Mathias in "Cormann The Unawarian"!

Ok, it's proabably unfair to use Schwarnegger references when talking about Mathias…

Some interesting snippets from Senate Estimates

A few observations from Monday’s Senate Estimates hearings:Ministers Michaelia Cash and Michael…

Death by Video: Morrison Combats Refugees by Film

Caught in the backwater of the world’s existence, Australia struggles for relevance…

$35 Million Boost For Music Sector

Media ReleaseA Daley Labor Government will increase public support for the music…

Forget The Canberra Bubble, Scott And Take A…

Answering a question the other day, Scott Morrison dismissed a journalist's concern…

No, ScoMo, the last thing we need is…

There's something about the debate around asylum seekers that taps into the…

Refugees as Business: The Paladin Group Contract

Despair breeds profits; disturbances supply opportunity. The genius and venal nature of…

Morrison: Drop Everything And Start Talking About Boats,…

People have a tendency to expect history to repeat itself. Of course,…

«
»
Facebook

Ostracism (or “Hinch is no Aristeides and a vote is no ostracon”)

I have two daughters, a grand daughter and two grand sons. I have many other relatives, neighbours and friends. Close friends and friends separated by distance. Friends and relatives I love.

The mere thought that someone has hurt a single hair on their heads could well have me feeling murderous and grieving for a long time. If then a creature like Senator Derryn Hinch – cursed be his name and cursed be the Senate that has him in its fold! – decided to publicise the gruesome details of that event (real, alleged or imagined) would make both, my grief and my urge to be murderous near impossible to control.

Hinch has no idea about grief. He has a platform which he has turned into a pulpit of hateful dogmas. He has no idea of what he is saying nor what the effects of his sayings are, how powerfully hurtful they are and how close to being lethal they can be. Hinch does not protest. Don’t make the mistake of thinking his frenzied and mindless attacks are acts of protest. Don’t think that his sonorous accusations, all his drum beating and all his crass and vulgar, his bilious hatred towards a sex offender are acts of protestation.

They are anything but.

They are simply acts.

Acts by a bad actor

They are acts of accusation which, like ancient Greek stage masks, are worn to hide some flaw in his character. Hinch wears a mask to hide his attempts to gain kudos and relevance. Distinction from the rest of us. To hide his lack of, or his inadequacy of, almost anything that a compassionate human has. His loud accusations are nothing more than masks of inhumaneness.

He committed this despicable act of tweeting the gory details of what Aiia Maasarwe had suffered in the hands of a savage, not so as to correct an errant law because if that was his purpose he could have done it by many other means, very powerful means and much more effective means, means that we could all relate to and give our consent; this tweet of his shouted in no uncertain language, “I am your saviour, I am your messiah!”

It is the shouting of delusion, of psychopathy – in any case, of a deep psychological problem, desperately seeking a cure.

And, instead of correcting an errant law, the highly possible change that Hinch has effected would be that he brutalised the law. By this grotesque act, he is urging the masses to put pressure on the legislators to create new laws -or, rather to exhume old laws from the graves civilisation had buried them in a long time ago- and to apply them anew. Old, abandoned brutal laws become the new accepted brutal laws.

Next stop, if Hinch has his way, will be capital punishment or banishment for stealing a loaf of bread.

Hinch was born with a tin howler in his hands which he took for god’s golden mike and so he uses it at every opportunity to tell the world what the principal teacher of morals, according to some, Jesus, would say.

Hinch, like almost all politicians does not want to change the law. Such laws give them air and legitimacy. Something to hang their hat on. An emblem.

No, they are after the tin howler, the one they think god uses to straighten us all up.

I cannot bear to see his face let alone listen to his grating rants. I’ve stopped listening to him pretty much the first time I heard him speak. Can’t remember what it was but no matter, the message hasn’t changed one apostrophe or one exclamation mark since he started. One issue, one solution, one dogma: Stop the law from being the law, be as graphic as you can when describing the brutality a victim has suffered, create even more victims out of that one act of savagery, so that the law would change and so that he, Senator Derryn Hinch would be declared our Messiah.

Never mind that his dogma causes more victims, more grief, more pain, more virulent pain, more lasting pain.

It seems our radio stations, our TV channels, our press and our Parliaments have been, at some point not that long ago suddenly stormed by a horde of bastards and now we hear and see nothing putrid hatred for humanity.

From George Brandis’ “we have the right to be bigots, you know” to Dutton’s “they’re doing well at Manus and Nauru” to… things said in such number that, well, let me borrow Jack Hibberd’s delicious line, “too numerous to enumerate!”

Bastards, one and all.

What do we do? What do we do in a state where Democracy is the clarion call and “freedom of speech,” its slogan?

