Mangled Thoughts

The starting point is the controversy over the Bill Henson exhibition. Are the few pictures of a young girl art or paederastic pornography? Without seeing the photographs, it is difficult to decide but if the latter it is disgusting. The matter to zoom in on is what the scandal discloses; it’s a symptom of something else. It is not merely a controversy, and Henson does face the possibility of being charged.

Bracks and Brumby have effected a neo-Marxist coup-de-tat in Victoria, a matter I had intended to sum up this week but will do it next week. With it, under ‘anti-discrimination law’, the Blasphemy Act and such like what has happened is the judgement and discrimination exercised by many has been overthrown and instead all must obey the ‘morals’ of a narrow ‘elite’ who despise the liberty of mere dumb oafs.

Secondly, Government has undermined conventions and mores. Recently I had some chats with parents who, thanks to Federal and Victorian governments, watch their teenage offspring ruin their lives. The Federal ‘living away from home allowance’, for example, has made it possible for school children to leave home. The parents have no say, and what is more under the Bracks anti-Bill of rights it’s basically a horrific crime for parents to discipline their children.

Free markets don’t undermine families. Free markets yields the basis for families to thrive. Government has been the means for ideological parasites to deliberately undermine families. The upshot is the likes of Rudd, whose fascist, oxymoronic slogan ‘working families’ has nothing to do with families at all.

The second leg is demagoguery. Common law is rooted in absolute property rights and economic freedom. Take narcotics. Under common law, it’s not a question of legalese. If someone tries to corrupt your children, and hook your children on narcotics and thus destroy your children, you have every right to defend your children. If you are physically capable of it, you can pulverise the scumbags. If not, you can get a burly policeman to nab the scumbags, haul them into court and be assured the Judge would hand down a satisfyingly punitive sentence. Statist politicians have eliminated the right to defend yours, made it a criminal offence in fact. Crimes are crimes only if politicians say so, and the reverse is politicians declaring daily what is lawful to be crimes.

Socialism destroys morals, a real crime both major parties commit. As we see in the case of the Greens’ lie and “Kyoto compliance”, they proceed by whipping up passions using lies, and also use real concerns to justify each new decree. This is what Rudd and others are doing over petrol supply and its price control scheme euphemistically called “Fuel Watch”. Rudd is whipping up passions by slandering oil producers - “big oil”. Rudd is a demagogue.

As the Blasphemy Act and anti-discrimination Acts show, some are free to exercise discrimination and say what they wish to say. The trouble is, every other Victorian must obey the selective morality of a parasitic ‘elite’. But, in spitting on modest, decent Australians and their morals, they set something else in train, the backlash.

Unfettered, non-selective immigration for example, has generated real and nasty problems. The admission of a large number of Muslims, leading to the now ever present danger a terrorist cell will kill Australians through a bombing. Then, the gangs bashing and raping and stabbing modest Australians daily, in Victoria. Today it was reported that in Adelaide a backlash is growing, with increasing assaults on immigrants. The violence is to be condemned, but its a nasty symptom of something Sir Enoch Powell said, which was distorted by his opponents, his “Rivers of Blood Speech”.

Within the Church, the stupidity of clerics and contempt for the laity has fuelled reactions and false controversies. There are those, for example, who have been slandered and vilified for very fine work indeed. Tolerance is overthrown, intellectual liberty with it. Neither are mushy sentimental indulgences. They are in fact rooted in absolute property rights, economic liberty and advanced through common law. The break down of tolerance is due to, the major parties having overthrown absolute private rights and are extinguishing economic freedom. The distinction between meum and tuum is crucial.

In Victoria aka “Brackistan”, things are far worse. Ah, it must not be forgotten, common law and the Judges are a bar to tyranny, which is also why the former has been overthrown and the judiciary stuffed with the ideologically correct. The ‘elite’ are tolerant of only themselves and their rotten ideology; they despise all else . Art is not exempt from the upshot of the Victorian triumvirate of politicians, bureaucrats and judiciary.

Government and local councils throw taxpayers property at artists. There was a display of ‘art’ in a Melbourne lane, glorifying Islamic terrorists. Footscray Council is now showing an exhibition that is nothing but a propaganda exercise justifying the Islamo-fascist terrorist rat-hole called the “Palestinian territory”. This is besides much that is trash, though not controversial. Modest Australians are supposed to abide this abuse and have no choice but abide it. To refuse to pay taxes is now treated as a crime worse than murder. Those who strip modest Australians and entrepreneurs of their private property squander it on things that give them pleasure and not anyone else.

Modest, decent Australians might see in art only more abuse and thus, understandably go on the warpath. The self-appointed ‘elites’, Left and Right, indulge at taxpayers’ expense brutalist rubbish palmed off as art. These parasites, who spit on ordinary Australians daily and then froth at the mouth when serfs fight back, have brought on a reaction, the furore over the Henson exhibition. The question is; is the reaction warranted?

There is no point in art lovers and artists crying crocodile tears when they are the subject of hostile demands, including they be censored. If we did not have thugs for politicians stripping many of their rights, and imposing their values and tastes while making it a criminal offence for all others to exercise their rights, including judgment, they might not be in the invidious position they are in now:

1. The public baying for their blood
2. Leftist politicians promising to impose censorship control over art, and, amusingly, deciding what will be allowed to be purveyed as art.

A grim irony is, it won’t stop the politicians funding ‘exhibitions’ glorifying Islamo terrorists, and depicting Jews and Israel as Nazis and Nazi Germany. Censorship will be applied according to the selective morality and discrimination of the dictators who have, say, run riot over Victorians.

Consider this:

Premier of Brackistan John Brumby came out in support of Rudds damnation of the exhibition

“Politicians must decide and legislate what is moral behaviour…”

They are the words of dictators, and not civilised men. Who else said the same? Robert Doyle, the 2nd former Victorian State Liberal Party Opposition leader before Red Ted. That makes sense. After all, it was Doyle and every (not at all) Liberal MP who fully backed Bracks’ Blasphemy Law.

The irony is, Bill Henderson prepared his photographs in Victoria. Bracks, Brumby and Hulls have rammed down a mountain of ‘law’ to make Victorians ‘moral’. How is it then, according to all who have attacked the exhibition, a pornographic flash show for paederasts was prepared in Victoria. Oh, I know, it’s ‘art’.

In Victoria, Bracks and Hulls rammed down Acts which state, it is a criminal offence for adults to be engaged in sports clubs, tourist guiding, and many other activities, without extensive police checks, in case children are present and many a decent Victorian suddenly turns rock-spider. It is a criminal offence in Victoria to employ youngsters under a certain age and for the same reason. These extensive police state morality laws have seen youngsters sacked from their part time jobs, and Victorians presumed child molesters. Yet, despite all this, there is an artist photographing a prepubescent girl in the buff.

What is also crucial about Brumby’s statement is, it prepares the way for police state censorship. Is Rudd preparing his own censorship ‘laws’ to control art. Rudd can exploit the scandal as an excuse knowing modest Australians have understandably had enough of violent rodents committing violence against children:

Govt weighs into nude teen art debate

It’s hilarious, the number of artists and Oz Hollywood hams who vilified Howard and plump for the ALP. Some, like Kate Blanchette, also support Stalinist Greens policies. Blanchett can reprise her role as Queen Elizabeth and screech at Rudd (oh dear, dear, dear, they were such good friends) but Rudd is only hitting her with the chook that came back to roost.

Then there is The Spencer Street Soviet Age, who hurled abuse at Howard, equating him with Hitter, when the real totalitarian thugs are the Victorian ALP administration and now the Federal Rudd administration. They didn’t give a stuff about Bracks and Hulls and Brumby stripping Victorians of their inalienable Rights, but are now howling because one of their pet causes is given the same treatment.

