|
2013
Jan 17, 2013 8:27:16 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 17, 2013 8:27:16 GMT 10
Well, obama's released his gun control shopping list. It's a typical product of US politics - not so much what needs to be done, as what probably can be done.
Personally, I think he should have just commerce-claused the hell of out of the problem. Possession, ownership and transfer of any firearm should have required registration, notification and background checks. Give the public a year's notice, then after that - if you're caught with a gun that isn't registered, that's a federal crime. If you give or sell a gun to somebody without a background check and notification, that's a federal crime. Both of those would have been legal under the 2008 supreme court ruling (as far as I understand it). That would have been simple. Give it a decade to work, and then they can meaningfully talk about whether untrained, undisciplined bozos who couldn't pass muster on meth are really "the militia" just because they have a semi-auto bang stick with a "don't tread on me" sticker on the stock.
Obama's allocated 15 million for programs to identify The Wrong People. That'll sure go a long way - it'll probably cover the stationery. I think we can safely assume that wasn't something he thought was a winner.
Also not something he wanted to fully support was police in schools. He's supporting 1000 more resource officers - basically doubling what was already available. To give some idea, there are about 80,000 schools in the US which currently have no official armed presence. Giving them each a single "resource officer" (I checked, and the going salary is currently about $50k) would cost 4 billion, at least (and then some), and would give each school ONE person with a gun. One. Columbine had one of those - he was on his break. One of the recent school shootings, there was one of those, he was snowed in. I think the level protection of one guy in a whole school has been amply demonstrated. The quaker school that teaches obama's kids has an armed guard on every entry. 7 on duty at any time. That's what would be required to be effective. Obama's funding 1000 - that says how effective he thinks that'll be (and I agree).
But the rest of the plan makes sense. It's just a bit patchwork - and that, I guess, is how america works.
|
|
|
2013
Jan 17, 2013 12:42:56 GMT 10
Post by angra on Jan 17, 2013 12:42:56 GMT 10
The NRA ad against Obama's proposals is pretty despicable. Using his kids to suggest that he's an elitist hypocrite because they have an armed security detail. He's the US President for God's sake!
"1 Successful assassinations
1.1 Abraham Lincoln 1.2 James A. Garfield 1.3 William McKinley 1.4 John F. Kennedy
2 Failed assassination attempts
2.1 Andrew Jackson 2.2 Abraham Lincoln 2.3 Theodore Roosevelt 2.4 Herbert Hoover 2.5 Franklin D. Roosevelt 2.6 Harry S. Truman 2.7 John F. Kennedy 2.8 Richard Nixon 2.9 Gerald Ford 2.10 Jimmy Carter 2.11 Ronald Reagan 2.12 George H. W. Bush 2.13 Bill Clinton 2.14 George W. Bush 2.15 Barack Obama
3 Presidential deaths rumored to be assassinations
3.1 Zachary Taylor 3.2 Warren G. Harding"
I'd be pretty shocked if even Gillard didn't have armed security personnel somewhere in the background.
But to use this as an argument against the mildest of public gun control proposals is pretty low.
I give up on ever understanding the Yanks and their obsession with guns. Shooting presidents seems to something of a hobby with US rightist nut-jobs.
|
|
|
2013
Jan 17, 2013 13:26:40 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 17, 2013 13:26:40 GMT 10
This is just infuriating pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/01/16/guns-accounted-for-less-than-one-percent-of-all-deaths-in-2011Just a pack of lies. They've used only preliminary homicide data for the year 2011 and claimed that it represents all gun-related deaths in 2011. Ack! The real number is closer to 32,000, and it results in 1.28% of all deaths in 2011 being gun-related. If they'd actually got the numbers right, I doubt if anyone would have even published that story. But if you just lie a bit, it's worth claiming!
|
|
|
2013
Jan 19, 2013 13:44:10 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 19, 2013 13:44:10 GMT 10
I've just posted this to the "contact us - editorial" site on PJM. I'm not really expecting a response, buy you never know.
Me: Matthew aka "Techno" Email: xxx Subject: Why have I been banned?
Howdy.
I can't post any comments to PJM. It appears to be based on IP address - it doesn't seem to matter what name or email address I use.
I don't believe that I've been "trolling" at all, although I have been fairly robustly disagreeing with the premise of a few articles, particularly a few about gun policy.
I haven't been posting under more than one name/email, I haven't been abusive in any way, I haven't suggested or linked to anything illegal, or misrepresented me or anyone else. As far as I can tell, I haven't breached any of the terms of use at all. I've just disagreed, and I believe that's all I've done.
Now, it's PJM's right to block anyone it wants to. In this case, I'm just baffled as to why - it appears to me as though I've been banned simply for not toeing the website line. I think that's ironic, when PJM criticises other media outlets for doing the same thing.
I'd just like to know what the reason is.
