 |
|
|
|
| More!? More!? |
|
 |
| Weasel Words | |
At the Earth Summit in Johannesburg, Kofi (I've-got-gareth's-job) Annan has
called for greater business investment in poorer countries. This makes a
welcome change from the usual calls for greater handouts from rich,
hard-working nations to poor, badly managed ones. Or does it? Presumably Kofi feels that the rich (those with capital), instead of
investing in ventures in rich countries, should instead be investing in
ventures in poor countries. Why does he think that they don't do so already? Well Kofi, there are several possibilities
- They are totally irrational and don't know any better;
- They are all racists,
and want to hurt the poor countries out of spite; or
- They will get higher returns and/or greater security in the richer
country.
The first seems a little unlikely. Rich people are rich for a reason: they
make good financial decisions. The second seems pretty unlikely too - surely
there are enough rich people who don't care whether they feed starving Africans
or not - they just want to get richer. Surely there are enough people in the
world who are more greedy than racist? That really only leaves the third option, Kofi. But surely the undeveloped
world (offering more potential for 'development') should offer greater
potential benefits. Surely the money should be flocking into these countries! On the other hand, maybe there is no point building a building which is
likely to be suddenly seized by corrupt government officials. Maybe there
isn't much point in importing machinery which is going to smashed by rampaging
mobs. Maybe going to do business with you is unattractive when they have to
bribe corrupt officials at best, and at worst be beaten, assaulted and robbed.
Maybe there is no point is building infrastructure when a greedy government
will break their contract, dictate exactly how much you can charge for it, and
then set arbitrary taxes to strip any profits. Maybe the poorer countries should be looking within themselves to work out
why the rich are interested in investing in rich countries which provide
guarantees of the rule of law and secure private ownership. If they want to be
rich, maybe they should take a closer look at what the rich countries do to
become rich. The song remains the same - the call for investment is just a disguised
demand from more money handouts. Meanwhile many of the 60,000 delegates at the Earth Summit are complaining
about the richer countries hijacking the agenda. This seems only appropriate in
Johannesburg, which (since the appointment of Nelson (the-rich-must-pay)
Mandela) is the car-jacking capital of the world. At least they have excelled at something.
|
|
 |
| An Obvious Forgery | |
Philip (boundless-compassion) Ruddock has rejected the recent aboriginal
demands for guaranteed Aboriginal parliamentary representation as 'intellectual
pursuits'. Presumably these are things which the intellectual elites
engage in between dipping their hands into the taxpayer's pocket. Of course the
demands could be taken a bit more seriously if anyone was able to define what an Aborigine actually was. Some of us were taught in school that the Tasmanian Aborigines were totally
wiped out (they didn't use the word 'genocide' back then). So it
came as a bit of a surprised to see so many Tasmanian Aborigines on the ABC's Four Corners last Monday
arguing over who were 'real' Aborigines and who weren't. One fellow thought that ATSIC should buy $5000 motor cycles for his children to ride around his
farm because it would reduce the chances of them taking drugs. His blonde-haired kids
thought this was a pretty good idea too, and when asked whether they were
Aboriginal were happy to reply 'um, I suppose so'. All parties in the 'who is the real Aboriginal' debate had some common ground
though - they all agreed that it was about money. Everyone agreed that the
others just wanted to get their snouts into the big ATSIC honey-pot. The funny thing is that none of them could see an obvious solution - removing
the funding, and therefore the financial gain resulting from fabricating an
Aboriginal identity. It is impressive that their strong cultural ties have survived
several hundred years of neglect, dispossession and persecution. One wonders if
it would also survive the removal of the subsidies which it now
brings.
|
|
 |
| The Big Begging Bowl | |
The latest piece of idiocy to come out of the Earth Summit is the claim by
poorer nations that the US is
keeping them poor by subsidizing US food production. Apparently the US policy
of taxing their own citizens to
subsidize their food
producers causes global food prices to drop and causes other nations to go
hungry. But nations are either net food exporters or net
food importers. If they are net food exporters and their own people are
going hungry, one has to question why. If they kept the food to
feed their own people, instead of trying to sell it at US-deflated
world-market prices they wouldn't be so hungry. If they are net food importers they can hardly be worse
off by the US offering to sell them food for less than it takes
to produce it. It is only rich countries like Australia which are
disadvantaged by the US self-destructive subsidization idiocy. Australia is
also a net exporter of food, and loses money due to the low world
market prices. But the truth never stood in the way of a good story at UN whine-sessions. Just
another example of squishy-logic designed to draw attention away from the real
reason these countries are poor - corruption, government incompetence and
lack of secure private ownership. Rarely do they explore a topic that is so black-and-white.