In reality, it’s not so much Henderson, it’s the looming blanket censorship ‘laws’ that are now the threat and the politicians have found the excuse to ram them down. It must no be forgotten the Rightwing MPs during the Howard years who were trying to raise censorship control of the Internet. The reason is obvious, the Internet hurts them.

The Henson exhibition: Art or paedarastic pornography?

Without seeing it, it is difficult to decide. To this, I did look at the few photographs published in The Age. Child abuse, rape and pornography rings and convicted crims plus, the fact the Victorian Government protects the identity of convicted scumbags, particularly when they release them, has generated understandable outrage. Given many animals are hardened offenders, are understandably Victorians are furious. Therefore, anything suggestive of this vile, criminal conduct does upset Victorians. The well was poisoned long before the exhibition.

Many who have inveighed against the photos have not seen them.

Some years ago, I was impressed by a photo image of Christ on the Cross. It distils there is nothing nice about the crucifixion. In the man tortured and executed on the Cross, there is despair “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me”(Matt. 27:46). A famous Russian icon, but of the ‘temptation in the wilderness’, similarly depicts the face of Jesus; cracked eyes stare out through darkness.

For a photo, I don’t dispute the aesthetic merits of the image of the Son abandoned itself. Two details, however, caused a storm; a blunt title “pissed Christ”, and that later it was disclosed Andres Serrano produced the effect by urinating over the crucifix. Here’s a link to the picture. The crude title irritated, but it was regrettable how he produced it was disclosed; my appreciation of it was punctured. Serrano did go public in defence of his picture, saying he is a devout Catholic. He explained the image was spurred by his yyears of meditating upon the passion of Christ. It might be said, he showed no theological depth, but he is in good company with, say, Australian clergy.

What of obscene material purveyed as art? Are censorship laws required? I might be mistaken, but it seems reasonable to assume, a stiff common law judge would find against obscenities shown in public, and against material which is criminal. Pornographic photos of children, would see the photographer and anyone assisting the photographer convicted on crimes concluded out of sound principles in common law.

If Henson has committed child pornography, the pity is it is not common law principles that will prevail. On the other hand, if has not committed the crimes on which child pornography devolves, he can be on the receiving end of a gross miscarriage of justice, but we now know why, if he is falsley prosecuted.

Artists, journalists, others might rage in Henson’s defenece, but none of them gave a stuff about the very things which have lead to this backlash. Indeed, is it not so, if he has committed crimes, that he will still be on the receiving end of a miscarriage because the case would not run on sound principles but the incipiently totalitarian measures politicians and bureaucrats have substituted for law. Mr. Henson might ponder his Leftist and Rigthwing pals and patrons. They are respoibsle for the mess and, typically, politicians have seized on the backlash as an excuse to not only get him, but to prepare for Stasi control over art.

Now, I’m not altogther sure, but it’s decent to tend towards, Henson isn’t a perverse crim catering for rockspiders by producing porn pictures of naked children. Not having seen the exhibition, my reasons rest on the little generally available published evidence. First, I would mention an exquisite triptych:

It’s theme is the fall of angels from heaven - before, during and post fall. They tumble out of heaven. the figures are rotated in each cancass. It’s mainly back, behind and head, and sides shown. No frontal nudity. The model was clearly a boy. There is nothing indecent about the figures, and the scenes and theme is makes this plaint. The artist is accomplished indeed with, for example, stunning landscapes in his ouvre. Other fine paitings by other masters include children in the buff, and they are not purient either. (Though, I suppose, the purient and perverted would take a twisted view of them.) The question is, would those brilliant artists face charges today if they painted such canvasses today? It seems highly possible they would be charged and convicted:

Stella Stuthridge [criminal lawyer], who has defended people accused of child pornography, said she was unaware of any defence on the basis of artistic merit in Victoria, nor any way in which a child or parent could consent to being part of making pornography.
It was a crime in Victoria to make any depiction of a minor “in an indecent sexual manner or context”, Ms Stuthridge said.
“If you were under 16, it would be unusual if parent or child was able to consent to child pornography, for obvious reasons … in my experience, Victorian child porn laws have been very strict.

ARCHITECT Zahava Elenberg was 12 when she posed for controversial artist Bill Henson. Now, more than 20 years later, she has “absolutely no regrets”.
Ms Elenberg, now a 34-year-old mother, and another woman who once posed for Henson’s dark and evocative photographs, yesterday came forward to offer a spirited defence of the artist, whose works were seized in Sydney last week.
“Bill asked my mother at an exhibition opening if I would like to pose for him and we talked about it and decided to do it,” Ms Elenberg, who did not pose nude, said.

Model’s mother defends Henson

THE mother of the 13-year-old girl at the centre of the Bill Henson controversy has broken the family’s week-long silence to mount a strong defence of the artist’s portrayal of her daughter.

The parents of the teenager, whose nude image adorned the Sydney exhibition invitation that sparked the original complaint to police, have known the artist for more than a decade.

The girl lives with both her parents in the family home in Melbourne.
In a statement to The Age yesterday, the mother said: “There is a police investigation under way and we cannot say anything other than (that) we are very strong supporters of Bill Henson and his work.”
The mother initially declined to comment when approached by The Age, but later issued a statement through an intermediary. The girl is said to be a self-aware teenager with a keen interest in the arts.

However, The Age has learnt the girl, who is still 13, posed for Henson over the past year. The parents met Henson, who also lives in Melbourne, through family and friends and were well acquainted with the nature of his work before their daughter posed nude, sources said.
The family have been anxious to protect their privacy. Their legal interests are being represented by the high-profile Sydney media lawyer Mark O’Brie

There are of course some parents who are criminally vicious, but this does not fit the parents of the girls mentioned in the above articles. As for the photos, some explanations are no good at all, assuming Henson is innocent of what he is accused of, such as Dr Banfield’s obnoxious remarks -

“I appreciate that society’s values and knowledge of such things as child pornography and pedophilia have changed in recent years,” she said.

“This is just pandering to a hysterical minority and using the same tactics that applied to the terrorism debate, breeding a culture of fear.”

(Child abuse was ok in the past?!) It is just this sort of contempt that also motivates what is set out above and issues into backlashes; and, as numbers of Victorians on talk-back radio have made plain, makes a nonsense of what should be a solid point (if true) by Banfield;

But these works in no way endorse or hint at (pornography).

“If you were to investigate Henson’s relationship with these photographs and his life’s work that would be plainly apparent.

“Most of the commentary on this issue has been from people that have not seen the images and are being asked to react to a half-baked version of his work on the internet.”

Though does not “endorse” or “hint” are lame. If Henson is not engaged in it, he needs someone who is not so contemptuous of mere dumb oafs, and can state things with greater clarity and forthrightness. These are the sort of friends who can kill a guy in court. Such assertions as this are no good at all either:

The controversial career of Bill Henson
Occasionally it voiced some discomfort, but mostly there was admiration for an artist whose moody use of light and dark subject matter was in the spirit of bad-boy painter Caravaggio and hard-drinking poet Baudelaire

Whether photography can be art is debated, devolving on the contrast between the technique of say a master painter versus clicking a camera shutter. However, to compare photographic art with great masters in painting and sculpture, including any emerging today, is ridiculously exaggerated. Also, it was Turner who observed, painting is not realism and what the painter does is not, say paint a cow as a cow is. Socialist realism in art drives his point home rather well, it’s ugly stuff. This isn’t helpful to Henson either -

Suffer the little children
IF WE lived in a world where we let children be children, there wouldn’t be this controversy over Bill Henson’s work, it would be taken for what it is: a technically brilliant exploration of the fear and metamorphosis involved in transitioning from a child to an adult…

Pretentious bilge is only that, and thus doesn’t explain why the photo’s are chilling, dark and unpleasant. That they are front to camera, one from waist up, another clealry full length itensifies the obvious. They are not as art illuminating pictures at all. This gives weight to the perversity accusations. One is trying to give Henson the benefit, the furore doesn’t help and neither do his pics. It is odd Henson has concentrated on photographing teenagers.

Nudes by great painters, including Australians, are adult women. Go back to the masters, their matter is adults and the world of adults. Children and teenagers in their early teens figure only when in their proper place. Looking at Henson’s pictures, his defenders are blind as to why they can be seen as disgusting, and photos are not paintings in which the painter does transform subjects (allowing some painters can be perverse, as Brett Whitely’s, in his self destruction, shows - stamped also with myopic conceit and nastiness).

The photos in the paper are too ambiguous to decide off-hand either way. In common law, Henson might not be prosecuted. Where his defenders are wrong, fatally wrong, is, even so, that does not mean he could escape the censure of public disgust.

The self-styled elites, Right and left, treat Australians with contempt, strip them of their rights and property and then add insults to injuries, while indulging themselves to the hilt. The trouble with these types is, they are not highbrow. They are low, as what they dish out as ‘public art’ also frequently shows. They scream when those they spit on, fed up with the abuse give that lot a taste of their own poison , enforcement of stasiland law.

Being hotly opposed to satisland laws, including censroship, yet one can enjoy the irony in: They set up the regime under which one of their pets can be tried and flung in jail. Under some of the “laws” rammed down by Bracks and Brumby, that might well be the case. They have the hide to scream now, when they happily applauded every totalitarian measure the sort of rotten politicians who stuff Spring Street could ram down on the mere lumpenmasse. This is the moral compass of the treacherous Left and the Right in Australia. It is very odd, to repeat, though Bracks with the support of the Right rammed down ‘laws’, Henson could continuing shooting his photos in Victoria and only now they go for him?

As I say, the scandal is only a symptom of what the real problem is.

No doubt the CIS, John Humphreys, Mr. Yates, Professor Sinclair Davidson will be able to explain this:

Blackouts hit thousands as generators fail, The Times (28/5/08)

Hundreds of thousands of people were hit by electricity blackouts yesterday when seven power stations shut down. The unscheduled stoppages were regarded as an unprecedented sign of the fragility of Britain’s power infrastructure.

Operations were cancelled, people were…

We know investors are loath to sink capital into energy firms because of carbon taxes. Keep in view the recent $40billions write down on stock in Australian coal-based firms, and that Japanese energy companies have killed maintenance plans and new plants because of carbon taxes. Having made the point earlier in articles on the CIS’ unconscionable full support for carbon taxes, large, general blackouts would occur as capital is extinguished in energy companies. So, what do we read but this:

It was unclear last night why the power stations had failed…
National Grid spokesman admitted that the the number of shutdowns was highly unusual…

However, this:

David Porter, chief executive of the Association of Electricity Producers, said that…more investment was required urgently to prevent more regular problems.

It’s now a matter of wishing. No investor will supply capital so that Brown, the Labour Party and the Greens can wipe it out. Now, this report is the latest in what emerged early this year as manufacturers began contracting, shutting down, and laying off thousands of employees. Thanks to Blair’s and Brown’s carbon taxes, energy supply was already being cut and prices spiralling; of course manufacturers were hit. Now it’s merely a case of everyone brought to a halt.

Blair and Brown, and their Green Stalinist mates, are culpable of ruining enterprises, causing massive blackouts and, generally impoverishing those they don’t serve at all, the British. Oh, I’m wrong, they ’serve them up’ alright. I’m still eagerly waiting for the CIS-Humphreys paper on why carbon taxes are costless, and really good for everyone and the spur of a new age of prosperity riding on ‘alternative energy’.

It’s curious, the CIS, John Humphreys, Mr. Yates, Professor Sinclair Davidson have not mentioned a bound problem. Carbon taxation and Kyoto compliance requires totalitarian, police state measures. Just to check, let’s look at our British cousins:

Every adult in Britain should be forced to carry ‘carbon ration cards’, say MPs

Under the scheme, everyone would be given an annual carbon allowance to use when buying oil, gas, electricity and flights.

Anyone who exceeds their entitlement would have to buy top-up credits from individuals who haven’t used up their allowance. The amount paid would be driven by market forces and the deal done through a specialist company.

A totalitarian control card of which only one function is rationiong. The force of the second quoted paragraph is, those who exceed their miserable allotment of energy will have supply cut off until the next year. Mind, Brits won’t have to worry about the prospect too much, the Labour Cabinet is wiping out energy companies by carbon taxation. But wait, there’s more joy. It will be a universal rationing card as well as a police state control card:

In theory it could be used to cover all purchases - from petrol to food.

It has the full support of Brown, his fellow LP thugs, and the Stalinist Greens. But, who dreamt up this totalitarian scheme? Here’s a hint. The Tory Party is stuffed by the same types who have stuffed the Australian Liberal Party. It is Tory big beast Tim Yeo’s dead obnoxious brainchild.

Yeo is head of the Parliamentary “Environmental Audit Committee”. This “Committee”
must be as compassionate as the CIS is, for they pontificate on the wonderous benefits of wiping out capital and imposing a totalitarian state and that the destitute will be overwhelmed by joy from all this compassion -

“…a personal carbon trading scheme is the best and fairest way of cutting Britain’s CO2 emissions without penalising the poor.”

Ah, I see, it’s because it’s “personal”. Funnily enough, it is personal. However, the real benefit is everyone will ‘be ‘fairly’ ground down, except for the ‘mastahs’ the thugs in both the LP and the Tory Party. Ah - the CIS didn’t advise the “Environmental Audit Committee”? No, just joking. They have their own cretins to tell them the same things.

Returning to destruction of capital in energy production in Britian; this is exaclty what Rudd is soon to ram down on Australians. It does follow, totalitarian measures will be rammed down because there is no other way to impose it. Who are the brains behind all this for Australia’s very one Soviet Gulag in the making? Why, the likes of CIS, John Humphreys, Mr. Yates, Professor Sinclair Davidson. Bye the bye, these clowns will have to work fast at writing up their paper on “The joys of carbon taxation and totalitarian thuggery”.

Rudd has used the same arguments to excuse what he is planning. Rudd will be in need of a paper to recite to millions of immiserated Australians, telling the lumpenmasses why they never had it so good, and besides, mere dumb oafs should really not expect to live prosperous lives and in freedom.

Ah, the CIS paper has a lead in, setting out carbon taxes have the added benefit of making the unwashed do what their overlords decide is good for them - the term used is ‘changing behaviour’. See, unlike the Right and Rudd and his gang of thugs, most Australians are mere animals to be herded and flogged to death.

Note: I have decided to cease calling Rudd a fascist. It’s not because he isn’t a fascist. It’s because he is thick the meaning of the word is lost on him. I’ll call him a blundering idiot who is a statist that has gone absolutely stark raving mad. Then, no one apart from their admirers said dictators are sane.

Ah, Rudd is already fleshing out his version of a control cum rationing card. I will line this out tomorrow.

No, rather finish them off entirely, in view of the demolition job called carbon taxes. The fallacy of consumption drives economic growth, as against the truth only capital accumulation drives growth.

Rudd and Swann, bye the bye, is intensifying what Costello did in office, ‘closed loopholes’, inclusive of on taxation of super funds. What it is sacking more capital hitherto not extinguished by a Governments’ ‘grab it and spend it policies’ that are now eupehmistically called ‘investment. Swann’s budget is a massive increase in ’snatching and squandering’.

Amusingly, the Key to the Rudd-Swann ‘plan’ for economic frowth is to consign all to universities. Pieces of paper, unlike capital and its accumulation, is ‘the new way’ forward to increasing economic prosperity. Saner types would see in it the reduction absurbum showing why the consumption notion is not only fallacious but itself destructive. To ram it home, Rudd isn’t proposing fuel supply can be increased and so prices cut by an army of ’skilled Australian graudates” is he?

But then, Rudd is in becauase the Right are economic illiterates too. We are in deep sewerage water and for this we can thank the likes of Kroger. So, we read in Hansard this (in “Continued”) (Continued)

In a television interview broadcasted during the weekend, Michael Kroger declared that “the 12 years of the Howard Government were wasted…” Kroger was responding to a rhetorical question. Bull, it was a cuing, faux rhetorical question on “how do you explain the state of the Liberal Party”. It’s a right stumper - out of office in all States’ Parliaments and the Federal Parliament. We could do no better than follow the meister of “cock- ups”.

Unfortunately, meister killerman has a dose of laryngitis when trying certain notes. Kroger expurgated them to sound good. He also has memoritic sclerosis. Otherwise, he told more than one white lie. Let’s commence with an up-beat contrast. It was the last day of the 2007 Federal election campaign when Kroger opined:

VIRGINIA TRIOLI: By this time tomorrow you’ll have had your say and we should know who will be getting the keys to the lodge and also to Kirribilli House.

Michael Kroger:… this poll is two days old so it may well indicate they are now focusing on their decision, this large group of undecideds….are moving towards the Coalition…because they’re concerned about the economy…That will be the sole reason they’re actually going back

As we know, the Liberal Party had been defeated by 2005. Hugh Morgan made it certain. Hugh Morgan, fresh from destroying multi-billion dollar WMC (he was paid handsomely for that mind-numbing exercise in incompetence) and a $700,000 oil under his arm, puckered up to the communards’ of communards’ cameras, ABC. He smiled.

There’s nothing nicer than walking out of a burned gift shop and telling modest Australians they must have a large pay cut. Why? So that wealthy spoilt brats such as he can feel holy after having ruined many others. He is in good company. The likes of neo-Marxist wealthy brats Bracks and Brumby, Green Guru Peter Garrett, and almost dead “Red Ted”. This was his grip on labour market reform.

The ACTU bosses, pulling the ALP, had to do zilch in 2007. Morgan, Minchin, HR Nicholls Society, Kroger’s mates Evans, Moore and Morgan, the CIS and IPA, ran the very campaign the ACTU was preparing to mount against free labour markets. Their case was wrong, a complete lie.

They, not the ALP and ACTU, discredited the thoroughly sound, highly moral case for free labour markets. They, not the ACTU, put Kevin Rudd and his fellow brown pantalooned cretins into office. Why didn’t Kroger, instead of the CIS and their pro-ALP switch-optioner John Humphreys, tell all and sundry: “Hey, if you won’t let me roger Australia then go with my mates (”Nuke coal energy companies” Ron Walker and Hugh Morgan), and vote ALP.” Ah, I know; he’s yellow.

I have related that Kroger not only buried material that was for Federal Cabinet, as did his fellow HR Nicholls Society Clubman and then Cabinet Minister(!) Nick Minchin. Kroger sent in his thugs to ruin Richmond Branch, slander their candidate in an upstanding, patriotic Australian of Greek extraction (Kroger’s henchmen spread the lie Prodos was a vehement racist who would be on the spot signed up by the Ku Klux Klan), and impose his loyalist to the Filipino government, Marina. Kroger master-minded the alteration of a Left’s stronghold, Richmond, into their heavily buttressed Mt. “bloody” Everest.

Saturday fortnight past, “The Australian” ran a spread on Kroger, Costello and the collapse of the Liberal Party. The journos who wrote it, passed by the editor, asserted Kroger’s control over the Victorian division of the Liberal Party is the stuff of legend. To check how reliable they are, it is obvious they cannot answer:

1. How he and jointly with his bed pal, Costello, can stack branches, impose candidates, and close down branches?

2. How Kroger could sign the human “dipstick”, Julian Sheezel, a $5,000 a week pay check, when Kroger held no (and still holds no) executive position?

3 For a presumed ordinary member of the Liberal Party, why do the mainstream media seek him out for official explanations of the state of the Liberal Party?

4. Why, with a decade under Keating and Hawke, over a decade under a Howard, Kroger and his fellow not at all genuine Liberals supplied advice worthy of either a snail or a snivelling ‘rightwing’ ALP faction?

Kroger is fighting for himself. I have no clue why. He bought the Victorian Liberal Party -not with his own money (his Brahman backers gave him the lolly money). He has a stranglehold over the Party, via the KKR re-write of the constitution and his “Administrative Committee”. What, then, is his worry?

Kroger has nothing to fight for. Darn, I’m wrong. With his pals in the HR Nicholls Society, IPA and CIS, and his Parliamentary wing acolytes such as Minchin, there is all to fight for: “Me, me, and them thingos I call pals for appearances sake. That’s why I like old Nick Minchin; he appearances before me and helps pulls wabbit wallets out of fancy hats. Aargh, Minch has a scholar’s grip on both but he can’t grip mine - and I’ve stuck the precious stuff where Nicky can’t get ‘em.”

Kroger on why the Liberal Party is on the skids, argues “how to commit murder and enjoy cake with cream on top”. Kroger gets away with it unlike, say, the anti-heroes in greats Kroger is entirely unsuited to star in such as, “Arsenic and Old Lace”. Kroger’s Hollywood movie lead role is Porker Pig and he is a natural.

Any economics that is grounded on totally unrealistic assumptions is ultimately bound to fail, as the case of perfect competition demonstrates. The ‘guns’ of the CIS, IPA, and the HR Nicholls. Society have caused considerable damage because of defective assumptions. The case of their wrecking labour market reform shows this, as also their collapse over Green’s claims and carbon taxation. Confined to themselves, they only damage those close to them and themselves. In affairs in which Government intervenes and supplying advice to it, such types can bring misery to many.

Stupid people are blind to others, what they do to others, to the sheer damage they wreak. This is unmistakably true of CIS, IPA, and HR Nicholls Society (also Michael Kroger viz the Victorian Liberal party).

Compounding defective economics, The CIS, John Humphreys, Professor Sinclair Davidson pretend to be experts on Hayek and Mises but they are ignorant, as their own papers put beyond question. They merely name-drop the names Mises and Hayek. To check, if they knew them, they would also be thoroughly steeped in Austrian school economics, history of economic thought, and doff their caps to Jackson instead of smearing him and generally making every effort to blacken Jackson’s solid reputation as a distinguished economist of that illustrious school.

Theirs is a an undergraduate, texbook grasp of economics. Combined with hubris, their inadequacy in economics fuels an unmistakeable callousness, but then stupid types are callous.

The CIS, pushed for a specific carbon tax, one aimed at coal fuelled energy companies. Their ‘case’ and non-existent stance of their position reflects the above. What they support is not ‘costless’.

To ram this home:

Why Prime Minister Rudd should ignore demands for price controls Gerard Jackson

The real costs of the greens’ carbon tax Gerard Jackson

Carbon Taxes and Keynesian Insanity by Gerard Jackson

Carbon taxes versus living standards Gerard Jackson

How much damage have the CIS and IPA caused over carbon tax. Monday, March 31, 2008,Great damage.

Having run the general survey on how “The Right aided the Greens”, this is the opening shot on a different line of attack that will be taken up first thing Tuesday Morning. I have been called away until then. There are other matters to run next week, such as the Neo-Marxist coup mounted by the Bracks

Having summarised the failure of the Right to shred the Greens on the count of bogus science, Pt II attends their failure on the economics side of the fraud. It wasn’t simply a failure in economic argument, debate and polemics.

Liberal MPs, the IPA, and their link, David Kemp.

12 years in Federal Office, preceded by a decade in one of the crucial States in the Federation Australia, Victoria under Kennett, and the Right did not merely fail miserably to shred the Greens, their Great Lie, and bulldoze the bureaucracies raised to enforce the Greens’ totalitarian aims. No, they imposed an extensive range of Green’s demands and helped the Green’s promote their great lie. As for Kennett and McNamarra they almost beat the ‘watermelon red’ not Liberal former ministers, David Kemp, Malcolm Turnbull and Ian Campbell on such matters as imposing the ethanol fraud. They also rammed down a mountain of capital destroying, absolutist regulations to enforce compliance to the Greens’ cult of death.

The IPA, as advisers to Kennett and Howard Cabinets, demonstrated a contradiction. The IPA’s self-proclaimed forte is fighting regulation. They have over the decades consistently failed. Why? It requires sound economic theory to fight regulation. They are as defective in economics as are the CIS and the HR Nicholls Society. During the Howard years, they did not fight the economic measures of their rightwing pals in the Cabinet, to effect ruination of Australians to “stop global warming” and “protect the environment”.

The IPA’s efforts were given to working out the ‘right’ measures to ram down on Australians. There is a “governance issue” hanging over them. David Kemp and family owns the IPA. As “Minister for the Environment”, he was not merely “watermelon red”. Kemp was a zealot who foamed at the mouth when anyone dared to politely say, “it is all bunk, Minister”.

So, before further ado, we have already three reasons why the Right has served the Greens and their treacherous Leftist allies:

1. Idle “Liberal” Ministers, illiterate in science and economics. Their performance demonstrated these defects. The IPA blamed Howard for the defeat of the Liberal Party; they are free with the truth. Howard by instinct is genuinely Liberal, and he was only one Minister in a Cabinet stuffed with the likes of Minchin, Kemp, Turnbull and a rather long list of the same types.

2. Incompetent advisers in economics and science, who ran up the flag yellow. The IPA even spat on scientists who offered to do the work required, pro bono.

Cowardice, ah yes… While the likes of David Kemp and his IPA spat on genuine Liberals, scientists and economists, they and their chums in Cabinet, and the CIS trembled before the Left dominated press. Chinese acquaintances, who lived under the worst horrors of the Communist regime of China under Mao, are puzzled as to why these ‘freedom fighting” heroes of the Right are terrified of Lefitsts. These venerable acquaintances know all about starvation due to the sort of measures Kemp, Turnbull, and Campbell put in place, and Rudd is about to intensify and multiply.

3. Contradiction. It seems to have escaped the Right’s notice the measures Kemp is guilty of imposing are incipiently totalitarian. The IPA and CIS claim to fight for market freedom and liberty, yet supported that. In Parliament last week, Kevin Rudd set out a progrom that is not merely confined to capital destroying carbon taxation. The measures are extensive, and the force is appalling; they are set out below in “Continued”.

The performance of Rightwing MPs and the IPA has been nothing less than betrayal of their duties to the Howard Cabinet, the Liberal Party, and Australians. Thus, it is fitting who remains are: blubbering Brendan Nelson; polar ice-cap Helen Kroger; Nick “Howard did us in” Minchin; Malcolm “I’m only a poor little wealthy brat like Peter Garrett” Turnbull, who demands Government impose killer price rises on energy and other raw materials.

Turnbull: Shadow Treasurer, thirsts to be Prime Minister, and El Presidente Le Respublico Los Bananos Australiano. Instead, he should be slung out of Parliament and replaced with a genuine Liberal. Then, he and David Kemp must be booted out of the Liberal Party. They can join their fellow travellers, the Greens.

CIS gives master class on carbon taxes

The failures and cowardice of the IPA pales before the actions of the CIS. The CIS has made it plain, they fully support the aim of the Greens: economically raze Australians. Their position paper demanding imposition of carbon taxes demonstrates their capitulation to the Left. The ALP has used the very same arguments the CIS asserts as the way to impose the measures “costlessly”. Even funnier, last week, they stood up in Parliament and used another false proposition put by the CIS, John Humphreys, and their ‘defenders:

Income transfers can compensate modest income earners. Rudd’s pals did say in Parliament, they are studying, by how much, but have established they will have to be large.

There are two problems:

1.Transfers can be made only by impoverishing many others – robbing Peter to pay Paul, then Paul to pay Dixie. This from defenders of freedom and free markets!

2.Mr Jackson demonstrated in devastating papers, carbon taxes destroys capital . I laid out a large number of major cases which drove home this very impact.

Needless to say, there is no income to be seized and ‘redistributed’ when the generator of income, capital, is smashed. The CIS’ rebuttal was a fit of hysteria and calling Jackson, then Strider, Prodos, and others liars. They did not refute Jackson’s economic analysis. They had no rebuttal, so they conducted themselves as Leftist Quiggin, his fan club of juveniles do, and their chums in the media do, slimed those who have every good reason to reject their claims.

(Professor Sinclair Davidson joined in. He pretends to a thorough understanding of Mises and Hayek, as some of his ‘knowing” comments in some of his usual tripe in the IPA Review attests. His papers show he’s a blank on the Austrian school. Yet, he had the hide to smear Jackson, who is a distinguished exponent of Austrian economics. Why attempt to refute Jackson, when abuse will do. Professor Sinclair Davidson is a bloody disgrace.)

Notice the moral force of the actions of the CIS. They don’t give a stuff about the impact of carbon taxes on Australians. ‘Callous’, is a litote. Only the Greens, Kevin Rudd, Peter Garrett, and the leftist liars in the media are cheering them on. We can tell, because Rudd and his Cabinet of “Brown Pantalooned Morons” are using the very same arguments to not only excuse these devastating, totalitarian measures. Rudd and co are using them as the rationale for a wondrous expansion of ‘plans’ worthy of the defunct Soviet regime.

Here’s the rub, the CIS, as the IPA, ignored a mountain of evidence that had accumulated over a decade before their decision to support what the Stalinist Greens demand. Moreover, they ignored one horrific measure already in force in Australia, the food destroying fraud of ethanol production. Since, however, they hold carbon taxation is costless, they will no doubt publish a paper explaining this, and they will have their gun, John Humphreys write it. To help the CIS explain ‘costless carbon taxation’, we supply them a list of economic reading material they need to include (below). The material fully demonstrates why it can be so wonderful.

Conclusion of this article

There it is, ladies and gentleman, the Right has served the treacherous Left and their Stalinist pals in the Greens on two counts, science and economics. Oh, I am not saying they did so deliberately. They have done so because of their congenital defects.

It irks the IPA and the CIS that their mates are not in office, for they have been cut off the taxpayer kept gravy train. Rudd and Co have to funnel ‘transfers’ into Leftist ‘thunk and tanks’. Oh Rudd is, presumably, grateful to the CIS, and, hey, the CIS need not tighten their belts as much as the IPA has had to do (seems like the reason why they railed against Howard). The Peking based Peony Company can shovel a few millions their way via Mr. Yates in gratitude for all the fine work they did in encouraging Rudd to smash Australians into the ground.

Recommended reading

1. Helen “Fidelia Castro” Clarke has wrought devestation through her Green measures, having, for example, already razed forestry based production. Rodney Hide, began as a bureaucrat central planner (the orginal name for socialism) until the penny dropped, it issues only in misery.

New Zealand’s Right, who constitute the New Zealand National Party, detests Hide as much as Helen “Fidelia Castroina” Clarke and the New Zealand Labour Party do. Hide has tracked the devestation wrought by “Castroina” over the years on his site. However, “Fidelia” is about to blitz the trail for ‘costless’ carbon taxes:

Kiwi Climatology, WALL STREET JOURNAL ASIA, May 13, 2008. Kiwi farmers must be waiting in eager anticipation for the forthcoming CIS article.

Global-warming alarmists tend to understate the true costs of cutting greenhouse gas emissions. So give credit to New Zealanders, who seem poised to give the rest of us a real-life illustration of those costs…

2. Here is a “Christian gentleman”, who knows how costless carbon taxation is. We can tell, he is making a fortune out of it, in the form of ethanol,

Khosla’s Conspiracy, May 20, 2008, WSJ.

3. Oh, drat, here is entrepeneur extroadinaire, Mark Vaile, at it,

Government MPs plan to rip millions off in subsidies for ethanol producers, Brookesnews, 2005.

4. This cannot possibly be due to carbon taxes, the CIS and Professor Sinclair Davidson say so, so there:

The Biofuels Backlash May 7, 2008;

Even the environmental left, which pushed ethanol for decades as an alternative to gasoline, is coming clean. Lester Brown, one of the original eco-Apostles, wrote in the Washington Post that “it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that food-to-fuel mandates have failed.” We knew for sure the tide had turned when Time magazine’s recent cover story, “The Clean Energy Myth,” described how turning crops into fuel increases both food prices…

To create just one gallon of fuel, ethanol slurps up 1,700 gallons of water, according to Cornell’s David Pimentel, and 51 cents of tax credits. And it still can’t compete against oil without a protective 54-cents-per-gallon tariff on imports and a federal mandate that forces it into our gas tanks. The record 30 million acres the U.S. will devote to ethanol production this year will consume almost a third of America’s corn crop while yielding fuel amounting to less than 3% of petroleum consumption.

5. I suppose the uppity will indulge this, wounding the sensitivies of the Right, a fracas,

Food Fracas, By Lene Johansen,5/9/2008 American Prowler

Let’s not mention food riots. No, regulation has crippled food production and investment in it, before the impact of carbon taxes is factored in.

6. Surely, to follow the CIS, John Humphreys and Professor Sinclair Davidson, anyone who can write, “cap and trade is folly”, is either a clown or a liar…there’s one born every few seconds:

Cap-And-Trade Folly, Investor’s Business Daily, May 15, 2008. The conclusion must be describing Australia’s Right - no, just clowning around:

All this economic wreckage done in the name of reducing environmentally benign greenhouse gases by men who should know better — and likely do. But they have politics to think about, as well as invitations to Georgetown cocktail parties that probably are not being sent to GOP Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, who in his skepticism of global warming is performing a valuable public service.

7. CIS certainly has weight of numbers agreeing with their position:

The Biofuel Dilemma, By Ben Lieberman, The Heritage Foundation

Lieberman argues carbon taxes have proved successfully costless and have accomplished much of what the Green’s, the CIS, David Kemp, Malcolm Turnbull, Peter Garrett, and Kevin Rudd seek. Therefore, they can be responsibly rescinded now, before millions more around the world die from so much joy.

Oh, that is enough material for the CIS to digest, for the present. We shall supply them with fresh material I have to hand in another item.

Yes, Sir, I am looking forward to that CIS - Humphreys follow up paper. Better yet, it can be a joint paper, Humphreys and Professor Sinclair Davidson. Why don’t they go for the trifecta - a Humphreys-Professor Sinclair Davidson-Chris Berg joint paper, in which they will re-assert the Greens’ Great Lie is all true and why; and thus Carbon taxes are necessary, and why they are costless. It shall be a thrilling read, I can’t wait.

Rudd’s grand Soviet Era style planning:

Rudd has declared carbon taxes will also apply to cattle and sheep. It is not only carbon taxes he is about to impose. Moreover, his additional plans do entail extensive coercive measures. Read these additional shocking plans in, “Continued”. Oh, it does contain good news, for those spivs about town, Ron Walker and Hugh Morgan, who suppport carbon taxes because they want to steal billions per annum from taxpayers, courtesy of Rudd, via a ‘nuclear power plant’. It is itemised in Rudd’s Soviet style Plans, but listed as still under “Inquiry” - Rudd’s favourite expression to cover thuggery.

Source, Hansard, Federal Parliament, Senate:

(Continued)

The claim man causes climate change is a deliberate fraud. Originally pushed by the thugs in the Greens, why did Western politicians and bureaucrats accept the lie?

It was a good wheeze to justify empire building and ram down measures that are incipiently totalitarian in force. Rudd is building on what the “Watermelon Red” Rightwing former “Liberal” Ministers, Malcolm Turnbull, Ian Campbell and David Kemp established. The Right had over a decade in office and instead of eviscerating the charlatanism purveyed as ’science’, they proliferated it. They did their bit to corrupt science, and institutes engaged in pursuit of science and its impartation. The credibility of, for example, the CSIRO is shredded. This is what the Right also did, not only the Left, ably assisted by the CIS and the IPA.

With the general debasement of the function of schools (and not just under States’ and Federal ALP administrations) science was trivialised to, at best, as ‘another way of looking at truth’. What truth? The truth of charlatans and liars. Science cannot be imparted, and promising young scientists identified when science is locked into a pack of lies summed up in the garbage of ‘environmental science’. The “Liberal” Ministers oversaw the introduction of what is nothing less than an overt progrom of indoctrination into the Greens’ beliefs in schools. In Victoria, for example, school children berate parents ( thus they are also being turned into nasty little tyrants for good measure) for collecting firewood. Why? Here’s the sort of ‘reasons’ they give:

“They are homes of little animals”.

There was a day when a child would have been given a clip over the ear for both the insolence and the stupidity.

Who is the source of such infantile, moronic rubbish? The Greens. Who is drilling it into youngsters? Kommissars of not schools but brainwashing camps. It is understandable why so many illiterate, juvenile ignoramuses are ‘employed as teachers’. Bright adults would refuse to purvey such monstrous perversions; they would be punished for white-anting the progrom by teaching science.

A lecturer in Physics, an acquaintance, has no undergraduates to tutor. The reason is, the schools are producing raw talent in physics in fast diminishing numbers. Mr. Louis Hissink has observed the same of Western Australia - a dire consequence is the shortage of geologists. Now, these remarks encapsulate what the whole great lie turns on, exemplified by that monstrosity the IPCC. Let’s turn aside to other interesting observations.

Having mentioned even Wikipedia could not altogether ignore the hard truths about Bob Brown’s best pal, Chavez, there are limits to its capacity for truth. Wikipedia has smeared Britannica, and for good reasons and here is one of them:

Wikipedia’s Zealots

The Wikipedia page is entitled Naomi Oreskes, after a Professor of History and Science Studies at the University of California San Diego…is mostly devoted to a notorious 2004 paper that she wrote, and that Science magazine published, called “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change.” This paper…is nonsense.

….it was immediately challenged by science writers and scientists alike, one of them being Benny Peiser, a prominent UK scientist and publisher of CCNet…

when visiting Oreskes’s page on Wikipedia several weeks ago, I was surprised to read not only that Oreskes had been vindicated but that Peiser had been discredited. More than that, the page portrayed Peiser himself as having grudgingly conceded Oreskes’s correctness.

Upon checking with Peiser, I found he had done no such thing. The Wikipedia page had misunderstood or distorted his comments. I then exercised the right to edit Wikipedia that we all have…and advised Peiser that I had done so.

Peiser wrote back saying he couldn’t see my corrections on the Wikipedia page…

Someone called Tabletop was undoing my edits (who)…explained why. “Note that Peiser has retracted this critique and admits that he was wrong!”

Why can Tabletop speak for Peiser but not I, who have his permission?

Tabletop parried: “we have a reliable source to this. What Peiser has said to *you* is irrelevant.”

(Tabletop is) Kim Dabelstein Petersen. She (or he?) is an editor at Wikipedia. What does she edit? Reams…of global warming pages. I started checking them. In every instance I checked, she defended those warning of catastrophe and deprecated those who believe the science is not settled. I investigated further…

I checked the pages too, and yes, that is what they have done - suppressed science and promoted fraud. They are propaganda sheets.The Oreskes’ paper served one good job, it exposed the formerly respected science journals Science and Nature for suppressing papers which contradicted fabricated claims and papers supporting the Lie. The Telegraph happily published on the scandal, in 2005:

Leading scientific journals ‘are censoring debate on global warming’

Turning to another article by Lawrence Solomon,

How many scientists does it take to establish that a consensus does not exist on global warming? The quest to establish that the science is not settled on climate change began before most people had even heard of global warming.

…1992 and the United Nations…Earth Summit in Rio. It was billed as — and was — the greatest environmental and political assemblage in human history. Delegations came from 178 nations…118 heads of state or government and 7,000 diplomatic bureaucrats. The world’s environmental groups came too…some 30,000 (of them)…7,000 journalists converged on Rio…

In February …to head off the whirlwind that the conference would unleash, 47 scientists signed a “Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming,” decrying “the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuels and requires immediate action.”

To a scientist in search of truth, 47 is an impressive number, especially if those 47 dissenters include many of the world’s most eminent scientists. To the environmentalists, politicians, press at Rio, their own overwhelming numbers made the 47 seem irrelevant.

Knowing this, a larger petition effort was undertaken, known as the Heidelberg Appeal…

(Next)The Oregon petition…an astounding 17,800 signatures…The petition drew media attention, but little of it was for revealing to the world that an extraordinary number of scientists hold views on global warming diametrically opposite to those they are expected to hold. Instead, the press focussed on presumed flaws that critics found in the petition…

Some claimed the petition had phonies. There was only one phony: Spice Girl Geri Halliwell, planted by a Greenpeace organization to discredit the petition and soon removed. Other names that seemed to be phony — such as Michael Fox, the actor, and Perry Mason, the fictional lawyer in a TV series — were actually bona fide scientists, properly credentialled.

Like the Heidelberg Appeal, the Oregon petition was blown away. But now it is blowing back. Original signatories to the petition and others, outraged at Kyoto’s corruption of science, wrote to the Oregon Institute and its director, Arthur Robinson, asking that the petition be brought back:

“E-mails started coming in every day…The writers were outraged at the way Al Gore and company were abusing the science to their own ends. “We decided to …

Solomon could be summing up the situation in Australia. Now this;

Monday, May 19, 2008

Dr. Arthur Robinson (OISM) to release names of over 30,000 scientists rejecting global warming hypothesis
Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM)

As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science — including 9,021 PhDs, are not “a few.” Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not “skeptics.”

Here’s a site written by scientists, ICECAP - for example, this:

The simple truth is…our research at the University of Alabama in Huntsville does not support predictions of an impending disaster-the regulations proposed to date and promoted by the green agenda will have no measurable effect…May 13, 2008

What is not in dispute is climate change can occur as a regular physical phenomenon. Whether it is occurring now is a different question. What is rejected is the Greens’ claim that man produced Co2 emissions causes climate change.

The scientists are not sceptics in the pejorative sense that not only Peter Garrett has used to smear scientists but also the likes of Campbell, Kemp, and ABC’s ‘Science Show’ Robyn Williams. The overwhelming arguments against the Greens’ great Lie are not ‘consensus’; they are sound scientific arguments mounted not by some collective but by individuals engaged in science. Their objections run from solid theory. They include a very large number of Nobel Prize winners. The assertion the Greens’ lie is good science is an overt fraud and corruption of science, reflected in their capricious habits:

When the original Greens’ claim of man causes global warming by Co2 emission was smashed, they shifted the ground. They altered it to; man causes climate change through Co2 emissions. As this claim is being eviscerated for the lie it is, they are altering it again. They now simply assert, climate change is occurring and C02 is the mechanism. In other words, they have never even bothered to meet a primitive requirement in science, to put a valid, testable hypothesis. They merely assert their claim is established theory.

If it were theory, bye they bye, what exactly in physics is explained? Nothing; there is no explanatory power in their assertion. To make this plain, what laws of physics are involved? What laws of physics, which distinguished scientists have not fathomed, have the Greens advanced as the ground of their claims and, no less crucially, take the weight their claims requires? Zip, absolutely nothing. It is worse than a travesty of physics.

As for evidence, they have never produced scientific evidence indicative of events and interactions that might be suggestive of their claim and any laws involved. Computer modelling is asserted to be evidence. It is not. It is merely playing with written programmes. So, even the attempts of the IPCC to cover itself for the fraud they have perpetrated with good news ‘projections’ are entirely worthless -

NOAA: Global Warming Means Fewer, Not More Hurricanes (Monday, May 19, 2008)

It would be just as effective to consult the Delphic Oracle. Hmmm, it’s also why ‘economic modelling’ is rubbish. Computer modelling is a very expensive fraud committed against taxpayers.

The Greens’ lie is a grotesque violation of the laws of physics, corruption of scientific inquiry, perversion of the quest for truth in science. This is why Australians have to endure the likes of Tim Flannery, whose latest fantasy is to “change sky colour“. There I was, impressed “Professor” Garnaut could be one of the most deranged of Greenies In Australia. Is Flannery who takes the completely insane cake or has large slice of Brown’s apple crumble. “Pump the atmosphere with sulphur!” Flannery is totally deranged, as his other demands manifests. Ha, Bob Brown will be jealous.

Then, there is The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who blame fat people for the (ethonal caused) cut in food supply, and global warming.

If it were confined to the Greens and other madmen it would not be a problem, but it’s not. Politicians have proliferated it, with the propaganda machine called media, and brainwashing camps drumming it in day and night. It’s not these liars either, who are so much the worry as the fact they have succeeded with their disgusting efforts. It’s the voting man in the street parroting the inanities that is the realised danger - the sheer numbers of them who believe the Great Lie.

Anglers can be heard blaming ‘climate change’ if they don’t catch a fish. Drought! Why, ‘curse that Co2′. Storms, they are “wild weather” and this means Co2. It’s not simply the numbingly inane slogans littering everyday speech, it’s the fact that very many Australians accept ’something ought to be done about it’ that is the final straw. That, they are willing to accept all the punishment the increasingly totalitarian politicians and bureaucrats can dream up. It’s the final sign we are in deep shite.

The Right are as culpable for the systematic corruption as are the Greens and the ALP. They, after all, entrenched it in the course of over a decade in office. What an appalling record. The Right should stop pretending to the public and cease calling themselves Liberals, they are not and it shows also in - they have all but destroyed the Liberal Party too. It is testament to their intellectual sloth, laziness, and self-satisfied mendacity. Thus, Kevin Rudd and his Cabinet of “Brown Pantalooned Morons”.

Having stripped Victorians of all their rights under the “Bill of Rights”, Bracks’ pal is quietly, behind the backs of Victorians, preparing to shove dead paupers in body bags and stuff them into the ground of pastoral lands in Western Victoria. What is the response of the Right? They agree, by their Stone-cold silence on this scandal.

During the weekend, locals of two neighbouring towns told me that Brumby is preparing land to stick deceased paupers in pasture land. The areas are in Terang, and the other a few minutes out of Campberdown in a two house village called Foxhow.

They will be stuck in holes, feet first. I suppose this is to ensure the blood doesn’t rush to the head of dead paupers deliriously delighted at being accorded their just desserts. Covered up, the usual cropping and grazing will continue over the top of a sadistic twist on the Chinese Stone Army.

Let’s see: no decent burial or cremation of paupers. No, the comrades in Spring St. will shove them in holes, forgotten. Yet, this is how both the Left and the Right regard Australians, useful only so long as they can be worked to death, taxed to death, and then dumped, the evidence buried in deep, obscure holes. We can see the point of paupers, they are no bloody use at all.

Ah, Jeff “an ethanol still in every Victorian’s backyard” Kennett refers to individuals as ‘units’. As both the CIS and the IPA have amply demonstrated, the Right are as contemptuous of the individual as the Left is. I appreciate Kennett’s euthenasia policy all the more.

Julia Gillard in Parliament, and in the media, has declared she will use modest Australians as body parts. Of course it is terrible for those in need of vital organ transplants, hoping they might be a recipient of an organ. It is not, though, an excuse for the totalitarian measure the perpetual hot red undergraduate moonlighting as Deputy Prime Minister of Australia trying this “u-beaut” con-trick. But, since this is where things are heading, the dilemma has been solved:

Paupers have a use. They can serve as ‘units’. They can be rounded up, and the increasing numbers of Castro-style doctors can rip out their organs while they are still alive, and then stuff the poor bastards into body bags and stick them under the turf of pasture land. Oh, some readers might object to this colourful description - well, that is how the worst regimes in history arrived at their worst measures.

I have always drummed both Bracks and Brumby are not decent gentlemen. They are neo-Marxist thugs, and they have been ably supported by the Right. This nice development is only a mere footnote to their thuggery, and I mean also the thuggery of the Right. They all hold modest Victorians in contempt. After all, vassals are mere oafs to be abused everyday.

The locals detest both Right and Left. The locals are shocked. They are scandalised. I am too, and, on reading this item, so will any decent Australian be appalled. The Press? Oh, don’t expect a squeak out of them; they never attack Bracks and Brumby, and that goes for the Herald Sun too. The media have never opposed any such vile measure rammed down by any “tier of government”, so why would they start now?

What disgusting parasites they are, lording it over Victorians, robbing them of all their inalienable rights, sacrificing Victorians on the alter of the Greens’ Stalinist death cult and for good measure, desecrating mere oafs. Well, if it is good enough for paupers to be stuck into ignominious holes in the ground, it is good enough for Bracks, Brumby, the “Reverendress” Pike, Kemp, Kroger, Red Ted and the morons in Rightwing ‘think tanks’. ( I say, Steve Edwards, will you still stick up for your pals?)

Shocking, absolutely shocking.

I have underestimated Chavez’s existing close ‘diplomatic’ ties with Australia.

In, Bob Brown gave a candid speech in the Senate and Liberals failed to shred him for what he disclosed (Friday, May 16, 2008), we noted Bob Brown’s demand for re-establishment of diplomatic ties, and on a very close basis, entails headaches for ASIO and Federal Police. It turns out, ASIO does have a headache. Some Australian arms dealers, at least two, are supplying at least one of Chavez’s terrorist fronts, the Marxist cell FARC, with arms.

Fox news:

The Washington Post reports that Venezuelan officials set up contacts with Australian arms dealers and arranged for missile training in the Middle East, according to the documents, which were on computer hard drives seized by Colombia.

Venezuela’s ties to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, came under further scrutiny Thursday when Interpol said it had concluded that the Colombian government hadn’t tampered with the seized computers.

Interpol’s report bolsters Colombia’s claims that the computers contain evidence of meddling by Venezuela in its neighbor’s war with FARC. Venezuela has asserted the files on the computer are

Also reported here on World news, along with other items on Chavez and his terrorist cells.

In The Australian, here.

Bob Brown and the Greens want to ‘legalise’ narcotics. This would open the gates to Chavez in Australia. Bob Brown and the Greens are pals with a Stalinist junta, that funds and fuels terrorism around the world, and funds the Islamo-Fascists enemy of Australia and our allies. Why?

The Greens is, stripped of its facade of unholy beliefs, a Stalinist front. The KGB didn’t establish the Greens to play tiddlywinks with the West. It set up the Greens as a Cold War front to topple the West and pave the way for takeover by Stalinist regimes. In the Senate, though the old USSR and the Cold War are finished, Bob Brown laid out the Greens’ updated manifesto, and it did not recieve even a squeak of an objection from Liberal MPs. Neither did the ALP slam Brown and the Greens over this grievous scandal - understandably because it is stuffed with treacherous leftists, such as Ms. Irwin, who supports the terrorist rat-hole called the “Palestinian Territory”.

One reason the Liberals failed to attack Brown is laziness mixed with incompetence and ignorance. They can’t be bothered to even do an Internet search. Since last Wednesday, the Liberals have still not gone for Brown’s and the Greens’ jugulars over their support for their fellow Stalinist travellers the Chavez regime. I do not simply mean that they have not said a word in Parliament. They have not gone for Brown and the Greens outside of Parliament.

Types such as Brown and his Greens chums should be unrelentingly skewered and torn apart. The Right and their advisers wouldn’t say boo. Besides, they are afraid of the left dominated media. Secondly, the IPA, for example, not only published that complete fabrication, Islam and the Free Market (why? is still being asked) they published an apologia for the Stalinist regime of Cuba, in the May edition of the IPA Review.

It should be noted, unlike the disgusting Islam and the Free Market ( and a corrective paper by someone who has a thorough, scholarly grasp of the history of economics - Mr. Jackson does - must be printed), they have simply pulled their propaganda piece on behalf of the ruthless, Stalinist dictatorship. However, while readers cannot call it down from the Internet, the article is still in black and white in the hard paper copy of the IPA Review. I have the article before me and I will, soon enough, write on it and skewer the thuggery of the IPA Review in detail.

Andrew “Andy Pandy” Kemp, son of Kommissar David Kemp, wrote the disgusting item. “Andy Pandy” is the guy who wrote a disgusting piece for The “Spencer Street Soviet” Age, waxing lyrically about that evil mass murderer called Che Gueverra, and what a great pin-up guy he is.

Andy Pandy went on to muse, why don’t we idolise Hitler too? This is the moral compass of Andy Pandy Kemp and the IPA Review. So, having apologised for the Stalinst regime of Cuba, the stunning problem is, Chavez fully supports it , and this fact is for another item on Bob Brown, the Greens and their fellow Stalinist travellers the Chavez junta, which funds, arms and trains marxist and Islamo-fascist terrorist cells.

(It truly is risible the Right’s claim they defend free markets and liberty, when they apologise to thugs, for thugs, and as they do these things spit on real free market economists, and are terrified of the treacherous left dominated media).

This is an addendum to the article, Bob Brown gave a candid speech in the Senate and Liberals failed to shred him for what he disclosed (Friday, May 16, 2008), posted immediately below.

Interpol has just released a report that only adds to the mountain of evidence against Chavez, whom Bob Brown fully supports. The report speaks for itself, so no further comment from me on it:

Computer Verified, Chavez Implicated

In the article posted below, an item on Obama concerning his embrace of our enemies was also cited. Here’s more evidence of Obama’s treachery.

Hitting A Nerve

Keep in clear view: Liberal MPs failed to shred Bob Brown. It is transparent why they put in another dismal, supine effort.