The French are revolting!

Well ... they are trying to rise up against Iran, at least!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6997935.stm

Apparently the French think that threatening Iran with war is meaningful. I think they are kidding themselves. I mean, honestly - given France's war record of the last 100 years, I don't even think they could successfully invade Luxembourg without the help of at least one major world power!

But at least they seem to have learned some lessons. Their own nuclear record has always lacked a good PR spin doctor and the covert operation that sank the Greenpeace ship, Rainbow Warrior in New Zealand was more like a chapter from Inspector Clouseau's police manual! Perhaps they are hoping that some honest and open threats might get the French some positive media attention ... riiight! haha.

Despite France being one of the handful of permanent UN Security Council members, I doubt that the world, and especially Iran, will do much more than yawn at this bit of lame sabre-rattling.

C'est la vie!

LOL

What the ... ?

Some interesting news items hit me today as I was scanning blogs, google news and mainstream sources. The following three news items are clear examples of how one-sided journalism has become. It is so bad that items requiring further investigation are glossed over or given a positive spin to alleviate any awkward public questions.

I refuse to ever be part of that whitewash.

The first was North Korea's agreement to cease nuclear armament in exchange for a watered down USA non-aggression pact and ample supply of oil and electricity. Yet, as I write this new reports suggest that the North will not agree unless it is given nuclear reactors to generate power.

It concerns me that all this tension could be alleviated with some horse-trading of energy issues. It seems a little too easy and unrealistic. My bet is that something more substantial is hidden in the detail of the negotiations, and that the latest development seems to point to a continuation of nuclear development.

In another development, NASA has revealed plans to launch expeditions to Mars from the Moon. The strategy involves a number of manned missions to establish a lunar launch facility. Again it's the detail that bothers me, with plans to explore whether "resources, such as oxygen, hydrogen and metals, are available for use in NASA's long-term lunar exploration objectives". That seems to be a careful way of saying that the Moon has been targetted for mining operations! Under whose authority, I ask?

And in a bizarre situation in Iraq, two British soldiers were working "undercover", (dressed as Iraqis) and were arrested by Iraqi police after shooting at a traffic policeman. They were later "rescued" by British forces, who "used an armored fighting vehicle "to gain entry" to the police station to release them".

It begs the question why army personnel were "undercover" in the first place, and how is it that they are somehow above the laws that they should be trying to enforce.

Iraq is in total chaos, on the verge of civil war, and every day that allied forces are asked to remain in that country perpetuates an unnecessary living hell for both the military and the civillians.


[+/-] show/hide this post

The Brogden Code

The deeper one digs, the more it seems that the Brogden affair is a carefully planned strategic manouvre by the lowest life-forms in Australian politics. The story is slowly unravelling as a bizarre tale of sex, religion and power worthy of a Dan Brown novel.


The secretive Catholic sect Opus Dei, a favourite scapegoat of Brown's, is now part of the twisted plot leading up to the resignation and self-harm of former NSW Liberal leader, John Brogden. According to Alex Mitchell in the Sun-Herald:

"[Brogden's] public execution was conducted by a coalition of powerful interests from the hard right of the Liberal Party and Catholic right-wingers aligned to the Opus Dei network to sections of the media."

And while it seemed that O'Farrell was counting his chickens before they hatched, it was the religious right that swooped in to make a meal of the deal.

Peter Debnam's succession will, no doubt, come at a cost to the NSW Liberal Party, whose members must now be in a state of fervent back-watching. Add to this climate a growing desire to ruthlessly gather intel on colleagues and opponents and it could fuel a messy backlash against the religious fundy-cons.

The NSW Liberals could be headed for nuclear meltdown if Debnam's leadership is not allowed to cool party divisions and temper the fundy-cons bolemic-like hunger for power.

Not that I'm supporting anyone in the Liberal Party, but there's no sense in hiding the fact that I would enjoy seeing the religious right be the cause of their own downfall. And Victoria seems to be heading in a similar direction.

The champagne is on ice ... the popcorn is on the shopping list ... and the Theocracy Alert is raised to orange once again :-)




[+/-] show/hide this post

The War Against an Idea

Does the 'War Against Terror' have a known enemy? Is the treatment we are providing worse than the disease?



It certainly seems that the more the USA and its allies fight the terrorists the greater their number and more widespread their attacks become. It is like trying to fight Golden Staph with simple penicillin.




