repsonding to.
Razor, does the PM’s annnouncement, rather less than an hour ago, about agreement with Malaysia on a Regionl Processing Centre affect your thinking on this?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/07/3210503.htm
Fact – as soon as there was a change in Australian government and policy there was an immediate increase in boat arrivals. It is the boat arrivals that are the issue not refugee claim numbers.
Fact – boat arrivals admitted to journalists that they were waiting in Indonesia until the government and policy changed.
It is the boat arrivals that are the issue, not refugees per se. Most Asutralians are quite happy to run a refugee resettlement programs (despite some law and order and welfare dependency issues they bring with them). The fact is that the boat arrivals, who are wealthy in order to pay their way, push out those in a camp somewhere in the world. This clashes with most Australians idea of a fair go.
The possum analysis is flawed because NZ does not have the same boat arrivals problem as we do and only looks at boat arrivals as a “more complicated” sideline. It is the boat arrivals that are the issue.
Your declaration of racisim is unsupported by the facts. Most Australians are happy for us to operate a controlled refugee resettlement program. The boast arrivals, by asylum seekers who have the means, means that destitute people who are in camps aroubnd the globe miss out – this is not in accordance with giving everyone the good old Aussie fair go.
The Italy example is not the same as here – we do not have arrivals direct from an adjacent war zone. And, nite how unhappy France is with the Italian approach to the hand balling of the arrivals.
@13 – no it doesn’t change my mind in any way. Why should it? In fact it is her accepting that offshore processing is the way to go. Why did they get rid of that again? How’s that working out?
I thought she was supposed to be a good bargainer? 4000 for 800 – how is that good bargaining? Should have been 1 for 1 as a minimum, but Malaysia would have known she is over a barrel on this one. I wonder wht there ambit bid was? 10,000 for 500?
@14 – sorry for the typos – wrangling a 4 and 6 year old while typing is hard. I’m male.
@16 Razor – It shows.
So Gillard lied about the carbon tax and now does the big time backflip on the pacific solution. She got Rudd to drop the ETS and then knifed him. Faark – how bad can she get?
Whoever fixed my comment @ 4, thanks.
I’m fascinated by the huge amount of publicity and how upset people are getting about jumps racing and, specifically, the horse jumping into the crowd at Warrnambool races.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/06/3209388.htm
For the record, I’m against jumps racing because I think the fatality rate is too high. But, in terms of animal welfare it seems like a fairly low level order of priority to me and I was shocked to see the RSPCA have a full page ad about it in ‘the Age’ today. Thousands of horses of all types get sent to abattoirs every year. In Australia. We have two abattoirs catering specifically for the European horse meat market. Why isn’t there a fuss about this? Presumably, many of the bien pensant bourgeoisie who are up in arms about jumps racing eat meat of various types sourced from repugnant farming practices. Probably many of them have dogs purchased from pet shops, which means the pups come from puppy mills which are extremely cruel. But, because we can see horses falling at jumps, it becomes a cause celebre.
I suspect the people organising a lot of the campaign, the ‘Racehorse Protection Association’ have never spent too much time with horses, because some of their statements are way off course. Describing the Warrnambool incident as ‘carnage’ is risible. OTOH, the jumps racing lobby seems to be totally populated by idiots and the Minister, Dennis Napthine, seems the biggest idiot of all. Their arguments in favour of jumps racing lack all logic. But,the horse who jumped into the crowd has the most fantastic leap. He must have given himself the most awful shock on landing.
Sorry Razor, was having an afternoon nap when you started posting (my 7 year old is at her mums).
I originally thought you might have not seen my second post when you started throwing your ‘facts’ around. My point was not whether Uhlmann was right, whether he had good ‘facts’ or specifically whether the ALP is right. Its whether Uhlmann should be taking the approach he did in the article (and takes, in a different way, in interviews), given his privileged position on the 7.30 report, which allows him access – on our behalf – to senior government people, to ask questions and discuss the complexities.
When you have the position he does, it’s not appropriate to make it all about how good Uhlmann is at making the government look stupid or throwing ‘facts’ in their faces to make himself look good. And, as if those same senior government people are going to fall for that ‘gotcha’ crap – even if you repeat yourself and interrupt.
