Thurston, Inglis, Prince, Folau. A dream combination which could be a nightmare for New South Wales. Thurston enjoys the extra room at five-eight and so does Inglis. He was sent on many a raid down the left side of the field by Thurston in game 2. An obvious tactic for New South Wales is to keep Inglis quiet. And that means shutting Thurston down.

This is where the New South Wales forwards need to step up. They lacked penetration in game 2 and gifted many metres to Queensland and no platform for Wallace. While Anasta and Pearce are in great form for the Roosters, it will mean nothing if the forwards fail to give them room. The one forward that needs to stamp his authority on the game is Willie Mason. He talks tough but seems a “flat track bully.” If the team is going well Mason will dominate against lesser opponents. But when the going gets tough, Mason has a tendency to disappear.

This is his game. An inspirational effort will seem in the Blues jumper for many season to come. Another failure and it could mean the end of his representative career. Unless Fulton, Daley and co are selectors again next year. There is some disquiet around Sydney town regarding selections this year. This decider will either vindicate the selectors or give the armchair critics (and I’m one of them) further ammunition for blogging and to join in a chorus of “We told you so.”

It will be a close game. It will be a mighty game. The fields of battle shall ring to the crash of bodies, the whistle of Tony Archer and disputes questioning the parentage and visual acuity of the aforementioned ref from both sides of the border. My tip as ever is for New South Wales to redeem themselves at the last moment; to tear away the veil of darkness and herald a new dawn for New South Wales in Origin.

23-16 and the Blues victorious once more.

Join in the fun here at LP. I’ll also be live blogging the game as Sidelined which will commence sometime between 7:30 and 8:00pm with the ceremonial bagging of Ben Ikin.

PS Some may find this post a little less maroon than Brian’s efforts. Blue is a more appealing colour dont cha think?

That is some pretty heady sermonizing. I mean, you’d never hear a good ole boy saying that the US brought the 911 attacks on itself. Would you?

Of course, Obama was asked to denounce the sentiments of Reverend Wright. Which he did Tuesday in a speech in Philadelphia (transcript).

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

Then something strange happened as Obama continued his speech. He willingly gave way to the forces of nuance and sensitivity. Not only did he frame the Reverend Wright’s comments in the context of lingering black anger over racism, he also outlined the anger and resentment felt by whites in American society. It was, to paraphrase Jon Stewart on tonight’s The Daily Show, as if Obama had decided to talk about race as if his audience were adults.

We know await McCain’s denouncement of John Hagee in the same, eloquent, unequivocal terms.

During the course of the program David Wright-Neville explained how this may happen:

DAVID WRIGHT-NEVILLE, GLOBAL TERRORISM RESEARCH CENTRE (at seminar): Nobody is born a terrorist. In any society, and if this triangle represents an area of society, only a few people will make the transition from membership in mainstream society to the point where they’ll involve themselves in violence here at the end of this transition.

Terrorism is a process, people pass through a series of processes. Along the way they cross what one might call the alienation threshold, at which point they begin to disengage from society and mix in groups of people who are similarly alienated, who have similar experiences, who feel collectively as if society is against them and excludes them from involvement in all mainstream activities…

SALLY NEIGHBOUR: After alienation it’s a short step to the next threshold – the decision to use violence.

DAVID WRIGHT-NEVILLE, GLOBAL TERRORISM RESEARCH CENTRE (at seminar): …Once they’ve crossed the violence threshold they begin to ethically disengage from society and they’ll begin to contemplate killing others outside of that particular in-group into which they’ve gravitated.

SALLY NEIGHBOUR (to David Wright-Neville, at seminar): So how important is alienation in this process?

DAVID WRIGHT-NEVILLE, GLOBAL TERRORISM RESEARCH CENTRE: Alienation is critically important. Most terrorist research shows that unless the person is alienated, coupled with feelings of humiliation, disempowerment and so on, it’s very unlikely that a person will become a terrorist.

