In which the pond desperately tries to avoid an enraged hole in the bucket man, but as a result steps into a deep pile of cackling Claire and the lizard Oz editorialist ...
...Jones, who has long decried pornography to his viewers as a plot to “end the family” and “reproduction,” also regularly texted links to hardcore films to his associates. (Jones also sent a “naked” picture of his wife to political trickster and Trump ally Roger Stone.) “It’s meant to destroy families, destroy relationships. It destroys the pleasure of real sex. It destroys families,” Jones said during a March 2020 broadcast of Infowars. That same day, he texted a PornHub link to a contact.
... and then the pond can move on.
The trouble comes when the question is asked, move on from what?
Well, the pond announced a little time ago that it was well over the frock lover, so it has absolutely no time for zealots of the onion muncher kind, nor even Tess, out and about and dribbling over their hero, but even so things came to a pretty pass at the top of the lizard Oz digital page today ...
Ignore Dame Slap doing what she does, ignore the lizard Oz editorialist, look at the feeble excuse offered below that notorious, shameful and shockingly indefensible photograph.
"He was just following orders."
Ignoring World of Warcraft and associated follies, the "just following orders" routine even has its own wiki. Inter alia ...
One of the most noted uses of this plea, or defense, was by the accused in the 1945–1946 Nuremberg trials, such that it is also called the "Nuremberg defense". The Nuremberg trials were a series of military tribunals, held by the main victorious Allies after World War II, most notable for the prosecution of prominent members of the political, military, and economic leadership of the defeated Nazi Germany. These trials, under the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal that established them, determined that the defense of superior orders was no longer enough to escape punishment, but merely enough to lessen punishment.
So now we must accept the frock lover as a lower order Nazi, just following orders and thereby up for a lesser punishment?
Note that the pond didn't break Godwin's Law, it was that just following orders routine, and the suggestion that the frock lover was just a hapless minion, a pawn, a minor Nazi ...
As for the rest, the pond read the onion muncher and read Tess, away from the d'Urbervilles, rabbiting on about how the Dominator avoided the service, and a single sample will serve to explain why the pond ignored these reptile offerings ...
Oh FFS, spare the bullshit about the humble lad from Ballarat resorting to native argot and just following orders, though Wilcox had a thoughtful comment, which saved the pond the bother of saying anything more ...
And so to the rest of the day's offerings ...
It will be noted that the pond did read the onion muncher, but after the nausea subsided, decided to pass, just as the pond decided to ignore the roving Rove...
The feud is something of an about-face for Rove, who, as Business Insider reported, was assisting with the 2020 Trump campaign’s voter-outreach and swing state tactics less than a year ago, working directly with Jared Kushner and Brad Parscale in an informal, behind-the-scenes role.
So the girls are still fighting, and delicious ironies abound, but after the moment of comedy, the pond can move on.
But to what? Why save all this time, and then settle on a serve of climate science from cackling Claire? Well, it's what the pond does ...
... and right away the pond struck reptile gold.
How many conflating and confusing climate change stories have the reptiles run, featuring either (a) a terrifying graphic of a vast array of threatening solar panels, or (b) a vast array of terrifying windmills, enough to drive a beefy boofhead with an office in Goulburn into a frenzied fit of despair?
You might as well ask how many angels on the head of pin, or how many slavering bits of worshipful hagiography about the frock lover the reptiles have run ... speaking of which ...
But enough already, on with Claire, and yes, the pond has already guessed where this is heading, but there's no need for a spoiler alert, we'll get there soon enough ...
Yes, yes, it's astonishing how climate science denialists suddenly care deeply about the environment, and the planet, so long as it doesn't involve renewables, and we'll understand why when there's a solution soon at hand ...
The solution? You guessed it. Nuke the country, and never mind all that recent fuss about an escapee which titillated the media endlessly, with the news even reaching late night hosts in the US ...
Strangely Claire seems to have missed out on that attempt to nuke the country with a wayward capsule, and so we get this for her closer ...
Then, because the pond likes a side of salad after the mains, there was the lizard Oz editorialist bleating away ...
The only notable feature? Instead of the usual blather about "virtue signalling", we were served up "a proxy for virtue".
Have even the reptiles become wearied and stale by constant blather about "virtue signalling" and are virtuously searching for a new proxy for the old short hand?
Who can say for sure, but the FUD and fear mongering is a never ending journey, up there with ways to explain how the frock lover was just following orders, as indeed, the lizard Oz editorialist might plead at future climate change trials ...
On the upside? The reptiles seem to have forgotten about cackling Claire's call to nuke the country, but the pond assumes it was just a temporary blip ... and now the pond can't avoid the inevitable, though it did deploy many stalling tactics ... because the hole in the bucket man has been patiently waiting in the wings, chomping at the bit to fix the bucket and Jimbo ...