The ancient Athenians had an answer. Ostracism.

Aristides and the Citizens

Every year – once only a year and against one only citizen – people in Parliament would be asked if they want to hold an ostracism. If yes, then two months later (enough time for discussions to take place) a minimum of six thousand people would gather in the agora, the market place, the speech making place at the centre of the city and there they would scratch on broken pieces of pottery the name of the man they hated the most and place them in great urns. Men who have done unconscionable wrong or men who, like Aristeidis the Just, simply annoyed people. These were generally rich, influential people who got under the skin of the commoners for one reason or other. I won’t go on discussing this summary law, other than to say that there was no court, no judicial process, no lawyers, no prosecution nor defence lawyers, no involvement by any other person or body of persons. Just you and your ostracon, your shard of pottery. You were asked to participate in a reverse “popularity contest” by scratching on that shard the name of the person you hated the most.

Officials would preside and the person whose name appeared the most would be given ten days to get out of town – for ten years.

These were almost exclusively people of wealth and influence because it was they who could cause the greatest civil agitation and harm.

The banished person would be kept away from Athens for ten years with death being his punishment if he tried to come back any earlier. And when he did, all was forgiven. His property was not confiscated, his reputation – good or ill – remained and he would not be stigmatised for being ostracised.

Only one per year.

It was a way of keeping the political process and the ego of the politicians, just that little bit more sanguine. More circumspect.

It wasn’t an idea that was perfectly executed but certainly one that requires some examination as to how to improve it and make certain that it stays uncorruptedly in the hands of the common citizen.

And although, many rascals (Cleon and Cleophon are two that come to mind) have escaped this process, Senator Hinch, I’m certain, would be told to pack his venom-dripping bags and leave the country. I’d be there, at the agora with enough anger and fury to make sure I’ve spelled his name right:

Ντέρρυν Χιντς.

And please don’t bring up his own story of molestation. Whatever it was, it must have been horrific and would have had enormous impact on his views about paedophiles and sexual miscreants. This should make him think even more about what he is saying about what words he is using about what impact these words have upon the victims and their family.

The incident did nothing of the sort and at the kindest, one would say he is acting so relentlessly out of revenge.

I’m not so kind to people who cause so much grief.

He is doing it so obsessively because it’s the only thing that gives him, in his mind, the legitimacy to hold a mike, a tin howler and I very much wish that someone would take it off him because he is using it to cause harm and not good.

Yes, we could do this done by vote but an ostracon would see him out of the scene quicker and cheaper, which is what is sorely needed.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

47 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Paul Davis

    Thank you George. Imagine if we had revived the Athens ostracism say ten years ago… there would be fewer shock jocks and no Dark Sky.

  2. nonsibicunctis

    “I cannot bare to see his face let alone listen to his grating rants. I’ve stopped listening to him pretty much the first time I heard him speak. Can’t remember what it was but no matter, the message hasn’t changed one apostrophe or one exclamation mark since he started”

    … and how would you know that if you haven’t listened to him for any considerable period? How can you suggest that you can’t bare (sic) listen to his ‘grating rants’ when you supposed “stopped listening to him pretty much the first time I [you] heard him speak.”

    How is it that although you “Can’t remember what it was” you are able to declare that “the message hasn’t change one apostrophe or exclamation mark since he started”

    Your piece suggests that the discounting of the doctrine of Natural Justice and its replacement with vengeance by mob on the basis of personal dislike is somehow justifiable, even noble.

    You need to think again.

  3. Joseph Carli

    A good idea, the ostracon, George…except that if one was astute enough,he could hire people to scratch the name of his enemy on enough shards to get that person driven away from the market place and so profit from the absence of competition….and didn’t such things happen at election times where an “agent” for a particular person or party would recruit whole villages…who were too busy doing harvest to attend the voting booths in the major centres (the powers that be careful to call elections at times of harvest or so)with largesse or favour to cast their vote for the agent’s master.

    But hey!..you had to be wealthy even THEN to corrupt elections!

  4. nonsibicunctis

    Paul Davis, we would also have abandoned a long and well tried system of justice that, however imperfect, is far more valid than one you would also rail against, i.e. trial by media or the one you support here, condemnation on the basis of personal dislike. Yet you imply that things would be better.

    You also need to think again.

  5. Diannaart

    It’s not all about Derryn Hinch. He is a man of privilege with social media advantages beyond the means of the average person.

    This is what my friends and I have been discussing, the culture of fear and how, when we do express our concerns, experiences or knowledge, we are trivialised.

    We know it is only a small percentage of men who wreak so much damage across our world. Yet, still, not enough is being done. Here at AIM this very real and valid and valid fear rarely rates a mention.

