:: Wog Blog ::


:: Welcome. This blog will present a wog perspective on matters. And this wog will decide what matters.:: ::bloghome:: | ::contact::
::WOG FROG(&SPAIN) 2006::
:: Day 1 of 14 - Start Here
::WOG MOG LEJOG 2005::
:: Day 0 of 14 - Start Here
::WOG ON THE ROAD 2004::
:: Day 1 of 10 - Start Here
:: Wog Blogger Profile
::A Few Recommended Oz Blogs::
:: Tim Blair
:: Belmont Club
:: Silent Running
:: Bernard Slattery
:: Tony the Teacher
:: Yobbo
:: Adrian the Cabbie
:: Andrew Bolt
:: Romeo Mike
::A Few Recommended News Sites::
:: News Now
:: Sydney Morning Herald
:: The Daily Telegraph
:: The Australian
:: The Financial Review
:: Atlantic Monthly
:: Drudge Report
:: Counterterrorism Blog
::A Few Recommended US Blogs::
:: Jules Crittenden
:: Glenn Reynolds
:: James Lileks
:: Little Green Footballs
:: The Corner
:: Matt Welch
:: Ken Layne
:: Stephen Green
:: Eugene Volokh
:: Iraq Now
:: Jeff Goldstein
:: Powerline
:: Opera Chick
::A Few Recommended Italian Blogs::
:: 1972
:: I Love America
:: Il Foglio
:: Il Nouvo Riformista
:: Wind Rose Hotel
:: Libero Pensiero
:: Beppe Grillo
::A Few Recommended UK Blogs::
:: Oxblog
:: Harry's Place
:: Theo Spark
:: Tuscan Tony
:: Biased BBC
:: Melanie Phillips
:: Oliver Kamm
:: Samizdata
:: Harry Hutton
:: Norman Geras
:: Tim Worstall
:: Freedom & Whisky
::A Few Recommended Other Blogs::
:: Gates of Vienna
:: EurSoc
:: Iberian Notes
:: Healing Iraq
:: Baghdad Burning
:: The Messopotamian
:: Mahmood's Den
:: No Pasaran!Merde in France
:: Dissident Frogman
:: The Head Heeb
November 2002 December 2002 January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 April 2006 June 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 May 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 November 2008 April 2009 May 2009 October 2009 April 2010 May 2012

:: Saturday, 21 May 2005 ::

More Sullivan rubbish.

Among other egregious bullshit he claims the Republicans won't lesbian couples visit one another in hospital. I am not even going to link it because it is such crap.

What is missing from wife and wife marriage and husband and husband marriage, which is what gay marriage is, is the rights of succession and presumption of nearest-family-member status that husband and wives have.

That is all.

Lesbians can go to hospital to visit their lovers.

No Republican can stop them.

Sullivan is a hysterical jackass on this topic and he is trying the patience of straights like me who, in supporting gay marriage, are doing so at a considerable inconvenience to themselves.

No longer can I just be asked "are you married?". Once gay marriage comes in, I will get the followup question "to a man or a woman?".

That upsets me hugely cos I am appalled personally at the idea of me marrying someone of my own gender. That is me. Straight. I am not appalled at the idea of someone else doing so, but that second question is evidence of just how fake the whole idea of gay marriage is. It is fake. But hey, if gays want it okay with me. I am not going to fight to prevent it.

But it seems to me that what gays want is to be taken seriously as partners in the same way as husbands and wives.

Willing your estate to your surviving spouse should work for gays as much as straights.

Presumptions of authorisation for medical procedures which lie with a spouse should work for gays just as much as it does for straights.

Presumptions for superannuation should work just the same for gays as well as straights.

But sheesh, a Sullivan gay, who bangs on and on and on about gay marriage using utterly unreal examples of discriminiation and screeching at anyone who blanches cos not everyone wants to dance around a friggin' maypole about it really test the patience of straights.

Some folks do not care for gays.


It has been ever thus.

Some folks do not like wogs. Some wogs do not gays. Rather a lot, I reckon.


All of us who are not gay are giving up something when we support the idea of gay marriage, alright? The gays are not giving up anything, which is fair enough, cos they are after all actually trying to gain something. But they could be grateful for the support they do get. I know folks who are. Top gay folks.

Not Sully. He is appalled that there are some folks who do not like gays and who do not care for gay marriage.

Get over yourself, man. Stop being such a thought policeman. Focus on the law - cos that is at the very heart of this whole gay marriage issue.

The law of committed relationships.
:: WB 6:42 p.m. [link+] ::
Shockingly Crap

That would be the Stassinopoulos Post.

Have a look at this for their comment policy on posted news, as opposed to blog posts which have no comments allowed at all:

Post a comment
We read every comment submitted but only publish comments that are on topic and have the potential to interest other readers. This means there will be a delay before your comment appears. Please post only once.

Why not just have a policy as follows:
We only publish comments that are on topic and which we determine, using wholly subjectively criteria, whether a comment is on topic. Exchanges are not allowed so please take care what you write in your single comment.

I mean, what on earth is the point of having commentson news if you do not encourage exchanges?

No comments on my site cos I am an nfrequent poster, so adding comment review as a bloggy task is unrealistic. And if you have comments you gotta check 'em out to keep 'em legal, I mean, we are in the publishing game after all. We're in the international publishing game, after all.

Anyhoo, enough of the half-way Stassinopoulos Post comment policy - the site itself, and its blog, is just the most depressing theatre of moribund left-wing views and unfunny offkey observations I have encountered.

How is it posible that they are publishing the work of this man, Simon Jenkins as their Iraq go to guy.

He wanted to quit Iraq in September last year.

He wants to quit it now.

There was an election in January 2005 and a government has been formed by May.

But he wants to quit.

That is all he wants.


Do read the whole blog. I defy you to read it and not come away with a bliling rage at the pointless negativity and cynicim and the utter absence of any solutions to any of the "problems" being identified.

Shallowness personified. It needs to be fisked. But, whoo, what a job that would be.
:: WB 5:56 p.m. [link+] ::
Channel 9's 'Sunday' show on MacQuarie Fields

Good grief this is absolutely awful. What a toilet this suburb is, at least the bits of it that we have seen so far on this morning's show. But it is all houses on whatever, quarter acre blocks.

"Growing up, getting' drunk, gettin' stoned, you know they're not breaking the law, they're just having fun, stealing cars and havin' fun" - well, there it is.

We had a mum as a drunk, a single mum, lots of different boy friends, she'd hit me with whatever she could get her hands on.

These quotes come from the uncle, Robert, of the boy, Jesse Kelly, who stole the car back in February refused to stop when chased by police and ended up crashing killing two passengers and fleeing the scene staying on the run for around a week before finally giving himself up.

Now some guy, Milo, single dad of 5 kids, electricity cut off at the house, one of his kids morbidly obese, all of them inarticulate and just filled with rage - he is a violent cretin. Natch he was involved in the riots after Jesse Kelly killed his two passengers.

Now they are interviewing another man, a former jailed fellow, who defrauded the gumment on social security which got him imprisoned, who says I will never get a job cos of something stupid I done as a kid but I am 32 and I am changed and I want to want my daughters grow up.

How sad is that? A glimmer of goodness in an otherwise pointless shell of a person.

Now we have an interview is the 19 year old girlfriend of Jesse Kelly, mother of his daughter. No finishing of school and her rationalisation is What's the point of 1 x 1 if you're just going to go home and no one's getting anywhere in MacQuarie Fields.

Everyone's an alcoholic and a drug addict or something.

Lord, she is a sad girl. She wants to change her life but she lacks willpower, strength.

