Saturday, July 22, 2006


I got an alarm call today. Politics and paltalk spilled over into my real world life. I fought with my son, scared my daughter in law, argued with my brother in law and alienated the people most precious to me in life.
As the world turns to shit, I have been feeling every blow, every dead child, every injustice. I KNOW TOO MUCH!
It's too much for a compassionate human to bear. The final straw was the use of white phosphorous on the children in Lebanon. (link above)
I am closing the batttler as part of my rehabilitation. It can join the graveyard of past importances Thanks for visiting, it was fun, but got real dangerous real quick.
Special thanks to Jesus Claus from paltalk, for mentoring, and my many friends and foes in social issues.
hug ya kids! goodbye, ononotagain.

Thursday, July 13, 2006



By David CrawshawJuly 13, 2006

A PIGGERY part-owned by Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone is breaching industry guidelines by keeping pigs in cramped conditions, animal welfare activists allege.Animal Liberation said it lodged a complaint yesterday with South Australian police, complaining of conditions at Wasleys Piggery, near Gawler. Senator Vanstone yesterday said she owned shares in the piggery but had nothing to do with the running of the operation, thought to be one of the largest in SA.
She said she did not condone cruelty to animals.
"I am simply one shareholder in this business," Senator Vanstone said through a spokesman.
"I have nothing to do with the running of it. Any suggestion that I support cruelty to animals is both untrue and defamatory."
Animal Liberation executive director Mark Pearson said Senator Vanstone had shares in the piggery worth more than $1 million. He said her husband, Tony, was a director of the operation.
Further details were being sought from Senator Vanstone's office on the size and nature of her stake in the piggery, and her husband's involvement. Mr Pearson said the piggery was breaching industry codes of practice by keeping pigs in severe confinement.
The group released images appearing to show pigs in cages barely big enough for them to move.
"Not only are the pigs tormented by the cruelty of their confinement where they can never walk or even turn around but they are kept in cages that are even smaller than federal regulations allow," Mr Pearson said.
"An urgent, thorough . . . investigation is crucial to ensure help is provided for these desperate animals."
There was no answer when Wasleys Piggery management was contacted last night.

Friday, June 30, 2006


John Winston Howard has done a Rupert Murdoch. He has mutated into a BLOODY AMERICAN!. Howard is damaged goods as an Australian politician. He has to go. AND HICKS HAS TO COME HOME!

From: AAP

THE Federal Government today rejected calls for David Hicks to be returned home after The United States' highest court found the military commissions set to try the Australian terror suspect were unlawful.
Prime Minister John Howard urged US authorities to find another forum to try Hicks, saying he had no sympathy for the Adelaide-born man accused of training as a terrorist with al-Qaeda.
Hicks' father, lawyers and politicians demanded Hicks be brought home after the US Supreme Court ruled overnight that the military commissions set up to try Guantanamo Bay detainees were unlawful.
.................. READ THE FULL STORY,10117,19637221-2,00.html

and further... REACTIONS to the ruling.
From: Reuters
June 30, 2006

A US Supreme Court ruling invalidating US military tribunals for Guantanamo Bay prisoners has rocked the Bush administration and attracted comment around the world.Here's what key players are saying:
PRESIDENT GEORGE W BUSH:"As I understand it - now, please don't hold me to this - ... there is a way forward with military tribunals in working with the United States Congress. As I understand, certain senators have already been out expressing their desire to address what the Supreme Court found. And we will work with the Congress.
"And one thing I'm not going to do, though, is I'm not going to jeopardise the safety of the American people. People got to understand that. I understand we're in a war on terror, that these people were picked up off of a battlefield, and I will protect the people and at the same time conform with the findings of the Supreme Court.
LT. CMDR. CHARLES SWIFT, a lawyer for Salim Ahmed Hamdan, defendant in the case before the US Supreme Court:"All we wanted was a fair trial and we thank the Supreme Court. Yes it is a rebuke for the process. ... It means we can't be scared out of who we are."
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL:"Today's Supreme Court ruling blocking the military commissions set up by President George W. Bush is a victory for the rule of law and human rights. The US administration should ensure that those held in Guantanamo should be either released or brought before civilian courts on the US mainland."
ZACHARY KATZNELSON, lawyer for 36 Guantanamo inmates including Ethiopian Binyam Muhammad, one of 10 who faced charges before the military commission:"I think its a fantastic victory for us. It's a strong rebuke from the Supreme Court to President Bush. They clearly have said he is not above the law and that the men at Guantanamo absolutely have rights, and the military commissions are just blatantly illegal."
NICHOLAS HOWEN, secretary-general of the International Commission of Jurists in Geneva:"Now is the time for the Bush administration to move ahead swiftly to release all prisoners in Guantanamo against whom there is insufficient evidence of criminal acts having been committed, abolish the military commissions, and if there is anyone who is suspected of a criminal offence, they must be tried under normal US criminal law in normal US criminal courts."
JOSE-LUIS DIAZ, spokesman for UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour:"On the merits, it would seem to be a vindication of the need for vigilance in the protection of all human rights, including those of persons suspected of terrorism."
US SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY, Vermont Democrat on Judiciary Committee:"For five years, the Bush-Cheney administration has violated fundamental American values, tarnished our standing in the world and hindered the partnerships we need with our allies. This arrogance and incompetence have delayed and weakened the handling of the war on terror, not because of any coherent strategic view it had, but because of its stubborn unilateralism and dangerous theory of unfettered power.
SENATORS LINDSEY GRAHAM AND JON KYL, Republicans of South Carolina and Arizona:"We are disappointed with the Supreme Court's decision. ... It is inappropriate to try terrorists in civilian courts. ... We intend to pursue legislation in the Senate granting the Executive Branch the authority to ensure that terrorists can be tried by competent military commissions.
SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts Democrat:"This decision is a stunning repudiation of the Bush administration's lawless behaviour at Guantanamo. As we approach the Fourth of July, it is entirely appropriate that the Supreme Court has reminded the president and Secretary Rumsfeld that there is no excuse for ignoring the rule of law, even when our country is at war."
SENATOR JOHN WARNER, Senate Armed Services Committee chairman and Virginia Republican:"I don't regard it as a blow, it's an interpretation of the law."
MICHAEL MORI, a military lawyer appointed to defend Australian prisoner David Hicks before the tribunals:"It doesn't come as a shock to me. The military lawyers who have been defending the defendants at Guantanamo have been saying this all along. Any real lawyer who isn't part of the administration knows this violates the Geneva Conventions."
MUNEER AHMAD, civilian lawyer for Canadian defendant Omar Ahmed Khadr:"We are very happy. ... It's clearly a decisive blow to the administration's view of what its powers are."
ARMY SGT 1ST CLASS LAYNE MORRIS, who helped capture Omar Khadr:"I'm disappointed because I think it's justice delayed. I think in the long run it's going to end up having the effect of all those people spending more time in Guantanamo, which I have absolutely no problem with."- Sgt Morris was blinded in the right eye by shrapnel during the firefight and agreed to testify against Khadr.
FARHAT PARACHA, whose husband was sent to Guantanamo in 2004 after 15 months at a detention centre in Afghanistan:"There is no justice. They have no rights, even don't have status of prisoners of war. It reminds me of the medieval era. ... Really, it is not serving any purpose but triggering more and more hatred."

