More WMD lies

It was revealed by Dr. John Gee (a former Weapons Inspector with the Iraq Survey Group), that Downer deliberately supressed the circulation of a letter he wrote, stating that there were no WMD's in Iraq.

Dr. Gee resigned from the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) after what he believed was a flawed process that was "intellectually dishonest". He says that rather than going into Iraq to find if there were WMD's, the ISG was being pressured to substantiate the false claims of an imminent threat, upon which the invasion was based. He said the ISG was being run by the CIA, to protect the CIA. Upon resignation, Dr. Gee submitted a letter to Downer (as well as various foreign affairs and defence officials), outlining his concerns about the process. He also met Downer face-to-face to spell out what he saw wrong. He claims Downer supressed this, and cites information passed to him by several respected people involved.

It was interesting to see Lord Downer today in his usual paltry arrogant way, denying any knowledge of the communication... but when pressed, yes he remembers the meeting, but Dr. Gee raised some concerns about the 'process', which is now academic, since no WMD's were found. He denies stopping the circulation of the document to other departments, but was less than convincing.

This is classic Howard Government politics: supress what doesn't support your case, and deny it until the storm blows over. They have taken Ministerial responsibility to a new low, and apparently have no moral qualms about bare-faced lying at all.

Stem Cells

After lauding Howard for allowing a conscience vote on Stem Cell research, he has today released another government commissioned study stating that there should be no further liberalisation of Stem Cell research. It would appear that he has been "shopping around" for a suitable report to further his case, thus attempting to influence an open and honest debate.

To quote one of his own, Liberal MP Mal Washer said (paraphrased)
"Whilst this isn't Cash for Comments, it certainly smacks of something like it"
This is Howard, the two-faced master manipulator at his best.

Jihad Jack

Well, apparently after being acquitted from terrorism charges, Jack Thomas has now been the first person to be served a Control Order - a new instrument available to Federal Police created at the last round of "anti-terror" law changes.

He was recalled from holidays early, and must observe, amongst other things, a nightime curfew. He also has a list of people he can't contact, including several dead people, several people in Guantanamo Bay, and wait for it... Osama Bin Laden.

This would be funny except the Feds are serious about it. I would have thought they should encourage him to call Osama, since it might help capture him? The Magistrate who handed down the control order has criticised the federal police for bringing him back from the holiday, and for this farcical list of people he can't contact.

It seems the control order really achieves nothing that surveillance couldn't, and ensures that *if* this man is a terrorist, the police would not be able to leverage any contacts he tries to make.

A cartoon worth 1000 essays

Wilcox has done a beauty with this one: sums up so many situations so succinctly.
Image here

Stem Cell Debate

Full credit to Howard for allowing a conscience vote, athough I suspect it was more political pragmatism than any believe that there should be an open debate about the issue.

One thing that is clear is that Abbott is both a Zealot and a moron. Human/Animal Hybrids? Clones taking over the world? He should be ashamed using his dogmatic beliefs to bring ridiculous claims to what should be a sober and serious debate. The facts are: we are a talking about 100 cells of unfertlised embryo. 100 Cells. You brush more of that off your arm when you take as shower. There is NO potential for that 100 cells to become a human life.

Second point: the embryo's that will be used are going to be thrown out any way. Apparently, the Catholic/Conservative position is that these embryo's should die in with dignity, not be destroyed. Dignity? These are lumps of 100 cells, not a human being!?! And even if you consider them life, how is dying in a dustbin dignified? The arguments put by the "against" position don't seem to stack up logically.

The slippery-slope argument perhaps has some merit - that once we begin playing around with embryo's and the like, there is a potential for the science to grow into cloning humans, or at least certain characteristics. However, if I applied the same logic to many things... say, guns - humans should never be allowed to used guns since there is a "slippery slope" to murder. We shouldn't use chemicals for anything, since thats justa "slippery slope" to poisons. We shouldn't have a beer, because thats a "slippery slope" to alcoholism. All technology is potentially a "slippery slope" to bad things. Our whole society is build around extracting value from what we have, whilst using societal expectations and laws to control the negative potential of technology. This argument just doesn't stack up.

I saw this article by Jillian Abbott (a relation, perhaps?). As far as I can tell, her argument is purely syntactic. Does it matter if its called cloning? Does it matter if it IS cloning? The point is, we are NOT cloning human beings. We talking about cloning cells. Cells clone continously - thats how they grow.

It comes down to a position i've put forward frequenty. If your beliefs prevent you from using the technology, don't use it. Don't individuals theological convictions onto the whole population. Jillian Abbott makes reference to "fanatical pro-abortionists". There is no fanatical "pro" position, since the pro position allows, but doesn't force a particular option. Nobody says you HAVE to donate your embryos, or HAVE to use the technology. The only if there is fantacism in the debate it comes from the "anti-" camp, since they prohibit the option. "Pro-" allows people to choose what they believe to be the best decision according to their circumstances an beliefs. "Anti-" proscribes one set of values and beliefs on everyone. Which is the more fanatical approach?

I would love to hear any thoughts on the matter, especially if someone can present a logical and considered "Against-" position. Click on "comments"

2005 MTV Awards

...had this little skit. No Jack Black, unfortunately, but anything that references Star Wars is good by me!

Police Sign

The police tell it straight. Note, it's an Ford XR8.

Weird

I found this on the Triple M Website. Hmmm... very weird.

2006 Engo Review

V is for Vic Bitter
Well... what can I say: it was the Engo Revue. And unfortunately, it seems to get less funny each year. Don't get me wrong, there were highlights, such as "80's guys" version of "American Pie" - a tribute to all things 80's. The band was pretty good (but the sound mixing was waaaay off). First time i've seen actual female nudity (although I suspect it was a slip-up, and the girl just grinned and bared it. Heckling was of not bad (but not great).

Actually, the highlight for me was the new venue - at Manning. It was more cozy and more fitting for an Engo Revue. Seriously, the Seymour is just too highbrow - and when they start ejecting hecklers - that just ruins the show.

Anyways, i've done my service to the arts, attending all 5 Engo revues while I was at uni. I can graduate a happy man.

We still love you, Seloni!

The Chaser at it again

Awesome work from the Chaser: They've booked flights under the names Mr. Al Kyder and Mr. Terry Wrist. The best part was when they didn't show up for boarding, and Virgin Blue paged passengers Al-Qaeda and Terrorist to board! SMH Article here. It seems they make the news every week now!

States initiative on Greenhouse Gasses

The state governments are preparing a discussion paper with the aim to introduce a national scheme of Greenhouse Gas capping and trading.

Under the scheme, businesses will have an allocated quota of Greenhouse emmissions. Hefty fines will apply if companies exceed their quota. Spare credits, for underpoluting companies can be traded on the free market.

I think this makes sense - it used the free economy to control greenhouse emissions. It makes greenhouse pollution a "scare resource" and lets the market take care of the rest.

The Federal Government has come out saying that it will cripple the economy and costs jobs. This is based on some recommendations from an organisation that looks at the economics of the greenhouse problem. They quote statistics such as if we try and 1/2 greenhouse emissions by 2050, we will send electricity bills 6x their current rate.

Unfortunately, this organisation (the name eludes me, but it is an acronym), allows companies to "donate" their way onto the board. Primary board members include Texaco, MobileExxon, Rio Tinto and Australian Coal. Hrm... i wonder if these results might just be a little tainted.

Nonetheless, the Government doesn't want to do anything to tackle the Greenhouse problem. They are willing to let future generations pay the health and lifestyle cost so that they can continue their massive budget surplusses. The "conservative" side of Government is incapable of showing real leadership (I mean long term planning, not simply hard-headedness). This attitude keeps Australia from investing properly in its future, because future investment doesn't reap rewards today. And therefore, not at the ballot box.

Well said

Chuck 'em all out, I say.

Week in politics

REVOLT!!!

For the first time in the 10year history of the Howard Government, there have been 3 members crossing the floor and voting with Labor against the government's bill to excise the whole of Australia from the migration zone. This proves that there is still some heart left in this government, although its fading.

Now, if Sen. Judith Troeth crosses the floor in the Senate, the Government will need the vote of Sen. Fielding (Family First) to push it through. Fielding has had a meeting with Howard, the Indonesian Ambassador AND one of the West Papuan Asylum seekers. I admire Bruce Baird (one of the "dissident" liberal) in his statement if that "Family First" means anything, they cannot vote for a bill that splits up families and/or places them in indefinite detention in an overseas country where we have no say over the conditions and laws that govern their existence. Indeed this is a great fob-off of responsbility. The other "wildcard" is Barnaby Joyce, who has also resevered his decision. I like that guy, if only that he brings a bit of unpredictability and brinksmanship to the Senate.

Just to restate my point: People don't jump onto leaky boats and take a dangerous trip to Australia because they want to make life difficult for Australians. Nobody puts themselves and their families at such personal risk, unless they are very, very desperate.

In other exciting news, there was a fantastic stouch betweeen "Bomber" Beazly and "Ironbar" Wilson Tuckey. The upshot was the Beazly describe the legislation as "Weak and Worthless", then told Tuckey to take his "Weak and Worthless self" back into the building. Tuckey came within millimetres of calling Beazly a Son of a Bitch, but pulled back, calling him a "Fat so-and-so". Great theatrics.

Great bumper sticker

On my 11.5km walk to Uni yesterday, I saw a car with the bumper sticker:
Is that the truth, or did you read that in the Telegraph .

I thought that was quite good.

Just on that, here is my list of journalists who regularly make claims that are so obviously biased that they don't even make any sense.

1. Miranda Devine (Fairfax)
2. Janet Albrechtsen (Newscorp)
3. Piers Ackerman
4. Andrew Bolt

Miranda Devine takes top place, for attacking any claims that humans are rapidly and drastically changing the environment. According to her, its all a big myth perpetrated by green-facists.

The War on Everything

Remember that Highschool dude who hugged the PM last week, whilst holding a screwdriver? The Chaser decided to test the PM's security and what they'd let get away. Oversized novelty Axe: that was ok. Running chainsaw.... hrm... not so good.

Those people who play the violin in restaurants and serenade couples...? Well, why just a violin? The Chaser team decided to field test different musical instruments... starting with a Kazoo, and ending with a full 4 piece bagpiper ensemble complete with drummer.

Also, see the surprise spruiker get thrown out of Sexpo, as well as the regular segment "What we learnt from Current Affairs shows this week", all about the ethics of ethnics.

See the highlights, or download the video podcast!

www.abc.net.au/chaser

New Holden Commodore

I'm not sure if anyone has noticed, but the SMH has been running nearly blanket coverage on the new Holden Commodore - with articles nearly every day. In fact, in the general media, the Commodore has been getting excellent press - free advertising. A few weeks ago, even the 7.30 report ran an article on it!!

Why doesn't the Ford Falcon get such favourite treatment?

My gripe of the day.

Meat Loaf, Steinman and Bat III

Meat Loaf has made up with Steinman about the rights to the "Bat out of Hell" Copyright, and has publically acknowledged Steinman's contribution to his success. (SMH Article here). This clears the air for the third and final "Bat" album, due out in October. Steinman has written several songs on the album, so I'm defininetly looking forward to it.