Now some boy who looks like a young Bon Scott from ACDC. Something about just waiting til it's your turn (to die, presumably).

But there is a park, and there are homes on big blocks, and trees. Natch, there would be no life without a car, cos it is not as if MacQuarie Fields, or any fields for that matters, are walking distance to anything or anywhere. And goodness only knows where the jobs are, bt you would have to think a half hour or an hour away.

Uncle Robert has converted to Christianity but he cannot let go of it being the gumment's fault.

Robert, it takes two.

Cripes, back to Milo, the tard. He struck his hysterical daughter who was screaming at him to leave but he just would not leave. He just kept staying in her company. And now he is bleating that he cannot see his daugher's daughters - yes, Lord help us the man's a grandparent. Well, what on earth would he imagine would be the consequence of goading his daughter into hysterics then choosing to hit her? Does he think he should have a medal?

You bet he does.

Self-pity and self-righteousness mixed liberally with stupidity and violence.

Now, the end of the report and a thorough cop out by Channel 9 - something about until the education system improves and gumment services blah blah things will be lousy.

Look, alls you have to do at school is sit still and listen. And alls you have to do at home is not get spastic drunk and high on dope and keep your house clean.

What was missing from that story was interviews with perfectly law abiding residents of MacQuarie Fields. There was an elderly Scottish woman interviewed but I think she was just talking about it when it was newly developed.

It cannot be all lousy.

It can be mostly lousy but not everyone is slovenly and prone to drunkennes and drug abuse. There are children who go to school. Presumably some of them pass their classes and progress up the chain to the next year.

Would have been nice for the whole of Sydney to have seen some nice folks from MacQuarie Fields. Cos if there genuinely are none, not a one, then this story did not properly evidence that. Poor teevee journalism in this wog's view.

And there were not even any wogs in the show.
:: WB 5:08 p.m. [link+] ::
:: WB 5:05 p.m. [link+] ::
Insiders Today

David Marr and Virginia Trioli. They are both appalled at Alexander Downer's speech about past Labbor leadership and the habit and preference and instinct for isolationism which Marr is trying to craft as laughable and Trioli is trying to craft as 'out of date' and 'put to bed long ago', as if history should not be discussed.

Piers Akerman seems to me to shocked at this absurd tack and unable to get them to see sense - the Labor is instinctively isolationist. G'uh. It is a philosophy. Defend it. (I personally cannot but that is because I like wogs, wherever they are, so I like the idea of messing around mucking around overseas and having lots of wogs here in Oz too. Labor is all for wogs here but very very unsettled at the overseas commitments viz East Timor, Iraq and even Papua New Guinea.)

An objectively superior analysis comes from the Currency Lad, natch. An Insiders Show with CL on the couch would likely be a quality teevee product.

Barry the host - whatever I cannot recall his name - is trying to paint Bob Carr's news that he turned down Federal Labor party leadership twice, which gave rise to Mark Latham, as 'isolationist' in perhaps the most pathetic attempt at a segue from the Downer speech story or the most pathetic attempt at sledge of Downer's speech.

In either case pathetic.

Now they are on Vivian Solon Alvarez Young Wilson and Cornelia Rau. Marr is patronising. No, I mean unbelieveale. Leaning forward, lowering the volume of his voice, putting his together, raising his eyebrows. Does he think Piers is a child? And when Piers asks 'well, whatdya want? Microchips under the skin? An Australia card?' Marr has nothing to say except 'you should not deport your citizens.

This is a perfect excahnge, Between the all compassion all the time left and the shocked right who thrives on solutions.

Marr had nothing and neither did Trioli.

They both want a presumption that folks who present foreign identification are doing so mistakenly and are in fact Oz citizens.

For crying outta loud, it is the immigration department not a psychiatric hospital.

Folks have family - in both the Rau and Alvarez cases there was family who could have helped.

It is not a government problem to keep tabs on perfectly lawfully present citizenry.

It is the governments problem to keep tabs on folks who are not here lawfully.

Seems to me that is exactly what happened in both the Rau and Alvarez cases.

Marr and Trioli should address the microchip and Australia ncard issue. But if some crazy Rau or Alvarez presents a foreign card instead of the Oz card? Well, that is a flaw in the solution. Guess it will have to be a microchip then.

I reckon we do a good job in Oz now and I do not want Mandy Vanstone going anywhere.
:: WB 4:25 p.m. [link+] ::
Labradors would never vote Labor

Phillip Adams gets its wrong again, even when he is trying to get it right.

There is not the merest whiff of the Labor party in Labradors. Urgh. Makes me sick a little even to think of it in connection to my special Black Lab rugga1 from New Zealand who looked an awful lot like this.
:: WB 4:03 p.m. [link+] ::
:: Thursday, 19 May 2005 ::
Good Grief, This Vivial Alvarez Solon young Wilson Business is Weird.

No wonder she does not want to sue. It kinda seems like she had no problem with being away from her family after her deportation.

:: WB 3:39 p.m. [link+] ::
Yasamin Alttahir's mantoo is green not blue.

Sheesh. My eyes.

I once had an argument with a buddy over the colour of a belt. It was brown. Not black.

Oh, and apparently Yasamin has been wearing her shapeless floor length green overcoat for God for years. If that is true that is pathetic. She is ony 17. If she started wearing it at 15 - if she was obsessed with being overly "modest" in her dress at 15 then she has not enjoyed even the remotest normalcy as a teenager.

I maintain, she could get by complying with her religion by wearing the stupid white scarf to her cover her immodest hair (puhlease, but anyway) and a perfectly sacklike extra large Auburn Girls' School uniform.

But she has chosen not to. Nothing to do with God. Nothing to do with her school. Everything to do with Yasamin.
:: WB 3:30 p.m. [link+] ::
:: Wednesday, 18 May 2005 ::
I wonder if McGeogh agrees with this lede:

Hopes for the release of Douglas Wood soared yesterday after the hostage was allowed to make a phone call in which he assured the Australian cleric Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly he was alive and well.

Only asking, cos the story simply says Sheik Hilaly got approached at the Babylon Hotel by a stranger who handed him a mobile phone and he thinks Douglas Woods was on the other end.

Is it right to say so baldly that Douglas made a call?

Whatever. I hope they are right even if there is no hard evidence, just the sincere sayso of Sheik Hilaly.
:: WB 2:56 p.m. [link+] ::
Marian Wilkinson of the SMH buys hearsay on hearsay

A guy says that a guy who has a brother says that some relatives of the guy and his brother saw the brother in a Kuwaiti jail and he told the relatives that he had been abused and tortured in that Kuqaiti prison.

Got that?

Shocking isn't it.
:: WB 2:51 p.m. [link+] ::
Poverina Clementina Cantoni - kidnapped in Afghanistan

By a madman who is threatening to kill her.


"If our demands are not accepted ... we will show our reaction and finish her," he said.

He demanded that the government set up more Islamic boarding schools in Afghanistan, that authorities provide "alternative livelihoods" for farmers who are being forced to stop growing opium, and that independent radio station Arman stop broadcasting a programme about young people's social issues.

He did not say why he opposed the show.

Shah also said Cantoni's health was "very critical," adding that she had internal bleeding, was vomiting and had not eaten in three days.

He said she hurt her head during her abduction, when four men dragged her from her car in Kabul on Monday night.

Barker said the demands made in the interview were different from others Shah had made previously.

Those demands included more Islamic education in schools, the eradication of opium farming and a halt to the sale of alcohol, Barker said.

Authorities have said they suspect Cantoni was kidnapped by the same criminal gang accused of abducting three UN workers last year.

The Italian government said on Tuesday that contact had been made with the kidnappers and that the hostage was unhurt.


Madness. What a medieval violent thug. Horrible. Let her go, dammit. Stop with the kidnapping, whether it is Afghanistan or Iraq or elsewhere. Stop it. It is a disgrace.

:: WB 2:39 p.m. [link+] ::
I want Sheik Hilaly to be right

Want Douglas Woods home alive and safe. Just a little balder, and nothing else.

Fingers and toes crossed, eh?
:: WB 2:33 p.m. [link+] ::
Media Watch Disgrace

Afor I forget, this week's Media Watch should have included an apology to Janet Albrecthtsen and Arthur Chrenkoff for the egregious slur on both broadcast the week before (look it up in posts below, I cannot be asked to link).

It did not.

What it did include was an escalation of the slur on Chrenkoff, a repeat of the baseless assertion that janet Albrechtsen's opinion of Chrenk is too high and an out of context quote from Rupert Murdoch about the difference between bloggers and journalists, all to support their slimey slur that Janet awarded Chrenk's 'Good News In Iraq' series too much credibility by connecting to its actual publisher, the Wall Street Journal.

Media Watch failed to note that the New York Times published Chrenk this week giving him the appellation 'journalist'.

So, we get slur in week one, and then followup to support slur in week two.

Standard Media Watch tactics.

I am thinking of doing a podcast every Monday night Sydney time at 9.15pm for 15 minutes called Media Wog. Not a Media Watch show, because who needs more shitful analysis from leftie wankers about the media.

Just a happy wog reading through crap journalism that does not deserve the high level of credibility that Media Watch accords it.

But I am inherently lazy. I might not do it. Whatever. If I do I will let Blair Bilious and Bunyip get the word out.

And if I do I will not adopt Media Watch's dreadful habit of calling some guy in a cafeteria to chase facts, and then lurch ahead with bald assertions about X based on the mere sayso of that cafeteria guy. For example, they did a show about some wanker artist who reckons he has some French title for art and that he has had painting exhibited at the Louvre and that his art can fetch $200k, right?

So who did the intrepid Media Watch crew call about this? Cos they smelled a fraud, a bullshitter.

They made 4 pointless phonecalls.

Someone at the Ministry of Culture in Paris.

A cultural counsellor at the French Embassy in Canberra.

A media officer at the Louvre.

And some person from Sotheby's.

What did they learn?

In order:
- there is no title 'Maitre'. There is something else.

- the symbol used by the art wanker is not recognised at the French Embassy.

- Louvre media guy has no record of any exhibition.

- someone at Sotheby's has never heard of this art wanker.

Why didn't they just ring my mother? She would have told them exactly that empty rubbish.

My taxpayer dollars at work, for Media Watch to create a patina of reporting.

Alls they had to do was a google search of the 'Maitre' claim and troll the guy's website. His is the only site on earth with a symbol for the 'Maitre' claim - and he is an artist, so he could conceivably have designed it himself. Plus his art does not come up in any catalogues or other mention of sales. it seems to be basically overwrought 70's album cover type art, at least to my eyes. Yetch, no offense painty guy. But, you know, if he does commercial art maybe that can sell for $200k and it would not turn up in a catalogue. But whatever. I do not care. That is not the point.

The Snidely Jackass Crew at Media Watch did a whole song and dance slamming some arts wanker when they just should have googled the guy and chased the journo who wrote the original piece and ask her if she googled the guy or just published a press release.

I mean, why the song and dance? Do they think it makes viewers reckon they are a hard working crew in at Media Watch? Because they call total strangers?

Puhlease I could get change from 8 cents a day for the work the Media Watchers do.

It was pure spite - pick on this pointless guy and do not even break a sweat actually proving anything and add the journo at the end just for some relevance. Total arse about.

You know?

Is it their job to out art wankers?

Or out Media wankers?

Yeah. I reckon so too.

It was like with Chrenk - they could not call the WSJ's James Taranto and ask him about the website URL. They had to make a big song and dance about calling some guy or gal in editorial who never heard of them and did not bother to respond. And they went to air with that. You know? Natch the next week they scabble around to find something to support their slimey political hackery and they use, of all people, Rupert Murdoch in a quote that is cut out and doesn't show how Rupert is really in to bloggers and blogging. Not that that was Media watch's point in the first broadcast anyway. Their point then was that Chrenk is a Liberal party guy who has never been to Iraq and whose site is not part of the WSJ and they got the fundamental last part wrong.

In the transcript about the arts wanker - and no I am not going to link to that crap show's site - is this priceless line: 'We don't think so." And Lizzy Borden said it with her lemon lipped sneer, the ghost of David Marr alive and well in the presentation. I do mean Borden, by the way. Not for the slaughter of the olds, but for the inability to take a step back and admit you done wrong.

That quote says it all about Media Watch, really.

We don't think so.

Who gives a shit what you think, you arses? You are living off my taxes. Do some homework before you go to air.

Urgh. And with that, Buona Notte.
:: WB 5:09 a.m. [link+] ::
Love that the Bunyip is back.
:: WB 5:05 a.m. [link+] ::
Suliivan is Berserk

Have a read of this, then this, then this and maybe this one, from Instapundit this time.

Put it all together and what have you got?

For Andrew, abuse is just the same as torture and humiliation is the just the same as abuse and you cannot lift a goshdarned finger against any detainee at Guatanamo Bay or Gitmo or whatever cos it all just awwwwfulllll.

He is quoting Daily Kos people who do nothing but aggregate unsubstantiated allegations of Koran desecration, without ever identifying that my mere touching of a Koran would amount to abuse in the eys of some Muslimaniac.

He is even telling Glenn what he write about?

How about Andrew starts acknowledging that the folks in Guanatamo are offended by everything and focus his steely attention on genuine torture.

Oh, I know why he does not. Cos there is hardly any.

There is some. There have been investigations and some findings of homicide. Purposeful murder. That is torture by any definition. Worthy of investigation, punishment and immediate review of processes to see it does not occur again.

His hysteria is leading Sullivan into a chicken little-like bloggy meltdown on this topic.

Oh what am I saying? It has led him there. He is there.

Now Oz has its own 'Alberto Gonzales'. Chrenk gets it.
:: WB 4:36 a.m. [link+] ::
Mantoo's All Round

Yasamin Alttahir got the right to shit all over the school uniform rules at Auburn Girl's High school in Sydney.

She can now wear a shapeless blue floor length overcoat over the top of her shapeless green school uniform. And the school gave her that right.

Why on earth bother to have a school uniform at all? The school principal, Sharon Ford, who I had hoped would hold out, in fact never intended to hold out. She just wanted the rules followed so Yasamin could get her way - a parents' letter seeking Yasamin's exemption from the school uniform code to allow their daughter to wear a shapeless floorlength blue overcoat over her shapeless school uniform.

I guess that makes her twice as modest in her pathetic ugly degrading "Islamic" clothing as the Muslim girls at her school who just get by expressing their Islamic faith with an ugly pathetic degrading white headscarf.

I put "Islamic" in quotes cos Yasamin's choice has nothing to do with her faith at all. Her faith just requires her to dress modestly.

It does not decree a shapeless floor length blue overcoat.

It is her choice.

She chooses to express her faith by wearing a shapeless floor length blue overcoat.

She could choose to expres sit by complying with the schoold dress code of Auburn Girls' High.

But nooo. Yasamin is too cool for school, and by 'cool' I mean pathetically self-obsessed.

Maybe soon she will choose to express her faith by not going to school on Fridays - or whatever the week days are that Muslims consider the weekend - because it interferes with her faith.

And her parents can give her a note.

Yasamin does not appreciate a school uniform and what it is for. Community, teamwork, school spirit.

Or maybe she does, she just does not care for team work.

She chooses to waft around her school in her shapeless floor length blue overcoat while all the other Muslim girls dress modestly by wearing their school uniforms loose and just using the ugly white headscarves. She might as well be holding a sign up that says 'youse are all sluts. Not me. I am closer to God that youse'.

I ain't the only one who is appalled at her self-centredness and needless spite shown to her school. I am certain she does not think she is spiteful but how else can what she has chosen and what she has done be understood?

Yeah, yeah, freedom of religion and liberty and all that. Puhlease. It is school. A uniform to be worn for 6 to 8 hours a day. Her religious freedom s not being impinged one bit.

But she sure is impinging on mine - if I was an avowed secular aetheist and appalled at all organised and overt religion - cos you cannot miss her. In her shapeless floor length blue overcoat. She is on the bus, on the train, in background photos, in my face all the time. Flauting her faith.

Is she trying to convert me? No? Then what the hell does she have to be so obvious about her religion for?

The scarves are pathetic. They just are not chic. And since they lead to mantoos in Oz and jilbabs in the UK is the burqa that far behind?

I am with the Tobester - and not just for the linky love - the French have got this right. No Islmaic headscarves or mantoos or jilbabs or hijabs or abayas or burqas (and haven't the Muslims really got too many kinds of oppressive dress for women...?) or other overt religious symbols at school.

To paraphrase the Jesuits:

Gimme the Muslim girle free of the oppressive dress code for 6 hours a day and maybe just maybe I'll give you a liberated educated girlie whose Muslimness is secondary to her good citizenry and her refusal to be bowed by mysoginistic Muslim men and disgusting false interpretations of that faith.


Double urgh.
:: WB 3:52 a.m. [link+] ::
:: Sunday, 15 May 2005 ::
The Tin Ear of the Muslim Community

Maybe 2 dozen Muslims in Washington this weekend turn out for an anti-terror rally.

Of all the Muslims that could have turned out.

I do not work in PR but I got buddies who do. And every one of them reckons that what the Muslims in the West need to do is start rallying publicly to convince non-Muslims that we are all on the same side when it comes to Muslim terrorism. We are all disgusted by it. Muslims should demonstrate how much more disgusted they are than any non-Muslim Western folks, after all the terrorism not only kills more of them (Muslims) than any other folks, but it slimes their religion at exactly the same time.

2 dozen. How absolutely depressingly pathetic.
:: WB 12:43 a.m. [link+] ::
:: Saturday, 14 May 2005 ::
What the...?

The independent Bangladeshi press is running a 2003 piece about Ken Bigley and the two Italian Simona's who got captured in Iraq.

On May 13, 2005.

Do the editors think the victims of Iraq's brave resistance who kidnap and slaughter Westerners are interchangeable and that no one will notice Ken Bigley dying twice? Or is this just a sad cock-up?

However it happened, my Italian heart fell when I saw the headline on the newsnow site. I am alright now, but sheesh. No one needs that sort of trauma on a Sunday morning.
:: WB 7:01 p.m. [link+] ::
:: Friday, 13 May 2005 ::
Show Us Yer Hair, Love

O Niice.

The Oz Muslim community has popped its cherry and now we can all welcome to the stage our very own whiney Muslim girl who wants to dress in a sack cos she thinks she is closer to God than every one else when she is in her sack, and she thinks school rules should be moulded just for her weirdo belief in her saintliness. And the sack she needs to achieve that saintliness.


Absolutely pathetic.

Her faith, the Islamic faith, does not require her to get about at school in a sacklike coat and an ugly haircovering. Her faith simply requires her to dress modestly.

She is an Oz Shabina Begum. And that is no good thing. Amemba Shabina? The English girlie who, at the behest of her brother, natch, sued to be able to wear the jilbab that covers neck, hair, hands everything, leaving just a nun-like face. That Dalrymple link pretty much expresses my view about these appalling females.

And that is what are - Shabina and Yasamin Alttahir - females of the species Muslimaniac Troublemakerus.

Yep, that is exactly what I think. And it not disrespectful to Islam. Keep reading and understand where I am coming from if you think this is skating close to some edge of vilification - cos it ain't.

This Year 11 student, Yasamin Alttahir goes to Auburn Girls' High. It is a mostly Muslim girls' school. Check out this picture - scroll down. That is the existing dress code.

Bfugly, with all those stupid headscarves in my view. That is my view, and it is not hateful.

But would you call that school dress code immodest?

Even the girls with their hair uncovered and just their uniforms covering their bodies?

I mean, Yasamin, come on.

It is pretty easy to slut up a girls' school uniform and none of those girls in the pick are doing anything like slutting up.

It is also pretty easy to make a girls' school uniform effectively a sacklike thing - if that is what you want to achieve.

I mean we are not talking revealing couture here.

But it is all too immodest for Yasamin.

Check this lovely message from the school captain of Auburn Girls' High School. Donating blood, raising money for the Tsunami victims, and here, doing good stuff.

School stuff. But for Yasamin all that matters is that she is at school for 6 or 7 hours a day and she cannot bear a single moment of a minute of any one of those hours if she has not got her shapeless formhiding coat on.

I hope the Principal stands firm against Yasamin's unilateralist attempt to change school dress rules that are already perfectly modest and accommodating of Muslim practice.

I hope the School Captain explains to Yasamin that diversity and school spirit are not mutually exclusive and she should pull her freakin' head into her scarf and not play the martyr over something as insignificant as the difference between wearing a sacklike school uniform with scarf and wearing a coat over the top of a sacklike school uniform with scarf.

I imagine Yasamin can go on and on and on about how liberating it is to be underneath a sack without men ogling her, or judging her and blah blah blah.

You are the one under a sack, hon.

It is not you that is free, okay?

The skippy school principal has not backed down to date - good onya, love.

Her school dress code has taken into account Muslims' collective oversensitiveness, misogyny and poor taste to come up with a uniform that allows for those appalling headscarfs - Christ on a stick they are ugly, I mean, anything that goes under the chin is ugly unless it is transparent and allowed to swing loosly over the shoulders, right?, which is why Indian women look chic and Muslim women who buy into the whole bullshit haircovering and body disguising look pathetic.

Googling around for Auburn Girl's High I found this.

Youse gotta read it - it is a priceless capturing, at the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission natch - of Muslim whining about how they are being discriminated against because of racist looks, vibes and whatever. But no evidence of actual damage or injury or loss of stuff is presented.

The same old stuff wogs have dealt with in skippy Oz for decades is getting dealt with by Muslims. They can handle it, just like every other wave of wogs handled it. By being proud of where they come from and embracing Oz as home, a real home, and skips as good friends and good people with a good culture and attitude, and not ghettoifying themsleves for any more than generation.

That is what the Italians did. And other wogs.

What the HREOC complainers show, but, is that for them, the root of the matter is that they do not feel respected. And they want to be respected. And they have HREOC to whine to about it, whereas wogs like Italians in Oz never had such a venue in the 50's and 60's and 70's etc, and had to make do with actually being respectable.

Plus good looking, great cooks, top drivers, and generally fun folks.

Now, we all wanna be respected.

But Yasamin has been respected.


Auburn Girls' School respects Muslims girls enough to let them wear their ugly scarfs.

Oz society respects Muslim women enough to leave them to wear their ugly scarves if they want. It is not illegal, you know.

Yasamin, however, wants to be respected for doing something completely religiously unnecessary but she wants to paint it as part of her Muslim faith. Just like the HREOC folks complaining about being mistreated cos they are Muslims.

Yeah, well, I am afraid I am all out respect when it comes to folks like that.
:: WB 10:51 p.m. [link+] ::
WogBlog for Posterity

Gonna get archived at the National Library of Australia. Cos this blog has 'cultural significance'. Cool huh? Excellent judgement NLA folks. Very good.

Carry on.
:: WB 10:16 p.m. [link+] ::
George Galloway and why it is that he needs such a pinch

And yet more justification for it.

Harry's Place is leading the complaints about Galloway and they strike me as pretty much on the money.

When challenged by Salam Pax recently - do not ask me for a link, harry's place will have it - George said something like 'It is not for you to demand that we remove Saddam. It is for us to decide whether or not to commit our troops to do that.'

He actually is quite right about that.

It is for us. Us meaning US UK and Oz and Italy and Poland and others, as allies, with a common world view that favours removing the shackles that prevent democracy - also known as tinpot despots and brutal military regimes - from occurring.

To decide.

Whether to remove Saddam Hussein, whether to remove the Indonesian military from East Timor, whether to remove Milosevic etc etc.

None of those decisions was bad in my view and the view of plenty of other folks.

That is where George and Pat Buchanan and every isolationist Green or other wanker who uses the 'but ooh, there are so ,many despots' argument as if that is a reason not to remove one despot, well, we part company. Chrenk addresses this in a top post.

I have no respect for isolationism.

Isolationism is inherently anti-wog.

At its best it is patronising to wogs and likes them for their funny accents and cool restaurants but not for their fast driving and obsession with paving everything.

At its worst it just plain hates wogs and does not want them around.

Either way, youse isolationists can gi fa.
:: WB 9:56 p.m. [link+] ::
How 'bout The Wicker Man 1973?

Listy goodness from the fabulous Jeff Goldstein's Protein Wisdom - 70's movies to be seen by all.

I like this movie game.

And I think Goldstein might actually be channelling me cos I seen just about everything on his lists.

The question is, is there is 6th list, cos he seems to be missing some stuff.

Like Edward Woodward and Christopher Lee, in The Wicker Man awfulness, all weirdo English island pagan ....weirdness.

And 'Blue Collar' 1978? Excellent depiction of prideless US rivethead existence.

And 'Sunday Too Far Away' 1974 and 'The Odd Angry Shot' 1979? And 'Wake in Fright' 1971?

All three Oz on a stick.

Whoo, I could go on, but youse should post at Goldstein's if you wanna argue.

Oh, 'Gaygoyles' 1972, most excellent US roadside horror, and 'The Ninth Configuration' with Stacy Keach and Scott Wilson...oh no, 1981. Bugger.
:: WB 9:28 p.m. [link+] ::

A well known media outlet, with no evidence whatsoever, publishes that a US someone at Guantanamo Bay flushed a Koran down the terlet as part of an interrogation or a Muslim detainee.

One Koran. No evidence of who, if anyone at all, did the flushing.

Reaction in the Muslim world?

Hairtairing violence and whole focus on awful US actions of the 'Abu Ghraib Abu Ghraib Abu Ghraib' variety, natch.

Christ Almighty, my Lord, no wonder artists today have not got the balls to do a Piss Mohammed the way Andres Serrano did a Piss Christ - imagine the reaction?

There was a VIZ magazine cartoon, not online sadly, of Gilbert Ratchet walking down a street when he sees a sign for a Grand Fete at Fulchester Mosque. In one frame he says "I'll pop along there. Perhaps there will be the opportunity to light-heartedly poke gentle fun at aspects of the Islamic religion."

In the next he approaches the Mosque and says "Actually, readers on second thought I think I'll just visit the Christian church over the road instead."

Says it all, eh?
:: WB 9:26 p.m. [link+] ::
Media Watch, McEvoy, Jackson, Chrenkoff, Taranto

I did not see the Media Watch hatefest on Monday last, but got told about it pronto after it had gone to air.

It has been quite the issue of the week. I know this has been captured elsewhere perfectly, but just to recap:

1. Media Watch Witch Hunters, McEvoy and Jackson, went after Janet Albrechtsen, The Australian columnist and ABC Board member, for making an error in her column about Arthur Chrenkoff's 'Good News From Iraq' posts. The column referenced publication on the Wall Street Journal, and the Media Watchers broadcast that Albrechtsen was wrong and Chrenk's work was not published at the prestigious WSJ but at a non-prestigious and free sister site, OpinionJournal.

2. The Media Watchers went on to out Chrenk as a member of the Liberal party and a aggregator of already published news. The point? It seems the Media Watchers considered Albrechtesen opinion of Chrenk's work was unreasonable and she was according his blog posts a level of prestige they do not deserve, and they felt sliming Chrenk as a Liberal (ie pro-war stooge of the US) who was not published at the WSJ showed Albrechtsen's high opinion of Chrenk was objectively wrong.

3. James Taranto runs OpinionJournal, and confirms he is part of the WSJ editorial team and OpinionJournal is part of that editorial collection and it publishes Chrenk and Media Watch is simply wrong if they think there is a difference just cos of a URL.

4. So the whole Media Watch point about Albrechtsen getting it wrong about where Chrenk's posts are published is out the door. All that is left is a stupid judgement about Albrechtsen allocating too much prestige to Chrenk's works.

5. This very week, and prolly because of Taranto's post bitchslapping the Media Watch idiots, Chrenk gets published in the New York Times this week.

Bottom line, Liz Jackson and Peter McEvoy should never have gone after that Albrechtsen column. There was nothing Media Watch-worthy in it. It was pure opinion by Janet and the Media Watchers are not paid out of my tax dollars to use their stinking 15 minutes as a bully pulpit for their lefty opinions.

Tim Blair has all the goods linked here.

Tim's been Media Watched too. The Daily Telegraph published that the US flag put on the Saddam Hussein statue when Baghdad fell - amemba? - was connected to the terrorism attack on the Penatgon September 11. Media Watch went to air with a 'well, we are not about to believe that' opinion and no actual support for their view. They said they called Centcom to ask about the provenance of the flag. And some ensign at Centcom said they did not know about it and doubted the pentagon connection.

Hardly hard evidence to show the Tele was wrong.

Blair did some digging and found support for the idea in other media reports. He published on it in the Bulletin and called out Media Watch as being wrong by going to air all skeptical when there were sundry media reports supporting the connection to the Penatgon.

Media Watch then did some real homework. And they caught a lucky break - they found someone who said the flag came from the Senate, not the Pentagon as the Daily Tele and later Blair had claimed.

Media Watch did their homework after Tim's report. Got it?

They went to air with no evidence just David Marr's lemonlipped leftie skepticism and a phone call to some nobody at Qatar.

They were lucky their skepticism was supported.

They had no facts when they originally went to air. Does not excuse the Tele and Blair and sundry other media outlets being wrong (if they were wrong - Blair never checked the Media Watch homework preferring to take his wrongness it on the chin, and the Tele does not give a shit what Media Watch thinks about anything so they never checked up on McEvoy's team either).

Why am I mentioning this?

Cos Media Watch went after Albrechtsen without doing their homework properly - read the links, they never spoke with Taranto, never even tried to contact him.

And this time there is no lucky break.

I mean, fancy doing your homework after you go air.

This is a tax payer funded show. My taxes. I expect the Media Watch people to work for their money. Before they go to air, not after. I expect them to break stories of media wrongness and be able to support its assertions, not waste more time justifying their prejudices and dislikes.

They should apologise in this case.

Neither Chrenk nor Albrechtsen need to take this one on the chin.
:: WB 7:35 p.m. [link+] ::
Somehow I had never photographed Irving...

Have you ever read a more perfect example of empty NooYawk arts scene wankery than this post? It has every nothing element. Cripes, I am having trouble avoiding a narcoleptic collapse just rea........zzzzzzz

Oh, back again. To find this fabulous hypocrisy from yet another artsy wanker, this one called Larry Gelbart, accusing Ann Coulter of being hate filled and called her a heartless sexually unappealing liar.

What was that about 'hate' Larry? Sheesh.

I am thinking this Huffington blog is a like a corral of stupid. You?
:: WB 6:57 p.m. [link+] ::
:: Saturday, 7 May 2005 ::
Christ, save Douglas Woods

The pigs who kidnapped him have shaved his head and demanded Oz remove troops in 72 hours - I think the timing is just a few hours past.

Pigs, bandits, scum, terrorist, bastards. And if you read that Reuters piece you will see the reference to the Phillipines. That country caved to the kidnapping scum. Oz must not cave. But Oz must go all out to save Douglas Woods too.

Jesus. This is just disgraceful. What on earth did they shave his head for? make it easier to kill him? Urgh. They must be crushed.
:: WB 1:48 a.m. [link+] ::
:: Friday, 6 May 2005 ::
Blair in UK joins Howard in Oz & Bush Stateside post-Iraq War election victory

Excellent result for me, a one issue wog who supports democratic nations removing despots from power in undemocratic nations wherever they may be found, including and especially in the Middle east which is the source of the world's major 21st C problem - fanatic Islamofacism.

So Anthony is my man.

Tim Blair does the linky thing of the silly Economist magazine cover, which was silly, even though hindsight seems a cruel measure. But it is fair cos they did endorse John Kerry in the US and they always call Howard in Oz some sort of facist and Berlusconi in Italy some sort of media monopolising maniac so it has become apparent that the editorial team just wanted to see Howard and Bush and Blair lose, to fo with their pathtic question mark.

Well, a big old wog salute to them - now, back to the UK Election.

There was one awful result I reckon - in Bethnal Green & Bow, the East End of London.

The strongly working class white and Bangladeshi Muslim community has voted for George Galloway of the Respect Party by a margin of 803 votes (I think) over his nearest rival, a Labour party pro-war MP named Oona King who is half Black American and half Jewish English.

There has been quite a bit of gnashing of teeth over the Respect result in the Brit Blogosphere. Check this Stephen Pollard post which links to Harry and Oliver Kamm as well. You will get the flavour of disappointment over that result.

But what I reckon, cruising through comments and posts is that this is a case of toxic wogs.

I bin trying all afternoon to collect my thoughts and post about toxic wogs and block voting and stuff.

Cannot do it. Cannot do it justice, sorry. Gonna have to think about all this tomorrow maybe.
:: WB 6:30 p.m. [link+] ::
:: Tuesday, 3 May 2005 ::
Thanks, Reuters

I know, weird to write that, huh?

This is a piece about Robert Hills' candid comments that he wishes for Douglas Woods' release safely and he and the gumment is working to achieve that end, but he is not confident of release cos the history of kidnappings is not good in Iraq.

[NB: Technically Hill is wrong about that - more have been released alive than have been slaughtered by the Brave Iraqi resistance of pig thug kidnapping madmen - do not ask me for a lnk to that informazione, but I found it yesterday so it is around.]

But anyhoo, the point of this post is the extra 4 paragraphs Reuters appends to this short go nowhere piece:

Australia, a staunch U.S. ally, was among the first to join the U.S.-led war on Iraq two years ago.

A further 450 Australian troops are due in Iraq in coming weeks to provide security and train the army, bringing the total number of its troops in and around Iraq to about 1,400.

Opinions polls showed in May last year that nearly two-thirds of Australians believed the war on Iraq was unjustified.

Howard won a fourth straight term at an election last October by crushing center-left opposition Labor, whose leader had vowed to bring Australian troops home by Christmas.

To parse this:
- Oz honours the real meaning of the term "alliance";
- Oz is committed to helping Iraqis get on their feet as the troop numbers show;
- Opinion polls do not count for anything, only voting counts;
- More voters than ever endorsed Oz's alliance and its actions in Iraq.

Take that, Philippinos - remember how they withdrew their troops for a truckdriver father of, was it 10 kids? Great to save his life. Pretty lousy to sell your international reputation to filthy kidnapping scum but.

Everything is crossed for Douglas Woods' release alive and unhurt and for the capture and punishment of his kidnappers.
:: WB 2:21 a.m. [link+] ::
Joey "The Clown" Lombardo?

The Ombudsgod reveals some kind of journalistic turetts symdrome at the Chicago Tribune, unfortunately - for them - to do with the Mob?

The editor must be reeling from this....and getting his wife to start his car in the mornings.
:: WB 2:06 a.m. [link+] ::
:: Monday, 2 May 2005 ::
Calipari Lost his Life Needlessly

It is not a case of "blame" on a US soldier's "inexperience".

It is a case of:

1. The roadblock was on on a on-ramp at a tight curve without advance warning;
2. The US troops manning the roadblock were meant to have been replaced but had had to remain in place over their allotted time because support was late getting to them;
3. The one soldier who did the shooting was young and had not long completed his training for the role at the roadblock;
4. He fired 51 shots, 11 of wich hit the car and one or two of which killed Calipari.

No punishment for the US soldier? I understand why not. I do not believe he just shot up the car to kill the occupants. I do not want to believe that.

But I do believe this was a needless death.

Who puts a roadblock on an onramp at a tight curve without advance warning of its presence for drivers?

And who leaves in charge of the roadblock just-out-of-training folks who have overstayed their assignment and need to be relieved?

Chalk up a lost life of a good man to another error of the Iraq liberation.

God, this is just awful - all prayers and wishes for Calipari and his family and friends. They have lost a good man when it need not have happened.
:: WB 4:04 p.m. [link+] ::
Besmirching the Good Game of Boules (which is, of course, inferior to Bocce at every level, even re drugs)

We had a bocce course at the farm. Under some lovely old eucalyptus trees. Or were they Stringy Bark? Whatever.

Much hilarity and funness had, hurling the balls bodily to smash the opponents ball nearest the little white one well away from the little white one.

And much delicate rolling balls down the sandiness to to end up just next to the little white one.

A bit of a Campari and soda refresher between games.

Ah, good times.
:: WB 3:46 p.m. [link+] ::
Goldberg is Good

Do watch this if you can. I mean, wha...?
:: WB 3:19 p.m. [link+] ::
It is the same Douglas Woods

Why he was identified as Douglas Woods Barry aged 53 is anyone's guess. Must be those many layers of editorial checking that makes the main stream media sooo very good at imparting information.

:: WB 3:09 p.m. [link+] ::
Spectacular Optimism from Our ABC

Tonight's Lateline features an interview with the brother of beheaded Ken Bigley, English hostage of the brave Iraqi resistance murdered despicably, appalling last year.

The brother was on to talk about how family members should do the negotiating with the insane Shura mujihadeed kidnappers of Oz hostage Douglas Woods.

I know the brother has suffered from the killing of his kin, but really, what can he do for the brothers of Douglas Woods but alarm them and make 'em more worried than they doubltess already are? Sheesh, ABC - you could not find Martinkus to talk about getting released instead?

Urgh. Bouna Notte.
:: WB 6:03 a.m. [link+] ::
Calipari's death - the leaked report

3. (U) 14 March 2005 Report
(U) A forensic examination of the car was performed after its removal from the scene. This analysis disclosed 11 entrance bullet holes. They are consistent with 7.62 mm bullets. Three bullets perforated the front section of the car at the bumper, right head light, and right fender. Two bullets perforated the windshield. Six bullets perforated the right side, right door, right front and rear passenger windows. No bullet holes or ricochet damage was noted on the car’s undercarriage. (Annex 1I).
(U) The trajectory analysis demonstrated that all 11 bullets came from one point of origin. The actual distance from the car to the machine gun could not be conclusively determined because of several variables: the grade of the curve and curvature of the roadway; depressions or elevations of the terrain; the lateral movement of the car; human reaction time, modulation of speed and braking by the driver; a flat tire; and lateral and vertical movement of the machine gun. The security situation at the incident site prevented examiners from visiting the scene. (Annex 1I).

4. (U) BP 541 Traffic Samples
(U) On Friday, 25 March 2005, a certified radar operator conducted two traffic samples at BP 541. From 1809 hours to 1824 hours, 27 vehicles were clocked. The average speed at the Alert Line was 44 mph. The average speed at the beginning of the on-ramp’s curve was 24 mph. From 1956 hours to 2015 hours, 30 vehicles were clocked. The average speed at the Alert Line was 46 mph. The average speed at the beginning of the curve was 26 mph. Unlike the night of the incident, which was also a Friday, the road was dry during these samples. (Annex 1M).
5. (U) Number of Rounds
(U) The ammunition box in the blocking vehicle originally contained 200 rounds. There were 142 rounds remaining in the M240B ammunition box. No casings were collected. Eleven rounds hit the vehicle. The weapon had been fired on seven previous occasions using the same ammunition box. As such, there were no more than 40 additional rounds that could have been fired. (Annexes 85C, 99C).


(U) Specialist Lozano spotlighted the car before it reached the Alert Line, fired warning shots as it reached the Warning Line, and fired on the vehicle in an attempt to disable it immediately after it crossed the Warning Line. (Annexes 79C, 87C, 129C, 134C).
(U) Specialist Lozano was the only one to fire his weapon. (Annexes 77C, 79C, 81C, 83C, 85C, 87C, 89C).
(U) The car was traveling at approximately 50 mph as it crossed the Warning Line. (Annex 83C).
(U) Mr. Carpani did not apply his brakes until after the rounds began striking the car. (Annexes 104C, 105C).
(U) Given the cyclic rate of fire of the M240B, Specialist Lozano’s expertise with the weapon, and that only 11 rounds struck the vehicle with only five of those impacting the front of the car, it is highly unlikely that any shots were fired after the car came to a stop. (Annexes 79C, 6G, 1I, 3M).


The gunner complied with the Rules of Engagement. After operating the spotlight, and perceiving the on-coming vehicle as a threat, he fired to disable it and did not intend to harm anyone in the vehicle. (Annexes 79C, 83C).
(U) There were a number of unrelated events that had a role in the incident. These were: (1) bad weather forcing a VIP to convoy on Route Irish that evening vice the preferred method of traveling by helicopter; (2) communications problems involving a unit new to the AOR that caused the Soldiers to be left in position longer than expected; (3) the recovery of Ms. Sgrena being pushed back daily, for several days, to 4 March 2005; (4) the Italians did not know the Soldiers were at the on-ramp, and were not expecting any such roadblocks; and (5) the Soldiers did not know the Italians were traveling to BIAP. (Annexes 51C, 52C, 57C, 59C, 60C, 61C, 63C, 97C, 104C, 105C, 107C, 109C, 116C, 117C, 118C, 119C, 120C, 121C, 122C).
(U) Mr. Carpani was driving faster than any other vehicle observed by the Soldiers that evening. He failed to stop for the spotlight since he was not expecting a roadblock. Additionally, he was dealing with multiple distractions including talking on the phone while driving, the conversation in the back seat, trying to listen for threats, driving on a wet road, focusing on tasks to be accomplished, the need to get to the airport, and the excited and tense atmosphere in the car. (Annexes 104C, 105C, 125C, 140C). Any one of these would have affected his reaction time.

Naturally the Americans blame the Italian driver - albeit in fairly sensitive language.

Carpani was driving at 'approx 50 miles an hour'.

The road block was on an on-ramp at a tight curve.

One US soldier fired 51 bullets, 11 of them entering the car, one or two killing Calipari.

This is just awful and of course, I take the side of the Italians. You are nothing if you cannot be loyal to your life.

Just awful.
:: WB 5:47 a.m. [link+] ::
This might be the best blog post ever
:: WB 4:18 a.m. [link+] ::
Pravda - it is Russian for Inaccuracy

So much for John Martinkus, the Oz wog journo who got kidnapped last year, eh?
:: WB 4:14 a.m. [link+] ::
:: Sunday, 1 May 2005 ::
Just caught Bob Brown on SkyNews about Douglas Woods

And, credit where it is due, the Greens' Leader was reasonable through and through.

He persisted with the stoopid Green - our troops should never have been there and we want them home' trope - but he was unequivocal about the fact that the troops should not come home just because a bunch of terrorist kidnapper thugs want it.

He called them terrorists and was striaght up and down in condemning them.

But he still calls for the same aim as the terrorists. And he still bangs on about how Oz troops should never have helped remove Saddam and set up a new Iraqi gumment and blah blah blah. Tsk.

Cognitive dissonance indeed.
:: WB 6:06 p.m. [link+] ::
Action from Foreign Affairs re Douglas Woods

Good. State it plainly: "Let's make it clear that of course we are not going to withdraw our troops as a result of a the statements that have apparently been made by Douglas Wood in response to demands made of him by insurgents," Foreign Minister Downer said.

Statements apparently made by Douglas Woods in response to demands made of Douglas Woods by violent thuglike imbecilic kidnapping bastards.

I hope what Douglas Woods says is one thing and what he really thinks is 'To hell with you kidnapping jackasses - I am an engineer building this country. What the hell are you doing? Just making it worse'.

:: WB 4:50 p.m. [link+] ::
Just saw the whole Douglas Woods tape on SkyNews - horrible.

Definitely 63 year old fellow, working for John Watkinson?? in US with US military? Weirdness and not great audio. Someone whispers to him in mid speil, and it is a speil about troops getting out and Iraq being able to look after itself.

I would say kidnapping is a a bit of Res Ipsa Loquitur that Iraq cannot look after itself, wouldn't you?
:: WB 4:01 p.m. [link+] ::
Cripes, Zarqawi's group behind kidnapping of Douglas Wood? NOPE- see update below

Last night, it appeared that Zarqawi may have another card to play: a videotape showed a kidnapped Australian who identified himself as Douglas Wood, begging for his life and surrounded by gunmen. While it was not clear whether a Zarqawi-affiliated group was holding the man, al-Qaeda terrorists have bought hostages from criminal gangs and beheaded them.

No, no, no, on the beheadings. This group was specifically identified by Woods as patriotic Iraqis, not spazz Jornaian bootlicking headsevering foreign violent Islamic thugs maniacs. Zarqawi is a foreigner. His team is likely foreign - can you imagine the Iraq the Model boys getting their hands on Zarqawi? I do not think Ol Z would last long given all he has done to keep the country from progressing to peaceful democracy.


UPDATE: According to a terrorism expert from ANU I think, the group that has Douglas Woods is not Zarqawi related, and the expert believes Douglas Woods snatched because he is a westerner and not because of his Oz status. Also the expert said he understood that Douglas Wood was without security when he was snatched. Do not know where that info is - it is not on Google that I can find. But this expert reckons the kidnappers are Islamists. And the demand as expressed by Douglas Woods for removal of Oz and other troops had nothing to do with Ismalism. It had to do with Iraqi isolationism and hatred of foreigners.

What the heck is this expert going about? I wonder...
:: WB 3:31 p.m. [link+] ::
Kidnappee Douglas Wood....Barry?

Could this be the same guy? Some discrepancies but some similarities too.

Check it out:

Australian Douglas Wood Barry, 56, an engineer by training, spent 25 years working for Bechtel, the US construction giant, before starting his own small joint venture construction firm. Since coming to Iraq two months ago, it has won two contracts, the renovation of a building inside the Green Zone, and a military camp in Falluja. He has 200 employees working at the two sites.

'I saw real potential to work, to build things, to make things happen in Iraq,' he says. 'I miss watching the grandchildren grow up and sharing with them the everyday things. I miss my view, jumping in my pool, BBQs in the backyard, all that crap. But [here] I wake up in the morning wanting to go to work, creating things, making things better. When you have construction in your blood you want to build things. I don't feel afraid for my life here. There are incidents that are disturbing, but I've never been person ally threatened.' Despite that, he admits it has affected his work - not least in Falluja, where intimidation by insurgents and the US military response has kept the site shut for a week.

'I've heard the sounds of mortars dropping near by, rifle fire in the streets, but this is like occasional background music. The reality is that it's not all that difficult. There are probably scarier places in downtown Washington DC.'

No wonder folks are trying to verify the video of Douglas Woods, 63, engineer from Oz who lives outside of San Fran with his American wife Pearl, and is a US resident as well as an Oz citizen. The coincidink of names and occupation is a bit much.

Plus the Observer article is from April 04 and says DWB came to Iraq a couple months before - same time line for DW.

Whatever, whoever. He does not deserve kidnapping, horrible detention against his will with the threat of death if a third party does not do something utterly unrealistic.

Kidnapping - the preferred tactic of thugs and imbeciles.
:: WB 3:23 p.m. [link+] ::
Fantastic work from Harry.

Take that, angry pro-Saddamites. How youse can sleep at night orunno.
:: WB 3:05 p.m. [link+] ::
Ismalic Rage Brigade? Losers

Here is a list of kidnappees in Iraq, victims of the Brave Iraqi Resistance of pointless jackass MiddleEastern men who know literally nothing about how the world works.

:: WB 2:58 p.m. [link+] ::
An Old Australian man has been Kidnapped and Threatened with Death by the Brave Iraqi Resistance

His plea, which is getting round the teevee stations (but curiously nowhere on the Murdoch press as at the time of typing), is the most articulate of any kidnappee I can recall:
- I do not want to die
- my captors are patriotic Iraqis and want foreign troops out so they can take care of Iraq themselves and defend against their neighbours if need be
- Howard Bush Blair and Schwarzenegger (the kidnappee is a skippy living in California with his US wife and he has US reisdency) please get me out of here.

My captors are patriotic.

His captors are Iraqi.

These Iraqis are fucked in the head - pardon my blue language but there is little to be sympathetic too.

They are also disgustic hypocrits - why? Because Iraqis are in Australia - they have arrived illegally into Oz in the past. And you do not see Oz citizens forming militias to kidnap those Iraqis folks who are in Oz. Or Brit citizens in Britain. Or US citizens in the US, or Candian etceteras.

This whole bullshit philosophy about 'ooh I canot tolerate the mere presence of foreigners and foreign troops in my land so it iis inevitable I must kidnap someone" is juvenile kiddie thinking. It is pathetic and would be laughable if it was not so serious.

Those giuys are so patriotic? How come they did not kidnap Saddam when he was turning Iraq into a fucked country with the result that the rest of the world has ended up playing host to Iraqis who fled for their lives?

Hmmm? Brave Shura Mujahadeedn of whatever these fuckers call temselves.

Howard should not be negotiating with the kidnappers - he should be approaching the Iraqi community out here in Oz and getting a statement from the putative leadership that condemns the kidnapping, demands the release of Douglas Wood, and declares that the Oz troop commitment has been focussed on building Iraq and tarning security forces to achieve the very thing the idiot kidnappers say they want - foreign troops out and Iraqis wholly responsible for their own destiny.

Howard should not remove a single troop member.

But he should be trying to get Douglas out unharmed - trying bloody hard.

Because Douglas Wood is from Oz and it is not on to be kidnapping Oz folks in Iraq or anywhere else for no good reason.

The kidnappers do not have a good reason. Foreign troops, including Oz troops will get out of Iraq as soon as Iraq can manage without them - and kidnapping folks is not evidence of Iraq being able to manage without troops.

Cripes, these kidnappers are just impenatrable and unscaleables walls of idiocy.

UPDATE: SkyNews is interviewing the SMH's Paul McGeogh (he of the Allawi shot 6 folsk some day some time no evidence claims that won him a Walkley, saints preserve us) who is saying the kidnappers' claim to have captured Douglas Wood to coincide with Defence Minister Robert Hill's visit and McGeogh says it is baloney and dumb luck for the kidnappers who he refers to as 'insurgents' natch, instead of kidnappers. He says Woods' language describing what he does in Iraq is cryptic cos Woods refers to working with US forces but he is obviously, in McGeogh's opinion, too old for any role as a soldier or anything else.

McGeogh says the video of Wood does not include any deadline for its demand for removal of troops (I demand world peace and Jarno Trulli win the 05 F1 championship - just as realistic, eh?) but the plea is to save Woods' life, so we have to watch and wait to find out if Woods is going to get released like many other hostages. 300 taken 30 killed, many released many unaccounted for.

A proud stat for the Brave Iraqi Resistance eh?


Lord, I hope Woods gets out alive and okay. And I hope the pigs who have him are shot up but good and dead. Pigs.
:: WB 2:12 p.m. [link+] ::
Aussie Mossies

I like it. It has a nice wog ring, dontchathink?

:: WB 3:47 a.m. [link+] ::
I've been Normed - and I am ever so grateful.

Thanks a bunch Prof.
:: WB 3:43 a.m. [link+] ::
You are darn right it is a religion

From fabulous Bilious comes this tale of censorship and zealotry in "global warming" worship (if ever a phrase needed the scare quotes Gb is it, eh?).

This got me thinking about Michael Crichton's State of Fear which I read in two mammoth hits over the Anzac Day weekend. A ripsnorting page turner that is not just fantastic cos it delivers the smackdown to evangelical envirowankers, but because of the footnotes at the end and all the potted reviews that Chrichton delivers of his sources for the book.


Cos of real good writing, interesting character ideas, fabulous actual challenges in conversation of deeply held stupid political ideas by folks who genuinely are better informed and do not hold the same idealogical blindness. It is all there.

Terrific stuff.

Closed that one and picked up the Economist boys' The Right Nation: Why America is Different (Mickelthwaite & Wooldridge) which is also a terrific page turner of very interesting work. It really is, albeit marred a little by use of the following which is just not abloe to be helped by folks who work for a magazine that actually endorsed John Kerry.

Not your proudest moment guys.

Language like "peddled" ideas, "smothered" media. Yeah, yeah, plus the whole canard about lies about Iraq and such.

It is sad when good journos go sloppy but what can you do?

Keep reading, that is what - cos it is a terrific book filled with interesting stuff.


But, the economist has got mucho informazione wrong - flat out wrong - about Italy. Berlusconi owns the media so Italy is obviously a lousy place run over with rightwing berluganda. Puhlease. The Italian media is saturated with commies and everyone knows it. Urgh.

And Lord only knows their coverage of Oz is just tardlike. Howard is a despot leading a nation of white folks all of 'em racists. Bah.

And they did endorse Kerry....

So, maybe it is not so great, maybe it is filled with all crap and I will find out later how wrong the book is.

Whatever - I am enjoying it so for what it is worth, this wog gives it two meatballs, alright?

:: WB 3:18 a.m. [link+] ::

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?