Tuesday, June 27, 2006


From: Agence France-Presse
June 26, 2006

XIKU the chain-smoking chimpanzee has almost kicked his deadly habit thanks to the efforts of zoo keepers in China, but it has taken a beer or two to help get him through detox.
Xiku became addicted to smoking while mimicking the habits of humans during a career as a circus performer, the state-run Xinhua news agency said.
By the time he was sent to a zoo in Urumqi, the capital of China's northwest Xinjiang region, in 2002, Xiku was already smoking 10 cigarettes a day.
That number doubled as visitors threw him cigarettes for amusement, but he is now down to smoking four a day after some unorthodox efforts from zoo keepers, Xinhua said.
``At the beginning, he became irascible when he wanted to smoke, jolting windows and doors,'' Xinhua quoted one of the keepers as saying. ``We sometimes gave him some sunflower seeds or a bottle of beer to help him shake off the addiction and visitors are no longer allowed to throw him cigarettes.''


SPEAKING OF ROTTIES.. This chook was the inseperable friend of Bundy. They slept together and shared dinner bowls. The chook has her own story.

Monday, June 26, 2006


Can't get law and order, can't get electricity, can't get water supplies, human shit flows in the streets, can't rebuild bombed infrastructure, can't travel in safety, can't get medical treatment, can't get schools rebuilt, can't bring dead children back, can't get rid of these fucking invaders! But we can break all production records in our extortion of Iraq! I still remember the triumphant look in Bushs' beady little eyes when he announced "The southern oilfields are secured!" Meanwhile ammunition dumps were left to be looted, arming the most radical people in Iraq, which Saddam never allowed. Meanwhile treasures of antiquity, so carefully guarded for thousands of years, were left to looters and vandals. The most heavily guarded facility in Iraq was the Ministry of oil building, the nerve centre for Iraqs oil machine. With all of the above in mind, please read this article:

From: Agence France-PresseJune 26,
IRAQ'S oil production is now over 2.5 million barrels a day, a record since the fall of Saddam Hussein, the country's oil minister said overnight.Oil Minister Hussein Shahristani said on US television that Iraq hopes to be producing 4.3 million barrels by 2010 and to be challenging Saudi Arabia as the world's largest producer by 2015.Production was about 2.5 million barrels a day when president Saddam Hussein was deposed by US-led forces in 2003. It then collapsed to virtually nothing and has been slow to rebuild because of insurgent attacks and other problems.In an interview with CNN television, Mr Shahristani emphasised that only one month and three days after the Iraqi government took office, "we have been able to break a record"."Today's oil production was in excess of 2.5 million barrels a day. And that's a record since the fall of Saddam's regime in April 2003," he told CNN's Late Edition program.He said Iraq hopes to increase production to 2.7 million barrels by the end of the year and to 4.3 million barrels by 2010, which would be a new all-time record for Iraq. The minister said Iraq's highest oil production was 3.5 million barrels a day."Our ultimate aim is to reach more than six million barrels a day, hopefully by 2012."And needless to say, Iraq holds one of the largest reserves of oil and gas in the world, and we are determined to prove it has the largest world reserve."

Sunday, June 25, 2006

ALLIES AT WHAT PRICE? (click here)

AUSTRALIA'S biggest-ever defence project, the $16 billion Joint Strike Fighter, has potential flaws that could reduce the world's newest warplane to just an "average aircraft", according to internal Defence Department documents.
The documents reveal the JSF is beset with serious software problems and a cockpit display system so bad it had to be almost completely redesigned.
Defence Minister Brendan Nelson, a staunch defender of the troubled JSF program, will travel to the US at the weekend for talks with the plane's manufacturer, Lockheed Martin.
But despite the latest setbacks with the project, Dr Nelson still supports plans to spend $16billion to buy up to 100 of the yet-to-be-built JSFs to replace the ageing F-111 strike bomber and F/A-18 fighter jets from 2012.
Dr Nelson described the JSF program as not only the most expensive, but also the most challenging, defence project in Australian history.
"We are very committed to the JSF as it will deliver all the capabilities we need and want," he said.
Dr Nelson agreed that the transfer of information from the US to the project partners, such as details of the plane's stealth technology, was a significant issue and he vowed to walk away from the project unless guarantees were given.
"I will be meeting with US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld next week and this issue will be discussed," he said.
Despite the risks raised in the Defence Science and Technology Organisation report, he said, he remained confident the JSF was the best choice for the Royal Australian Air Force.
The $256 billion US-led JSF construction program has been dogged with cost blowouts and production delays, raising doubts about the value of the deal and the ability of Lockheed Martin to deliver the new fighter on time.
Now, Australian scientists from the DSTO have identified "major risks" to the plane's performance in its complex software, advanced cockpit displays and central computer system. A DSTO report from December, obtained under Freedom of Information laws, warns that a "technical risk assessment" by DSTO found "major risks" inherent in the aircraft's cockpit display system.
"Late or substandard software development within the display system results in poor mission system integration," DSTO says.
"Realisation of this risk may result in loss of functionality, poor system reliability, or poor man-machine interface which reduces the pilot's ability to perform."
It describes the integration of technology for the plane's cockpit as being only "at the laboratory breadboard stage".
Sources told The Weekend Australian last night that the cockpit problems were so severe the system had been completely redesigned.
Another major problem identified by Defence scientists is the central computer system - the same issue that led to the Collins-class submarines initially being labelled as "dud subs".
DSTO complains of difficulty assessing the scale of the JSF's software problems because of a lack of information from the US.
"Software is a key enabler ofthe integrated mission systems, which transform a kinematically average aircraft into a highly capable weapon system," DSTO says.
"The lack of technical information prevents DSTO from conducting a thorough analysis of the integrated performance of the (cental computer system).
"The lack of information is due to a number of factors including the novel acquisition approach, US International Trade in Arms Regulations, and what would appear to be proprietary restrictions."
The first JSF test plane was built early this year and will have its first flight later in the year. But the partnership between the US and its allies over the plane has been fraught.
Australia and Britain - which also plans to buy the plane - have complained to the US about Washington's reluctance to share the JSF's stealth technology, warning they would pull out of the deal if that technology were not made available.
Britain has since signed a deal with Washington to share the stealth technology, but Australia has yet to do so.
Opposition defence spokesman Robert McClelland warned yesterday that the JSF's problems, and possible delays in its delivery, could leave Australia with a dangerous gap in air capability. "Billion-dollar bungles like the Government's mismanagement of the Super Seasprite helicopter project could really pale in comparison to this unprecedented $16 billion project - big enough to account for almost the entire annual Defence budget," Mr McClelland said. "If Labor win Government we will closely examine the option of acquiring F-22 Raptors, at least in the initial procurement phase, to ensure Australia does not forfeit regional air superiority between retirement of the F-111s in 2012 and delivery of replacement JSFs in 2015 at the earliest and more likely 2017." The Howard Government has paid $155 million to join in the design of the JSF, with a final decision on the purchase of the plane due in 2008. Cost overruns have lifted the average fly-away cost of the plane from $45 million to more than $60 million per plane.