The disturbing aspect of this idea is that those who may fall into terrorism are very likely to be born and raised in Australia. Australian born Muslims interviewed for the program expressed confusion and dismay over the struggle to be both Muslim and Australian. How does one react to being told: F**k off wogs, go back to your own country Mohamed when they were born in Australia? The alienation threshold helps explain how people could participate in a terrorist act like the London bombings and poses a lesson for Australian approaches to counter-terrorism.

While Australia’s counter-terrorism policy has played on the politics of fear and racist dog whistles, Dangerous Ground did illustrate some of the positive approaches to policing and security that are being develop.

The Victorian police have adopted a community policing approach (pleasantly surprising a group of Sudanese women) to build links into the Muslim and immigrant communities. The NSW police have adopted similar measures and even the Federal Police have employed a Muslim mediator to work with the community and allay concerns.

Racism is bred of ignorance and fear and eventually feeds the distrust of both Muslim and non-Muslim Australians. If terrorism is to be negated, we need to build bridges in the communities rather than engage in the bigotry of sterotyping; viewing all Muslim Australians as potential terrorists or all anglo-Australians as probable racists.

While promoting social cohesion and trust between Australians of all creeds is not the only method of counter-terrorism, it is a vital part of a comprehensive strategy that deserves more recognition.

For more, the supplementary collection of reports and articles collated by Four Corners are worth reading.

The source of the foul odour is the ICAC investigation into shady development deals done by the Wollongong City Council. That alone is an interesting story and has implicated a number of Iemma ministers. The rogues gallery being NSW Housing Minister Matt Brown, Police Minister David Campbell, Health Minister Reba Meagher and Minister for being mentioned in ICAC Investigations Joe Tripodi.

In the letter columns in both the Daily Telegraph and the SMH, along with the obvious voice of the disenfranchised talk radio, people have been asking the obvious question. What can be done to rid us of this plague of factional fiends masquerading as politicians?

Can’t the governor sack Iemma as happened to the Big Fella, Jack Lang in 1932?

The short answer is no. The circumstances surrounding Lang’s dismissal was a sequence of events stemming out of animosity between the NSW and Federal government and shenanigans over loan repayments and collection of taxes. In the end, governor Sir Philip Game felt that Lang was acting unconstitutionally and gave him the boot.

All Iemma is guilty of is gross misjudgment and having the spine of a jellyfish. The governor would have nothing to justify the use any of her reserve powers. Also, Section 24 B of the NSW Constitution Act of 1902 outlines the events that would lead to the Governor being able to dissolve parliament.

So unless something extraordinary happens, we have 3 more years of Labor in NSW. Iemma still has a chance to turn it around. But on form so far, Iemma has neither the vision nor political courage to affect any real change.

Hopefully, Castro’s resignation will see a detente in relations between between the US and Cuba and an end to the irrational US policy on Cuba. On the Cuban side, there is a lot that needs to be done to relax restrictions on political freedom as well as improve their human rights record.

A historical what if is would have Castro held onto power so long of the US had adopted more liberal approach to their relations with Cuba?

Then again, maybe the reason for Castro’s resignation is something akin to what happened in this Simpsons’ episode:

Fidel Castro: Comrads, our nation is completely bankrupt! We have no choice but to abandon communism!
Castro’s Aide #1, Castro’s Associates: [sigh]
Fidel Castro: I know, I know, I know… but we all knew from day one this mumbo jumbo wouldn’t fly! I’ll call Washington and tell them they won.
Castro’s Aide #1: But presidente, America tried to kill you!
Fidel Castro: Ah, they’re not so bad. They even named a street after me in San Francisco!
[Aide #2 whispers something into his ear]
Fidel Castro: It’s full of what?

Documents released to The Daily Telegraph show the farewell fling at The Lodge on November 28, hosted by Mr Howard, included $548.18 worth of alcohol, said by one source to be “top shelf” wine.

I’m sure that many of you are just as outraged by this as I am. $548.18 spent on top shelf wine is simply deplorable, disgraceful even. Jeez, by myself I’m sure that could polish off more than $600 bucks of good quality wine in a sitting (though standing could be an issue afterwards). Imagine the bash if Amanda was still around.