    Why culture matters

    Too often when people talk about culture and sexual violence, they think of problems “out there” in the world. It is comforting, perhaps, to criticise other nations for their attitudes towards women and to tell ourselves that in Australia women are treated equally and with respect.

    But rape culture and its impacts are a global problem and the NCAS survey results show that Australia is not immune.

    In a culture that minimises, trivialises or excuses sexual violence – and shifts responsibility away from perpetrators and onto victims – individuals, organisations and communities are less likely to respond. When attitudes condoning sexual violence are common, some men are more likely to feel it is okay to behave disrespectfully or even violently. We as a community are less likely to take action to intervene, or to support a victim.

    In a culture that fails to take rape seriously, victims feel afraid to seek help. They are unsure of what kind of response they are going to receive from friends, family and institutions like police and courts.

    Yet sexual violence and the attitudes that condone it are not character faults in individuals; they are learned. If we want to change attitudes we need to change our culture and the influences that shape it. This involves the way we raise boys and girls, the way men’s and women’s relationships are shown in media and popular culture, and the position our leaders take on this issue.

    Much important work remains to be done to tackle, and ultimately prevent, sexual violence in Australia. We have to challenge rape culture at its source. This means addressing gender inequality as well as the attitudes and behaviours that minimise, trivialise or excuse sexual violence.

    We can start with early education with young people, delivering programs that teach respectful relationships and sexual ethics as the basis for consent. Individuals can take a stand against gender inequality and its everyday occurrences – whether it’s sexism, harassment or violence against women. Organisations and workplaces have an important role in acting on sexual harassment and discrimination.

    https://theconversation.com/rape-culture-why-our-community-attitudes-to-sexual-violence-matter-31750

  6. Paul Davis

    nonsibicunctis

    Of course you are right, i am chastened and corrected. Sorry.

  7. helvityni

    I have never taken any interest in our much -loved shock jocks, but I have seen the Senator Derryn Hinch sleeping, snoring in the Senate… We elect those people into our Parliaments…most puzzling…

  8. George Theodoridis

    Joe, corruption of this couldn’t happen for a number of reasons. The first, because Athens was, by today’s standards, a small city. About 50,000 “citizens” all in all, the rest being women (not to be seen at the ostracism) and slaves, also non-citizens and non eligible. Everyone pretty much knew everyone else. There was a suggestion that it might have happened once -by a crooked politician to remove another politician- but that too was discounted. This is because the ostracised person might have been banished but that doesn’t mean that he was robbed of any influence in the political running of the city. Usually these men were wealthy and well travelled with friends in many other surrounding cities. It’s just that, like Hinch, they weren’t in your face, day and night and the tweets were less offensive.

    Non, thanks for pointing out my typo. Fixed it. “Natural Justice” ey? What is Hinch screaming through his howler about again? Could it be that he wants this right to “natural justice” removed from certain people, you know, the people he tells us he hates?
    And he does it with such class and regard for the pain and suffering his rantings might cause. He is, in short, the epitome of all that is humane and good and virtuous, our Derryn is!
    Justice?
    He only screams the word when it affects him and when he wants to mutilate every chance that anyone else is worthy of it.

    “A long and well tried system?”
    Are you joking, are you being sarcastic or are you being downright disingenuous? It is a justice system that dispenses justice according to those who have legislated these laws, the rich and the scurvy-ridden pompous arses in powerful positions. “Not perfect?” Ask the indigenous, ask the poor, ask the vulnerable about how “perfect” these laws are! Check out some statistics!

    And I suggest that the reason that Justice -that great lady with the sword in one hand and the scales in the other, is crying scorching tears beneath her blindfold knowing what these thugs are doing in her name.

    As for hearing and seeing Hinch. I would have thought that it would be understood that I did hear some of his garbage and saw him often enough to know that what comes out of his mouth is nothing that can be differentiated from the rants of another fellow hater, many in fact. Pauline being but one.

    But thanks for pointing out my shameful ignorance about the word bare. Unbloody bearable!

  9. Joseph Carli

    ” Joe, corruption of this couldn’t happen for a number of reasons. . . .”……ah, George….spoken like a true Greek…

  10. George Theodoridis

    Diannaart, what you say is correct and what the passage you’ve posted says is also correct.
    What I am saying is that the reason you and the author of the passage are are correct is because of people like Hinch who are at the epicentre of this cultural phenomenon, because of their immense power of voice and the lack of it in brain and heart.

    It is, in fact about Hinch and his henchmen.

  11. George Theodoridis

    I do that occasionally, Joe! Stop being a bloody Roman!

  12. Joseph Carli

    Called for dinner, George..I’ll get back to you on that one!