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

SAD DAY FOR DEMOCRACY reports: The Senate has just passed the biggest attack on Australia's system of campaign finance since the Hawke Government first mandated disclosure of donations to political parties more than 20 years ago. Despite vigorous opposition from Labor and all the minor parties, individual donations of up to $10,000 can now lawfully remain secret. This gives Australia arguably the weakest system of political disclosure in the developed world. In the US, all donations above $US200 must be disclosed, and during election campaigns any contribution above $1,000 must be revealed within 48 hours. Contrast that with Australia, where the Russian Mafia could have donated $9,999 to the eight different Liberal Party branches on July 1 last year and at least we would have been told about it (although not for 19 months until February 1 2007). Under the new laws, such donations from international mobsters would permanently remain secret.In the UK, political leaders even have to reveal how much they spend getting their hair done, whereas an Australian political party could pay $5 million to Mick Gatto and no-one would be any the wiser.What we now have is a recipe for corruption. In a world where political and business accountability and transparency is on the rise, the Howard Government has taken a retrograde step and abused its Senate majority like never before. It's a sad day for democracy.

Monday, June 19, 2006


PM would welcome US bases
From: AAP
June 19, 2006

Prime Minister John Howard said today he would warmly welcome the establishment of American military bases in northern Australia.
The Financial Review reported that two joint Australia-United States bases, designed for military training and as forward camps, would be established at Bradshaw in the Northern Territory and Yampi Sound in Western Australia.
Mr Howard did not confirm the details but said the government would welcome the American presence.
"We made an announcement some time ago ... to the effect that we were going to expand the capacity for training and operations exercises ... in northern Australia for Americans," he said.
"Whether you describe that as bases or not, I don't know.
"Can I say very openly that the notion of that sort of thing occurring in Australia ... involving American forces is not something that I would other than very warmly welcome."
Mr Howard said he expected the public and the states would support such operations, which would generate substantial income.
"As far as I'm concerned, subject always to the proper arrangements to fully respect and maintain and continue to observe Australian sovereignty, the notion of bases or operational facilities or training facilities by Americans is something I would warmly welcome," he said.
"My understanding is that all the Americans want at the present time is to have a capacity to train.
"I don't have any difficulty with that and I imagine it would be quite warmly supported by the Australian public."

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

MUSIC MAKING A DIFFERENCE It's astounding how little money it takes to make a huge difference to so many. If this song encourages anyone to be a donor. All the better. Sarah McLachlan could have spent $150,000 to launch her song, but instead she made a difference! enjoy.


Coffee May Cut Cirrhosis Risk06.13.06, 12:00 AM ET
TUESDAY, June 13 (HealthDay News) -- Drinking coffee seems to protect alcohol drinkers from liver disease, a new study suggests.
Every daily cup of coffee reduced the incidence of cirrhosis, a condition that destroys liver tissue, by 22 percent, according to researchers at the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program, in Oakland, Calif.
However, Dr. Arthur L. Klatsky, the leader of the study and an associate in Kaiser Permanente's research division, said the results "should not be interpreted as giving a license to drink without worry, because of all the other problems connected with drinking."
Liver damage is just one of the "multiple medical and social problems caused by heavy drinking," Klatsky said, adding, "the only proper advice is to drink less." Three drinks a day should be the limit for most people, he said.
The study finding was no surprise to Dr. Constance E. Ruhl, co-author of a study published last December in the journal Gastroenterology. Data from the National Health and Nutritional Survey showed that people at high risk of liver disease had half the likelihood of being hospitalized for cirrhosis if they were coffee drinkers.
"The thing that is different about their [the Kaiser Permanente] study is that they were able to look at different causes of cirrhosis and the relationship of coffee with those different types, which we were not able to do because we did not have data on what caused the cirrhosis," Ruhl said. "Also, their study was larger."
The Kaiser Permanente researchers analyzed data from more than 125,000 people who were free of liver disease when they had examinations between 1978 and 1985 and who gave information about their alcohol, tea and coffee consumption.
By the end of 2001, there were 330 cases of cirrhosis in the group, 199 caused by alcohol consumption. For each cup of coffee they drank per day, participants were 22 percent less likely to develop cirrhosis caused by alcohol.
"It's encouraging to me that they found something similar," Ruhl said. "It's additional evidence that there might be a relationship there."
The new study findings appear in the June 12 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.
Ruhl works at Social and Scientific Systems Inc., a for-profit organization that does research on public health. Her study was funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease and was done in collaboration with Dr. James E. Everhart of the NIDDK.
The mechanism by which coffee might protect the liver "is pretty speculative at this time," Ruhl said.
One possible mechanism has been suggested by Dr. Bruce N. Cronstein, director of the division of clinical pharmacology at New York University School of Medicine. He recently reported that caffeine induces the release of adenosine, a molecule that prevents the inflammation that leads to kidney damage.
Still, the picture of caffeine's potential protective effect is far from complete, Ruhl said. "The next step is to do clinical trials to look at the relationship between coffee and liver disease," she said. "Also, we need laboratory-type studies because it is not clear what components of coffee might have a direct effect on the liver."

Sunday, June 11, 2006


THE mystery of long-term heroin users dying by overdose despite experience with the drug may have been solved by a study linking overdoses with liver disease.
Researchers have puzzled for years about why heroin users defy the laws of experience and mortality that apply to others who practise risky activities and are more likely to survive as they age. Instead heroin overdoses are more likely to occur among people who have used the drug in a similar way for many years than among novice users.
The NSW Drug and Alcohol Research Council investigated 841 deaths due to opioid toxicity and found 10 per cent of those aged 35 to 44 and a quarter of those aged over 44 had been diagnosed with cirrhosis.
This could make them more susceptible to overdose, said Professor Shane Darke from the Drug and Alcohol Research Council at the University of NSW.
"They've got these phenomenally high rates of … liver disease," Dr Darke said. "If they hadn't died of overdose, they would have died of cirrhosis."
A 70 per cent incidence of hepatitis C and a high rate of alcohol consumption may account for the likelihood of liver disease, the study said.
Nearly a quarter of those studied had multiple-organ disease. "They're drinking, they're using heroin frequently, their bodies are just wearing out," Dr Darke said.
In 2004, 357 Australians died of heroin and opioid overdose. Those aged 25-34 comprised the biggest group at 43 per cent, followed by people aged 35 to 44 (28 per cent), 45 to 54 (18 per cent) and 15 to 24 (10 per cent).
Meanwhile, a significant number of injecting drug users are not being tested for hepatitis and other blood-borne diseases despite national public health policies, a survey has found.
Transmission of blood-borne viruses among drug users is still a considerable problem in Australia, with hepatitis B and C still spreading rapidly.
A survey of 222 drug and alcohol services has found that while about 75 per cent offer some testing and vaccinations for these conditions and HIV, fewer then half do so routinely.
The study, published in the Medical Journal of Australia, also found only one-third offer these testing services routinely on site.

