'government has gagged debate on the fairness test'

- is it just me or is there inherent irony in that statement?

Just for arguments sake, I made my last post at 12:30am on Tuesday morning. Here's what came out in the Sydney Morning Herald, that same day, an article about Malcom Fraser's, former Liberal Australian Prime Minister, criticism of Howard's use of fear politics.

I'de just like to make this heard...somewhere

We.

As in - you, me, your grandmother, the postman - are living in an era of global fascism.

You are living in fascist times.

I'm going to bed now. I just had to make that truth heard. Because I suddenly realised that most people don't know, or don't want to know, that they are living in backward, suppressive, dictatorial, unfair, violent times. Because they can avoid the truth.

But I can't. And this will help me sleep. More importantly, it will help my neighbours sleep, as it will prevent me from screaming my hatred and despair at the whole present State Of Things out my bedroom into the night air.

Am I happy? I'm not blindly happy, but I'm getting better.

WV

- Oh, and if you have no idea what I'm talking about, I give you a stepped plan excuse to not remain ignorant:


1. Look around your world.
2. Read George Orwell's 1984
3. Search Arundhati Roy's transcripts, speeches or books and listen to/read them
4. Look around your world again.

I wonder

Gun culture.

In other news, I wonder.

I wonder if my thoughts are a construction. I wonder if they are a construction of my upbringing, the school I go to, the circles I turn in. I know they are. But if they are, who am I? And where is the world going? And can I make a value judgment about it? Can I choose to be righteous, successful, intelligent, philanthropic?

Who doesn't want to be a good human being? Who is damaged? Who isn't? What does being a lawyer mean? What does focusing on profit maximisation mean? What does opting-out mean? What is drug use? What is reality?

What is caring? What is selflessness? What is science and what has it done for us? What is meaning, and what is the structuralised meaning in language? And where has it gone? And was it ever structured? And if it wasn't, how was it meaning?

What is modern, post-modern, valuable? What is evil and what is good?

What is the difference between a double espresso and a soy decaf late? What is getting drunk?

What is disease? What is war? What is terrorism? What is poverty? What is inequality?

Who is at fault?

What should be done?

Who should do it?

Where am I? Not in time or space. Where am I in the dimension of life?

edit: who reads my blog?

aaaaaand I'm back in Sydney :).

billboard

demolition

Terrorists have ambitions of empire

Terrorists have ambitions of empire, says Cheney - SMH 23/02/2007

I knew it! That must be why they have military bases in the Japan, Europe, the Middle East, the Pacific, hell, the middle of Australia. That's why they're starting wars with sovereign nations under provenly false pretenses. That's why they have ignored the international organisation of countries which was formed to enable diplomatic decisions on global issues (the UN).

Wait a second! That's America!

I think my head is going to explode.

JOHN HOWARD has turned up the political heat over Iraq by committing 50 to 70 more troops - SMH 20/2/2007

50-70 troops? How many soldiers does it take to change a lightbulb? Cause that's about all the use they're going to be.

WV's wordplay for Tuesday

The text below is taken from a Sydney Morning Herald article regarding John Howard's recent comments about American presidential candidate Obama's plan to withdraw troops from Iraq by 2008. The quoted text is Howard's speech:

Senator Obama's call for a withdrawal of troops from Iraq by March 2008 was also matter of Australia's national security (Howard)

"If I was running al-Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008 and pray, as many times as possible, for a victory not only for Obama, but also for the Democrats."

"I do not apologise for criticising Senator Obama's observations because I thought what he said was wrong. If America is defeated in Iraq that will be catastrophic for the West and it will have tremendously adverse consequences for Australia."

"The greatest current threat to the quality of the alliance would be a sense in the United States that Australia had deserted her in her hour of need,"


Well lets have a look here:

Senator Obama's call for a withdrawal of troops from Iraq by March 2008 was also matter of Australia's national security (Howard)

The logic presented by Mr Howard in this sentance seems to be that if American forces were removed from Iraq, the security of the nation of Australia would be put under threat. Would the various groups and forces fighting Australian and American foreign intervention in Iraq, having suceeded in their goal of freeing the country from foreign military intervention, decide it was then time, when the troops are removed, to launch an offensive in a country on the other side of the world? The more likely assumption is that a withdrawl of force would actually lead to a softening in anti-Australian sentiments from the various military organisations ('terrorists' as they are commonly known) causing violence in the middle east. The public rhetoric of organisations such as al-Quaeda support such a conclusion.

"If I was running al-Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008 and pray, as many times as possible, for a victory not only for Obama, but also for the Democrats."