And so it ends with not a bang, but the soft plop of a cork being removed from a pricey bottle of red and an early finish to ponder life out of power.

Then again, maybe the cellar was bare.

And there is more with Samantha Bee taking Stewart to task for his own on-set eruptions.

Looking at the US onscreen political pundits I can only guess that they have taken lessons from Anna Coren. Or maybe they have seen how being consistently and utterly wrong hasn’t wiped the smugness from Bill Kristol’s face.

The United States seemed to have become a rhetocracy, ruled by professional wordsmiths: ‘axis of evil’, ‘war on terror’ and ’shock and awe’ are all speechwriters’ phrases … Despite my professional admiration for the craftsmanship of Bush’s speeches, the whole process seemed to me an absurd and dangerous separation of rhetoric and emotion from substance, argument and reason.

Australia suffers from a similar problem. Peatling rightly tips a bucket on Rudd’s election night speech. I’d say she would have done the same upon hearing Rudd stating “the government had declared war on inflation.” Yes, the “war on something” is a perennial favourite for politicians but it is a lazy rhetorical device.

The danger is that behind Obama’s speechifying lies nothing of substance. But the way he talks does make stand above other politicians in that regards. It is something fresh and while not new, almost foreign in the current political landscape.

No arguments with Peatling’s conclusion that we could with some of the same in Australia.

But hype and marketing campaigns do not always mean a good movie. So does Cloverfield deliver?

The first 15 minutes or so sets up the main characters. It centres around a party that is rudely interrupted by a massive explosion and burning debris falling from the sky. We don’t really get to know the characters (apart from finding out two of them had a fling that adds a little dramatic tension early on) during the initial scenes. Even during the movie, during the scenes of flight and strife, we don’t get much further into their psyche. It doesn’t matter as they are the vehicles from which we experience the destruction of Manhattan.

If you have ever seen a Godzilla movie (not the execrable 1998 US version – the Japanese ones) you would have noticed anything in the path of Godzilla’s rampage is destroyed. Apart from the stock shot of people running away screaming, the plight of those caught in the path of destruction is never shown. Cloverfield adds a nice twist to this as the movie is told from recovered footage taken by the main characters in the middle of the mayhem (this is made clear at the beginning of the movie). The footage is a little Blair Witchy (so some may need to take a seasick medication) but it does give you an indication of what it would be like on the ground during an all out monster mash. You have no idea of what is going on at the higher echelons, how the crisis is being managed or which renegade hero with a reckless disregard of authority is going to be called in to save the day.

The fact that the origin of the monster is never explained (though there is a hint in the very final scene) does not detract from the movie. Even the end of the movie resolves nothing with final fate of some characters or the monster itself. Some see this as a weakness but this intolerance of ambiguity is a reflection of the limited imagination of some critics rather than the movie itself.

There are some nice touches during Cloverfield showing how the wired generation would behave during a crisis (mainly taking photos of everything with their mobiles). And there is one scene that is a direct reference to 911. But in the end Cloverfield is not trying to make some comment on the mores of current society nor is it a constant reference to 911.

Cloverfield is simply an effective, at times genuinely scary, monster movie that Cloverfield’s patron, Godzilla, would be mighty proud of.

We are going to try something similar as a bit of an experiment. But on a budget with varying production values hence the title. Over the fold is an mp3 file of 5 riffs all played by yours truly. In the comments you can have a go at the answer. The first person to correctly list all 5 riffs wins bragging rights down at the pub and adulation from the other LP commentors.

So have a go. It shouldn’t be too hard.

[audio:http://rocknrolldamnation.wordpress.com/files/2008/01/99dollar.mp3]

Riffs recorded using a Fender Telecaster and an el cheapo lap steel into Behringer V-Amp Pro. Recorded with n-Track with some post production in Audacity.

Suggest a topic for some time in the future: the nature and the future of the social contract, not the legal contract, involved in military service.

Newcomers should probably read MarkL’s and Katz’s comments for some background. I’m not going to offer anything and let those who want to discuss it frame the issue.

