Time out. The pond never pays attention to the Captain Spud side, except as refracted through the reptiles at the lizard Oz, which inevitably leads to the conclusion that they're all barking mad.
Cue sweet Bid, carrying the name of the pond's grandmother, appearing in the Graudian's Bridget Archer says Dutton appears to be ‘weaponising’ child abuse for ‘political advantage’
This won't take long and then the pond will turn to the usual weekend reptile business, but the pond wanted to put in a kind word for Bid.
...Bridget Archer has blasted Peter Dutton for appearing to “weaponise” child sexual abuse for “some perceived political advantage” after the Liberal backbencher crossed the floor to vote against a motion calling for a royal commission into child sexual abuse in Indigenous communities.
A furious Archer told Guardian Australia on Tuesday she would probably support a royal commission into child sexual abuse if any new inquiry examined the prevalence of that behaviour in all parts of the community, not just in Indigenous communities.
Archer is a survivor of child sexual abuse. Her criticism followed Dutton’s move to suspend the standing orders early on Thursday to demand that parliament back the Coalition’s call for a royal commission into child sexual abuse in Indigenous communities.
A furious Archer told Guardian Australia on Tuesday she would probably support a royal commission into child sexual abuse if any new inquiry examined the prevalence of that behaviour in all parts of the community, not just in Indigenous communities.
Archer is a survivor of child sexual abuse. Her criticism followed Dutton’s move to suspend the standing orders early on Thursday to demand that parliament back the Coalition’s call for a royal commission into child sexual abuse in Indigenous communities.
Dutton’s motion also called for a new audit of spending on Indigenous programs and “practical policy ideas” to improve the lives of Indigenous Australians to help close the gap.
After voting against the Coalition’s motion, the Liberal backbencher said child sexual abuse was “a significant issue right across the country”.
“The numbers bear that out,” Archer said.
Archer pointed to a recent commission of inquiry in Tasmania examining the responses of government institutions to allegations of child sexual abuse dating back more than 20 years.
That inquiry found children had been abused in a range of government institutions, including hospitals and schools, and the responses had been inadequate.
“Are there issues in Indigenous communities? Of course,” Archer said on Thursday.
“What’s needed is action. We could act now.”
Naturally this got the Spud agitated and he promised a private talk with Bid - the name reminded the pond it still has a missal from its grandma Bid, complete with the Latin needed for the mass - and this Tassie Bid sounded Christian, not in the onion muncher sense of bigotry and hatred, fear and loathing, but in the sense of putting people above politics:
...Archer argued the Liberal leadership was engaged in mixed messaging. “I also think there are inconsistencies in what was said during the voice referendum.”
“We don’t want to divide the country by race, yet we are singling out abuse in Indigenous communities,” she said.
“It’s very difficult to see [this motion] as anything other than weaponising abuse for some perceived political advantage.”
Archer campaigned for a yes vote in her marginal Tasmanian seat of Bass...
“We don’t want to divide the country by race, yet we are singling out abuse in Indigenous communities,” she said.
“It’s very difficult to see [this motion] as anything other than weaponising abuse for some perceived political advantage.”
Archer campaigned for a yes vote in her marginal Tasmanian seat of Bass...
Wait, one more thought on Bid, thanks to Katharine Murphy in the Graudian:
...As she told me after crossing the floor to protest Dutton’s race-specific motion, child sexual abuse happens in institutions, in families, right around the country. All races. All ethnic groups. Rich and poor. Her point was simple. If you want to stand up for children, stand up for all children. Don’t inflict another inquiry on traumatised people. Do something about it. Resource the frontline services, the professionals with the expertise. Stop talking. Start acting.
And then this:
...It wasn’t just in the chamber. As sometimes happens in the bro-zone of 2GB, things got hysterical. Dutton’s mate Ray Hadley wanted to know how long the leader was going to tolerate … (wait for it) … independent thinking. “How long are you going to put up with Bridget Archer? She’s crossed the floor to support Labor on housing, on emissions reduction, and a censure motion against the former prime minister, and now, embarrassingly, she’s voted with the government on something I think the vast majority of Australians want to see happen. And she’s still a member of the Liberal party!”
Given Archer’s life experiences, Dutton should have told Hadley to take a very deep breath. To his credit, Dutton did remind the shock jock that Liberals have the right to cross the floor “if that’s where your conscience takes you”.
But things went downhill from there. He indicated he’d have a private chat with Archer because she’d made a “mistake” voting with Anthony Albanese. This was the “wrong decision.”
