Add to Technorati Favorites

Sunday, November 11, 2012

We've moved!

Yep - we have moved over to wordpress at but soon to be going to our own domain name. Come on over and have a look!

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Anthony Bloody Mundine

Anthony Mundine has definitely done it again - made a complete dickhead of himself.

Mundine's latest stunt is making himself the arbiter of what it means to be Aboriginal in Australia. His definition clearly means you must have sufficient darkness of your skin - like him - and most definitely do not dare to have a 'white' wife and kids. And God help you if you don't measure up to his standards. Or perhaps it should be Allah help you - after all, Mundine did not just convert to Islam (I don't give a damn about what his chosen religion is) but declared himself to be 'The Chosen One' ie chosen by Allah (which I definitely do give a damn about - what phenomenal arrogance).

In the wake of terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre, Mundine defended the act, claiming "it’s not about terrorism. It’s about fighting for God’s law." I wonder if it ever occurred to him that faithful fellow Muslims also died in that attack?

This is the same clown that when getting his professional boxing career off the ground, tried to make a Big Man out of himself by challenging fighters from the past. I watched the televised bout between he and Lester Ellis. Ellis had been retired for some years, was considerably older than Mundine, shorter, fought in a much lighter weight category and was by then clearly well out of shape. Judging by some footage of Ellis in the change room before the fight, I was also left with the feeling that he had finished his career without all his marbles still in place. But Mundine did not just challenge Ellis, he publicly taunted Ellis into agreeing to the bout.

The fight was stopped early in the first round with Ellis's corner throwing in the towel. Mundine celebrated this 'win' by leaping around like a madman, punching the air and doing standing somersaults. For what? Beating a much older, long retired, out-of-shape retired fighter that Mundine towered over?

After that, Mundine started a long-running campaign, challenging retired world champion, Jeff Fenech, to get into the ring with him. Yet more media carrying on, building himself up. Fenech responded by saying rather than Mundine challenging a retired fighter from several weight classes below him, that he instead do the same thing by stepping up weight classes to challenge Mike Tyson. And as Fenech is friends with Tyson, he said he was pretty sure he could organise it. No meaningful response from Mundine. Which is a pity. I have no doubt that even the retired 'Iron Mike' could have wiped the floor with Mundine.

This was part of Mundine's way of making himself out to be such a Big Man. I half-expected him to throw down the challenge to the retired Johnny Famechon who was in his fifties and crippled by a car accident.

Mundine has previously put himself forward as a representative and spokesperson for Australian indigenous people. Except now he is not just a self-appointed spokesperson, he is a self-appointed tyrannical dictator. If you do not measure up to his expectations then expect to be on the receiving end of his rants that would be more at home in a training manual for the Ku Klux Klan or a neo-Nazi gang. The current target of that vitriol is Daniel Geale.

Geale identifies himself as a Tasmanian aboriginal, wears an icon of the Indigenous Australian flag on his shorts and is to face off against Mundine in a title fight. But according to Mundine, Geale is not black enough, that his having a white wife and children is somehow proof that Geale should not be able to call himself aboriginal. Mundine even resorted to the long-disproved theory that all the Tasmanian aboriginals were killed off long ago. For crying out loud - what is this? 1963?

I am not an indigenous Australia. If I were, I would be highly embarrassed to have the likes of Mundine claiming to represent me and my interests.

At the end of the day, this is typical Dickhead Mundine behaviour which goes well with his dressing like a pimp and talking 'street' (which suddenly appeared later in his life) - just a pretense at being a Gangsta Badass. The only purpose it serves is to give him more media attention which I expect shows him off as a media whore rather than any other legitimate purpose.

Sunday, October 7, 2012

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

And so it still continues with Alan Jones.

Let us take a step back for a moment.

Lebanese Muslims are rapists - according to Alan Jones.

Julie Gillard is only fit to be sewn up in a chaff bag and tossed into the sea - according to Alan Jones.

Julia Gillard killed her father - according to Alan Jones.

Those are only three of the many outrageous statements he has made over the years. He has repeatedly been in trouble with the Australian Communications and Broadcasting Authority for, to quote Monica Attard, failing to meet pretty basic broadcast standards.

Now Jones and his employers at radio 2GB are calling foul because there are campaigns running online against him.

As recent episodes with Charlotte Dawson have demonstrated, there are arseholes and idiots out there who get their rocks off by making nasty threats etc behind the assumed anonymity of social media such as Twitter. But given Jones's repeated offensive behaviour over the years, I would have thought he would be quite used to angry responses to him.That said, I do not support threats of violence or anything like that. And if there are people out there who are using the current controversy over Jones as an excuse to respond in kind to Jones, then they do not have my support. But that does not mean that everyone who supports the campaign to have Jones held accountable for his continuing abuse of his position with incitement of hatred and other similar socially unacceptable stunts, is automatically a bully as both Jones and his station have claimed today.