So have at it. And please do not comment on the Andy Olmsted post. All discussion concerning the topic of this post is to happen here.

First off, cricket will survive this brouhaha as it survived Bodyline, Ray Illingworth taking his players off the field, regular attempts by Pakistan to take their bat and go home, Sunil Gavaskar not liking an Aussie umpire’s decision back in 1981 (which was a little cheeky given the standard of umpiring that faced any team touring the sub-continent around that time) and Dennis the menace’s infamous aluminum bat.

The state of play at the moment in this sorry saga is that India seem happy that their umpiring scourge, Steve Bucknor, has been dropped from the Third Test in Perth. And this was the correct decision by the ICC (International Cricket Council). Bucknor had a shocker and is at the end of the long career as an umpire. It would be better for him to bow out gracefully and take an administrative role.

The hangover is still the three test suspension given to Indian spinner Harbhajan Singh for allegedly making a racist comment to Australian Andrew Symonds. At the moment, India are content with the notion that Harbhajan’s sentence will be suspended pending an appeal. If that appeal does not happen by the time everyone gets to Perth then he will play the Third test.

One thing that seems to be forgotten is that ill feeling between Harbhajan and Symonds goes back to Australia’s tour of India back in October. This was the same tour where Symonds was taunted by sections of the crowd imitating monkeys. Even if Harbhajan had called Symonds a monkey, failing to recognize any racial connotations, he is an idiot. Still his three test suspension does seem quite harsh.

And while calls for his sacking are the worst of hyperbole that has accompanied this saga, Australian captain Ricky Ponting has not handled the situation well. As captain, he should make overtures to Indian captain Anil Kumble and sort this out between the teams. Ponting’s failure in leadership has only exacerbated tensions.

Still, the Indian cricket board (BCCI) have not covered themselves with glory either. It is not good form to complain about the lack of sportsmanship from one side while throwing a petulant dummy spit yourself. India does have legitimate grievances with regards to the umpiring and possibly with Harbhajan’s hearing. But the BCCI’s attempt to heavy the ICC and the Australian cricket Association was the wrong way to go about things.

As for the Australian team in general, yes they did display a singular lack of graciousness in victory. But the talk of Australia being arrogant and boorish is becoming boring itself.

Australia’s arrogance is more a perception that comes from the fact that they are the best bloody team in the world. While the odd team can match them for a session or a day here and there, Australia’s style of play is relentless. They train harder and play harder than any other team. Note that more than one international side has an Australian coach. Teams want to emulate that style of play. Of course the ends does not justify the means but aggressive as Australia is, other teams that point the finger in regards to their “sportsmanship” aren’t exactly squeaky clean themselves in regards to un-cricket like behavior.

Events will cool down and the players will get back to the game and the Third test will be a cracker. But thinking this issue over, there is indeed one party involved in this affair that has benefited from the barney.

Effigy makers. Especially those that do a good Ponting or Bucknor.

Elsewhere: Tony at After Grog Blog and Andrew Bartlett offer their views.

Cross posted at Sidelined

Unfortunately one of the members of Obsidian Wings was killed recently. Posting under the moniker G’Kar, Andy Olmsted was an Army Major in Iraq. He was killed in action just a few days ago. He had a post ready to be published in case of death while on active duty. This request was fulfilled and can be found here.

Andy’s posthumous post is one of the most moving I have ever read.

Note: Andy requested that his death not be politicized. LP will honour this request so please be mindful of this when commenting.

One of these friends is Nyasha. She is from Zimbabwe and we first met back in the wild days of ESL teaching in Japan in the early 90s. Currently she is on a walk from New York to Texas to try and raise money for a plane ticket back to Zimbabwe. I’ll let Nyasha explain why:

I’ve been here many years now, and as most of you know I’ve been homeless and on the streets for quite a number of the last few years. For many of those years I have tried to work with different agencies to get me situated and back into an independent living situation, to no avail. For the past year I’ve been trying to finance a ticket back to Zimbabwe but because of the situation I am in, have been unable to do so. I have tried friends, the Embassy, my Church here in New York, and various social service agencies! Can anyone say IRONY! how hilarious is it that there are so many complaining about immigrants in this country and I can’t get out of it!