|
|
 |
| Hungry Infant | |
The world's youngest nation, the offspring of surly parents Indonesia and Portugal
and delivered by a proud Australia midwife, celebrates 100 days of
independence. However after the rape of the nation, the bloody birth, the celebrations, and
then the sudden withdrawal of the United Nations groups, they are now simply
languishing in poverty. One of the major problem is that the fledgling nation decided to adopt Portuguese as
the national language - a language which hardly anyone in the country (or even
outside the country) speaks. The common people speak their local dialect, their largest neighbor speaks
Indonesian, and the international community speaks English. The only people
in East Timor who speak Portuguese are the elites - the people who want to
lock themselves into power, and lock the commoners out. Much the way the
English Aristocracy used to speak French to differentiate them from the working classes. If the East Timorese had adopted English, a similar thing would have
happened, but the next generation would have learned English at school,
enthusiastic do-gooders from English speaking nations would have volunteered
their time as teachers, and the the trade advantages would have meant that the
vast majority of the people would know English within one or two generations.
This is the model roughly adopted by Philippines. But as a result of the East Timorese laws (and the law courts) being limited to
Portuguese, the process of making and enforcing laws is almost
unworkable. Things just happen too slowly. In particular, there are as yet no
workable private property laws - which makes people reluctant to invest. There
is little point building a home or a shop if some arbitrary government official
is going to take it off you because of a law which is not yet made -
particularly if that law is written in a language you can't even understand. As a result, the the only thing the fledgling nation is producing is poverty.
And it's even exporting some of that - being dependent on foreign aid.
Foreign Aid of course is the transfer of money from poor people in a rich
country to rich people in a poor country. The elites will do well. But at least the infant nation has a firm grasp on the welfare tit. It seems
destined to join its suckling sister country Papua New Guinea, and become a
permanent fixture to a proud, if patronizing, wet-nurse - Australia.
|
|
 |
| Pick your village on this map. | |
After leading journalists and Australian Immigration Authorities on
a wild goose chase around Afghanistan looking for
his ever-changing home village, celebrity asylum-seeker Ali
Baktiari finally admitted that he had lied about his past, and admitted that he
had spent 'several years' in Pakistan. Just like seasoned politicians, his support
groups 'refined' their earlier position on their version of the
truth. Effectively saying that it was acceptable for asylum-seekers to lie in
order to ensure a successful refugee claim. Many Australians will feel quite betrayed by this. Initially the asylum-seeker
support groups tried to stir up outrage in the community because of the
contradictory position that the Immigration Department seemed to be taking.
Ali Baktiari was classified as a refugee from Afghanistan, but his wife and
children were classified as being from Pakistan. Gleefully, the left
joined in the chants of 'liar Ruddock, liar!' and presumably believed that
enough repetitions made a truth - that the children overboard fiasco had
permanently tarred the Howard/Ruddock position so that they could simply
make up their own facts. However, this was not to be. Few people would have predicted the events of September-11, or the
resultant Taliban
overthrow. In 2000, claiming to be a victim of Taliban persecution
would have been a Pakistani plumber's best chance of emigrating to
Australia. After the collapse of the Taliban became inevitable, so was exposure
of the lie. And slowly, bit by bit, the lie was exposed. First as lack of knowledge
about local currencies, then doubts expressed about accents and language and
customs, then witnesses in Quetta (Pakistan), and then finally by journalists who
went to the village that the Baktiaris claimed to be from. But the left never saw this coming. They didn't see that drawing attention
to the plight of this asylum-seeker would result in his certain downfall. They
didn't understand that making it newsworthy would ensure the free press would
investigate it themselves. Like a religious prayer, or witch's spell - which
gains more potency with repetition, presumably they believed that by repeating
the lie often enough it would be believed. And they chose to put their
credibility behind a case which was suspicious at best, and at worst an obvious
fraud. The Australian public now consists of three groups.
- Those who have had their suspicions about asylum-seekers confirmed.
