Monday, July 31, 2006

Johann Hari responds to my letter

After my initial detailed criticism tearing apart Johann Hari's savage and dishonest analysis, blaming Israel for every civilian death in the conflict, he has prompty responded with the following short letter (my comments in Italics):

You say I "justify further violence and terrorism against Israeli
civilians." This is factually wrong and disgustingly offensive. Go on - find a
single line that defends attacks against Israeli civilians. The whole point of
my articles is that I am against attacks on civilians on both sides -
Israeli and Lebanese.

I am not anti-Israel at all. I desperately want to see a safe, secure
Israel within the 1967 borders, alongside a safe, secure Palestine. The
actions of the Israeli government are taking us further and further
from that goal.
Great.. thanks for settling that. I had come up with several compelling reasons why his analysis was bigoted and stank of anti-semitism, but he reassures me that he wants to see a peaceful and safe outcome.. great. But he never issued a retraction of his labelling Hezbollah as "a self-defence organisation". Well that goes beyond the pale for me. You cannot support Hezbollah and claim to pursue peaceful outcomes. Here is my response:
My proof is the fact that you started a paragraph with the following words:

"Hezbollah is at its core a self-defence organisation, however ugly, and its recent operations have been limited largely to this function."

Well maybe you and I are not living in the same realities. Hezbollah is a genocidal terrorist group committed to the destruction of Israel, and anybody who stands in its path. Hence in 1983, it slaughtered 230 US marines in Beirut in a truck bombing. How can this be the activities of a self-defence organisation ?

You brazenly claim that the only provocation by Hezbollah since 2000 was the firing of a single rocket across the border. Forget the fact that they deployed over 10,000 Iranian supplied rockets along the border, they kidnapped 3 Israeli soldiers in 2000, and have made repeated statements to show their commitment to attacking Israel. Hezbollah, in my definition, is purely a terrorist organisation that targets Israeli cities, and operates from within Lebanese villages. My concern for civilian lives on both sides makes me place the blame on their shoulders. And they have ignored UN resolution 1559 and continue to occupy Southern Lebanon.

As much as you would wish to frame this conflict as a 2 party conflict, of "Israel versus Lebanon", sadly for your analysis, it heavily involves, and was sparked by, a 3rd party - Hezbollah. Kidnapping Israeli soldiers from Israeli soil, bombing a tank killing 8 soldiers, and firing rockets at Israeli towns is not self-defence.

Friday, July 28, 2006

Doublethink of the day

Johann Hari, icon of the left, symbol of progressive ideology, cheers on the campaign to make poverty history. Lamentably, he does this by suggesting measures that will only make wealth and living standards history, and make poverty the futureof life for all of us. This guy couldn't even pass high school economics, nor high school english, with this kind of illogical Orwellian doublethink:

The first is free trade. This is where all countries – rich and poor – abolish their tariff walls and their subsidies, and exchange goods as equals on the free market. An Algerian can sell his goods to an Alabaman or Albanian without hitting any tariffs, and vice versa.

The second is fair trade. This is where the rich world abolishes its tariffs and subsidies, but the poor are allowed to keep some. It means the Ghanaian chicken farmer would be able to sell to us, but a chicken farmer from Surrey would have to pay a fat fee to sell anything back to her.
Ah yes. Its only "fair" that farmers are treated differently because of the country they live in. Isn't that discriminatory and racist ?

NEC, Panasonic and TI join forces for 3G/3.5G mobile development

For quite a while, there was a high level of sharing between these 3 companies in their mobile phone chipsets. Now they have formalised the partnership by forming a joint venture in Japan called AdCore-Tech