To hold the opinion that Alan Jones is a piece of filth is not bullying. To express the opinion that he is a piece of filth who should be held properly accountable is not bullying. To call on the sponsors who have been throwing megabucks at Jones for years to cease supporting his behaviour is an expression of social outrage. To expect 2GB to pull him into line is not bullying.

In contrast, to use a radio broadcasting position and other events such as speaking opportunities that are a direct result of that broadcasting position, to then disseminate hatred and vile abuse, is most definitely being a bully.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

Now if you have an opinion on what I'm blathering about or even just feel like saying hi, then don't be afraid to leave a comment or post something to me via Twitter or Facebook. I don't bite - at least not always.

The Jones saga worsens

Alan Jones is finally really coming under the hammer for his behaviour.

Radio 2GB has announced that it is pulling all sponsorship from the Jones timeslot. That may seem to be something of a victory for those who have been demanded that Jones be held accountable. But have a closer read. Macquarie Radio Network executive chairman Russell Tate stated "There is almost universal agreement that Jones' remarks were unacceptable, wrong and inexcusable. Alan himself acknowledged that from the moment he first advised me of them. He immediately arranged a media conference to state that publicly and apologise to the Prime Minister." Tate is essentially arguing that the baddies in this matter are not Jones or the station that has employed him for so long and supported all of his outrageous behaviour, but those who are now calling for him to be held accountable. They have had years in which do something about it but have failed to do so. Why? Quite obviously because they have been making money out of it.
Clearly Tate is taking the stance that Jones issued an apology via a press conference. There is a problem with that view. Go and listen to that press conference. There are copies of it online. Jones does not actually say "I am sorry" to Prime Minister Gillard.

There is a bigger issue here that is being overlooked. This is not just a matter of a single, accidental outburst by Jones.

Alan Jones has a history of using his position to push disgusting and deliberately hateful and hurtful positions. He has been directly profiting from these. Allow me to recap some again:
  • cash for comment scandal where he was pocketing large sums of money for making positive comments on air about products and organisations but hiding the fact they were actually paid advertisements - by deliberately hiding the truth, in my opinion he was nothing but a liar;
  • being found guilty of inciting hatred against Muslims immediately prior to the 2005 race riot in Sydney - in my opinion he was damned lucky to escape being found guilty of worse things considering he was reading out text messages which to all intents and purposes advertised the planned, violent attacks on Muslims, being organised and pushed by white supremicists (the leader of which publicly called for police protection after the riot) - please note I am not claiming Jones to be a white supremacist, but merely whoring himself to make a buck;
  • Jones's appeal against the above finding being dismissed for being largely irrelevant ie he could not come up with a decent excuse for or defense of his actions;
  • a continuing, deliberate and hurtful campaign against Julie Gillard which went way beyond any reasoned political stance, including his using his airtime to call for Gillard to be sewn up in a chaff bag and thrown into the sea - this was not just a bit of satire or goofing around but was delivered in his hostile and inflammatory manner.
The fact that Alan Jones has retained his lucratively paid position means that he has been consistently rewarded for his behaviour.

The extent of his sponsorship deals is demonstrated by the fact that he has been driving around in a new Mercedes worth $250,000, that was given to him by Mercedes Benz. Mercedes Benz have cancelled their sponsorship, having had enough of the Jones behaviour and are demanded their car back. Good.

In Australia we have been damned fortunate to not have the extent of social troubles experienced elsewhere. But we still have some. And the sort of stunts pulled by Alan Jones merely add to those. He has a long history of deceitful, deceptive and socially unacceptable behaviour. And enough is enough. Like everyone else, he has to be held accountable for his actions.

A small update - I have just discovered that I am in agreement with Peter FitzSimons. I feel unclean.

Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Keep flushing the dunny and get rid of the turd!

the petition calling for sacking of Jones
There are some things in life that are really unpleasant and annoying. Like the stray turd that refuses to be flushed away, stubbornly floating on top of the water in the dunny bowl until eventually being forced off down into the sewer where it belongs.

That analogy could also be applied to people such as, oh I don’t know – perhaps radio broadcaster, Alan Jones. Make that definitely Alan Jones.

Controversy surrounds Jones like a foul smell which refuses to go away. Probably because Jones is the source of the stench.

