Mangroves: environmental guardians of our coastline

University of South Australia Media Release They are the salt-tolerant shrubs that thrive…

Tuvalu, Climate Change and the Metaverse

When lost to climatic disaster and environmental turbulence, where does a whole…

Nats Vote No OR When You're Standing At…

It's sort of interesting that just a few days ago we had…

Was Amtrak Joe derailed?

By 2353NM Prior to becoming President, Joe Biden was a US Senator for…

Football Capitulates at Qatar

It did not take much. The initial promises of protest from a…

Thanks To Dan Andrews I Got My First…

Just to be clear here, I didn't get it at the polling…

Democracy Tested

The only defence that we, the people, have against an arrogant leader…

Promises, Promises, Promises

What's a promise or, more specifically, an election promise? Is it a…

«
»
Facebook

An Open Letter to Tony Abbott

Dear Tony Abbott,

I will try to keep this letter brief as I know you have a short attention span and since you’ve never responded to my previous correspondence, I can only guess it was because they were longer than your brain capacity could absorb. The main topic of this letter is to let you know that I think you’re an opportunistic, petty, vindictive creep and that you’re running the country as if you would like to imagine that all Australians are equally as petty and vindictive as you. But we’re not. And you’re not going to win your soon to be announced election because we’re better than that.

Over the last 24 hours, Barack Obama, the greatest President America has ever had and possibly the best leader the world has ever seen, has once again shown what it is to be a visionary, compassionate, highly intelligent, gracious, composed and dignified statesman. He sang Amazing Grace at the funeral of Charleston murder victim Rev. Clementa Pinckney as if it was the most natural thing in the world for him to lead the chorus. He celebrated the decision by the US Supreme Court to recognise the constitutional legality of gay marriage by tweeting with hashtag #LoveWins. Obama is a giant of our world, whether you agree with his politics or not. And next to him, your pettiness, your aggression, your predilection for the path of least residence to the lowest common denominator makes you a meaningless flea. A blip that will be forgotten by history as a negative, sloganeering, fear-inducing, mean spirited low point of Australia’s history.

In the last 24 hours, you and your government have shown your true colours. With three terrorism attacks overseas in France, Kuwait and Tunisia, the pleasure in your eyes, the excitement at having a scare mechanism, the opportunity for you to use these events politically, make me feel ill. You’ve said the death cult is coming for Australians. You’re ramping up the rhetoric on threat levels which have absolutely no grounding in reality. You’re using the deaths of innocent people at the hands of barbaric, violent, evil, yet distant, criminals to further your own political cause. If you can’t see how low it is that you enjoy, and take pleasure out of these opportunities to be a scaremonger, let me tell you, it’s unedifying to the extreme. We know you’re only talking about national security because you’ve comprehensively failed to deliver vision, policies, negotiation, competency and functional government in any policy area so far in your dysfunctional term as Prime Minister. You therefore rely on plane crashes, on sieges carried out by mentally ill lone-wolves, and on the tragedies of people in far-away places to make yourself feel better about yourself. To keep your flag collection multiplying. For opportunistic photo stunts. Petty. Vindictive. Creepy.

And of course, everything you do, everything you have ever done in opposition and seamlessly into government is just about wrecking progressive policies with your negative ‘always on’ election campaign. We hear this morning that you’ve already produced negative attack ads about Bill Shorten. Is Shorten the first thing you think about when you wake up? I bet he is. You are the Prime Minister of arguably the best country in the world and all you care about is bashing your political rivals. Of giving jobs to your boys. You want to unpick every good progressive policy this country has ever delivered and take us back to a yesterday that none of us are interested in revisiting. Wrecking health and education funding. Destroying technological advancement. Wrecking environmental policy. Wrecking whole industries and destroying thousands of jobs. Depressing consumer confidence and in turn destroying economic growth. Wrecking social security. Dog whistling about asylum seekers while they are treated in detention centres no better than captives of the ISIS ‘death cult’. Attacking the union movement. Your nasty little thought bubbles on user-pays public education and wielding your wrecking ball into highly successful industry super funds are just the latest of the daily onslaught of terror you wreck on ordinary Australians. And why do you do it? For the same reason as a dog licks his balls. Because he can.

I dare you to go to an early election Tony Abbott. I dare you to believe that Australia wants to give you another chance to do even more damage to the fabric of our community. While you use national security as your play thing, we can see what you’re trying to do. Your leaked memo made that very clear. And when I compare you, the petty, vindictive, creepy flea, to the likes of Barack Obama, I want to cry with frustration. The sooner you give me and the rest of Australia the chance to vote you out, the better.

Yours sincerely
Victoria Rollison

 

 698 total views,  8 views today

191 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Barry Thompson

    Spot on Victoria.Great article.
    Abbott is a Stoat who makes Billy McMahon look good.

  2. mark delmege

    Victoria you really should get out more – calling Obama the greatest ever is just downright foolish and ignorant.

  3. Bronte ALLAN

    What a nice long “brief” letter about Australia’s most favorite person, Tony Abscess! He has certainly made himself very popular with all the people of Australia–especially all the workers & persons on Welfare etc–NOT!! What an extremely poor excuse for a politician is this inept, lying, right wing, tea party, flat earth, conservative crone!

  4. heatherex

    What a fantastic summary of Abbott. I agree 100% with everything you wrote, and I think you are the only person who has accurately described the man. Everything else I read, either online or newspaper won’t go close to accurately describing such a vindictive man.

    Some hint at his character but most make excuses for him, or actually approve of him. We are stuck with a media that will not be honest with the Australian people.

    Thank you for telling it the way it is. A pleasure to read even though its not going to change anything..

  5. John Harris

    this is how I feel and what I think and I thank you for your temperate words through gritted teeth. I cannot manage keep the ***king F word out anything I write about this bottom-feeding scavenging jackal.

  6. Suan

    A great letter. Tony spreads hate and sooner he has gone the better.

  7. nowun

    Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.

  8. Roswell

    Victoria you really should get out more – calling Obama the greatest ever is just downright foolish and ignorant.

    And I suppose, Mark Delmege, that you’re the type who’d reckon that GWB was the greatest ever. And on the local scene, Tony Abbott, perhaps.

  9. Maureen Walton (@maureen_walton)

    You have expressed it all very well Victoria. Everything that I would love to write about Abott and Co. Who, are preparing for an Election as soon as they feel they have a bit more control over people by Scaring them. As there are many who agree with LNP Abbott in all they do and say Scare Mongering really pays well in Australia. Do not worry about the Lies or who you Tread on just get in and scare the Old and Gulible. Does not matter as you have most of the Media and Rich with their own Agendas behind you Abbotts LNP Shame on you all…

  10. richard grant

    We need to send the PM a copy.

  11. Florence nee Fedup

    Billy McMahon biggest fault was that he was not up to the job., Not evil.

  12. mark delmege

    Roswell… I’m normally temperate in my criticisms of posters in here but Roswell that too if foolish and ignorant or worse

  13. Kaye Lee

    Compare the message…..unity or division, hope or fear?

  14. mark delmege

    I am forever amazed at the simple dialectic of so called progressive people who seem to think they have to chose between the Republicans or Democrats or The Liberals and the Labor Parties here. They CAN all be shite and deserve no support whatsoever. For me in the case of the USofA this should be particularly obvious and any clear headed interested person should know that during Obama’s Presidency he (his country for which he is commander-in-chief ) has destroyed whole countries, whole countries Roswell, created millions of refugees and killed endless numbers of people – much the same as Bush before him – only worse. But these so called progressive can be convinced otherwise by a few well crafted words, humour, a smile or a song – I mean how shallow can you get? It’s not words but actions that matter.

  15. Lynn Meyers

    Well said,he won’t care they,he thinks he is beyond reproach .

  16. Helen

    Brilliant. I so wish he would read this.

  17. roaminruin

    Three cheers Victoria. The reptile will be squashed soon and we can start work on the repairs.

    mark delmege – I think you’ll find Dubya started those wars and left Obama to clean up.

  18. Harquebus

    Victoria.
    As much as I enjoy reading your articles, your comparison of Barrack Obama to Tony Abbott is way off. They are more alike than you think.
    A quick browse through my history and I am not saying that everything here is true or accurate although, most of it probably is, to say that he is the “greatest President America has ever had and possibly the best leader the world has ever seen” is, in my opinion, way off.

    Just a few of many links that I could have posted.
    “Barack Obama has a reputation for being one cool customer. But underneath that aloof exterior lurks a hot temper and foul mouth capable of hurling obscenities, according to someone who knows him very well.”

    Revealed: Obama temper rages at ‘motherbleeper’ confidante

    Obama Administration Has Secured 526 Months Of Prison Time For Whistleblowers

    Fun Fact: It Took Obama Only 7 Minutes To Get On Golf Course After Giving Remarks On Ferguson And Iraq…


    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/16/aclu-files-new-lawsuit-over-obama-administration-drone-kill-list

    Obama Administration Sets New Record for Censoring and Denying Access to Government Documents


    http://sgtreport.com/2015/03/we-are-in-big-trouble-obama-mentally-unfit-for-duty/

    Why Yemen’s Collapse Dooms Obama’s Foreign Policy Legacy


    http://www.infowars.com/jeb-bush-praises-obama-over-nsa-spying/
    http://www.thedailysheeple.com/obama-wants-usa-freedom-act-rammed-through-by-midnight-sunday-or-else_052015
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-03/unprecedented-move-nobel-peace-prize-chairman-demoted-decision-give-obama-2009-award
    http://www.opednews.com/articles/Guiding-Obama-into-Global-by-Ray-McGovern-Merkel_Obama-Effect_Propaganda_Putin-150314-388.html
    By hook or by crook” – Ring any bells?
    http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/by-hook-or-by-crook-determined-obama-vows-to-go-beyond-executive-actions-to-rule_03232015
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-30/creator-infamous-hope-poster-lashes-out-obama-calls-americans-ignorant-and-lazy
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-24/obamatrade-passes-corporations-win-again-and-now-they-gloat
    http://www.infowars.com/obama-endangering-all-life-on-earth/
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/06/25/detroit-police-issue-arrest-warrant-for-artist-behind-obama-hope-poster/

    I tried to keep the list of links short. Including Ukraine, Russia, China and the economy would have tripled its length.
    Cheers.

  19. abbienoiraude

    Thank you Victoria!

    I wish it were so that we Australians ‘all’ want to rid ourselves of this parasite, but having read comments on MSM newspapers I despair that anything but the LNP ideology is cutting through. It is depressing to read and overhear ( here in National Party heartland) how the ‘average’ Australian thinks. They really do follow what the shock jocks gabble. Orwell was NOT a blueprint. His was an warning of what was possible when people get lazy in their thinking.

    ( On Obama. He has done amazingly well in very difficult circumstances re Republican majority. My only and biggest disappointment and criticism is his non damning of Israel and the bombing and burning of babies in Gaza. Shame.)

  20. robertvincin

    The Prime Minister writes to one following decades of dialogue and helping write Green Corp “Direct Action” (Adelaide Review June 95) giving specific instruction to implement. One follows the instructions including making a one on one meeting (to apply the science to reverse deserts grow soil trade CO2e offsets to Global emitting nations and business. (www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbI8YZmBP8g&feature=youtu.be http://robertvincin2020.wix.com/soil ) included in plan as applied in other nations, engage 200,000 Australians (A B$160-320 pa meeting UNFCCC 100 yr rule). Here is the problem (met by many) when trying to set up meeting; COS “I cannot understand the science how can I INSTRUCT him (PM). What ever happen to the days as Branch electoral secretary to PM Howard 95-99 showing him how to win Green groups. The Hon Jon Howard MO AC would hand write replies to the advice. Without prejudice Robert Vincin

  21. Loz

    I just hope the majority of the electorate agree with your above comments. I fear for this country if this appalling government are re-elected.

  22. mark delmege

    Some of these comment reminds me of the ABC promo (still running) on The Secret River mini series when they describe it as story of ‘survival and redemption’. Can you imagine anything more racist following the final episode when Aboriginal people are hunted down and killed en masse?

    Sorry roaminruin Dubya didn’t attack Libya or Syria run a coup Ukraine, in Honduras try two in Venezeula etc. Obama hasn’t cleaned up anything only created more chaos.
    I got out of bed thinking I would be positive today but when I see these sorts of comments I can’t let them go.

    Look I’ll be happy if TABbot is deported for bringing this country into disrepute and I remember how Fraser who I hated at an earlier time warned us of Abbott being a dangerous politician. terra terra terra cut cut cut. Is he neo fascist or neo calvinist?

  23. Harquebus

    I forwarded Colin Price’s “A letter to Steve Ciobo” to the P.M. just yesterday.
    If someone wants to forward this onto him.

    http://www.pm.gov.au/contact-your-pm
    (Down for the moment. Hmmm. I wonder why?)

  24. OzFenric

    I wish it were as simple as this, but it never is. Tony Abbott in my reckoning is not evil – just petty and amoral and self-justified. I have no doubt that he means well and truly believes that his actions are for the betterment of the country. It might seem hard for us to understand, but the conservative mindset is real, and people of Abbott’s ilk truly believe that small government and big business are the best way for a country to progress, and the surest and most efficient path to a happy and healthy populace.

    Abbott is surrounded by a cadre of hungry jackals all of whom are hungry for advancement at his expense. Amoral Tony is happy to forge a middle path through politics guided by populist sentiment, appropriately spun conservative ideology (spoon-fed to him by the IPA and his colleagues) and a political instinct to rabidly attack every single proposal from the other side. On climate change, whilst I believe he is a denier despite his disavowals, he is so uncaring of the policy area that he is happy to base his policies on the interests of his party’s donors and the beliefs and commitments of his hard-right colleagues who can keep him at the helm. On asylum seekers, he has wedged himself by his elevation of the “problem” to something vaguely treasonous. On terrorism and opportunistic national security, he refers to longstanding political tradition and happily accepts the advice of his security apparatuses, seeing it as a win/win. I have no doubt that he is himself terrified of terrorist attacks and believes that the political benefits are secondary to his avowed goal of keeping Australians safe.

    Remove Abbott, and another will take his place. The Coalition has some good and sensible people in it but they’re in the minority. Whilst his government is presiding over unprecedented social retreat, it’s not entirely Abbott’s fault. Playing the man ignores the sad fact that he is the product of his party, not the other way around, and if we vest all our displeasure in him, we’ll be several steps behind should he leave the stage.

  25. Matters Not

    just petty and amoral and self-justified.

    Well we all should be pleased he’s not evil.

  26. miriamenglish

    😀 Don’t hold back, Victoria. Tell us how you really feel. heheheh
    I agree with almost every word you wrote. I wouldn’t characterise Obama as the greatest US President though. Sure, has done good things (such as re-introducing affordable health care), but he has done a lot of bad too. Rushing the secret Trade “Agreements” through is one example, ramping up the drone assassination program is another, lying about and excusing the insane NSA spying program is another.

    Anyway, on almost all that you say about Abbott, I couldn’t agree more. I would be tempted to pepper my text with expletives, so I have to admire your restraint.

    One thing I sadly think you may have wrong is that he won’t be re-elected. The nasty little slime uses fear because it works.

    Unfortunately I think Labor are busy handing him a victory by maddeningly following him ever deeper into the evil side of politics. How could they vote to allow sexual abuse of children in the detention camps? (They should be more accurately called concentration camps!) How could labor abandon these vulnerable people to bullies and prevent reporting on their well-being? How could Labor sell out to the big entertainment industry and hand them the ability to block our websites? How could they let this awful government sabotage the Renewable Energy Target (RET)? On and on it goes… Labor has discarded any chance of distinguishing themselves from the Abbott government, except for using softer voices and at least pretending they care.

    I wish I was wrong, but I think Labor is busy sawing off the bough they’re seated on. They’re playing the hate game too, though in a lower key. They’re repeating Kim Beazely’s big mistake. The people who enthusiastically hate will vote for Abbott, and the ones who worry about all this needless fear and hate will be torn between Greens, Sex Party, progressive independents, and some will stay with Labor, hanging on with white knuckles hoping that Abbott can be defeated and that if he is, that the Shorten government don’t merely implement the same without the yelling, just as the new QLD Labor government has after Newman’s horrid LNP government was booted out.

  27. miriamenglish

    OzFenric, well put. I let myself get a little carried away in my frustration and almost vomit-inducing disgust for Tony Abbott, but you’re right.

    On one point I’d like to disagree though. Sure, Tony Abbott probably really believes he’s right and doesn’t think he’s evil, but his actions speak very loudly.

    I’m sure Hitler thought he was right and being a good and reasonable person. He carried a bible with him everywhere he went and was fond of quoting the scriptures, as he was a deeply Christian person, but his actions were, by any objective viewpoint, deeply evil.

    The same with Al Capone, who in his final day, when he was pinned down under gunfire, wrote a letter describing himself as someone who genuinely believed he was a great benefactor of mankind. His actions spoke of great evil, however. When he demonstrated to a guy how the perfect murder could be committed, in killing the bartender serving them drinks, he explained that he couldn’t be convicted of it because he had no possible motive for killing him. How utterly evil is that?

  28. Blinkyewok

    Great letter Victoria. Perhaps Labor and Greens could send it out with their election material. To many Australians believe Abbott when he yells “DAESH is coming for us. Murdoch/LNP fear campaign ramping up. Some states eg. SA, only have Murdoch newspapers from which many older people get their info.

  29. Sally K

    Victoria I agree with you about Tony Abbott but I agree with Mark Delmege about Obama and our capacity to be deceived if the rhetoric is what we want to hear.

    This is a link to an article by Michael Hudson, a professor of economics at the University of Missouri:

    Obama’s Master Class in Demagogy 101

    It is an analysis of Obama’s speech to Knox College liberal arts student in 2013, where it no doubt went down very well. Hudson shows Obama’s real agenda is more for the benefit of his backers, the Wall St investment banks, at the expense of the average American.

    “The speech’s actual content boils down to: “I’m doing fine and housing prices are recovering. The way to heal the economy faster is to make a Public-Private Partnership (with Wall Street) to finance new infrastructure investment. The government will guarantee a return – and if there’s any loss, we (you taxpayers) will bear it.” His political genius was not to sugar-coat the shady parts of his proposals.”

    Obama’s public speaking skills bear out the quip attributed to George Burns:

    “The secret of life is sincerity and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”

  30. Annie B

    An interesting letter Victoria. …. I doubt anyone could add to your comprehensive view of the current leader of our country. … You certainly have covered all – and it is a very well written letter.
    …….

    Harquebus ……. that link is up and working again – from my computer anyway. … Might depend on the browser you use.
    ……..

    Miriam …. ref. your third paragraph here – about fear.

    ” Fear is the tool used by despots” …. has been restated many times over, in different ways. …. I found the following interesting, especially the last part – and history underscores it :

    ““Within a system which denies the existence of basic human rights, fear tends to be the order of the day. Fear of imprisonment, fear of torture, fear of death, fear of losing friends, family, property or means of livelihood, fear of poverty, fear of isolation, fear of failure. A most insidious form of fear is that which masquerades as common sense or even wisdom, condemning as foolish, reckless, insignificant or futile the small, daily acts of courage which help to preserve man’s self-respect and inherent human dignity. It is not easy for a people conditioned by fear under the iron rule of the principle that might is right to free themselves from the enervating miasma of fear. Yet even under the most crushing state machinery courage rises up again and again, for fear is not the natural state of civilized man.”