Thanks. Matt.
|
|
|
2013
Jan 20, 2013 12:51:12 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 20, 2013 12:51:12 GMT 10
I've been listening to some of these while I clean up the crud around the house. backstoryradio.org/They're really good. The one about drugs is a ripper, the one about disease is even better. I've just hit play on the one about domestic terror.
|
|
|
2013
Jan 21, 2013 9:51:35 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 21, 2013 9:51:35 GMT 10
Ok, who reckons the coverage of this story is going to be balanced, evidence-based, sensible ... www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-21/student-debt-climbs-to-record-26-billion/4473386The Grattan Institute report has found current and former students have accumulated Higher Education Loan Program (HELP) debts of $26.3 billion, up almost $10 billion since 2007.
The report estimates that of that figure, $6.2 billion is never expected to be paid back.
|
|
|
2013
Jan 21, 2013 11:07:19 GMT 10
Post by angra on Jan 21, 2013 11:07:19 GMT 10
|
|
|
2013
Jan 21, 2013 12:27:22 GMT 10
Post by angra on Jan 21, 2013 12:27:22 GMT 10
Removed after some legal advice.
|
|
|
2013
Jan 21, 2013 19:41:45 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 21, 2013 19:41:45 GMT 10
"Removed after some legal advice"
Oh dear.
|
|
|
2013
Jan 21, 2013 20:04:29 GMT 10
Post by angra on Jan 21, 2013 20:04:29 GMT 10
Yes. The story is about a private Boeing 737 which arrived at Jacksons airport, at Port Moresby last Thursday, without CAA permission or knowledge.
It carried merely two passengers and some bags of unknown stuff. The passengers who are of Vietnamese descent but with diplomatic passports from Vanuatu, are known to Interpol. They met with various Government ministers, and were cleared to leave PNG without proper civil aviation and customs checks.
It is said to be a charter jet from the UK which came to PNG from Mali via the Maldives.
Make of this what you will. I had posted more stuff, but was advised against it.
Try Google.
|
|
|
2013
Jan 22, 2013 20:40:16 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 22, 2013 20:40:16 GMT 10
This is just nasty www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/life-on-the-pension-is-a-riot-for-omar/story-e6freuy9-1226558635258And the oz is in on it too (is this really a national story? Oh, I forgot - tabloid) www.theaustralian.com.au/news/life-on-the-pension-is-a-riot-for-omar/story-e6frg6n6-1226558635258Basically, what we have is a kid who did something stupid and broke the window on a police car. According to the coverage, it appears that he paid for it. He goes to court - a first time offender, apparently showing remorse, and gets a good behavior bond. That's pretty much what I'd expect, to be honest. We don't throw people in prison for a thing like that - it's just not justified, it costs a fortune and turns out people in worse shape than we found them. If he's got no money, I don't see what good fining him will do - he'll just default on the fine and end up back in court. So what's the big deal here? Oh, I see - he's on a disability pension, so it feeds the whole "these people come here" crap (did I mention that he's a muslim? Or at least that's what folks are saying - tim blair goes one further and declares that he's a "Muslim rioter"!) So he's a muslim, and HE'S GETTING FREE STUFF!!!1! For that, he gets the telegraph banging on the door wanting an explanation, and people checking up on him with government departments, and demanding quotes from representatives of australian muslims generally. It's a frickin' feeding frenzy over a broken windscreen. Get a grip. Apparently he's collecting 200$ a fortnight. 100$ a week. That's at the low end of the scale. It's definitely not a full pension, and it's definitely not supporting him. If he was on newstart, he'd be getting more. We don't know what the disability is, either. We don't _actually_ have any right to know what his condition is, and I don't see what value there is in harrassing him and his family. I think the daily telegraph is, right now, demonstrating why "many" people don't respect journalists (see? andrew? I can do that too!). It's just publishing prurient crap, and attacking small people with big headlines and sensational claims. Oh, and the australian's publishing it. Guys, jeeze - just put some tits on page three or something. Or go find something newsworthy. Can this story have really kept TWO writers busy?
|
|
|
2013
Jan 22, 2013 21:25:40 GMT 10
Post by angra on Jan 22, 2013 21:25:40 GMT 10
|
|
|
2013
Jan 23, 2013 9:36:11 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 23, 2013 9:36:11 GMT 10
This is now way beyond nasty (and bolt's spruiking it) www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/bloody-idiot-rioter-pension-reviewed/story-e6freuy9-1226559592954WHILE the taxpayer supports accused rioter Omar Halaby, he spruiks about terrorism and illegal drugs on his Facebook page - and even does the odd day's work on a construction site, despite receiving a disability pension. Guys, for god's sake - he's 19. Let it go. And while you're doing that, go and read the flamin' rules for the disability pension. The government quite clearly does not expect anyone to live on 100$ a week. At that level of assistance, he's EXPECTED to find work. There's nothing new about that. By all means, bang on about the maximum that somebody might be able to get on the pension ... but THAT'S NOT HIS SITUATION. He's NOT collecting 700$ a fortnight. This is nasty. This is very nasty journalism. He's a kid, he's an idiot, he did something stupid but (in the scheme of things) fairly trivial. The daily telegraph has decided to turn him into a story and a spectacle and beat him up for the creepy enjoyment of its readers. The daily telegraph is being a thug and a bully, and andrew bolt is joining in. Guys, you don't earn respect this way. This is gutter journalism, and it's vile. And a brief observation about the special magic that bolt's adding to the story: It’s strange that someone capable to smashing car windows with just a plastic milk crate at a Muslim riot was deemed too disabled to work: If he's getting 100$ a week, he's obviously not "deemed too disabled to work". Go look at the web site for the pension and look at scale of payments, then think a bit. On a disability pension since he was 16? For the trivial reasons given by his lawyer? Is that how easily hundreds of thousands of people can claim this handout from taxpayers Well, no. Not for the "trivial reasons given by his lawyer". Even allowing for the fact that those reasons were reported by the daily telegraph (listed just below the ouija board for reliability), it's not the lawyer who decides his case. The real reasons will be known by the department, and we have no presumed legal right to know what they are. If Halaby’s pension is now being reviewed on the apparent grounds that he can and does work, after all, should not the light sentence be reviewed as well - given Halaby’s lawyer raised his disability in mitigation? See above - he's allowed to work. He's a first-time offender, he paid for the car window, he's hardly going to he stuck in the clink for that. And if you want cases to be retried you're going to have to come up with something better than that. Some of the usual poor-us excuses made for him may have to be retracted, too: Hang on a minute ... what do we know about that quote? We know (or at least believe - it's the daily telegraph) that he actually said that, but what was the question? Somebody spent the day trawling around for material to write a story, and they approached trad, but we don't know what else was said or what the reporters put to him. Tell us what the question was, and what information he was given, and then we can decide whether that was a "poor-us" excuse. This whole thing is just vicious. Bolt, you're joining in with a pack of thugs and you're digging through some stupid kid's garbage (or at least letting someone else do it for you) to make him into a story. Leave it alone - he's not your voodoo doll to beat up over everything you don't like about the underclass. He broke a window. Woopdef4ckingdo.
|
|
|
2013
Jan 24, 2013 17:33:34 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 24, 2013 17:33:34 GMT 10
|
|
|
2013
Jan 24, 2013 19:15:26 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 24, 2013 19:15:26 GMT 10
Today, cory blogs: Today I find myself in a rare position – exactly what should I be blogging about? That was probably a hint. But nonetheless ... But this week we need to talk about money. Most Australians would think they don’t have enough of it but the problem is that too many governments don’t have enough of it either. They are borrowing to the limit and then printing more of it just to pay the bills. In many instances, the bills are interest payments on the debt and soft welfare payments designed to appease a struggling citizenry. Both practices ultimately have disastrous long term social and economic consequences for everyone involved. Actually, no. That's not what "too many" governments are doing at all (do conservatives actually have a grasp of specific numbers at all?). Mostly they're borrowing that money to bail out a private banking sector that dug itself a hole, then got shoved into it by crappy US financial products. Sure, a lot of countries were in debt, and probably too much, but that's not what caused the current mess. Naturally, there are some who think you can continue this government-level Ponzi scheme indefinitely – or at least long enough for them to stay in power before leaving someone else has to pick up the pieces. In the past, it has been the preserve of the working class to deal with the consequences as the ‘ruling elite’ seem strangely immune from austerity measures. The "ruling elite", cory, would include you. And australia is quite clearly not gearing up to continue this "ponzi scheme" at all (did all wingnuts learn that term in the last few months, or something? Because it's everywhere right now). Right now, we have a government enviscerating itself to try to hand in a surplus. And it'll probably get pretty close. Not bad for a government that saw 3% of GDP in revenues go south thanks to the aforementioned dodgy US financial products. But that's not the insane part of that post ... this is: The most telling tale is the decision by Germany to repatriate its gold reserves from foreign into domestic storage. There is talk that this policy will also be adopted by the Netherlands and Azerbaijan. Effectively these nations are saying that the thin air and political promises backing many currencies is not sufficient and that gold is real money. That's just nuts. Nobody really knows why germany is "repatriating" about 20% (not all) of its gold reserves back from the US. It serves no financial purpose - it's perfectly safe where it is, and the US is even keeping it safe for no fee (whereas the UK charges half a million pounds a year to mind its share of germany's gold, and germany's leaving that right where it is). As far as I can tell, it's just a populist appeal to nationalism, being driven by some bonkers newspaper. That is - unless germany's planning to declare war on the US. Seems unlikely. The gold is worth exactly the same where it is now, it's in no danger of being misused, and all they achieve by shifting it is a great big transport bill and some ill-feeling in washington. Even the gold standard never relied on countries actually physically HAVING their gold - usually it was kept in very safe places in major financial capitals around the world and promissory notes were passed around instead. Actually moving gold around makes no sense. That's just a chance for some of it to go missing, or for wars to break out. So I'm not sure why germany's doing what it's doing (I'm not sure if anyone does), but it's got nothing to do with whatever cory's on about. I wonder if he's gone and got himself subscribed to some ron paul RSS feed?
|
|