Anyway, having knocked around a few ideas, I came up with the idea of doing a cross-country trek. As some of you may know, there is an ex-Giants football player walking across the United States to raise money for the victims of 9-11. This, in all my selfishness, could not have come at a better time! I was planning to walk to Texas, but I figured, here is this man walking all the way across the United States, something I’ve always wanted to do, why can’t I follow his beaten path, so to speak.

Nyasha is asking for donations to either cover general expense on the trip or a donation at the end of the trip (can be per mile or just something to help with the airfare). To follow her journey and be able to donate you need to be a member of the Facebook group “Following in the footsteps of a Giant.” This is invitation only. You can either send a friend request to Nyasha Katedza or if already on my friends list, I can make you a member.

The situation in Zimbabwe is grave and I can understand why Nyasha wants to return, even given the danger. If you would like to help out and on Facebook that would be appreciated.

Nyasha does have her story regarding Zimbabwe but that is for her to tell when ready.

Richard Dawkins makes a good point that he is a “cultural Christian.�? He grew up in the traditions of Christmas and, philosophical issues aside, still enjoys those traditions. I’d gather that would be the same for many a non-believer. Disbelief does not preclude use from taking delight and joy in carols (The Little Drummer Boy if done right is majestic) nor appreciating the joys of this time of year.

For atheists there is nothing wrong in enjoying the festive season. It is as much a secular tradition now as a religious one. Of course some do avoid Christmas for reasons including the oppressive commercial nature of the event. But as a new Dad, I can see Christmas becoming more significant in the coming years. Though this year there will be some respite as the Little One will find delight equally in her presents and the wrapping paper and is too young to anticipate the day.

So a happy and safe Christmas to the bloggers, commentors, readers, lurkers and everyone else who has happened on the good ship LP during 2007. And have a great 2008.

A move away from the pokie supported beer barns and to smaller boutique bars is to be welcomed. Of course the AHA are unhappy as they now have some competition. They are already claiming that it will lead to a rise in alcohol related violence. David Elliott, the deputy chief executive of the AHA also has concerns regarding Responsible Service of Alcohol (RSA) provisions What the AHA forgets is they have been the main culprits in promoting and supporting a drinking culture that facilitates alcohol related problems. And anyone who has been to a busy pub on a Friday or Saturday will note how difficult it is to enforce RSA regulations in large venues.

To belabour a point, what the AHA and others (such as Adam Shand as noted by tigtog), fail to understand is that not everyone who wants a drink needs to also puke, get into a fight in between a flutter on the pokies. The target clientele for the smaller boutique bars will tend towards those that want to avoid such a scene.

There is talk of a Melbourne style bar scene and other plans for new bars are afoot. While that sounds like a grand idea, Sydney should be allowed to develop its own bar culture.

Pubs will still be around as they have their place, especially in smaller communities, and there are still a few pubs that have avoided the pitfalls of other venues. But for many who would like a nice place for a drink on a friday night and not be assaulted by pokies and pissed patrons, change is gonna come.

To celebrate, I think I’ll head to one of my favourite pubs tomorrow for a beer. Note that the pub still has tiled walls, a reminder of the six o’clock swill.

Crossposted at LP in exile, where readers may leave comments during LP’s server woes!

For Jacobsen his idea of values, specifically of the family type, include bigotry.

It is interesting to see Family First try and play in the Australian political arena with the values of the American religious right. Such a move is doomed to fail. The reason why such politics work well in the United States stems from a long history of puritanical ideals. We simply don’t have any tradition like that in mainstream Australia. Any austere religiously motivated practices get overwhelmed by Australian’s tendency towards Dionysian pursuits. It is also a reason why the Culture Wars were “lost” by the right. Most issues couldn’t get any traction as the issues were imported from the United States with little understanding of the social history of the cultural battlegrounds.

