Oh to be blissfully unaware, totally unconscious, dead-to-the-world, and all me, myself and I-ish just like the author of this promotional morsel in an airline magazine - which was passed it on to me by some wag - why me? - with that annoying, seemingly obligatory order when one is handed food these days: 'enjoy'. Here's my pared-down version. Enjoy:
"Seeking out the gym for my first krav maga class in Melbourne's Caulfield, I couldn't help but note the many local restaurant options. If nothing else, that was going to be my motivation for going all-in.
"In Hebrew, krav maga means 'contact combat' and is popularly known as the self-defence system used by the Israel Defense Forces... Class starts and our instructor casually mentions he used to be a sniper (gulp)... It's easy to imagine krav maga as brutal and masters of the sport being aggressive hotheads always looking for a fight... "
What?! The IDF? Aggressive hotheads always looking for a fight? Never!
"As I head home... I skip the many enticing dining options this time, but I'm certain I'll be back soon, and with more reason to show up than just excitement over the food."
However, that lovely Max Brenner place I saw on the way...
Showing posts with label Stuff & Nonsense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stuff & Nonsense. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 14, 2018
Saturday, May 12, 2018
No, No, Babette
She was born in India, but lives in Toorak, Melbourne. She's pro-life, and she haunts the letters page of Murdoch's Australian. Her name is Babette Francis.
Now, despite the fact that in the land of her birth 3 teenage girls have been raped and burned alive just this past week, Babette's got her knickers in a knot over women in... Iran. Enjoy:
"Heading my list of Mother's Day gifts is for democracy in Iran and freedom for Iranian women from the compulsory wearing of the oppressive hijab. Each week I receive an email from an Iraqi [!!!] man listing all the human rights violations, tortures and executions in Iran. I feel helpless about doing anything to relieve this suffering. All I can do is to pass on the information to Julie Bishop in the hope that she will call the Iranian ambassador and ask for explanations. Donald Trump is correct in assuming that a regime that does not allow its women to uncover their heads is unlikely to uncover its secret progress towards developing nuclear weapons."
Now, despite the fact that in the land of her birth 3 teenage girls have been raped and burned alive just this past week, Babette's got her knickers in a knot over women in... Iran. Enjoy:
"Heading my list of Mother's Day gifts is for democracy in Iran and freedom for Iranian women from the compulsory wearing of the oppressive hijab. Each week I receive an email from an Iraqi [!!!] man listing all the human rights violations, tortures and executions in Iran. I feel helpless about doing anything to relieve this suffering. All I can do is to pass on the information to Julie Bishop in the hope that she will call the Iranian ambassador and ask for explanations. Donald Trump is correct in assuming that a regime that does not allow its women to uncover their heads is unlikely to uncover its secret progress towards developing nuclear weapons."
Thursday, September 28, 2017
The White Man's Burden Rides Again
Check out the abstract for The case for colonialism by Bruce Gilley, published in Third World Quarterly, 8/9/17. Gilley is an associate professor of political science at Portland State University:
"For the last 100 years, Western colonialism has had a bad name. It is high time to question this orthodoxy. Western colonialism was, as a general rule, both objectively beneficial and subjectively legitimate in most of the places where it was found, using realistic measures of those concepts. The countries that embraced their colonial inheritance, by and large, did better than those that spurned it. Anti-colonial ideology imposed grave harms on subject peoples and continues to thwart sustained development and a fruitful encounter with modernity in many places. Colonialism can be recovered by weak and fragile states today in three ways: by reclaiming colonial modes of governance; by recolonising some areas; and by creating new Western colonies from scratch."
So what's next for the TWQ?
Hmm... hey, I've got just the thing: HW Crocker's If you live in freedom, thank the British Empire (PragerU.com):
"Over the last 400 years, what power has done the most to spread the ideals of limited government, an independent judiciary, certain inalienable rights, and free markets. That power would be the British Empire, the largest empire the world has ever known, which made these ideals global aspirations. It was the British Empire, along with America, that defended these ideals in two colossal world wars.