Tokyo, July 27, 2006 --- NEC Corporation ("NEC"), NEC Electronics Corporation ("NEC Electronics"), Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. Ltd. ("Matsushita"), Panasonic Mobile Communications Co. Ltd. ("Panasonic Mobile") and Texas Instruments Incorporated ("Texas Instruments") today announced that the five companies have signed an agreement to establish a new joint venture company. The company will conduct global development, design, and technology licensing for a hardware and software communications platform (*1) to manage the core communications functions for mobile handsets for the third generation (3G/3.5G) and beyond.
The new company, Adcore-Tech Co., Ltd ("Adcore-Tech"), is scheduled to be established in August, 2006 at the Yokosuka Research Park in Yokosuka, Japan, with approximately 180 employees. The five companies will jointly invest 12.0 billion yen in the new joint venture, with approximately 44 percent held jointly by NEC and NEC Electronics, approximately 44 percent held jointly by Matsushita and Panasonic Mobile, and approximately 12 percent held by Texas Instruments.
As mobile phones become increasingly sophisticated and improved with the integration of music, video, broadcasting and other new technologies for internet and high-speed, high-volume communications, an extraordinary amount of resources are required for their development.
Looks like a wise move to me. The development costs of 3G and 3.5G (HSPDA) handsets is ever increasing. Its usually risky for any one company to shoulder the cost of development of all technology in a 3G handset, even a technology giant like NEC. So rather than reproducing the same efforts as their competitors, each company can specialise in certain areas. This is what they call "synergy" :)

Thursday, July 27, 2006

How dishonest can the media get?

For 10 days, the headlines have been along the lines of "Beirut is rocked by Israeli missiles", "Lebanese hurt in airstrikes" and worse. Journalists go to every effort to describe carnage, chaos, bombs and smoke as being common everywhere. They actually go to very little effort to describe that Israeli targetting is very precise, limited and specific. So here is a diagram of Beirut, where the black dots represent where Israel has struck (courtesy of Israeli Bunker blog) :

Political Dictionary online

This blog, being a fan or Orwell, is indeed interested in the use and perversion of the English language by certain individuals, used to propagandise debate and discussion. Orwellian language refers to, in my opinion, a dishonest or downright incorrect usage of language. For example, calling religious fundamentalists who target civilians with suicide bombings are terrorists under the dictionary definition. But yet huge swathes of the media continue to refer to them as "militants" or "guerillas". Another widespread example is how some more extreme types refer to Israel's democratically elected government as a "zionist regime", or worse.

Tim Blair has a hilarious dictionary online - my favorite definitions here:

  • Disproportionate, adj. Any response at all from Israel to the kidnapping or murder of Israeli citizens.
  • Globalisation, n. System of interlinked international trade opposed by interlinked international anti-trade movement.

  • Context, n. Something no Australian Islamic leader is ever quoted in, i.e. “A spokesman for the sheik said that his demand for a tsunami of infidel blood had been quoted out of context”.

  • Australian Film Industry, n. Body that ensures the funding, making and distribution of Australian films. But not the viewing.

  • Charismatic, adj. Punishingly dull, i.e. “Charismatic Greens senator Bob Brown spoke for three hours again yesterday on the importance of alternative non-carbon energy sources.”

  • Global warming, n. Scientifically observed phenomenon whereby scientists the world over receive warm, toasty funding to talk about the weather.

UN and Hezbollah: Brothers in arms

Look whose flag is flying alongside the UN flag inside a UN compound ?

Just remember.. when the media use Orwellian language and call for "peacekeeping forces", don't be surprised when Israel objects or at least complains that it certainly won't end the violence. With "peacekeeping forces" like these, who needs enemies ?

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

May Chidiac - Lebanese hero

Thanks to the Big Pharaoh for the post on this symbol of Lebanese independence and democracy, May Chidiac. She was a Lebanese journalist who often spoke against Syria and Hezbollah, and put her life at risk whilst doing so. Last September, Syrian agents attempted to assassinate her, but she survived the attempt despite losing an arm and a leg. Freedom of speech often comes at a price, something many of us in Western society do not apreciate.

Edmund Burke famously said "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"

May Chidiac, the popular Lebanese journalist and TV anchor, returned to host her program on LBC after she recovered from the effects of last September's assassination attempt. Chidiac, who lost an arm and a leg, appeared today on TV and discussed the future of Hezbollah's weapons with two other guests. She had a prosthetic arm.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Andrew Sullivan is not a conservative

A conservative, in any definition, is at least an economic conservative. Whilst Sullivan claims that on principle, he supports tax cuts, and has criticised the Bush administration for its largesse and pork barrelling, at the same time, he manages to keep a straight face and call for an increase in gasoline taxes and automative regulation.

Obviously he believes in the not very conservative notion of regulation and tax rather than free markets to determine supply and demand of a commodity.