So we’ve reached the crux of the thing. Dutton believes he has a valid perspective on the problem of child sexual abuse because he’s a former cop. Fair enough. But doesn’t a person who has actually survived child abuse have moral and practical authority as well? Isn’t a survivor entitled to express her view? In what universe is that unreasonable, or (to quote Dutton) “wrong”?
I’ll tell you what universe. In the absolutely arse-about universe.
While serious people were preoccupied with war crimes, less serious people were hunting down alleged thought crimes
Things got worse. Archer was deluged with abuse. Keyboard warriors, high on the mission of letting no good deed go unpunished, came out in force, hissing in the inbox, on social media platforms.
The survivor found herself cast as an apologist for child sexual abusers.
This was not just bad. Disgraceful, more like...
Given Archer’s life experiences, Dutton should have told Hadley to take a very deep breath. To his credit, Dutton did remind the shock jock that Liberals have the right to cross the floor “if that’s where your conscience takes you”.
But things went downhill from there. He indicated he’d have a private chat with Archer because she’d made a “mistake” voting with Anthony Albanese. This was the “wrong decision.”
So we’ve reached the crux of the thing. Dutton believes he has a valid perspective on the problem of child sexual abuse because he’s a former cop. Fair enough. But doesn’t a person who has actually survived child abuse have moral and practical authority as well? Isn’t a survivor entitled to express her view? In what universe is that unreasonable, or (to quote Dutton) “wrong”?
I’ll tell you what universe. In the absolutely arse-about universe.
While serious people were preoccupied with war crimes, less serious people were hunting down alleged thought crimes
Things got worse. Archer was deluged with abuse. Keyboard warriors, high on the mission of letting no good deed go unpunished, came out in force, hissing in the inbox, on social media platforms.
The survivor found herself cast as an apologist for child sexual abusers.
This was not just bad. Disgraceful, more like...
A marginal seat and yet still Bid spoke truth to deranged, demented, deliberately abusive power, but unfortunately if the pond said it would vote for this Bid, likely it would doom her career.
Another non-reptile moment, this one from Meena Kandasamy, writing in the Graudian Arundhati Roy is being hounded by the Indian state. This is a test case for its democracy. The topic at hand was the matter of the legal persecution of Roy in an alleged democracy, done Hindu fundamentalist style ...
...It will certainly embolden the vast troll armies that exist virtually, and their members and supporters who inhabit the streets. This won’t be just a one-off case – they will go after anyone who has made the slightest whimper of displeasure against the regime. I also fear that the ruling party, the BJP, and its affiliated student groups will take it to the next level. The last nine years of the regime has been replete with demands that the work of dissenters be removed from university syllabuses. Educational institutions will become the next contested site for rightwing bullying. Drawing strength from the action against Roy, they might disrupt peaceful meetings. Inspired by this case (and that of opposition politician Rahul Gandhi, who was disqualified from parliament before being reinstated), underlings of the regime would prove their loyalty and quench their thirst for publicity by using the legal machinery to file cases everywhere against those who criticise the ruling party.
So why is the government doing this now?
First, against the broader international backdrop of the intensification of the superpower rivalry between US and China, the Biden administration has made wooing India to its side a key part of its geopolitical strategy. US imperialism needs India as a regional bulwark against China – Modi’s visit to the US in June was pivotal from that perspective. Aware of its indispensability, Modi’s regime knows it can get away with a lot. In assuming that India has rising geopolitical (and to an extent economic) value for the west, the regime feels more confident to scale up its attacks against domestic political opponents without fearing too much backlash. Perhaps it has overplayed its hand.
Second, facing a groundswell of opposition and criticism across the country on many issues, the BJP does not want to leave anything to chance ahead of next year’s general elections. Unaffiliated to any political organisation, unafraid when the riot act is read to her, unflinching in her criticism of the corporate cronyism that underwrites the hate-mongering Hindutva political programme – Roy embodies an opposition to everything the BJP stands for.
So why is the government doing this now?
First, against the broader international backdrop of the intensification of the superpower rivalry between US and China, the Biden administration has made wooing India to its side a key part of its geopolitical strategy. US imperialism needs India as a regional bulwark against China – Modi’s visit to the US in June was pivotal from that perspective. Aware of its indispensability, Modi’s regime knows it can get away with a lot. In assuming that India has rising geopolitical (and to an extent economic) value for the west, the regime feels more confident to scale up its attacks against domestic political opponents without fearing too much backlash. Perhaps it has overplayed its hand.