Oh Jimbo, Jimbo, why did you do it? The pond has had to put up with agitated reptiles for days on end, and while the hole in the bucket man is late on the scene, and just repeating what has already been said endlessly in the lizard Oz, the pond must pay attention, and work out the deeply Freudian reason for the agitation ... and in this case it's extremely personal ...
First the usual gobbets of rage ...
Ah the outrage of yoga mats and chai lattes - the pond hastens to reassure readers that you won't find a chai latte within miles of the reptiles HQ in leet Surry Hills - and there's no need to joke that the pond would rather Qantas delivered its ethics on time than rely on the Catholic church delivery service ...
The pond will rely on others to celebrate the hole in the bucket man's celebration of the marketplace ... if only they'd done a transcript of that podcast noted by a reader ...
I listened to a podcast by the LRB on Hayek https://www.lrb.co.uk/podcasts-and-videos/podcasts/the-lrb-podcast/the-hayek-puzzle. He was a really weird person (well, Austria in 1899 was a really, really weird society - does anyone remember the BBC TV series about the Austrian aristocracy pre-1914?). He was in favour of the minimum wage, von Mises called him a socialiist, Ayn Rand hated him, he believed Pinochet was doing a good job - no wonder the reptiles love him. General Motors put out a cartoon version of his Road to Serfdom https://fee.org/articles/the-essence-of-the-road-to-serfdom-in-cartoons/ and of course there was a Readers Digest version. The greatest moment of his life was when he met the Queen.
Dammit, the pond knew it would come in handy, what with our Henry being somewhat of a local weird Hayek type, but never mind, the reason for his deeply Freudian resentment of Jimbo will soon be revealed ...
Well that ranting and railing is all as expected, but now for the big reveal.
Oh Jimbo, Jimbo, why did you have to do it? You knew it would get the hole in the bucket man right in the clenched sphincter muscle, you knew that only our Henry was the guardian of ancient texts and none may quote them but him and his appointed ones, and the only relief for the pond is that you didn't mention Thucydides ... because let's face it, Hercalitus and his dictum was bad enough, and sure to send the hole in the bucket man off into a foaming, frothing frenzy ...
Please Jimbo, leave the treasures of ancient Greece and Rome to pompous asses in the lizard Oz. It's their right and their privilege, and to hell with talk of free markets ... and next time, why not use someone like Sun Tzu? He's a deviant oriental and surely only the bromancer, as treasurer of The Art of War, would be offended ...
And so to what the pond hopes will be a final "final" mention of the frock lover, courtesy the immortal Rowe ...
And now because the pond is reluctant to give up running the odd audio visual moment, another thought from James O'Brien on our Henry's free markets...
I get the impression that Our Henry has been waiting for the opportunity to use that “Ardern across the Tasman” line for some time. What a pity that it’s now obsolete - though of course that’s never been an obstacle to a Lizard Oz scribbler.
“It consists of caricaturing his opponents, assaulting straw men, ignoring all contrary evidence, and then failing to explain his own philosophy with any clarity or detail”. Surely Henry has simply pasted the standard editorial instructions to aspiring columnist and then followed up with numerous examples in his own offering.
Oh E-Claire: "...the International Energy Agency has estimated [nuclear power] will become the cheapest source of dispatchable low-carbon electricity by 2025." Now does E-Claire grasp that it's already 2023 and that 2025 is just 2 years away ? Somehow, in 2 years, "nuclear" - and that means fission, of course, fusion is decades away, if it ever arrives - there's going to be a "nuclear" revolution and that so-called Small Modular Reactors will suddenly become very cheap ? And very quick and easy to build ? And it'll take no time at all to build the grids to carry nuclear power everywhere.
Besides, how can the green energy industry have a "dirty secret" when even Clueless Claire knows about it ? Some bleedin' bloody secret that is.
And in any case, what's the hurry about recycling solar panels (and wind turbine blades too) ? We can just stack 'em up for a decade or two while we develop and improve our technology. Isn't that what Bjornagain keeps telling us: put in the research and develop the required technology ?
I could probably find something on nuclear, but you get the point - zero credibility! Rather like Dot’s herpetological studies the discussion has moved on from whether the statements are wrong to just why they are so hilariously wrong. Paid advocacy, ideology or simple stupidity
"The International Energy Agency (IEA) is a Paris-based autonomous intergovernmental organisation, established in 1974, that provides policy recommendations, analysis and data on the entire global energy sector..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Energy_Agency
Now really, Bef, you wouldn't expect an "intergovernmental organisation" beholden to no less than "31 member countries and 11 association countries" to actually be able to get any predictions right, would you ? Just think 'IMF'.