    ― Aung San Suu Kyi, Freedom from Fear …. ( winner of 1991 Nobel Prize for Peace ).

    Personally, the last sentence resonates strongly.

  31. Kenneth McGrath

    Brilliant, sums up this mob of neoliberal capitalist thugs to a tea!

  32. Anomander

    Here’s an article from former independent Tony Windsor, with an awesome paragraph that explains Abbott’s approach:

    “The following is a controversial view, but it is one this government has forced me to hold: I believe that any tragedy or terrorist activity in Australia would almost be welcomed because of the political benefits that would flow from it. The continual progression of asylum-seeker and terrorist law is all about where the blame can be laid when that tragedy occurs, rather than engaging with the domestic and international drivers of these issues. This is all very well in the short term, but what Abbott and his conservative colleagues don’t seem to appreciate, or perhaps care about, are the long-term implications.”.

    https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/opinion/topic/2015/06/27/asylum-seeker-policy-dark-spot-australias-history/14353272002050

  33. Ulysses

    You said everything I think, Victoria! Well written!

  34. Kaye Lee

    Annie,

    Aung San Suu Kyi refuses to speak up for the Rohingya.

    By speaking out for the Rohingya, both Myanmar’s ruling, military-dominated Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) and the NLD could risk losing the support of the country’s majority-Buddhist voters, said David Steinberg, Distinguished Professor of Asian Studies Emeritus at Georgetown University.

    “I think she is holding back because anything to do with recognizing the Rohingya, including even the name, is anathema before the election,” Steinberg said, adding, “It is a sorry state of affairs.”

    http://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/silence-05292015152020.html

    The desire to win power turns even the bravest mute.

  35. rabiddingo

    Annie, I enjoyed your post and found a lot of it compelling. Not entirely sure about your characterisation of Obama, but thoroughly comfortable with the depiction of Abbott.
    I don’t believe that he has anything whatsoever to offer Australia, except to amplify the deep-seated racism and Philistinism of our nation. He is, without a doubt, as Keating and Fraser both noted, the most dangerous man in Australia.I’m certain that he jerks off in the shower imagining 12 flags at his “press conferences”.
    His hubris is breath-taking.
    He gives the finger to the law, to propriety, to decency, to everything that vaguely represents morality and virtue.
    His moral compass obviously went missing around the time he quit the seminary because Catholicism didn’t live up to his demands of it. This is the man who has made lying the default position of the LNP. The man who gave a character reference to his pedophile seminarian mate.
    This is the man who boasted to the nation that his daughters were virgins.
    Hello? Sick or depraved or what?
    But, when all is said and done, he is not merely a dog-turd in long grass, but a consummate politician, so long as you prefer your politicians to be feral, without an over-arching morality or a sense of social justice.
    He is the rabid pitbull cross you meet in your nightmares.
    His dog whistling reverberates around the country: it hits the Pavlovian reflex of every flannelette-clad redneck and wife-beater and illiterate Bogan in the nation: the same sort of people who pour scorn on and despise the Aborigines, who loathe gays, who think that live animal export and live blooding of greyhounds is perfectly cool, who think that all artists and poets are “poofters and dunces who don’t love Jesus”.
    Well, I have terminal cancer, and in the grand scheme of things, Abbott is less important to me than an itch in my anus: but he is destroying the country in which my children and grandchildren have to live.
    I only want to live long enough to piss on his grave.
    That’ll do.

  36. brickbob

    Good article Victoria,and so sad but true,Obama makes Abbott look loke Homer Simpson,but not narly as funny.”””””

  37. Harquebus

    Thanks Annie B
    Up and running here as well.
    I hope that some will make use of it.
    Cheers.

  38. Annie B

    Kaye –

    I doubt that Aung San Suu Kyi has changed her ideals. …

    The excerpt I posted, was that written back in the 1990’s when she was a lot younger and way more potent in her attitudes towards fairness and equality for all, in every aspect. She suffered badly for that stand.

    She is 3 years younger than I am now … and frankly I think she may have backed off being an avid advocate for what is correct for all concerned ….

    That does not excuse her, but – – – it IS understandable.

    No-one knows if she is ill, or just aged, or just plain bloody tired. …

    Obviously some ( from the article – I did read that one thoroughly, and another ) feel that she still has political sway – and that she should and must use it. … Well, I would agree with them when it comes to the welfare of the Rohingya Muslims, many of whom have lived there for a very long time, and are being treated like 6th rate people, but — — —

    Perhaps she does not want to incarcerated – yet again – for the remainder of her natural life ?? ( I figure that just might be her right. ?? )

    In that country, that COULD happen. …. The Dalai Lama has bibbed in to the argument, but that man is totally stateless, made so by China, and Tibet ( under Chinese dominance ) – and he drifts around the world, making sensible and sensitive observations, but with no political clout whatsoever – because he no longer, politically, belongs – anywhere !!

    Myanmar ( Burma ) has long been a hotbed of intrigue and hostility – within and without – their history reeks of political brouhaha – which has it’s roots as far back as 1962 ( possibly even further back in terms of setting the agenda for the 1960’s ! ). … The Rohingya Muslims are now stateless – much like the Dalai Lama ?… And they are similar to the refugees that our own gov’mint puts into detention – denied so many human rights.

    “denied the right to have medical treatment, YES –
    denied the right to have movement, YES –
    denied the right to have children, NOT SURE ABOUT THAT –
    denied the right to have education YES
    and [it leads to] ( state-sponsored ) violence against them, ( and burning down their houses ) and pushing them to the camps – in some instances YES – particularly violence against them ” …….

    Not a lot of difference is there, to what this rabid gov’mint are doing or trying to do to refugees.

    But I have digressed.

    So – those that speak and label Aung San Suu Kyi as ‘no longer a human rights activitst’ …. that may be true to some degree – actively by her, that is, BUT it also may be political opportunistic bumff.

    Here is a far more comprehensive survey of the situation : http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33007536 …. Please note particularly ( and onwards ) the sub-heading : ” Mahfuz Anam: Not Bangladesh’s responsibility” and the following sub-heading particularly : “Gwen Robinson: International community must play a ‘delicate game’ ”

    ,,,,

    Sadly Kaye – this reeks of the same kind of ‘activisim’ that our current political monsters-at-the-helm are perpetrating. … Damn the Muslims, incarcerate people in need of refuge and assistance, don’t help anyone who doesn’t measure up ( in terms of wealth ), employ fear to try and control the masses, ignore the domestic side of violence, illegal drug use, needs of health and education, and a myriad of other draconian ‘ideas’ they have put forward.

    The latest INSANE blurb being ” they are coming to get us” ( the abbott said it ) ………. Ye bloody gods – bah-humbug and an enormous phfffftttt … to him / them.

    p.s. – got a little off track there !!! 🙁 …. sorry about that.

  39. chopper

    Spot on Victoria!
    Abbott and his far right wing front bench is the worst thing that ever happened to our country.
    PS Rabiddingo – I would be delighted to act in your stead. Best wishes.

  40. Annie B

    @ rabiddingo …

    I am indeed saddened by the battle you have to endure – with that monster of all monsters – cancer. … But you still have the get-up and go to post – and good onya for that. …. Much kudos and appreciation … and I trust your intent is as strong with the monster within, as your intent is here.

    Appreciate your appreciation, although it was not me who delved into the whys and wherefores of the Obama ongoing debate. …. I dared not !!! … I think that could be attributed to another poster here. … however, I think, bearing in mind Obama is a consummate politician in every respect ( therefore probably not to be trusted ) … he has in fact, done a few good things for that ailing country – and sick that country is. … No matter who is in power over there, they are pushing the proverbial – up hill. !!

    I wish you everything that is best ….

    🙂

  41. nevk21

    Well said mark delmege and Harquebus! This article is fantastic on so many points but absolutely BS on others. This is why it is important to get information from as many diverse sources as possible to get to the truth, Obama (Barry Soetoro) is a sick puppy that has left people dead in cemeteries and in small pieces eaten by animals all over the world. The slick looking, walking, orator of the biggest litany of lies in history is just another puppet of the filthy slimy fat cats!

  42. eli nes

    A lovely sentiment about an amoral bully.
    The description of our buffoon next to obama brought back images of obama and gillard. The rapport was obvious and equality shone through in their smiles and body language.
    ps A good idea rabid, I will freeze a pint and get my children/grandchildren to sprinkle it on his grave.

  43. Annie B

    @ nevk21 …

    Wasn’t going to get into the Obama thing, but think I should now ….

    Please have a look at : http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/studentid.asp … which shows the ‘Barry Soetoro” as crap – which I am sure it is. ….

    And no use slamming Snopes, as they have long been held as being biased – against the Democrats. … Yet they seriously show this nasty little gem as ‘FALSE’.

    Obama, along with our illustrious leader of doom – might well be a ‘puppet of filthy slimy fat cats’ ( to use your words ) … but have to say, aren’t they all to varying degrees ? … Politicians I mean. …

    No doubt you have heard the old saying ” Power is corruptible, and absolute power is absolutely corruptible”

    No truer words uttered – as is shown in our own country, today. …. Corruption ad infinitum.

  44. Harumi

    OMG how ignorant are you about Obama?! Whilst I agree that Abbott is an idiot that we don’t deserve, your glorification of Obama shows you know nothing about his terms in office. Your lack of knowledge discredits your reporting. I am embarrassed for you! Do some research on world matters, if you want people to take you seriously!

  45. Harquebus

    rabiddingo
    Hoping you get your wish mate. I will come and join you. All the best.

    Something I read years ago and could not find the original.
    Jack Ryan, ex husband of Star Trek babe Jerri Ryan, was Barrack Obama’s republican candidate in the 2004 senate election. He had to withdraw after sex scandal allegations setting the stage for Barrack Obama’s subsequent victory and entrance to the U.$. senate. J.R. was having an affair with the Star Trek producer which, prompted the divorce.

    http://hillbuzz.org/question-why-did-jack-ryan-drop-out-of-illinois-senate-race-in-2004-which-paved-the-way-for-obamas-rise-89310
    http://inmycopiousfreetime.blogspot.com.au/2008/12/how-jeri-ryan-made-barack-obama.html
    “And in a very real sense, we can thank the Borg’s “Seven of Nine,” actress Jeri Ryan, as much as anyone else.”
    http://beforeitsnews.com/obama/2014/11/the-borg-and-the-antichrist-2468250.html

    Search criteria: obama “star trek” “jerri ryan”

  46. Harquebus

    Correction: Jack Ryan was Barrack Obama’s republican opponent.

  47. lawrencewinder

    Prime Miniature, Rabid-the-Hun succinctly nailed. What a disgrace this ruling rabble are.
    Well done,VR.

  48. Byron Williams

    agree with everything except Obama being best leader ever, He is up there but for me the best leader ever was GOUGH just look at what he did for the ordinary people of this country, not only visionary but able to get the job done , you say Australia is arguably the best country on earth, well that is only because of Gough Whitlam if it wasn’t for him we would be living in america right now how shit would that be.

  49. rabbitsnthqld

    Thank you Victoria for telling as it is, this bloke and the Lnp party is a bloody disgrace I cringed when I heard him announced that Isis is coming to get us, besides all of the rhetoric and bluster where are the policies of this ” adult government” who announced that they are in charge.

  50. corvus boreus

    There is some validity in the personal catharsis achieved by publicly posting a personally abusive letter, in this case comparing the current PM to both a specimen of Pulex and a canine orally grooming it’s own gonads.
    Other commenters have suggested that Victoria should send her missive off to Abbott’s office. I agree.
    It may give the junior staffer who reads it some light comic relief.

    Meanwhile, in the absence of any effective opposition, I brace myself for another term of parasitic Siphonapterid infestation and more gratuitous ball-licking at the general expense of the nation.

  51. Gangey1959

    ROFL. Way too true.
    Who makes his flags? At least that job is safe.

  52. Phi

    mark delmege

    why is it necessary to insult the writers and commentators? Have you thought of arguing cogently with opinions that differ from yours?

    OzFenric

    What you say makes a lot of sense to me.

  53. Michael Taylor

    Thank you, Phi. We get sick of people coming here for their mere pleasure of attacking the writer instead of the argument. I’m pleased you’ve noticed too.

  54. Don Kenyon

    Right on about Brer Rabbott but very, very naive on Obama,

  55. doubting Thomas

    A wave of nostalgia has swept over me with the recent rants of PM Abbott re the “death cult ” and scary boat people arriving
    to murder us all in our beds!! Shades of dear old ” Pig Iron ” Bob Menzies in the 1950’s and 60’s he certainly put the wind up
    me; as I was only a youth at the time of his dire warnings of red and yellow peril. Asiatic hordes, Domino theories etc.
    Not to mention “dirty Commos ” lurking under our beds…

  56. DaDark

    Great letter Victoria 🙂

  57. Keitha Granville

    Love the piece Victoria.
    I’m teribly afraid though that TA speaks to a huge mob out there in Aus land who think the same. They hear his fearmongering and they are afraid, they feed on his hate speech and they hate, they listen to his lies and they believe him. Those are the ones we have to get through to before the next election. You can never change TA and his cronies, but we HAVE to focus on changing all those who are listneing to him and agreeing. And there are more than we think there should be, because he is VERY good at stirring up the emotions. He learned it well from the Nazi party handbook.

  58. Susan Freeman

    Spot On Victoria!!! totally agree with what you have written! ..I cringe every time “Abbott” appears on television and opens his mouth! I am sick of him and and his team continually blaming others…enough is enough!! just get on with the job and shut up!! …I will certainly not be voting for this lot in the next election!! …. I know with past governments we are not always happy with their views …..but what we have now are the worst lot of Federal politicians in Australia’s history……….I hang my head in Shame

  59. Conrad

    I start off by stating that I loath The Toxic Abbcess – and I sheet home the rise of such a deranged person to that vile John Howard, who ‘cleaned out’ any moderate local Members so that the LNP was ready to be captured by the most deranged and ideological and cruel and selfish Toxic Abbott – truly the most corrupted PM that Australia has had to suffer, who worships the rich, and is prepared to shatter civil society in his war on the poorer and disadvantaged sectors.

  60. Trevr

    Great letter Victoria except for the Obama accolades. Politics is politics no matter the model. The closer you get to the centre of Political Power the greater is the stench. Power is the game and rule books came from fallen trees. The madness in people’s name continues unabated whether in Ozland or otherwise elsewhere.

  61. nevk21

    @ Annie B…

    I think you might find that the Barry Soetoro thing is not “crap” at all as you suggest. As I said in my post it is important to get information from several sources which you may or may not have done but your link proves nothing as there is much information on the net including the following link as an example that would suggest otherwise: The Barry Soetoro stuff starts at the 10 minute mark:

    Interview 975 – Field McConnell Introduces Abel Danger

    And don’t worry about me bagging Snopes and them being biased against the Democrats. Hopefully I never have to visit the sight again and as for the Labor/Liberal, Democrat/Republican hoax….well it is just there to give the illusion that you have choice….another filthy slimy fat cats trick.

  62. Jaq

    Victoria agree on most things but then, I find OzFenic, Harquebus, Annie B, miriamenglish too have very valid points, that I am in agreement with. However, I am most heartened to see one thing…that people are TALKING! Discussing. If there is anything of worth to come out of this shamble of ignorant Bogans now at the helm, it must be the number of people having conversations regarding not only our national politics, but International ones too. I am sure Abbott would be very disgruntled to find that he may have given us the very thing we need to get rid of him- a more aware electorate.
    I am sorry for your illness rabbingo, and I hope sincerely that you get your wish… as for afore mentioned eloquent and enlightened persons … get thee into POLITICS!! We need people like YOU!

  63. mark delmege

    PhiJune 28, 2015 at 11:21 am
    mark delmege

    why is it necessary to insult the writers and commentators? Have you thought of arguing cogently with opinions that differ from yours?

    I thought I did! (argue cogently that is)

    But obviously you have a different opinion and if you can put a contrary cogent argument ….

  64. Harquebus

    Sally K
    Thanks for that link. I finally got around to reading it.

    Conrad
    Your term “Toxic Abbcess” is most apt.

    Cheers.

  65. Annie B

    @nevk21 ….

    Well, I have done the ‘information from several sources’ as you suggested, and boy did that open a can of worms. …. First, I clicked on the link you provided, which eventually played – to and past the 10 minute mark, and the admission by Field McConnell, that he was ‘out to get Barack Obama’. … It is evident that not only is this person an extreme right wing proponent, but also very much a conspiracy theorist. … The Barry Soetoro thing came up, but not as much as I would have thought. …. It was all a bit muddled, including references to McConnells’ sister – not sure how she got into the audio picture he was painting. …. Upon mentioning Serco being “Octopus” I googled that and found that it is a British company, with Australian offices / plants ….

    The link he asked listeners to google, was not available ( but was shown on Google exactly as he had pronounced it ), and the next item on the search page was openable but was labelled the same – plus ‘this site should be closed down’. And it was :

    http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message2589841/pg1

    ( after 15 seconds !! but not before a lot of warnings about the site e.g. “WARNING: Obsessive Compulsive IP resetting with the intention of avoiding bans on this website and harass our users will result in your ISP being contacted and loss of your Internet service for abuse. )” …. goes to http://www.givemegossip.com/

    Well – that’s exactly what happened after 15 seconds. … went to a gossip blog – which contained all kinds of trivia and conspiracy.

    Further on in the audio, this rather befuddled person mentioned the missing MH370 Malaysian airlines flight and what we should search about that – mentioning ( look it up on the link you provided – it is all there, in text ) … Boeing Uninterruptible Autopilot … which was found rather easily, despite his protests that the word ‘uninterruptible’ might not be a real word, and might raise a red flag ?????????

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Uninterruptible_Autopilot

    It was at this point that I stopped – as I knew I would only be lead further into conspiracy theories, and thought – what the hell does it matter what a person calls or called him/herself at any stage in their lives. If they are a genuine citizen of a country ( like me – like you I presume ) …. then it really does not matter.

    ……. continued –

  66. Annie B

    nevk21 – continuing ……

    However, if the person at the head of a country is a dual citizen ( say Kenyan AND U.S. citizenship) then that’s another matter altogether – much the same as here – if the p m is in fact a dual citizen holding both British and Australian nationality, then he should be outed and ousted.

    By the way, both Obama and his wife Michelle, have admitted to their family roots being in Kenya, quite openly, and no one can tell me, IF that presented a problem, the entire worlds’ press wouldn’t have been all over it, like ants on sugar, for a very long time. ….. For gosh sakes.

    I went only one step further. … Visited “Truth or Fiction” website – ( similar thing to Snopes ) …. It also calls all reference to Barry Soetoro as being Obama, as FICTION. … It went on to show the original ‘story’ when it did the rounds of the internet and email. …

    ……….

    For your further information ( and I do hope this is the end of the discussion ) …. I have no ideas or ideals about Barack Obama, one way or the other. … I do believe however, that he is a clever orator, and that he has managed to do a couple of good things for an ailing country, the main one being a form of manageable health care ( to date ). …. Other than that, I am neither for, nor against him … definitely neutral on the subject.

    I would however, seriously suggest you be careful yourself, of the sites you follow – as it is so easy to be sucked in to one side or another in politics. … I do believe, after listening to Field McConnell, that the Soetoro story is indeed ‘crap’ … as so much is, when one lot are trying to bury the opposite side – in politics. ,,,, McConnell did not impress me one bit. … waffled on about 2000 military killed since Obama, but neglected to mention the 4,400+ U.S. military killed during the ‘ Dubya ‘ years, in the Middle East …. hmmm.