  13. George Theodoridis

    Addendum for nonsibicunctis. Have you ever been in a taxi, non? I’m afraid for a while there I had to travel in them more often than I wanted. Their radio was always on some shock jock or other and on Hinch frequently. Tell them to either lower the volume or turn the thing off and you’d have an argument to deal with. These drivers were addicted to these loud mouths with nothing but Tony’s suppositories in their heads. That’s how I heard what Hinch and all the other alien creatures are about.

  14. Diannaart

    George

    I do understand the point you are trying to make.

    However, Hinch is only a small part of a problem which is not being addressed adequately.

    Hinch did not rape and murder a young woman. Another man did. Perhaps we should be discussing this man’s motivations, how he thought he could simply abduct a woman and use her like a throwaway sex toy.

    Worse than Hinch, Codey Hermann sees himself as an aspiring media … something …

    Media have named the man as Codey Herrmann, a self-described aspiring songwriter and rapper who has multiple social media accounts featuring posts about drugs and depression.

    “Suicidal thoughts yeah, I’ve walked the line. The real fight was keeping all the demons in my mind on the inside,” he rapped in a song posted to a website three months ago.

    On January 8, Herrmann posted a short message to Facebook:
    “International girl
    Of mystery
    You knows who you are.”

    https://www.mamamia.com.au/aiia-masarwe-arrest/

    Hermann, like, Hinch are symptoms, not the catalyst nor epicentre, more a part of an epidemic of distorted ideas about women and humanity.

  15. RomeoCharlie29

    Perhaps his fellow women senators could show their contempt, if indeed they have it, for Senator Hinch by turning their backs on him — a sort of ostracism— the next time he rises to speak as it will probably be to give vent yet again to his obsession.

  16. nonsibicunctis

    George, there is a considerable difference between the doctrine of Natural Justice and the common understand of natural justice. Perhaps you might wish to check that out at some time.

    I empathise with your anger at Hinch’s actions. I found hit tweet despicable and completely devoid of compassion or consideration of how it would affect so many.

    However, playing the man rather than the ball will rarely win you the game. Neither will ignoring fair comment on a self-contradictory argument that removes your credibility at the outset.

    I suggest that, rather than dressing up your dislike for Hinch in accounts of the unjust way in which citizens at one time used mob mentality to justify exiling someone for nothing more than that lots of people disliked him – or were in some way coerced to say that they disliked him, you simply say what you mean;

    “I don’t like Hinch. I think he did the wrong thing. I have no time for him.”

    As is often said today, “less is more”, and as a generalisation, that has always been true in the wise use of language.

  17. George Theodoridis

    Non,with all due and undue respect, I don’t think you understood a word of what I said and, I shamefully admit that I understood none of yours either. Perhaps we’re talking at cross purposes. I don’t know but I think we ought to leave the argument here at least until we find a language we both understand.

  18. George Theodoridis

    Romeo, a bloody good idea. Ostracism by turning your arse at abhorrent people. That’s exactly the point of the ancient form… of telling bastards and their lawyers that they’re not wanted. It was very effective against Howard.
    The putrefying, heartless vulture is still searching for a way to get back in.

  19. George Theodoridis

    Mob rule:
    On one side of justice we have mob rule and on the other, the rule of The Mob.
    When justice is asked to rule between two members of the mob (this is quite rare since the mob can’t afford the lawyers to call on justice) Justice might adjudicate fairly but Zeus help anyone from the mob if s/he calls on Justice to adjudicate on a case between them and a member of The Mob!
    When it comes to Justice, there’s one rule for the mob and another for The Mob.

  20. Joseph Carli

    George…back to our discussion on Greek philosophy…..I have worked for several Greek builders over a long period of time…so I got to know how they reason (in public) and how they ..step by step come to a rational position.

    1) I was at a regular site one day and I needed a long extension ladder..”Here..use this one”…Yanni pointed to a bright aluminium ladder stored behind the shed.
    “Oh” I said wide eyed ” this is a beauty…how long you had this ladder?”
    “I got it a couple of weeks ago…a linesman from the electricity company left it behind when he did a job out the front”
    “What…just forgot it?”
    “Yes…it was there for three days in our front yard, so I moved it around the side so it wouldn’t get stolen”..Yanni quietly informed me…I must have looked a tad credulous…so he explained his motivation.
    “Look..it is a general rule we Greeks have…: If an item is left laying around for several days without the owner coming back for it, then you move it to a place to protect it from theives……Then, after several more days and the owner does not come back for it, you can move it to a more secure place INSIDE your property…if then the owner does not come back for it after another week or so…it is considered yours through abandonment.”

    I gave a low whistle and pout of admiration for Yanni’s “honesty” as a citizen.
    And I used “his” ladder.

    There is a 2 and 3..but I will come to them later.