In 2001 the world stood in the wake of 911 and vowed to bring justice to those who lost their lives. Soon we will witness the passing of four years, with two wars fought (and still underway) and two 'evil' regimes overthrown (despite being unconnected to the attack on the USA).



In the time since that fateful day the horror has continued with Bali, Madrid and London as well as numerous smaller attacks, all of which have left tens of thousands of people dead or mourning and millions more living in fear or with their rights under threat.



Jason Burke writes in The Guardian today to suggest that what we are seeing is the work of an idea sweeping the world, rather than a carefully crafted plot by some underworld organisation.

... we need to face up to the simple truth that Bin Laden, al-Zawahiri et al do not need to organise attacks directly. They merely need to wait for the message they have spread around the world to inspire others. Al-Qaida is now an idea, not an organisation.

He is right. And what is more, the governments and the media are the unwitting fuel for this pandemic. What we are seeing now is the start of a long list of copycat terrorist attacks from all manner of people, not just trained terrorists or crazed fundamentalists but real people with a real grudge.



The new war is beginning to be fought in our own streets, near our homes and places of work. It no longer requires a large network of terrorist cells financed by middle eastern billionaires or a magic word to awaken the sleepers that lie dormant in our suburbs.



Today's terrorists are people we went to school with, the guy we chat to in the lunch bar or on the bus. They are regular citizens who, for whatever reason, get hooked into the idea that is now being played out on their TV's, radios, newspapers, magazines and the internet.



Just as the green movement, and the anti-nuclear movement before it, swooped across the world in a wave of acceptance with powerful consequences, so too can the ideals of peace in the Middle-East or faith in Islam be turned to less positive consequences and have such disastrous effects upon the world.



Burke is right - and it goes far deeper than he cared to admit.







[+/-] show/hide this post

Priorities

I've been taking care of some important stuff in my life. Unfortunately, this blog wasn't on that list. Thanks to those who have enquired as where I've been and even "demanded" (or else!!) that I get back on here :-)

Here's something that I found in my inbox recently - it pretty much sums up what I've been working with lately. I hope you get something out of it too.

A professor stood before his philosophy class and had some items in front of him. When the class began, wordlessly, he picked up a very large and empty mayonnaise jar and proceeded to fill it with golf balls.

He then asked the students if the jar was full. They agreed that it was.

The professor then picked up a box of pebbles and poured them into the jar. He shook the jar lightly. The pebbles rolled into the open areas between the golf balls. He then asked the students again if the jar was full. They agreed it was.

The professor next picked up a box of sand and poured it into the jar.

Of course, the sand filled up everything else. He asked once more if the jar was full. The students responded with a unanimous "yes."

The professor then produced two cups of coffee from under the table and poured the entire contents into the jar, effectively filling the empty space between the sand. The students laughed.

"Now," said the professor, as the laughter subsided, "I want you to recognize that this jar represents your life. The golf balls are the important things -- your God, your family, your children, your health, your friends, and your favorite passions -- things that if everything else was lost and only they remained, your life would still be full.

The pebbles are the other things that matter like your job, your house, and your car. The sand is everything else -- the small stuff. "If you put the sand into the jar first," he continued, "there is no room for the pebbles or the golf balls. The same goes for life. If you spend all your time and energy on the small stuff, you will never have room for the things that are important to you. Pay attention to the things that are critical to your happiness. Play with your children. Take time to get medical checkups. Take your partner out to dinner. Play another 18.

There will always be time to clean the house and fix the disposal.

Take care of the golf balls first -- the things that really matter. Set your priorities. The rest is just sand."

One of the students raised her hand and inquired what the coffee represented. The professor smiled. "I'm glad you asked. It just goes to show you that no matter how full your life may seem, there's always room for a couple of cups of coffee with a friend."

It's Maslow, stupid!

It takes a rare piece of journalism or opinion to make me stand back, reassess my own attitudes and finally to change my stance.

This piece in The Age today, does just that.

What Australian and US voters now crave

The Age - November 11, 2004

The left has failed to recognise society's need for a sense of social and moral order, writes Gregory Hywood.

But I'm going to take it further than the author does. It is more than just morality being sought, it is the wider umbrella of safety and security - the need to be protected.

It is clear to me now that we (the libertarian progressive left) have been going about the last few months (years even) with our heads stuck so far up our arse that we couldn't see what was really changing in Australia, let alone the rest of the world.