    I think we have enough to worry about in our own country, than to be bothered about what Obama is, or is not, or what anyone claims – for or against him.

  67. nevk21

    Annie B

    I really don’t have time to respond to you, I have more important things to do. You obviously didn’t listen to the link I provided and as far as “Conspiracy Theorists” go, if you think conspiracies don’t exist then you are deluded.

  68. Annie B

    nevk21 …

    Not arguing the point with you … however, I DID listen to the link you provided – and explained that in my reply … McConnell was – er – odd to say the least, and I was not impressed. … Very much a right wing, perhaps even as far right as Tea Party, supporter. … not someone I would trust, in any way.

    Nope – not deluded mate – I absolutely KNOW that conspiracy theories most certainly DO exist – they can be found in a million places all over the net, for any number of subjects. …. I said that also in my replies. … I doubt that you read them, actually. … Admittedly, they were long !!

    I do believe this to be the end of the discussion, there is nothing to be gained from it – for either of us, or for other readers …. as far as I am concerned, it certainly is at an end.

  69. nevk21

    Annie B

    It is not the about the Conspiracy Theory but the Conspiracy. Did you know that the average Australian pays 80% of their income in tax!

    ….and you seemed to have missed my point about the left/right political con-job.

    This is a good short video presentation from James Corbett with The Tea Party getting a mention.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eInuuLp1Dw

    And I do know a bit about Obama… time for change he said… he is one sick puppy…450 dead children in Gaza last year from U.S. funded and supplied weapons, it wasn’t a war it is Genocide, lets cut the crap..and now Hillary and Jeb,…how dopey can people get!

  70. Kaye Lee

    “Did you know that the average Australian pays 80% of their income in tax!”

    Ummmmm….. no I didn’t. Care to show how you arrived at that figure?

    On an average wage of $80,000 you pay $17,547 in income tax and $1600 medicare levy leaving a net income of $60,853. Are you suggesting that from this net income that you would pay a further $45,000 in indirect taxes?

    Relative to GDP, Australia has the third lowest level of total taxation on personal income in the OECD. (11.2 per cent of GDP, OECD average 18.4 per cent).

    Australia has the fourth lowest level for goods and services taxes and total indirect taxation in the OECD. Australia’s indirect tax burden is 9.7 per cent of GDP which is significantly lower than the OECD average of 12.9 per cent.

  71. Michael Taylor

    I’m sure Gina wouldn’t be one of them. Or Twiggy. Or Joe for that matter.

  72. diannaart

    Arriving late at this thread, apologies Victoria.

    Comparing Obama and Abbott? No competition; one is all class, the other is an arse.

    PS

    In case someone here is so incredibly thick that they have misconstrued my meaning; Obama will find his rightful place in history for his courage and vision, in spite of the active campaign of hate leveled at him every step of the way. Abbott will slide to his rightful place in the sewer of the self-entitled.

  73. Harquebus

    diannaart
    Obama will find his rightful place in history as the despot and the tyrant that he really is. What you see is ain’t what you are gettin’. See my post above.
    Cheers.

  74. Randroid

    By focusing on insults, rather than engaging with ideas, I think you are doing more or less the same thing Abbott does with his sloganeering. Except he’s PM and you are not, so he’s possibly better at it than you.

    There are people who are rusted on Abbott supporters, or rusted on haters. It’s those of us in the middle, looking desperately at both majors and struggling to discern the lesser evil, who will decide the next election. I’m not as sure as you that the next election is a foregone conclusion.

  75. Stevie Christy

    Well actually I didn’t vote in this PM, nor would I ever give a vote to a right wing liberal, and to send this kind of a letter to him, is exactly the reason he didn’t read the other letters you sent to him, and to honor Obama for allowing same sex marriage, in a country that used to say”” IN GOD WE TRUST””, is like handing Obama a sledge hammer to smash down the sacred walls of all the religions in America, that cherish GOD and all that the universe stands for.( I’m a spiritualist ) and i was married to a American and lived in the USA. I understand that HOMOSEXUALITY has been around for centuries, Is It normal, I Don’t believe so. I firmly am a believer in Adam and Eve. And that is my opinion, and as far as I’m concerned i will stick to it, just as it is the opinion of every GAY that say’s they want to be married to a same sex partner. BUT pls understand this, children are in my eye’s conceived in a marriage between a man and a woman, and I will stick by that as well.. To shove in the face of a innocent child your sexual needs that you call normal. Then understand I firmly believe a child has the right to normality in a world that adults have now decided they have the right to exploit their sexual needs. And legally get away with it. Thankfully, I have about 20 years left of life, if God permits that, and I pray I’m not here to see the Karma. As to Australia, I’m ashamed to even call myself Australian, I have never seen racism at a all time high in my life,( All For Greed) to strip Indigenous ppl of their land, with out giving them royalties, so they can mine the very earth out of it, to terrorize Australians and make them believe in their political scandals, and strip them from being educated,in a country that used to have free education, and by far better health system then America ever had,to which is now been taken from Australians, to strip Australians of free speech, this is barbaric and back in the dark ages. I hope all of you ppl who voted this right royal wing bastard into power, are feeling very guilty by now for what you have done to “”HARD WORKING AUSTRALIANS”” who paid tax, purchased their home’s to give their families security and keep themselves out of poverty. Some of those blue collar workers who purchased their homes, who are now being stripped of aged pensions and medical benefits, while these bastard’s take everything and give it to the wealthy, sell of our country, and call it fair trade.. I CALL IT TREASON, and every right wing politician involved need to be tried and persecuted. Including the ENGLISH Bastard who is not an AUSTRALIAN, who sailed here on a ship as a migrant. YOU represent YOU and your bastards from ENGLAND, Understand this, I DID NOT VOTE FOR YOU. Nor would I ever vote for a RIGHT WING of either Labor or Liberal . I’m the daughter of a Left Wing Unionist. I fight for the blue color worker, the poor, the sick, the disabled, the very ppl you call criminals because you stripped them of employment and sold their jobs overseas.

  76. Mark Needham

    I can not wait untill Bill Shorten becomes PM

  77. miriamenglish

    Stevie, I heartily agree with much of what you said, though I find it hard to believe that someone who believes in the rights of oppressed minorities to be free can voice such a hateful and distorted view of gays. Clearly it comes from the hate propagated by religion, as you keep referring to God and religion throughout that part of your comment. If you believe in a God, then surely you must feel that gay couples are an important part of his plan.

    There is roughly the same fraction of same-sex-attracted members in every intelligent species on the planet — penguins, horses, lions, dolphins, dogs, giraffes, geese, eagles… and humans. It doesn’t matter whether people live in capitalist, social-democrat, communist, dictatorial, or feudal monarchy societies, roughly the same proportion of people are gay. And gay people have historically been some of the greatest and most important contributors to society — Leonardo da Vinci, Michaelangelo, Piotr Tchaikovsky, Alan Turing, and many, many more. You would almost certainly not be typing comments on your computer if not for the efforts of the father of computing Alan Turing. Writers, scientists, musicians, statesmen, business leaders, social leaders, trade union leaders, they all owe much to gay people who do much more to help society than their small numbers would seem to make possible.

    As for the children, it has been demonstrated many times that children of same-sex parents are happier, better adjusted, and perform better at school. How could that be? There seem to be a few factors at play. One is that, like in the case of IVF, the parents feel so grateful for their children that they are very careful to attend to those children’s needs. Another is the fact that the family of a same sex couple doesn’t usually have just two parents. They often include the other man or woman who helped. This makes those families stronger and more supportive of the children. We see this in the wild too. A good example was written about by the famous animal behaviourist Konrad Lorenz half a century ago when he observed a pair of male geese who bonded (geese mate for life) and a female goose who became enamoured with one of the males used to push between the two males during their courtship. When she laid a clutch of eggs the resulting goslings had a much higher than normal survival rate because they were looked after by three adult geese instead of just two. So you see, your concern for the children is misguided.

    Please extend to gay people your desire to defend all people whose freedoms are being denied them. Gay people don’t wish to take anything away from anyone else. They merely wish to have their devotion to the person they love recognised. They want to be able to attend their loved one in hospital, have their devotion recognised in wills and insurance, and so on. It seems very hard-hearted to tell these people that because they love someone they must be hated. And that really comes to the crux of the matter. Shouldn’t marriage be about love, not hate?

    If you think the bible speaks ill of gays, please note that it also celebrates a gay marriage in 1 Samuel 18:1, 3-4, 20:41. If the contradiction with Paul’s rather blatant homophobia strikes you, remember that there are many other contradictions in the bible that don’t disturb its message. (Was Jesus crucified before or after Passover? How many days after the crucifixion did the women visit the tomb? How many women were there? How many angels were in the tomb? And what about the two different contradictory accounts of the genesis story in the first pages of the bible?) In the end you must look at the main message Jesus seemed to give: love your neighbour as yourself. That must extend to gay people. They have no more ability to fall romantically in love with someone of the opposite sex than you have of romancing someone of the same sex. Would a good and loving God really condemn them for something that he built into their very nature, just as it is a part of so many other intelligent creatures on this planet?

  78. Randroid

    While I support same sex marriage, I have to disagree with your interpretation of 1 Samuel, which clearly describes a close friendship.

    You would also need to justify the notion that children of same sex parents do better. I am aware of one Australian study, run by gays, whose method was to ask gays how they thought their children fared. Hardly a bias free methodology. Perhaps you could post details of other studies to educate me.

    To be honest, of the gay couples I have known, only one had a child. The couple were great to him, but he copped a certain amount of grief over his home situation. At one point my (church going) kids were the only ones in the school who went to his place to play. This is incredibly sad, but it happened. I cannot believe it wold be an isolated incident.

    I do agree that people don’t choose to be gay, and we need to rethink current marriage laws. But let’s keep some perspective here, and let’s not pretend the decision has no impact for children, just because we wish it didn’t.

  79. diannaart

    Children tend to be far more adaptable, resilient and tolerant than many adults – homosexuality is only a problem if adults make it one. As with racism, it is adults who teach children to hate.

  80. Stevie Christy

    I DONT HAVE HATE ISSUES, AND I’M SO OVER HEARING THIS BULLSHIT, STOP TURNING THIS AROUND. JUST AS U HAVE THE RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH, SO TO DO I. AND I’M AGAINST SAME SEX MARRIAGE. I’M NOT OF ANY RELIGION, I’M A SPIRITUALIST. RE-SEARCH THAT.

  81. Randroid

    Diannaart, you would need to justify the claim that children are resilient. I’m not sure it’s true. It’s not a reason to avoid marriage reform, but the needs of children need to be considered. Surely we can do both.

  82. Stevie Christy

    and WHILE WE ARE AT IT, just as you all want respect for GAY COUPLES how about a bit of respect for us STRAIGHT people who still believe in traditional marriage. If any one is bigoted it’s the GAY society who want to shove the life style down the throats of straight ppl but won’t respect them or their way of life. And NO I DONT HATE ANY ONE, it’s against my soul to hate. I just have a belief and that’s my belief, just as it is your belief to encourage it.

  83. diannaart

    Randroid

    Children are open to learning; they are not strait jacketed into rigid thinking as are many adults.

    Evolution has ensured that children adapt fast and learn quickly.

    They only have problems with people other adults perceive as different, when those adults make a big deal over those differences. Such as the case of denying marriage equity.

    I don’t need to provide a university study for you when common sense works so well. This is often referred to as ‘thinking things through’.

    😉

  84. corvus boreus

    Stevie Christy,
    When the right for heterosexual couples of appropriate age and mutual consent to openly and legally marry is threatened, I will raise my banner and join you at the barricades. Until then, heterosexuals are enjoying a right that is currently being denied to those of differing orientation.
    Ps, I would recommend losing the CAPSHOUT, it makes a post look like a RANT.

  85. Randroid

    Diannaart, thinking things through indeed. Have you thought through whether all discrimination will end when marriage reform occurs?

  86. miriamenglish

    Randroid, I applaud you. Having your kids remain friends with those kids would have been a great help to them.

    On 1 Samuel, read past the initial part, and on to the part which describes how Jonathan and David react, hugging, kissing and crying, when they have to be apart for a while. There is no possible way to interpret that as just friendship. Even the early part of the quote, with the ritual is very difficult to imagine being mere friendship. But it doesn’t really matter anyway. The important thing is the message Christians take from Jesus, and he doesn’t denounce homosexuality, but in fact implores people not to hate. In the new testament it is Paul who hates gays. It is my firm belief that he should never have been included in the bible. He never met Jesus and his writings are generally those used by anyone who seek to hurt people with the bible. He was misogynist, homophobic, scared of sex, and authoritarian, justifying the use of force by rulers because he said that God put them there. Utterly at odds with a Jesus who liked to spend time talking with women, particularly prostitutes.

    On the research about same-sex parenting and their children, your intuition is correct. The kids are generally the same as or better than hetero families, except in one respect: other children teasing or excluding them. In other words, the only negative impact on the kids is caused by homophobic adults influencing their kids to hate them.

    There have been hundreds of studies on the subject. The most recent, largest studies proved beyond a shadow of doubt that the kids of same-sex parents are, on average, happier, healthier, and scholastically better than their peers. Here are some links:

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-05/children-raised-by-same-sex-couples-healthier-study-finds/5574168
    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/06/29/science-clear-children-raised-same-sex-parents-are-no-disadvantage-0
    http://www.salon.com/2014/07/06/worlds_largest_study_on_same_sex_parents_finds_kids_are_healthier_and_happier_than_peers/
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3136529/No-difference-kids-sex-opposite-sex-parents-study.html
    https://www.kidsmatter.edu.au/health-and-community/enewsletter/better-health-kids-same-sex-parents
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/07/children-of-same-sex-couples-are-happier-and-healthier-than-peers-research-shows/
    https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/same-sex-parented-families-australia/childrens-wellbeing-same-sex-parented-families

  87. miriamenglish

    Please don’t be angry Stevie. My comments here are not intended to wound you. Remember that I agree with everything you said except the homophobic part. I’m just trying to get you to look carefully at what you are saying.

    and WHILE WE ARE AT IT, just as you all want respect for GAY COUPLES how about a bit of respect for us STRAIGHT people who still believe in traditional marriage.

    I am genuinely puzzled by this. How is that you think that making marriage about love instead of hate disrespects straight people?

    If any one is bigoted it’s the GAY society who want to shove the life style down the throats of straight ppl but won’t respect them or their way of life.

    I have actually never met a gay person who wants to shove their lifestyle down anybody’s throat. Conversely, I have met many, many straight people who want to force a straight lifestyle on gay people. I’ve even met straight people who believe gay people deserve to die! All the gay couples that I know have lots of straight friends and have absolutely no problem with people being in straight relationships. But I suspect that you’re not saying what you really mean. When you talk about gay people “shoving their lifestyle down other people’s throats“, what you really mean is that you can’t bear to see gay people in love, holding hands, or (heaven forbid!) kissing. You seem to think having merely the same rights as other people is an assault upon you. Can you see the problem in that? How would it sound if you said the same of interracial marriages? They used to be condemned with exactly the same language that you’re using: It is unnatural; think of the children; they are throwing it in our faces and forcing it down our throats.

    And NO I DONT HATE ANY ONE, it’s against my soul to hate.

    I’m honestly sorry, Stevie, you are good at hiding your feelings from yourself, but they are clearly on display for anyone to see, like the racist who says “I’m not racist, it’s not my fault that people of that race are untrustworthy.” (Whatever that race may be.)

    Please see what I mean here. I am not criticising you. I’m trying to get you to notice the inconsistency in your concern for those mistreated by society, and uncharitable effect of homophobia on a basically good person. You are someone I’d be happy to count as an ally. Please think about what I’ve said.

  88. Randroid

    Miriamenglish, 1Samuel 20:42 makes it clear the relationship under discussion is a friendship, not a marriage.

    I did not say children in same sex partnerships have it as good as or better than children in heterosexual relationships. I thank you for the links to studies. However, a couple are literature review with no detail to check substance and the rest all refer to the same Melbourne study, which is the one I said was flawed and biased due to the sample used. So if there have been hundreds of studies on the subject, I need to see more than one, particularly when I think that one is ideologically driven and worthless.

    Does it really matter whether it is “as good or better”? I just care if it’s good enough. It’s not a competition.

    Jesus stood up for right. He spoke about love but not in a “feel good” sense. (If you want to discuss love in the New Testament, you need to go back to the Greek, which has four distinct words for love). Christ was willing to confront wrong. Matthew 23 for example. On marriage, he spoke of it as being between man and wife (Matthew 19). That’s the only indication I can think of as to what he thought, and it’s not enough to conclude much. In any case, I don’t reject people because they are gay any more than I reject people because they are divorced, had sex before being married, or whatever else Christian teaching in relationships mentions. And I don’t believe the Christian teaching on marriage should have the force of law. We are all just people. We all get to make our choices in a secular society,

  89. Annie B

    @ miriam and randroid –

    fascinating interpretations of Samuel 1 – and the verses / passages shown therein.

    It could be construed as gay love, … but I rather think it is simply ‘love’ of one person for another – as shown in ancient scripture. … ( the word ‘gay’ did not exist then ) … but who is to say NOW – at this time, what that might have meant ? … this is the problem with interpretation, by mere humans, of ancient biblical scriptures. … and will go on being.

    I think it is a well known fact that what we now call ‘gay’ ( same gender attraction and/or love ) has been in culture since time began. … However, I would doubt that it could be called ( back in those brutal days ) as love – most likely lust at best, and more likely purely sexual pleasure – at any cost. ….

  90. Annie B

    @ Stevie Christy ……

    While you say you do not hate, you sound as though you do. You may well be a spiritualist, and I very much respect that ( one of my best friends is a spiritualist ) … however, spiritualism comes from a firm background and grounding in Christian or God principles … it is an extension from that – from what I have been able to see, first hand. … God does come into it in the form of the “infinite intelligence” … and so – I believe you are coming from a decidedly formal religious background, and endeavour. … Yet you claim no religious affiliation – – ” I AM NOT OF ANY RELIGION”

    I also believe you are confusing something here in your mind. …. Sexuality is one thing – with many variances – love of another person is another thing. Sometimes however, the two fuse together, and a coupling of two men or two women, combines to embrace love and sexuality.

    There are so many variances to love – love of a mother or father for a child, of a sibling for a sibling, of a friend for a friend – be it male to female, male to male – whatever. IF it is genuine, and is kind, heartfelt, and wishes only the best for that ‘other’ person, then it can be seen as love…. Very genuine, but sometimes with varying degrees.

    I believe you have become stuck solely on the sexual activity part of same gender coupling. I don’t wish to shock you, but heterosexual partners engage in many many sexual acts, through love or even plain old married lust, identical to those activities practiced by ‘gay’ people. You don’t have to believe me …. just do some medical research on the subject. Don’t take my word for it, or the word of a ‘gay’ person – the medical world knows the facts sooo very well. … and I mean the ‘straight’ medical world.

    Nobody here, has smeared or besmurched the idea of heterosexual marriage.

  91. Annie B

    @ Kaye Lee – … good on you for raising and answering the question – re taxes being 80% of our income, and presenting the facts and figures to totally dispute and put to rest, the rather quaint ideas that nevk21 brought forth. … I’d love to know where he got that from, as well. !!