Second, facing a groundswell of opposition and criticism across the country on many issues, the BJP does not want to leave anything to chance ahead of next year’s general elections. Unaffiliated to any political organisation, unafraid when the riot act is read to her, unflinching in her criticism of the corporate cronyism that underwrites the hate-mongering Hindutva political programme – Roy embodies an opposition to everything the BJP stands for.
And with that noted you could move on to Arundhati Roy in the Graudian back in February of this year, writing Modi’s model is at last revealed for what it is: violent Hindu nationalism underwritten by big business.
And with all that noted, et cum spiritu tuo, Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona nobis pacem, time to get out the cilice, strap it on and endure another round with the reptiles ...
First to what the pond won't be covering, and that's freedumb fighting lizard Oz style ...
Suddenly far right loons in Israel of the Benji kind are the free world. Good old freedumb ...
And here's another coupling the pond will ignore ...
Meanwhile, Josh, the ethnic cleansing begins to pick up speed, visualised by the Graudian this day ...
Only the Graudian could describe that snap this way: Arial view shows destroyed buildings in al-Zahra city south of Gaza City following Israeli bombardment. Photograph: Belal Alsabbagh/AFP/Getty Images
Did they mean Ariel's view?
Meanwhile, here's a few more to add to the list of those who won't be appearing this day ...
Another red card for Dame Slap - but the verbal diarrhoea in the splash should be remembered when the pond turns to the dog botherer below.
As for "Ned", the pond only gave him a yellow card, because who knows how desperate the pond will be for reptile content by tomorrow ... just look at the useless tribe that turned up in the comments section this day ...
Polonius doing his usual ABC bashing has been saved for the Sunday meditation, and out of a deep sense of pity, the pond decided to give the dog botherer a run ...
Uh huh, but why then is the dog botherer still with Sky, why is he still scribbling for the lizard Oz? Is he aware that he's keeping company with the likes of this kind of EXCLUSIVE?
More on that anon, back to the dog botherer failing to understand that it might have something to do with the company he's kept in the past, the company he's still keeping in the present ...
But still the pond wonders why he stays inside the tent, pissing out, when surely what's needed is the dismantling of a machine dedicated to racism and knavish trickery ...
... not that you'd read about them in the lizard Oz ... not that the dog botherer would take the hint ... not while the pond dwells in its very own land of delusion and hope ...
And so to the real problem, the thing that the dog botherer seems incapable of seeing.
Here's how it works. You head off to a bigot in his dotage, and give him the EXCLUSIVE headline treatment, as a way of promoting his EXCLUSIVE contribution to reptile bigotry ...just in case the captive subscribers might miss the offering ... and make sure the dog whistle is there in the headline ...
The pond hasn't taken the bait of heading off to the Inquirer to cop the full dose of bigotry. This EXCLUSIVE will serve the purpose for the moment ... as an example of how the reptiles play the game ...
Throw in a couple of contending snaps ...
... one of the smugly smirking The Price is Wrong, balanced by a snap of a Prof, and that's how you get away with it.
You give the bigot a hearty run, and only at the very end do you suggest that he might be a little off-key ...
And that's how you do it dog botherer. You publish and promote "contentious claims" and give them EXCLUSIVE star billing, and then having given the dog whistle a great work out, you try to give the dog a little minimal instruction on how to behave ...
... but the dog whistle has done its work, and the bigotry has been given an ample airing, and the dog botherer keeps wondering where it all went wrong ... and will keep on going wrong, as he keeps on keeping the wrong company, in there with bigot Blainey and all the rest of the tribe ...while disingenuously scribbling "this rhetoric has always found a welcome home somewhere". Yep, it has dog botherer, and the calls are coming from inside your home ...
Poor Bid might need the pond's Latin mass missal, because prayer might be all that's left ...
And so to wrap up with two cartoonists both having the same idea, and nothing wrong with that ...
Actually the pond's T-shirt doesn't still fit, but that's another story ... might be time to get a new one.
It’s difficult to decide which is more worthy of outrage - a corrupt media outfit cheerfully exploiting the senile burblings of a discredited old historian, or a discredited old historian happily being exploited by a corrupt media organisation andproducing some senile burblings based on a few selected statistics.
ReplyDeleteIt’s now around 40 years since Blainey first made his predictions of the dire impact of Asian immigration on Australian society; it would be interesting to see how they’ve panned out in comparison to reality. Shouldn’t the few remaining whiteys all be pulling rickshaws by now, or some such?
"...this Tassie Bid sounded Christian, not in the onion muncher sense of bigotry and hatred, fear and loathing, but in the sense of putting people above politics".
