The post below came up on my timeline today. Next year we will all vote on the issue of changing the Constitution to recognize the Indigenous Peoples. While its a fair way off, you can click to 'save' this info for later consideration. You can also click the post to download the IPA pamphlet [and file it if you have a 'file' that you use]. I personally haven't decided on this issue so I am not promoting either side. However, the issue of multiculturalism is a hot topic right now and I will be blogging/posting about this soon because there is a general misunderstanding of what constitutes 'culture', and the issue has become divisive, and is used by some to promote harmful agendas. i will present the case that Australia is bi-cultural, [Aboriginal and Euro-Anglo], that it is multi-ethnic and diverse, but that it is NOT multicultural in the proper and strict sense even though 27% of us were born overseas. As usual, I try to inform everyone about issues so that, ultimately, our vote at the ballot box is an informed one rather than an emotive one; which is the reasoning behind all my contentious posts on politics, climate change, social justice, human rights, Mid-East war, Islamism etc.
http://www.ipa.org.au/publications/2449/ipa-welcomes-indigenous-recognition-council-announcement
Sunday 6 December 2015
Tuesday 3 November 2015
The U.N.: Guest Post by AFT
Big lies as the UN suppresses truth with ideology
In his first month as Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull’s most decisive actions have been in cultural and international relations. His government has signed Australia up to the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, announced a bid for membership of the Security Council and declared candidacy for a seat on the Human Rights Council.
The multilateral moves have taken a nation accustomed to Tony Abbott’s more hawkish foreign policy by surprise. While the renewal of soft power relations with the UN may be viewed favourably, Australia’s new era of cosmopolitanism should be tempered by political realism.
Even ardent advocates of the classical liberal ideals that inspired the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are beginning to recognise there is something rotten in the heart of the UN. Since the turn of the century, it has been beset by corruption and a culture of profligacy which would likely elicit strong criticism were the organisation a private enterprise. But it is the emerging culture of dishonesty at the UN which poses the greatest threat to its legitimacy as an independent and trustworthy arbiter of human rights and justice worldwide.
Dishonesty and double standards mark the rise of the UN in the realm of 21st-century human rights. In Australia, Europe, Canada and the US, human rights commissions have undermined evidentiary standards by supplanting empirical truth with emotionalism, campaigned against border integrity, criticised national security policy, engaged in judicial activism and sought to censor freethinkers. They have been unrelenting in the pursuit of a neo-Marxist social agenda that respects neither parliamentary process nor the views of citizens who pay their wages.
The most pressing problem with UN human rights advocates, however, is their use of dishonesty to achieve political ends. When attorney-general George Brandis rightly criticised Australian Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs for fibbing about the presence of armed guards at immigrant processing centres, he was accused of violating her human rights.
Rather than correcting Triggs’s misrepresentation of the truth, the UN defended it.
Michel Forst, the UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders, asked the government to explain its actions while condemning its alleged violation of Triggs’s rights. The violation of truth was not raised as a matter of vital interest. While that may offend our moral sensibilities, it is consistent with UN values.
The UN has created a new value system where the truth is subordinated to human rights activism. For example, in the report Human Rights Defenders, it states that the “critical test” of a human rights defender is not to be correct — to base their case on objective and validated truth — but to pursue rights. Human rights have been transformed into a master ideology that transcends truth.
As history has shown, the supersession of objective truth with political ideology produces big lies. The big lie of the modern age is that secure-border policy produces more harm to humankind than it prevents. The UN is a powerful purveyor of the lie that effectively protects people-smugglers and frequently proves lethal to their human cargo.
In the organisation’s latest attack on Australia’s highly successful secure-border policy, UN migrant rights rapporteur Francois Crepeau whipped up a media storm on the false claim he was denied adequate access to immigration centres.