  21. Diannaart

    An excellent suggestion from RomeoCharlie29.

    I would suggest that all senators of any gender give a backside salute to Hinch. After all murder and rape is not a women’s issue, it is a horror for all to deal with.

    However, Joseph Carli wants a return to his discussion with George on Greek philosophy … I will leave the gentle reader to consider such a wish.

  22. George Theodoridis

    Building sites, where Philosophy is given a ladder and the ladder is given a home.
    Wonderful story, Joe, much appreciated.

  23. Joseph Carli

    I knew you would appreciate it, George…Greeks are like that…: always looking for the ‘soul of the matter”….and after all, is it not written that every great column of Truth that supports the rafters of the heavens has its feet firmly set in the salt of the Earth.

  24. George Theodoridis

    Diannaart, I felt the sting and the welt of a whip on my bum just then. Was it you?

    I might have mentioned in passing that I am the grand father of three little angels, the cutest ones on earth. I don’t know and I do not wish to intrude and be a crass sticky nose but you might be aware that grand parents, the moment they become such, lose all control of their time which is henceforth fragmented according to the wish, whim or behest of the little ones. We get five minutes here, ten there, thirty when the gods are being sympathetic.

    I haven’t done a decent hour’s work for the last three years, two months and sixteen days.
    But I am not mentioning this either as a complainant or as a plaintive of excuses. The babies are the highlight of my existence, as I am sure all babies are to the existence of the rest of the world.
    So, if I’m ever late with my responses, this could very well be the reason.

    As for our discussion. I gather we differ on the issue of who’s at fault when a woman is raped, especially in such a brutal way.

    The focus I wanted to give in this article was not on why such rapes take place -and I might add here, you’re being mightily unfair to suggest with a fairly sharp and bitter sarcastic dog whistle that I’m saying that “rape is not a women’s issue” if this was truly your intention. Nothing is further from the truth of what I intended the article to be about.

    But let me look at our final positions.
    I say “men like Hinch are at the epicentre of such abhorrent crimes” and you say that, no, he and the perpetrator are. ” Hinch is only a small part of a problem which is not being addressed adequately,” that he and the perpetrator are only the symptoms of the problem and that we should, instead be discussing the perpetrator’s motives. Have I got the battle lines drawn accurately?

    If so, we are running into the well-worn path of circular argument posed more luminously by the religious and the atheists, to wit:
    “Who created the Universe?”
    “God did!”
    “And who created God?”

    The ancient Greeks had it cut off at the knees, as it were. “In the beginning was a god called Chaos (a male whose name means “vacuum,” or “void”) and Chaos with no copulation with anyone at all, gave birth to Uranus and a whole lot of other creatures which started off the ever-expanding Universe. There ends their creation story.
    The Christians have another. According to St John 1.1, “In the beginning was logos (reason for, logic for) and the logos was with god and god was logos,” so, in effect, we’re told to shut up and be nice little sheep. Only god knows why he created the universe. He is the reason and he is its creator. He is the Shepherd of the universe.

    We, in our humble debate, I humbly suggest, don’t want to end up in the snares of such a hollow and absurd, circular, “chicken n egg” argument. We are better than that, far better equipped with reason and logic so we examine the question more closely.

    I agree, the problem is one created by the society as a whole but here we are talking of a society comprising 7 billion people! Problems of this nature are not enclosed and incarcerated within geographical borders; they are universal, so long as humans are a part of the universe. And we cannot in any way at all, fix this universal problem by saying that that’s what it is, that it is… well, universal.
    We cannot fix this problem because we don’t have the reins of everyone’s psyche, a phenomenon which is moulded by a multitude of things, some of which are, yes, generically societal. There are many others, genetic dispositions to violence also playing a major role.

    What I wanted to discuss here and to illuminate is the fact that the effect tweets and other types of utterances of this nature, made by mentally ailing bogans with a mike in front of them and a huge platform to stand on, are very nasty, very dangerous, very corrosive to a society’s need to be a “virtuous” society (as Aristotle would call it) and a “happy and just” society (as Plato would have it)

    I wanted to tell Hinch that he’s being a bastard. You want me to say that but also to think about the problem being a societal one and that he’s not the problem but a symptom of the problem (as is the perpetrator.).

    Thinking as you do, puts a full stop to the debate. We can get no further. I certainly don’t know what to do with such massive problems, perpetrated, encouraged, nurtured and nourished relentlessly by the media, the greater part of which is not only run by deranged men like Hinch, not because they are deranged but because they are reckless goons, uncompromisingly narcissistic Dorian Greys, seeking to gain even more meaningless kudos for himself.
    I wanted to highlight this nature of this man.
    Had I the urge to discuss the perpetrator, his motives for the crime, the effect that this crime had on the victim’s family and friends, indeed upon our society as a whole, as well as the effect that Hinch’s crime had upon the same family and friends and society, the article would have stretched to many pages.