Whats also indicative of his stance is his blind faith in the coming apocalypse, predicting by the global warming doomsayers on the left. Andrew Sullivan has joined their church and called for government intervention on behalf of environmental causes. Soon he will be devoting his column space to attacking even the most respected global warming skeptics, and economists who wish to leave markets unregulated.

Monday, July 24, 2006

The Mid East conflict summarised

More on my earlier theme of the UN being supporters of Hezbollah. A story developed where back in 2000, Hezbollah guerillas crossed into Israel dressed as UN peacekeepers. They bribed 4 Indian peacekeepers for their uniforms. The IDF soldiers approached what they thought were peacekeepers, and Hezbollah managed to kidnap 3 Israeli soldiers. The real UN peacekeeping force, UNIFIL, sat idly by and watched as Hezbollah kidnapped the soldiers and retreated into Lebanon.

Full details here.

A letter to the Victorian ALP

To whom it may concern,
I heard the Mr Bailleu on talkback radio this morning announcing his plans to regulate gaming and poker machines heavily. I am appalled by this proposal and am writing to express my heavy disappointment at the current direction of the Victorian Liberal party.

I am not a gambler, I do not use poker machines. But I am absolutely certain that the party has abandoned its philosphical origins and is no different to the socialist and regulatory principles of the ALP.

According to your website, you describe your platform as "The platform is the statement of essential principles based upon the Liberal philosophy. The policies are detailed statements of specific programs of action derived from the platform." But many of the proposed 2006 election policies violate classical liberal principles. I would not have imagined that the Liberal party could ever stand to regulate industry even more than the ALP, and support nanny-state welfarist approaches.

How can the party justify regulating the gaming industry when one of your policies is a belief in "
A free enterprise economy that has a responsive government and is free of undue union influence is the best framework for these hopes to be realised." ?

You also have a state platform of "
We believe that free enterprise will maximise economic growth and national prosperity.". Another state platform described is "We believe in the decentralisation and distribution of power and believe that local decisions are best made at the local level." How are these consistent with the current batch of socialist and regulatory policies proposed by the Liberal party ?

There are many other policies which violate all of your principles and are no different to the ALP. Environmental regulation, regulation of the water supply are radical power-centralising policies that belong to the Greens. Why should government be responsible for funding tourism, when the private sector handles it in a far more efficient and productive manner ? Where are your parties economic credentials ?

The Victorian Liberlas are also becoming socially authoritarian, with its plan to combat anti-social behaviour by handing over yet even more power to local councils and police. And to continue supporting the current oppressive anti-smoking laws shows that your party is no friend of freedom.

Why isn't your party fighting for freedom and power-decentralisation ? Why doesn't it fight the ALP's authoritarian restrictions on freedom of speech, on it's burdensome regulation of industry, on its wasteful public funding of grand sports projects, tourism ? Why does it believe in the socialist ideal of central planning, with dozens of proposed "plans to deal with" issues ?

The only proposed policies I support are the easing of speed camera laws and the deregulation proposed in "A fair go for small business" and "Cutting waste on government advertising" and cutting red tape on business. But individuals deserve freedom, and instead of increasingly taxing and spending, government should reduce its spending and hence its demand for more and more taxes.

At the moment, government is a leviathan intruding into our lives more than ever before. Local councils are given extraordinary powers over roads and parking restrictions than ever before, which harm all individuals.I will be voting for the party that promotes freedom at the next election.

Yours sincerely,

The UN finds common cause with terrorists

"So we both agree on what should be done with
the pesky Jews

For those that don't recognise the people above, its the head of the UN Kofi Annan and Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah. Before 9-11, Hezbollah was the terrorist group responsible for the largest number of American deaths. Its sole purpose, the reason it exists, is the destruction of the "zionist entity" - aka Israel.

Friday, July 21, 2006

Life imitates art.. or is it vice versa ?

How odd.. yesterday I watched an episode of the hit-TV show Lost, where a couple of guys uncover a hatch on the island, leading down into a long passage.

And yesterday, Israeli soldiers uncovered a similar structure in Southern Lebanon, created by Hezbollah to store weapons and rockets used to fire upon Israeli towns.

Thursday, July 20, 2006

Johann Hari hates Israel

In his latest attempt to smear Israel, Johann Hari starts by quoting his role-model, Lenin, and then rubbishing the lives of the Israelis kidnapped by terrorist groups:

does anybody still believe this is about saving three Israeli soldiers – a piece of Hollywood schmaltz called ‘Saving Corporal Shalit’ and its two sequels?
Johann proceeds, as the left wing progressives do best, to give his analysis in tin-foil hat conspiracy mode.
Are Beirut, Haifa and Gaza City burning for them?