The leftist media reported Crepeau’s hysterical claims as though they constituted fact. Nowhere was his history of criticising conservative government policy reported. His recent attack describing defence of the continuous historical tradition of British culture as “bullshit” went unremarked. No one questioned his ability to conduct an impartial investigation into Australia’s immigration processing centres given he is one of only eight council members of the Global Detention Project, an activist group highly critical of such centres.
The Turnbull government passed its first test on border security by refusing to submit to Crepeau’s fantastical claims. But it faces an uphill battle to convince the electorate that deeper engagement with the UN is in the national interest and will produce return on investment.
The Syrian crisis has exposed the UN’s radical impotence in dealing with the major security threat of our age, Islamist terrorism. Its bloated bureaucracy is too dilatory to respond to the multi-ethnic civil wars that have emerged as the greatest global threat to human rights. Rather than realise the liberal universalist order out of such chaos, the UN appears beholden to its greatest detractors, communist and Islamist states.
Russia has emerged as the strongman of the UN in responding to the Syrian crisis and Islamist states now comprise the largest voting bloc at the UN General Assembly. The world’s worst human rights violators populate the Human Rights Council. The minority of UN members that constitute the liberal democratic world order which inspired its inception cannot compete with the sheer size and determination of authoritarian states to overwhelm it.
Turnbull has initiated a marathon of diplomacy by committing Australia to the UN until at least 2030, if our bid for Security Council membership is successful. We will undoubtedly hear more about how deeper engagement with the UN will form a part of Turnbull’s recast foreign policy strategy.
The easy route for the government would be to stage a UN love-in with the leftist media and ignore the warning signs about declining public trust in the liberal institutional order. But there is little point in denying that the free world’s relationship with the UN is rapidly approaching a tipping point where we must decide whether to dig in and deepen engagement, or declare it a lost cause and start anew.
The UN remains a vital part of the liberal international order, but it has abused public trust by elevating ideology over truth and defending the indefensible in a desperate bid to remain relevant. In its recasting of foreign affairs, the Turnbull government should embrace a critical and transformative approach to international relations, acknowledging the UN requires serious structural reform if it is to become a force for good in the 21st century.
Jennifer Oriel is a political scientist and commentator.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/big-lies-as-the-un-suppresses-truth-with-ideology/story-e6frg6zo-1227556738266
In his first month as Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull’s most decisive actions have been in cultural and international relations. His government has signed Australia up to the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, announced a bid for membership of the Security Council and declared candidacy for a seat on the Human Rights Council.
The multilateral moves have taken a nation accustomed to Tony Abbott’s more hawkish foreign policy by surprise. While the renewal of soft power relations with the UN may be viewed favourably, Australia’s new era of cosmopolitanism should be tempered by political realism.
Even ardent advocates of the classical liberal ideals that inspired the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are beginning to recognise there is something rotten in the heart of the UN. Since the turn of the century, it has been beset by corruption and a culture of profligacy which would likely elicit strong criticism were the organisation a private enterprise. But it is the emerging culture of dishonesty at the UN which poses the greatest threat to its legitimacy as an independent and trustworthy arbiter of human rights and justice worldwide.
Dishonesty and double standards mark the rise of the UN in the realm of 21st-century human rights. In Australia, Europe, Canada and the US, human rights commissions have undermined evidentiary standards by supplanting empirical truth with emotionalism, campaigned against border integrity, criticised national security policy, engaged in judicial activism and sought to censor freethinkers. They have been unrelenting in the pursuit of a neo-Marxist social agenda that respects neither parliamentary process nor the views of citizens who pay their wages.
The most pressing problem with UN human rights advocates, however, is their use of dishonesty to achieve political ends. When attorney-general George Brandis rightly criticised Australian Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs for fibbing about the presence of armed guards at immigrant processing centres, he was accused of violating her human rights.
Rather than correcting Triggs’s misrepresentation of the truth, the UN defended it.
Michel Forst, the UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders, asked the government to explain its actions while condemning its alleged violation of Triggs’s rights. The violation of truth was not raised as a matter of vital interest. While that may offend our moral sensibilities, it is consistent with UN values.
The UN has created a new value system where the truth is subordinated to human rights activism. For example, in the report Human Rights Defenders, it states that the “critical test” of a human rights defender is not to be correct — to base their case on objective and validated truth — but to pursue rights. Human rights have been transformed into a master ideology that transcends truth.
As history has shown, the supersession of objective truth with political ideology produces big lies. The big lie of the modern age is that secure-border policy produces more harm to humankind than it prevents. The UN is a powerful purveyor of the lie that effectively protects people-smugglers and frequently proves lethal to their human cargo.
In the organisation’s latest attack on Australia’s highly successful secure-border policy, UN migrant rights rapporteur Francois Crepeau whipped up a media storm on the false claim he was denied adequate access to immigration centres.
The leftist media reported Crepeau’s hysterical claims as though they constituted fact. Nowhere was his history of criticising conservative government policy reported. His recent attack describing defence of the continuous historical tradition of British culture as “bullshit” went unremarked. No one questioned his ability to conduct an impartial investigation into Australia’s immigration processing centres given he is one of only eight council members of the Global Detention Project, an activist group highly critical of such centres.
The Turnbull government passed its first test on border security by refusing to submit to Crepeau’s fantastical claims. But it faces an uphill battle to convince the electorate that deeper engagement with the UN is in the national interest and will produce return on investment.
The Syrian crisis has exposed the UN’s radical impotence in dealing with the major security threat of our age, Islamist terrorism. Its bloated bureaucracy is too dilatory to respond to the multi-ethnic civil wars that have emerged as the greatest global threat to human rights. Rather than realise the liberal universalist order out of such chaos, the UN appears beholden to its greatest detractors, communist and Islamist states.
Russia has emerged as the strongman of the UN in responding to the Syrian crisis and Islamist states now comprise the largest voting bloc at the UN General Assembly. The world’s worst human rights violators populate the Human Rights Council. The minority of UN members that constitute the liberal democratic world order which inspired its inception cannot compete with the sheer size and determination of authoritarian states to overwhelm it.
Turnbull has initiated a marathon of diplomacy by committing Australia to the UN until at least 2030, if our bid for Security Council membership is successful. We will undoubtedly hear more about how deeper engagement with the UN will form a part of Turnbull’s recast foreign policy strategy.
The easy route for the government would be to stage a UN love-in with the leftist media and ignore the warning signs about declining public trust in the liberal institutional order. But there is little point in denying that the free world’s relationship with the UN is rapidly approaching a tipping point where we must decide whether to dig in and deepen engagement, or declare it a lost cause and start anew.
The UN remains a vital part of the liberal international order, but it has abused public trust by elevating ideology over truth and defending the indefensible in a desperate bid to remain relevant. In its recasting of foreign affairs, the Turnbull government should embrace a critical and transformative approach to international relations, acknowledging the UN requires serious structural reform if it is to become a force for good in the 21st century.
Jennifer Oriel is a political scientist and commentator.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/big-lies-as-the-un-suppresses-truth-with-ideology/story-e6frg6zo-1227556738266
Saturday 10 October 2015
Sunday 4 October 2015
A.J.KINMAN: BOOKS: REDBACK
A.J.KINMAN: BOOKS: REDBACK: NEW Nick Riley's life is turned upside down when he is framed for murder, not once but twice. He is on the run from both the poli...
Sunday 27 September 2015
Wednesday 5 August 2015
Monday 15 June 2015
Wednesday 20 May 2015
Tuesday 12 May 2015
Wednesday 29 April 2015
Thursday 23 April 2015
Wednesday 22 April 2015
Tuesday 31 March 2015
Saturday 28 March 2015
Monday 23 March 2015
Sunday 22 March 2015
Taking Melbourne’s temperature | Climate Etc.
Taking Melbourne’s temperature | Climate Etc.
This guest post [via Judith Curry & Joanne Nova ], allows us Joe/Jill Average to gain an understanding of some intricacies of temperature measurements. A cursory reading shows how temps are affected:
* by the Urban Heat Island effect [UHI], meaning heat sensors are affected by increases in population, traffic, buildings, emissions etc.
* by changing the instruments that measure temps, usually thermometers,
* by changing the location of sensors [thermometers],
* by changing the time of day when mins. and max temps are recorded,
* by adjustments and compensations used by BoM's, [bureux of meteorology].
This guest post [via Judith Curry & Joanne Nova ], allows us Joe/Jill Average to gain an understanding of some intricacies of temperature measurements. A cursory reading shows how temps are affected:
* by the Urban Heat Island effect [UHI], meaning heat sensors are affected by increases in population, traffic, buildings, emissions etc.
* by changing the instruments that measure temps, usually thermometers,
* by changing the location of sensors [thermometers],
* by changing the time of day when mins. and max temps are recorded,
* by adjustments and compensations used by BoM's, [bureux of meteorology].
Wednesday 18 March 2015
Monday 16 March 2015
Sunday 15 March 2015
Saturday 14 March 2015
Friday 13 March 2015
Wednesday 11 March 2015
Wednesday 4 March 2015
FOR THE YOUNG: Painless Financial Future....2ways
Let's say you are an infant. If mum and dad put away just $1 per day into an account for you [or $400 per annum], and roll it over at about 4 per cent, by retirement that fund will have a few million dollars. Say you are about 15 or 16 with a part-time job, put away $1 per day and roll it over. If your job pays $50 per week then it can be a little hard to save $7 to $10 per week. But when you have full-time work, it will be easy. Later on, you can increase the saving to $15 to $20 weekly. In 10 years the average wage will be around $1500 per week, so this saving will be painless. Even at 50 yrs. of age you will pick up a million dollars or so. If you are in your twenties, work out how much you need to put away and roll over to give you the lump sum you want at what age . Yes, super will go into an account for you, which you generally can't touch until you retire, but don't place total faith in super. My neighbour had made contributions over 25 years in his super fund but on checking it last year he only had $5000 out of the $45000 that had been paid in. WANT a hobby or an interesting investment that will make money in the future? DON'T have enough funds for the usual investments, shares, land, etc? Don't laugh as I know stamp-collecting appears too nerdy, BUT, snail-mail will soon be a thing of the past. Stamps will be a curio or a rare item. A few dollars per week will soon buy you all issues of Australian stamps and the number of issues printed each year is already declining quickly. The future value of a stamp [and mostly everything ] depends on its scarcity. Many of the issues of 1920 are today worth $30,000 each, but you don't have to wait that long for scarce stamps to appreciate in value. I know of no stamp older than 25yrs. that is worth less than its original value. You don't have to be a "stamp collector" to indulge in this investment. But you will need advice.... e.g. never handle stamps, and they need special storage conditions. Why didn't I do the saving trick? Nobody told me and I was too dumb to think of it. But I still have a small stamp collection that is not worth a lot now, but will be in 15yrs.
Tuesday 3 March 2015
TURNBULL NO TURNCOAT
Brilliant interview on 7.30 tonight [ABC 3.3.15], Leigh sales. Turnbull gave a cogent explanation of OZ Post woes, meta-data and the leadership within the govt. Get over it Labor, the govt. is secure and ruling the way your present team could never do. MT was convincing in outlining that he and Abbott may have differing views on some issues but they were of the same ideology and it would take too long to encapsulate Abbott's strong points. This anticipated new spill is not happening much to the chagrin of the leftist media. A nd while i'm at it , what a great speech by Netanyahu last night..... slightly embarrassing to the Democrats' approach to Iran. And Obama will boycott his address to Congress tomorrow. Shame!
Saturday 21 February 2015
Friday 20 February 2015
BOOK and FILM REVIEW.
Before D.P.C.Pierre brings out his next novel, check out his Booker prize-winning work: Vernon God Lightly. I only tackled it to see what Booker standards were. I really struggled for 40 pages because every other word was the F bomb. But the low-life adolescent American protagonist, [DPC is an Aussie, by the way], gets into some hairy moral situations and DPC develops this bloke in a realistically wonderful way. I must have really enjoyed it because I remember it well, and that only applies to very few books. I can't believe I chose to watch a movie titled "Shoot 'Em Up". But I did and I was enthralled. It helped that Clive Owen played the main character. How he kept a straight face?..... Well, I couldn't. Sure there's quite a bit of shoot-em-up and the violence that we chauvenists are attracted to but, LADIES, this is a man-movie that I'm sure you will love. Why? All I'm prepared to say is that a baby stars - but will he/she survive? The other characters are not big names but they all give a great showing. Then there's the .... ca .....no, I'm not telling, but its an inanimate thing that keeps popping up throughout and wow, I never thought a ca....... could have so many uses. One minute I'm on the seat's edge, next I,m chuckling. This is a British-style film, much tongue-in-cheek, with an emotion-tugging theme. Sometimes, being larger than life, I thought the director may be Baz Lurman.. I'd definitely watch again and I rarely say that. It sure ain't for under 18's.
DOES HALAL FUND TERRORISTS?
There are 15 halal certification groups in OZ. Some lobby groups are claiming that part of the fees paid to gain certification is going to terrorist organs, such as Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood. Apparently this has been proved in France and Canada, but I don't have details. Having visited these lobbyists' sites, in the course of my research into Islam, I do so reluctantly because public posts and comments are often vitriolic racism. However the site owners believe they can prove that OZ certification payments are going to terrorists. OZ law enforcers say there is no evidence. So that's the nutshell view if you haven't heard anything on this matter before. I, for one, hope the issue gets a sensible airing and debate. Unhappily I have just heard the issue aired on The Drum [ABC, 6pm, 20.2.15], where the two guest lefties thought that diversity of food choices is to be lauded! Well, Mikey Robins emphasized this, so it must be right..... perhaps he was in the wrong studio addressing a totally different issue. [ Why is it that actors/comedians are deemed necessary expert commentators on serious panel shows?]. The issue has nothing to do with what Muslims choose to eat.... it is about the destination of halal funds I am building a portfolio on Islam, which I posted weeks ago expressing the fear that Islam itself is now off the rails. I hope this view is misguided but we'll see. The Egyptian President, Asisi, must have read my blog because he recently echoed my opinion on Islam in general. Relevant material has been posted on my other sites, e.g., Google +, Tumblr, Pinterest, Evernote. In the meantime, please be kind to your local Muslim.
Wednesday 11 February 2015
Sunday 8 February 2015
Saturday 7 February 2015
Thursday 5 February 2015
Tuesday 3 February 2015
ABBOTT-HATERS REJOICE.
So there may be a spill next week [from Feb 9 on] when the LNC [coalition], replaces the mad monk with a new PM, possibly one who , because of his penchant for leather jackets, is much more popular. What's the real story? Its this: Due to one or two minor gaffs by Abott, e.g. gonging Prince Phil, an opportunity arises for long-standing back-benchers to secure a spot on the front bench with its accompanying salary and power, a spot they will never get under Abbott. Enter Doc. Jenssen, W.A. MP, who has been successful through several elections. ["Hey, the people love me - I deserve to be a Minister]. Ho-hum, such people are in all parties and walks of life. But now is his big chance.... form a cadre of back-benchers, install a new man who will reward them with ministeries. Jenssen & friends will undoubtedly be swept up in the hoo-ha tidal wave of Abbott-haters. Hey Doc, they are the opposition, you dill! Tonight, [Feb3], the brilliant Leigh Sales made the audience believe that the LNC is in disarray, and its only cynics like me who see what is going on.... Jenssen wants a slice of power! [A little while ago, she let Bill Shorten make himself look dumb]. Doc., you think the brilliantly relentless campaign of the Lefties is your endorsement. You may well get your way, and Malcolm may soon be PM, but it will backfire in the long run, just like it did for Rudd-Gillard-Rudd. Will only go to show that education does not equate to intelligence.
Saturday 31 January 2015
SAY CHEESE! [Home-made mascapone, or any soft cheese].
Heat 2 ltrs. full-cream milk to 100deg.. Stir in 1/2 tsp. of citric acid [or try tartaric acid or even vinegar]. the mix must coagulate into curds and whey, [ if not, reheat and add more acid]. Leave aside for 12 hours. Scoop out the curds into muslin [or sterile Chux], Hang over a bowl in frig for a few hours. DONE! I've made this only twice and find it quite bland, but fried its very nice. Good for use in recipes like tiramasu, and can be mixed with cream. For a hard cheese, put the curds in a mould and press with a weight [tin of beans?], and store at 12deg. for as long as you wish...but turn and clean every 3 or 4 days. If you want to get professional and use proper starter culture and rennet, the only supplier I know is in N.Z. [quick and cheap service]. Using above recipe will give cheese a slight acidic taste. I have found an excellent addition is honey and salt [ but do not use table salt...use cooking salt]. If you made the yoghurt from my previous recipe, or if you have excess store-bought, you can make an even easier yoghurt cheese. Mix 1tsp. salt in 1kg plain yoghurt, pour into muslin, let drain in frig for 2 days. DONE! Maybe roll in chives, herbs, paprika etc. You can marinate these cheeses in oil and keep in frig around 3 mths. EXPERIMENT and have FUN.
Thursday 29 January 2015
WHEN THE RIGHT IS IN THE WRONG.
Day 5 and the media is still pumping us full of the cataclism that will befall the country because Prince Phil got knighted. Here's the real nasty bit..... the right-wing commentators to a man/woman have condemned the PM's appointment for their own grubby ends. Oh! the criticism per se is fine but some of us are not fooled. You see folks, every now and then, conservative media voices need badly to be seen as non-biased, to be seen to arc up against their pin-ups, to appear totally independant and even-handed. In this case they have hung their hats on an issue of trivia and they know full-well that the next zephyr of political import will blow those hats to oblivion, never to be remembered when the next election is around the corner. BUT, they can always claim: hey! didn't we lead the criticism against the PM. This is reverse dialectics!! Another recent example is the Bikie clubs donating to the LNP to make a very salient point. Another is: the Chinese communist politburo setting up a phoney Catholic hierarchy. I"m not the dill these commentators want me to be. SHAME on you.....Andrew Bolt, Alan Jones, Janet Albrechtson, Miranda Devine et al. Tell it like it really is...a touch of trivia that has merely rushed in to fill the vacuum of a sparse news cycle.
Tuesday 27 January 2015
MARRIAGE should be happy but NOT GAY.
To add to the previous post on "gay marriage", [click the article from Crisis magazine]: gays do not have a "right" to marry under any natural law or otherwise. It is becoming a very common mistake to claim "rights" to this, that, and the other. What gays have a right to is the right to protest, petition and persuade, i.e., the right to seek a change in legislative law. They have no rights to something that is deemed not lawful. They do have a right to seek a change to the law. I say "common mistake" as all and sundry seem to claim a right to do what suits in our present social milieu. E.G., claiming the right to voice an opinion! In fact, no such right exists without qualification: one cannot voice an opinion if it is calumnous, slanderous, racist, sexist or a clear lie. However, all have a clear right to any view, but at times that view ought not be voiced. This is basically what the A.G. meant when he said we all have a right to be bigots [but it may well be illegal to give voice to one's bigotry].
ART Vs CRAFT
The term ART has become confused over time with colloquial usage. E.G., an "art" exhibition displays paintings and/or sculptures but the fine arts encompass dance, music, plays, story-telling, poetry, painting, sculpture and occasionally items that are, over time, elevated from "craft". The difference may be arbitrary but, I would argue, is not down to "the eye of the beholder", as though an individual can decide on a personal whim what is ART and what is CRAFT. It is quite possibly a truism that "beauty" is in the eye of the beholder. But beauty is not a pre-requisite of art [e.g. the paintings of El Grecko], nor of craft [tribal war/death masks]. But there well may be some validity in claiming that true art is often determined as such by the many eyes of many beholders over time, which principle in no way concedes to the notion of the individual "eye". So what are some of the differences between art and craft? Craft is predominately an object and remains so, although there are exceptions like say, juggling or acting or whip-cracking. Essentially, a craft is utilitarian.Art is not, [not to say that art is useless, far from it], but craft is distinguishable by its functionality. ART affects the many, pertains to and contributes to culture, is emotive, value-laden and societal. Art is determined as such generally by a collective philosophical determination and acceptance, usually over time. Craft is obvious and immediately accepted for what it is and its purpose is obvious. Art can often be attributed a moral value. Craft has no morality. Consider examples. The Sistine Chapel, Brahm's concerto and Swan Lake would certainly have been considered admirable at first, but nobody would argue decades later that they are not art. Such things point mankind to matters beyond the mundane. The writings of Shakespeare and Dickens contributed to actual culture change. Early religious paintings leave society with a record of its religious development. When a primitive society had no alphabet [written], to pass on knowledge and advance its culture it used rock-art, which is one of those examples of craft elevated to art. Mankind would be far more beastial without art. What is or is not art is not determined by an individual's likes or dislikes. One may dislike classical music, hate the Mona Lisa or be repulsed by a Caravaggio but one's opinion does not disqualify art from being art. In a similar way, I happen to "love" the Valiant Torque Flite among cars and the Spitfire airplane gives me goosebumps but I could not class them as art. I do not like Andy Warhol's art, but it is art. And I venture to claim that, for all the reasons given so far, the post-terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo will one day class those cartoons as ART. The eye determines beauty, not what is art.
Wednesday 14 January 2015
DEAR MOHHOMED [ C.C. Jesus Josephson ].
Dear Sir, Your followers have had to put up with some insults in recent times and they have reacted by killing people around the world, e.g. Sydney, Paris, Iraq, Africa etc., including the kidnapping of 200 schoolgirls and the butchering of a lot of kids in their classroom. Let me tell you about my society, a largely Christian one. We have had art exhibitions depicting rude insults to the Mother of Christ, artwork entitled "The Piss Christ" and so on. We have a satyrical TV show by "the Chasers" which demean everything religious, spiritual or of a value that we hold up as dear and noble. We have a main-stream media that impunes rightiousness. While your followers want laws banning such things, we don't have them nor even seek them. Do you know why? Its because we are above petty insults. Our values are not shaken by this psuedo-comedy or partial commentary. We are too strong in our values, our psyche and determination to stay free. Sure we have hiccups. The man who is now our P.M. saw to it that an opponent called Pauline Hanson was sent to gaol on a technicality because her views were too popular. Then a political commentator called Chris Kenny was cartooned having sex with - I think a pig with the PM's face - for which he sought private redress in the courts. Then another commentator was prosecuted for highlighting that some folk on Aboriginal welfare were more European than indigenous [ and found guilty too ]. Yes we have hiccups. Mind you, satyrists like the Chasers and others are careful not to demean gays, Aboriginals or Greenpeace, Green pollies, satanists, bikies, climate proponents et al.. [They don't even demean you and your kind]. No sir, we even laugh along with those who make fun of us and our values, simply because such carry-on has no fundamental influence. After all, Jesus is hardly going to curl up in a foetal position because somebody painted a profane picture of him. We have a - rather hackneyed - saying that could even be as old as you: Sticks and stones....etc.
Tuesday 13 January 2015
SECRET BIKIE BUSINESS.
Ask Siri to tell you where the nearest abortion clinic is...she won't. Ask predictive speller to write "fuck" and it won't. A moral law is being applied here, while abortion and swearing do not break legislative law. In the reverse, Catholic law does not prohibit the theft of food to a starving person, but under state legislation that person will be prosecuted. The fact at work here is that there is a moral or natural law and a legislative law. Sometimes they intersect to either agree or contradict. Great problems here as exemplified by Jesuischarlie: Hebdo contravene a moral law but not a legislative law, hence the assassins believe moral law comes first, so the following is offered in good faith. Enter Newman's LNP bikie association laws, [love the name "disestablishment act"....personally I'm into antiredisestablishmentarianism ]. Forget [for mine], any U.N. human rights treaties [only because I have personal problems with the U.N.], for they are not needed here. It would seem to be a natural and moral law that humans have a right to associate with others; in fact that doesn't have to be legislated for. But the LNP have done just that .... by legislating against associating with a certain group, the general population is being told by law with whom they can associate. This absolutely has to be a contradiction and arbitrary quashing of a natural law. The dictum of: "if you are not doing anything wrong then you have nothing to fear", [as arguably applies to CCTV monitoring], has no application here because it criminalises normal and even admirable everyday activities. A hundred scenarios could be given where innocents will accidentally break these laws, but they will be guilty nevertheless. How the heck does anyone know who will be at the neighbours birthday party? This has to be said: yes, at times we need extreme laws to protect the population, such as anti-terror laws, curfews in an emergency and so on. But bikies are simply maladjusted throwbacks who profess a peurile code of anarchy, hate for rival clubs, hatred of cops, pronounce the death penalty on any who hurt family, produce and distribute substances that could kill our kids, are into weapons, racketeering and so on. They are stupid and misguided more than evil. They are les of a danger to the populace than paedophile priests, extremist moslems, con men, serial killers and rapists, maniac drivers, fast-food chains, ciggy companies, asbestos producers and banks. So no, this is not written in their defense. It is written in the defence of moral law and as an ALERT to the thin edge of the wedge of Totalitarianism . And I haven't even gone on about bikie's relegation of women, [we don't even need to ask, "relegated to what?" because categorising women is sufficient. Nor have I gone on about their suppression of the individuality of each soul for conformism or conformity to their many childish mores and rules. That grown men need immediate approbation of the group numbers under the banner of demons [hell's angels] or barbarians [mongols] and so on is more of a danger to themselves than to society. Outlaws, so self-styled can be dealt with by the organisation society has instituted for its freedom from harm, that's spelled c-o-p-s. Totalitarian laws are a heinous over-reaction. THE CONUNDRUM: I'm happy to harangue all voters in any election. Why? Because we all too often vote to the criterium...What's in it for moi? Rather, shouldn't we temper this with what may be good for our community at large. So yes, the Queensland Opposition has promised to repeal these laws, but Queensland voters must ask; which mob will do the best for the state. I don't envy them.
Friday 9 January 2015
EASY-PEASY and CHEAP YOGHURT.
NO SPECIAL EQUIPMENT NEEDED: 1 litre milk, bring almost to the boil; let cool to 40deg. [or blood temp such as you would test for a baby's bath. Add 2tabs natural yoghurt [store-bought or saved from your last batch]. pour into a thermos and let set overnight. Decant and refrigerate up to 10 days. BINGO! One-third the cost. TIP: For a Greek-style thicker type, buy a good pot-set thick brand like Mundella. [Cornflour or gelatine can be used to thicken, if thats your go]. TIP: For a sweet yoghurt, add sugar or sweetener before heating. TIP: Make it yummy by adding good amount of vanilla before heating. TIP: Bits of fruit can be added but ensure not to use too much juice, and don't let the temp. drop. TIP: While a thermos and sugar thermometer are ideal, they are not vital, especially in warmer weather when the saucepan will remain warm overnight. If not using a thermos, wrap the saucepan in foil then a towel. TIP: Ensure all utensils are sterile and DRY, as any soapy residue will kill the useful bacteria as will too much heat, [While if too cool, the bacteria will not grow].
Monday 5 January 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)