- Those who feel betrayed by those who have asked for their help under false
pretenses.
- Those who feel that fraud, cheating and lying are acceptable if they are for personal
gain.
There is nothing quite like the coldness from someone who has had their
generosity and trust betrayed. Ali Baktiari, and some 700 other 'suspect' cases
may like to consider this on their trip home. Australians are a generous people, but they don't like being lied to.
|
|
 |
| Even More Unexpected Greatness | |
True leadership is a dangerous characteristic in political parties, and such
deviant behavior is normally conducted only by the very brave and the very stupid. Johnny (beloved-little-leader) Howard understands this well - strongly
criticizing leftist stupidities such as feminism, aboriginal rights and
multiculturalism only after the issues have already been totally discredited in
the eyes of mainstream Australia. Watching a little man like Johnny lay his boot into the rotting corpse of
political correctness while looking statesman-like is a bit of a giggle, but it
is no more 'leadership' than it is 'divisiveness'. It's just leading from
behind. However true leadership was shown yesterday by the National Executive of
the Australian Democrats. Normally content to be faithful sheep following their
ever diminishing flock of supporters around, they hit back at Aden
(I-offended-nobody) Ridgeway for masterminding the downfall of their
leader. Some people might have expected that a deputy leader would take be
appointed as interim leader until the members elect another one in six weeks.
Instead of appointing him as the interim leader until the member's vote in
October, they instead appointed one of the (only) two senators who supported
Natasha - someone who few people had even heard of until yesterday, Senator
Brian Greig. They are playing for higher stakes than they may think. There is a
three-way tug-of-war between the members, the national executive, and the
senators themselves, and the national executive are flexing their
muscles. However the gang of four, who ambushed Natasha with their ten
commandments on Wednesday, may just join their former leader Meg
(chortling-from-the-backbenches) Lees and create a new party of five - leaving
Natasha and her faithful national executive with just three. At the next election the party members will vote for Natasha, but the
electorate will prefer Meg. True leadership is a funny thing in a party famous
for the blonde leading the blind.
|
|
 |
| Unexpected Greatness | |
Sheep are curious animals. They run with the flock when frightened by a sheep
dog, but then turn towards the dog when cornered and repeatedly stamp
their feet. There is nothing quite as pathetic as a sheep stamping its feet
at a dog. Except possibly seeing Natasha Stott Despoja doing the same thing
at the media hounds. An increasingly bitter Cheryl (no-blame-no-shame) Kernot, as she was
turning on her adopted ALP,
called the Stott Despoja / Ridgeway team the 'dream team' when they took power
from Meg (GST) Lees. A young woman and an Aboriginal in power was
obviously a feminist's wet dream. However the dream suffered a rude awakening
when the party fell apart this afternoon. Natasha's increasingly petulant and
tedious foot-stamping was rejected by the majority of the remaining tatters of
her party, and she resigned. When was first elected to the Federal Parliament
she boasted that she was the youngest woman to ever do so. Today she also
looked the silliest. She has said that she will remain in the party and in the Senate. She
criticized Meg (not-gloating-just-friendly) Lees for taking her seat with her
when she left the Democrats, and she criticized Andrew (white-ant) Murray for
declaring himself Democrat in Exile, so she can't take either of those options. She can either prostrate herself to the greater party
machine and sit in the senate corner like a naughty little girl, or leave parliament. Leaving
parliament is hardly on the cards though - she hasn't yet been there long enough
to comfortably retire on her pension. In theory she could go out and get a
job, but she has never worked in her life (unless you count celebrity
current-event chat-shows), and she is hardly about to start now. This fiasco of course has been caused by the fundamentally
'super-democratic' constitution of the Australian
Democrats. The leaders are elected by the members, not by their
parliamentary colleagues, and 100 members can initiate a leadership spill. The
result: a leader who is popular with the barely-over-18s who participate in the
leadership ballot, but who the rest of the party can't work with, and whom
fewer and fewer Australians want to vote for. Australian Democracy at its
best. Well, the Australian Democrats at their best anyway. So after earlier throwing out the leader with the brains, the Democrats
have now thrown out their leader with the looks. Where does that leave them?