Saturday, June 10, 2006


KLEINMOND, South Africa - A South African inventor unveiled a new anti-rape female condom on Wednesday that hooks onto an attacker’s penis and aims to cut one of the highest rates of sexual assault in the world.
"Nothing has ever been done to help a woman so that she does not get raped and I thought it was high time," Sonette Ehlers, 57, said of the "rapex," a device worn like a tampon that has sparked controversy in a country used to daily reports of violent crime.
Police statistics show more than 50,000 rapes are reported every year, while experts say the real figure could be four times that as they say most rapes of acquaintances or children are never reported.
Ehlers said the "rapex" hooks onto the rapist’s skin, allowing the victim time to escape and helping to identify perpetrators.
"He will obviously be too pre-occupied at this stage," Ehlers told reporters in Kleinmond, a small village about 60 miles east of Cape Town. "I promise you he is going to be too sore. He will go straight to hospital."
The device, made of latex and held firm by shafts of sharp barbs, can only be removed from the man through surgery which will alert hospital staff, and ultimately, the police, she said.
It also reduces the chances of a woman falling pregnant or contracting AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases from the attacker by acting in the same way as a female condom.
South Africa has more people with HIV/AIDS than any other country, with one in nine of its 45 million population infected.
Ehlers, who showed off a prototype on Wednesday, said women had tried it for comfort and it had been tested on a plastic male model but not yet on a live man. Production was planned to start next year.
But the "rapex" has raised fears amongst anti-rape activists that it could escalate violence against women.
"If a victim is wearing such a device it may enrage the attacker further and possibly result in more harm being caused," said Sam Waterhouse, advocacy coordinator for Rape Crisis.
Other critics say the condom is medieval and barbaric — an accusation Ehlers says should be directed rather at the act of rape.
"This is not about vengeance ... but the deed, that is what I hate," she said.

Thursday, June 08, 2006


The nuclear debate has conveniently forgotten all the truths we uncovered in the sixties. Click on the title for a reminder. WE CANNOT INFLICT THIS ON HUMANITY FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS TO COME!

Monday, June 05, 2006


WA rejects nuclear power plant
From: AAP
June 04, 2006
A LIST of 14 possible sites for a nuclear power plant in Australia were a facade to soften up the West to accept a nuclear waste dump, the West Australian premier Alan Carpenter said today.
A submission to federal cabinet nine years ago reportedly lists a number of sites for a nuclear power plant.
The document was obtained by a Sydney newspaper.
"People would not only be surprised but stunned to learn that the federal cabinet considered possible sites ... without disclosing them to any state government," Mr Carpenter said today.
In a statement issued afterwards, Mr Carpenter said the leaked submission named sites in the electorate of O'Connor held by Wilson Tuckey, Brand held by Kim Beazley, Canning held by David Johnson and Pearse held by Judi Moylan.
Mr Carpenter says the document specifically mentions a site near Perth airport.
"People should wake up to what's happening around Australia, particularly in WA," said Mr Carpenter. "Only a few weeks ago, we had three prominent WA Liberal MPs supporting a nuclear waste dump in WA," he said.
"This is all a facade in the Howard Government's push to soften up West Australians for a nuclear waste dump."
Western Australia is obviously the target for waste disposal....... to be continued.

Saturday, May 27, 2006


When a 7 month old baby suffers a rape, surely it is time for swift and decisive action. Another talk fest isn't going to change a bloody thing!
  • Sack all the bludgers who have their snout in the trough. The co-ordinators, administrators, policy authors, pseudo academics, cultural consultants, social engineers, anthropologists, anyone at all from Canberra and absolutely everyone funded by a grant.
  • Totally prohibit spirits, wines and full strength beer on remote communities, substitute 'non sniffable' petrol for the present type of fuel.

Tuesday, May 23, 2006


At last Peter Garrett has found his voice! This man has vision and integrity. If he can survive the ethical washing machine that is Australian politics I predict greatness can come from Peter Garrett. To see clearly through the strategy of John Howard is no mean feat, but Garrett does just that with his criticism of Howards "Uranium Leasing" deal cooked up with USA and Canada. reported here:

Australians will remember Garrett as the spastic dancing front man of MIDNIGHT OIL, a raw, blatantly political rock band.

Wednesday, May 17, 2006


take a moment to reflect on events and ask yourself why.


They're MadeOut of Meat
From the collection Bears Discover Fire and Other Stories
by Terry Bisson
“They’re made out of meat.”
“Meat. They’re made out of meat.”
“There’s no doubt about it. We picked up several from different parts of the planet, took them aboard our recon vessels, and probed them all the way through. They’re completely meat.”
“That’s impossible. What about the radio signals? The messages to the stars?”
“They use the radio waves to talk, but the signals don’t come from them. The signals come from machines.”
“So who made the machines? That’s who we want to contact.”
“They made the machines. That’s what I’m trying to tell you. Meat made the machines.”
“That’s ridiculous. How can meat make a machine? You’re asking me to believe in sentient meat.”
“I’m not asking you, I’m telling you. These creatures are the only sentient race in that sector and they’re made out of meat.”
“Maybe they’re like the orfolei. You know, a carbon-based intelligence that goes through a meat stage.”
“Nope. They’re born meat and they die meat. We studied them for several of their life spans, which didn’t take long. Do you have any idea what’s the life span of meat?”
“Spare me. Okay, maybe they’re only part meat. You know, like the weddilei. A meat head with an electron plasma brain inside.”
“Nope. We thought of that, since they do have meat heads, like the weddilei. But I told you, we probed them. They’re meat all the way through.”
“No brain?”
“Oh, there’s a brain all right. It’s just that the brain is made out of meat! That’s what I’ve been trying to tell you.”
“So . . . what does the thinking?”
“You’re not understanding, are you? You’re refusing to deal with what I’m telling you. The brain does the thinking. The meat.”
“Thinking meat! You’re asking me to believe in thinking meat!”
“Yes, thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The meat is the whole deal! Are you beginning to get the picture or do I have to start all over?”
“Omigod. You’re serious then. They’re made out of meat.”
“Thank you. Finally. Yes. They are indeed made out of meat. And they’ve been trying to get in touch with us for almost a hundred of their years.”
“Omigod. So what does this meat have in mind?”
“First it wants to talk to us. Then I imagine it wants to explore the Universe, contact other sentiences, swap ideas and information. The usual.”
“We’re supposed to talk to meat.”
“That’s the idea. That’s the message they’re sending out by radio. ‘Hello. Anyone out there? Anybody home?’ That sort of thing.”
“They actually do talk, then. They use words, ideas, concepts?”
“Oh, yes. Except they do it with meat.”
“I thought you just told me they used radio.”
“They do, but what do you think is on the radio? Meat sounds. You know how when you slap or flap meat, it makes a noise? They talk by flapping their meat at each other. They can even sing by squirting air through their meat.”
“Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much. So what do you advise?”
“Officially or unofficially?”
“Officially, we are required to contact, welcome, and log in any and all sentient races or multibeings in this quadrant of the Universe, without prejudice, fear, or favor. Unofficially, I advise that we erase the records and forget the whole thing.”
“I was hoping you would say that.”
“It seems harsh, but there is a limit. Do we really want to make contact with meat?”
“I agree one hundred percent. What’s there to say? ‘Hello, meat. How’s it going?’ But will this work? How many planets are we dealing with here?”
“Just one. They can travel to other planets in special meat containers, but they can’t live on them. And being meat, they can only travel through C space. Which limits them to the speed of light and makes the possibility of their ever making contact pretty slim. Infinitesimal, in fact.”
“So we just pretend there’s no one home in the Universe.”
“That’s it.”
“Cruel. But you said it yourself, who wants to meet meat? And the ones who have been aboard our vessels, the ones you probed? You’re sure they won’t remember?”
“They’ll be considered crackpots if they do. We went into their heads and smoothed out their meat so that we’re just a dream to them.”
“A dream to meat! How strangely appropriate, that we should be meat’s dream.”
“And we marked the entire sector unoccupied.”
“Good. Agreed, officially and unofficially. Case closed. Any others? Anyone interesting on that side of the galaxy?”
“Yes, a rather shy but sweet hydrogen-core cluster intelligence in a class-nine star in G445 zone was in contact two galactic rotations ago, wants to be friendly again.”
“They always come around.”
“And why not? Imagine how unbearably, how unutterably cold the Universe would be if one were all alone . . . ”

Monday, May 15, 2006


AUSTRALIA could be used as a global waste dump for spent nuclear fuel as part of a worldwide push to increase the use of nuclear power. Nuclear leasing, as proposed by the US President, would allow the sale of uranium to countries that have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. But they would have to use the uranium for power plants and return spent nuclear fuel.
How low can these bastards sink? What price will humanity pay for todays short sighted greed? The plans are in place to control the entire energy economy.