"Freedom was an Englishman's right - and wherever he went, he took that right with him. Whether he was an English colonist in America, governing himself through a locally-elected assembly; or an English adventurer, like Sir Stamford Raffles, creating the free-market city state of Singapore, or an English officer, like T.E. Lawrence, leading Arab tribesmen against the Turks, the British always thought of themselves as liberators, as bringers of freedom. The British believed the final and necessary justification of their empire was a moral one. The British kept the peace; they brought sound, honest administration; and they insisted that basic moral standards were honored.
"The British did not try to nation-build in the way we think of it now. They were under no illusions about making Arabs or Afghans or Zulus into Englishmen. They were more content to leave people alone, to let them be themselves, to govern them with the lightest possible hand.
"In American history, we remember this when we think of the British Empire's so-called 'benign neglect.' We can see it throughout the history of the British Empire. Think about the vast territory of the Sudan - it was governed by 140 British civil-servants. Even Gandhi praised the British Empire, paraphrasing Jefferson, saying that he believed that the best government was the government that governed least, and that he found that the British Empire guaranteed his freedom and governed him least of all.
"In the defense of freedom, the empire drew moral lines. No power did more to abolish slavery and the slave trade in the modern world than did the British Empire. The British treasury spent enormous sums to liberate slaves and compensate slave-owners in the Caribbean. The Royal Navy had, as a primary duty, the eradication of the slave-trade - and, in fact, abolishing the slave trade became a major factor during the expansion of the British Empire. The British enforced a Pax Britannica, putting down pirates, taming headhunters, and keeping the peace between previously warring tribes and religions. While respecting - and often ruling through - local leaders, the British still insisted on certain Judeo-Christian moral standards. They were not, in that respect, multiculturalists. They had a firm sense of right and wrong. When Sir Charles Napier was confronted by the practice of suttee - widow-burning - in India, he told the Brahmin priests involved that he understood it was their custom. But the British had a custom, too: They hanged men who burned women alive, and their goods were confiscated. So, if the Brahmins insisted on continuing their tradition of widow-burning, then he would insist on following his British tradition of hanging the murderers of widows. Widow-burning in India soon ceased.
"But we don't have to dig far into history, into the abolition of slavery and widow-burning, to find the British Empire on the side of moral right and freedom. We can think of events within our own lifetimes or those of our parents and grandparents. When we think of the two deadliest threats to freedom in the twentieth century, we generally think of Communism and Nazism. But how many remember that in 1940, after the Hitler-Stalin pact, and after the fall of France, one power, the British Empire, stood alone in mortal combat against the combined tyrannies of the world.
"Even where the British have merited criticism, as in Ireland, there is more to the imperial story. During negotiations to create the Irish Republic, for instance, British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, who could speak Welsh, reminded the Irish nationalist and Gaelic extremist Eamon de Valera that the Celts never had a word for 'republic.' It was an idea given to them by the English.
"This is our own history, too. If you love America, you should also love the power that gave us our sense of inalienable rights - rights traceable back to Magna Carta. It all started in America with the British Empire, a great, liberty-loving empire. It is the empire's legacy - the English-speaking world - that remains the great global guardian of freedom today."
"For the last 100 years, Western colonialism has had a bad name. It is high time to question this orthodoxy. Western colonialism was, as a general rule, both objectively beneficial and subjectively legitimate in most of the places where it was found, using realistic measures of those concepts. The countries that embraced their colonial inheritance, by and large, did better than those that spurned it. Anti-colonial ideology imposed grave harms on subject peoples and continues to thwart sustained development and a fruitful encounter with modernity in many places. Colonialism can be recovered by weak and fragile states today in three ways: by reclaiming colonial modes of governance; by recolonising some areas; and by creating new Western colonies from scratch."
So what's next for the TWQ?
Hmm... hey, I've got just the thing: HW Crocker's If you live in freedom, thank the British Empire (PragerU.com):
"Over the last 400 years, what power has done the most to spread the ideals of limited government, an independent judiciary, certain inalienable rights, and free markets. That power would be the British Empire, the largest empire the world has ever known, which made these ideals global aspirations. It was the British Empire, along with America, that defended these ideals in two colossal world wars.