Alan Jones’s latest stunt was to use his speaking appearance at a recent event to launch a viscous attack on Australian Prime Minister, Julie Gillard. But this was no attack against her polices or her government. Oh no. This was an obviously planned and intended diatribe that Ms Gillard was the cause of her father’s death, that he literally died of shame, that he had lived in shame for years every time she stood in an election.

True to form, Jones did not let the facts get in the way of a good rant. The fact that Mr Gillard was in his eighties and already hospitalised did not have anything to do with his passing. According to Jones, Gillard Senior literally died of shame.

What a load of crap.

The event in question was a fund-raising event by a branch of the Young Liberals (for my North American friends, for ‘liberal’ read ‘republican’) with Jones as the featured speaker. Unfortunately for Jones, a reporter was present, having purchased their own ticket and presumably hoping for something newsworthy dripping from Jonesy’s lips. And pretty much all hell has broken loose on Jones after the story was released.

Controversy in highly questionable circumstances is hardly new to Jones. For example, he was caught up in the nasty ‘cash for comment’ scandal where he was pocketing lucrative payments to make positive statements about particular products and organisations. You may be asking ‘so what?’ – isn’t that what advertising is? No, it isn’t the same. Jones was pocketing the money, whoring himself out but pretending it was independent commentary, quite deliberately hiding the fact that it was in fact paid comment. But he still claims to be an independent broadcaster. Yeah. Right. Better keep an eye out for those flying pigs as well.

Back in 2005, there was nothing short of a race riot in Sydney. Being openly pushed by a white supremacist group among others, this started as a brawl on the beach before spilling out into the streets and public transport. Just having the appearance of someone from the Middle East was enough to cop a beating as CCT footage amply demonstrated.

Just prior to that riot, Alan Jones was talking it up on his radio program. He was reading out alleged text messages which advertised it. He openly referred to Lebanese Muslims as "vermin" who "rape and pillage a nation that's taken them in".

Not surprisingly, a complaint was made to the New South Wales Administrative Decisions Tribunal. In 2009, the Tribunal found that he” incited hatred and vilified Lebanese Muslims.” He was fined, forced to publicly apologise and his employer condemned for their practices in allowing this behaviour to go ahead. Jones appealed. Just as the furore over his ‘death by shame’ comments burst, the Tribunal finally ruled on his appeal, dismissing it.

This is someone caught out using his broadcasting time to disseminate racial hatred. In my opinion he was quite lucky to escape even more serious punishment for a perception of a role in inciting racial riot.

Yet again, Alan Jones was way over the line. Yet again, Alan Jones managed to apologise but without actually saying ‘I’m sorry,’ instead turning into an opportunity for yet another rant. Yet again, Alan Jones is essentially getting away with simply unacceptable behaviour. His radio station has loved him because he has been bringing in big bucks, thereby justifying his own big bucks salary.

It has been reported that sponsors have been pulling out. If that is a complete withdrawal from funding sponsorship at the radio station, then beaut – hit them in their pockets. But if it were just moving the sponsorship to another timeslot, then it is a pretty empty action, not actually causing the station any loss.

I was happier to learn that regional radio stations have dropped their subscriptions to take Jones’s broadcast. Now that is definitely a monetary loss to the station – and good news it is. Causing them actual real financial loss is clearly the only way to get the message across.

A petition is now circulating around courtesy of the Internet, calling for boycotts of Jones, his program and his station, further calling for his sacking. Naturally enough, Jonesy didn’t like that either, having a blast against it on-air. Clearly in his world’s view, he is the only one who should be allowed an opinion, nobody else. As for people daring to disagree with him, watch out you scum suckers! Well, I signed it happily enough and have included a link to it at the head of this post. As I type this, the petition has 108,038 'signatories'.

In all of this, Prime Minister Gillard has shown a distinct quiet dignity. She has declined to give comment against Jones other than to state she refuses to ever appear on his program again, as well as thanking the many Australians who have made contact to express their sympathy. She has also declined to accept calls from Jones.

Let's be honest about things. Jones has only backed off because he was caught out. His attempted defense that he thought it was a private event is nonsense - it was an event that anyone could have bought a ticket to. Would he be making such a public stance if he hadn't been so publicly caught out? No bloody way.

In contrast, pretty much the only comment from her opposite number, Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott, has been to refuse to boycott appearances on Jones’s program. Fair enough – he has the right to appear there or not. But am I the only one who thinks Abbott should be making comment on someone using a Liberal Party-affiliated event for such an appalling, over the top attack? Especially if it was a paid appearance and I sincerely doubt Jonesy would be turning up as a featured speaker as a freebie. Or is it really just a case of Tony Abbott’s usual stance that in his opinion, pretty much anything goes. One cannot help but wonder just what class taught that world view back at the seminary he studied at?