If I wanted to buy into this sort of argument about refugee policy, I could go to any media outlets, and/or come here and read people like you.
I’d just like it if our ABC was served by some journalists who do something different than that. Perhaps then we could all have a better informed discussion about the issues of the day.
@Fine, I have much the same general sentiment towards jumps racing and the way that most people prefer to not notice what happens to unsuccessful horseflesh.
What struck me about the Warrnambool incident is that the crowd barrier seemed to be several feet forward of the end of the brush fencing on that blind jump. Of course the riderless horse, trying to avoid the rest of the field, jumped right at the edge of the brush fencing and came down right where those people were! What buffoon at the course didn’t realise that having the barricade within that landing zone for the edge of the jump was just exactly this sort of accident simply waiting to happen?
tigtog, it was really stupid risk management planning. The 2 metre barrier the horse jumped was supposed to prevent any horses jumping off the course and onto a public street. But obviously they didn’t tell the horses.
I’m going here tonight.
Razor, you really have to do better than saying “change of govt=increase in asylum seeker flows, therefore govt is responsible.” You have to rule out all the alternative push factors before you can blame dropping TPVs. This is unlikely to work for you.
sg,
I would tend to agree with you if the asylum seekers were arriving by boat directly from the country in which they were being threatened.
The simple truth is that they are not.
Having left their native country they are then going through one or more other comparatively safe countries, some of them with functioning refugee processing centres, they then choose to spend around USD10,000 on getting boat passage to Australia, risking their lives in the process.
The only reason they would do this is that they feel one or both of:
* Their claims will be processed faster if they are in Australia.
* They will be more comfortable in Australia while their claims are processed.
Personally, I believe we are not taking enough asylum seekers in Australia and I am happy that we take more than we currently are – but that is not the issue here.
The danger to the people coming by boat is very high. To reduce or eliminate the process of them arriving by boat we can do several things – including working with Indonesia to try to prosecute those organising this trade.
As with several other illegal activities, though, the only real way to stop it is to eliminate the demand – in this case by attacking the two factors that make the option attractive.
Offshore processing and dropping those that arrive by this method to the back of the queue while taking in more people than we currently are, providing their claims have been processed correctly, is IMHO the only way to achieve this.
The government deserves some applause for coming to this conclusion. The only real pity is that so many died on the high seas while they were learning the lessons that Howard could, and did, try to teach them.
And cue Mercurius rant in 3…2…1…
Yes. Possum’s article showed that neither the Pacific Solution nor the illiberality of our processing or visa systems affected the number of boats coming to Australia. Agreed ?
Sure. People are rational. If they suspect the visa system is about to change and they’re not being hassled in Indonesia then they’ll remain there until the system changes.
Razor, the reason all these Iraqis and Afghanis are in Indonesia in the first place is because war has driven them out of their home countries. No war => no-one waiting in Indonesia => No boat arrivals.
War is the controlling factor. Agreed ?
Piffle. The rise and fall in NZ’s asylum seekers correlates exactly to Australia’s. NZ retained a more liberal processing and visa system than Australia yet their numbers of asylum seekers rose and fell and the same rate as Australia’s during a time when our attitude became extremely illiberal. The obvious conclusion is that the illiberality of processing and visa systems does not materially affect refugee flows, in boats or otherwise.
Italy’s example shows that refugee flows are dominated by the presence of war, something so obvious its frankly amazing you can’t admit it.
Sure. People don’t mind a few darkies bobbing up provided they’re in small numbers and know their place. Even in the Old South people had trusted Negro nannies and genuinely loved them. Its only when minorities get out of control that the fears and bigotry rise up.
That’s why the Coalition are out there banging on all the time about Border Control, the criminality of asylum seekers and their various character defects such as being queue-jumpers, document destroyers, dole bludgers etc., which concepts are then repeated dutifully back into
LP threads by people such as yourself and jumpnmcar.
Razor, Australia was created as a White Man’s Paradise in the South Pacific, a goal that was assiduously pursued over several generations. That kind of imprinted cultural thinking does not evaporate easily. Even when it does evaporate residues remain. Hence the Coalition’s rhetoric.
Politicians are not usually stupid, just cunning, and they know what makes us afraid.