Oh my: "Chalmer's method is simplicity itself. It consists of caricaturing his opponents, assaulting straw men, ignoring all contrary evidence, and then failing to explain his own philosophy with any clarity or detail." Haven't I said so very many times that the reptiles know exactly what they are doing and how to 'project' their evil onto others as though it's nothing to do with they themselves. And like any good salesperson, they believe it passionately for just so long as it takes to say it.
So then Holely Henry gets down to it: "We are repeatedly told, for example, business should be 'value based'; what we are not told is what that would actually entail." Well maybe, just maybe, Holely, it would entail a Qantas that values honest and effective service to its customers so that it can deliver their baggage to the right place on time rather than sacking a lot of workers and replacing them with cheap contractors so that instead of delivering customer's baggage, Qantas can deliver CEO bonuses. Just maybe ? Whaddaya reckon.
Indeed, GB - far from being a “dirty little secret”, issues associated with recycling solar panels are widely known. What may be a “secret” to Reptiles - possibly because actual research is either beyond them or considered unnecessary - is that it’s been the subject of industry research for some time. Some welcome recent news is that it appears progress is being made in that regard - https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/16/australian-research-finds-cost-effective-way-to-recycle-solar-panels
Of course, Reptiles wouldn’t take any notice of so suspect a source as the Graudian - particularly if contradicts the News Corp narrative.
You wouldn't really expect the Reptiles to read - and even moreso to actually take notice of - the Woke (Guardian) press, would you anony ? Anything found there is just a dirty litle secret that reptiles wouldn't want to know about.
Is the Claire hoping for validation in ‘New Scientist’? The ‘Back Page’ of NS does enjoy trotting out proposed standard weights and measures, such as how many London buses equate to a Blue Whale. The Claire offers two. Australia will accumulate solar panel waste by 2047 equivalent to 19 Sydney Harbour Bridges. I see that as an attempt to latch on to the established national unit of water storage - the Sydharb, of 500 gigalitres - which is considered a convenient descriptor for large impoundments, such as Lake Argyle (about 18 Sydharbs.)
The less rational effort would be that she predicts China to accumulate 2000 Eiffel Towers of waste by 2050. No, she does not explain whey she chooses to go only to 2047 for Australia, but 2050 for China. Well, it is probably to do with her disinclination to work even the simplest calculations. An inventive columnist could have rounded-up the Australian measure to 20 Harbour Bridges by 2050, and simplified the Australia/China comparison for their readers. Why, a truly inventive columnist might even have worked out how many Eiffel Towers might make a Sydney Harbour Bridge.
Should we also assume that the Minerals Council of Australia, which contributed to generously to the editorial, by now will have read the Claire’s technical revelations, and will just get on with installing those cheap as chips nuclear gadgets from next financial year, and stop bruising their principles by asking for money from government, because, as the Henry (further cross referencing) will remind them, government money will just set the whole program off in the wrong direction.
As I thought more about the Claire's reference to 2000 Eiffel Towers - difficult to imagine in any practical way - I wondered that she did not suggest that the Chinese might consider a suitably grand response to Rodia's Watts Towers, if only to show their creative superiority to the USA.
I get the impression that Our Henry has been waiting for the opportunity to use that “Ardern across the Tasman” line for some time. What a pity that it’s now obsolete - though of course that’s never been an obstacle to a Lizard Oz scribbler.
ReplyDeleteDorothy,I see the reptiles as drinkers of the no name brand of coffee
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/chaser/status/1620928670885109760?s=20&t=hCdCtafBshppQyfN-OvybA
ReplyDelete“It consists of caricaturing his opponents, assaulting straw men, ignoring all contrary evidence, and then failing to explain his own philosophy with any clarity or detail”. Surely Henry has simply pasted the standard editorial instructions to aspiring columnist and then followed up with numerous examples in his own offering.
ReplyDelete:)³ Too funny, and all the funnier for being too true ...
DeleteOh E-Claire: "...the International Energy Agency has estimated [nuclear power] will become the cheapest source of dispatchable low-carbon electricity by 2025." Now does E-Claire grasp that it's already 2023 and that 2025 is just 2 years away ? Somehow, in 2 years, "nuclear" - and that means fission, of course, fusion is decades away, if it ever arrives - there's going to be a "nuclear" revolution and that so-called Small Modular Reactors will suddenly become very cheap ? And very quick and easy to build ? And it'll take no time at all to build the grids to carry nuclear power everywhere.
ReplyDeleteBesides, how can the green energy industry have a "dirty secret" when even Clueless Claire knows about it ? Some bleedin' bloody secret that is.