Only a dwindling band of people now believe this, the official pretext for the twin-set of wars Israel is fighting on its Northern and Southern fronts. If it had been true, there was an obvious solution short of war – swapping prisoners.
This analysis has already lost touch with reality. Firstly, he ignores the 1600 missiles fired at Israeli cities and villages, but hey, who cares about Israeli peace and security ?

Secondly, this is not a sinister conspiracy by the Israeli military, its a popular and widely supported mission. When Israel negotiates towards peace, and a 2 state solution, and withdraws from disputed lands and palestinian areas, it is overwhelmingly popular and supported by Israelis except for the hard-right. Now, Israel is engaged in a military offensive against Hezbollah and Hamas, and this is also overwhelmingly supported by at least 90% of the Israeli public. Its easy to see why since Israel has been the target of terror, missiles and kidnapping for several years despite its withdrawals from Gaza and Lebanon.

What does Johann suggest to avoid future conflict with the terrorists ? Why - surrender to the terrorists of course and give them what they want !
Israel is currently holding 8200 Palestinian fighters, as well as at least three Lebanese fighters who were seized in Lebanon itself during the long eighteen years when Israel was occupying its entire Southern region. Both Hamas and Hezbollah have said the Israeli soliders will head home as soon as there is a fair swap.
Tell me, if you reward the kidnappers by giving them what they want, how does that do anything but motivate them to continue in the future ? I have already read of the Palestinian's long history of airplane hijackings in the early 1970s. Every time a terrorist was captured by a European state, the Palestinians would hijack another plane and demand the release of their comrades, and European leaders complied. By 1973, after over 200 Palestinian hijackers had been caught, less than 5 remained in prison !

Even still, look at the fairness of that deal.. 3 Israelis in exchange for 8200 militants and terrorists.. you can see whose side Johann is fighting for. In an attempt to appear balanced, Johann devotes a couple of sentences to denouncing Hezbollah ideology as being repugnant... but is quick to return to Israel bashing mode, with the sickest piece of moral equivalence I have encountered for a long time, full of lies and distortions and Orwellian language.
Yet if being ideologically repugnant, snatching fighters and owning rockets were a reason for a war, then Lebanon would have an even greater right to invade Israel. After all, it holds their snatched fighters, owns far more than 13,000 rockets (some nuclear) and has a history of invading their territory and committing mass slaughter on dishonest pretexts. One Israeli general demanded this week, “How long can we live with a knife to our throats?” But in reality the far bigger knife belongs to Israel. Are they really saying the right to self-defence and a buffer-zone of security belongs to them alone?

Hezbollah is at its core a self-defence organisation, however ugly, and its recent operations have been limited largely to this function.
The rest of the article is a dishonest and lengthy attempt to legitimise Hezbollah as a resistance organisation formed to liberate land captured by Israel. (even though Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000). To give his analysis a look of intelligence, he quotes quasi-historical "facts", refers to the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon as a reason why Lebanon still needs an aggressive terrorist militia armed with thousands of Iranian supplied rockets along it's southern border with Israel. And of course, he employs one of the left's favorite talking points - all Arab violence against Jews is justified so long as palestinians do not have a sovereign state.

Johann Hari believes its all Israel's fault, it should have already taken advantage of the opportunity to negotiate an accord with the terrorist Hamas government ( who also happen to be committed to the destruction of Israel ).
To remind us that Johann is a psychic mind-reader who knows the true evil motivations of the Israeli PM, he continues with more lies:
So here it is, the kernel of emotional truth behind this war. Its clearest expression can be found in the speeches of Ze’ev Jabotinsky, figure-head for the right-wing of Zionism, the man Olmert was raised to revere. Talking of the Arabs in 1923, Jabotinsky insisted, “A living people makes enormous concessions… only when there is no hope left.” That is the true purpose of the wars in Gaza and Lebanon – to ensure, at last, there is no hope left for the Arabs.
This is a disgusting analysis, even by Johann's standards. If he were more honest about his intentions, he would have headlined the article "I really hate Israel, this is why". Instead, he uses all sorts of Orwellian language where you twist the meaning of words to make it look like you are debating on principled grounds and applying sane principles to the analysis. Let's go through the checklist:
  • Conspiracy theory - check
  • Evil motives behind Israeli actions - check
  • Supporting terrorists demands - check
  • Distorting Israeli history - check
  • Refusing to approve fighting terrorism with violence - check
  • Describing Hezbollah as a self-defence organisation - check
  • Putting the onus of responsibility on Israel to negotiate with Hamas - check
Nothing but shameful.