But look, I accept you personally are not racist. You are just worried about losing control, somewhat irrationally, given the puny amount of boat arrivals. Tell me, what precisely are you scared of, what would happen if we lost control ?
Being kidnapped, raped and tortured because you put a poster of someone your government (an Islamic dictatorship police state) killed on a lamp post also clashes with my idea of a fair go.
Mate, becoming a refugee is not akin to queuing for tickets to the AFL Grand Final. I’m not sure you get this. The road to your local Ticketek is not usually roadblocked by homicidal maniacs who would like to kill you then rape your wife and children.
Circumstances, in war, are not generally under your control Transit camps can be horrendous and prone to attack by said homicidal maniacs. Besides which the boat arrivals are doing what many responsible parents might do which is to seek out the best possible opportunities for their families.
Let’s say China invaded Australia, bombed Perth to smithereens then went door to door hunting for the local population to enslave/rape.
In that position I might hazard paying a boatperson to sail me to NZ, New Caledonia, Tahiti or Hawaii. PNG, while closer, does not have quite the educational opportunities I’m after. Taking the 285 bus to the UN agency in the Perth CBD might not be possible under conditions of aerial bombardment or even if it were, not the best option for a better life. Strewth, its worth a risk.
What would you do ?
But this has taken us away from the main point under discussion which is whether or not TPVs and Mandatory Detention reduce boat arrivals. Possum shows they don’t. Your rebuttal to his article amounted to sticking your head in the sand.
To award your bare point, should a refugee previously displaced by war end up very close to the country of destination, yes the prospect of an imminent liberalisation of visa and processing laws would be a strong incentive to defer arrival in the asylum country.
While this is an Open Thread, we do have an active thread on asylum seeker rhetoric. Why aren’t the latest comments going on that thread?
Razor
While we’re chatting, where do you get your Climate information from: Lindzen?
I am interested in your contention that changes in CO2 will not change temperature any mare than that due to natural variation.
Any links would be appreciated.
I really cant imagine what Gillard is thinking over the single mother bashing. Is she determined to pitch all policy at the people who’ll never vote for her, or is she genuinely a Tory at heart?
I mean seriously – why WOULD any progressives still vote ALP? Anyne? No wonder the GRNs are rising.
Lefty E, my guess is a little from column A, a little from column B.
@28 – “Tell me, what precisely are you scared of, what would happen if we lost control ?”
There are millions of refugees looking for a safe haven. We have a responsibility to take our fair share, and we do. If we just say, “Bugger it – if you can get on a boat to our shores then Bob’s your uncle” there will be a massive uncontrolled influx of refugees.
I’ll probably be called racist for this but I actually like Australian culture. I also like the way it evolves, slowly over time. The UK and Europe provides us with examples of what happens to societies that allow massive influxes of cultures that are at odds to western democratic societies. Putting aside to one side for a moment the activiites and influence of radical islamists in those societies – it is now obvious the social dislocation and lack of integration that occurs when very large numbers of a culture that doesn’t wish to integrate is allowed to immigrate and establish monocultural centres. Try being a young attractive female and walk around Lakemba in a partying outfit – the abuse, threats and comments wold make a working girl blush.
The majority of refugee activists and their supporters do not live in the communities which suffer the impact of large numbers of refugees being resettled. Subiaco, Cottesloe, Kew, South Yarra, Bondi and North Sydney are not where the refugees are resettled. It is actually the core labour voters who suffer the effects in places like Balga, Frankston and Western Sydney that cop it. If they were happy to put up with all the negative effects, not just the lovely art and new eating opportunities, then ,maybe I’d respect them. But they don’t – just like most of the Global Warming advocates who fly around the globe and behave in ridiculously hypocritical wasys.
As for your last point – what would I do? I didn’t spend 3 years in the ARES and 10 years in the ARA to lie down and be kicked like a dog. More than happy to go down fighting.
I also forgot to add that it is morally bankrupt to not actively discourage people from putting to sea aat great risk in unsafe boats.
Razor -
Full marks to you for being honest.
You fear the de-Australianisation of our national culture. You just don’t want foreigners to outnumber you in your home country. I can understand that.