    I thought that highlighting Hinch’s grotesque absorption on his ego would have been enough for one article.

    Perhaps you could grace us with an article of your own, expounding your views on the wider matter of society’s flaws when it comes to the safety of its citizens, the urgent need for a more -nay, totally- egalitarian attitude towards both genders, all religions, all sexual orientations, all political beliefs. Because these are but a few of the contributors to crime of every sort.

  25. George Theodoridis

    Yes, I noticed that, Helvi. Couldn’t take my eyes off the TV set last night!
    What stunning tennis from both players. Awestruck we was!

  26. Diannaart

    George

    My ire was not aimed at you. Although you would be forgiven for so thinking.

    Also thinking we got wires tangled about rape, I believe it is a societal problem, not just a woman’s. I admit your pages are probably not the most suitable ones to air such grievances regarding violence. However, there was not much choice. Yes, I would love t write an article to address such issues myself. That will have to wait, personal reasons.

    As for Hinch’s ego. Aging white males obsessed with themselves are not rare. Hinch is but a small part of a very large problem.

  27. nonsibicunctis

    Perhaps, George Theodoridis, you ought to get down from those pompous heights you appear to occupy and actually listen to others. I would also suggest that in this last piece you have effectively stated what I suggested in my last response to you – the one that you subsequently suggested meant that I didn’t understand your article – another arrogant and false assumption, by the way.

    You appear to feel that writing a hundred words when only one or two are needed is worthwhile. It also appears that you have only one reference point and that is the various opinions of ancient Greeks, who despite your reverence for them, often contradict one another and, in many respects have had their particular views shown to be considerably lacking. I suspect that, leaving aside your obvious heritage, you see this constant ancient philosopher wrapper into which you pour all your diatribes, gives them some sense of wisdom or gravity.

    In fact, Dianaart was right on the mark in what she wrote and it is your pompous and laborious response that has it wrong.

    You need to take a good look at yourself, George. Your arrogance and clear belief that you are either the font of all wisdom or very close to it is about as far from the truth as it could be.

    Indeed, you said you couldn’t understand my last response to you yet it was simple, brief, clear and direct. No complications and no padding. If you couldn’t understand that then I’d suggest that you are in serious need of some help with English literacy.

    Clearly, as do so many, you believe that the the more copious your offerings and the more repetitive your assertions, the more they will impress people as being authoritative. They are not.

    I hadn’t intended to respond to your last dismissive and rude comment to me but reading the continual tedious, dressed up, and largely empty articles you produce under grandiose titles is becoming just too much to take. Someone needs to let you know that, no matter how fine a man you may be, or how much your heart is in the right place and your motivation only to do good and contribute to a better world, your pompous, overbearing, unnecessarily wordy articles and their logical fallacies and dependence for worth on the respect people have for ancient philosophers, just do not cut it.

  28. George Theodoridis

    Non, I join -with some considearable pride- Paul Davis in the dark recesses of the chastisement corner you’ve put him.

    Mate, I have a choice which is this, either I write as I write, provided the editors allow me to do so, or I simply don’t write. I also have the choice to either read what’s here or not to read. I am sincerely drawn to the intelligent, informative and engaging writing I read here.
    I suggest most strongly you exercise the choice of not reading my “pompous” stuff at least for the sake of your own equanimity.

    My writing is what it is. Leave it, mate, or you’ll go blind.

  29. nonsibicunctis

    Then, George, you continue to ignore an opportunity to learn. One that often has to start with a little humility, the strength to admit an error with grace, and the ability to listen and consider difference actively.

    I did not chastise Paul nor yourself. I suggested that you think and wrote about what was written, not who you are. i.e. the issue, not the person.

    However, if Paul is standing in a corner – and there is no reason why he should, nor you – it is your choice as to whether you wish to join him.

  30. George Theodoridis

    So gracious of you, non!

    Now do us a favour will ya?

  31. nonsibicunctis

    Thank you, George. Who is the ‘us’ you refer to or should I take that in the vein of the royal ‘we’?

    Regardless, yes, George, if I can I will do you a favour. What is it that you want?

  32. Joseph Carli

    Now, George…George….remember the serenity….

    2) This other Greek developer I worked for….A squad of tradies and labourers were having smoko at one of his sites, when he comes swiftly into the car-park there in his little sporty number car…he leaps out and calls for all of us to go straight over to a another job in a suburb close by…
    “Number 63 East Terrace…I’ll meet you there in a minute!”..and off he goes…

    WE are all gathered there at number 63 waiting for Spiro….after a bit we can hear his car racing down the street…he pulls up comes over and starts to tell us what he wants done….