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Joke of the day

Via samizdata:

Three white collar prisoners are hanging around the yard comparing notes:

Former Exxon executive: They say I charged too much for oil. I'm in for price gouging.

Former Microsoft executive: They say I charged too little for software. I'm in for unfair competition.

Former Samsung executive: They say I charged the same price as everyone else for computer chips. I'm in for price fixing.

Heh. Its funny coz its true. If public officials don't like you and your succesful big business, you can be dragged down and prosecuted for any random crime, in just about every western economy now.

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

The danger of central planning

All readers out there will agree that the value of "freedom" is of the highest order. But then, many people don't appreciate how freedom gives us our high standards of living, and gives the greatest number of people happiness. The free market is a dynamic concept, of millions of individuals making many complex decisions every day. People look at every decision they are faced, and decide based on the information available. People have to deal with the limited amount of resources that they have - i.e time, energy, money. A rational person takes these things into account when making a decision.

And as thousands of people make their decisions, they encounter each other. Under the free market, they trade and barter voluntarily. These voluntary transactions are mutually beneficial. Both parties profit when no coercion or violence is used. Profit is a word often demonised by anti-capitalists and progressives. But it doesn't always involve money. If I am allergic to peanut butter, and I swap my peanut butter sandwich for a tuna sandwich with a willing partner, then we have both profited from the exchange.

This is not to say that people make mistakes. People often decide to go gambling with their savings, expecting a return but losing it all.

Anyhow, stop for a minute and think about how many billions if not trillions of decisions there are each day. Imagine all the people deciding what to eat, what to wear, where to go shopping, which route to drive, when to get petrol. You are starting to see the complexity of the economy. But the full measure is incomprehensible.

Here is a concept:
I could not, for a minute, make all the decisions for another person that would give them the same level of happiness as they would acheive making it for themselves. And similarly, nobody else can decide whats best for me and make decision of my behalf that would give me the same level of happiness.

Do any politicians realise this ? Most of them seek to regulate my life. They change the law due to popular public sentiment, so that certain actions I would take are penalised or outlawed. This is known as central planning. A central authority sets in place rigid laws and regulations that cannot be violated by the market. They make a decision for all others. In China alone, central planning of the farming industry killed over 50 million people through famine.

The free market has evolved and now most economies have money as a medium of exchange. Prices, denominated in the local currency, are used to indicate information. A seller sets a price at which he is willing to sell his goods. And a buyer can only accept or reject that. Prices indicate all kinds of input factors, like scarcity and cost. A toothbrush made of solid gold would cost hundreds because gold is rare. Consumers only want a simple device to clean their teeth and are not willing to give up so many resources for such an item, hence you don't see many gold toothbrushes on the market. The important point in all of this is that prices are an important indicator and signal to help the market function. The Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises realised this and correctly foresaw the failure of communism in the early 20th century, because of its removal of prices and its centrally planned economy.

At the moment, Victoria is hardly a free economy.

I cannot exercise my free speech in Victoria if it is even slightly critical of religion, race or sexuality, or else I risk prosecution. I cannot ride a bicycle without a helmet or else I risk a hefty fine. I cannot park in certain areas, or for certain durations or else I risk another hefty fine. I must drive my vehicle below a certain limit or else I risk losing my license - even though I have excellent reflexes and may wish to travel slightly above the limit when I judge it is safe, I am persecuted if I do so. My dog must be on a lead, even if it is a friendly and well trained pet.

But theres more. Besides regulating individuals, the Bracks government has done more than any other to regulate commerce and industry. Australia is already a rigidly bureaucratic workplace, with set work hours, minimum wages, work conditions, mandatory 9% superannuation, sick leave, public holidays, workplace safety laws etc. But Steve Bracks plans to regulate the energy and water industries in the near future. Energy retailers will have to purchase 10 percent of their energy from renewable sources, which are much more costly, less reliable and efficient. And there will be a ban on any new construction of dams, which would help boost our supply of water. Large retailers will no longer be allowed to offer free plastic bags to customers.