I'm not saying that we are wrong, just that we need to rethink the issues that are important to voters. I think Abraham Maslow might have the answer.

When an economy is doing well (as has the USA and Australia) basic needs, such as food, water, sleep etc, are mostly met and few want for much. Such is the first level of Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" - the physiological.

The next concern is that of safety. We desire the need for a secure home and a family. Refugees stuck in a detention centre are clear examples of those who desire this basic need. But middle Australia also, in its own way are being failed at this basic level, because national security and moral grounding are also tenets of safety.

When both physiological and safety needs are met, we tend to aim for love or inclusion - we need to feel we belong. That is part of the reason for creating a family. It is also why people joing sports clubs, community organisations and churches.

After that is met we focus on our esteem and we seek to improve this by the clothes we wear, the car we drive, the house we live in, the job we have. The luxuries in life that tell society "what and who we are". We give ourselves status.

Finally, if we can ever fulfil those four needs we can then seek 'self-actualisation'. We seek to improve ourselves, not by physical stuff but mentally and spiritually. Self-fulfilment, peace, knowledge etc.

It is becoming clear to me that the stereotypical "leftie" is predominantly coming from a higher level on Maslow's hierarchy. We are campaigning for how WE want the world to be by fighting for human rights and debating high-brow issues like stem-cell research and the war in Iraq. We are the Chardonnay set.

However, middle-Australia (as with the majority middle in the USA) are still scrambling to meet their needs for safety and belongingness. Quite often they are trying to aim for esteem needs (by purchasing plasma screens with surround sound) in the hope that it will fill the other hole in their life. But they are ahead of themselves. They turn to materialism because they cannot answer the need for safety and security for their family.

They are so hocked up (average debt is 140% of the average Australian's income compared with 50% two decades ago) that if interest rates rise by 1/4 of a point they will need to work an extra shift to pay for it.

These people, the majority of voters, do not care that Howard lies, as long as he keeps the economy safe. They've had enough of saving the trees and the rivers, they want someone to keep interest rates low and employment high. They have no need to understand the plight of refugees or the Sudanese because they are rightly concerned about their own plight. Charity must begin at home.

So how do we, the high and mighty lefties turn the focus from our pet projects (war, free trade agreements, old growth forests, medicare gold, gay rights, Telstra, ABC funding, etc) and towards the things that matter to THEM?

It's their sense of security, stupid!

Until all those millions of middle-Australia voters feel secure enough with their lot to comfortably move onto the esteem train, or even the self-actualization shuttle, we will be fighting a lost cause campaigning for the esoteric, the altruistic and the utopian.

The reason that we had the human rights boom of the 50's and 60's is precisely because the economy was sound and families were not under financial pressure. They had the time, the money and the desire to move past esteem-building and into promoting self-actualisation.

At the moment we are trying to pull down the upper-class in order to
haul the lower class up Maslow's ladder - over top of the middle
class, even! If instead we choose to help middle-Australia to move
beyond their safety-net concerns, they will undoubtedly turn around
and assist the lower class to move up.

How do we do it? I'm honestly not sure. But sitting in our ivory towers drinking Chardonnay and discussing the rights and wrongs of the world ain't cuttin' the mustard.

We need to be forming progressive economic policy that can be implemented step by step. E.g. While a Tobin tax is a great idea we need to realise that it isn't going to happen soon. However, income splitting is plausible and possible. An overhaul of the tax brackets to link them with CPI is a valid proposal. But these are just some of the ideas that need to be promoted and they require strong campaigns.

As much as I despise the religious right, I must admit that Family First seem to be on the right track. Their policies are in line with the strategy I've outlined above. They are off the blocks and racing ahead while we are left scratching our heads and wondering why everyone has shifted to the right.

They haven't! They've just voted for the people that are listening. We've stopped listening because we are spending too much time preaching about the things that DON'T matter (at the moment) to the average Australian. Us lefties are simply ahead of schedule in being too progressive for the issues that are not high priority and we've forgotten what really matters to the voters that count.

It reminds me of a human resource philosophy I learned many years ago ... a happy employee is an effective employee. If an employee is having trouble paying the mortgage, it will reflect in their work and they are less likely to be enthusiastic, effective or charitable to colleagues that may need help.