    ………..

    @ diannaart ( June 29, 2015 at 5:48 pm and 6:26 pm ) — great posts – and well said.

    ………..

    @ miriam (June 29, 2015 at 7:17 pm ) … your interpretation of ( Samual 1 and onwards ) Jonathon & Davids reactions, hugging, kissing and crying, can be seen in an airport at any destination on any day of the week. … It does not necessarily mean the people engaging in overwhelming joy at seeing someone they love, are homosexual. … It also doesn’t mean that they are not. … Most people prudently turn away and allow the people concerned, their private moments, or – – – they revel in the sight of joy and re-connection with a loved one.

    ………….

    @ All

    Peoples’ sexuality is their own business. … – it is a private situation, a deeply personal choice. …. for example a heterosexual couple who engage in one type of sexual activity only ( nothing wrong with that btw ) …. because one of the partners denies all other forms of sexual interaction. …

    Is the person who wants a little ‘spice’ in love making correct ? or is the person who wants only ‘one way’ correct ? …… that answer lies strictly between the persons’ concerned.

    I defy anyone else to answer those questions.

  92. Annie B

    @ Miriam English … ( and I promise this is the last !!! 😉 )

    “I have actually never met a gay person who wants to shove their lifestyle down anybody’s throat.”

    Actually, I have known one homosexual guy who did just that – continually – a good friend too. …. I think he was still in the process of deciding what part of him was homosexual, what part he had to preserve for the sake of his family, what he was willing to show to friends, and whether those ‘friends’ would remain friends, after he admitted his considered preferences, which had changed from hetero to homo sexual. …. So, I do believe he was trying to justify his stand in life, and was having enormous trouble doing so — as so many ‘gay’ people do, and go through.

    Have seen several disasters resulting from the stultification of a persons’ preferred sexual orientation – because of the inacceptance of it, the alienation of them because of that inacceptance, and the resulting depression, insecurity, and sense of isolation that it produced.

    Love can be found just about anywhere, and is not something to be laughed at or sneered at by anyone. ( not that you have done that at all ).

    Genuine love is just that …. and frankly has little to do with sexuality – in the long run.

    Just a thought !! ….

  93. nevk21

    Kaye Lee and Annie B:

    I do understand that you might think 80% tax is not correct but I am inclined to think it is about the mark.

    Personal income tax is about 22% of the average Australian income and indirect taxes are about another 12%….apparently.

    http://press.anu.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/4-2-A-4.pdf

    So we have about 34% so far.

    It is a difficult and complex answer to your concerns and I am short of time but I will provide a few links to help.

    I have no qualm in admitting I got the 80% figure from a recent interview with Larry Hannigan on The Know Your Rights Group Website in episode 32 of the Radio Show:

    Welcome

    I have been researching this for a while and Larry Hannigan is in my opinion a very trustworthy source and has been researching Australian Government, Constitution, Taxation for 35 years.

    First of all you must understand that personal income tax is voluntary and unlawful.

    http://www.investigatemagazine.com/FEB00%20Tax%20NZ.htm

    In Law it is better to refer to what would be a person to a “natural person’ or “living/human being” as a person in law can be a corporation etc. Your Birth Certificate is your parents consent for the fake/corporate you as explained here:

    http://www.yourstrawman.com/Strawman.pdf

    and

    Strawman

    Check your CREDIT CARD I bet it is in “ALL CAPS”.

    Businesses have revenue minus cost and pay tax on the “income”. The “business” does not produce anything only “living beings” do so and therefore it is fair the “business” pays tax. “Living beings” earn for example a PAYG wage and pay tax on their PAYG before any expenses are taken out. This is fraud as this is not income and the ATO cannot define income. The “living being” must pay his mortgage or rent, then you have to feed and clothe yourself then Medicare Levy (and private health Insurance for many) etc so your “income” as usually defined is not income but a payment for your human effort and should not be taxed and is unlawful under The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia.

    This may help to explain:

    http://larryhannigan.com/whypaytax.htm

    and

    http://www.larryhannigan.com/we_have_already_paid_for_our_roads.htm

    As for the 80% tax, I haven’t seen Larry’s figures or even know if he has published them but think about it. The relationship between the Judiciary and the Executive Government IS NOT separate like it should be and there is much evidence of this. There most definitely is a conspiracy of fat cats to keep us in our slavery. Water rates are the classic example where Local Governments which are nothing more than Departments of State Government and unlawful (as opposed to the Corporate illegal) rip us off and is in reality another tax. For example a developer may develop a new estate and the infrastructure e.g. water pipes and associated pumping and health (Chlorine and Fluoride (yes fat cats turned waste into a wallah! Product)) are very expensive but that cost is totally paid for when the home owner purchases his property. The Local Government/Council then charges about $1500 every year for water that falls from the sky and supplied in infrastructure already paid for!

    Then we have vehicle registration, drivers licence, speeding fines (another story), parking infringement (and pay wave now at the meters), stamp duty on vehicle purchases, road and bridge tolls already paid for, it goes on and on. I am sure I have forgotten many.
    But you know where the biggest fraud is, where do the tax dollars go. Much of it goes into “Defence Spending”. The fat cats have throughout history “created enemies” because it allows public spending on a massive scale to end up in fat cats pockets because they own all the military hardware manufacturing facilities. I don’t have time to explain but most terror is false flag State terror. Just listen to Abbotts OMG “Muslim Terrorist” everywhere !What utter bullshit! Howard signed up to Dubyas F35 with a $40 billion initial cost and another $50 billion maintenance over 20 years and I just heard on the radio today that the Queensland Government has not funded a new Women’s Shelter in Brisbane for 27 years and the Salvos etc. are putting these poor souls and kids in motels, it makes my blood boil!
    So as far as the 80% tax goes I would suggest it is close to the mark and is in many ways subjective as Government and most Universities have effectively sold their arse! As for the hate/main/stream media well they are there to propagate the fat cats agenda. The truth is nowhere to be found.

    I used to think of myself as a compassionate person but life has made me cynical. Not of all because there is much beauty in life, but much is deceitful like the “club” “Reverend” Tim Costello from World Vision who was on $251,000 pa about 10 years ago,….and still there raking in the cash while claiming to represent the wretched! just another crony!

    I hope this info will help in understanding that effectively Australia is a Corporation, a business and personal income tax is a fraud. Government lies are endless. Australians are an apathetic bunch but it is time to understand your rights and the fight for them!

  94. miriamenglish

    Randroid, we’ll have to agree to disagree about Jonathan and David in 1 Samuel.

    I did not say children in same sex partnerships have it as good as or better than children in heterosexual relationships.

    No. I was referring to you correctly seeing that the kids from same sex parents would have to contend with prejudice from homophobic people.

    Regarding your doubt that there have been hundreds of studies, one of the reports referred to a study which surveyed the results of 19,000 studies and articles related to same-sex parenting from 1977 to 2013. The survey was conducted by University of Oregon sociology professor Ryan Light and Jimi Adams of the University of Colorado at Denver. (It came to the conclusion that it is overwhelmingly clear same-sex parenting is not harmful.)

    I’m not sure why you think the University of Melbourne study “is ideologically driven and worthless“.

    Does it really matter whether it is “as good or better”? I just care if it’s good enough. It’s not a competition.

    I agree. I wasn’t making it a competition. I was merely quoting the articles I listed.

  95. Randroid

    The University of Melbourne study – read the methodology and consider what biases it might include.

    The Oregon study….sounds more or less like s Google search. Says nothing about the quality of what they looked at.

  96. diannaart

    @Randroid

    What a strange question:

    Have you thought through whether all discrimination will end when marriage reform occurs?

    Giving LGBTI people the same rights to marry as straights is but another small step to a more inclusive society. Unfortunately bigotry and prejudice will still exist.

  97. Randroid

    @diannaart, not strange at all. I want to progress marriage reform but I don’t want children being cannon fodder on the process. If that means affecting the timing or sequence of steps in marriage reform, so be it.

  98. diannaart

    @Randroid

    I do believe we are either talking at cross purposes or worse. However, another attempt to open the doors of perception.

    Children only become cannon fodder when adults of any sexual preference, use them as such. For example, when a couple separate and/or divorce, many children are tossed around like the luggage on a weekend visit – this happens because some people do not deal well with situations in their lives and use children as part of their argument with their former partner.

    What this has to do with marriage equality appears to be a red herring on your part.

    I am curious to understand what you mean by marriage “reform” and “the timing or sequence of steps in marriage reform”.

  99. Annie B

    @Diannaart –

    Your comments above are spot on …. particularly :

    “Children only become cannon fodder when adults of any sexual preference, use them as such.

    @ Randroid –

    please see emphasis ….. ” of any sexual preference” …. that is ANY… meaning both heterosexual couples, as well as homosexual couples. …. I would venture to suggest that more heterosexual couples end up in disputes about their children, than do the ‘gay’ couples.

    Simply because, there are ‘still – and remaining ‘ more heterosexual couples who have children – and then divorce, than do homosexual couples at this point in time. … Stands to reason – % wise, if no other.

    The statistics change slightly from year to year, but it still equates to ( now ) approx. 1 out of every 2.6 marriages end in divorce. …. NOT a happy statistic.

    May I suggest that gay couples, or even a single gay person, who adopt or have a child / children by AI, – have far much more to lose if they break apart, than the heterosexual couple do. …. simply because there remains a homophobic element in society today, and the homosexual couple ( or single ) have more to face in the extremely negative sense, than does a heterosexual couple – in divorce or separation proceedings.

    I can hear it now ( and have heard it said ) … “ah well, best that they face up to their differences before it gets worse ” – words to that effect – ( heterosexual separation and divorce) … and ” what could you expect – they are gay ” .. ( homosexual separation etc. ). …. Yes ?

  100. Annie B

    @ nevk21 …

    First, I acknowledge your effort and endeavour in your post ( June 30, 2015 at 2:53 am ).

    I followed the links you provided, and they opened up a hornets nest to something bordering on a resolve to anarchy – a small number who want to totally buck the system, but it was there … ( mainly American – funny that !!! )

    We have had a system which we ( to date ) have democratically voted to preserve. This ( whether we like it or not ) involves the paying of taxes, from out of our wages. …. And yes, governments over many decades have devised ways and means of taxing ( or charging ) us further … ( you have listed some of the extra costs associated with home buying, owning a car, stamp duty etc. ) …. agreed, and while we might not like it, we do it. …. Whether it impinges on our rights or not, is another matter entirely.

    Because …………

    We do NOT have a right to live anywhere, whatsoever, for free – on a ‘free’ ride, which many of the links you provided ( and the links from thereon ) have hoped to be a pursuit worthy of consideration – and action.

    There is no ‘free lunch’ and there never will be. … If you think this is a ( particular ) governments’ fault – then so be it, but …. it can be traced back many many decades, through many many governments – ( in our country – both Liberal and Labor ).

    What our credit cards being printed in all capital letters has to do with anything, is quite beyond me. Thousands of credit cards are made each day ( to replace stolen or lost, or for new customers ) … and they have templates that are set … it has nothing whatsoever to do with corporate shenanigans, or business. … It is a process of production of cards. Nothing more, nothing less.

    If you want to question however, what happens AFTER a request is put in by a ‘free thinking person’ for a credit card, then by all means do so – it is only after a credit account is opened, that we find the extra money making spins by credit card companies, e.g. yearly account keeping fees, exhorbitant rates of interest, late payment fees et al.

    But we – as a people – make the decisions ourselves to take up ( or not ) a credit card. …. so that comment of yours, ” credit cards printed – ALL CAPS” has to remain in the bullshit basket.

    We retain ‘freedom of choice’….

    If you truly advocate that we cease paying tax – as construed by ANY government – ( and according to the links provided ) … then you advocate we go down the exact same path as Greece finds itself in at present.

    And I seriously don’t think you would want THAT. …. Beyond this, I cannot and will not say any further.

  101. Randroid

    Annie b, divorce was not what I was talking about.

  102. Annie B

    @ Randroid ….

    OK … but. …. “Children being cannon fodder” is often a result of divorce … so I took it to mean just that – – Divorce. …

    What is ‘marriage reform’ in your opinion … and has it only to do with the acceptance of ‘gay’ marriage being legal and equal ? … ( I do wish we could think of another word, other than ‘gay’ – the word is gratuitous ).

    Children are also ‘cannon fodder’ in a marriage that is rife with argument and violence, and where the ‘ partners in crime ‘, remain together ( for heaven knows what myriad of reasons ).

    However, point taken. …. and I agree – we all get to make our choices in secular society.

  103. nevk21

    @Annie B

    Annie B you obviously have one of the worst cases of “Stockholm Syndrome” I have seen!

    The truth of what amounts to subservience of a criminal gang is not “bucking the system”, you are being ripped off big time and also it is unlawful and it would appear you don’t understand that and more so don’t care.

    As for “mainly American”, what BS, the only thing American was one researcher Eddie Kahn who was assisting the legal case in New Zealand and Australia. All the links were Australian related.

    Do you really understand the true meaning of Anarchy?…no big Government.

    Paying taxes is one thing but paying them twice and three times is another matter which was all explained in the links which it seems obvious you didn’t read and or don’t understand.

    This “free ride” and “free lunch” you refer to is just delusional. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Corporate Australian Government is a parallel Government to the original and is unlawful and it has devised ways that steal your money and keep you under control. Do you know what Government means. Govern is control, ment is mind, Latin if I remember correctly, so control your mind, look it up or more importantly think about it. If you can’t see the politicians manipulating and lying to manipulate the public opinion there is no hope for you.

    AS for the “All CAPS” being bullshit well as I said you obviously didn’t read the links provided or more likely looked at them but it was all too much to understand. The “Strawman” is no secret if you understand what your birth certificate really is, it is a monetary note that is trade under the Universal Commercial Code the UCC. This is all verifiable information. The article I provided about this is a 40 something page document and very comprehensive, if you don’t understand it or care, I cannot help you, I have tried.

    As for “freedom of choice” Government is in many ways like marrying someone you love and then finding out they are an adulterating lying piece of garbage because they pulled the wool over your eyes. As I said in a previous post the Labor/Liberal, Democrat /Republican thing is a fat cat trick to make you think you have choice, you don’t, these pricks own you!

    As for ceasing paying tax and ending up like Greece, it is not about ceasing paying tax and I never said that, it is about a fair and just tax system and as for Greece what the mainstream media is telling you is absolute bullshit. Yes they had structural problems but the European Central bank is the culprit in this (just google search Ireland and the European Central Bank and blow your mind and learn something) but that is another story.

    I only want to inform and educate, this stuff is not new but it is kept very quiet, the slimy fat cats don’t want you to know about it.
    If you want to understand what is happening in a funny but informative way go You Tube and watch some of comedian and social commentator George Carlin’s stuff.

    If you desire go back to the links, particularly the “Strawman” and read them more carefully and hopefully you can understand what these fat cats are up to. If not I will have to condemn you to the willfully ignorant basket!

  104. diannaart

    Annie B

    This thread’s Patience of a Saint Award goes to Annie B, for her generosity in detailed explanation – those of us who are running on empty really appreciate your facilitation.

    😀

    ——————————————————

    @Randroid

    Are you able to reply to my earlier questions?:

    I am curious to understand what you mean by marriage “reform” and “the timing or sequence of steps in marriage reform”.

    My reason for asking is that I don’t see opening the concept of marriage to all people, irrespective of their sexual orientation as requiring “reform” so much as returning the Marriage Act to its wording before John Howard decided to redefine marriage to male and female heterosexual adults only. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/27/1085461876842.html

    Apart from removing Howard’s amendment, what are the “sequence of steps in marriage reform”?

    I understand if you cannot reply – I do not have unlimited time either, however, I would appreciate any clarification you may bring to your claims.

    Thank you

  105. Annie B

    @ diannaart ….

    Thank you for your kind words. …. …very much appreciated. 🙂

    I too, would appreciate randroids’ explanation of what ‘marriage reform’ means – to him / her.

    The link you provided was more than interesting. … It showed John Howard, tripping himself up in no uncertain terms, by denouncing on one hand, gay marriage out of sight – but allowing superannuation death benefits, to “interdependency relationships” — including those of ” members of the same sex relationships”.

    Which I guess comes down to just a matter of ‘money’ … nothing to do with loving and honest relationships.

    But then – what would one expect … and nothing much has changed. !!

  106. Annie B

    @ nevk21

    You did provide a giggle for me – in mentioning the ‘Stockholm Syndrome’. …. Last time I checked, I was not being held hostage by anyone – and I do not empathise with brutes; this current government; big business who rip off unsuspecting clients; or ‘slimy fat cats’ as you so succinctly (?) describe a lot of what we deal with today, unless we are careful and prudent. ….

    There are also individuals ( singular or pairs perhaps ) out there mate, who are trying to be ‘slimy fat cats’ – e.g. ripping off pensioners with their signatures on the dotted line, for structural work that is subsequently ultra inferior or not even completed. Check the facts. … I know personally of two such cases. … Yes only two, but that’s two too many.

    On one of your posts ( June 30, 2015 at 2:53 am ) you stated “I used to think of myself as a compassionate person but life has made me cynical.” …. well, I could not argue with that. Cynicism abounds.

    “Do you really understand the true meaning of Anarchy? …no big Government.” …. I suspect I understand the true meaning of anarchy – maybe more than you do ?

    It is ” a state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority or other controlling systems.” which translates in the widest terms as riots, civil disobedience, punishable offences, rebellion, mutiny, revolution, turmoil et al. … It also means the “absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.” … the cart to which you are hitching your poor overladen donkey. … there IS no ‘absence of government’ at this time, in our country, but I am still free and feel free enough to make decisions for myself – – – so far. !! … Perhaps you feel already, that you are not ? … Sadly, that is your problem and yours alone. … While what we’ve got is not good enough or equitable enough, we must stand united and question it without fear… continually ( which is exactly what so many people on this site, do ).

    As for your ‘strawman’ ? .. ” it’s the name of a logical fallacy,
    which means that if you carefully dissect the argument or statement,
    it doesn’t make sense. … Debaters invoke a straw man when they put
    forth an argument — usually something extreme or easy to argue
    against — that they know their opponent doesn’t support.” ….

    There are a lot of ‘strawmen’ out there on the Internet, nevk21, and you seem to have fallen prey to them.

    One ( American ) strawman site I found – simply by googling at your suggestion – was this : https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

    ” By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely
    fabricating someone’s argument, it’s much easier to present
    your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty
    serves to undermine honest, rational debate.”

    Is that what you mean ?

    Finally – and I mean, FINALLY …. in your latest post you mention :

    “As for ceasing paying tax and ending up like Greece, it is not about ceasing paying tax and I never said that, it is about a fair and just tax system and as for Greece what the mainstream media is telling you is absolute bullshit.” …. SO you do agree that paying taxes is ok – as long as it is fair and just ? …. Well, there’s a bit of a turnaround if ever I saw one. … However, one for your duck ‘ouse – not sure that many taxes anyone incurs, is always seen as ‘fair and just’. … But them’s the breaks, kiddo, until a better government comes into being – perhaps ?.

    Btw – ‘ment’ does NOT mean ‘mind’ – it is a suffix ( if you understand English ) and is quite simply ” forming nouns expressing the means or result of an action.” … e.g. argument ( topical ! ) … to argue ( disagree ) argument – a state that comes from disagreement. Compre ?