Aden (expert-at-saying-nothing) Ridgeway has been described as 'charismatic',
by his fellow Democrats. Not very convincing perhaps, but 6012 repetitions make
a truth, and many people like the feel of wool against the skin of their
eyelids. Apparently now it's Aden's turn to stand in front of the frightened
flock and stamp his foot. As for policies - maybe if every sheep in outback Australia gets a subsidized
mobile phone to report on salinity levels in the Murray, Telstra will be sold
after all?
|
|
|
A group of Lebanese attacked a SBS news crew as they were filming reaction
to the recent 55 year sentencing of a multiple pack rape leader outside a
Sydney Mosque. The crew claim that they were being respectful, and stopped
filming whenever they were requested. They were attacked from behind by a group
of Lebanese men, beaten and kicked to the ground. The elders from the Mosque
intervened, and the assailants ran off before jumping into a number of cars and
speeding away. The spokesmen (and no, there don't appear to be any spokeswomen) for the
Lebanese community have come out in support of the harsh sentence for the
rapist, and agree that they are appropriate considering the obscenity of the
crimes. This is not surprising. There has been a great deal of suspicion about the
Lebanese since the rapes. These spokesmen are politicians, and they are well
aware that the best interests of their community are served by distancing
themselves from these crimes as much as possible, and showing a little
sympathy as possible with the perpetrators. However, in spite of their support for the actions of authorities, it
remains to be seen whether this support extends to helping them actually catch
criminals. There was apparently a sizable crowd at the Mosque. The Lebanese
involved in this assault would clearly have been known to other people present,
and many people from the community would have seen them jump into their cars,
and would have been in a position to report their license plates. As yet, no charges have been laid for these assaults. The Lebanese community faces a test over this incident. Whether they will
support criminals in their communities, or whether they will cooperate with the
authorities in their new country to assist them in upholding its laws.
Carefully crafted rhetoric from the community leaders will not be sufficient to
allay the suspicion felt by the community of mainstream Australia.
|
|
 |
| Don't assk don't tell | |
Nothing succeeds like excess, and the Annual Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras may be a case
in point. Severe financial problems (specifically lack of money) may mean that
the show does not go on. After several decades of shock tactics, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence,
the Dykes on Bikes, the Giant Percys and those muscle-bound men with Bulls-eyes painted
on their bottoms, just became a bit ho-hum. Even the sight of a nipple-ringed
Bob the Builder failed to titillate a blase and jaded public. The main thrust of the movement was about acceptance of homosexuality as a
valid lifestyle choice. Having achieved this goal there is not much interest
in it any more. The modern age doesn't really care about someone's
sexuality. Even the once homophobic US military now has a don't-ask-don't-tell
policy. There is something a bit sad about grown men running around the street
saying 'notice me', 'notice me' when there is nothing to actually protest
about. The beginning of the end must have come when the Rev Fred Nile finally
stopped his annual praying for rain to wash away the heathen festivities.
Apparently he realized that in the permissive age it was inconsistent with his
main goal of preying for reign - particularly as rain dances are regarded as a
bit .. well .. primal if not actually carnal. There was some suggestion of the government bailing out the
Mardi Gras, but in
the end, the average tax-payer wasn't very comfortable with the prospect of the
gay lobby putting their hands into their pockets.
|
|
 |
| X: 40 to 55. | |
There was hysteria in Sydney last night as the ringleader
of the series of ethnic-related gang-rapes was sentenced to 55 years in prison
for his crimes. The perpetrator's family and friends screamed that he was
innocent, while his victims rejoiced that they had finally won. The severity of the sentence is unprecedented in modern Australian judicial
history, and reflects both the outrage about the crime itself and the
frustration of the failure of two decades of political correctness. Few people
feel any sympathy for the perpetrator, and the thought of him spending not only
his youth but also his middle age in a cage may satisfies people's need to hit
back at a criminal who's obscenity defies understanding. However the precedent
is a dangerous one. A 55 year gaol sentence is greater than murder. Faced with a 55 year gaol
sentence, future rapists will just kill their victims. Few people would call this penalty too harsh, considering the crime, but
regardless of the level of disincentive, there will always be some level of
rape. If Australia wants to impose these kinds of sentences, she must
reintroduce the death penalty for murder. Otherwise we are condemning future rape victims to a death sentence.
|
|
|
>> Please Sir, I want some more
|
|
| Feedback/Forum |
|
- ANON -- Anonymous Coward 2011-12-02
|
|