The same goes for voters - the Australian public. A happy Australian will be more enthusiastic, more effective in their work and home life and more likely to take an interest in current affairs, social issues and the plight of those less fortunate.

To that end, I'm making a big commitment to focus my energies on assisting the necessary reforms to shift mainstream Australia out of the safety mindset and into the esteem and self-actualisation phases. That can only be achieved by focussing my energy on domestic issues, especially pertaining to the economy.

I'm basing that strategy on the hope that once in these higher levels of Maslow's hierarchy, Australians will be content to support the greater causes in life. I could be wrong, but I'm hoping I'm right.




[+/-] show/hide this post

Push for Nader to request recount

Just like the 2000 USA election, this year's vote has also been criticised for numerous faults and inconsistencies in the counting of ballots. But the difference this year has been the Democrat's apparent willingness to just let it go and to promote a united nation.

That may appease many staunch Democrats and Republicans in mainstream USA, however some people are not willing to leave the fate of democracy to the major parties.

Black Box Voting has commenced a campaign titled Help America Audit and, according to an email request spreading through the Internet, it is hoping to enlist the help of (former Greens) independant presidential candidate, Ralph Nader, to commence a recount in certain electorates.

While realising that the Kerry/Edwards team are not challenging the vote, the optimists hope that if Nader can be convinced to do the dirty work (and take the obvious PR fallout) that "Kerry's TRUE counts will be exposed".

I think it is a waste of time and energy to focus on trying to get Kerry across the line. Instead they should be urging an immediate and comprehensive independant (United Nations perhaps?) review of the electoral system with a view to homogenising the process across all counties and states.

Anything less is proof of a farcical democracy.

[+/-] show/hide this post

The voices in our heads

If Armageddon is nigh, I believe we will only have the religious zealots to blame. Which is doubly ironic, considering my agnosticism!

From the Canberra Times today, I read a posting in "Your Say" that sparked a worrying realisation about how fragile our future might be with the increasing popularity of fire and brimstone preaching. The posting stated:

Much more scary than Jesus

Max Smyth - Sunday, 17 October 2004

Graeme 'Godwhacker' Gibbon, our resident 'Get Ready Man', let me tell you about something far more frightening than Jesus H Christ's second coming, that thing nutters have been obsessed with for 2,000 years.

I am truly scared that the dimwitted Godwhacker President of the United States is going to win a second term. This could happen next month - not 2,000 years off. Wanna see him fry humanity in the Armageddon he believes is inevitable and within his control?

It heralds a stark realisation that we have in our midst (and increasingly among our elected representatives) people of the firm belief that the world as we know it will soon end and that unrepentant sinners will face eternal damnation.

These people are not merely forewarning of impending doom, they are actively working for, and rejoicing in, the approach of that day. They WANT Armageddon, they pray for it, they live for it, and they are willing to die for that belief.

Strangely, we are not talking about a Jonestown cult. These are everyday citizens of Australia and across the civilised world. Yet their strange and morbid fascination with the final days is commonly accepted without so much as a raised eyebrow. Why?

We laugh at the image of the disheveled vagabond with his sandwich board heralding that "the end is nigh", so why do we give more credibility to millions of bible-bashing church-goers? Is it safety in numbers? Is it because they wear shoes and dress neatly and have a home to go to each night? Does a particular level of hygiene bestow great gifts of respectability?

As an agnostic leaning towards atheism, I won't get into a debate about the truth of "The Word" - its just too subjective. Besides, biblical debates are emotive, not rational. Instead my rant today is more about the double standards we set and the implications for world harmony.

If I claimed to speak with 'God' on a regular basis, and that he told me what to do each day nobody would over react by sending for the straight jacket and booking a room at the local asylum. And if you are the President of the USA, well, that just makes your actions even more credible, being the work of God and such. Only the Pope and the President of the USA could get away with dropping a bomb and claiming it was God's will. A Moslem would be seen merely as a terrorist.

Change the perspective slightly and claim that you speak to some dead Swedish blacksmith from the 14th Century, who tells you what you should do each day, and many people will start to question your sanity. The dead guy has a lack of credibility, whereas God (as long as it is the Judeo-Christian monotheistic god) has ultimate credibility, at least within the relevant nations.

Moving into a Buddhist, Hindu or other polytheistic society may provide a similar acceptance of holy conversation. However the point is that religion is given far too much credibility when used to explain motives or rationale. I believe it tends to be an improper excuse or defence.