    There is absolutely no more to say on the subject – you have your opinions, I have mine. … and never the twain shall meet.

    To each his own – and all that. !! … Goodbye and good luck to ya.

  107. Randroid

    Hi AnnieB……sorry about the delay. Work and such….

    We are moving from a model where the law mandates one family structure, to a model where we recognise the choices of individuals. It was decades ago we made divorce easy, and now gay marriage? Why stop there? So for example, I can make an argument against marriage to a minor (their lack of ability to consent) but I can’t think of a reason not to endorse group marriage. From a legal point of view, I think we need laws about ownership of property and the rights/responsibilities toward children. I can;t thin of much else.

    From a moral and religious point of view, my gold standard remains a lifetime commitment to a heterosexual marriage. But that’s my personal choice. I think the law should allow it, but not mandate it.

    Re your comments on Howard, I think he clarified what was at that point the intent of the law. How many gay marriages happened before he made that change?

  108. Annie B

    @ Randroid …

    I do know what you are saying – … “opening the flood gates ? “. … where does it stop ?

    I guess it stops where individuals ( and the populace in general ) see it as needing to be stopped ? … ( sorry, that’s the only way I can put it ). … e.g. child brides – NOT acceptable, but was acceptable so many centuries back – even in biblical times and onwards. … Personally I think that is abhorrent – but it is still practiced in parts of todays’ global society. …

    While I respect your point of view – ( heterosexual marriage being the only legitimate form ) – it still remains, that homosexual couples are usually ( probably 99.999% ) adults, and of consenting age. … in my mind, that makes it reasonable – particularly as there are so many persons now, of that specific persuasion.

    As for group marriage, [ polygamy ] the only ones’ I know of are the Mormon community, most of whom do not now indulge in bigamous unions, but still a few do ( as long as they can get away with it !! ). … There was a group in NSW – ‘owned and operated’ by a monster of a bloke, who had numerous wives, and made a huge living from the government of the day, because of the number of children he sired ( I wouldn’t use the word ‘fathered’ ). Dunno if he is still in existence ?? … He was shamelessly ripping off the taxpayer to cater to his over-sexed desires, and blatant bastardry of religious tenets. ( cannot now remember the years he was active in his chosen pursuits !! )

    How many gay marriages happened in Howards’ day ? … I would suggest maybe none, or perhaps a few at most, world wide, as it is only a very recent situation, that so many have come ‘out of the closet’ – to coin a phrase. … I still think Howard played both sides of the coin at the time – perhaps he was wiser than we give him credit for – ( knew more than he was letting on ) … and could see that it might become an issue in the future. ….. which it has.

    Guess one could open another discussion ……. what is love ? …. ( think I might leave that one for the time being ).

  109. Randroid

    AnnieB, You have remembered that I am pro marriage reform right?

    What is wrong with opening the flood gates? Seriously? We agree that the law should not enforce marriage as being a lifelong union between a man and a woman. So what should it allow and what should it forbid? And why?

  110. Annie B

    @ Randroid … ( Good, but very difficult questions you have posed !! )

    I was initially replying in reference to your statement ” From a moral and religious point of view, my gold standard remains a lifetime commitment to a heterosexual marriage. But that’s my personal choice.” ….

    My apologies if I misread that statement. …. I now read it as your preference ( as is mine ) to a commitment to ( your own ) heterosexual marriage. … and yes, it is your / my / our / others – choice.

    Opening the flood gates ? …. well, – there is a limit. …. but that is my own personal feeling. … As mentioned, I find the idea of child brides, abhorrent – as it is based on the puberty of a young girl, when she is able to bear children – ( as long as she has had her first several periods,) and does not take into account her mental and indeed physical immaturity at that time of her life. … That’s where the flood gates get closed as far as I am concerned.

    Why ? …. taking only this example – – – because the abuse of a child in any way, is totally not acceptable. …. And the so-called ‘marriages’ to a ‘child’ who happens to be of child-bearing capability is still an abuse in every way imaginable. …. but not to some of various religious affiliations. …. We cannot alter those beliefs – but we could not allow it to be acceptable in our own country as a normal occurrence. … Has nothing to do with religion here, or whether we are largely ( or not ) a Christian society. …. It has everything to do with respecting a childs’ right to be a child, until he or she reaches the age of ( alleged ) adult-hood – that being – by law, 18 years of age.

    Child abuse is out – absolutely OUT.

    Polygamy ? …. ok … if that is what adults want to do, as long as they don’t make a meal-ticket of it and receive through devious means, massive sums of money that comes out of the tax-payers pocket. … It would be up to a government to be on top of that. … Can’t stop some people’s strange beliefs !!!

    Divorce ? … it was made easier by the setting up of the Family Court – across the country. …. I went through a divorce when Family Court had not even been thought of – and it was cruel, exacting, and beyond comprehension as to how it affected both parties, and our children. … Perhaps if it had remained the way it was, more people would be less inclined to divorce, although in todays’ world, I don’t how that would work out … there is so much undue pressure applied in families these days, not to mention the incidence of domestic violence. …. btw, my ex-husband and I get along very well, these days – we have mellowed !!

    What should it allow ? …. Sorry, I have no answer to that, as no matter what I – or anyone said, the matter resides with the government ( of the day ) …. IF it is their will to broach the subject at all. … I doubt many governments would introduce changes as mandatory – but that’s beside the point, as they can apparently change the law, as they see fit. ??

    Can’t answer any more than that ……..

  111. nevk21

    @ Annie B

    You seem fairly keen to have the last word Annie B with your ” finally” and “goodbye” but I have to respond to the false claims and lack of understanding in your reply.

    In regard to the meaning of Anarchy, well you can google and cut paste your selected bits all you like but this is it:

    http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/anarchy

    As for the origins of the word Government I stand by what I said: Your attempted English lesson is bullshit.

    You just don’t understand what I have put to you, it is a simple as that.

    Your Strawman explanation is nothing more than your google search went up the wrong drain pipe and is absolutely NOTHING to do with what I referred to and you just cannot see that.

    As for my apparent turnaround on tax, what utter bullshit. I never advocated not paying any tax but double and triple dipping is the norm in our current crony system of Government. The ATO is a corporation.

    As for your smartarse remarks and making assumptions about me it says more about you than me.

    In regard to decision making well you seem to have made your decision to be willfully ignorant.

    I have been to the Know Your Rights Group seminars and researched the history of Government and the Constitution in this country and I also gave you the link to Larry Hannigan’s website who has researched for 35 years. You obviously cannot grasp the 40 page Strawman PDF doc either or you wouldn’t have ended up in that drain pipe you are in. Smartarse remarks deserve another.

    There is little argument about the facts in regard to the Corporate Australia and the associated rip-off. The facts are there it just depends on whether you are interested and/or can understand it.

    I have many friends who are beginning to see what has been done to this country. In the last few years we have anti-terror laws, metadata retention laws, soon citizenship withdrawal laws and border force laws that will put a worker in a detention centre in jail for up to two years if the speak to the public or media about abuse in the detention centres. There is a clause in the anti-terror laws for public subversion. What could that mean, anything! These laws are aimed at the people of Australia but that is another matter.

    And then there is the Trans Pacific Partnership hell hole we are about to descend into, that is another story also.

    If you are happy to be ripped off and have Australia turned into nothing more than a business, that is your problem and if you want to stay ignorant of these facts Annie B, go ahead, but you can’t say you weren’t told!

  112. Annie B

    You … nevk21 – are nothing but a bully …. you obviously like ‘talking down to others on an unprecedented scale’ … and I for one ( yes – having the ‘last word’ here for sure ) will not tolerate your damned insolence, rudeness, and contempt.

    Your comment ” In the last few years we have anti-terror laws, metadata retention laws, soon citizenship withdrawal laws and border force laws that will put a worker in a detention centre in jail for up to two years if the speak to the public or media about abuse in the detention centres. There is a clause in the anti-terror laws for public subversion. “

    Gee whiz – really ? …. Ya don’t say ? …

    ( And hey, just of yesterday, we have the new Australian Border FORCE … yep – know all that crap. … the TPP has been mentioned as well.on the AIM !! ?? ). …

    Go to any or many of the articles written here, and the thousands of posted comments attached thereto, and you will see that these subjects have been debated on a more than regular basis – but you come barrelling in as though it is a whole new ball game.

    Get YOUR facts straight mate. …

    As for the Cambridge version of anarchy … I have to laugh – the old Oxford vs. Cambridge school of learnin’ …. the Oxford version is er – slightly different. But then, everything is in the eye of the beholder, and similar words can present a different spin.

    Can’t say I wasn’t told ? ( as per your very last statement ) …. just who do you think you ARE ? .. There is no debate here – it could descend into an all out slanging match, if it hasn’t already … and I will have no further part in it …

    Go for ALL the last words you want – I am utterly finished with you and your diatribe.

  113. nevk21

    @ Annie B

    Bully, heh….

    You just don’t like fact that you think you can be a smartarse and get away with it. You started the slimy remarks and are continuing them and now you are crying wolf.

    Remember this you posted Annie B:

    It is ” a state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority or other controlling systems.” which translates in the widest terms as riots, civil disobedience, punishable offences, rebellion, mutiny, revolution, turmoil et al. … It also means the “absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.” … the cart to which you are hitching your poor overladen donkey. … there IS no ‘absence of government’ at this time, in our country, but I am still free and feel free enough to make decisions for myself – – – so far. !! … Perhaps you feel already, that you are not ? … Sadly, that is your problem and yours alone. … While what we’ve got is not good enough or equitable enough, we must stand united and question it without fear… continually ( which is exactly what so many people on this site, do ).

    Cut and paste followed by slime. Well done Annie B.

    You bloody hypocrite!

    Are you having the last word?

    All my comments were relevant and factual and if you don’t like it, bad luck.

    I gave you a comprehensive explanation of “The Strawman” and what do you do, instead of reading it you go off and try to discredit it to because your ego says so.

    As for barreling through well I think you just don’t like your slime being thrown back at you!

    As for the Oxford/Cambridge thing you have some serious anal retention happening, baby!

    You know the mate/baby thing.

    Yes, who do you think you are?

    If you can’t handle your slime returning to you, that is not my problem.

  114. diannaart

    @ Randroid

    AnnieB, You have remembered that I am pro marriage reform right?

    I do too and am still waiting on a succinct definition on what you mean by marriage reform. All I have been able to strain from your words is that you are pro-heterosexual marriage – which is fine, I don’t think this form of marriage is about to be banned any time soon.

    You are also against child marriage – no argument from me there either, this ‘union’ being nothing more than abuse of children.

    Polygamy? Well if the parties are all well informed, consenting adults, it is not for me to stop them – no one is forcing you into such a menage are they?

    Divorce? You apparently oppose divorce – well that is your choice, however divorce has literally saved the lives of many as no-fault divorce enabled me to escape a tyrannical relationship.

    Where were we? Marriage reform – which is what exactly? Allowing adults of any sexual orientation to marry. You, oppose this right? You deny the right to other people that you claim for yourself, to marry a person of your choice, to other adults.

    Because you don’t approve of what they do in the bedroom? How is this “reform”?

  115. miriamenglish

    nevk21, sorry to have to tell you this, but Annie was right on all counts.

    The “ment” in “government” has nothing to do with mind, but is merely a suffix denoting a thing rather than an action or an adjective (that is, government vs governing vs governor).

    Anarchy has more than one meaning.

    The renowned philosopher, logician, and pacifist Bertrand Russell (one of my personal heroes) was a great proponent of anarchy, but the idea stretches back to Ancient Greece. There has been a dazzling array of different kinds of anarchism, each with its own take on what kind of organisation is allowable. The libertarians are merely the latest to promote another variant of anarchism.

    The original meaning of simply being without leaders became most corrupted during the late 1800s and early 1900s when some anarchist individuals (e.g. Johann Most and later, Luigi Galleani) gave the anarchy a bad name by advocating assassinations and bombings. Unfortunately those violent anarchists were so successful at publicising themselves by their deliberately violent propaganda campaign that these days what most people think of when anarchy is mentioned is some kind of degeneration into violent and chaotic anti-social mob.

    I’ve always been partial to the idea of anarchy, but recently I’ve begun to wonder if part of the reason why today is the most peaceful, least violent time in history might be because the rule of law through large states make violence largely a loser’s game. Stephen Pinker makes this point in his talk The Myth of Violence and in his book The Angels of Our Better Nature.

  116. ozfenric

    Okay Nev. I have read your 40-page diatribe about the “Straw Man” (which, by the way, is not an easy task as reading polemic is always tiring) and have a few clarifications that need making. 1. This document appears to refer mostly to British and US law, not Australian. I can’t find any reference in it to Australia. The circumstances of your birth, citizenship, birth certificate, legal requirements of ownership and regulation and tax liability are entirely different to the circumstances of a US citizen or a British citizen. 2. I have come across the “Paying taxes is optional” trope before. Fortunately this is very easy to disprove. See, for example, http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/JustNoLaw.htm. According to US law, US citizens are legally required to pay tax. 3. The ATO is a corporation – so? It is a Statutory Agency. It is fully owned by the government of Australia. There are lots of agencies that have corporate identities, but this does not stop them being arms of the government and legally entitled (and, actually, mandated) to do what they do. 4. What is this nonsense about your name not being accurate on your birth certificate? It appears to be the core assertion of the document, that you are not you: that you, John Smith, are not the JOHN SMITH on your birth certificate and drivers’ license. This is completely unsupported. You can claim that your drivers’ license does not apply to you all you like, but then you must stay off the roads.

    In long and short, we all opt in to our government and our citizenship. That’s what government is about: it’s people deciding that we will work better if we work together. It’s us deciding in our strength to help the weak. Even if there was a legal possibility to opt out of my taxes, I wouldn’t take it because I choose to allow my taxes to be used for the betterment of society. (And I may feel righteously aggrieved when they’re used for unethical purposes such as paying off people smugglers, but that’s a whole other story). Even if there was a legal possibility to opt out of my taxes, all it would take would be one test case in the courts and the government would be jumping over itself to legislate that loophole away. The fact that it hasn’t been done would indicate to me that there’s no actual likelihood of success, otherwise someone like yourself would have already challenged it.

    I’m not going to change your mind – you’re obviously set on it. But you’re throwing red herrings into this discussion which should really stay focused on the topic at hand.

  117. nevk21

    @ Ozfenric

    Maybe diatribe can be a mutual thing, do you know what I mean?

    The Strawman is the same in Australia as Britain. If you back to my links I supplied for The Know Your Rights Group in Australia you will see that.

    As for tax is optional “trope”. Firstly get your facts straight, I referred to personal tax and yes it is true here and in the United States, Aaron Russo did a 90 minute documentary Freedom to Fascism about the Federal Reserve and that personal tax is optional here:

    As for your birth certificate I have supplied the links and stand by what I said.

    Go back to Larry Hannigan’s links (if you want), there is many sources of info but he packs it all into one website.

    As for someone challenging, people get out of paying speeding fines for example all the time on constitutional grounds and there is a class action in Victoria at the moment challenging the authority of Local Government because they are an unlawful entity and are nothing more than a Department of State Government that has got out of control. It is just the media keeps it quiet and it is not well known.

    As I explained in my post I never said that you should not pay tax but Government is double and triple dipping and ripping us off.

    There is no red herrings here it is all factual.

    I have better things to do and I really don’t care if you think it as all BS because I know better.

  118. Annie B

    Miriam ….

    I am currently reading “The Angels of our Better Nature” … I pick it up and put it down in between reading novels or autobiographies – ( when I get time !! ). It is a quite fascinating, and very well written book.

    Anarchy which is also revolution and the reasons behind it, is one interesting study. …. So often produced by first a softening of people – by fear, by constant authoritarian speeches from leaders ( as opposed to truthful advice ), threat by leaders of ” what will have to happen if, if, if “, the introduction of new, harsher and more stultifying laws, promotion of anxiety and disquiet in the populace …

    Just taking another good look at our current incumbents, tells the story. ….

    I hope reason can win out via the polling booths, without Aussies having to get into complete rebellion. …. ( ” Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities … Voltaire” ). I hope Voltaire was wrong. !! 😉

    But, as you said, anarchy takes many forms. The popularity of commune-ism in the 1970’s … was an attempt at quiet mutiny, further than just social experiment – with an ideal of equality for all. …. …. [ the families of those who entered communes must’ve had conniptions about their beloved offspring doing such things ], but the ideals and ideas did not work – not in the long run. … They found there was in fact no such thing as true equality.

    You write short stories and they are great to read, having read quite a few so far. …. so I guess you might like to have a chuckle at this little gem I found today … it is fun to read, but makes the points.

    COMMUNE-ISM

  119. nevk21

    @miriamenglish

    As for you and Annie B being right there IS obviously people who disagree with you.

  120. Randroid

    @diamnaart this blog is proving way too time consuming. I expect this will be my last post.

    Legally, I think there should be as few restrictions as possible. We have a liberal divorce regime, we will soon ( I think ) allow same sex unions, and I see no reason to insist for example that a marriage be two people. I think we need laws for the custody and protection of children, laws to determine property ownership within a new marriage paradigm, and laws to outlaw inherently abusive unions ( off the top off my head this probably means it needs to be between consenting human adults).

    Reform, to me, is building this new legal structure,

    Morally, my personal values are more restrictive. But that’s my business. That doesn’t mean I deny people of other orientation the right to form a marriage. I explicitly said I didn’t. If I have understood you correctly you have leapt onto your high horse without due cause 😉

  121. miriamenglish

    Thanks for the link Annie, I got a good laugh out of that. 😀

  122. diannaart

    @Randroid

    Thank you for deigning to explain what you mean by “marriage reform”

    For me, “reform’ has other meanings far more intrusive than bringing in marriage equality. However, no point in attempting to discuss what you or I mean by reform. I now have a better understanding – that is all I ever asked for – astride a horse or on my own legs – 😉

  123. Kaye Lee

    nevk21

    “I do understand that you might think 80% tax is not correct but I am inclined to think it is about the mark.

    Personal income tax is about 22% of the average Australian income and indirect taxes are about another 12%….apparently.”

    What a very silly statement. There is a formula to work it out. What you are “inclined to think” is irrelevant. I gave you the figures for an average income of $80,000.

    If we go to the highest bracket of $180,001 and over, you pay $54,547 (30%) plus 45c for each $1 over $180,000

    On top of that is the medicare levy and the temporary high income levy making the most anyone can pay 49% for the dollars over $180,000.

    Australia’s indirect tax burden is 9.7 per cent of GDP. The individual burden obviously varies for different people.

    If you just accepted the 80% figure because some guy said so then, not only is his credibility questionable, so is yours.

    Tax isn’t a matter of opinion.

  124. nevk21

    I got a good laugh out of the link too but if you think the present capitalist system is better it is ONLY because you are on the top of the food chain.

  125. nevk21

    @ Kaye Lee

    Go to Larry Hannigan’s website and learn something.

  126. Kaye Lee

    Why on earth would I go to the site of someone who talks such rot. It is you who made the claim….back it up.

  127. Matters Not

    Kaye Lee, walk slowly backwards. Don’t take your eyes off him.

    And don’t go to Larry Hannigan’s web site. It’s a giant Gish Gallop.

  128. miriamenglish

    nevk21, you are a strange person with quite a propensity for making unjustified statements. If found the story that Annie linked to funny because it is very well written and shows a lovely sense of humor, something that seems quite absent from you. Might I suggest you calm down a little?