Al-Qaeda is a military organisation that uses violence to achieve its goals. In this sense, it is similar to the militaries of American and Australia. The difference being that American and Australia are sovereign states and thus assume moral supremacy when they use bombs, tanks and guns to kill people and destroy other sovereign countries in the name of a safer world. There was no al-Qaeda in Iraq before the American and Australian invasion of Iraq. Local resistance by such organisations grew out of a situation of foreign intervention. The country is now entrenched in civil war and there are arguments that if foreign forces withdraw the situation will further deteriorate. But it is questionable if the situation could deteriorate any further. There are daily bombings and people on all sides are being killed every day. A withdrawl of foreign forces could lead to a softening in the killing, as hapenned in Afghanistan. Granted there are still massive problems there, but at least people aren't being killed as they were during the conflict period.

"I do not apologise for criticising Senator Obama's observations because I thought what he said was wrong. If America is defeated in Iraq that will be catastrophic for the West and it will have tremendously adverse consequences for Australia."

Was America's defeat in Vietnam catastrophic for the West? We must remember that the wars being fought between the middle-east and the west are being fought on middle-eastern soil. They are wars were eastern military organisations tied to no particular nation state are fighting the foreign powers of western sovereign states. A defeat for the west in this context would lead to less violence. This is mainly because these are ideological wars, they are fought on the basis of values and religion. They are not geographical wars because the 'terrorist' military organisations have no country to call their home. The wars therefore cannot be won on geographical grounds, as the invasion of Iraq has shown so clearly. The terrorists in Britain were home grown. In this context, continuing to use military force will only fuel the violence. Diplomacy and recognition are thus needed. An avenue not once, not ever, considered by America or Australia in dealing with these military organisations.


"The greatest current threat to the quality of the alliance would be a sense in the United States that Australia had deserted her in her hour of need,"

American parliament in both houses is now ruled by the Democrats. The Democrats initially opposed the Iraq war and are looking to removing troops by 2008. It is hard to see how Australia's alliance with America would be threatened if we choose to pull out troops in the near future as well. Also, It is impossible to imagine that the world's only superpower, who is fighting technological wars it has initiated in countries outside it's borders on the other side of the world, is 'in her hour of need'.

fireworks

Chinese new year's a coming baby!

I'm in Vietnam. Will blog when the internet becomes more interesting than beach and cheap seafood. Photos when I get back

peace

WV

for the last time,

Hewitt is a fuckwit.

Two photos. But yeah, there's a purpose here. This is the late night Muslim snack joint. They fry up just about anything except pork and you can have it with noodles or rice. I don't think people are aware there is quite a large Muslim population in China. Especially southern China. A lot come up from Malaysia and other SE Asian countries. Anyway, the food is good, and awfully cheap.

sweet potato sweet potato!

This is the honeyman. He walks around the cafes we frequent trying to sell watered down honey with a constant, chiseled-in, smile on his face. When he's not selling honey he's smoking copious amounts of tobacco through a bamboo water pipe or snoozing in the lotus position at various shady spots on the sidewalk. His speech is unintelligible and he's almost definitely a little crazy, but he appears happy.

There are stories to these photos and I should be telling them. This was taken near the water's edge of a relatively unknown Chinese port city on the way to Hainan. The old woman in the bottom left of the photo is sorting through garbage for used wooden barbeque skewers with the slow persistence of aged and weary hands. I assume they will provide here sustenance for the day. She is pilling them up on the edge of the garbage, below the black garbage bag on top of the concrete blocks. You should be able to see them if you look carefully. She did not once visibly recognise our presence. Rare in a country where people will sit and watch you play cards for hours on day long train journeys because you are white.

I'd just like to once again point out the obvious. Basically, why the political leadership of Australia, America and much of the rest of the west is full of shit. John Howard responded to Bush's speech regarding more troops for Iraq by claiming that if there was not a continued military presence in Iraq and Allied forces withdrew it would be a win for terrorism. Let us follow a little train of logic on this,

1. there were no 'terrorists' in Iraq prior to the American invasion,

2. the original reason for invading Iraq was because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (which it didn't),

3. it is generally understood, even admitted by American military leaders, that much of the violence in Iraq is being caused by civil war between rival religious groups.

This is the problem with the concept of 'terrorism'. What is terrorism to you? What is a terrorist to you? Is a US soldier who sits in a tank and fires shells at residential housing a terrorist or is the 16 year old Iraqi kid who fires back with a Russian made AK-47 the terrorist? Who is more morally in the right? Who's cause is more important? Whose blood is more valuable?

Who started it!? And should that really matter?

What really troubles me is that because John Howard has made a decade long career out of feeding the public bullshit, the public mindset has become bullshit. Orwell named it 'doublespeak'. Where you use language in a way which destroys meaning. You know what you're saying is bullshit, but you say it anyway, at the same time believing in it yourself if you're really good at it. Look it up on google for more definitions, or read George Orwell, 1984.

Anyway, enough of that. Also, beware of French-Canadians. I won't go any further than that but they have special powers which you should watch out for. Especially if you're competing with them to chase women.