At the risk of losing the argument under Godwin's Law one only has to look at how Hitler brandished such extreme power under a Christian banner. The Crusades of old are no different to the Jihad of today. Same objective just different weapons. Is it any different for the leader of a nation, especially one that prides itself on the separation of church and state, to claim fortitude and a mandate under God?

What then does this say about the modern rise of a Christian theocracy? How is that political forces, like Family First, can rise out of religious fundamentalism to encroach on the separation of church and state by enforcing their conservative values on a secular society?

And why is it that they can hide behind a deity for all manner of acts and claims. Speaking in foreign and non-existent languages, miracles that claim to defy logic, healings that usually have little proof, conversations with apparitions. When excluded from a religious setting all of these would normally result in a psychiatric assessment of the individual. Religion is its own protector.

If traditional religion is immune from objective scrutiny and reality, should we begin to fear what the future may hold with these doomsayers making decisions of global importance. Should we worry that the man with his finger on the red button talks to voices in his head and believes that only Christian nations are good nations.

Should we especially be concerned that the people who most want the four horsemen of the apocalypse to ride across the earth are the very same people that are vying for more power in our parliament. The very same people that may, someday, have to choose between averting or starting World War III and potentially causing worldwide nuclear extinction.

Given a choice between languishing in this earthly existence or assisting in the fulfillment of holy prophecies by precipitating Armageddon at the press of a button, what would a zealous Christian do? Of course, they've already thought of that ... hence the reason for the third anti-Christ.

No matter what the non-believers and pagans think, Christianity will always win. Even if there is no god and no after-life, world destruction vindicates them. And as long as life continues, they continue to work and wait for the second coming.

Meanwhile those of us who are trying desperately to improve our mortal lot have to put up with their lot. There really is no justice.




[+/-] show/hide this post

Gilligan's Island nuclear waste solution

This is a follow up to a previous post titled "What To Do With Nuclear Waste"

Offshore dump safest nuclear waste option: Senator

Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell has defended the Coalition's decision to store nuclear waste from the Lucas Heights reactor on an off-shore island.

I find this a most extraordinarily stupid concept. Mainly because it goes against the main logical criteria for placement of a storage facility, as outlined in my original posting, which were:

• stable democratic government [no problem here]


• geologically stable [a small island is surely significantly less stable than the mainland, not to mention that the surrounding waters are full of life!]


• desolate and remote land that is relatively easy to secure [desolate and remote may be simple, but how to secure it 24/7? the middle of Australia is far more secure than the middle of the ocean]


• resources and ability to receive international support [not particularly relevant for domestic purposes]

The article goes onto quote the Minister as saying:

It's a decision that reflects the view that there's not a single state or territory in Australia that wants to have waste in their backyard.

While that is certainly true, I'm not sure how this proposition overcomes this problem ... after all, isn't every part of Australia our "backyard"? Aaahhh, but then the Government has set a precedent ... if the government can excise an island from our 'immigration zone' then why not excise it for any purpose it sees fit?

Oh well, at least they aren't planning to do a deal with Nauru to take our nuclear waste in return for dollars to bail them out of economic catastrophe (we've done it once after their lucrative phosphate mining ceased, and did it agin as part of the 'Pacific solution')!

[+/-] show/hide this post

News attack!

What a day it has started to be already!!

After logging on to the net this morning Outlook¹ provided me with 8 new emails (a relatively small number considering what usually comes through the inbox) and what a treasure trove of information unravelled as I read.

Firstly there were a couple of bits from an email discussion group, then came the first of two daily news bulletins I receive from the ABC. Usually I get only one or two of the headlines jumping out at me, but today I'm awestruck, gob-smacked and down right bloody well excited to be alive. And finally a couple of things that just made me smile!

First, I'll give you the headlines, together with their web links and a small comment from me on each.

Medicare Gold is fully funded: Latham

The federal Labor leader has hit the airwaves this morning to sell his plan to provide free hospital care for every Australian over the age of 75.

Clearly the ALP are getting some social conscience, and about time too!

Police bust nationwide child porn ring

One-hundred-and-fifty people, including police officers and teachers, have been arrested in what the Federal Police (AFP) describe as Australia's biggest Internet child pornography bust.

Fanatstic news, but I fear what this will do for the F*FF party's chances in the coming election. Two of their key platforms (child abuse and pornography) rolled into one big headline-grabbing vote-winning issue.