    It was then he spotted the car parked in the dirve-way….

    “whose is this car?” he demanded to know….of course, no-one did know…He then went into a rant….

    “Who parks their car in another person’s drive-way…what sort of delinquint would think THEY had the right to park their car in another person’s drive way…who the hell owns this thing…I know what I’ll do..I’ll ring the council to come over and tow it away!…”…..

    All this in a shouting voice so that the neighbours could hear….and one did…the attractive lady who lived in the unit next door… She appeared glancing over the fence, a small gardening fork and gardening gloves in hand..

    “Excuse me…excuse me” she quietly and politely interrupted Spiro’s arm-waving proclomation just at the point of calling the council on his phone..”excuse me…it’s my car…..”……Spiro immediately took in the seriousness of the situation…he had railed in anger at a beautiful woman…He quickly snapped his phone shut, straightened his suited form and approached the fence…

    “That’s alright then” he suavely murmured “You’re a beautiful woman…you CAN park your car there”.

    Because…George..as was explained to me at a later time when Spiro was excusing his fawning over a particular woman we both knew…:

    “We Greeks believe and take as a point of faith…that if a woman physically offers herself to a man, and he refuses her advances…….(he pinched his thumb and fore-finger tight together at this moment)……it is the ONE SIN God will not forgive…the one sin…God WILL NOT forgive..”

    And in that last statement was the philosophy of Epicurius….surely?

  33. Joseph Carli

    Ahhh!…but , George!….Zorba!…it’s Zorba….you can almost hear the bouzouki playing even on these pages!!…..Ah…I learned so much from those Greeks…..I’ll tell you another one day…

    But here..just for you…: https://freefall852.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/a-simple-love-affair/

  34. Vikingduk

    Thanks George, your article does it for me. I find the arrogant pompous criticism just more shit. Nonsi, old bean, I suggest you desist looking in the mirror when criticising this or any other article, pomposity seems to be your middle name. Yeah, I know, an entirely simplistic comment from me, but shit, the surf’s crap, the blue bottle invasion monstering all and sundry, and anyone with the will and the energy to write an article deserves more than ego tripping shit. Maaaate, really easy, don’t like it, move on. This comment has been sponsored by a very nice Vodka. Prost.

  35. Diannaart

    I have yet to read of any sympathy for Aiia, here or on other related threads.

    Let alone a glimmer of light upon the day to day lives of women.

    But that would ruin everything, I guess.

  36. nonsibicunctis

    Vikingduk,

    At least you don’t disappoint. That sort of pathetic prattle seems to be all I’ve seen from you. I’m sure that you must be capable of better so I wonder why you insist on writing puerile nonsense and demeaning me for what I’m not and for what I haven’t done.

    There is nothing whatsoever pompous about me, mate. Nor am I about to descend to the level of rhetoric in which you seem to relish. Perhaps when you either learn the definition of a few more words or, should you already have a more extensive vocabulary, start to use it, you may write something that is worthwhile reading.

    I notice that George can’t or won’t answer a simple question. I wonder why that is, particularly as it was asked in order to clarify one he’d asked me.

    Similarly, I wonder how many of those who appear to get off on lambasting, slurring and demeaning various others on this site actually have the nerve or take the trouble to say it directly to the person. How many of those besmirching Hinch, for instance, have taken the trouble and had the courage to say those things directly to him – at least by email if not face-to-face?

    Were some of you to step back from your self-gratifying ego trips and actually go back over what you’ve written as ‘devil’s advocate’, being as objective as you can, you might just realise that most of the time you write in the same style and with same sham hyperbole and personal attacks that is typical of right wing Liberals – the very people whose views and policies you purport to oppose.

    In other words, you lower yourselves to the same pathetic standard. Is that really why you’re here? It seems much more likely that you are taking advantage of Michael’s generosity in moderation to boost your own egos as you revel in your mutual appreciation society while saying very little of import in terms of useful evidence based argument against those policies you profess to be so bad.

    I have no doubt that both individually and collectively you could do much better and actually contribute something of substance that would make the AIMN worthy of its name. Unfortunately, it seems that with, a few notable exceptions, the majority of you are not willing to do that. Much less effort and much more ego building to have pats on the back for unexceptional and usually poorly written diatribes that offer nothing more than the average Internet troll.

    So, although no one has yet had the courage to say it outright and directly, I will move on but sadly, for I had great hopes for this group when Michael set it up. Right now it is failing miserably and that’s a real shame.

    Censorship is, of course, one of the first recourses of dictators, autocrats, and others who cannot accept any critical analysis or different view than their own, let alone actually voice it. Hitler burnt the books. Fraser closed school libraries. People such as yourselves just fall back on the pathetic -“if you don’t like it, go away.” It is cowardice and the inability to mount an evidence-based argument to support your own claims or counter those of anyone who differs.