All 3 measures will hurt consumers. The cost of electricity and water will rise, and the cost of groceries and shopping will rise as businesses are forced to charge a fee for plastic bags. And how does the economically illiterate Bracks government describe these measures ?

The Government predicts the move will result in $2 billion in investment in clean energy production and create hundreds of new jobs.
Nonsense ! Talk about trying to put a positive spin. This is dishonesty at its peak.
Imagine trying to describe a ban on, lets say the sale of all breads and toast, as the following:
The Government predicts the move will result in $2 billion in investment in cereal and create hundreds of new jobs.
Well thats what we are faced with. Millions of people will be worse off because their will be less choice and less freedom. Of course, every single person will be faced with a new set of (smaller) opportunities after the regulation comes in. They will have to make decisions based on whats available, and if you ban the consumption of bread, more of the alternative foods will be consumed. But thousands of jobs would be destroyed, bakeries closed, consumers and families worse off with no breads at all, restaurants would lose patronage. etc etc.

Victoria - we are moving backwards.

Socialism is driving us back in time

Steve Bracks plans to usher in a new era in Victoria where stores will no longer be allowed to offer free plastic bags to customers.
Brookesnews summarises my thoughts exactly:

Here is an issue that the state Liberal Party should get stuck into. Environment Minister John Thwaites is calling for a ban on plastic bags if retailers do not reduce their use. This is another example of ALP stupidity and ignorance. Retailers do not use plastic bags — their customers do. So what kommissar Thwaites is really attacking is consumer preferences. If those pesky consumers do not behave the way they should, so much for them!

That consumers might be right about the use of plastic bags is too painful a thought for the self-righteous Thwaites to consider. In his mindset only lefty politicians and their apparatchiks really know what is good for consumers. (And I bet you thought Soviet-style thinking died with the Soviet Union).

In other totalitarian moves, Bracks plans to make electricity and water even more scarce for Victorians with his moves to regulate the energy sector, and ban the construction of all new dams. We are heading for some dark times in Victoria. Ever since Bracks took power, he changed our slogan (which appears on license plates) from "On the Move" to "The Place to Be". Well we are no longer on the move, we are moving back in time and our standards of living will take a big hit.

Central planning has murdered scores of millions in the last century. It has impoverished the masses. But hey, it makes our central planners feel good about themselves and show the people they are "doing something".

Friday, July 14, 2006

The Age demonise Israel yet again

As Israel takes the necessary steps to punish the Hezbollah terrorists behind the acts of war, kidnappings and rockets, the left wing rag known as The Age is actually begging all civilians who might be in Lebanon to send pictures with camera phones or email.

Are you in Lebanon, or do you have family or friends there? SMS your photos and video to 0416 905 403 or email

This is a sickening breach of journalistic standards. Don't they have their own photographers in the region ? Clearly they are hungry for some images to make Israel look bad. I have never heard of The Age asking Jewish Australians to send in images from an Israeli town under terrorist attacks. Why ? Because that would evoke reader sympathy with Israel, and the socialist editors at The Age couldn't have that.

Letter to Andrew Sullivan

Hi Andrew,

I've been a longtime reader, for over 4 years now. Many people have said that you are no longer a conservative, and I haven't reached that conclusion myself. But as a non-American reader, I do believe that your focus has shifted towards American politics and ignored more pressing issues. And being America-centric is something that the left are guilty of far more often.

This weeks escalation in the middle east, with Israel being under siege and terrorists firing rockets at cities and kidnapping soldiers, you have almost totally ignored this issue.

I don't recall more than a token mention of the Mumbai train blast. Also, you devoted very little column space to North Korea's missile firing last week. You seem to be more concerned with torture and, since the Hamdan ruling, exposing past examples of torture, than other global conflicts.

Perhaps other conservatives don't cheer and support torture as much as you accuse, but they have other priorities. I've noticed you haven't said much about Iran's nuclear deceptions and Hamas shelling Israeli towns from Gaza over the last few months.

So perhaps, as far as foreign policy goes, you're not as much of a conservative as you once were.


Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Kofi Annan praises despots, dicatotrs and thugs

This is what Kofi Annan, secretary general of the UN, had to say about the OIC - the Organisation of the Islamic Conference - a group of dictators, miltary generals and religious fundamentalists who oppress hundreds of millions of Muslims, deny women's equality, outlaw homosexuality, fuel anti-western hatred and promote intolerance, support terrorism, and most of all, demonise Jews and Israel.

Over the years, and especially the past decade, the United Nations and the Organization of the Islamic Conference have worked to promote tolerance, equality, development and the peaceful resolution of conflict.

Peaceful resolution of conflict ? Has anyone checked how peaceful the borders of most Muslim countries are ? Saudi Arabia is building walls to keep out Iraqis and Yemenis. Pakistan has bloody borders with India, Afghanistan and Iraq are full of ethnic violence, Chechnya is a hotbed of terrorism, and the Palestinians are the world's biggest supporters of terrorism and anti-semitism.

Heck, the UN would be quiet place without all the thugs and backward regimes of the world.

Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Costello vs Howard... yawn

The Australian media is buzzing with talk about the treasurer calling the PM a "liar". Well, not that Costello actually used the word liar, but they are trying to sensationalise the issue just a tad. According to the treasurer, back in 1994, Howard promised him that he would step aside after 1.5 years or something. And our PM of 10 years denies this was said or that any promise was made.

Whats really interesting is just how frantic the media have become. The media have a very short attention span and focus heavily on the personality behind the politics. Unlike the US media, the Australian media only focus on "who said what" on that day. There is very little focus on what policy they advocate and what principles they stand for. Everyone in politics seems to get a free pass when they change their stance on an issue, except for the PM himself who is scrutinised heavily. For example, the leader of the Greens does a backflip every month on a range of issues and says utterly moronic things, but the media pretend to have no memory and let him get away with it.

Ideally, when a bunch of power hungry politicians (is there any other variety) fight over power, it shouldn't be headline news. But theres an element of the paparazzi in there, our leaders are celebrities of a sort, so the media like to write about their lives at every turn.

Friday, July 07, 2006

The UN continues to bash Israel

The UN is a mafia, heavily populated by dictators, thugs and cronies.

If anyone tries to use the UN as a moral reference, a source of authority and sovereignty, in a debate, simply point them to this inconvenient truth (via Anne Bayefsky writing for the Jerusalem Post):

In Darfur, there are three quarters of a million people beyond humanitarian reach, 2.5 million people displaced by the violence, 385,000 people in immediate risk of starvation, and over two million dead in 22 years of violence and deprivation.

But it wasn't genocide in Sudan that interested the Human Rights Council. Nor was it a billion Chinese without civil and political rights. Not 13 million women in Saudi Arabia whose lives depend on hiding from sight in public places and never being caught behind the wheel of an automobile.
Not the dire human rights conditions of 23 million people in North Korea. Not Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's incitement to genocide or his country's legal system, which includes crucifixion, stoning and amputation.

NO, THERE was only one country singled out by the UN Human Rights Council, and that was Israel.



On its final day, the Council passed just one resolution condemning human rights violations by any of the 192 UN members, and directed it at Israel. When it was all over, the Council decided to hold its first special (emergency) session within the next few days - on Israel.

Your ABC.. sticking its nose where it shouldn't

I am not a fan of the ABC, but those that are, claim that its in the national interest to have a non-commercial broadcaster providing news and current affairs coverage. Despite the fact that the free market always provides these things so long as consumer's demand them, friends of the ABC proudly boast that because they are funded by government taxes, they are not susceptible to evil, corporate interests which skew their news reporting.

Of course, they ARE very prone to the left-wing biases of their editors and staff, but hey, lets not mention that.

Well lets concede for a second, that the ABC has a useful role as a provider of news and current affairs, and that is in the "national interest". But why the children's shows, or the gardening and cooking shows, or comedies and dramas ? Oh well.. I guess the ABC would justify that content as being important because they show "Australian made" shows, or with a local flavour, or "higher quality" shows than the commercial rivals. Mind you, unlike the commercial broadcasters, the ABC has a measure of quality that doesn't have anything to do with audience share and ratings.

Well lets even concede all of these things.. can someone please tell me what the hell the ABC staff are doing writing a book which is nothing more than a sensationalist smear attack on a conservative radio journalist, Alan Jones ?