Blair ready to talk with hostage takers

British Prime Minister Tony Blair said he was ready to open up contact with captors of a British hostage in Iraq, shown on video begging Mr Blair to save his life.

What the? I thought the uber-civilised western nations never negotiated with terrorists? Must be coming up for another election LOL!

Ranger Mine warned before contamination

It has been revealed the operators of the Ranger Uranium Mine in the Northern Territory were issued with a Government safety warning a month before a water contamination incident earlier this year.

Oh, if only we'd just stop mining the damn stuff!

Sexual abuse trials underway on Pitcairn

Pitcairn Island's sex trials have started this morning with Mayor Steve Christian the first to face the court.

What is it with these small communities? Don't they know they shouldn't have sex with their cousins? Just look at Tasmania! (sorry Tassies - you know I'm only joking, even though it is rude to laugh at people with two heads.)

Israelis, Palestinians killed in clashes

Palestinian militants, eluding an army crackdown, killed two Israeli children in a rocket attack from Gaza and Israeli troops have killed seven Palestinians in raids in the coastal strip and the West Bank.

and they still call this news? They may as well report that the sun rose today in Perth at 0553hr (GMT+8)!

Allies 'planned' Iraq war despite denials

The United States, Australia and Britain started to plan the invasion of Iraq months before the conflict, according to a report Wednesday quoting a leaked Pentagon document.

*WHOA!*
What the ... ? No kidding! Are you for real?
you mean the politicans lied to us ... AGAIN?

Photos and fingerprints now needed for US visits

Australians, who are allowed to travel to the United States without a visa, will from today have to give fingerprints and have a photo taken when they arrive at US airports and ports.

Well, that does it! I _was_ planning to go to Chicago for the Gay Games in 2006, but unless I can get a visa and avoid having my picture and fingerprints taken I'll have to avoid that terrorist nation altogether and just spend some extra time in Montreal before the 1st OutWorld Games.

I have rights in Australia when it comes to my fingerprints ... I'm not going to give them up for the sake of some pissant fear-mongering US bureacracy.

IMF warns of rate hikes as growth soars

The world economy, powered in part by China, is set to grow this year at its most brisk pace in almost three decades, 5 per cent, before losing steam in 2005 in the face of higher oil prices the International Monetary Fund (IMF) said.

ok ... getting bored now

US crude reserves calm markets

The price of crude oil has held below $US50 a barrel overnight helping lift the mood again on Wall Street.

yeah whatever ... get it up to $75 a barrel and I'll be happier cos we might start looking more closely at alternative energy sources, unless Howard follows through on his mantra that "coal is the future".

SpaceShipOne makes successful flight

A private manned rocketship blasted through the Earth's atmosphere into space after a hair raising corkscrew ascent on a flight aimed at capturing a $14 million prize.

WOO HOO! Congratulations. They already have a better track record than NASA ;-)
I especially enjoyed the revelation that Richard Branson (of Virgin fame) is teaming up to provide commercial space flights within 3 years. Go Dick!

Rogers retains time trial crown

Australian cyclist Michael Rogers has won the time trial title at the road cycling world championships in Bardolino, Italy.

Sport? What is that?

So that was a powerful start to the news day! After which I managed a few chuckles whilst reading these two reports:

Keep abreast of new feminism and raise a cup to Russ


By Emma TomThe Australian - September 29, 2004


SEVENTIES pornographer Russ Meyer used to say he became interested in mammary glands only once they reached D-cup status. After that, his interest knew no bounds.

AND THIS ONE ...

France Launches Gay TV Channel


The transgender sportscaster wears a miniskirt, the porn is gay, lesbian and
bisexual, and Wonder Woman will be on every night at seven.

What a start to the day!

1. OK, so i'm a hypocrite for dissing Microsoft while still using their products! At least I didn't pay for it! MS gave it to me for free. Honestly! All I had to do was attend a presentation promoting their latest Office suite. Cool eh? If anyone knows of something to replace my MS gear (for free), let me know! back to top





[+/-] show/hide this post

What to do with nuclear waste?

href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200409/s1208387.htm">Claims
have resurfaced that the Federal
Government has a secret list of up to 22 sites for a nuclear waste
dump.

NO KIDDING?

