|
Post by angra on Jan 22, 2013 8:08:01 GMT 10
MoC - apparently yes.
"Very, very few senior politicians dare to challenge the global warming “consensus” - even now, after 16 years of no warming." says he, quoting Boris Johnston, who is about as good an authority as King Danny I (Danny Wallace). Check the Kingdom of Lovely.
And then we have "Human rights commissars".
And Obama went to church. Then tweeted. But the timing is suspicious. So that proves - what exactly? So link to a far-right conspiracy theory site and you have it! The church service was actually a political rally.
I bet he had secret service men with him who probably had GUNS as well!
Why is the Blot so obsessed with dissing Obama?
|
|
|
Post by angra on Jan 22, 2013 15:53:39 GMT 10
Dr Mengele used precise skull measurements to determine who was of an appropriate Aryan origin. Mr Bolt apparently uses a colour chart to determine who is 'black enough' to be regraded as Aboriginal. My favourite song from Bran Nue Dae. www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_-EGqgQn8w.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 22, 2013 16:34:29 GMT 10
*sigh*
|
|
|
Post by angra on Jan 22, 2013 18:21:11 GMT 10
Bolt admits he is a racist.
"Bolt, who has just returned from leave, delivered the attack in response to news that he and fellow commentator Alan Jones are on a draft list of witnesses set to be called before the inquiry, which will hold hearings in early April.
Mr O’Farrell has asked the NSW parliament’s law and justice committee to examine whether anti-discrimination laws dealing with complaints about serious racial vilification constitute “a realistic test” and have kept up with public expectations… Mr O’Farrell has noted that there has not been a successful criminal prosecution since the laws came into operation in 1989…
Bolt asked why Mr O’Farrell didn’t simply “set a quota of how many racists he wants hauled before the courts?”
Well he's chosen you and Jones. So that's two to start with.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 22, 2013 19:54:20 GMT 10
Angra, no. Stop it. Really.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 22, 2013 20:25:58 GMT 10
Apparently the bar for "significance" is low. Bolta actually LEADS with an excuse: But now comes another, London mayor Boris Johnston, seen as a future contender for leadership of Britain’s Conservative Party. What’s important is not so much the argument he puts, but that he dares to put it(Just as an aside, I still don't understand why vaclav klaus has any significance whatsoever. Does his european-y-sounding name somehow confuse conservatives into thinking he's one of those communist-fighting brave people, like maybe that OTHER vaclav - the one who actually WAS a brave communist-fighting person? Do all vaclavs just look alike or something?) Okay, back to the main point ... so after bolta warns us that the actual argument's importance is "not so much", he quotes a few bits from boris' bizarre rambling about how it's cold in london. You can read that here. It's basically rubbish - the word games about 'warming' (when it's cold!), the deference to the accuracy of a guy who's so sure of himself that he threatens to sue people for quoting his predictions, the teach-the-controversy 'unanswered questions', the history-ignoring 'we're too small to affect the planet' ... it goes on, and on, and there's a lot of it. And it's been thoroughly debunked elsewhere by others already. Anyhey. Just in case anyone missed the disclaimer at the top ("the following is bollocks" would have been clearer), bolt reiterates that the argument isn't significant: Again, the significance here lies not so much in the argument. After all, there is a lot of debate about solar activity and its effect on the climate. Nor is Corbyn the fount of all climate wisdom. So .... why on earth are you quoting this guy then? But what cannot be seriously disputed is that the world certainly isn’t warming as many alarmists predicted.Oh, I see ... so any old crap will do in pursuit of a cause. Cherry picking is one thing, but this is something else - no ladder is required to select stuff like that. It tends to just collect on the ground. And what's this "many" weasel? Are you saying that the world is warming as _some_ alarmists predicted? Or are you trying to avoid saying anything definite at all? (no, don't tell me). The overall structure is familiar: The actual argument doesn't matter, it's just true anyway. It could be engraved on a plaque. And no, it's not brave for boris to say any of that. He's always saying rubbish. It's part of his charm. His approach to expectation management has been stellar.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 23, 2013 9:09:08 GMT 10
Today, bolta sums up nicely the reason I'm not getting all het up about the terrible things that the gubbmint is doing to our free speech. Bolta's spelled it out so beautifully, that I'm just going to quote the guy, with some emphasis for those who get distracted by the extensive use of a thesaurus: From blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_tyranny_of_tender_feelings/Put it all together, and Labor is presiding over the greatest assault on Australians’ free speech in our lives:- it has held an inquiry into what the Greens dubbed the “hate media” - particularly critics of the government
- it is promising new privacy rules affecting the media
- it is threatening new laws to control who owns the media - a response to conservatives such as Gina Rinehart buying into media assets
- it is considering tough new laws to regulate “bias” and reporting, applying tougher controls - back by threats of jail - on everything from big newspapers to even small blogs.
- it has punished News Ltd for its critical coverage by twice over-ruling the decision of an independent panel to award News the tender for the Australia Network.
- it proposed new workplace laws that make it easier for workers to sue their bosses if they’ve had even their political views or social origin offended by something said or done.
- it has rejected calls to alter the Racial Discrimination Act even after it was used to ban columns that questioned how fair-skinned people with both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal ancestry identified only as Aboriginal.
- it has issued demands and threats to media executives in response to coverage of the Prime Minister’s involvement in the AWU scandal. Two senior journalists were subsequently sacked.
- it has privately warned at least one media boss that running conservative opinion was a hostile act
- it proposed a government-run internet filter
- it plans to save people’s phone and internet data for two years as a “crime fighting” measure - a big increase in the surveillance of what Australians say or write. What Labor is doing is sinister. It’s sick. So that sums it up ... a lot of (alleged) considering is going on ... and even one inquiry!. But what labor is actually doing isn't very much. There are a couple of points there worth mentioning - The business with NEWS and the ABC and the broadcast tender, I have no idea what happened. I personally don't think it should have ever been privatized in the first place. That "government-run internet filter" (two errors contained in four words - more like a government mandated HTTP blacklist) was actually something that andrew bolt supported. He even went on TV and told us to be morally serious about it. I think it's a bit rich to be putting the boot in about it now. Particularly given that it's been shelved. The "demands and threats" were issued after people who should have known better decided to ramp up a smear campaign to the level of personal defamation. The oppo leader (et al) once sued a publisher over much less than the stuff that NEWS has been peddling (with maximum weasel). Try accusing any liberal MP of the sort of corruption and criminality that's been inferred about the PM and see what happens. But leaving in the australia network tender process, bolta's list of totalitarianism amounts to not a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 23, 2013 9:48:09 GMT 10
Oh, and one final observation: - it plans to save people’s phone and internet data for two years as a “crime fighting” measure - a big increase in the surveillance of what Australians say or write. First up, no - the government itself is not planning to "save" anything. That's just false. The proposal is to required ISPs to save that data, to be requested in exactly the same way that phone call records are requested now. There are actually laws and regulations about how phone call data is requested, and I expect that they would remain. And the data that ISPs would be required to keep would very likely not include anything that anyone "says". Ideally, it's just the URL information - the "metadata". Now, agreed, some of that URL information could be more specific than others, and there is debate over whether it could reveal more than simply which sites are being visited, I don't know any web site which includes posted information (or responses) in the URL. So that's not really accurate either. Bolt actually onto something with that point, but I don't think he understands the real issues. The concerns that most detractors have isn't over the collection of metadata - that's a legitimate legal resource that we already have for phone calls (I hope this isn't news to anyone). The real problem is about what might happen to that data by other means - we don't have sufficient privacy regulations in place to stop ISPs from using it themselves (for example). Oh, and I guess the absolutely gargantuan storage and data processing required to actually collect it in the first place - that's going to cost somebody money. At least in principle (assuming the details can be ironed out) I don't see why any citizen (excluding people running ISPs) would have a problem with that proposal, assuming they're ok with phone call records being kept now.
|
|
zoot
Junior Member
Posts: 58
|
Post by zoot on Jan 23, 2013 14:13:12 GMT 10
Why is the Blot so obsessed with dissing Obama? It couldn't possibly be the colour of his skin. Must be something else entirely.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 23, 2013 21:34:43 GMT 10
This one isn't really entirely bolt's fault, but he IS linking to it, which makes it just that much less credible. Under the heading: Running out of people to pay our debtsHe links to this: www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/lifting-lid-on-a-ponzi-scheme/story-e6frgd0x-1226559587756It's from maurice newman, who is (and I know everyone will be shocked to hear this) criticising the current government. I'm no economist, but I think that article is a bit silly, at least in how it relates to australia. We know why the guv ran deficits, and we know that it's not a long-term strategy. Whether they deliver a balanced budget in may, or even a small deficit, I don't think it's particularly rational to say that it's "now in the process of establishing its own Ponzi scheme". What really gets me about that article, and bolta's little sprinkle of pepper on the top, is this: "One day even debt servicing will be an issue. With fewer taxpayers and lenders, the ability to take from the future to provide for the present will end"Now, I realise that he's talking about "the west" there, but he works very hard to tie what he's saying to australia. Bolt goes further and adds that "Maurice Newman says the Gillard Government is now dropping us into this same giant Ponzi scheme" And that's where I think they're parting company with the plane of existence we call "reality". I used to buy the bursting baby boom theory as well, until one day I saw an actual age profile for australia. Here's ours, for 2012: I don't quite see the demographic time bomb there that people assume is looming. Yes, the over 50s have padded out a bit (as a fraction) in the last 20 years, and there's a bit of a dip in the ages up to 20 (as a fraction, which makes me wonder if that's the effect of skilled immigration pushing out the 20-40 age groups). But we're also increasing the age of retirement, and australians are retiring with more assets and savings than they did 20 years ago. Ok, changing the superannuation tax rules so retirees paid less tax wasn't the greatest howard-era policy, but ... those elections don't win themselves. Yes, we will have an increasing fraction of the population in retirement age, but post-boom era isn't marked by any sudden drop-off in population. I don't think it's quite the problem we're led to believe.
|
|
|
Post by angra on Jan 25, 2013 8:34:59 GMT 10
I see Andrew is giving a free plug for Monckton's forthcoming tour, sponsored by the Lord Monctkon Foundation. The tour is also being lauded by the climatekepticsparty, riseupaustraliaparty and catchthefire. Who exactly are the Lord Monckton Foundation? This is a bit scary - lordmoncktonfoundation.com/visionHints there of paranoia about a 'new world order'. Can't be anything to with with a cabal of banksters can it?
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jan 25, 2013 19:24:18 GMT 10
"The tour is also being lauded by the climatekepticsparty, riseupaustraliaparty and catchthefire"
It's almost hard to believe that a bunch of libertarian-slash-agrarian-socialist-slash-1950s-flashback-wowsers and a bunch of creationist faith-healers could possibly find any common ground with chris monckton.
Or even better - that he could find common ground with them.
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
|
|
|
Post by jack on Jan 26, 2013 12:20:15 GMT 10
You know it's Australia Day when a child of migrants characterises debate about national issues as "violent attack"... You know it’s Australia Day when Fairfax newspapers run opinion articles violently attacking Australia’s:
- flag...
- history...
- constitutional monarchy... [/blockquote] Happy Australia Day to you too, Andy. (Please try not to take that the wrong way.) " hard to believe that a bunch of libertarian-slash-agrarian-socialist-slash-1950s-flashback-wowsers and a bunch of creationist faith-healers could possibly find any common ground with chris monckton" A manifestation of something colloquially known as 'Blair's Law', usually formulated as... the ongoing process by which the world's multiple idiocies are becoming one giant, useless force
www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Blair%27s+law It's doubtful, however, that Timmeh will blog about this one.
|
|
|
Post by angra on Jan 26, 2013 12:38:24 GMT 10
Poor little me (again).
"I don’t think comments are being moderated today, and after campaigns against me - exploiting restrictions on free speech - it has been deemed safer that I not moderate them myself. "
Too right - News' lawyers would have heart attacks.
|
|
|
Post by jack on Jan 26, 2013 13:44:56 GMT 10
Oh, almost forgot...
"Happy Race Riot Day from Labor"
Maybe I'll take his confected outrage about "a vile and degrading new form of political warfare" a bit more seriously when he can apply the same laser-like scrutiny to the LNP's grubbiness in certain pre-selection scandals.
|
|