Red Rag

When the term “khaki option” was used to describe Howard’s latest Governor-General , I thought yeah, that’d be right, but it didn’t overly concern me.

As soon as I read that Major-General Michael Jeffery was going to “talk on issues and principles and values and standards”, I got worried.

When he further mentioned that he would take a particular interest in youth issues, I knew what was coming:

He also signalled he would promote young people to be involved in youth groups and cadet organisations.

“I’ve always been a believer in youth movements - youngsters belonging to some youth group,” he said.

He said as Western Australia governor, he regularly encouraged participation in various military, police or environmental cadet services.

“It was incredible when cadet units were formed in schools for example, you’d get an immediate reduction of say 30 or 40 per cent in minor crime in that area,” he said.

It also encouraged people to take up careers as police or park rangers, or in the military.

Now we’re going to have a loudmouth figurehead banging on about “kids these days”, law-and-order, and trying to force kids to learn how to kill each other — under the eupemism, of course, of “national service” or “nasho”. (Do you really want me, Bailz or Yobbo running around with guns?)

This is a cynical appointment made to capitalise on the military momentum of Howard’s regime. He’s made a big deal of Jeffery’s interaction with the Iraq war veterans:

As the honorary colonel of the SAS regiment, he naturally turns up at any gathering that is very important to that regiment, and he was there on Friday at the reception … mixing very freely, very easily, and obviously a very welcome person.

All I hear and what I have observed tells me he is very much, in the proper sense of the word, a man of the people.

Prime Minister, a career military man mixing comfortably in military circles does not indicate that he is a man of the people. Although it might eventually, if he gets his way and forces every young Australian to pick up a gun…

I’m with Scotty Wickstein: “But blogs are to me as children are to you, dear reader — they grow, develop, and take a character of their own. And they cause thier parents immense worry. Will they get into bad company, are their grades alright, will their teeth need braces?”

I don’t know why, but a recent exchange of comments brought a big smile to my face.

It all started with Gianna’s first post in her new MT-based digs:

blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah. blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah…

And so on, and so forth. Then the replies:

Robert: Wow, you move in to your new digs and the content immediately improves!

Gianna: Don’t laugh, Robert, I happen to think this particular post is the most honest and truthful I’ve managed to write :)

Geoff: It’s a thing of great beauty Gianna, much like yourself.

Tim: To whit, I trust their will be a phot hanging on the new walls?

Tim: Or better still, a photo. (There’s enough phots, don’t you think?)

Gianna: you guys…. Geoff, you’re just had Near Death Experience so you’re probably feeling particularly generous, but thank you anyway! (and I hope you’re feeling better too).

Tim, talk about the phot calling the kettle black! I recall certain representations being made by you many moons ago about showing your face, but we’re still having to make do with your foot (nice foot though).

Tim: So that’s a no, is it?

Gianna: actually it was supposed to be more like ‘i’ll show you mine if you show me yours’.

Matt: Oh you two. Get a room, already. =)

Sometimes the sniping involved in blogging gets me down. Sometimes its potential for rejuvenating debate is inspiring. But I think the best thing about it is that it provides occasional glimpse of deep friendship among people who have never — and may never — met.

Bailz writes:

Click the image for a more readable version. It’s PNG, so if you’re using one of those non-IE browsers … well you might be in trouble…

Graham writes:

PNG is nicer, but unfortunately every moron’s browser of choice botches up the doovy alpha transparencies, so there’s not much incentive to use them.

Hmm…

I just got an email asking me to submit an icon for The Lafayette Project:

As yours is one of the essential weblogs, we want to make sure we’re preserving the association of your brand with your content in the directory, by using small image thumbnails of your logo or photo on your profile page and elsewhere. The thumbnail images would be small, roughly 32x32 pixels in dimension, and need to look good at that size.

No doubt many of you also received it, because if mine is “one of the essential weblogs”, it must be a fairly extensive database. Could be very interesting.

I want to make it clear to certain peoplethat I am opposed to the despotic Iranian regime.

The reason I have not written anything about it so far is simply that I don’t know enough about what’s going on there. For example, who is organising the student protests? Why are the People’s Mujaheddin being raided by Western governments? (To say it’s just French support for Islamofascism is ridiculous — the group is considered a terrorist organisation by the US, but not by the UN.) This Iranian blogger argues that the faction behind the protests is an important consideration:

There’s a lot of information flying about Iran, but many people don’t understand that there are lots of factions in the Iranian community and only a vocal minority is making its voice heard. I’m Iranian. I was in Iran last year and I’m in contact with people there. So, I offer this cautionary note to those who want to be informed and to help, because you must be very careful about where your information is coming from when it comes to Iran. …

The MKO is universally reviled by Iranians. … Beware the Monarchists. That’s Reza Pahlavi and his coterie. … Take NITV hype with a grain of salt.

On the face of it, the protests seem to be a genuine, spontaneous people’s movement against a horrifically brutal, corrupt, and undemocratic regime. The US is right to offer moral support to the students, and in certain circumstances (such as the outbreak of a genuine civil war) they would be justified in offering military support to the opposition.

Iran’s current regime must go, but there’s no use replacing it with something equally terrible, and I’m not sure what the revolution that appears to be gaining momentum would result in. For that reason, I’m hesitant to forcefully back what’s going on there. Instead, I’ll give it a tentative and heavily qualified “Yay!”

As for the lack of posts on Indymedia, I agree it is disappointing. But I managed to dredge up a few posts. And Steve, Yobbo, feel free to post to Perth Indymedia. In any case, distinterest in the revolution is more general than that.

I feel so fucking shabby this morning afternoon.

Kevin: “He certainly is munted.” Sam: “He? Dude, that’s a chick.”

Matt Price:

Next comes Graham Edwards, who’s long flouted house dress standards by refusing to wear shoes. Admittedly, the wheelchair-bound MP has a fair excuse.

He wasn’t wheelchair-bound this week, though, courtesy Qantas…

This story, about Philip Ruddock’s email address, rings true. The 12 at the end of it is a telltale sign…

Paul Watson, Master of Juxtaposition…

I linked, over there on the side-blog, to Paddy McGuinness’s latest wank about Ken Park. When I first read it, I thought it was just another sensationalist, moralising column; but it’s more than that — it’s misleading. McGuinness writes:

The film to arouse the latest storm, Ken Park, is neither, but it apparently involves mature actors (if the age of 16 or 18, can be considered mature) pretending to be under-age participants in various sexual activities, graphically and realistically portrayed or actually performed.

This implies that the actors in the film were aged between 16 and 18. The truth is something different:

Clark, who co-directed the movie with Ed Lachman, says the sex is simulated rather than real, with the exception of one scene showing a youth masturbating. And all the actors were over 18. (My emphasis.)

The age of consent in most Australian states is 16. Paddy is obviously unhappy about that, but is he seriously concerned about people over the age of 18 simulating sex?

Probably not, so instead he’ll fudge the figures to suit his argument.

Matt Price should probably stop drawing attention to the fact that he didn’t know what a talsiman is.

Would Phillip Adams just fuck off and leave us all alone? His latest column is another example of convoluted, self-important drivel:

Rivkin supporters, including the woman who proclaimed her love in the heavens in wisps of smoke extruded from the bum of a light aircraft, tell us that he was guilty of a very, very small crime. He did, after all, get away with just $350 as a result of his mendacity. This is like arguing that a murderer should serve time according to the height of his victim. “He was only 129cm, Your Honour,” says the expensive barrister. “So surely Your Honour would not propose a custodial sentence? Had the deceased been over 188cm, one might expect a few years but . . .”

Couldn’t you argue the opposite in Rivkin’s case? Not only was he an inside trader but he proved, beyond reasonable doubt, that he was an inept inside trader. Double the sentence, say I.

What a crap analogy. The amount of money involved does not equate to the height of the victim; it equates to the “deadness” of the victim. What Phil’s arguing is that an attempted murderer should get twice the sentence of a successful one. Chalk one up for logic… or not.

But the real point of the article comes next — and the logic gets worse:

A while ago I found myself at Hayman Island with the Rivkins. … Resisting the temptation to say this could only be for the better I decided, then and there, that I would never write about Rivkin or even mention his name in a column. And I am determined to honour that firm resolve.

… he says, having mentioned Rivkin’s name (or his initials) a measly fourteen times in the very same column.

Still, Phil’s introduction (with a slight modification) is something I can agree with:

As a lifelong opponent of capital punishment, I’d fight tenaciously against its reintroduction. But in the case of [insert the name of a certain useless columnist here] I think I’d make an exception. If only to put him out of our misery.

Oh, fuck off Paddy. Apparently Ken Park will lead to child pornography and the breakdown of the family unit, among other things. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it.