Hyperidian Bannerman tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1 2010-03-12T05:15:20Z In the progenitor's honour. Movable Type 3.33 In the Spirit of Godwin tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1129 2010-03-12T04:53:19Z 2010-03-12T05:15:20Z Here’s an interesting piece I happened across in today’s Oz... Niall Cook in today’s Oz]]> here.
”The proof of the pudding is in the eating and is reflected in our audiences’ approval of our services and the positive knock-on effect this has had for our recent funding success. Let us never lose sight of this reality. Our future is inexorably intertwined with how diligent we are in faithfully discharging our obligations under our Act and Charter.”
A veiled warning about balance in reporting, something public broadcasters worldwide are often accused of not adhering to. It’s fine & dandy, however, for the likes of Murdoch to be as unbalanced as the owner’s ideology dictates. He then goes on to point out in no uncertain terms just how gratified he was by Chis Uhlmann’s online blog article, ‘In Praise of the Sceptics’ 30 October last year, in which Uhlmann wrote:
By now it should be clear that I am building towards an act of heresy. In mainstream political and scientific debate today what held true for Einstein does not hold true for climate science. Climate science we are endlessly told is "settled". But to make the, perfectly reasonable, point that science is never settled risks being branded a "sceptic" or worse a "denier". "Denier" is one of those words, like "racist", which is deliberately designed to gag debate. And what is wrong with being a sceptic? The Greek root of the word means "thoughtful" or "inquiring" and that used to be a virtue.
Uhlmann didn’t actually defend the sceptic or ‘denier’ stance in regard to Climate Change, any more than he defended the apostolic acceptance stance, simply defined the difference between scientific inquiry and uninformed opinion. I agree with his opinion, that science is never settled because science by its very nature is a process of hypothesis, test, theorising, test, hypothesis some more when the tests draw out more conclusions, and so on. No one in their logical mind will claim that the science of Climate Change is ‘settled’, because it’s not. What Newman did not address, and herein lies his act of dropping all of his emporer’s clothes, was the issue of Climate Change ‘deniers’ completely abrogating the scientific process in favour of un-proven, non-peer reviewed opinion. I’ve not yet come across one ‘denier’ personally, who understands the science, can reason its implications or more pointedly, will accept the high probability that human industrialisation is a major contributing cause. Not one. Okay, be a sceptic, challenge the science, but challenge it on an equal basis. Ian Plimer is an excellent example of the unequal challenge, with his postulation that geology has an major impact(??), and the Sun is most likely the principal causal factor. He completely dismisses, in fact, does not even consider the issue of human industrialisation as a causal factor, however minor . I can understand completely why ABC journalists would be offended by this thinly disguised nihilist accusation from the organisation’s own Chairman, and the anger expressed by many at the implication of partisanship on the part of highly respected research journalists, many of whom are scientists themselves (Catalyst) who present the viewpoints we see on Aunty ABC. I’m offended even writing about it. It seems as though the 'deniers' want their cake and eat it too. Don't criticise us, but we can denigrate you, even though you have science on your side. Perhaps we should have a principal on which to judge these discussions, debates about Climate Change, something along the lines of
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a Climate Change sceptic invoking Al Gore and/or Global Warming approaches 1"
I’ll call it NDC’s Law of Probabilities. ]]> Stumbling Clowns tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1128 2010-03-09T03:58:40Z 2010-03-09T04:00:44Z Freebie advice today for Tony "judge me on what I say now & not what I've said before" Abbott from Peter Costello's former political advisor, Niki Savva. She's right too. Abbott is not a good speaker, despite how convicted his... Niall Cook Freebie advice today for Tony "judge me on what I say now & not what I've said before" Abbott from Peter Costello's former political advisor, Niki Savva. She's right too. Abbott is not a good speaker, despite how convicted his tone of voice. He gives the impression of someone who's always caught on the hop, not done his research, announcing new initiatives because they just came to him in a flash of inspiration. Not a good look for a pollie. Not good at all. This is a flaw in a great many of our current crop of politicians. The inability to at least appear lucid and confident about what they have to say, and then say it effectively. There wouldn't be one Jim Killen or Fred Daly in either federal Parliament, and certainly no Whitlams or Menzies. The closest I've seen to a really cogent speaker would be Lindsay Tanner. I've not yet seen him on his feet without something pointed and authoritative to say, and deliver it without stumbling, uhm-ing and ahh-ing. Not a statesman by any means, but at least not painful to listen to. The bulk of our elected representatives are what they appear to be. Former solicitors, bankers, union officials, doctors and indian chiefs. Mostly, the latter.]]> Another WTF Moment tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1127 2010-03-08T01:12:57Z 2010-03-08T02:28:18Z IWD, Greer, Nowra, The Monthly Niall Cook International Womens Day, otherwise known as IWD. Sounds eerily like a birth control device, doesn't it? I digress...]]> vitriolic furore in the Oz 'sphere today over an article written by someone named Louis Nowra ( a male, no less!) which lambasts Germaine Greer and her seminal work, The Female Eunuch. I'm especially amused and enthused by Helen Razer's post, which far and away states the opinion of a truly liberated woman better than I've ever read, anywhere. She even uses my favourite four letter word, cunt.
Louis-Nowra-032-393x590.jpg
So, who is Louis Nowra? That's him above. Apparently a playwright, author, arts promoter and something of a closet misogynist with a latent Oedipus complex if the preview of his damning essay in this month's The Monthly is anything to go by. I'm not going out to buy the mag, nor pay for online subscription because there's rarely anything of genuine interest in it for me, so perhaps it's unfair of me to castigate the man for his opinion, when I've not read it in it's entirety. I'll let those who have do that. Suffice to say though, that any male who attacks Germaine Greer, rightly or wrongly, is going to incur the wrath of the woman's fan base. Nothing is more likely. I've not read Greer's book - The Female Eunuch - principally due to the fact that I don't have a cunt, even though I've often been described as being one, and while my tits seem to have blossomed somewhat with age & good living, other men don't seem to be falling over themselves to grope me. I'm male. The book was, presumably, written for an exclusively female readership. From all accounts, it had - some might say still has - a message for women everywhere who wonder if their place in the grand scheme of human society is what they think it is. See? I told you I hadn't read it. That aside, apparently Nowra_nee_Doyle - why change a name you'd lived with for twenty years to one equally as unattractive or memorable? - has read it, with the principal critique he offers being a nasty form of personal commentary about Greer's appearance, predilection for attention-seeking (his words, not mine), and concern for her mental health. Nothing at all about the time of the book and the culture of that time. Just a typically male perspective to which he's entitled, but also one which he cannot expect to get away with expressing in a national publication scot free. Women bring such fascination and beauty into the lives of we males, we forget that apart from being good home-makers, bearers of off-spring and convenient containers for our ejaculate, they are also human beings just like us. An essential part of us, if truth be told, and genetically, some might say, the more perfect part, if the human species can in any way be considered anywhere near perfection. Me personally, I love women. They are just as flawed as we males, but in radically different ways. They think differently, act differently and above all else, offer a view of life, the Universe & everything which we males all too often dismiss because of their gender. 'What would a woman know?'This is a man's world!' Well, no.....it's not. It - meaning the westernised societal culture we inhabit and operate under - doesn't belong to either gender. It is what it is because of the engagement between the genders, and in most cases, the disengagement on the part of the male of the species. Take the anti-abortion row for starters. The most vociferous opponents of abortion on demand are males, when surely, the right to decide to bear or not bear a child belongs solely to the female. I'd go so far as to state, what-the-fuck business does ANY male have telling any female what she can or can't do with her own body?? I could go on, but why bother, because I'm male & what would I know. Suffice to say, I'm bonded to a female for life and yes, I find her to be an extra-ordinarily confusing, frustrating, caring, thoughtful, attractive, annoying, demanding and satisfying adjunct to what would otherwise be an existence left hollow by the experience of living it alone. We males NEED our females. We rely on them, despite our macho claims to the contrary. Yes, we bag them at every turn, and why? Because they are not like us. Do we really want them to be like us? No, so why do we constantly whinge otherwise? Because we can. That's a part of the male psyche, to always want what we can't have. Green grass, etc. So, do I have any sympathy for Mr Nowra_nee_Doyle? Absolutely not! Do I have empathy with his opinion? hmmm....some, but not a lot. He is, after all, a brother albeit, an upper-middle-class, opinionated brother, but a fellow male none the less. I wonder if he even realises that we males do have our own international day, 19 November annually? Probably not. In typically male fashion, it's a whole lot easier to pick on the female and turn a selectively deaf ear & blind eye to the realities of modern life. Get me another beer, sweetie! I suppose a fuck's out of the question?]]> WIIFM tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1126 2010-03-04T05:10:47Z 2010-03-04T05:13:04Z There's an excellent article in Business Spectator today, extolling the virtues and inevitable rise of the electric vehicle for consumers.... Niall Cook electric vehicle for consumers. ]]> Tesla Roadster mentioned in the article. At a recommended purchase price of US$111,005 they ain't a cheap item, and Tesla don't want to sell it to you. They want to lease it to you. Easy monthly payments of US$1,658/m over 36 months or 30,000 miles (48,000 kilometers, whichever comes first), plus duties and at the end, you can 'pay a fee' and simply walk away. Or, you can pay the residual and own the car. The residual would equate to some US$55,000 if I've worked the lease yield right. Now, in this country, a car travels an average of 15,000 klicks per annum, so you might or might not get three years. And you're US$57,000 out of pocket if you take the operating lease option. But wait.....the fuel cost savings. Hey, if everyone thinks they're going to charge their vehicles in off-peak times, off-peak won't be off-peak any more, will it. The cost of electricity is slated to increase by at least 30% in the next couple of years and there's no data available right now to tell you just how heavily charging an electric car willweigh on your power bill. To my mind, estimates of cost savings are just bollocks without that data. I'd warrant that if you have an electric vehicle, you'll be required to have your power supplier install a separate circuit in your home so you can be monitored as to how much power you're drawing and be charged accordingly. What's the bet an excise get's lumped onto such usage???? Yes indeed, it's a fond dream right now, the electric vehicle, and doubtless will become a reality one day in the future, but to claim it's all going to come about before the end of my time is optomism at it's most fervent.]]> Realities of Spin tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1125 2010-03-01T02:22:37Z 2010-03-01T02:25:13Z The cocks are crowing, and gathering around at the far end of the barnyard, plotting the celebrations to be had when the farmer comes along with his axe to lop off the head of the prime rooster.... Niall Cook The cocks are crowing, and gathering around at the far end of the barnyard, plotting the celebrations to be had when the farmer comes along with his axe to lop off the head of the prime rooster. seems to think that this visitation process is enhanced by failures within Labor ranks to recognise the fallacy of spin, over substance. If spin is a prime factor in the current state and federal Labor government spheres, then surely the very same must be said for Labor's ideological opposites with concepts such as Great Big New Taxes and calls for even greater government interference into small businesses to forestall what Peter Garrett has been held responsible for. Those failures, by the way, are all state responsibilities to administer. There's an excellent post at the Blogotariate on this very issue, which I highly recommend. yes, the Rudd government could be doing better, but given the pace at which it's been operating, surely additional haste would seem to lead to even greater avenues for failures?]]> Bashing the Bolts tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1124 2010-02-26T03:22:16Z 2010-02-26T03:24:45Z Clive Hamilton - author, academic and ethicist - writes again today in the ABC's Unleashed pages for the fifth time on the rise and substance of Climate Change denial in the media. A damn good read it is too, but... Niall Cook Climate Change denial in the media. A damn good read it is too, but nothing new to those of us who follow these quasi-cultural wars between Climate Change realists and Climate Change deniers. ]]> The Australian. Again, it's hardly news to those of us who are aware, that the Oz is a nest of ideological Januses purporting to be journalists, all of whom bow & scrape to the edicts of the lord & master, Rupert. Anyone reading the Oz over the past two years would have recognised the awareness which gripped the likes of Dennis Shanahan, Greg Sheridan, Janet Albrechtsen, Glenn Milne, Caroline Overington, Imre Salusinszky, Bernard Salt, and Chris Mitchell, the editor in chief in Early November 2007 that politics in Australia was about to change. So did the tone of the conservative cliche at the Oz. All backing Rudd, all jumping pell-mell from the foundering Howardian tramp steamer. The change of heart lasted less than six months and ever since, there has been a steady return to the lines of old, bagging the Labor government at every turn, while attempting to fostering hope in conservatism as the coalition parties rent themselves asunder. I'm especially enamored by the way Hamilton highlights the likes of Andrew Bolt and Timmy Blair as doyens of the nhilist right, heads jammed firmly into their own particular sandpits, scraping dags from their own arses to hurl around at anyone and anything even remotely supporting or validating Climate Change science. Hamilton is only too accurate when he identifies the complete lack of peer reviewed science which accompanies these attacks, which only goes to prove that fighting fire with fire, or in the case of Climate Change, science with science, has never occurred to the denialist mindset. I've not read the previous four articles, because I didn't know they existed, but I will be now. It's well and truly past time that science received the support it deserves and denialism the brickbats it cries out for. Congratulations Auntie ABC, for acting as the vehicle carrying such weaponary into the Climate Change battle, in direct contrast to the massive media resources being utilised by the right.]]> So It Begins tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1123 2010-02-25T06:50:49Z 2010-02-25T06:56:26Z It's been a long road for Mamdouh Habib, and he's received very little in the way of moral support from Australian society, but it seems that the evidence which had him suddenly and mysteriously released from Guantanamo Bay in 2005,... Niall Cook soon to see the light of day. Justice might finally be able to unwrap herself from the bureaucratic bindings she's endured since the dark days of the Howardian era.]]> Malcolm Fraser tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1122 2010-02-23T09:56:06Z 2010-02-23T10:25:36Z If you've missed the bi-sected interview with Malcolm Fraser on 7:30 Report over the past couple of nights, you'll be pleased to discover the entire interview is available on the 7:30 Report website. I missed last nights edition, which is... Niall Cook 7:30 Report website. I missed last nights edition, which is on the site now as I type, but from what I saw tonight, it would appear that Malcolm Fraser has as low an opinion of the man we all love to hate as the majority of Australians who voted him out in 2007. Maybe it's the maturity which comes with age, maybe in the period 1975 to 1983 I was too young or even disinterested to pay a whole lot of attention. I recall being incensed by the dismissal of Whitlam, and remain to this day a carrier of the flame lit on that day. Fraser seemed, to me then, and to some degree even now, a political conniver, an opportunist and just another of the long, seemingly unending line of politicians seeking power and glory. Watching and listening to him over the decades since his retreat from political life, his role with Care Australia and the times when his opinion makes good media copy in response to social issues of import, I can't help but draw the conclusion that this man IS a genuine liberal. Something from the machine begun by Robert Menzies which isn't conservative in the far-right, big 'C' sense of the word fostered by Howard. I even find myself admiring the man, at least for his openness and honesty in a post Parliamentary life. Form your own opinions, as any rational thinker will, but I don't believe I'm wrong in my assessment of John Malcolm Fraser. It's just a shame the current incarnation of so-called liberals aren't just a little more like him.]]> Say It, Think It, But Don't Put It In Lights tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1121 2010-02-23T02:40:22Z 2010-02-23T02:42:57Z Are our pollies just a little too precious?... Niall Cook a little too precious?]]> Burn the Witch! tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1120 2010-02-23T01:37:05Z 2010-02-23T01:39:08Z The witchhunt of Peter Garrett is really becoming rather tiresome.... Niall Cook The witchhunt of Peter Garrett is really becoming rather tiresome. "here ya go, Pete.", and from that point, it's clearly hands off as far the the party political machine is concerned. This is where the politics comes into play. The idea is valid, an excellent stimulus concept and judging from the number of jobs created, now being decried as lost in the News Corporation press, the concept worked. What hasn't been taken into account is the human element. The human greed which always accompanies any form of government handout. Watching Q and A last night, I was struck by the statement made by Mungo MacCallum in regard to individual responsibility. Should Peter Garrett or indeed, any federal minister, be held responsible for the activities of those who act against regulations of legislation beyond the auspices of their portfolio? Should Peter Garrett be held responsible for employers who knowingly continued to use banned materials, knowingly sent their employees into unsafe workplaces, and knowingly enforced unsafe work practices? This negation of personal responsibility on behalf of those directly responsible for deaths and/or house fires is akin to a negligent father blaming a paedatrician for helping to bring a child into the world that the father had knowingly helped to create. The father had the fun of the moment, but isn't responsible for the consequences???? That's simply bizarre. In my mind, I have to agree with MacCallum, in that shoddy employers, sending employees into dangerous workplaces to perform dangerous work-practices are far more liable than a distantly removed Minister for the Environment can be proven to be. As to those who've suffered as a result of the stimulus incentive being shut down, I say point the finger at those seeking to make political or even ideological mileage from the affair. Then we come to this mythical creature called Ministerial Code of Conduct, within which resides Ministerial Responsibility. Para 1.3(iv) of that document describes Ministerial Responsibility, which to all intents and purposes, Garrett has complied with. Obviously this document can be interpreted as the reader sees fit, but the essence of the document is clearly in Garrett's favour. Interestingly, if you go to the Parliamentary Library website, scroll to the para Ministerial Code and click on 'A Guide on Key Elements of Ministerial Responsibility', you'll find a broken link. Read into that what you will, dear reader. To further enhance the scenario, I note an article on the ABC's Drum today which discusses this very issue of Ministerial Responsibility. As the author states:
Kim Beazley scored some scalps but it didn't help him become prime minister.
]]> No Smoke and No Gun tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1118 2010-02-19T04:44:51Z 2010-02-19T04:51:53Z Further to yesterday's post regarding the hype being fostered by vested interests surrounding Iran's nuclear program, I came across this small piece in today's Oz, of a much longer article apparently sourced from AFP.... Niall Cook this small piece in today's Oz, of a much longer article apparently sourced from AFP. ]]> here, at the Wall Street Journal. The actual report to the Board of Governors of the IAEA is confidential and not in the public domain, so in reality, we have no way of knowing the context in which the IAEA Director-General, Yukiya Amano phrased his suspicions regarding Iran's nuclear program. That said, Crawford includes much more of the alleged wording from this confidential report, than the Oz deigned to print.
"The information available to the agency...raises concerns about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile
" Such statements, as Crawford points out, must be viewed in light of Amano's differing perception of the role of the IAEA, to that held by his predassesor, El Baradai. That statement is definitely not the smoking gun of irrefutible proof required to support the hype some would like to see escalated, nor is it even close. I note also the clarification of the US administration's stance on the issue, in that the formal policy is one of acceptance that Iran's presumed past attempts at weaponising nuclear fuel have been 'shelved'. Now, 'shelved' to my mind means recoverable, and logic dictates that the knowledge required to weaponise nuclear fuel and create warheads is easily obtainable from the right quarters. Evidence the A.Q.Khan network which was operating between Pakistan, Germany and the Middle east. That said, it remains highly disingenuous of Greg Sheridan et al to bang a drum when no clear evidence exists. As I stated, Iran has every right to pursue a peaceful nuclear energy program, and to all intents and purposes, that is what she is doing. Unless or until the I.A.E.A. uncover anything to the contrary, all the hype under the Sun is as empty and meaningless as the integrity of those trying to foster it.]]> QandA Redux tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1117 2010-02-18T09:14:16Z 2010-02-18T09:21:06Z For those of you who missed QandA on Monday evening, can't face watching Bananaby Joyce embarrass himself yet are still interested in how the government Finance Minister answered the questions about government debt, salvation is at hand. Simply pop over... Niall Cook Lindsay Tanner's blog on the National Times for a succinct but informative version of what Lindsay had to say in response to Bananaby's bumbling accusations.]]> More Wailing and Keening tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1119 2010-02-18T04:47:00Z 2010-02-19T04:50:41Z Y'know, I get really, really tired of the shrieking, wailing and gnashing of teeth which occurs everytime Iran thumbs her nose at the West's demands that she not explore nuclear energy. Here's that Ameri-centric Australian pundit, Greg Sheridan, yet again... Niall Cook Ameri-centric Australian pundit, Greg Sheridan, yet again touting the line promoted almost exclusively by some in America, that Iran having nuclear energy is tantamount to the next global military conflict. These fear and loathing spruikers, like Sheridan, conveniently ignore the fact that the right to explore nuclear energy is sovereign to every nation on the face of the planet, as decreed by the Nuclear Arms Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which Iran is a signatory. Any nation is free to explore nuclear energy, as long as that exploration does not evolve into weapons development, which to date, Iran's program has not. We know this because the International Atomic Energy Agency - the watchdog - tells us so. The IAEA inspects such program developments, and providing there is deemed to be no weapons development going on, there is no issue. Frankly, I believe Sheridan and his ilk merely flap their virtual jaws to the American tune because they're sycophants unable to think logically about such issues. That, and the fact that deep down inside, it's the done thing to be anti-Islamic in every aspect of criticism of any nation-state which isn't the US of A. ]]> The State of Things tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1116 2010-02-17T03:55:02Z 2010-02-17T03:57:53Z I was alerted to this article by a blogger friend on another medium. The stats quoted are factual. Yet another set of obvious facts which confirm the decline of the American Empire.... Niall Cook this article by a blogger friend on another medium. The stats quoted are factual. Yet another set of obvious facts which confirm the decline of the American Empire.]]> Of Spotty Cats and Historical Lessons tag:www.waddayano.org,2010:/blog//1.1115 2010-02-16T03:40:35Z 2010-02-16T03:43:06Z It's an election year. We all know this because in the far-too-short Parliamentary cycle, this year of 2010 is year three of the current government.... Niall Cook It's an election year. We all know this because in the far-too-short Parliamentary cycle, this year of 2010 is year three of the current government. Op-Ed by George Brandis in today's Oz. Actually, it's a fairly poor effort on Brandis's behalf to paint Tony Abbott as something akin to himself, and not the dyed-in-the-wool conservative that he truly is. I thought his Alfred Deakin Lecture, delivered in October 2009, was a far better precis of Liberalism as he saw it. Abbott doesn't espouse any of those values, as a Liberal. It's also ironic that Brandis, who voted for Turnbull in the most recent leadership spill and is a self-declared centrist Liberal, should be making what I regard as a weak-kneed attempt at assuaging voters fears of Tony Abbott's obviously hard-nosed right-wing conservative beliefs as something not to be feared. Tell that to the working voters, the common-or-garden forgotten people that John Howard forgot. We all know Abbott is a Howardian accolyte and leopards never change spots. yes Virginia, 2010 is an election year. Never forget the past for history contains it's own lessons which those who neglect will pay the price for. Abbott is not the political fox that Howard was, but he's an ardent student who will be continuing to listen at the feet of his master. ]]>