An interesting feature of the sexually repressive nature of United States politics are the seemingly regular revelation that a strident anti-homosexual politician (invariably Republican) doesn’t mind a bit of same sex action. While there is an obvious sense of schadenfreude with such revelations, it is also quite sad.

Now that Family First have overcome the hurdle of representation via Stephen Fielding, the more they play on the Australian political stage the more is revealed of their religiously motivated agenda.

There is some good news. Firstly the coalition, with some provisions, will support the bill. Secondly Alison Megarrity, the Labor member for Menai, has told caucus that they risk being seen as stooges of the AHA if they oppose or make concession in regards to the Small Bars bill. Thirdly the SMH ran an op-ed today by the AHA president John Thorpe that confirms he is an out of touch dinosaur who thinks Bob Askin is still premier.

Thorpe’s op-ed does nothing to allay suspicions that he has any idea of what Sydneysiders really want. For example Thorpe asks

So why is it that we cannot have a civilised public debate on the need for small bars without emotive outbursts

Indeed. Maybe Thorpe could help an example and stop making nonsensical statements like “We don’t want to sit in a hole and drink chardonnay and read a book.”

Continuing on we have a nice little non sequitur

Hotels still remain the centre of many people’s lives, providing valuable meeting places to socialise, eat and drink. We are the community’s lounge room, particularly in the bush.

Thorpe is indeed correct regarding the function of a pub in small towns. But we are talking about Sydney and other centres with larger, diverse populations that want a more than an AHA approved pub culture.

The proposal that “small bars” can allow up to 120 patrons should set the alarm bells ringing in every police station in the state. Experience suggests new outlets would require serious security applications such as CCTV and security staff.

John, we are talking about small intimate bars. Not the large beer barns. The assumption here is that large gatherings of people imbibing leads to trouble. Thorpe has this weird notion that all the same customers that flock to the beer barns will also flock to a cozy inner-city bar.

The hotel industry has identified an emerging trend in leisure drinking known as “hubbing” where people visit more than two or three venues during an evening.

Wow, the hotel industry has just discovered “hubbing”? I’ve known about it for 20 years. I wonder if the AHA will pay me to research and identify an emerging trend I term “the pub crawl”?

Given the regulatory environment, it is difficult to see how the new establishments could be economically viable, particularly if hotels and small bars have to work on a level playing field.

Management and staff must be trained in the responsible service of alcohol, regardless of the type of venue.

Obtaining an RSA is not exactly an onerous task. I had one myself till last year. Anyway, those with bar experience will very likely have their RSA certification up to date. Thorpe presents running a bar as some mysterious, arcane art that only those initiated into the sacred rites of the AHA can ever understand.

To be fair, Thorpe does have a valid concern in ensuring that adequate toilet facilities will be included in any new licensed establishments. I’m not sure if this would be covered with the new legislation.

That aside, the overall problem with Thorpe’s arguments against the Small Bars bill is that he largely frames his objections in terms of the problems of current pub culture. One of the aims of The Small Bars bill is to provide an alternative place of imbibing that avoids some of the issues associated with large venues.

The passing of the Small Bars bill would not represent the passing of pubs. They would still will exist and do a good trade. Passing the legislation may however represent the passing of the outmoded ideas of the AHA.

In Australia, before the last election there was the revelation that Ross Cameron, himself a family values type, had a cheating heart. This election, Family First has fallen foul of some filthy shenanigans with Andrew Quah being dumped as the Family First’s candidate for the seat of Reid.

Quah’s misdeeds involve circulation of pictures around the internet which would lead voters in Reid no doubt which way Quah’s politics swung. He has since been disendorsed as the FF candidate for Reid.

As usual in such incidents, personal responsibility is cast aside in favour of a barely believable statement of denial:

Mr Quah told the Herald yesterday he thought it was possible that he had posed for the compromising photographs. “I might have been drunk off my face or my political enemies might have drugged me.”

2. Make sure that you promote your role in securing a $80 million project to build a new pipeline.

3. Threaten to freeze funding if the Liberal party is not happy with composition of a new board involved in the the management of the pipeline.

4. Back pedal furiously and hope somehow the damage can be undone.