Honestly, what do people expect the government to do about nuclear waste?
With disposal methods href="http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=nuclear+waste+disposa
l+sun+rocket&btnG=Goo gle+Search&meta=">(like sending it off to the sun)
currently too expensive it has to be stored somewhere!

The href="http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/campaigns/intro?campaign_id
=3940">debate about whether we should be producing nuclear waste in the
first place is an entirely different matter and not applicable to this
issue. The facts are that we DO utilise href="http://www.iaea.or.at/">nuclear energy, medicine and related
research. Australia's Lucas Heights
reactor is a real and necessary part of our lives and href="http://www.brendannelson.com.au/">Brendon Nelson is spot on
(that's a rare thing) when he says:

Federal Education, Science and Training href="http://www.dest.gov.au/ministers/index1_cp.htm">Minister Brendan
Nelson told Sky News that the states would have to find their own sites to
store waste and that the Federal Government was still looking for a site.

Clearly there needs to be more thought put into HOW and WHERE nuclear waste
should be stored. And not just for Australia, but the entire world.

Contrary to my fellow Greens and href="http://www.democrats.org.au">Democrats I support the establishment
of a world class href="http://www.uic.com.au/Pangea-TOPSEAL99.htm">facility based in
Australia to handle domestic and international nuclear waste. I firmly
believe that producers of nuclear waste should be required under
international law to ensure the highest standards for safely (as much as is
technically possible when we are taking half-lives of thousands of years)
and securely storing (disposing is not feasible) of the material.

IMHO the best opportunity lies in Australia.

• we are unique in having a stable democratic government for the last two
  centuries


• our nation is geologically stable with few earthquakes and no live
  volcanoes to present a danger to an underground facility


• Australia has an expansive area of desolate and remote land that is
  relatively easy to secure


• we have the resources and the ability to receive international support
  for the concept

On top of all this is the financial rewards that will flow from charging
the international community for the safest and most secure solution the
world has yet seen. We are talking billions of dollars a year in revenue!
That would easily give us a world class health and education system and
partially solve our growing welfare crisis.

Food for thought, my fellow homo sapiens!

[+/-] show/hide this post

The Blog War!

Its official ... there is a blog war! And it all started with my uber-polemic post, "Is USA killing civilians and blaming terrorist executioners?", which hit a raw nerve with some US citizens. I may have been a little too out-there with the post, but it was worth the responsive entertainment.

It is worthwhile to look at the included links and also my follow up post, "Yanks on the defensive", before making any judgements.

A great rebuttal against me is here ... 10 points to the author for his logical debate! [addendum 30/9 and also from Pink Kitty]

Meanwhile the crazies are gathering the troops! Examples:

• michaelsavagelistener


• barking-moonbat


• oferrall.net


• secondbreakfast


• secondbreakfast (more)


• silentrunning


• IMAO


• Conservative Punk (added 28/9)


• Occam's Toothbrush (added 28/9)


• Mountaineer Musings (added 28/9)


• E-Nough (added 28/9)


• Nice Doggie (added 29/9)

I've had some great exposure in response to this topic, and in all fairness I should reciprocate by promoting the those on the far right who would like to deliver me on a silver platter to their god (not sure if that god lives at the White House or on some cloudy abode with pearly gates). So please visit the self-appointed general of the war against polemic, Joshua Olinger from Hello Infidels blog.

I think the typical attitude prevalent on many of these sites can be summed up by this posting:

You Don't Get a Vote Because We Can Bomb You


I found this editorial arguing that all other countries should be able to vote in the U.S. Presidential election since our decisions have effects on the rest of the world.


To this columnist I say, dingus, the reason America is so powerful and domineering is because you guys all suck so much. You don't get the vote for the same reason ants and bacteria don't get to vote: you are small and insignificant, and we don't want your suckitude rubbing off on us.


Actually, it can be argued that the reason America is so great is because we don't have people like those who populate other countries influencing us.


So stop trying to meddle in business where you're not wanted, limey, and save your energy for cowering in fear at our every action.

Says it all really!

P.S. They have a headquarters?
Now I'm scared :-)

[+/-] show/hide this post

Phobia vs ism

REGARDING THE LIMITATION OF USING THE TERM "HOMOPHOBIA"

Wouldn't it be just easier to talk about and use the terms "heterosexism"(1) and "heteronormativity"(2)? Of course this might take some education, but it is inclusive and more accurate terminology.