After the ABC itself refused to publish the book written by one of its journalists, most likely because of pressure from Alan Jones' lawyers, the ABC writer found a publisher in the private market:

ALLEN & Unwin will publish the controversial biography of radio broadcaster Alan Jones, after the ABC dumped its plans to produce the book. Allen & Unwin today revealed it had secured the rights to publish the biography, penned by ABC investigative journalist Chris Masters. No release date has been announced for the book, which will be titled Jonestown: The Magic and The Myth of Alan Jones.

Of course, even though the ABC is no longer the pubisher of this book, they can't help but endorse it through their proxy mouthpiece, Media Watch, who pretend that the legal threats had nothing to do with the ABC's decision not to publish the piece of defamation and slander:
But ABC's Media Watch program this week claimed the decision not to publish was influenced by members on the public broadcaster's board.
This really makes my blood boil. Its not the fact that the ABC are biased. Everyone is biased. What is offensive is that the ABC are the only people with the arrogance to claim that they are not funded by sponsorship and advertising, so therefore they are free from corporate influence and bias. And they run a program with the seemingly innocuous name "Media Watch". But its nothing more than a mouthpiece for their left-wing ideology, each week attacking conservative media and journalists and never criticising or correcting their brethren within the ABC.

Privatise the ABC now !

Photo of the day

Theres a new party bear in town !

STATELINE, Nev. - A bear cub drew a crowd of spectators at a Lake Tahoe neighborhood as it munched on barbecue-chicken-and-jalapeno pizza in the back seat of a vintage red Buick convertible.

It also apparently washed it down with a swig of a Jack Daniel's mixer, an Absolut vodka and tonic, and a beer taken from a cooler, the vehicle's owner said.

Kinky airlines.

I bet Richard Branson came up with this, the sly old dog. Thats why he hires such good looking flight attendants.

Thursday, July 06, 2006

Human bomb factory

This is the epitome of a death cult society that the paleo-stinians have become. A woman who has given birth to 8 children and raised them to be "martyrs", has herself strapped on a suicide belt and hopes to murder as many Israelis as possible.
These are not the actions of a desperate and oppressed population. These are the barbaric actions of a people indoctrinated with a totalitarian ideology. Brainwashed with religious sermons to hate Israel, America and all non-Muslims.
A year ago, Israel withdrew totally from Gaza, giving Palestinians full control of the region. What do they do with that ? Do they built infrastructure and develop the economy ? Do they try to bring about stability, law and order ?

No - a bunch of terrorists dug tunnels, infiltrated into Israel and kidnapped an Israeli soldier. Israel is refusing to negotiate with these lunatics and are doing what it takes to recover him, using military incursions into Gaza.

A former Israeli PM, Golda Meir, famously said that there would be peace between Arabs and Jews when Arabs learn to love their children more than they hate the Jews. This woman has 8 children to raise, but she is willing to blow that all away (pardon the pun).

The caption reads:

Um Ahmed, 36, a mother of eight, holds what she claims is a suicide belt, as she sits for an interview with journalists in the village of Abasa, near the southern Gaza Strip town of Khan Younis Wednesday July 5, 2006. She is one of a group of at least 20 women in the village that are given, according to the local al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades commander, suicide belts every night in preparation for an expected Israeli assault on the town. (AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti)

Tuesday, July 04, 2006

Hamas: The violence will never stop

In an interview with Germany's Der Spiegel, a member of Hamas' political leadership in Syria reveals Hamas will never recognise Israel's right to exist, and therefore will never stop using violence:

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Now, Hamas has approved the so-called “Prisoners’ Paper,” which recommends a two-state solution. Does that mean that Hamas is now prepared to recognize the state of Israel?

Abu Marzook: With this agreement, we have primarily agreed to strengthen the resistance in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Aside from that, we have agreed on the goal of establishing a Palestinian state in these areas.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Doesn’t that mean that Hamas inevitably accepts the Israeli state in the rest of that area?

Abu Marzook: The paper does not say that at all. It is purely about the future of our people and about how a government uniting all Palestinian factions can work on building their independent state.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: And does Hamas also believe that an Israeli state can exist alongside a Palestinian state?

Abu Marzook: Hamas has always said clearly: We will never accept the occupation, because it is not legal, not correct and not just.