    Why would you would think I “think the present capitalist system better”? (Than what, I wonder?) As for being on top of the food chain, I live below the poverty level, I don’t own a house, and don’t own a car — decidedly not at the top of the food chain. However I do recognise that even in my impecunious state I am still among the wealthiest 1% of people on the planet, given that I don’t face the prospect of starving to death in the very near future. Around 16 million people starve to death every year, so I am a good deal better off than them.

    Taxes are largely responsible for our opulent lifestyle here in Australia. I have had some very well paid jobs in the past and have always felt it important to pay my fair share of taxes. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr expressed it well when he said, “I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilization.

    nev21k, you are free to disagree with opinions, but it is self-defeating to disagree with facts. And please drop the insulting manner. It destroys your argument before you’ve finished your sentence.

  129. nevk21

    @ Kaye Lee

    @ miriamenglish

    Unjustified hey……

    You just don’t understand do you, if you will not read it I will copy and paste it:

    …and from someone else in another country who agrees with Larry!

    An Overview of the Historical Con Job

    If this has all been a lot of new information for you, then it might be useful to have a ‘thumbnail’ sketch of the outrageous confidence trick which is being played on you. So, here it is for your local area, and the same situation is found in almost every other area as well.

    It all started before most people were born. It started with two brothers deciding to run a scam which would make them the richest people in the world and rig things so that everybody else worked for them without being aware of that fact. Even though they are literally brothers, in order to distinguish between them we will call them Mr Government and Mr Banker because that is what they needed to become in order to run this scam.

    Mr Government set up a very clever system of interlocking commercial companies, choosing names for them which made them look like official government bodies, while in reality, they are just ordinary companies like any high-street shop. In order to strengthen the illusion, Mr Government hires people to work for him and gives them names like “Minister” or “Member of Parliament” or some other meaningless working title. He employs most of them to sit around and argue with each other, and from time to time, he swaps them around by asking members of the public to vote for who will be his employees for the next few years.

    This is actually very clever, because it makes members of the public believe that their voting makes a difference, while Mr Government knows that it doesn’t as he sets company policy, and he makes all of the decisions, and he really couldn’t care less who happen to be his employees at any given moment.

    Meanwhile, his brother Mr Banker has set up two commercial companies of his own. One he calls “The Bank of England” or some other suitable name for his particular location (and yes, there are actually more than two brothers in this family). The other company, he calls “The Mint”. He owns both and so decides exactly what each will do.

    The action starts and Mr Government needs money with which to pay his employees, so he asks his brother Mr Banker to provide some. This is where the fun part starts. Our trusty Mr Banker “invents” the money and pretends that he has plenty although he actually has none at all. He “lends” a large amount, say, £1,000,000 to his brother Mr Government. This costs him nothing as it doesn’t exist, and it is just the first step in the scam.

    His brother Mr Government now says that he has a “National Debt” of £1,200,000 which will increase by 20% (one fifth) every year if it is not paid off completely. His cunning plan of calling it a “National Debt” makes people think that ‘their country’ owes somebody something. The reality is that nobody owes anybody anything. Good, isn’t it? Very clever ! Without using anything of any value, the brothers have persuaded people that (a) they have a government (which they don’t) and (b) that their country has borrowed money for essential services and so their country is in debt to some kindly lender (which it isn’t). Very slick – these brothers aren’t stupid !

    Next, Mr Government “pays” members of his staff with pieces of paper called ‘cheques’ and he sends them to his brother Mr Banker, to get those pieces of paper exchanged for ‘money’. But, Mr Banker does not have any money, so instead, he gets his company “The Mint” to print other pieces of paper called ‘currency’ and he gives these out in exchange for his brother’s cheques, swapping pieces of paper for other pieces of paper.

    What is the value of these pieces of paper? The cost of the paper, ink and printing.

    At this point, what have the brothers gained? Well, they have got a large number of people working for them, doing whatever they say, and it is costing them nothing.

    But, that is just the first step. Now, Mr Government takes back 80% of what he ‘paid’ to his employees in the form of taxation. After all, the country is in debt and so Mr Government has to take money from everybody in order to repay the country’s debt – hasn’t he? Why does everybody have to pay? Because his employees say so. They invent “statutes” and all kinds of charges designed to move money from ordinary people into the pockets of Mr Government, who promptly pays most of it to his brother Mr Banker as the repayment of borrowing (nothing) and interest on the amount borrowed.

    Where does the tax money paid by ordinary people come from? It is given to them to compensate them for the time and effort which they put in when working. This is real money, backed by the goods and services provided by the people who do the work. This is something of real value, and yet 80% of those valuable assets are taken from them by Mr Government. Why do people let this happen? Because they think that they have no choice and will be put in prison if they don’t. What they do not understand is that paying tax is optional and they don’t have to if they don’t want to.

    Mr Banker is doing very well out of this. His brother is paying him lots of real money in exchange for the fake money which he invented. So, he decides to expand his business and do exactly the same thing to as many people as he can.

    He offers to lend people money (which he will ‘invent’ and conjure up out of nothing) in order to allow them to buy whatever they want. We will skip the strawman here and just focus on the actual transaction offered by Mr Banker.

    A house purchaser comes to Mr Banker, looking for a loan of £100,000. This is a deal on which Mr Banker can’t lose no matter what happens, so he will approve the deal unless he has some very, very good reason for not doing so. After all, it’s not going to cost him anything and he will be paid with real money gained through real work done by real people. The deal is for 17% interest per year for 25 years. If the deal runs for the full 25 years, then the borrower may well pay back as much as £433,557 according to a professional mortgage calculator result. That is, you pay back four times what you borrowed, even though what you were given was fake money and what you pay back is real work-backed money.

    But, as Mr Government takes 80% of what you earn before you get to pay the mortgage, you need to earn £2,167,785 in that 25 year period as Mr Government will take £1,734,228 of it away from you in direct and hidden taxes. And to add insult to injury, Mr Government will give a large chunk of that £1,734,228 and give it to his brother Mr Banker in supposed payment of the (fake) “National Debt”. So, the house purchaser pays several times the borrowed amount, using his real money.

    It gets worse. Mr Banker and Mr Government make sure that not enough currency is issued for people to be physically capable of paying the interest on their loans as there just isn’t enough currency in the entire economy for that to be possible. This is another cunning ploy. The people who earn most will not have a problem, but most people will have great difficulty and will have very little left after paying their mortgage. The slightest financial problem, such as losing a job, can put the average person in a position where they can’t pay the amount demanded. When that happens, and it HAS to happen in a substantial number of cases, then Mr Banker tries to take the property, using some of his brother’s “statutes” (which are NOT law) to justify his theft. He may even manage to send in bailiffs ahead of seizing the property, and seize many of the house purchaser’s personal possessions as well.

    What the house purchaser needs to remember is that the original “loan” was fake and that Mr Banker never put up anything of value, the purchaser was never told the real amount which he would have to repay, a genuine contract was never drawn up, and in reality, it is not the human borrower which is being asked for the repayment.

    Want to know what Mr Banker thinks of any borrower?

    Sucker!

  130. nevk21

    @ Kaye Lee

    @ miriamenglish

    Money is credit or credo…I believe.

    I suggest you write to the ATO and ask them to define income….they cannot.

    A business income is determined by income minus costs, personal income is determined by income and an assumption you have no costs.

    If your employer thinks you are worth $1000 for a weeks work and you pay $200 personal income tax then you can never afford yourself can you!

  131. Kaye Lee

    It seems apparent that you have never owned a business or taken out a loan for that matter nevk21. You have obviously never done a payroll. Your “story” has little to do with reality.

    “17% interest per year”

    “as Mr Government takes 80% of what you earn before you get to pay the mortgage”

    “the purchaser was never told the real amount which he would have to repay”

    “I suggest you write to the ATO and ask them to define income….they cannot”

    Examples of assessable income are:
    salary and wages
    interest from bank accounts
    dividends and other income from investments
    bonuses and overtime an employee receives
    commission a salesperson receives
    pensions
    rent.

    Examples of exempt income include:
    some government pensions and payments, including the invalidity pension
    some education payments.

    “If your employer thinks you are worth $1000 for a weeks work and you pay $200 personal income tax then you can never afford yourself can you!”

    What on earth does that mean?

  132. OzFenric

    Nev. I will grant you this far, and no further: that our global system of governments and tax and capitalism is an artificial construction. It is an invention which has a purpose. Yes, money / currency is an abstraction. It used to be that goods and services were paid for in real stuff – sheep, carrots, haircuts, whatever it was of value that you had. This is an incredibly complex and inefficient way of organising transactions, though. A sheep is more valuable to a farmer than to a butcher, and more valuable to a butcher than a hairdresser. If you only have sheep as a currency and you need a haircut, the hairdresser needs to have somewhere to store and feed his new sheep until he can trade it to the butcher for something he actually wants. So we came up with the concept of currency, so we could standardise what stuff was worth and make sure that each person pays the same amount of value for anything they purchase. We buy into this construct because we need to work together to be effective. I have no interest in growing sheep or cutting my own hair.

    This only works, though, due to scarcity. Capitalism is built on the paradigm of winners and losers. In order to be prosperous, by definition you have stuff that others do not. Money only has value if there is a limited supply, and the business becomes capturing as much of it as you can. The value of a dollar bill is not the [paper]/plastic and ink. The value of a dollar is the value of a share in the issued money of the nation, and this has a real value against real goods and services. That’s why it exists.

    But I would like to reassure you. There is no “Mr Government” for whom we are all working. You can relax, there is no person sitting somewhere raking in the country’s GDP and being fed grapes by nubile slave girls. (I had to give up on that dream a while ago.) If you have learned nothing else from the past two years, it should have been that the Government is not an untouchable entity that does whatever it likes and cares about people only insofar as they pay it their taxes. We elect people to represent us as government and these people have actual power to actually do what we employ them for – to make and apply law, to manage the country’s defence, and to engage with our country’s participation in the world’s financial markets. The Abbott government is doing this in a way very differently to the previous government and the next government will do things differently again. The Government does indeed receive a lot of our money in taxes and levies. It then returns these taxes and levies into the economy through social services, education, grants and subsidies and through wages for those employed in the public service. The only way you can claim that the Guvmint is a-takin’ your money is if you don’t believe in wealth redistribution and strictures on capitalism and that, my friend, makes you a sociopath. Don’t feel bad, a lot of business leaders are sociopaths, which explains why the IPA can argue that we pay too much tax and give too much social support.

    It is true that our country could, if we wished, make sure every Australian is a millionaire. All we would need to do would be to release sufficient money into the system, and as this is just ones and zeros in a computer it would cost us absolutely nothing. Except then the cost of an apple would be a thousand dollars and, like Zimbabwe where this was tried, you would need several gazumpteen dollars to buy a US dollar. Right now Greece is a salutary lesson. If you can go it alone as a country, you need never go broke. But don’t expect to continue to participate in international markets, as the system relies on a dollar being actually worth more than the paper it’s printed on.

  133. miriamenglish

    nev21k, there are elements of the story you pasted that have some basis in fact, but other parts that are plain wrong.

    Stories like that promote the idea that the self-supporting monetary system is a conspiracy because it appears to hold itself up without any support. It is a bit like saying that of a farmer because he grows cabbages out of thin air and sells them for money! What a scam! Or that bloody Miriam English, she writes computer programs out of nothing but her imagination and sells them for money! What a total scam! They are completely made up. (Actually I don’t seem to be selling many, or even any, these days.)

    The problem is you are focussing on the wrong part of the system.

    In the case of the farmer, he puts a lot of time and effort and resources into making sure those cabbages grow from air and water.

    In the case of myself, I have spent decades learning an enormous amount about programming and understanding how to coax the billions of cascading switches in a computer to do something useful.

    In the case of government and banks (when they operate properly), they encourage large networks of people to prosper and be productive and support one another, making possible pensions that allow people to work on building society in the comfort that, when they are no longer able to do so, society will return the favor. It allows some people to work on things that are not obviously productive, like computers, or the internet, or lasers, or satellites, or little robots to visit other planets. Some of these things look initially like a complete waste of time, so would never be funded by people living self-interested, hand-to-mouth lives. The laser is my favorite example because for many years people condescendingly referred to it as “a solution without a problem”. It has become an incredibly useful device now, finding its way into almost everything. The internet was originally funded entirely by the government. If it had been left up to private interests it would not have happened. There are many examples of ways private companies tried to kill off the internet in its early days. Satellites were originally considered a total waste of time. Our modern communications revolution couldn’t exist without them.

    Yes, the whole self-supporting economic system looks like something based upon a shared illusion, but like me composing artwork or computer programs out of my mind, it begins with nothing to create something genuine.

    There are ways that the system can be used as a rort (cutting benefits paid to those who have done their job, paying excessive amounts to executives while cutting amounts paid to those who do the actual work, cutting access to health and education because the wealthy no longer consider the poorer members of society important, and so on), and by all means look at those and decry those scams, but to be upset that we pay taxes for something created out of thin air is to ignore what is actually created.

    We created a society here in Australia which is one of the most remarkable in the world. Until recently we had one of the highest standards of living on the entire planet, we had one of the most sophisticated and well-informed populations, and we produced scientific, medical, and technological advances at a far greater rate than our small population or limited wealth would suggest was possible.

    All this is being trashed now. Howard started to destroy it and Abbott has accelerated the decline largely because of the kinds of fairystories you are trying to promote: that government needs to be small or even non-existent. The people who believe this generally have nothing they can put in its place, other than a new kind of corporate feudalism, and heaven help us if that comes to pass. Feudalism, wherever and whenever it has ruled has been an utter blight equalled only by theocracy in the damage it wreaks upon society.

    I hope for a day when we can have a kind of enlightened anarchism that has no need of money at all, but that won’t happen until after we have a completely automated means of production and virtually 100% unemployment. At that point it would be a good thing. But that’s not going to happen anytime soon, and certainly not with corporate feudal lords in control, and it certainly won’t happen if we shoot the knees out from under the social programs and research projects supported by big government.

  134. nevk21

    @ OzFenric

    @ Kaye Lee

    @ miriamenglish

    You just don’t understand do you.

    I have better and more important things to do.

    The Strawman has left the building,

  135. Kaye Lee

    My dear old mum would, at this point, have said “Everyone is out of step except my Johnnie”.

  136. ozfenric

    Nev, that’s fine, thank you for your contribution. We look forward to hearing about the outcomes of your court case when you don’t pay your taxes this year. Please let us know how it goes.

  137. miriamenglish

    Nev, hon, don’t worry. When you get older and gain a little more patience you might read and attempt to understand (instead of dismissing out of hand) the very careful and helpful posts by people here.

    For myself, I found it an interesting exercise anyway. I seriously doubt you read my reply all the way through. Perhaps you should go back and read my closing paragraph and notice that it is really not so far from your wishes. That’s because when I was younger I had vaguely conspiratorial notions of how society is run. As I’ve grown older and learned more about the world I’ve realised that while there are indeed conspiracies, they are almost all run incompetently by sociopaths. A sociopath is someone who is an extreme example of someone who doesn’t comprehend the interdependent nature of society. Only someone like that can think they can get away with any kind of conspiracy, and they are always so lacking in understanding that they are always found out and resisted.

    Society is more like an ant nest, where nobody is really in charge, and those that do attempt to take charge are almost always naive, blundering sociopaths like Howard and Abbott who take a simplistic and unrealistic hypothesis and try to force the real world to fit it.

    Unfortunately, any rare individuals who are capable of understanding much of the complexities of social systems are not usually attracted to politics, and if they are, then the back-biting and knavery will get rid of them before long (examples are Barry Jones, Jim Cairns, John Hewson, Don Chipp, Natasha Stott Despoja, Gough Whitlam, Bob Brown). But they are well worth the wait, because when these people do arise they’re often able to undo the damage wrought by generations of underhanded conspirings by crap-artists and restore society to some degree of health, or at least resist much of that damage.

  138. Brett

    Oh, sweet, delicious, irony. An angry and sad blogger believes the PM of Australia to be as insignificant as a flea…. That is GOLD!

    You lose all credibility when you make such a ridiculous statement as you did about Obama. It signals clearly that you are an intellectual lightweight (flyweight?) when it comes to politics.

  139. miriamenglish

    Brett, I think the comparison Victoria was making was not so much one of size, but of his nature as an irritating bloodsucker. Perhaps she was also thinking of the saying “If you lay with dogs you get fleas.” Personally, I think mosquitoes are more like Abbott because of the diseases they are apt to spread, just as Abbott spreads lies and hate.

    I don’t agree entirely with Victoria about Obama, but the man certainly has presence and his skills as an intellectual and an orator place him far above his half-witted predecessor, and stratospherically above Tony Abbott.

    Calling Victoria an intellectual lightweight because she says something you disagree with actually says more about you, Brett. Although I don’t agree with everything she says, I have great admiration for her skills. She has dozens of clearly articulated pieces here. Care to point us to anything your “superior” mind has produced?

  140. nevk21

    The Strawman is back, I couldn’t help myself.

    @ Kaye Lee my mum would say their all bloody stupid!

    @ miriamenglish well said but I have to say Whitlam was the one who turned Australia into a Corporation by unlawfully changing the Constitution.

    @ ozfenic

    It is fine to be a smartarse, I have had plenty of insults thrown at me in these posts, but in a nice way, know what I mean. I prefer just to say what I think.

    Interestingly ozfrenic you didn’t acknowledge that I was correct about tax being optional as it was explained in the first few minutes of Aaron Russo’s documentary on tax and the Federal Reserve in the U.S. This IS also in the Australian Tax Payers charter section 6. Also for the third time I never said don’t pay tax it is just there is nothing lawful that says you have to pay personal income tax, it IS optional!

    And as for any court cases I think I have a much better chance of a win than you would, just remember when you go to court in Australia you are walking into the offices of a private corporation.

    You said you read the Strawman doc,and I find that hard to believe.

    Therefore, I will provide two links that I found and are excellent short video presentations on the Strawman and your birth certificate, ALL CAPS name “Capitis Diminutio Maximus” (sounds impressive doesn’t it, ha) and true.

    If you don’t want to watch them and inform yourself there is not much I can do is there.

    Meet Your Strawman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hlko

    Admiralty Law https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptHQu68MdMs

    Enjoy!

  141. miriamenglish

    🙂 At least it’s not as uselessly addictive as facecrack facebook.

    Nev, I think you’ll find you’re mistaken. The only constitutional change that occurred around Whitlam was after he was dismissed by the governor general. During his government Whitlam did propose a small constitutional change, that simultaneous elections be held,but it was rejected. Fraser subsequently submitted exactly the same constitutional change as well as one about casual senate vacancies and they were both passed.

  142. miriamenglish

    Nev, I should have also pointed out that the only part of income tax that is optional is the reference to the not needing to submit a tax return if your income falls below the threshold.

    As for the law courts in Australia being corporate, I think someone has been misleading you again.

  143. Michael Taylor

    Care to point us to anything your “superior” mind has produced?

    I think his comment was the best he could produce. I can’t envisage his mind reaching any greater heights.