And in any case, what's the hurry about recycling solar panels (and wind turbine blades too) ? We can just stack 'em up for a decade or two while we develop and improve our technology. Isn't that what Bjornagain keeps telling us: put in the research and develop the required technology ?
Best to consider the IEA’s track record on predicting the future
Deletehttps://zenmo.com/en/author/auke/
https://twitter.com/hausfath/status/1257752502126039043/photo/1
I could probably find something on nuclear, but you get the point - zero credibility! Rather like Dot’s herpetological studies the discussion has moved on from whether the statements are wrong to just why they are so hilariously wrong. Paid advocacy, ideology or simple stupidity
"The International Energy Agency (IEA) is a Paris-based autonomous intergovernmental organisation, established in 1974, that provides policy recommendations, analysis and data on the entire global energy sector..."
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Energy_Agency
Now really, Bef, you wouldn't expect an "intergovernmental organisation" beholden to no less than "31 member countries and 11 association countries" to actually be able to get any predictions right, would you ? Just think 'IMF'.
Oh my: "Chalmer's method is simplicity itself. It consists of caricaturing his opponents, assaulting straw men, ignoring all contrary evidence, and then failing to explain his own philosophy with any clarity or detail." Haven't I said so very many times that the reptiles know exactly what they are doing and how to 'project' their evil onto others as though it's nothing to do with they themselves. And like any good salesperson, they believe it passionately for just so long as it takes to say it.
ReplyDeleteSo then Holely Henry gets down to it: "We are repeatedly told, for example, business should be 'value based'; what we are not told is what that would actually entail." Well maybe, just maybe, Holely, it would entail a Qantas that values honest and effective service to its customers so that it can deliver their baggage to the right place on time rather than sacking a lot of workers and replacing them with cheap contractors so that instead of delivering customer's baggage, Qantas can deliver CEO bonuses. Just maybe ? Whaddaya reckon.
Indeed, GB - far from being a “dirty little secret”, issues associated with recycling solar panels are widely known. What may be a “secret” to Reptiles - possibly because actual research is either beyond them or considered unnecessary - is that it’s been the subject of industry research for some time. Some welcome recent news is that it appears progress is being made in that regard - https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/16/australian-research-finds-cost-effective-way-to-recycle-solar-panels
ReplyDeleteOf course, Reptiles wouldn’t take any notice of so suspect a source as the Graudian - particularly if contradicts the News Corp narrative.
You wouldn't really expect the Reptiles to read - and even moreso to actually take notice of - the Woke (Guardian) press, would you anony ? Anything found there is just a dirty litle secret that reptiles wouldn't want to know about.
DeleteIs the Claire hoping for validation in ‘New Scientist’? The ‘Back Page’ of NS does enjoy trotting out proposed standard weights and measures, such as how many London buses equate to a Blue Whale. The Claire offers two. Australia will accumulate solar panel waste by 2047 equivalent to 19 Sydney Harbour Bridges. I see that as an attempt to latch on to the established national unit of water storage - the Sydharb, of 500 gigalitres - which is considered a convenient descriptor for large impoundments, such as Lake Argyle (about 18 Sydharbs.)
ReplyDeleteThe less rational effort would be that she predicts China to accumulate 2000 Eiffel Towers of waste by 2050. No, she does not explain whey she chooses to go only to 2047 for Australia, but 2050 for China. Well, it is probably to do with her disinclination to work even the simplest calculations. An inventive columnist could have rounded-up the Australian measure to 20 Harbour Bridges by 2050, and simplified the Australia/China comparison for their readers. Why, a truly inventive columnist might even have worked out how many Eiffel Towers might make a Sydney Harbour Bridge.
Should we also assume that the Minerals Council of Australia, which contributed to generously to the editorial, by now will have read the Claire’s technical revelations, and will just get on with installing those cheap as chips nuclear gadgets from next financial year, and stop bruising their principles by asking for money from government, because, as the Henry (further cross referencing) will remind them, government money will just set the whole program off in the wrong direction.
Look what you can get for - is it still $4 a day?
Ah yes, the New Scientist. What a sad fate for a once great journal.
DeleteAs I thought more about the Claire's reference to 2000 Eiffel Towers - difficult to imagine in any practical way - I wondered that she did not suggest that the Chinese might consider a suitably grand response to Rodia's Watts Towers, if only to show their creative superiority to the USA.
DeleteYeah: we could measure things in multiples of 'Great Walls': weight, length, height and age. A new single basis of measurement.
DeleteRe the funeral of the bad smell (Pell) and the rant in praise thereof by the bodgie smuggler the full text has been posted on the quad-rant website
ReplyDelete