In the meantime, Alan Jones is now in the midst of a real stink. Perhaps, with a bit of luck, we shall see the ultimate flush that sees Jones off swimming down in the sewer with the rest of the turds where he belongs.

Now if you have an opinion on what I'm blathering about or even just feel like saying hi, then don't be afraid to leave a comment or post something to me via Twitter or Facebook. I don't bite - at least not always. Or even follow the blog by email. 

Friday, September 28, 2012

When to shut up - please!

The death of ABC employee, Jill Meagher, has had a very sorry ending with the discovery of her raped and murdered body. The good news, if there is such a thing in these circumstances, has been the charging of Adrian Ernest Bayley, 41, for those offenses, provided that he is the actual rapist and murderer.

Where matters have a distinct possibility of coming unstuck is the amount of anti-Bayley social media commentary that has been so prevalent that it has lead to Victorian police calling for people to basically shut up. And I agree with them.

All of us have a fundamental right to a fair trial. A foundation stone of a fair trial is that a jury hears your case, free from prior mental contamination. Once something has become seen widely enough in a negative sense against the party facing trial, the process can become contaminated to the point that the courts decide a fair trial cannot occur and matters are dropped.

Possibly the most infamous case of this was when Derryn Hinch used his then-television program to publicly name and shame a pedophile who was facing a trial for abuse of minors. Hinch was clearly warned by the Court not to do so. But he shot his mouth off andwas  subsequently found guilty of contempt of court, serving weekend detention. Hinch has made plenty of mileage out of that episode over the years, insisting it demonstrated his personal conviction etc. But what was the real outcome? An apparently known pedophile, facing a pretty strong case against him, had his charges dropped because of the contamination of potential process. I fail to see how Hinch's actions were anything more than a PR stunt that saw all sense of justice denied to all concerned.

The truly guilty should never be able to walk free simply because people refuse to shut their mouths. Are we entitled to our opinion? Yes. But if we really want the guilty to face the consequences of their actions, then we need to be careful how and where and when we express such opinion if it could provide a means of cases being dropped. If Adrian Ernest Bayley is guilty of the rape and murder of Jill Meagher, then while he deserves a fair trial, Meagher deserves to be remembered by her assailant paying for his crimes. Her family and friends deserve the degree of closure that a guilty verdict may provide. But should her rapist and murderer, Bayley or otherwise, walk free because people cannot shut their mouths, then it would be incredibly deceitful to her memory and an insult to her family and other loved ones.

So please, people, please - just shut the hell up about what you might want to do to Bayley and let judicial process take its course.

Monday, September 24, 2012

SOS! Save Our Shoes!

I am a day early this week. Does that make up for being late last week?

Now I am all for history and preservation of items of historical significance and/or interest. But there really does come a point of lunacy.

Remember Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos? Phillipines dictator and his wife who lived in luxurious splendour while ever so many of their nation struggled to even eat? Imelda's collection of at least 1,225 pairs of shoes, left behind when she and Ferdy had to do a sprint ahead of a revolt?

Shock. Horror. It has just been announced that Imelda's shoe collection, part of a stock of "precious mementoes from the Marcoses" was not properly stored by the museum that was given the task of looking after them. And now it has been discovered that they are rotting, infested with termites.

Imelda Marcos's shoe collection pictured in 1987, the year after she and her husband fled the Philippines. Photograph: Sipa Press/Rex Features
According to the museum curator Orlando Abinion, "Imelda may have worn some of these clothes in major official events and as such they have an important place in our history."

Oh give me a break. The bloody shoes she wore to an event are somehow an important part of history? Was justice ever truly served on the Marcoses? Nope. The literally billions believed to have been squirrelled away by them ever properly recovered? Nope.

I have some friends in the Philippines. And life is still pretty damned hard there for the average Filipino. Work is damned hard to find. Welfare services that so many of the rest of us take for granted are virtually non-existent. Yet this museum has the funding and resources to undertake conservation work to rescue and repair Imelda's bloody shoe collection.

Could it be that as Imelda has wormed her way back into Phillipines society and even into Parliament (the same ruling body that she helped Ferdinand quash), suddenly it is deemed wise to look after this nonsensical part of their past? Sure these symbols of extravagance and waste would be better remembered as a lesson, not as historic symbols to be valued in this way, seemingly more important than ensuring the average Filipino can actually eat.

 How completely and utterly ridiculous!

Now if you have an opinion on what I'm blathering about or even just feel like saying hi, then don't be afraid to leave a comment or post something to me via Twitter or Facebook. I don't bite - at least not always. Or even follow the blog by email.