Most acts of discrimination, vilification and yobbish behaviour are not homophobia, biphobia or transphobia (all being the fear of 'x') but are resultant from attitudes of normalcy or even superiority from a heterosexual perspective.

It is the same attitudes that cause sexism, racism, nazism, anti-semitism etc. It is definitely an ism rather than a phobia. Even though there are a few clinical phobics out there, those people are more likely to shun us or campaign against us rather than attack.

Focussing on 'anti-gay', 'anti-lesbian' or even 'anti-bi' or 'anti-trans' behaviour is not appropriate because the specificity of these focal points always means that a fringe group is left out. Using the term homophobia to try and encompass all the above is also incorrect and reduces the visibility of key segments. What about the heterosexual transvestite or the straight fag hag?

The English language is poor by anyone's definition, but the best terms that I know (when explained correctly) are heterosexism and heteronormativity. They also put the problem fairly and squarely on the perpetrators, being (generally speaking) the hetero side of the fence, rather than focussing on the identity of the victims.

check out: this site

As I state in one of my personal signature file, "End heterosexism - embrace diversity".

(1) HETEROSEXISM

The assumption that everyone is a heterosexual until it is otherwise known and that being heterosexual is the proper sexual orientation.

(2) HETERONORMATIVE

the prevailing culture that falsely views heterosexuality as ‘normal’ behaviour and alternative sexuality or gender identity as deviant. i.e. the nuclear family on the qtr acre block with a white picket fence, a dog, cat and a Holden Commodore is considered heteronormative. Anyone falling outside the "norms" characterised by a generalised view of heterosexual society would be considered non-heteronormative.

Here is a more detailed definition of the concept:

By heteronormativity we mean the institutions, structures of understanding, and practical orientations that make heterosexuality seem not only coherent--that is, organized as a sexuality--but also privileged.


Its coherence is always provisional, and its privilege can take several (sometimes contradictory) forms; unmarked, as the basic idiom of the personal and the social; or marked as a natural state; or projected as an ideal or moral accomplishment.


It consists less of norms that could be summarized as a body of doctrine than of a sense of rightness produced in contradictory manifestations--often unconscious, immanent to practice or to institutions. Contexts that have little visible relation to sex practice, such as life narrative and generational identity, can be heteronormative in this sense, while in other contexts forms of sex between men and women might not be heteronormative.


Heteronormativity is thus a concept distinct from heterosexuality. One of the most conspicuous differences is that it has no parallel, unlike heterosexuality, which organizes homosexuality as its opposite. Because homosexuality can never have the invisible, tacit, society-founding rightness that heterosexuality has, it would not be possible to speak of "homonormativity" in the same sense.


See Michael Warner, "fear of a Queer Planet," Social Text, no. 29 (1991): 3-17."

Source: University of Chicago

[+/-] show/hide this post

In The Wake of September 11

An Email to a friend who is also a writer.

Like most people around the world I've been trying to deal with the events of last Tuesday and writing has been a good outlet in the last few days.

I don't usually sit down and write, especially not poetry, but I got around to putting a few verses together and I thought that I would like to share my dark, apocalyptic thoughts with someone who can see more than just words on paper (or a screen).

Anyway, be warned that I haven't written anything flowery and optimistic - I've just been venting some dark bottled up emotion and this is what has evolved. I'm not really looking for a critique, just someone that can understand the need to use words and paper rather than bombs and bullets.

TWO OF A KIND


Two cards dealt by fate,

paired devices in a chanceful game.

Why do they gamble with innocent lives?

The diamond, still rough, and the club, absent of shame.

A lover of money and a trader of souls,

juxtaposed; enemies competing for similar goals



Two freedoms voiced under the banners of faith

a binary of ideals converged at the tangent

Are these the symbols of a world still forming?

The Cross and the Crescent,

the phrenetic and the fanatical,

contiguity; believers in the same ancient idol.



Two energies forged by the gods

a polarity of latent direction

Will the immovable object meet the irresistible force?

Eastern resurrection faces western insurrection

A phoenix rising to glory, an eagle in the twilight of power,

osculation; barbarians of the same hour.



Two battles fought by sentient beings (in theory!)

coupled semaphores of distress.

Can any be the victor of such bloody battles?

Both commit to justice, neither will confess.

Blood on the stars, blood on the half moon,

analogous; all humanity facing the same impending doom.




September 2001