But look mate. Despite large-scale wars we get a trickle of refugees coming here. You can relax, Think about it. Even a Cambodian peasant farmer, given peace and quiet will stay home with his own culture, family etc. The only thing that makes people become refugees is war. The rubbish that the Coalition is feeding you on the dole-bludging criminal queue-jumpers is merely to provide you with emotional cover to vote NO to darkies.
Here’s a secret. I don’t like the Barmy Army. Given my way I would limit ticketing to the Ashes to 2% Poms. In numbers higher than that they BarmyArmyize and wreck the whole thing. I don’t like ther songs, I don’t like their attitude, I don’t like their numbers. For me it wrecks the whole Ashes. They make me uncomfortable. I don’t like them taking over. It doesn’t feel like an Aussie cricket summer any more. I just want to send them home. Seriously. On the Barmy Army I am Hansonesque.
So I understand your unease at immigrants.
But neither of us are really rational in our disquiet.
Now mate you have dropped all reference to Possum and Push factors so it seems to me you have conceeded my points. War is the dominating factor, not TPVs and such.
As to ‘what would you do in the event you became a refugee’, I think you are avoiding the question, so I’m guessing you can see the validity of the decision to pay a boatperson for a chance at a better life. Every parent is entitled to take reasonable risks as they see fit for the betterment of their families, even Iraqi parents.
On where Refugee activists live you’re just recycling idiotic latte-drinker stereotypes. I think you know that.
As to negative effects of immigration. Yes, undoubtedly. No point being all romantic about it. I personally would cease all Muslim immigration immediately. Even though only approx. 15% of Muslims support Al-Queda that’s too high a quotient for my liking.
Forget that ‘luring people to their doom’ Bolt argument about removing TPVs. If the refugees’ home countries were not in war they wouldn’t be thinking about coming to Australia.
I also sent you a message about Climate which is in moderation. Where do you get your Climate information from: Lindzen?
I am interested in your contention that changes in CO2 will not change temperature any more than that due to natural variation.
Any links would be appreciated.
Lefty E @30:
Tony Abbott.
Razor, what’s going on in Frankston we should know about?
@30 – I think you are either misreading or misrepresenting what I wrote about CO2. I didn’t say “that changes in CO2 will not change temperature any mare than that due to natural variation.” – I am sure that I wrote that any changes to the climate are unlikely to be detectable from natural variations in the climate.
Is it against comments policy to call someone a [redacted]?
{Please don’t be obtuse ~moderator}
Sorry, I take that back – Razor, what’s going on in Frankston that we should know about?
Razor @38. At the risk of posting something that should really be on the climate thread, I’m going to call bullshit on your statement:
I assume you got this from Lindzen’s recent post on ‘internal variability’ on WUWT. This has been throughly debunked at SkepticalScience here.
Specifically:
I can empathize with that bloke on the roof at Villawood the other day, making and receiving phone calls: that’s the only way we can get mobile reception around here too!
Razor:
South Yarra is in Melbourne Ports, which has never not been a Labor electorate.
At a guess, a large proportion of Victoria’s refugee activists live in the electorate of Melbourne, which until very recently has also never not been a Labor electorate.
Moreover, the electorate of Melbourne, my own, is the place of residence of many, many refugees. Victoria Street Richmond, aka The Ho Chi Minh Trail, is the community hub of Vietnamese refugees in Melbourne. The presence of tens of thousands of refugees in Melbourne has not caused an outbreak of fiery crosses. Neither has it provoked a shift to the political Right. On the contrary, Melbourne boasts the only Greens federal MHR in the country.
You’ll have to rethink your stereotypes, Raze.
South Yarra isn’t in Melbourne Ports Katz. It’s in Higgins, Costello’s old electorate.
I think there is some truth to Razor’s point. A friend of mine has a job helping refugees settle in; access Centrelink, set up bank accounts, show them where all the local resources are etc. She works in the Dandenong, Frankston, Noble Park area and also makes the point the refugees are settled in more deprived areas and there is some resentment from the locals there. Their point is that refugees aren’t settled in South Yarra or Prahran, but in under-resourced areas where they put scarce community resources under an even greater strain.
Part of South Yarra is in Melbourne Ports.
It is undeniable that many refugees are to be found in the fringe suburbs.
However, it is also true to say that many are found in the electorate of Melbourne. I point his out to correct Razor’s stereotype.