  144. miriamenglish

    Nev, I watched the short video about the strawman. One of the greatest things about our human brain is the amazing way we can can create and use abstract symbols. Unfortunately it is also one of our great weaknesses because we have a tendency to give these symbols a separate existence, when really they don’t have any reality to them. They are only representations. A great example of how this can go so wrong is in people who believe they were able cast magical spells and manipulate magical symbols. They think the symbols have some independent existence. This is the mistake the strawman video makes. It sees the symbol (what it calls the strawman) as separate from yourself. In reality, that symbol represents you in the same way you personal name given you by your parents does. It isn’t a separate thing you can walk away from any more than a zebra can walk away from the description of “striped”.

    Even worse is the insidious nature of the film, in that it only talks about bills, fines, and taxes. It never mentions all the good things that the makers almost certainly consider their right, but which are paid for by those things: roads, garbage removal, police and laws to settle disputes and work against theft and violence, the internet, and so on. These things used to include electricity and water, but such services are increasingly being sold off to far less efficient and more costly corporate interests. The people who made that film are either sadly deluded, or else they are part of the corporate indoctrination to undermine elected governments and replace them with corporate fiefdoms, with us as their serfs instead of free people able to elect our representatives.

  145. miriamenglish

    Nev, a couple of other things that are worrying about that strawman video…

    It lies about the meaning of words.

    Understood The question by a policeman as to whether you understand what they’ve said is to foster communication. If a person doesn’t understand then the police need to get someone else who can explain it to the person if they speak another language or advocate on behalf of them if they are perhaps mentally incapable of understanding. it has nothing to do with being under someone who is standing over them.

    Register Has nothing to do with kings or queens. The Latin root of the word is regesta, which means simply list.

    I suspect you have got the government misinterpretation from the same people. As I said before, the “-ment” suffix simply indicates it refers to a thing, like endow (verb) becomes endowment (noun) or agree (verb) becomes agreement (noun). The -ment suffix seems to mean vaguely “the condition of being” and comes from the Latin -mentum, an abstract noun suffix originally added only to verbs. It has a completely different origin than the Latin mentalis relating to the mind.

    The other thing that bothers me about that film is its slick production, reminiscent of propaganda films. It uses emotion, small lies, and a single-sided argument the way a magician directs your attention away from the thing he is attempting to hide. I worked for years in the animated cartoon industry. Creating a piece like that is not a trivial thing to do. This would have cost quite a lot of money to produce. I can’t help speculating on who would foot the bill for something like this that would so greatly favor the purposes of big capital to get rid of the government.

  146. OzFenric

    Oh dear. Do we have to do this again?

    Nev, you give me a 40-page PDF (which I did indeed read, cover to cover), innumerable website links and youtube videos that are, speaking generously, high on rhetoric and low on evidence and proof. In return, I give you two links and a quote from each.

    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Strawman_theory: “It should be noted that there is a legal principle known as Idem sonans (Latin for “sounding the same”) which states that similar sounding names are just as valid in referring to a person. The relevant UK precedent is R v Davis 1851. ‘If two names spelt differently necessarily sound alike, the court may, as matter of law, pronounce them to be idem sonantia; but if they do not necessarily sound alike, the question whether they are idem sonantia is a question of fact for the jury.'”

    http://www.irs.gov/irb/2005-14_IRB/ar13.html: The formatting of a taxpayer’s name in all upper-case letters on government documents or elsewhere has no significance whatsoever for federal tax purposes. Courts have rejected as frivolous “straw man” arguments.

    The latter is from the IRS, which admittedly is the US context rather than Australian, but it seems pretty authoritative to me. The only way you can deny it is to deny citizenship entirely and I imagine the federal courts and immigration authorities might have something to say about that.

  147. Kaye Lee

    nevk21,

    Could you provide a link to Australian Tax Payers charter section 6 please so I can read for myself that income tax is optional.

  148. Annie B

    Maybe it’s the 1% – the wealthy, that can have paying tax as an ‘option’ ? …. After their you-beaut, crash hot, army of accountants have found every loop hole and off shore safe havens for their clients’ loot – and reduce millions to something like a low five figure amount that is taxable … perhaps it is all correct after all. ( coff ) !!

    But then again – they are the abbutts’ BFF’s … ( for only as long as he is able to pull the strings, btw !! ) … and he will do anything and everything to stay in their good graces – which includes NOT looking at the situation from a fair standpoint – on taxes, overall. …… Nothing ‘fair’ about this inane pee em.

    I have to laugh at the possibility, that he will disappear very quickly off their Christmas lists – if ( WHEN ) he loses government. …Oh what a sad day that might be, for the 1% !!! … An even sadder day for the head honcho – as he is dragged, kicking and screaming from his lofty position – and his self perceived, “dominion over all”.

    ??? …. 😀

  149. nevk21

    Well said Annie B, but Abbott is just the string pullee!

    @ Kaye LeeThis is the link to the Australian Tax Payers Charter:

    https://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/About-us/In-detail/Taxpayers–charter/Taxpayers–charter—what-you-need-to-know/

    It has changed recently but the words are still there under “BEING COOPERATIVE” on page 17.

    BEING COOPERATIVE
    We prefer to work with you cooperatively, providing you with help to meet your
    obligations voluntarily. However, if you are uncooperative or obstructive, we may need
    to take firmer action. For example, we have formal access and information gathering
    powers that we use if necessary. People who are obstructive may even be prosecuted.
    We ask that you treat us with the same courtesy, consideration and respect we are
    expected to give you. If we are subjected to rude or abusive behaviour, we may end
    an interview or phone call.

    You may think this is about “meet your obligations voluntarily”, so we don’t need to take legal (not lawful) action against you. If tax is compulsory why doesn’t it just say “meet your obligations” Yes you will disagree but this is classic legalese. They are veiling the fact that personal income tax is voluntary by making you think it is your obligation and compulsory but if you volunteer all will be well. Cooperate, voluntary, why doesn’t it detail the relevant lawful obligations let alone in the constitution at the start, because it is a private corporation and this document is effectively a code of conduct and voluntary for the Australian people and not lawful.

    I am replying to above posts, like it or not, just taking a while.

  150. nevk21

    @ OzFenric

    @ Kaye Lee

    @ miriamenglish

    @Annie B

    This is a very good presentation about why the Australian Government is a Corporation and how we are “livestock”, tax cattle traded under the UCC. And miriamenglish this is not a slick vid it is a bloke presenting his case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zltj1iOmxAk

  151. Kaye Lee

    nevk21,

    You linked to a brochure

    The following is the link to the law (or one of the many many many laws) setting out our legal obligation to pay income tax

    https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013C00082

  152. Annie B

    nevk21

    1) … I do hope you realised that in my last post ( July 4, 2015 at 9:51 pm ) I was being opportunistic in seizing on another avenue to rant at the current pee em. I happen to think he is a bad person, a bad leader, ( as most here do, along with other thinking persons in this country ) …. and his mates are the top echelon in wealth. Middle and lower income families are not worth the LNP’s consideration in any way at all. …
    I employed a fair amount of sarcasm in that post.

    2) … Whether he is the puller of strings or the pullee (?) or the pulled, is neither here nor there … he is the head sherang and the buck stops with him ( pun intended ).

    ………..

    I had a look at the link you provided “Tax Payers Charter” etc., and you c and p’d the “Being Cooperative” portion of that ‘charter’ … then added your own interpretation of it. … Ok, we all add our interpretations to a variety of subjects. They are our opinions – to which we all entitled.

    Personally, I found the “Being Cooperative” advice contained some rather odd phraseology, and while seeming to be kindly in intent, also warned of firmer action – and ( good grief ) an admittance that “we have formal access and information gathering powers that we use if necessary.” which appears to be honesty, but in fact ( to me ) is a thinly veiled threat. …. but then, what could one expect from this government, but this kind of thing.

    Before even getting to page 17 of the .pdf – I noted on the Australian Government / ATO page, the first of 5 bulletted comments – upon which I choked. …. It displayed, as part of ‘nurturing the relationship’ between government and taxpayer …. “* being open, transparent and accountable in our dealings with the community” ….. which is so far from the truth as we llve it at this time, it was ludicrous.

    By all this, again I am being opportunistic in slamming this government for its ineptitude, and thereby trying to keep in keeping with the original article. ….

    ,,,,,,,,, continued ….

  153. Kaye Lee

    And the link I provided is the law which clearly states, under the heading “Who must pay income tax: Income tax is payable by each individual and company, and by some other entities. You must pay income tax for each financial year.”

  154. Annie B

    @ nevk21 …. continued …

    My opinions of this government does not mean I agree with you as to what our country is ruled by ( which appears from your statements / links etc. to be 100% corporate, and is a form of company. ) …. however, for the sake of the debate – I am willing to pretend for a moment, that this country is a company or a corporate concern. ….

    Companies publicly listed on the ASX, have shareholders – large and small. A certificate is issued ( scrip ? ) … to each shareholder, showing his/her/their entitlement to those shares and dividends therefrom. Let’s say I buy ( I wish !! ) $5,000 worth of shares in company X. … once that money goes out of my account, it is no longer usable by me. … It’s gone. … and it’s been my choice to spend it.

    But I have something to show for it ( hopefully ) in that my small investment helps the company to grow in strength, size, wealth, and good for the community, and thereafter each year, I receive dividends, my money remains safe ( ??? maybe ), and I can sell them to make a profit, ( or a loss ). …. The company executive has the responsibility for adequate and proper decisions in so many areas, including the appointment of the best person for the job(s) within the company. … I then enjoy a return for my money. … Also, as a shareholder, I get to have a vote – on anything and everything to do with changes to the objectives, moves of executive personnel, the way dividends are to be paid, and some specific decisions in the running of the company etc. etc.

    Now, getting back to the government and the way IT is run – it only resembles a company, insofar as it has responsibilities to not over spend, to appoint proper persons for jobs allotted, to be prudent in its’ forward dealings so that the company / country prospers, and that it receives moneys from ‘investors’ by way of income tax, GST, stamp duties, Medicare levy et al. … It is a law abiding citizens’ choice to pay tax – in the hope that those taxes go towards improving our lives. … In the case of income tax, it is not even money we see in our account, to be gone from us on a particular day. … we mightn’t like paying it, but we don’t miss it – and we expect to see some ‘dividends’ for us, because we have ‘chosen’ to pay – and therefore, be law-abiding citizens.

    A GOOD Government provides the ‘investor ‘ ( tax payer ) with good services and ‘dividends’ being e.g. better living conditions, improved infrastructure, open dialogue with constituents ( shareholders ? ) … proper education at reasonable cost, adequate health systems, a freedom from anxiety about our country, and the solving of problems in a manner that assists ALL people.

    A BAD government, does the opposite. … Therefore the ‘taxpayers’ do NOT get anything at all for their money – they are in fact running at a loss , in every respect imaginable. …. and that is the case, at this time. …. this currently, is what we endure.

    A country, by its very nature, must have rules, regulations and laws. … If it did not have these, by which ALL should abide – as a community – then it would be like an unsupervised school only worse, chaos would reign, death and mayhem would result. … We would be in fact, lawless – and go back to primitive forms of living. …. I doubt that’s what you would want to see ?

    I hope that all can respect one anothers’ rights to have opinions, whether agreed with or not.

    Old Voltaire again comes to mind : “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” …….

    Maybe we should leave it at that ?

  155. nevk21

    @ Annie B

    Thanks for that. It certainly is confusing sometimes and I am not pretending to be academic or intellectual but I do have a thirst for knowledge.

    You know what gets me about the apparent fact that Australia is a Corporation, I presented the evidence to you all in Larry Hannigan’s website at:

    Larry Hannigan’s Australia > Constitution and Documents > Voice of the Constitution Associated Documents > The True Constitution > you can read the page and click the document links here but it is much easier to click on the “download this entire page as a printable .pdf” link in red an read it in PDF.

    Or this is the link:

    http://larryhannigan.com/the_true_australian_constitution.htm

    It is all there, very well laid out and explained with all the supporting documents. My guess is that not one of you have read it or maybe you didn’t go to that link. Read it, it is very interesting, it will take a while but I found it excellent.

    This was all backed up by Scott Bartle in his presentation. Scott is not as comprehensive as Larry but he added some interesting information also.

    Someone said Larry’s website is rubbish or words to that effect but I find the vast majority of his stuff very well researched.

    What a pity Larry’s name and title is not Professor Winston …..

    I am not being smart and if someone wants to show me the failings in his work, go for it.

    I will respond to some of the other points in previous posts when I get time.

    I find this all very interesting.

  156. nevk21

    @ Annie B

    When I made my last post my webpage was not refreshed and I didn’t have your last post.

    Yes you are right and very well said.

    I am really short on time today but I will respond soon as their is some points I would like to make.

    Enjoy the rest of your day.

  157. Kaye Lee

    “if someone wants to show me the failings in his work, go for it.”

    I was 5 paragraphs in on page one when I read

    “Note – NO State can impose taxation of any kind.”

    Although the text of the Australian Constitution allows both States and the Commonwealth to raise revenue, subsequent constitutional interpretation and political developments have limited state taxing powers.

    Prior to 1942, consistent with the concurrent power in s51(ii), the states collected income tax.

    They used to collect sales tax. Some examples of taxes that states collect now are payroll tax, land tax, stamp duty and fire services levy.

    I don’t think I’ll bother going further

  158. nevk21

    @ Kaye Lee

    If you go further down to page 9 of the PDF you will see that the Australian Constitution is invalid and the reasons why. I think Larry might know a bit more about this than you.

  159. nevk21

    @ Kaye Lee

    Also the link you gave was to distract from the fact that I was correct about the Taxpayers Charter Document being not just a brochure as you claimed.

    Furthermore the link was to the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 and not to where it says you are required to pay personal income tax which would be unlawful anyway.

    I think it may be the case you are just like me and pay your tax on the assumption you are required to.

    The ATO is a corporation with a ABN, so it is not the law is it, in fact it is unlawful, as Larry explains in the document that you say you will not read.

  160. OzFenric

    Kaye Lee started at the top. Let’s look at the bottom – the “Sold Out” section. If this weren’t so serious it would be laughable.

    “You cannot drive a nail into a piece of wood, you cannot knit a cardigan or repair your shoes.” Well, I could, but I prefer not to – I specialise so as to have time to do things I’m good at.

    “Your church is a private corporation with an ABN…” Not most churches in Australia, they’re not.

    “You walk the streets looking for an opportunity to gather revenue for your Corporation via parking/speeding tickets.” I prefer to live in a society where road speeds are limited, and a part of that system requires speeding tickets.

    “…working at the airport… You don’t feel entirely comfortable with what you’re doing…” We insist upon security at airports to prevent people boarding with weapons and to minimise the likelihood of hijacking. It works. We have far fewer hijackings now than we did two decades ago.

    “…you sell, promote and distribute toxic lethal drugs and vaccines under the guise of health care…” Now we’re getting scary. We’re well into “ALL DRUGS ARE BAD AND DESIGNED TO KEEP YOU SEDATE AND ALSO KILL YOU” territory. I hesitate to even glorify this with a response, but it gets worse.

    “…you don a uniform and are given an array of weapons to carry out a dawn raid and risk putting slugs in someone, just because you accept the ‘intelligence’ and orders of your superior officers…” Are we seriously claiming now that people deserving of armed dawn raids should be handled by one officer at a time? Yes, people in uniform obey orders. That’s how the system works.

    Basically this document reads like a paean to individual anarchy and that’s the antithesis of the society we live in. The only people who are tempted to believe – erroneously, as I and Kaye Lee and others have already pointed out – that you are not beholden to law and government are those who have no trust at all in the ability or intention of their fellow man. These are the people who will blithely claim that climate change is not really happening because they themselves have not proved it through independent study and someone told them to trust their own feelings. These are the people who feel it is okay for a business to charge what it likes to whom it likes to screw over however they would like but that no business should be required to pay credence to tax, industrial relations or little things like ethics.

    It doesn’t matter what we say or how many laws and regulations we point out to prove that you are an Australian citizen and legally required to pay tax. It is obvious your mind is made up that any “law” we could point you to is not legally valid, because Larry Hannigan says so. He’s welcome to his opinion, but I wager he hasn’t tested it in the courts and neither have you. If he wants to convince others, he should provide a higher level of proof than simply making bald statements of what he thinks is true.

  161. OzFenric

    “The ATO is a corporation with a ABN, so it is not the law is it”… As I pointed out above, there are a multitude of government statutory agencies that have ABNs and legal status as corporations and
    the same government which is entitled to claim tax from its citizens is also able to charge its agencies with the legal authority to seek those same taxes on its behalf. Simply being a corporation does not remove an agency’s status as an arm of government. This goes equally for the ATO, the Mint and the Treasury.

  162. Annie B

    OK – I will kick start this particular tangent.

    I am not a lawyer. … If there is a lawyer who specialises in Constitutional Law here, please advise.

    I am ( almost ) certain nevk21 does not have a law degree, particularly specialising in the above.

    Kaye – … your references are always awesome, but are you a lawyer ? … cos I am not for sure. … If you are a lawyer in any specialised area, my apologies.

    ………

    I finally got to see the Larry Harrigan site – and I would respectfully ask nevk to have a look at page 1, under the heading “What is the True Constitution” … scroll down to the sub-heading “Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1901” …. Clause 5: “Operation of the Constitution and laws; (of which we are all BOUND to)” – – open “Click to View” and read the 4th ‘law’ there – which is shown as [ at page 353 ] … No.34 ” Shall be Binding on the Courts, Judges and People” ….

    ,,,,, of which we are all BOUND to ….. ?? ( I believe Harrigan was trying to make a point with that bolded wording ) … however, moving on –

    Which states “ Under this clause, the Act, the Constitution, and laws of the Commonwealth made in pursuance of its powers, will be the supreme law of the land, binding on the Courts, Judges, and people of every State. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the laws of any State. The latter words operate as a rescission of all State laws incompatible with the Act, with the Constitution, and with such laws as may be passed by the Parliament of the Commonwealth in the exercise of its Constitutional rights. Therefore, by this clause, coupled with sections 106 to 109, all the laws of a State, constitutional as well as ordinary, will be in effect repealed so far as they are repugnant to the supreme law. All the laws of any State, so far as not inconsistent with the supreme law, will remain in force until altered by the proper authority. “

    Supreme law of the Land … something you nevk21, appear to be bucking.

    As a lay-person, I would like to know ( if anyone can answer please ) …. what ‘State’ means, in this context. …. Globally, ( as far as I can deduce ) … the word ‘State’ can apply to an entire country – and / OR it can apply to areas with borders, within a country, deliniated as specific area, with its’ own laws, rules and regulations. …. If however, these laws / regs / regulations, in Australia, conflict with the ‘supreme law ‘ given to the Commonwealth to enact – being the Federal Government in our country, they can be nullified, invalidated if they are ” repugnant to the supreme law “. …. So far, however, the Federal Government ( for decades ) has happily allowed the States to run their own areas, as best they see fit. … Nothing has become ‘repugnant’ to the Federal Government, under the provisions of the Constitution. ….. hmmmm.

    So, the final sentence of that statement in italics, I believe, is paramount. …. as a lay-person I read that as the States being permitted to enforce their own laws, which would include taxation or the raising of moneys by any legitimate means – ( legitimate being taxes ) – provided it does not seem ‘repugnant’ to the Federal Government.

    nevk21 …. I think you have to remember that a) the Constitution was initially drawn up in 1901 – the year of Federation – after some years of debate and with some alterations forthwith … and b) any major structural changes to the Constitution still has to be put before the public via referendum. … which is fair & proper.