In a recent, exclusive interview with The Sunday Age, Treasurer Peter Costello said nuclear energy was a safe, environmentally friendly option for Australia (Australia as waste dump) (leasing uranium)

The daily newspaper, the Australian, had reported that a meeting of senior officials in New Delhi last week discussed how Canberra might be able to reconsider selling uranium to India if New Delhi offered security guarantees and agreed to allow inspections of its nuclear facilities.,20867,19136513-30417,00.html be continued.

Friday, April 28, 2006


Peter Carlisle writes:When I heard about Jacob Kovko's death I was at first suspicious – how the hell could anyone shoot themselves while cleaning an Steyr (standard issue rifle used by Aust army). Made no sense whatsoever – almost impossible error to make especially after years of regular intensive training good habits and as a sergeant he'd be training both his subordinates and superiors. So I started to imagine potential suicide. Now I hear pistol and I remember training on the Browning (WWII vintage by the way) and thinking at the time "holy sh*t I never want to have to use this in operations – so easy to accidentally shoot someone". Any short muzzle weapon is inherently more risky, however the Browning has the most appalling safety catch imaginable, and the training/familiarity soldiers get? F*ck all in comparison. If they're still using Brownings (and I wouldn't be at all surprised) then Dept of Defence is culpable in my opinion – plenty of easier to use (safer) pistols available only, oops, more expensive
FROM crikey
A few hours later the military situation worsened. Speaking on the Alan Jones radio program, the Defence Minister revealed that Private Kovco did not die from a gunshot injury sustained while "maintaining his weapon" – the official reason given by Defence after his death last Friday. "He wasn't in fact cleaning his weapon," Dr Nelson told Jones. "It was near him in his vicinity and he made some kind of movement which suggests that it discharged. There was obviously a live round in it which there should not have been and that's as much as I should probably say at the moment

The Federal Government and the military maintain the two soldiers in the room with Private Kovco at the time did not see the weapon discharge.
A former soldier with experience in Iraq said the standard gun-handling procedure for Defence personnel on deployment involved discharging all weapons and removing the ammunition magazines upon entering the perimeter of a fortified barracks.

Wednesday, April 26, 2006


Most dangerous addictions are somewhat self limiting. I mean, take too much smack, your breathing stops, take too much speed, your heart stops or your brain makes you do risky things, drink too much, you fall over and go to sleep, eat too much, people laugh at you and call you american.
PALTALK is another matter. addictive for sure, damaging, no doubt, but the LIMITING factor is missing. Let's face it, if we spend long enough on PALTALK to be "regulars" then we are already addicted. just as surely as in a shooting gallery, PALTALKERS find a camaraderie among fellow addicts, and reinforce each others addiction with enabling strategies like acceptance, praise and AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH!

Sunday, April 23, 2006


Troops at Anzac taking a short break from the front line to chat. Chatting was not "having a yarn" although it is possible that that is the way the term started. Chatting was searching through your clothes to find and kill the chats, small lice like insects that infected everyone at Anzac and many in France/Flanders.


Australians have been dying for other countries causes since the beginning. We went from FOR KING AND COUNTRY to ALL FOR EMPIRE to ALL THE WAY WITH L.B.J..... (shudder).

Australia has sacrificed the flower of it's youth for other nations "Noble Causes" throughout it's history.
The ANZAC legend is painted in blood. The sacrifice was immense, 64.8% of Australians, and 58.4% of New Zealanders that sailed off to WW1 (The 'great' war, to end all wars) didn't come home.
Worthy sons of the empire, we may be, but we have paid a terrible price. Imagine where Australia would be today if the cream of our manhood had been at home, building our own nation?

The recent tragedy of Jacob Kovko dying of a gunshot wound to the head in a barracks in Iraq is a sickening blow to Australians.

At a time when most thinking Australians are alarmed at our continued participation in a war of aggression based on LIES, and a case being built to invade Iran with strategic nukes, the death of Kovko should give pause to those supporting John Winston Howard and his infatuation with Bush and the P.N.A.C. ambitions of world military intimidation.

Saturday, April 22, 2006


Concerns over veterans' orange Anzac protest
The Returned and Services League (RSL) is concerned about a protest which could see some veterans wear orange during next week's Anzac Day marches.
The protest is being stirred up by veterans of several conflicts who say they have been abandoned by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Paul Dignan says a departmental psychological evaluation has diagnosed him with chronic combat post traumatic stress disorder directly related to his service in East Timor.
But he says for the past 10 months the Department has refused to either accept the report or his claim for compensation.
Mr Dignan says the protesters will march as normal on Anzac Day, wearing something orange.
"The veterans who are allowed to march will simply march wearing an orange armband," he said.
"Some may prefer to wear an orange baseball cap type of thing and we will march with our units as we have done for years."
But the the RSL's South Australian president Jock Statton says Anzac Day is an inappropriate time for the protest.
"I believe the only reason they are doing it is because they haven't got enough support to make their demonstration stand out," he said.
"They are taking the opportunity of when Australians really feel for veterans to put across their point."
But Mr Dignan disagrees he says the orange protest is a responsibility.
"Not just a right, we have a responsibility to protest on Anzac Day. A responsibility as Australians this is not right and it's not fair," he said

Wednesday, April 19, 2006


by Alexander Downer (11 April 2006, to the Cole Inquiry) In order of utterance.
It could have been It may have been I don't specifically recall I can't precisely remember I don't recall I don't recall I couldn't rule out It is possible I don't know I'm not sure I have only a very distant recollection I don't recall I don't think I did I'm pretty sure I didn't make a note I don't recall I could have done I don't recall it I don't recall I simply do not recall
I would have made a note of it and been quite focused I might have turned out to be wrong I don't recall I don't recall I don't recall I don't recall I wouldn't use that language I don't remember precisely It didn't mean anything to me It doesn't mean anything to me I wouldn't recognise him Nothing at all I don't read the summaries unless I'm stuck on a plane I have no idea I have no idea I can't recall I gave no such direction I don't recall I didn't make any notes I just don't recall I can't answer that question I can't recall my state of mindI don't recall I simply do not recall I do not recall I can't quite find the place I don't recall I simply do not recall I don't recall I don't recall I don't recall I'd have to reflect on thatI don't recall I don't recall I'm not sure I don't know I don't recall It is sketchy very sketchy I can't tell you I wasn't aware There is so much intelligence It's a very major challenge to deal with intelligence I have no recollection of it I just can't recall it at all I have no recollection I have no recollection Information flows appear to be very imperfect I was not awareI don't know I don't know I can't recall I'm not aware I can't recall I don't know I don't recall I assumed I don't recall We had no knowledge I can't specifically recall I can't recallI just can't specifically recall It's very difficult to recall I'm not sure that I'm not sure I wasn't sure I can't specifically recall I don't recall I don't know I can't say I just don't knowI don't have any specific recollection I'm not aware I wasn't aware I had no knowledge I wasn't aware I wasn't aware I wasn't aware I just can't recall.


PHILOSOPHY AT A GLANCE: Now you don't have to pretend to know, in a few clicks you can get an overview of certain philosophers from history.

Monday, April 17, 2006



I splashed this link to a parody of racism into PALTALK. and you know what? Some of them got huffy and offended! THEY DIDN'T GET THAT IT WAS A PARODY! That tells me that you can't exaggerate the racism in America, it's as bad as you can imagine.

Saturday, April 08, 2006


You can trim the eyebrows; you can cap the teeth; you can cut the hair; you can put on different glasses; you can give him a ewe's milk facial, for all I care; but, to paraphrase a gritty Australian saying, `Same stuff, different bucket.' In the pantheon of chinless blue bloods and suburban accountants that makes up the Australian Liberal Party, this bloke is truly one out of the box. You have to go back to Billy McMahon to find a Prime Minister who even approaches this one for petulance, pettiness and sheer grinding inadequacy .
John Howard has always been proud to call himself a conservative. The problem I think is that he has confused this with preservative. He probably wishes good old Ming had dosed the country with formaldehyde when he had the chance. Because it all started going wrong in the late 1960s. Here is a man who lived at home until he was 32. You can imagine what he was like. Here were young Australians demonstrating against the Vietnam War, listening to the Doors, driving their tie-died kombi vans, and what was John Howard doing? He was at home with mum, wearing his shorts and long white socks, listening to Pat Boone albums and waiting for the Saturday night church dance.

Saturday, March 11, 2006


Poem by Mr VajPayee PRIME MINISTER of INDIA Sometimes at night, Suddenly, sleep deserts me, My eyes open, I begin to ponder Those scientists who invented nuclear weapons, On hearing the gruesome human destruction, Of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, How did they ever sleep at night
Those whose invention, Created the ultimate weapon... Do they even for a moment, Feel what was inflicted by them, Was monstrous? If they do then time will not put them in the dock, But if they don't, Then history will never, Ever forgive them.


THE SEDUCTION OF INDIA - beware fools playing geopolitics. The world's biggest and most dangerous game is being played by the United States in India - and there's a reasonable suspicion that at least half the players are fools. The United States' hypocritical nuclear deal signed yesterday is just one step in a plan to promote India as America's proxy against both Islam and China, a role fraught with danger for absolutely everyone. The cornerstone of real politick is "my enemy's enemy is my friend" - and thus the Bush administration is desperate to befriend India. The great danger is that the Republicans' Washington will promote an adversarial role for India against America's great foes. Left to its own devices, if not its prejudices, India (and the world) would have a better future if the two most populous nations and the second and third most populous religions pursued non-adversarial co-operation and friendship. That is a very difficult hope, but the last thing the world needs is the born-again neo-cons whipping up and supporting age-old rivalries. The United States' unnatural ally of convenience, Pakistan, of course wants the same civilian nuclear deal. Neither India nor Pakistan has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Bush is breaking the nuclear club's own rules in a bid to make up for the cold shoulder shown to India throughout the Cold War, but doing the same thing for Pakistan is much harder.What worries the US most is that its alliance with Pakistan is based on a military dictatorship remaining in control of an unstable Islamic nation that is at best ambivalent about the US. For all of Washington's bluster, it knows that an Islamic nation it doesn't really trust already has the bomb. The United States tried but failed to entice India to join its Iraq adventure. If you want something really big to worry about instead of our piddly local politics, consider that eventually the Americans will happily promote whatever forces within India might be interested in fighting its wars for it and garrisoning the Middle East. What India's leadership must be extremely wary of is the inevitable American courtship of India's military. The seduction can be powerful. Already, the money markets are assisting - the Indian stock market hit a record on the signing of the nuclear deal.
Australia will do its little bit for American policy as usual - John Howard is off to New Delhi next week. The trip is about trade, but Malaysian media interestingly homes in on the "strategic" angle: "Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who will embark on a four-day visit to India next week, has said that 'more energy' needed to be put into bilateral ties for 'general strategic reasons'."

Sunday, March 05, 2006


Top school officials will huddle privately this morning to discuss a classroom war crimes "trial"of President Bush at Parsippany High School that suddenly is drawing national attention. The school board's president, Robert Perlett, said the 8:30 a.m. meeting was called by mutual agreement on Thursday as the uproar surrounding the mock tribunal escalated on the Internet and talk radio Bush is being tried for alleged "crimes against civilian populations"and "inhumane treatment of prisoners,"


Nothing Bennish said is untrue. The outrage at this recording is a manufactured propaganda campaign. Probably engineered to intimidate teachers into taking a Pro Bush (PNAC) line. This is social engineering on a grand scale, where the mass delusion overwhelms the truth. I am hoping it backfires, and becomes the catalyst for truth in education.... Go to this link To read the Official Statement, in particular the steps they intend to take. (Including the chilling item 5. Use this as an opportunity to ensure that all staff understand and comply with district policy and expectations regarding balanced presentations on sensitive subject matter) At that link you will also find the audio of what Jay Bemish said. below is a transcript.
Bennish: [tape begins with class already underway. Bennish completing an unintelligble statement about Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez.] Why do we have troops in Colombia fighting in their civil war for over 30 years. Most Americans don't even know this. For over 30 years, America has had soldiers fighting in Colombia in a civil war. Why are we fumigating coca crops in Bolivia and Peru if we're not trying to control other parts of the world. Who buys cocaine? Not Bolivians. Not Peruvians. Americans! Ok. Why are we destroying the farmers' lives when we're the ones that consume that good.
Can you imagine? What is the world's number one single cause of death by a drug? What drug is responsible for the most deaths in the world? Cigarettes! Who is the world's largest producer of cigarettes and tobacco? The United States!
What part of our country grows all our tobacco? Anyone know what states in particular? Mostly what's called North Carolina. Alright. That's where all the cigarette capitals are. That's where a lot of them are located from. Now if we have the right to fly to Bolivia or Peru and drop chemical weapons on top of farmers' fields because we're afraid they might be growing coca and that could be turned into cocaine and sold to us, well then don't the Peruvians and the Iranians and the Chinese have the right to invade America and drop chemical weapons over North Carolina to destroy the tobacco plants that are killing millions and millions of people in their countries every year and causing them billions of dollars in health care costs?
Make sure you get these definitions down.
Capitalism: If you don't understand the economic system of capitalism, you don't understand the world in which we live. Ok. Economic system in which all or most of the means of production, etc., are owned privately and operated in a somewhat competitive environment for the purpose of producing PROFIT! Of course, you can shorten these definitions down. Make sure you get the gist of it. Do you see how when, you know, when you're looking at this definition, where does it say anything about capitalism is an economic system that will provide everyone in the world with the basic needs that they need? Is that a part of this system? Do you see how this economic system is at odds with humanity? At odds with caring and compassion? It's at odds with human rights.
Anytime you have a system that is designed to procure profit, when profit is the bottom motive -- money -- that means money is going to become more important potentially than what? Safety, human lives, etc.
Why did we invade Iraq?! How do we know that the invasion of Iraq for weapons of mass destruction-- even if weapons had been found, how would you have known, how could you prove--that that was not a real reason for us to go there.
There are dozens upon dozens of countries that have weapons of mass destruction. Iraq is one of dozens. There are plenty of countries that are controlled by dictators, where people have no freedom, where they have weapons of mass destruction and they could be potentially threatening to America. We're not invading any of those countries!
I'll give you guys another minute or two to get some of these [definitions] down. I agree with Joey. Try to condense these a little bit. I took these straight out of the dictionary.
Anyone in here watch any of Mr. Bush's [State of the Union] speech last night? I'm gonna talk a little about some of things he had to say.
...One of things that I'll bring up now, since some of you are still writing, is, you know, Condoleezza Rice said this the other day and George Bush reiterated it last night. And the implication was that the solution to the violence in the Middle East is democratization. And the implication through his language was that democracies don't go to war. Democracies aren't violent. Democracies won't want weapons of mass destruction. This is called blind, naive faith in democracy!
Who is probably the single most violent nation on planet Earth?!
Unidentified brainwashed student interjects: We are.
The United States of America! And we're a democracy. Quote-unquote.
Who has the most weapons of mass destruction in the world? The United States.
Who's continuing to develop new weapons of mass destruction as we speak?!The United States.
So, why does Mr. Bush think that other countries that are democracies won't wanna be like us? Why does he think they'll just wanna be at peace with each other?! What makes him think that when the Palestinians get their own state that they won't wanna preemptively invade Israel to eliminate a potential threat to their security just like we supposedly did in Iraq?! Do you see the dangerous precedent that we have set by illegally invading another country and violating their sovereignty in the name of protecting us against a potential future--sorry--attack? [Unintelligible.]
Why doesn't Mexico invade Guatemala? Maybe they're scared of being attacked. Ok. Why doesn't North Korea invade South Korea?! They might be afraid of being attacked. Or maybe Iran and North Korea and Saudi Arabia and what else did he add to the list last night - and Zimbabwe - maybe they're all gonna team up and try and invade us because they're afraid we might invade them. I mean, where does this cycle of violence end? You know?
This whole "do as I say, not as I do" thing. That doesn't work. What was so important about President Bush's speech last night--and it doesn't matter if it was President Clinton still it would just as important) is that it's not just a speech to America. But who? The whole world! It's very obvious that if you listen to his language, if you listen to his body language, and if you paid attention to what he was saying, he wasn't always just talking to us. He was talking to the whole planet. Addressing the whole planet!
He started off his speech talking about how America should be the country that dominates the world. That we have been blessed essentially by God to have the most civilized, most advanced, best system and that it is our duty as Americans to use the military to go out into the world and make the whole world like us.
Sounds a lot like the things that Adolf Hitler use to say.
We're the only ones who are right. Everyone else is backwards. And it's our job to conquer the world and make sure they live just like we want them to.
Now, I'm not saying that Bush and Hitler are exactly the same. Obviously, they are not. Ok. But there are some eerie similarities to the tones that they use. Very, very "ethnocentric." We're right. You're all wrong.
I just keep waiting. You know, at some point I think America and Mexico might go to war again. You know. Anytime Mexico plays the USA in a soccer match. What can be heard chanting all game long?
Do all Mexicans dislike the United States? No. Do all Americans dislike Mexico? No. But there's a lot of resentment--not just in Mexico, but across the whole world--towards America right now.
We told--Condoleezza Rice said--that now that Hamas got elected to lead the Palestianians that they have to renounce their desire to eliminate Israel. And then Condoleezza Rice also went on to say that you can't be for peace and support armed struggle at the same time. You can't do that. Either you're for peace or war. But you can't be for both.
What is the problem with her saying this? That's the same thing we say. That is exactly the same thing this current administration says. We're gonna make the world safe by invading and killing and making war. So, if we can be for peace and for war, well, why can't the Palestinians be for peace and for war?!
*Student Sean Allen, who is taping Bennish's rant, speaks up:*
Allen: Isn't there a difference of, of, having Hamas being like, we wanna attack Israelis because they're Israelis, and having us say we want to attack people who are known terrorists? Isn't there a difference between saying we're going to attack innocents and we're going to attack people who are not innocent?
Bennish: I think that's a good point. But you have to remember who's doing the defining of a terrorist. And what is a terrorist?
Allen: Well, when people attack us on our own soil and are actually attempting to take American lives and want to take American lives, whereas, Israelies in this situation, aren't saying we want to blow up Palestine...
Bennish: How did Israel and the modern Israeli state even come into existence in the first place?
Allen: We gave it to them.
Bennish: Sort of. Why? After the Israel-Zionist movement conducted what? Terrorist acts. They assassinated the British prime minster in Palestine. They blew up buildings. They stole military equipment. Assassinated hundreds of people. Car bombings, you name it. That's how the modern state of Israel was made. Was through violence and terrorism. Eventually we did allow them to have the land. Why? Not because we really care, but because we wanted a strategic ally. We saw a way to us to get a hook into the Middle East.
If we create a modern nation of Israel, then, and we make them dependent on us for military aid and financial aid, then we can control a part of the Middle East. We will have a country in the Middle East that will be indebted to us.
Allen: But is it ok to say it's just to attack Israel? If it's ok to attack known terrorists, it's ok to attack Israel?
Bennish: If you were Palestinians, who are the real terrorists? The Israelis, who fire missiles that they purchased from the United States government into Palestinian neighborhoods and refugees and maybe kill a terrorist, but also kill innocent women and children. And when you shoot a missile into Pakistan to quote-unquote kill a known terrorist, and we just killed 75 people that have nothing to do with al Qaeda, as far as they're concerned, we're the terrorists. We've attacked them on their soil with the intention of killing their innocent people.
Allen: But we did not have the intention of killing innocent people. We had the intention of killing an al Qaeda terrorist.
Bennish: Do you know that?
Allen: So, you're saying the United States has intentions to kill innocent people?
Bennish: I don't know the answer to that question.
Allen: But what gain do we get from killing innocent people in the Middle East? What gain does that pose to us?
Bennish: Let me ask you this. During the 1980s, Iran and Iraq were involved in an 8-year-long war. The United States sold missiles, tanks, guns, planes, to which side?
Unidentified student: Iraq?
Bennish: Both. The answer is both. Why would we send armaments to two sides that are fighting each other. That seems to be self-defeating. Don't we want one side to win? Not always! Sometimes you just want there to be conflict!
The British -- this is one of the grand strategies of the British imperial system--was to play local animosities off each other. To prevent them is to divide and conquer.
Do we really want the Middle East to unite as one cohesive political and cultural body?
No! Because then they could what? Threaten our supremacy.
We want to keep the world divided. Do we really want to kill innocent people? I don't know. I don't know the answer to that.
I know there are some Americans who do. People who work in the CIA. People who have to think like that. Those kind of dirty minds, dirty tricks. That's how the intelligence world works. Sometimes you do want to kill people just for the sake of killing them. Right?
Listen, between the years 1960 and 1962, the United States through the CIA conducted over 7,000 terrorist sabotage attacks against the small island nation of Cuba. Over 7,000 terrorist attacks were waged against just one little country called Cuba in a two year period, intentionally, let me rephrase that, intentionally blowing up medical supplies, intentionally burning down crops that feed their country, thereby creating starvation, right? Intentionally trying to make that system collapse. And we're willing to expend however many thousands of people died because we just want to get rid of Castro. And the sad reality is that there are some policy planners who are willing to let people die in order to achieve their objectives.
Now, do I think President Bush says 'I'd like to go kill some innocent Palestianians?' I don't think he thinks like that. But I also know that he's not the only one making decisions. I also know that after September 11, President Bush got on TV and he said, 'You will feel our wrath. You will feel the full force of the United States military. There will be paybacks.' He said it again last night. He said, 'We've killed a lot of top-ranking al Qaeda members. And for those who aren't killed yet, you're day will come!' Right? That kind of language to me is very obvious.
And when you go trying to kill one particular type of person, you know that you're gonna kill other people, too. And let me ask you this...
Allen: Later in that, he stated that he's [Osama bin Laden] trying to kill innocents...
Bennish: I understand that, but hold on, you have to understand something, that when al Qaeda attacked America on September 11, in their view, they're not attacking innocent people. Ok. The CIA has an office at the World Trade Center. The Pentagon is a military target. The White House was a military target. Congress is a military target. The World Trade Center is the economic center of our entire economy.
The FBI, who tracks down terrorists and so on and so forth around the world, has offices in the World Trade Center. Some of the companies that work in the World Trade Center are these huge multinational corporations that are directly involved in the military-industrial complex in supporting corrupt dictatorships in the Middle East.
And so in the minds of al Qaeda, they're not attacking innocent people. They're attacking legitimate targets. People who have blood on their hands as far as they're concerned!
We portray them as innocent because they're our friends and neighbors, family, loved ones. One of my best friends from high school, elementary school, and birth, lives in lower Manhattan. You know, he was right there, he was four blocks away from it. So, anytime it comes close to home, you begin to see things differently.
In no way am I implying, I don't know, you got to figure this stuff out for yourself, but I want you to think about these things--you know, think about this right here. [Apparently pointing to American flag.] Here's the real homeland security. Fighting terrorism since 1492! Ok. I mean, to many Native Americans, that flag is no different than the Nazi flag or the Confederate flag. It represents the people that came and stole their land, lied, brought disease, rape, pillage, destruction, etc. So it all depends upon varying people's perspectivesvarying. And of course, we're going to see ourselves as being in the right , at least the majority of us, because that's us.
Allen: But we were the ones that were attacked first. On September 11, 2001, we were the ones that were attacked. We were not attacking anybody until that point. Then we said ok, we're going into Afghanistan. Then we said ok, the Iraqi government has ties with al Qaeda. We're going to go into Iraq. We were the ones that were attacked.
Bennish: In actuality, if you remember back to my first day, the Sept. 11 attacks were, according to bin Laden, a direct response to our 1) support of the nation of Israel, which they consider to be a terrorist regime that does not have the right to control the land that the Palestinians lived on for over 1,500 years, and they also did it because of what George Clinton did--Bill Clinton, not George Clinton, they had a little documentary on him on PBS last night I was watching--Bill Clinton, when he launched the missile attacks into Afghanistan and Sudan and killed thousands of innocent Africans and Afghanistan people - Afghanis - that had nothing to do with al Qaeda or anything. In fact, in sudan, he blew up the country's largest pharmaceutical plant, which was producing medicines, alright, um, you know, that's as far as, in their eyes, that was retaliation for those attacks.
And so this whole idea of who attacked who first, how far back in time do you wanna go!? This is the whole thing with the Arab-Israeli conflict. Well, who was there first? Well, if you believe the Bible, you say, well, God gave the land of Canaan to the Israelites. But who was in that land when they got there? The Canaanites, who some archeologists would argue are the ancient descendants of the Palestinians. You know.
Other archeologists say the Hebrews didn't really come from Egypt. They were actually a group of Canaanites who decided they didn't like the other Canaanites and developed this story afterward to justify how they killed all their neighborsand took over the land.
Alright, and so this becomes very, very muddled. And I'm not in any way implying that you should agree with me. I don't even know if I'm necessarily taking a position. But what I'm trying to get you to do is to think, right, about these issues more in-depth, you know, and not just take things from the surface. And I'm glad you asked all your questions, because they're very good, legitimate questions. And hopefully that allows other people to begin to think about some of those things, too. (transcript lifted from MichelleMalkin)