As per our discussion a couple of weeks ago, I did what I said I would. I watched the Blot Report this morning, and made a note of the ads – if anyone is interested in mounting an advertiser boycott.
First ad break: Ch. 10 promo, Mr Rental, Skoda Octavia, Shine lawyers, Tele Choice, Ch. 10 promo.
Second ad break: Ch. 10 promo, Garnier hair care, Holden, Adidas CPA programme, Tele Choice, Ch. 10 promo.
Just to lighten the mood, here’s a musical dedication to Mr StinkyPants-On-Fire himself, from The Castaways.
Further to Silkworm @46. Here’s a clip from Hungry Beast last week:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-02rSjE9618&feature=feedu
Two notable individuals’ names crop up. Sometimes, if you wish to understand someones’ motivation, just follow the money!
Silkworm,
Much thanks.
Have copied that onto an e-mail and distributed it.
Now for something really entertaining. I’ve watched a DVD of the John Hurt version of Moby Dick to be screened on ABC1 tonight, Recommend it. Its very good. Liked it much better than the Gregory Peck version.
And, of course, there’s the book, if perchance any of you have missed it. Its not called the Great Ameican Novel for nothing.
Silkworm,
Much thanks.
Have copied that onto an e-mail and distributed it.
My immediate mailing list of 40+ ppl have already written a draft letter of product support to those firms, & extended family have been urged to consider those brands when shopping.
That’s more like it Katz. South Yarra isn’t in Melbourne Ports. A very small part of South Yarra is in Melbourne Ports, whilst the bulk is in Higgins. It’s nice to be accurate.
@49: Wow, a publican who knows 40+ people.
well, tough shit, SATP. I just put it on a rather large group mail for Socialist Alliance and sent it to the Greens. We outnumber you.
Even tougher sheets PB, we can outspend you welfare junkies any day!
Yes, I do appreciate accuracy.
Fine @ 44:
“South Yarra isn’t in Melbourne Ports.”
Fine @ 50:
“A very small part of South Yarra is in Melbourne Ports.”
I never stipulated that all or even most of South Yarra was in Melbourne Ports.
The fact that most most sugar is not in toffee does not mean that there is no sugar in toffee.
Lawyerish, weaselly reasoning, Katz.
Katz@43
Katz@54
I believe you Katz. Millions wouldn’t.
GregM, do you consider that your finger isn’t up your nose until all your finger is up your nose?
Further to silkworm @46:
The advertisers during Rusty’s “encore” on Sunday afternoon (in Perth) were Homebuyer’s Centre, Jeep (The Chrysler Group), The Wayside Chapel, Coles, Bioglan, EMI (flogging Katy Perry’s album), Nivea and John Hughes.
Thanks to the wonders of technology it is possible to note the advertisers whilst skipping past Ol’ Colostomy Lugs entirely. The whole exercise was almost painless.
So go for it SATP, I expect to see a massive spike in sales of Bioglan Super Fish Oil once your 40+ friends spring into action.
SATP,
welfare junkies? Steve, one of the really imporetant things about hurling insults at somebody is the absolute requirement for the insults to have some accuracy. As I have better things to do than get into a prolonged debate with you as to why you areinaccurate when you use the term welfare junkies in almost every context, all I’ll say is, you’re wrong.
Zootm
Do you mean to say they put the ….. on twice in one day. Gawd.
Not surprisung about the Wayside Chapel though. They used to attract some dreadful RWDBs as speakers back in the 70s on a Sunday night.
Paul Burns,
Apologies, I thought you mentioned “Socialist Alliance” & “the Greens”.
Now THERE is a pair of outfits that’d have self-reliant, self-funding memberships
Zoot,
Alas, since I sent the “suport those who support Channel 10″ email my mailout list has plunged from >40 members to <5
Clearly Silkworm & the other fascists shall triumph again.
SATP – I think the Greens (at least) are a party with pretty high average socioeconomic levels amongst their supporters. More so than Lib/Lab anyway.
Jess
Not the bloke handing out ” green how to vote cards” at the booth i voted at.
Barefoot, old jeans, Bob Marley singlet and blood shot eyes.
Thats fair dinkum.