ReplyDeleteOn that basis, then, none of the Churches have ever been 'Christian' (aka 2nd of the Trinity), have they.
True, but the pond has a soft spot for Bids, what with the pond's Bid a true believer and the patience of a saint living with a wife-beating alcoholic ...
Delete"And here's another coupling the pond will ignore ..." Ah yes but "...the Voice to Parliament could have succeeded had things been done differently." Quite so: if Albanese had only decided for the referendum to be held very soon (a week or two at most) after the declaration and therefore not given time for Advance Australia (the GetUp of the Coalition) to mobilise the haters and bigots and thus wear down the initial positive response.
ReplyDelete"If not now, when ?"
Further confession - which, we are told, is good for the soul (or the version that I recall Brendan Behan wrote about in ‘Borstal Boy’ - which was, of course, banned in Australia)
ReplyDeleteI was looking at the squalid rationalisations accumulating down the ‘Quad Rant’ this morning, when I found a comment which cited our Holey Henry. thus -
‘The contemporary useful idiot, described and skewered with devastating accuracy by Henry Ergas yesterday:
“Woefully ignorant both of international law and of the realities of war, drenched in the moral earnestness that is nothing but moral luxury, those voices are the price we pay for having bred the moral sense out of large sections of an entire generation, much as the wings have been bred off chickens to produce more white meat.’
Which then, apparently, lead into the part you quoted, Dorothy, ‘the religion-hating Greens, who epitomise the wingless generation’s moral confusion, ‘ I assume that in your kindly way, you abridged the Henry’s skewering, but now I see where the ‘wingless’ comes from.
Even if it is true that chickens are being bred to be wingless, it is a dubious metaphor. People who vote Green (in steadily increasing numbers) have been bred to that? Is our Henry venturing into eugenics?
In fact - there is no problem. From time to time the claim circulates around the internet that chooks cannot fly because they are being bred wingless. There is no evidence for this (no doubt Sharri could imagine up some evidence - after all, it IS discussed on the internet). People with knowledge of chooks point out that the jungle fowl from which they came were not given to flying - that being the reason they were readily domesticated. While Aristotle did go on in some detail about chooks, amongst other birds, he did not speculate on breeding them to be wingless.
It seems that the Henry (again) simply took up a convenient myth, and the contributor to ‘Quad Rant’, impressed by Henry’s classical authority, believed it. Fortunately, very few people read the ‘Rant’ in either of its forms, so it does little damage to the national knowledge base.
I could well imagine Henry citing the theory of eugenics. Purely as an example of the freedom to express and discuss a wide variety of views that existed in the Golden Age of liberal discourse, now long-lost in these repressive woke times (etc etc etc), of course….
DeleteOh pish tush, Anony, Holely Henry is a truly typical wingnut: 'Remember everything and understand nothing'. How much effort - and how much shock therapy - do you think it would take to get any of them to publicly grasp their central role as causation agents.
DeleteIn that respect, Henry is about on par with Doggy Bov: pretend to objectivity so long as it's only wingnut objects that are allowed into the discussion.
Yes, Chadders the pond apologises for abridging the hole in the bucket man, but was overwhelmed by a sense of tiredness and talk of pure evil. As soon as you go down that demonic rabbit hole, you can pretty much dehumanise everybody ...
DeleteAs for the chooks, perhaps the way forward for Henry is to apply Aristotle to vegan chicken and consign its creators to hell ...
A new animal-free fat for plant-based meats promises the real taste of chicken. Does it live up to the hype?
Where will it end with these Greenies? First they take away the wings, and then they take away the whole damn bird?
https://www.theguardian.com/food/2023/oct/19/tastilux-animal-free-fat-unveiled-sxsw-sydney-realistic-meat-alternative
PS: In actuality, 'large sections' of every generation of documented human history (all 6 or so thousand years of it out of around 200,000) never had "the moral sense" bred into them in the first place, it not being genetically constructed or inherited.
DeleteA 'moral sense' is entirely the result of training and conditioning, and that requires that the people who own you in your developing years have a 'moral sense' themselves. And most didn't, and don't. Does Henry even have any children to pass his intellectual and moral corruption on to ?
Struth, GB - image growing up as Henry’s nipper. Every minor transgression would be punished (or in Henry’s view, “corrected”) by an hour-long discourse on the views of Enlightenment philosophers on appropriate childhood behaviours…..
DeleteOh my, what a life:
ReplyDeleteThe life and times of my grandfather
https://jabberwocking.com/the-life-and-times-of-my-grandfather/