Wednesday, February 01, 2006


Breeding can be a lot of fun. I did some myself as a younger man, however I am referring to AXYLOTLS, also called MEXICAN WALKING FISH, and MUD PUPPIES. It's mostly hard work, I mean aside from admiring them for what they are, and what they can offer, they aren't as much fun as , say, a puppy ...... AXYLOTL may contain the secret of eternal youth.
The Axolotl is a fascinating creature for a number of reasons, including its grotesque appearance, its ability to regenerate, and primarily the fact that it exhibits the phenomenon known as neoteny. Ordinarily, amphibians undergo metamorphosis from egg to larva (the tadpole in frogs is a larva), and finally to adult form. The Axolotl, along with a number of other amphibians, remains in its larval form throughout its life. It grows much larger than a normal larval salamander, and it reaches sexual maturity in this larval stage.the axolotl is fully capable of complete limb re-growth. The animal has the added scientific attraction of having especially large embryos, making it easier to deal with under laboratory conditions. Its embryo is also very robust, and can be spliced and combined with different parts of other axolotl embryos with a high degree of success.

Wednesday, January 18, 2006


By the time this toddler reaches adulthood, The world will be radically different. China is ALREADY radically different. In a social experiment on a grand scale, the "one child policy" coupled with the undesireability of having girl babies has created an artificial demographic..... An entire generation (mostly boys) has been spoiled rotten by doting parents. An avalanche of affluence is about engulf China with all the problems that means for the rest of the planet.
Chinas economy is far bigger than previously estimated. New figures suggested it had probably passed France, Italy and Britain to become the world's fourth-largest economy. China revised its economic data Tuesday (DEC 20 2005) after a yearlong nationwide economic census uncovered about $280 billion in hidden economic output in China for 2004. The amount is roughly equivalent to an economy the size of Turkey or Indonesia, or 40 percent of India's economy.
Economists say there is little doubt now that China is a full-fledged economic superpower.China has also been accumulating foreign currency reserves at a very high rate over the past few years. By the end of 2006 China could have ONE TRILLION in foreign currency reserves, much of it in US TREASURY NOTES! Other experts are moving forward their forecasts of when China might overtake the United States as the world's largest economy. Some have advanced their estimation to about 2035, from 2040.


ALEXANDER DOWNER, Australias foreign Minister in fishnet stockings, the work experience kid, is caught out in another example of incompetence and corruption. The Australian Wheat Board, which is a privatised ex-government exporter, was funneling kick-backs to Saddam in the form of inflated "transport costs" This should come as no surprise, it's the way everyone was doing business. After Iraq was invaded, Australias wheat sales contracts were coveted by USA (some allies) I surmise that Australia simply out-bribed USA for what was our rightful market anyway.