    In the meantime ( from Wikipedia, admittedly ) …. the following shows : ” Under Australia’s common law system, the High Court of Australia and the Federal Court of Australia have the authority to interpret constitutional provisions. Their decisions determine the interpretation and application of the constitution.” ,,,,,,, which is what you seem to want to disprove. …. However, without this power by these two courts, bedlam could ensue.

    I have spent way too much time on this questioning, although it has intrigued me to a degree.

    I now bow out gracefully ( I hope ) … and will not engage in any further debate on the subject. … It is pointless, and nothing anyone says here, will change anything – ( according to the Constitution ).

  163. Annie B

    @ Ozfrenic … … Thank you …

    ….. for reading further down on the lead page – the Hannigan site – something I did not do, and apparently Kaye didn’t either – ( it is a large and comprehensive site with much to digest, on numerous tabs ).

    However, I did do a bit more digging around, and found a great many biblical and religious references abound.

    Fine, if one believes in all that – to each his/her own. … I frankly saw some sadistic form of evangelism there.

    After my rummaging around on that website, I have to conclude that this Hannigan bloke is potentially a very dangerous individual, for and to anyone who follows and believes what he is attempting to achieve – which is a super damning of society and its’ achievements, an inclination to complete lawlessness, and basically, a death wish for all and sundry.

    There is a great deal more I could say, but will not give it the time it would take, to specify.

  164. Michael Taylor

    The Consitution really doesn’t tell us much. For an interpretation of the Consitution you need to refer to High Court judgements.

  165. nevk21

    @ Ozfenric

    @Annie B

    I really don’t have time for a more comprehensive reply but I will make a few points.

    Annie B what you said about Larry is absolute categorical bullshit, like he is some kind of terrorist. Is this the best you can come up with? A website of excellent information and thorough research and attack the person for a pimple on his arse!

    This is where we part, it is about the truth, or would you rather just flirt!

    Ozfenric I am sorry but you don’t know what you are talking about, you are just attacking Larry and not making any point worth discussing. You had to go searching to the bottom of his website in a vain attempt to discredit Larry. Was his website too much for you was it?

    If you want to know something about DRUGS Ozfenric and how the Rockefeller/Allopathic medical cartel came into being I suggest that you google search Eustace Mullins-Murder by Injection, he was a brilliant researcher and writer. I have read his excellent book (and others) of the same name. Oh, yes do your Wiki thing and it will tell you Eustace is a populist, anti-Semitic, holocaust denier and all that crap, why would you go there.

    Annie B, I am sorry but I couldn’t see what your point is and why didn’t you just download the page in PDF it would have saved a lot of time.

    One point I would like to make is that if you watched Scott Bartle’s excellent presentation, why when he wrote to the Governor General, Attorney General and others did he get no reply! Here lies the truth, we have been lied to, simple as that!

  166. Annie B

    Oh for heavens’ sake nevk21 ….

    1) At no time did I label Hannigan, a terrorist !!! …. I did say he is ‘potentially a very dangerous bloke’ and I stand by that observation. ….

    2) No attack – just an opinion about a website that appears fraught with nay-saying & against law and order.

    3) Again, you have sunk into attack e.g. “bullshit” .. ” is that the best you can come up with” … ” pimple on his arse” … ” rather just flirt” …. ALL completely un-necessary, but tells me you are not interested in discussing anything whatsoever, will never accept anyone elses’ opinion ( other than your own ) and resort to slinging a bit of muck here and there, when things don’t quite go your way.

    4) Downloading a .pdf of that size – you gotta be joking. … Like you, I didn’t ‘have the time’. I have other ways of doing things without massive downloads, even of one page which was going to take for ever, according to my investigation of it.

    And don’t come back and say I started slinging slime – because you know damned well that I haven’t.

    ………..

    Actually Ozfrenic did not have to go far at all to find the “Sold Out” propaganda. … It was at the bottom of the lead page – i.e. page 1 after the Index page …. sitting there waiting to be read. … For that matter I needn’t have gone scrounging around on the website either … but I did.

    Oh – and btw – ( my bad ) … I called him Harrigan … oops – he is Hannigan. …

    This then is seriously the end of the conversation …. and boy, do I ever mean THAT.

  167. OzFenric

    Like others I am becoming tired of this rabbit hole. I would simply ask this, Nev. Can you point me to any authoritative source – i.e. not Larry Harrigan, although I will accept a source that he himself links to – that gives credence to the basis of his entire screed – that a) your name on your birth certificate (in all CAPS) does not really apply to you in legal terms; and that b) the use of one or another specific coat of arms can invalidate the document to which it is affixed?

    At the core, the entire conspiracy theory of Harrigan and his ilk looks, to my not-a-lawyer eyes, to be completely unjustified, unsupported and illogical. I see any number of claims from Harrigan that some statement indicates that an authority does not exist – claims that are manifestly untrue and unjustified by the statements themselves. Just as one example of many, in the section on “Seals of the Australian Constitution”, amidst a flurry of other strange and unilateral assertions, Harrigan points to the following:

    “The High Court of Australia. Decision – Re Wakin [1999] HCA 27; 198 CLR 511; 163 ALR270; 73 ALJR 839 (17 June 1999) Kirby JJ stated – A legislature cannot, by pre-ambular assertions, recite itself into constitutional power where none exists. [239] — In simple words Judge Kirby of the High Court of Australia is telling us that the Parliament of Australia is NOT working UNDER any Constitution.”

    Harrigan’s statement does not follow in any wise from the Kirby judgement by any stretch of the imagination – well, except for Harrigan’s imagination. What the judgement actually says is that a government cannot alter the constitution through means of legislation – thus confirming the primacy of the Constitution under which the Parliament really does work.

    Harrigan’s site is a flurry of breathless statements with no basis in fact. Reading every page with the core question in mind of “Who says?” the only answer is “Larry Harrigan”. I’m bowing out here until and unless Nev or others can point to actual legal support for the core claims of jurisdiction about names and seals.

  168. nevk21

    @ Annie B

    @ Ozfenric

    Annie B there is no attack it is in your mind.

    Ozfenric if you don’t understand, so be it.

  169. miriamenglish

    I advise everybody to stop trying to reason with nevk21. It is pointless. His final reference is this Harrigan guy and anybody calling into question that final source just gets either dismissed or snapped at. It is like trying to argue with a Jehovah’s Witness. You can say what you will, but you know they aren’t going to listen to a word you say because they’re just thinking what they’re going to say next. Their final source for everything is their Bible and anything that conflicts with it is automatically “wrong” so there is no way to successfully argue. It is the same for nevk21.

    I’m sure he’s not a bad person, he’s just sucked in by this worthless crap from this Harrigan loon. Nobody can disprove it because the minute they bring up some documented evidence Nev will either disregard it because it is wrong (it has to be if it contradicts Harrigan) or he will ignore it the way Christians ignore the hundreds of contradictions in the Bible..

    He has proven it is impossible to get any points across to him.

    Nev, by all means discuss other things here, but please, please don’t waste your time and ours with conspiracy theories on taxes not being obligatory and law courts not having legal standing and the constitution being unconstitutional. Later, when you look back on all this you will be embarrassed, please don’t dig yourself in any deeper.

  170. miriamenglish

    Last night I listened to an amazing conversation between Sam Harris and Megan Phelps-Roper. She is the grand daughter of the infamous Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church (the ones who stand on street corners and picket funerals holding signs saying things like “God hates fags” and “Thank God for dead soldiers” and “God hates you”). She suddenly realised a couple of years ago how crazy the church’s beliefs were and she left it. She talks about what it is like to be caught up inside such a self-reinforcing loop, how hard it is to question it, and how how she managed to find her way out. Fascinating conversation. She is a very smart young woman. I have a lot of admiration for her.
    http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/leaving-the-church

  171. nevk21

    @miriamenglish

    Embarrassed, lol, oh those insults but in a nice way!

    I told you I am short of time, I just DO NOT have time to respond, I am working, on my computer!

    Conspiracies are a fact of life. It is complete when the screwed defends the one screwing them.

    Enjoy the rabbit hole:

    http://loveforlife.com.au/content/07/05/28/harold-holt-evidence-he-was-murdered

    Hannigan worthless crap hey, you bloody.fool.

    Once again:

    If you watched Scott Bartle’s excellent presentation, why when he wrote to the Governor General, Attorney General and others did he get no reply! Here lies the truth, we have been lied to, simple as that!

    Why didn’t they reply, why would it be, please feel free to provide suggestions.

  172. Annie B

    Thanks Miriam. ….

    I tried to listened to the interview. Sam Harris apologised at the beginning for some of the initial audio quality, and all was well for a short while – and then it dropped out, so I moved it forward and it worked. As it is very long, I shall return to it tomorrow, as I know approx. where I left it. … That alleged ‘church’ is an evil thing … and it’s good Megan eventually saw the light and left.

    Cheers —

  173. Annie B

    Michael – thank you for your advice re looking to High Court judgements for some explanations of the Constitution.

    I do find the matter intriguing. .. Ozfrenic apparently found one of the judgements and posted it. I will endeavour to find out a little more.

    I would imagine it might be a daunting task, unless there have been only very few considerations on the Constitution by the High Court.

    Won’t know that until I get there !!! 😉

  174. nevk21

    …any suggestions why an Australian Citizen…no bozo Scott Bartle….wrote letters to the Governor General and Attorney General, several times and never got a reply?

    Maybe they thought he was crazy!

    This is the other documentary Bartle made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umVj5XQYAi8

    Did you watch his first presentation. I think not because of the silence or more likely you did but it f..ked your argument. Go on see how this young well articulated Australian battled the phoney Customs Department and ultimately the phoney Australian Government.

    So Hannigan and Bartle and Russo and Mullins are Conspiracy Theorist’s who have it all wrong, do they!

    Why don’t you google F. Wiliam Engdahl and Antony C Sutton, and they are Conspiracy Theorist’s too are they?

    Or maybe some people just can’t get their head around the fact they have been conned!

  175. miriamenglish

    No Nev, I haven’t downloaded Bartle’s video because I figure it is probably just like the crazy, unjustified list of assertions made by Hannigan on his site, and the second Bartle video, at 150MB is beyond my download budget.

    Yes, Nev, I know it is useless to argue with you, but these people really are just nutty conspiracy theorists. Engdahl is a climate change denier for heaven’s sake, and Sutton has loony beliefs that the Soviet military was funded by the USA for nefarious purposes. I wonder if you also believe in an alien race of reptilian rulers?

    I hope you can wake yourself out of your obsession with conspiracies. To be sure, some conspiracies exist, but they are usually conducted by jerks with diminished mental capacity, and because of the difficulty in keeping mouths quiet they are virtually impossible to maintain as secret for more than a very short time. Most conspiracies actually turn out to be a paranoid viewing of normal human stupidity:

    Never attribute to conspiracy that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

  176. Kaye Lee

    “I wonder if you also believe in an alien race of reptilian rulers?”

  177. OzFenric

    Against my better judgement I’m still here. 🙁

    Nev, I understand the claims very well. Unfortunately I’ve seen no evidence of any kind to support them. With our current government, I would be very interested in any justification for the claim that they are illegitimate, but it requires more than someone pointing to a document and saying the wording has changed or it uses a different seal, so it must be a fake government.

    My previous question – please show me a reason to believe any of this other than “Because I said so” – dealt with support. I’m still waiting for a response to this. Now I add one more query, dealing with logic.

    If when we pay our taxes to the “Government of Australia” we are sending them to a corporation based in Washington for the benefit of their shareholders and defrauding real Australians, as specifically stated in Bartle’s video, then where does our ‘real’ government get the money for social support and healthcare and national security and education? Or, if these services are being provided by the same Government that we pay our taxes to, how does this make them in any way illegitimate as a government?

    Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, I have a fairly strong suspicion of what it might actually be.

  178. nevk21

    I would believe F.William Engdahl and Antony C Sutton any day over media whores.

    You believe what you want to believe.

    I am finished and have more important things to do.

  179. miriamenglish

    And there we have the nub of the problem. How do people come to believe illogical, unsubstantiated things merely on someone’s say-so?

    How does someone believe a climate change denier?
    How do people believe anything Tony Abbott says, despite revelations of all his lies?
    Why does Tony Abbott himself believe he is doing the right thing?
    Why do the people who work at the IPA believe tearing society apart and handing it over to corporate interests to be run via the market is a good thing, given the many glaring failures of the unregulated market?
    How does someone believe what superstitious goat-herders said 3,000 years ago?
    Why would anybody believe what an illiterate warlord, prone to what appears to have been epilepsy, said 2,000 years ago?
    Why would people believe what a carpenter said 2,000 years ago, especially since, if he existed, he never wrote anything down?
    Why would anybody believe what convicted con-man Joseph Smith said about being able to write the book of Mormon with the aid of a magic hat?
    Why do some people believe, against all science and logic, that we are being ruled by lizard people from the constellation Draco?
    Why do some people still believe in crop circles even after the people who made them have come forward and admitted they did it as a joke?
    Why does anybody believe a Nazi holocaust denier?
    Why do some people believe anti-vaccination campaigners? How do they continue to believe even after epidemics sweep through their ranks?
    Why do some people believe homeopathy does anything? Or Bowen massage? Or chiropracty?
    Why do people believe in telepathy, astrology, aura reading, tarot cards, and water divining?

    What is it about human thought processes that lets them get locked into such erroneous loops? How can it be that when confronted with contradictions between a belief and the real world, the belief can be favored and reality rejected? Even when the belief itself contains contradictions, those contradictions tend to remain invisible to the believer.

    Some of those beliefs, especially the religious ones, defend themselves against being questioned by making the question itself into an evil thing, thus protecting itself against being challenged or doubted. But many of the examples I’ve listed above don’t appear to rely upon that. Why do they persist even when confronted with conflicts from reality? Some, like homeopathy, and astrology are sufficiently vague that almost anything can seem to confirm it. Some, like chiropracty and Bowen rely upon our social nature to make us feel better when people give us attention. But for many other of these broken beliefs I can’t see any obvious mechanism that maintains them.

    Considering the damage this kind of erroneous mind-loop can wreak upon our world, it is pretty damn important that we work out why they happen and what we can do to protect ourselves from succumbing to them. Also, we need to find out how to help people break out of such loops.

    For myself I have just one rule: don’t believe anything. Accept things only provisionally, and always be ready to drop the most cherished idea if found to be flawed.

    I use a few techniques to help me do this. Try to always give things an open-minded look to see if they have some merit. Try to to take pleasure in finding your mistakes, no matter how embarrassing they are, and try to be quick to admit them. Be grateful to those who help you see your errors and deliberately thank them. I don’t always succeed in this, but does help. I am haunted by the possibility that I too have, in spite of all this, my own erroneous loops.

  180. Möbius Ecko

    Why does anyone believe an anti-wind power generation spokesperson when she says it causes health problems but has no proof.

    That’s a whole new topic miriamenglish. It has always intrigued me that some of those in the Jonestown cult were intelligent and successful people, and that goes for many of the crazy sects with Scientology being right up there. There must be a type of mental mindset that has these in every other way normal and intelligent people switch off their cynacism and logic to follow crackpots even to the point of suicide.

    Another example are those who blindly follow Abbott. I’m in disbelief debating with people who state Abbott is doing a great job in the face of every bit of evidence to the contrary, yet they don’t offer a single fact to back up their contention he’s doing a good job, except of course the usual fall back to blame “Labor” response.

  181. Annie B

    Miriam …

    Enjoyed the video link you provided … Hank Green is very entertaining, hands waving and all.

    Your latest post I also enjoyed reading. In the past I have succumbed to some weird stuff – not the outright conspiracy theories, but along various religious lines … but have now left that part of life. Mormons in particular …. nice people with good intentions towards one another, but with some of THE weirdest mystical theories imaginable. Had joined the Latter Day Saints – being quite chuffed at the attention shown to me by two big hulking handsome American ‘missionaries’ ( with their own agenda ) – who had made so many wonderful promises, and with whom I felt ‘safe’. …. I learned my ‘basic’ lessons.

    Was ultimately baptised into the church, and then came the crunch. …. It was required of every ‘Mormon’ all over the world, to vicariously baptise their deceased relatives into the Church, which involved again being immersed fully in water – while ( I believe ) uttering the name of the deceased, and some form of oath taking. …

    They started with my father as first candidate – – – which ended it for me. And as I would not comply, and respecting my fathers’ life and beliefs HE had, they sat little lone me in front of 9 male elders to read me the riot act – quietly and gently of course. …. Just a few weeks later, I received a letter from the head honchos in Salt Lake City, excommunicating me from the church, from all contact with their brethren. … I was advised that I should be ‘shunned’ ( or a word similar ) forthwith by Mormons – and I was … Years prior, had also dabbled around in Scientology for a VERY short time. … the use of a couple of cans held in the hands attached by wire to some device never to be seen by the pre-clear, had all bells ringing … so I left that, and lost a boyfriend in the process ( he’d introduced me to Scientology and L Ron Hubbard who wrote about the thetans that had invaded our bodies as good spirits, and life givers, that we only live by their good will etc etc. !! and the science ? of Dianetics )

    Rather think that people who want to believe in fanciful theories, and become completely immersed in them, are denying something in their real lives that they find difficult if not impossible to bear, and cannot face up to. … I know that is why I was so taken in by Mormonism, I had been on very shaky personal ground at the time. … but maybe they were partly instrumental – in the long run and unbeknown to them, to bring me back to reality to face my own problems. …. Which I did, successfully. ….

    Logic must reign.

    Your questions would be an interesting study I would think.

  182. miriamenglish

    Möbius Ecko, good points. Cults are especially interesting because of the way they can suck in people regardless of how intelligent they are. It fascinates me that this government acts like a cult in many ways. They keep repeating simplistic mantras, they vociferously denounce anyone who disagrees with them, they decry and suppress any objective evidence that they’re wrong, they believe they’re right without needing evidence.

    Annie, it’s interesting that you have direct knowledge of these cults. You were lucky to escape the clutches of Scientology. They are especially dangerous. I’m glad you enjoyed the video by Hank Green. He made a follow-up video of top 5 real conspiracies. Amazingly, he still manages to handle the somewhat disturbing items with his characteristic humor. The final item in the 5 is the most worrying as it may relate to the current Tea Party in the USA and their heavy funding of the LibNats in Australia.

    It is an interesting point you make that emotional crises may be part of the motivation in believing weird stuff. It’s something I wouldn’t have thought of. Thank you.

  183. Brett

    If only this was as simple as a difference of opinion Miriam. If you reread what I wrote, I referred to her political intelligence specifially, and alas, my observation of Victoria is entirely objective. Her post broadcasts a juvenile understanding of Obama and extreme ignorance of history. It is a common accolade people with only an unserious pop-culture education attribute to Obama; she is not alone by any means.

    I must disagree with her intention of the ‘flea’ comparison. The term ‘meaningless flea’ leaves no doubt that she refers to significance.

    She may have dozens of clearly articulated pieces here, but surely you do not consider this angry, frustrated, extremely childish and insult ridden ‘letter’ one of them?

    I am unsure what you are asking of me to present to you that my ‘mind has produced’. Could you elaborate?

  184. Brett

    What makes you say that Michael? Clearly my comment has hit home with yourself. If you have the capacity to muster a rational argument, now would be a good time to display the ability, rather than resorting to petty insults.

  185. nevk21

    Charles Shaw explains why so called “Conspiracy Theorists” have over history had to fight for the rights and freedoms of people who don’t know better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: