So this is what happens when a professional protester and student activist who has never grown up gets elected to parliament.
No more riding a rusty two wheeler to the barricades for Comrade Scott, or struggling on the train with the banners and spray paint en route to the latest anti-whatever tear up. No, the Greens Senator charges the public 11 large ones to attend a protest these days.
All for a good cause naturally – the shutting down of an entire industry.
Workers of the world unite, and form an orderly queue, Centrleink is this way. The least Comrade Ludlum could have done is to take the carbon credit option. He certainly took the piss!
I have been a petrol head for as long as I can remember, and a keen supporter of Australia’s automotive industry.
Go Ford!
Boo Holden!
(sorry, I’m not sure if I’m allowed to say that anymore…)
Ahem.
Anyway, in a matter of a short few years, Australia will go from being home to several car manufacturers, to being the home of none. Not so good. This loss of heavy industry is of strategic concern to our nation, and has resulted in the loss of jobs, and will continue to until Toyota, Ford and Holden finally close their doors in the next couple of years.
But two Aussie blokes reckon that they can succeed where others have failed. They have started a new company which they believe can be both sustainable and successful.
It would be awesome if this fledgeling enterprise becomes a success, not only for local car fans, but our nation.
I sincerely hope and wish Ashley Fenn and Matthew Newey of Ethan Automotive every success with their venture!
President Barack Obama’s new best friend, supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has just launched a new book that all of us should find interesting.
The book is called “Palestine”, and is, as the New York Post describes:
“a 416-page screed against the Jewish state.”
Wonderful!
The Ayatollah makes it clear from the very beginning that Israel has no right to exist, just in case you were unsure. Furthermore, that this hatred of the Jewish people and nation doesn’t come from a crude form of anti-semitism which the good Ayatollah claims is a European phenomena, but comes from a time honoured and well established principle of Islam.
Ah! Well, that’s a relief!
Khamenei does not recommend conventional war or massacre of the Jews… oh no, but rather a slow niggling war that will wear them down, so that the Jews will become so tired of it they’ll throw themselves into the Mediterranean.
The New York Post goes on to explain that the blurb on book’s back cover credits Khamenei as “The flagbearer of Jihad to liberate Jerusalem.”
Isn’t it wonderful that President Obama is now friends with the likes of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei? It’s certainly a good arrangement for Iran and our enemies. You see, they can continue to hate us and wage war on us, whilst we imagine that having enemies is beneath us and just oh so 20th Century…
XYZ.
The Empire strikes back! Well, Nauru anyway. Sick of being bullied by national broadcasters with budgets several times the size of its Gross Domestic Product, the President of Naura, the wonderfully named Baron Waqa, directs a polite, but determined, two fingered salute in the direction of the ABC, The Age, the Guardian, the refugee council, Julian Burnside QC AO etc etc, the signboard at the front of the Gosford Anglican Church, the Australian Greens, and other assorted refugee “advocates” and “activists” who have pilloried the island nation over the treatment of the asylum seekers it hosts on behalf of terra Australis.
As Baron Waqa objects – our asylum seekers are seen swimming at leisure, dining out, and having a generally good time whilst sampling the, admittedly few, attractions the island has to offer the discerning refugee. Most of all, the good Baron would like the Australian critics of Naura – read here the cultural elitists of the political left – to drop the smug air of superiority adopted when it comes to lecturing our island neighbour.
Here at XYZ we’re loathe to fling around accusations of racism and bigotry, but it does seem the Baron has a point, and that, by its own standards, some of the self righteous media types in this country might well find themselves in the shoes of the accused should they want to play the dangerous game of stacking shit on the Republic of Naura, an island that can take plenty of it since it consists, in fact, largely of bird shit.
This is the kind of Australia Labor Senator Nova Peris wants:
One in which the Prime Minister can pick up a phone and demand that a journalist be sacked. In this case, Senator Peris was calling for the sacking, and silencing, of journalist Andrew Bolt, for denying a key tenet of the indigenous rights industry, the existence of the ‘stolen generation.’
Happily, the current PM is very unlikely to pick up the phone as instructed, and demand the sacking of the offending journalist, neither does he have that power. But do take note of the sort of Australia Senator Peris longs for.
It’s not all that long ago that the same Labor party wanted to place the media under an external authority. Anyone spot the enemies of free speech yet?
Nova Peris: Bolt should go (The New Daily)
In the spirit of justice for first peoples, XYZ draws attention to the plight of the indigenous people of the then obscure island described in this article by National Geographic who were subject to a sustained invasion by foreign settlers, resulting in an apartheid like society, and a tragic loss of identity.
The original custodians of this once peaceful land (putting aside the occasional human sacrifice) were forcibly displaced, generations were enslaved if not stolen, and a most ancient language, together with the somewhat brutal native culture that accompanied it, was tragically lost, surviving now only in a few council estates on the fringes of London.
Is it not time now for justice for the indigenous peoples of Britain, whose land was so ruthlessly stolen by Angles, Saxons and Jutes all those centuries ago? Has the time not come for the court of Camelot to reconvene, and for the descendants of the ancient Britons to rise up and take back what is theirs (assuming someone can find them)?
We are not sure where one would start in rectifying this historical injustice, but strongly encourage anyone named Arthur to undergo DNA testing now for traces of some Celtic heritage, however remote. A land rights claim on Stonehenge, and a nice town house in the West End, would also seem an appropriate way forward.
Britons arise!
Last night, we were treated to a remarkably interesting episode of the ABC’s Q&A. Regardless of whether or not the science episode is part of the ABC legitimising keeping Q&A out of the news department, the episode was an excellent example of the chasm between the genuine scientific issues of our day – and the rhetoric chosen by our leaders.
For example, eminent physicist Dr Neil deGrasse Tyson and ABC knock-about mathematician Adam Spencer discussed the quest to find basic life in outer space (something they claim we will detect within our generation), as well as the opportunities that will very soon be in our grasp for humanity to explore, utilise, and colonise the solar system, and indeed the universe.
They then spoke about the massive development in knowledge and technology that we are currently undergoing, which will make the social and economic changes that took place through the Industrial Revolution look like child’s play.
These current and soon to be made advances in technology and robotics have the potential to change the world and ‘disrupt’ over 40 per cent of traditional jobs within the next few years. This is a massive issue that we are already starting to face, but about which no one, not even a single politician or political leader is speaking.
But our leaders are speaking about other scientific issues. For example we have President Barack Obama yesterday, stating: “No challenge poses a greater threat to our future and future generations than a change in climate.”
Really? Really?
These comments from President Obama come from yesterday’s launch of a new campaign to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power stations, in a last ditch (and rather misguided) attempt to leave something of a legacy. The moral poseurs will be proud – but many will be left shaking their heads, wondering how we allowed ourselves to get sidetracked by global-warming *oops* “climate-change” rhetoric, and ignored other genuine challenges that we are facing, and will face in the next few years to come.
Mr President, it seems the science is way ahead of you. When are you going to face the actual global challenges and opportunities ahead of us, rather than reacting with a misguided knee-jerk desire to take us back to an imagined pre-industrial utopia?
What we are seeing, in last night’s Q&A, and in our mainstream media generally, is the rather dramatic divergence between politics and science.
One of the basic tenets of journalism is that you should always seek to interview more than one source for a story, both (or more) sources preferably having at least slightly divergent views and certainly not coming from the same organisation.
Perhaps figuring that no-one but public broadcasting advocates and credulous immigrants watch it, it’s pretty clear that SBS doesn’t play by that basic tenet, at least when it comes to spreading green propaganda, if last night’s World News at 6.30pm is any guide. Leading with the scary thought that the drinking water of 11 million people could be affected by development – mining, farming, urban sprawl (in other words, just a few of those hateful parts of modern society that stop us from living in bush humpies) – SBS devoted nearly two-and-a-half minutes to a scare campaign by the Australian Conservation Foundation.
The reporter, Gareth Boreham, interviewed only two sources: the ACF’s CEO (though she was not named as such) Kate O’Shannasy and its Campaign Director, Dr Paul Sinclair. Boreham, apparently a journalist, did nothing but regurgitate their talking points; he offered no alternative views, no quotes from any other source, no hard questions or doubt, and ultimately no credibility.
If any of the file footage was shot by SBS, I’m a monkey’s uncle. Slow-motion drifting over the ranges, kangaroos and emus in soft focus – it seems much more likely to have been shot by the pACF itself and handed over with a wink and a nod to an unquestioning SBS.
When Donald Trump announced his bid for the White House in mid June there were smiles all round, plenteous expressions of derision, and the odd sneer. A few weeks later, and Trump is leading the polls as the Republican nominee. The reaction of the media to the Trump candidacy recalled the vitriol directed at Sarah Palin, and not only her, but disgracefully, her family too.
Palin challenged the stereotype, as a strong, conservative woman, with a penchant for saying in public things that lots of voters were thinking, but were too scared to put into words themselves for fear of offending the politically correct brigade and being publicly shamed. Things have moved on a bit since the Palin years. It’s quite possible now to, not only be publicly shamed, but actually lose one’s job and income for offending the thought police, as we have seen several times recently in a number of high profile cases.
So Sarah Palin blazed across the scene, and then disappeared from it. But one gets the distinct impression that lots of American voters were hoping for another incantation of the ‘hockey mom’ who will not be silenced by the assorted do-gooders, activists and general hand-wringers, who, like the Death-Eaters of the Harry Potter novels, live only to suck every inch of happiness and joy out of the lives of the lesser beings who are the ordinary citizen. As unlikely as it may sound at first hearing, Donald has come up Trumps in the early running to pick up where Sarah left off, in her quest to take the hockey moms and dads – the ordinary salt of the earth type – all the way to Washington.
It’s not quite a modern day re-run of ‘Mr Smith goes to Washington.’ For one thing, Trump has plenty of the green folding stuff, and can fund a serious campaign, a bit like libertarian poster boy Ron Paul an election or two ago. The point of difference with Mr Trump is his standing in the polls – he is presently the preferred candidate among Republic voters, and has a realistic chance of securing the nomination. Paul came close, but was never in reach of the prize. The genesis of the Trump ascendancy is to be found in the speech accompanying his campaign launch, on home turf at Trump Tower in New York. On that occasion, he made the following, highly controversial comments, words that, subsequently, saw his popularity and standing among voters rise at a level commensurate with the vitriol and scorn directed at him.
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best…They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with [them]. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
This is about as politically incorrect as it gets, and would certainly result in a chorus of calls for immediate resignation here in Australia, followed by a stint in a re-education camp, and continued public shaming via the national broadcaster for good measure, pending a renunciation and self confession as a racist or homophobe or islamaphobe or whatever the group the delicate types hoping to be offended belong to. Trump, in saying this, gave the cultural elite, including of course the east coast media, the metaphorical two fingers. He managed to vocalise what was on many people’s minds. Even if his turn of speech was crude, and his generalisations large, Trump was vocalising the lived experience of many Americans, and giving expression to what countless court lists and crime reports, serving police, and the demography of prison populations across the United States, all point to. Trump backed up his comments by offering some further clarification to the perpetually outraged:
“The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc. This was evident just this week when, as an example, a young woman in San Francisco was viciously killed by a five time deported Mexican with a long criminal record, who was forced back into the United States because they didn’t want him in Mexico. This is merely one of thousands of similar incidents throughout the United States.”
The campaign slogan of Team Trump is “Make America Great Again.” If he does get the opportunity, he will have his work cut out after the wastage of the Obama years, during which the White House has been occupied by a speech maker whose primary achievements have come direct from the autocue. Trump has also claimed that, in and through his campaign thus far, “the voice of the silent majority is being heard again.” Even if he never attains the White House, if he can achieve only this, in making the voices of the ordinary moms and dads of America heard again over those of the smug cultural elitists who currently hold Washington captive, then it will be a victory for more than just America, but, potentially, for the rest of the free world too.
The Al Jazeera media network, owned by the non-democratic, pro-sharia Qatari Government has become a ‘trusted’ news source for Australian media.
The Egyptian court has yet again adjourned the retrial of Australian journalist Peter Greste, and his Al Jazeera colleagues Baher Mohomed and Mohamed Fahmy. The Guardian yesterday described the situation as “the latest setback in a prolonged case that has attracted the criticism of press freedom advocates worldwide.”
Furthermore, it is Peter Greste own view that, “he and two colleagues will not be truly free until a Egyptian court exonerates the trio of terrorism-related charges.”
Strangely, the media has failed to provide the exact details of this intriguing and prolonged case. The community has some knowledge that Peter Greste is an Al Jazeera journalist jailed in Egypt for spreading false news and supporting the banned Muslim Brotherhood, during the turmoil following the ousting of the Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi in 2013.
The jailing of Peter Greste caused great controversy, and became a media issue all of its own. The Australian Government, off the back of the public outrage over the jailing of Greste played diplomatic hardball with the Egyptians, and managed to have him freed and deported back to Australia in February this year.
Since then, Greste has been heralded as a hero and showered with journalism awards.
But there is something that makes me feel uneasy. When Greste appeared on the ABC’s Q&A recently, he made the usual statements apologising for Islamic extremism, attributing the blame for Islamic discontent on the shoulders of the West. He proceeded to say that Muslims are reacting to talk in the West about war and a clash of civilisations, yet failed to acknowledge that this kind of language is deeply embedded in and inseparable from the manifestos of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and indeed the Quran and the traditions of Islam itself.
Something is just not right.
Then I looked into the ABC’s international media darling Al Jazeera which is based in the Arab nation Qatar. Al-Jazeera rose to prominence in the West during the Afghanistan campaign of the early 2000s, and very quickly grew to become the preferred Middle Eastern news agency for Australia’s ABC as well as most of Australia’s and the United States’ mainstream media outlets.
So what do we know about Al Jazeera, and who owns it? Well first of all, al-Jazeera is owned and funded by the Qatari government. Starting to feel a little uneasy?
The Qatari government is a hereditary monarchy ruled by a royal family that has made tremendous wealth from oil and gas. Qatar is certainly not any bastion of liberal democracy, and Sharia law forms the foundation of the nation’s constitution.
At this point I’m guessing you’re feeling a little more uneasy, and there’s good reason to be concerned.
Al-Jazeera is a news agency owned by an anti-democracy, pro-Sharia law state that has become the trusted source for Middle Eastern and international news, not only for Australia’s ABC but for much of the Western media. You are right to be hearing alarm bells.
Moreover, Al Jazeera has been roundly accused of acting as the propaganda arm of the Qatari government, as well as promoting the interests of the Muslim Brotherhood. But most people have no idea of these facts ( & I urge you to check them out yourself, Google is your friend).
Last December, the Economist Reported:
“For the past decade Qatar had given quiet, generous and persistent support to the Muslim Brotherhood. It had lent money, diplomatic backing and a powerful media platform not only to the mother organisation, founded in Egypt in 1928, but to a range of affiliated and like-minded Islamist groups across the region. Qatar’s leaders leant ideologically towards the Brotherhood’s conservative but centrist Islamism.”
Now, without making any personal implications towards Peter Greste, this whole story looks and feels rather sickening.
Whatever Peter Greste’s personal convictions, it is clear that there are connections between Al Jazeera and Qatar, and Qatar and the terrorist organisation, the Muslim Brotherhood, – and therefore very likely a relationship between Al Jazeera and the Muslim Brotherhood too.
It is not just uncomfortable, but downright wrong that al-Jazeera, a news agency owned and funded by a non-democratic Sharia state, is the trusted source of news for the Western media.
I am pleased that Peter Greste has been released from his Egyptian jail. Yet I am not fully convinced that he himself has no connection with the Muslim Brotherhood. And whether he personally does or not, it is beside the point. His employer and its owner most certainly have, and the whole al-Jazeera media arrangement is extremely disturbing.
Whilst the Peter Greste saga has been made out to be an issue of media freedom and free speech, and Greste himself has been made out to be a hero, given what lies behind it all, we should be not just skeptical, but gravely concerned about the whole story and the reliability and trustworthiness of al-Jazeera news.
The AFL has accelerated its social engineering mission today, releasing an updated Universal Definition of Racism. An AFL “spokesperson” was already waiting on the steps of AFL House when the media swarm arrived:
“The community appears confused as to what racism actually is. We are taught that it doesn’t matter if your words or actions are intended, or not intended, to be racist; if the recipient perceives such words or actions as racist, it is racist. But there are two factors implied in this definition which until now have remained unspoken, and we believe require official explicit clarification.
“a) Given that a key factor in defining a person, their words or actions, as a racist, is how they make someone “feel,” then it only takes the accusation of being racist to make you a racist.
“For this reason, people should bend over backwards to try not to be racist. We are starting to see positive signs in this direction, with more and more of Australia’s elite condemning ordinary Australians as racist, and starting to question whether they are racist without even knowing it.
“b) What distinguishes a person, their words or actions, as racist, is who that person is, and with whom they are interacting. If a white person says something racist, or perceived to be racist, it is racist. If a non-white person says something, or does something, racist to a white person, or even to a “white non-white person,” it is not racist.
“In the latter situation, the white person, or “white non-white person,” should welcome having their privilege challenged, and should embrace having a non-white person rub it in all our white faces until we truly get the message. It was assumed that after the Monkeygate scandal of 2008, people understood this dynamic, but it seems that some white people still judge non-white people by the same standards as they are held to – such as expecting they can boo Adam Goodes when he blatantly shoves an opponent in the back and isn’t penalised, resulting in a goal.
“That some white people have been trying to judge people by the content of their character, rather than the colour of their skin, is racist. And that some white people have been trying to point this out recently, is also racist. That is why the AFL feels it is necessary to step in today to clarify these points. Thank you for your time. There will be no questions.”
It has been a busy week for the AFL. This new edict comes hot on the heels of several over the past week. Since declaring that it is racist to boo Adam Goodes, and ordering football fans to stop doing so, the AFL has declared it sexist to make fun of Bronwyn Bishop on social media, and has lambasted Mitchell Johnson for his racist quitting of cricket after he could handle being teased by the Poms.
The XYZ eagerly awaits the next instalment of the AFL’s crusade to make the world a better place.
It’s your XYZ.
Authorities are remaining tight lipped about the latest bail application to come before the Courts, after a man with a history of violence who has absconded from bail three times previously, was let out of prison on weekend release by a County Court judge, to attend his own wedding. In an outcome that took the Judge by surprise, once released from jail, the man, who was facing serious charges at trial the following week, declined to return.
Whilst details are still sketchy, XYZ has learned the latest such bail application is being made on the grounds that ‘marriage equality’ is denied to prisoners being held on indefinite sentences who wish to gay marry.
Said one prisoner, who wanted to be known only as “Sally,” and who spoke to us via a smuggled i-phone from inside Barwon Prison, “I just want our right to marriage equality recognised. My partner and I have already applied to have our ceremony in Alaska, and promise to return after the honeymoon. I hope we come before the same County Court judge. Ohhh… and if anyone out there has advice on a hat and accessories that would go well with a plus sized beige off the shoulder number I’d be very pleased to hear it.”
And now for something a little less serious, it is time for Wally of the Week, named after Everyone’s Favourite Muslim Apologist[TM], Waleed Aly.
This week, we cannot go past the Hawthorn Football Club. After winning their last three matches, including two against serious Premiership contenders, by a combined total of 299 points, they lost to Richmond.
Need we say more?
It’s your XYZ.
You idiot!
That’s what immediately came to mind when I read this via my colleague here at XYZ – Jeremy Morgan – and the always entertaining UK Daily Mail.
I’ve been something of a frequent flyer to the old dart, for both business and pleasure, the last few years, but each time I’ve visited I have stupidly paid my own way. So after reading this, no more Heathrow hell for me, with its mind numbing queues and unfriendly passport control people who don’t give a toss how long your flight was. No more paying forty quid a night for a B&B and stocking up on Tesco lunches when short of cash so the rest can be turned into liquid refreshment at the pub.
Upon arrival, I’m dumping my Passport and heading straight to the door labelled Immigration, and claiming the full asylum – from those capitalist bastards in Australia or something like that, or whatever story will do the trick. It doesn’t seem to need be overly convincing or complicated these days, the trick is to be bodily present. So tick the box “asylum,” answer “no sir” to any questions about documentation, and bingo, free meals, 35 quid a week, and a 3 star Hotel – that’s shaping up nicely for a week or two in the mother country.
UK taxpayer, I’m having one on you. Cheers.
Andrew Bolt’s guest on Sunday 2 August 2015 was Dallas Scott of the ‘Black steam train’ blog. Scott speaks with sincerity and clarity on the Adam Goodes booing controversy, and offers an insight towards the end into his own background and upbringing. Most importantly of all, Dallas Scott is a voice distinct from the pantheon of earnest types of Anglo-Saxon background offering commentary on the affair. We believe he speaks with sincerity and rare insight.
The XYZ has obtained exclusive information, unconfirmed as yet, that the Department of Finance, backed by the Australian Federal Police, plans to investigate the financial and travel records of every politician, from every political party, who has served at a Council, State or Federal level, over the last 30 years.
This has caused mass panic in Canberra, with roads leading out of the city clogged. Several members of the Greens party have been reportedly spotted desperately trying to ride their bikes, while other anonymous callers claimed they saw a dishevelled Richard Di Natale begging motorists for a lift, citing the extreme cold.
In the most dramatic news, some public servants have been claiming on social media that Penny Wong is currently stalking Parliament House with an axe, hacking open the skulls of any poor unfortunate soul still trapped in its cavernous halls, and eating their brains. The XYZ must stress that these reports are sketchy at best, although we must admit that such behaviour cannot be deemed out of character.
It’s your XYZ.
Elon Musk is the greatest human being alive, and will transform the face of the planet within our lifetimes. The South African made a fortune as the head of Paypal, and invested his dividend into founding or backing companies which have developed groundbreaking new technologies in three key areas -the electric car, clean energy, and space travel.
His electric car company, Tesla Motors, has blown the staid, boring image of the electric car out of the water. It is producing cars with serious grunt, cars which outperform the best supercars in the world for a tenth of the cost.
The long term aim of Elon Musk and Tesla Motors, (and one would be wise to put money on this,) is to mass produce viable, awesome and affordable electric cars which ordinary people want to buy and want to drive.
Along with developing the infrastructure necessary to support a viable electric car industry, Musk was instrumental in the founding of SolarCity, the second largest producer of solar power systems in the US, and is busy coordinating technology from Tesla into SolarCity.
Musk’s crowning jewel is SpaceX. Having designed and built its own rockets and spacecraft from the ground up, SpaceX is contracted by the US government to service the International Space Station with supplies, and eventually with astronauts. Despite setbacks such as the odd explosion, it is doing this better and more efficiently than NASA.
Most important of all, SpaceX is working on developing reusable rockets. By far the most expensive aspect of escaping earth’s gravity is that currently, a rocket can only be used once. Tremendous quantities of fuel are expended, but this pales into comparison with the fact that you have to build a new ship every time you travel into space. To solve this, SpaceX is developing a rocket which can take a ship into outer space, and then come back down to earth. At the moment, the only obstacle they face is landing it, and they are not far off resolving this.
This is groundbreaking, because it holds the potential to reduce the cost of space travel dramatically. Along with other private companies, they could open up space travel to ordinary people the world over, slash intercontinental travel time, and provide the impetus for humans to colonise the Solar System.
Musk is a fierce advocate of the free market, and voices his admiration for Margaret Thatcher. But he demonstrates a sense of proportion, in his relaxed attitude to his own patents, and his willingness to share his technology with other companies to spur competition, even if it means competition against his interests, because he understands that this will lead to faster advancement.
Musk understands that the free market provides the best environment for geniuses such as himself to fully realise their potential, and to provide the greatest possible benefit to humanity at large, by removing as many obstacles as possible from their path. It is ironic that far left extreme environmentalists, who are relentless in their advocacy of government programs, government intervention, and placing costs on private enterprise in order to reduce the amount of energy they and their customers use, are in fact the greatest obstacle to their own stated goal of a clean and healthy planet.
This leads to another way in which his desire to ensure the continuation of human consciousness differs in emphasis, and ultimately practicality from the misanthropic left. Rather than lecture us on how the earth is the only home we have, and how we must therefore lower our civilisational sights and our standard of living, (and barely disguise fantasies about extinguishing the human race so that Mother Gaia can live on,) Musk recognises the frailty of human existence if we continue to live on one small rock hurtling through the vastness of space. Hence, his eagerness to make human life multi-planetary. Although I differ from him on the extent of the threat of global warming, I have to admire his practical and philosophical approach to the issue, which is based on the belief that human ingenuity and human freedom can find the solution to any problem.
Likewise, I admire his clarity of thought when it comes to American Exceptionalism. America was founded on the concept of natural law, that rights are endowed simply by our existence, rights which government has no right to take away, as opposed to being bestowed upon us by government. I do not begrudge the fact that he is almost “nauseatingly pro-American.” He is right to describe America as “the greatest force for good of any country that’s ever been,” and is spot on when he states that without America there would be no democracy today, as it saved the world in World War 1, World War 2 and the Cold War. Personally, if there is one other country on earth I would chose to live in, by my own free will, other than my native Australia, it is the United States.
I love the fact that one of his spaceship designs, the Falcon, is a tribute to the Millennium Falcon from Star Wars. The generation that grew up on Star Wars which, when they were kids, fully expected to be travelling to outer space by the time that they were adults, are being inspired by it, now that they realise that the only way we are going to get there is if we stop waiting around for NASA, ie, the government, and do it ourselves. Furthermore, the spirit of America is encapsulated in these movies, (or at least the originals,) and is an enduring symbol of everything that is good about America – freedom, liberty, enterprise – in a time when these ideals are under attack from powerful forces within.
My only caution to Musk would be to keep his distance from the political process. He has donated a few million over the years to both the Democrats and to the Republicans, rationalising with the line that “in order to have your voice be heard in Washington, you have to make some little contribution.” I have no problem with SpaceX earning a government contract to service the ISS both with supplies and people, as this saves money, but I would be wary of government subsidies, and realistic about how much real sway one has over those one has lobbied.
The recurring literary image which comes to mind is that of Hank Reardon, from Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged. A genius, workaholic inventor and businessman whose creations bring himself a fortune and the rest of the world wealth and comfort, he remains a little naive about the utility of having “a man in Washington,” until he comes to the twin realisation: his man in Washington will ultimately look out for his own interests, not those of his benefactor; and that he doesn’t need the government – the government needs him.
I hope Elon Musk can extricate himself from a government and political system in America which is becoming increasingly eager to intervene in every aspect of the economy and people’s lives, and chart his own course. All of humanity will benefit from Elon Musk, not because he is a leader, and certainly not because he tells people what to do – he doesn’t – but simply because of what he does, what he has created, and what he will create in the future. Elon Musk should be free to let his mind and his ambition be the only arbiter of what he does, in a a world which places no barriers in his path.
Photo by pestoverde
Yesterday, the cartoonist and author, Paul Zanetti penned a rather interesting piece concerning media darling and host of Channel 10’s the Project, Waleed Aly, on the Adam Goodes saga.
Zanetti notes that Aly is a master of a special art known as “fractionalism” (a mix of fact and fiction dressed up as journalism). You see, although Aly is billed as a journalist, “he has not been trained as a journalist but as a lawyer” a profession that Zanetti highlights, “that trades on cherry picking convenient facts to win a case for their clients(s).” No insult intended to lawyers!
Zanetti has noticed, that:
“As a lawyer and former spin doctor for the Islamic Council of Victoria, Aly has mastered the skillful of manipulating the information he dishes up to the public, not so much by what he tells us, but by what he doesn’t tell us.”
This is precisely what Waleed Aly does. There is a lot that Aly doesn’t tell us about Islam and terrorism, conveniently cherry picking what he presents to his non-Muslim audience in order to present Islam is the most positive and friendly light, knowing full well that there is much, much more, and a much more sinister element to the story.
I was also struck by the silence of this talkative commentator on the occasion the Project, Aly’s daily hipster news show presented a 10 minute plus piece gushing over the same-sex marriage victory in Ireland. As each of Aly’s companions around the desk took their turn to express how beautiful and wonderful this victory was, Aly was untypically silent. What was that Waleed Aly? We couldn’t hear you. We’re still eagerly waiting for you to tell us what you think about this topical and important social issue. Furthermore, it is disappointing that Channel 10 thought it good that Aly stay silent, rather than potentially adding diversity to the opinion and discussion on the Project.
Zanetti is right. “Fractionalism” sums up perfectly the slippery, cherry picking, and opinionated Waleed Aly.
In breaking news, unverified reports from the Congo indicate that Cecil the lion has appeared in the skies over a remote village. One resident, speaking via a scratchy Skype connection, likened the manifestation of Cecil in the clouds to that of Mustapha in The Lion King. Local officials hope the remote site will one day become a place of pilgrimage, like Lourdes.
The world has been greatly distressed by the untimely death, in fact, the martyrdom of Cecil the lion.
The XYZ has had further unverified reports of members of the public feeling the spiritual presence of Cecil, and experiencing visions and apparitions of the saintly lion.
Whilst saints of old could be canonised by general acclamation, the Catholic Church nowadays requires holy men, women, and lions to have at least two verifiable miracles in order to be formally recognised as saints.
Your XYZ, in our desire to serve the community, is keen to petition Pope Francis to have Cecil formally recognised amongst the eternal communion of saints.
Holy Father, we humbly submit that henceforth, the Feast Day of Saint Cecil, Lion and Martyr, be a Holy Day across the catholic world, and among public broadcasters across the globe.
If you have experienced any miracles from Cecil the lion, or know someone who has, please contact us immediately at your XYZ.
St Cecil, pray for us, now and at the hour of our need.
Amen
_________________
This piece is a follow up post to our previous article: https://xyz.net.au/buying-into-the-cecil-controversy.
I want to start by making it clear that I don’t understand, at all, why anyone would want to ritually kill a magnificent wild animal like a lion, or an elephant, or a feral bearded Socialist Alternative protestor for that matter. In fact, being a gentle type, I don’t even get why some people seemingly get their thrills by shooting guns or letting off arrows in the wilderness. Do it on X-Box if you must. Further, I really don’t like dentists (traumatic past experience), and I especially dislike dentist’s from Minnesota, for no apparent reason. In fact, I’d love to see someone do a mock up of the Blues Brothers clip wherein the quip ‘I hate Illinois Nazis’ is changed to ‘I hate Minnesota dentists’ as some Third Reich wannabees are run off the road and into the river.
But here’s the thing. It sucks that some tool who spends his days sucking stuff out of people’s mouths and drilling out cavities in their teeth, put an end to the life of Saint Cecil, the late lion of the province of Zimbabwe. I’ve no doubt that Cecil is safe now in the arms of a loving Saviour, and has been given a decent funeral that has enabled the many around the world mourning for him to express their grief. As I have already said, I really do hate Minnesota dentists, and have no time for one who makes up for the inadequacy of his manhood by slaying beasts in the wild. But where is our moral compass in all of this? At the same time the world went into a frenzy over the death of Cecil, in the same nation as that which contains the State of Minnesota and its dentists, there has been a week long scandal involving the Planned Parenthood people, who apparently carry out abortions and are happy to on sell the body parts of aborted babies for a profit to interested buyers. If you think that is far fetched, as well as abhorrent, Google it. It’s true alright. The outrage has been largely limited to the existing stable of anti-abortionists.
But you really don’t need to fall into that group, nor be an habitual god-botherer, to consider this is pretty fucked up.
As someone said, somewhere on Twitter, in a place I can’t find again – If Planned Parenthood were selling puppy parts, or the harvested organs of the late Cecil the lion, or the brains of seals clubbed to death in the Arctic… you get the idea… the outrage would be palpable, social media would light up, and PETA would be calling for public hangings, if not a reintroduction of the preferred medieval methods whereby capital offenders, usually those who had threatened the current political power structures, were ritually disembowelled and their body sliced into quarters.
John Donne once famously wrote, “Any man’s death diminishes me, Because I am involved in mankind, And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee.” The death of Cecil, majestic lion that he was, has diminished us, and particularly diminished the future income of one Minnesota dentist in particular. But the disturbing and grisly on-selling of the aborted body parts of, yes call it a foetus if you will but it will grow to be a human being if left intact in the womb, this does not diminish us. The deaths of poor Nepalese in mudslides, sleeping in their beds in their flimsy mountainside huts, this does not result in tearful hashtag campaigns to ensure it does not happen again. The ongoing violence, injustice and cruelty in what was once the Republic of Syria, this sinks without a trace on social media in the West. Hardly surprising, really, when the new morality looks to people like Professor Peter Singer for its ‘ethics,’ a man who would even advocate the murder of newborn infants, and who considers a newborn human child as having less value than that of the life of a pig or a chimpanzee. http://www.abc.net.au/…/young-case-against-peter-si…/4199120
I don’t know where Professor Singer stands on selling the baby parts of said infants, but it’s not a long journey from that, to the actions of Planned Parenthood. Like the senseless hunting and killing of Cecil the lion, but only more so, this really does diminish us.
No more riding a rusty two wheeler to the barricades for Comrade Scott, or struggling on the train with the banners and spray paint en route to the latest anti-whatever tear up. No, the Greens Senator charges the public 11 large ones to attend a protest these days.