I’m sure many people who may have voted green, decided not to , the moment they saw him.
jumpnmcar said:
Indeed it is, or if I were affecting an academic air, I might say “authentic”.
Apparently, authentic is in this year. Authentic is the new black.
Fran
His dreadlocks were authentic, i think.
Jumpncar, thats like suggesting a whole lot of folks would have voted Liberal – till they saw some two-bit spiv in a cheap suit flash a cheesebag grin and a blue how-to-vote.
The ones who dropped you are the smart ones.
You obviously don’t know the meaning of the word “fascist.” You’ve stopped taking your fish oil capsules, haven’t you.
Anticipating the budget tonight, local radio here was full of people who were saying the cost of living is the main issue, with increasing difficulty in providing for basic needs.
Then followed an interview with a bloke from NATSEM who had done a cost of living comparison of 2010 compared to 2005. On average we are net 15% better off. He reckons that the problem is that our life-style expectations have expanded faster than our means. Everyone wants a plasma TV now.
There were marked changes up and down. We notice the ups and ignore the downs.
He reckons the only group that have made no progress are single mums.
Gosh Silky — doesn’t the word “f@scist” merely describe people who are borderline rude and intolerant of others’ lifestyle choices? That would have been the main thing you’d have said og H|tler and Mussol|ni would it?
Apparently those brown and black shirted types didn’t like people with puffy shirts … or something.
Funny thing Steve, but to me that just looks like market forces at work.
Potato potahto.
Single mothers are, of course, currently being demonised in preparation for having their chocolate rations increased in the budget.
re the budget – I am hoping that money will be raining down on my region thanks to the hard work and dedication of the Independents.
Democracy in action!
I got an ivitation to a John Pilger film night from one of the recipients of my e-mails. Doing better than you, SATP.
Sir Henry Casingbroke @7,
I love you.
Your description of the workings of Pakistan’s terrorism-based economy is so delightfully sordid I am inspired to believe it to be true. But alas, I cannot. PAK has taken so much damage from AQ I am forced to err on the side of sanity and conclude most of the ruling class would prefer AQ out and OBL dead.
Safe house: Could well be.
On execution et. al: very plausible.
OBL as wimpy non-warrior financier/spiv/PR man: No, he was an active combatant in the anti-Soviet Jihad.
Now, if its not too personal, are you dead?
Never mind we can make it work anyway.
Yrs Affectionately,
Giles
@72 — PB, lemme guess, second prize was two tickets to the Pilger film night??
Giles Anthrax @73, after your complete misreading of OnTheBus’s motives on the Climate Clippings thread I’m not too impressed with your powers of deduction. Suffice it to say OBL was indeed an active combatant in Afghanistan, but that was thirty years ago and the man has had severe health problems since. Sir Henry’s analysis seems valid to me.
Merc,
Na.
We’re starting regular screenings of radical docos at the Armidale Club. We used to do it a few years ago, then we stopped.
From the nutbag right …
Check out who is whispering in Mike Huckabee’s ear.
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/05/mike-huckabee-janet-porter-soviet-spy
Paul Burns #72:
I’ll concede that point, and you’ll remain ahead of me on that score, as ladies in my locale have learned to not invite me along to the pictures.
I found I could no longer comment on the leading blog as it appears on the LP opening page, so I’ll comment here instead.
In response to my comment on another thread that I’d feel guilty about watching Gran Torino last night, because of its racist jokes, or some stupidity like that = you don’t get subtleties do you, you RWDB? Gran Torino was one of the most powerful anti-racist movies I’ve seen for a while, done with great subtelty, (which you obviously missed) with a stunning ending, which I won’t give away for those who haven’t seen it yet – surely one of the film’s many messages was that it is foolish to judge by appearances. Anyway, tops to Clint Eastwood for another great evocation of working class American life.
As expected, things at Fukushima continue to detriorate.
Thanks akn.
Re Fukushima, it was just announced on the ABC news that the Japanese government intends to issue bonds to the sum of US$50 billion to pay for compensation for the persons whose lives have been turned upside down by the exclusion zone.
If only TEPCO had taken out insurance to cover these costs…
Oh yes, that’s right, no private insurance company would touch covering such risks.
Privatised profits, socialised losses. And what losses!