"Freedom was an Englishman's right - and wherever he went, he took that right with him. Whether he was an English colonist in America, governing himself through a locally-elected assembly; or an English adventurer, like Sir Stamford Raffles, creating the free-market city state of Singapore, or an English officer, like T.E. Lawrence, leading Arab tribesmen against the Turks, the British always thought of themselves as liberators, as bringers of freedom. The British believed the final and necessary justification of their empire was a moral one. The British kept the peace; they brought sound, honest administration; and they insisted that basic moral standards were honored.
"The British did not try to nation-build in the way we think of it now. They were under no illusions about making Arabs or Afghans or Zulus into Englishmen. They were more content to leave people alone, to let them be themselves, to govern them with the lightest possible hand.
"In American history, we remember this when we think of the British Empire's so-called 'benign neglect.' We can see it throughout the history of the British Empire. Think about the vast territory of the Sudan - it was governed by 140 British civil-servants. Even Gandhi praised the British Empire, paraphrasing Jefferson, saying that he believed that the best government was the government that governed least, and that he found that the British Empire guaranteed his freedom and governed him least of all.
"In the defense of freedom, the empire drew moral lines. No power did more to abolish slavery and the slave trade in the modern world than did the British Empire. The British treasury spent enormous sums to liberate slaves and compensate slave-owners in the Caribbean. The Royal Navy had, as a primary duty, the eradication of the slave-trade - and, in fact, abolishing the slave trade became a major factor during the expansion of the British Empire. The British enforced a Pax Britannica, putting down pirates, taming headhunters, and keeping the peace between previously warring tribes and religions. While respecting - and often ruling through - local leaders, the British still insisted on certain Judeo-Christian moral standards. They were not, in that respect, multiculturalists. They had a firm sense of right and wrong. When Sir Charles Napier was confronted by the practice of suttee - widow-burning - in India, he told the Brahmin priests involved that he understood it was their custom. But the British had a custom, too: They hanged men who burned women alive, and their goods were confiscated. So, if the Brahmins insisted on continuing their tradition of widow-burning, then he would insist on following his British tradition of hanging the murderers of widows. Widow-burning in India soon ceased.
"But we don't have to dig far into history, into the abolition of slavery and widow-burning, to find the British Empire on the side of moral right and freedom. We can think of events within our own lifetimes or those of our parents and grandparents. When we think of the two deadliest threats to freedom in the twentieth century, we generally think of Communism and Nazism. But how many remember that in 1940, after the Hitler-Stalin pact, and after the fall of France, one power, the British Empire, stood alone in mortal combat against the combined tyrannies of the world.
"Even where the British have merited criticism, as in Ireland, there is more to the imperial story. During negotiations to create the Irish Republic, for instance, British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, who could speak Welsh, reminded the Irish nationalist and Gaelic extremist Eamon de Valera that the Celts never had a word for 'republic.' It was an idea given to them by the English.
"This is our own history, too. If you love America, you should also love the power that gave us our sense of inalienable rights - rights traceable back to Magna Carta. It all started in America with the British Empire, a great, liberty-loving empire. It is the empire's legacy - the English-speaking world - that remains the great global guardian of freedom today."
Thursday, August 3, 2017
More Fake Noos
Hmm...
"Those who remain [in Raqqa] include Chechen veterans, former al-Qaida militants and Iraqi Ba'athists who fought for Saddam Hussein. They are ready to die for the 'caliphate' but have amassed hundreds of thousands of civilians around them as human shields." (Teen army tightening net on ISIS in Raqqa, Louise Callaghan, The Sunday Times/The Australian, 2/8/17)
Iraqi Ba'athists who fought for Saddam Hussein???
You're kidding me, Louise. That was 2003. This is is 2017.
Are you seriously telling us that a bunch of Iraqi blokes, brought up on a diet of secular Ba'athist Arab nationalism, and now over 14 years older than they were in 2003, are prepared to die for a... 'caliphate'... in Syria?
Pull the other.
"Those who remain [in Raqqa] include Chechen veterans, former al-Qaida militants and Iraqi Ba'athists who fought for Saddam Hussein. They are ready to die for the 'caliphate' but have amassed hundreds of thousands of civilians around them as human shields." (Teen army tightening net on ISIS in Raqqa, Louise Callaghan, The Sunday Times/The Australian, 2/8/17)
Iraqi Ba'athists who fought for Saddam Hussein???
You're kidding me, Louise. That was 2003. This is is 2017.
Are you seriously telling us that a bunch of Iraqi blokes, brought up on a diet of secular Ba'athist Arab nationalism, and now over 14 years older than they were in 2003, are prepared to die for a... 'caliphate'... in Syria?
Pull the other.
Thursday, July 20, 2017
The Art of the Barrister
Some light relief:
"Sameh Bayda allegedly had gruesome videos depicting Islamic State violence on his phone and a note from his young wife detailing how she wanted a child to keep as a memento after he died... Geoffrey Foster, the defence barrister for the husband and wife, submitted the Crown had failed to show there was a conspiracy between the pair. He also argued there could be alternative hypotheses for why the concerning material was on Bayda's phone. 'Mr Bayda could be seen as a scholar with a deep interest in the Muslim faith... with a curiosity in propaganda,' he gave as one example." (One half of 'Bonnie & Clyde' too soft to launch attack: court, Ava Benny-Morrison, Sydney Morning Herald, 7/7/17)
"Sameh Bayda allegedly had gruesome videos depicting Islamic State violence on his phone and a note from his young wife detailing how she wanted a child to keep as a memento after he died... Geoffrey Foster, the defence barrister for the husband and wife, submitted the Crown had failed to show there was a conspiracy between the pair. He also argued there could be alternative hypotheses for why the concerning material was on Bayda's phone. 'Mr Bayda could be seen as a scholar with a deep interest in the Muslim faith... with a curiosity in propaganda,' he gave as one example." (One half of 'Bonnie & Clyde' too soft to launch attack: court, Ava Benny-Morrison, Sydney Morning Herald, 7/7/17)
Wednesday, December 28, 2016
Look Who's Talking About 'the Aussie Way'
Every so often the mainstream press 'treats' us to a homily by Vic Alhadeff, chief executive of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies. This time around it's The Australian's turn. In Respect for the faiths of others is the Aussie way (24/12/16), Vic lectures us on Aussie values. The only problem is that Vic, as a prominent Israel lobbyist, is also a supporter of Israeli values, which sort of cruels his pitch, know what I mean? He begins with the following anecdote:
"Some time ago I was asked to get involved in a dispute that had arisen at a public school over the prominent placement of a Christmas tree in the school foyer. The pupils were encouraged to place beneath the tree a small gift that would be forwarded to Bear Cottage, a hospice that provides palliative care to children... The parent of one of many non-Christian pupils at the school objected vehemently to the prominence accorded to the tree and what she regarded as undue and inappropriate celebration of Christmas, given that the school was made up of families of numerous ethnic and faith traditions. I was invited to participate in a meeting with the school principal, the Department of Education and the aggrieved parent. My role was to facilitate a compromise that would ideally satisfy the policies and practices of the school while mollifying the parent and answering her concerns. The meeting was convened in the school office, with the parent setting out her objections to a Christmas tree being given pride of place in the entrance, requiring the non-Christian pupils to walk past it on arrival at school every day, which she argued was an affront to their respective faiths... My response to the impasse was that the hallmark of this greatest of countries is that we overwhelmingly embrace differences and respect diversity. We are a robust and healthy democracy that enshrines such principles as equality for all, the rule of law, an independent judiciary, a free press, equality for men and women and multiculturalism."
Needless to say, I had problems with this anecdote on several levels:
1) If Alhadeff's account is correct, the Christmas tree was really nothing more than a worthy attempt by the school principal and staff to encourage the students to think about other kids less fortunate than themselves, nothing more, nothing less.
2) As for the parent who "objected vehemently," I found myself wondering why the principal didn't simply inform her that Christmas trees have no particular religious significance, and that charity, not religion, was the object of the exercise. (He/she might also have asked her whether she avoided taking her children to the local mall for the entire duration of the silly season.)
3) The objecting parent is coyly described as "non-Christian." Although she might conceivably have been an Anglo with an atheist bee in her bonnet, Alhadeff's silence on the matter will have had the paper's readers jumping to the conclusion that she was in fact a Muslim, in which case, he leaves himself open to an accusation of dog-whistling.
4) Why was Vic Alhadeff involved in the matter?
Although he has been CEO of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies for as long as I can remember, for a brief period (December 2013 - July 2014) Alhadeff wore another hat, having been appointed chair of the NSW Community Relations Commission (CRC) by former NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell. (O'Farrell, you'll recall, lost his job in April 2014 after misleading an Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) investigation, when he claimed that he simply couldn't remember receiving a $3,000 bottle of Penfold Grange Hermitage from a business associate - despite having written him a thank you note.) Alhadeff's appointment, incidentally, was preceded by O'Farrell's presentation, at an Israeli Independence Day function in May 2013 of "an effigy of himself bearing the name Baruch O'Farrell" to the then Israeli ambassador, Yuval Rotem.*
Alhadeff himself came unstuck as Community Relations Commissioner during Israel's last major bout of bloodletting in the Gaza Strip in July-August 2014. Casting his CRC cap aside, he fired off an incendiary email to his Jewish 'constituents' headed Israel Under Fire. After accusing Hamas of "violating international law and engaging in war crimes as its militants launch rockets indiscriminately at civilians from civilian areas," he wrote that "Israel has made it clear that it is not interested in further escalation, but will do whatever is needed to defend its citizens. All options are on the table."**
Two weeks later, after coming under fire from the Arab community leaders, he resigned, claiming the matter had become "a distraction to the work of the CRC."
5) Most likely, no one involved in Alhadeff's intervention was aware of his typically liberal Zionist habit of running with the multicultural Australian hare while hunting with the monocultural Israeli hounds. Still, for the proverbial (but politically conscious) fly-on-the-wall, the spectacle of a leading apologist for the ethnocratic, apartheid state of Israel, babbling on about diversity, equality and multiculturalism, must have been quite something.
[*See my 9/5/13 post Barry to Baruch in 60 Seconds; See my 28/7/14 post Vic Alhadeff: Multicultural in NSW, Monocultural in Israel.]
"Some time ago I was asked to get involved in a dispute that had arisen at a public school over the prominent placement of a Christmas tree in the school foyer. The pupils were encouraged to place beneath the tree a small gift that would be forwarded to Bear Cottage, a hospice that provides palliative care to children... The parent of one of many non-Christian pupils at the school objected vehemently to the prominence accorded to the tree and what she regarded as undue and inappropriate celebration of Christmas, given that the school was made up of families of numerous ethnic and faith traditions. I was invited to participate in a meeting with the school principal, the Department of Education and the aggrieved parent. My role was to facilitate a compromise that would ideally satisfy the policies and practices of the school while mollifying the parent and answering her concerns. The meeting was convened in the school office, with the parent setting out her objections to a Christmas tree being given pride of place in the entrance, requiring the non-Christian pupils to walk past it on arrival at school every day, which she argued was an affront to their respective faiths... My response to the impasse was that the hallmark of this greatest of countries is that we overwhelmingly embrace differences and respect diversity. We are a robust and healthy democracy that enshrines such principles as equality for all, the rule of law, an independent judiciary, a free press, equality for men and women and multiculturalism."
Needless to say, I had problems with this anecdote on several levels:
1) If Alhadeff's account is correct, the Christmas tree was really nothing more than a worthy attempt by the school principal and staff to encourage the students to think about other kids less fortunate than themselves, nothing more, nothing less.
2) As for the parent who "objected vehemently," I found myself wondering why the principal didn't simply inform her that Christmas trees have no particular religious significance, and that charity, not religion, was the object of the exercise. (He/she might also have asked her whether she avoided taking her children to the local mall for the entire duration of the silly season.)
3) The objecting parent is coyly described as "non-Christian." Although she might conceivably have been an Anglo with an atheist bee in her bonnet, Alhadeff's silence on the matter will have had the paper's readers jumping to the conclusion that she was in fact a Muslim, in which case, he leaves himself open to an accusation of dog-whistling.
4) Why was Vic Alhadeff involved in the matter?
Although he has been CEO of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies for as long as I can remember, for a brief period (December 2013 - July 2014) Alhadeff wore another hat, having been appointed chair of the NSW Community Relations Commission (CRC) by former NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell. (O'Farrell, you'll recall, lost his job in April 2014 after misleading an Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) investigation, when he claimed that he simply couldn't remember receiving a $3,000 bottle of Penfold Grange Hermitage from a business associate - despite having written him a thank you note.) Alhadeff's appointment, incidentally, was preceded by O'Farrell's presentation, at an Israeli Independence Day function in May 2013 of "an effigy of himself bearing the name Baruch O'Farrell" to the then Israeli ambassador, Yuval Rotem.*
Alhadeff himself came unstuck as Community Relations Commissioner during Israel's last major bout of bloodletting in the Gaza Strip in July-August 2014. Casting his CRC cap aside, he fired off an incendiary email to his Jewish 'constituents' headed Israel Under Fire. After accusing Hamas of "violating international law and engaging in war crimes as its militants launch rockets indiscriminately at civilians from civilian areas," he wrote that "Israel has made it clear that it is not interested in further escalation, but will do whatever is needed to defend its citizens. All options are on the table."**
Two weeks later, after coming under fire from the Arab community leaders, he resigned, claiming the matter had become "a distraction to the work of the CRC."
5) Most likely, no one involved in Alhadeff's intervention was aware of his typically liberal Zionist habit of running with the multicultural Australian hare while hunting with the monocultural Israeli hounds. Still, for the proverbial (but politically conscious) fly-on-the-wall, the spectacle of a leading apologist for the ethnocratic, apartheid state of Israel, babbling on about diversity, equality and multiculturalism, must have been quite something.
[*See my 9/5/13 post Barry to Baruch in 60 Seconds; See my 28/7/14 post Vic Alhadeff: Multicultural in NSW, Monocultural in Israel.]
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
Australian Values
"We don't need burqa-clad ladies telling us 'well, what are Australian values anyway?'" asserts the Q Society of Australia Inc: Upholding Australian Values guide to 'Australian values'. (Q on: Australian values)
I see. I wonder what the Q Society would make of this:
"High school student Lily, 17, from Lismore, in north-east NSW, says posting explicit photos or sex videos online is 'pretty normal' behaviour among her peers. 'I get asked for nudes all the time and give them out. It's how people connect these days,' she says. 'The girls take them to show to their boyfriends or to have some fun. Guys love to take pics of their dick. It's how people show off what they've got to offer, like advertising. I know girls who will deliberately have sex in public places with boyfriends and then talk about it in the playground with their friends - no one talks about it as a bad thing'." ('It was terrifying', Peter Munro/Rachel Olding, Sydney Morning Herald, 20/8/16)
I see. I wonder what the Q Society would make of this:
"High school student Lily, 17, from Lismore, in north-east NSW, says posting explicit photos or sex videos online is 'pretty normal' behaviour among her peers. 'I get asked for nudes all the time and give them out. It's how people connect these days,' she says. 'The girls take them to show to their boyfriends or to have some fun. Guys love to take pics of their dick. It's how people show off what they've got to offer, like advertising. I know girls who will deliberately have sex in public places with boyfriends and then talk about it in the playground with their friends - no one talks about it as a bad thing'." ('It was terrifying', Peter Munro/Rachel Olding, Sydney Morning Herald, 20/8/16)
Friday, August 12, 2016
What a Cherub!
Seriously, would you own up to a family connection with a guy like this?
"I have a cousin who served in military intelligence for the Israeli army. His veracity can be guaranteed by the fact that the day after he finished his compulsory service he was head hunted half a dozen of the top IT companies in Europe, the UK and America. He once told me that all he needed was my email address and he wouldn't care what firewalls or antivirus programs I had, he would suck all the information out of it and I would never know." (From a letter by Richard Fry of Marrickville on Australia's online census debacle, Sydney Morning Herald, 11/8/16)
"I have a cousin who served in military intelligence for the Israeli army. His veracity can be guaranteed by the fact that the day after he finished his compulsory service he was head hunted half a dozen of the top IT companies in Europe, the UK and America. He once told me that all he needed was my email address and he wouldn't care what firewalls or antivirus programs I had, he would suck all the information out of it and I would never know." (From a letter by Richard Fry of Marrickville on Australia's online census debacle, Sydney Morning Herald, 11/8/16)
Sunday, May 22, 2016
The $1.3m (p.a.) Man
"We want to stamp out this behaviour, which we think is endemic in Western culture. We want to take a strong stand against it."*
That's Sydney University's vice-chancellor Dr Michael Spence** speaking about his academic beat. But what appalling behaviour could he possibly be referring to?
Surely, the 'ritualistic humiliation' and alcohol abuse going on in some of the university's residential colleges as reported in last week's Sydney Morning Herald?
Are you kidding?
No, he was referring to false allegations of anti-Semitism aimed at pro-Palestine activists by campus Zionists.
[*'Anti-Semitic behaviour is not acceptable at Sydney University', The Australian Jewish News, 13/5/16; **See my 28/4/15 post The Herald Awakes.]
That's Sydney University's vice-chancellor Dr Michael Spence** speaking about his academic beat. But what appalling behaviour could he possibly be referring to?
Surely, the 'ritualistic humiliation' and alcohol abuse going on in some of the university's residential colleges as reported in last week's Sydney Morning Herald?
Are you kidding?
No, he was referring to false allegations of anti-Semitism aimed at pro-Palestine activists by campus Zionists.
[*'Anti-Semitic behaviour is not acceptable at Sydney University', The Australian Jewish News, 13/5/16; **See my 28/4/15 post The Herald Awakes.]
Monday, May 2, 2016
A Work of Staggering Genius
Helen Elliott, "a Melbourne writer and journalist," reviews Israeli novelist Nir Baram's novel, Good People in The Australian of April 30.
She begins thus:
"How would I have behaved in Adolf Hitler's Germany or Joseph Stalin's Russia? It's the question we ask at some time in our lives. But can truth be involved? If we were not physically there within the intimate context of the time how could we have any idea if we would be one of the good or one of the evil? We would hope we would have the gravity and courage of a Dietrich Bonhoeffer, but maybe we would be, well, just ourselves. Israeli novelist Nir Baram is interested in good and evil in exceptional times when evil strides unchecked across the earth."
What I can't understand, though, is why Baram had to go back to Adolf and Uncle Joe for a novel on "evil striding unchecked across the land"?
Surely, any Israeli regime, from David Ben-Gurion's to Benjamin Netanyahu's, would have furnished ample scope for an Israeli writer to explore this subject?
Be that as it may, Elliott concludes her review with the following upbeat assessment... and one helluva silly question:
"This is not a flawless novel but it is tremendous. I read it in two sittings and I learned a lot. How does a man in his early 30s know how to write like this?"
Well, he is Israeli, isn't he?
She begins thus:
"How would I have behaved in Adolf Hitler's Germany or Joseph Stalin's Russia? It's the question we ask at some time in our lives. But can truth be involved? If we were not physically there within the intimate context of the time how could we have any idea if we would be one of the good or one of the evil? We would hope we would have the gravity and courage of a Dietrich Bonhoeffer, but maybe we would be, well, just ourselves. Israeli novelist Nir Baram is interested in good and evil in exceptional times when evil strides unchecked across the earth."
What I can't understand, though, is why Baram had to go back to Adolf and Uncle Joe for a novel on "evil striding unchecked across the land"?
Surely, any Israeli regime, from David Ben-Gurion's to Benjamin Netanyahu's, would have furnished ample scope for an Israeli writer to explore this subject?
Be that as it may, Elliott concludes her review with the following upbeat assessment... and one helluva silly question:
"This is not a flawless novel but it is tremendous. I read it in two sittings and I learned a lot. How does a man in his early 30s know how to write like this?"
Well, he is Israeli, isn't he?
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
Meet the Australian Liberty Alliance
OMG, lock the door, draw the curtains and turn off the lights, an election's coming, and a veritable zombie apocalypse of muppets, misfits and morons is on the prowl for our votes. Among them, a gibbering troop of Islamophobic sadsacks (inspired by Geert Wilders no less), called the Australian Liberty Alliance.
Has the word 'liberty' ever been so slighted?
A sample of their puerile and contradictory pap:
"Our Australia stands for individual liberty, small government, Western values built on Judeo-Christian and Humanistic foundations, social fairness and an integrated multi-ethnic society with one set of laws for all, regardless of colour, gender or creed." (australianlibertyalliance.org.au)
Judeo-Christian Humanists aside, check out the ALA's foreign policy. Of the 6 paragraphs devoted to the subject, the final two read as follows:
"Australian Liberty Alliance considers Israel to be the only liberal democracy in the Middle East today. We find Israelis not deserving of the criticism from those with limited understanding of historical and social political developments in the Levant.
"We acknowledge Israel's right to exist in peace and within secure borders, including the traditional homelands of the Jewish people in Judea and Samaria, with Jerusalem as its undivided capital."
IOW, every square inch of Arab Palestine.
Whatever did the poor bloody Palestinians do to this lot?
Has the word 'liberty' ever been so slighted?
A sample of their puerile and contradictory pap:
"Our Australia stands for individual liberty, small government, Western values built on Judeo-Christian and Humanistic foundations, social fairness and an integrated multi-ethnic society with one set of laws for all, regardless of colour, gender or creed." (australianlibertyalliance.org.au)
Judeo-Christian Humanists aside, check out the ALA's foreign policy. Of the 6 paragraphs devoted to the subject, the final two read as follows:
"Australian Liberty Alliance considers Israel to be the only liberal democracy in the Middle East today. We find Israelis not deserving of the criticism from those with limited understanding of historical and social political developments in the Levant.
"We acknowledge Israel's right to exist in peace and within secure borders, including the traditional homelands of the Jewish people in Judea and Samaria, with Jerusalem as its undivided capital."
IOW, every square inch of Arab Palestine.
Whatever did the poor bloody Palestinians do to this lot?
Friday, April 8, 2016
Hick Nation
The government can let into this country any number of warmongers, war criminals and other assorted nutjobs, but a renowned Syrian calligrapher? Now that's a bridge too far:
"Mouneer Al Shaarani is a master Arabic calligrapher whose compositions have been displayed in museums across the world. But the 64-year-old Syrian artist was refused a temporary work visa by the Immigration Department to open his first Australian exhibition at the Mils Gallery in Sydney's Surrey Hills. Al Shaarani was rejected on the basis of being a Syrian passport holder and it was determined that he did not fulfil the requirements that indicated his visit would be 'genuine temporary stay.' A disappointed Al Shaarani says 'it is clear I did not intend to stay in Australia permanently' and that he will not reapply. Mils Gallery director Adriano Rosselli... says the department declines to 'believe in Al Shaarani's intention to return to Syria following his exhibition... The grounds for this refusal were blatantly at odds with al Shaarani's expressed desire to remain practising his art in Syria.' A Department of Immigration and Border Protection spokesperson says they cannot comment on Al Shaarani's case. The exhibition runs until April 16." (The official line, Jennine Khalik, The Australian, 7/4/16)
Will this nation ever GROW UP?
"Mouneer Al Shaarani is a master Arabic calligrapher whose compositions have been displayed in museums across the world. But the 64-year-old Syrian artist was refused a temporary work visa by the Immigration Department to open his first Australian exhibition at the Mils Gallery in Sydney's Surrey Hills. Al Shaarani was rejected on the basis of being a Syrian passport holder and it was determined that he did not fulfil the requirements that indicated his visit would be 'genuine temporary stay.' A disappointed Al Shaarani says 'it is clear I did not intend to stay in Australia permanently' and that he will not reapply. Mils Gallery director Adriano Rosselli... says the department declines to 'believe in Al Shaarani's intention to return to Syria following his exhibition... The grounds for this refusal were blatantly at odds with al Shaarani's expressed desire to remain practising his art in Syria.' A Department of Immigration and Border Protection spokesperson says they cannot comment on Al Shaarani's case. The exhibition runs until April 16." (The official line, Jennine Khalik, The Australian, 7/4/16)
Will this nation ever GROW UP?
Thursday, January 28, 2016
NOTICE to MY FOLLOWERS
FYI, it appears that Blogger is now removing non-Google Account profiles from its blogs, so you'll need to switch over to a Google Account if you wish to remain/become a follower of this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)