    It is a poor, even pathetic stance, and does those who take it no credit at all.

    So, Michael, I am sorry that your dream hasn’t eventuated but congratulate you for your efforts. I cannot find any button to facilitate leaving the group so perhaps you can just take me off the list. That should allow the cliques and the mutual admiration society and the self annointed brilliant political analysts or raconteurs to enjoy the paucity of intelligent and well written and directed prose which has real purpose and that uses armaments of rhetoric and evidence rather than the mud-slinging and beligerent intolerance of those who have the temerity to be different.

    I won’t apologise for the difficulties of my position on the autism spectrum or my mensa IQ or my wide experience in a variety of fields and disciplines from the most menial to university lecturing and much in between. Nor will I apologise for my three degrees, many certificates, wide life experience and having managed to hold down work and be a single bread-winner for around 55 years, all from a start of a slum background and being the black sheep because others couldn’t see what I could and therefore derided it as fanciful, without even giving it a thought.

    Your criticisms and animosity are not new to me. Those who live with mental health issues accept such treatment as every day normality.

    Amongst you, you’ve called me all manner of demeaning names. At no time have any of you actually taken the trouble to actually read and attempt to understand the point or points that I was making. That is clear from the nature and swiftness of most responses and their content.

    Ok, so be it, enjoy your mutual masturbation party and applaud those who can turn on the biggest and longest display of nothing more than what all have already seen and know about.

    I wish you no ill and sincerely hope that you turn the group into one with purpose, a degree of discipline and direction, and a focus on issues rather than people. There are many people here. Some are well capable of offering much, others simply delight in seeing their own names in print – and because it is think that they have offered something valuable. Some are bemused by the occasional disagreement on an issue turning into something approaching a flame war. Some simply offer nothing but attacks on contributors & some say nothing at all or simply follow the crowd.

    Ok. Cut me off, Michael. No hard feelings. I admire what I understand were your intentions but perhaps I got that wrong. I still think that the site could be purposeful and a real focus for enlightenment and informed and well aimed thrusts against the Liberal hypocrisy and the facile and skewed reporting of the main stream media. However, it will take a change from this general atmosphere of hostility to newcomers and those who differ or have the temerity to expose flaws in argument and so attack the person who exposed them.

    Bye all, Most of you, I’m sure, have got what you wanted – me gone. Some of you never even noticed I was here and, reading this, would wonder what had been going on. Some will have a conscience tweaked. For others it will be c’est la vie or ‘fuck him’. The real culprits, of course, unless stopped to prevent this prediction eventuating, will simply continue their assault on my character. Whoever or whatever your reaction, I hope it gives you satisfaction, though I would like to think that some of you, at least a few, might learn something and change your ways.

    bye all

    nonsibicunctis / mikisdad / roger hawcroft / the wicked troll / isopen / fransdad / gandolph / … and more.

  37. George Theodoridis

    It’s not about Hinch, it’s about the whole society!

    The thing that makes me feel quite angry is the formulaic phrase, “it’s the problem that needs to be fixed by the whole society.”

    It’s what politicians say all the time and that’s why nothing is ever done about any problem. We have been placated by waffle, by motherhood statements.

    The thing that is called “society” is akin to what is called Odysseus’ trick: He wanted to make certain people thought he was mad, (so as not to be drafted to the war against Troy) so he yoked a donkey and a horse to the plough and began ploughing his paddock. The two animals have different strides so the ploughing cannot be done. Such is society. Twenty-odd million animals in Australia, 7 billion of them in the world, all of which have their own stride, all of which wanting the plough to go where they want.

    Nothing is ever done.

    This was Ruddock’s trick on the QANDA of the 22nd of October last year, in respect of doing something about climate change: “… if you’ve not got China if you’ve not got Europe, if you’ve not got India, if you’ve not got the United States if you’ve not got South America all involved …” (https://theaimn.com/the-children-the-children/The children, the children!)

    Anything at all done about that issue yet?

    I prefer quick direct action at the issue, by looking at it and seeing how it can be fixed. What happened in Aiia’s case? How can we avoid it happening? Better lighting perhaps, I don’t know but that’s where I’d be looking, not at what is wrong with the whole society and how we can fix it.
    It is true that this issue, this problem represents a wider problem for the wider world but if I’m going to be effective at all, it’s best I quickly try and look at the narrow and surrounding precincts of that problem rather than to wait until someone finds a solution that can be adapted to the whole world and which is effective. There is no such solution and looking for it is a waste of time.

    The phrase, “it’s not about him… he’s only a tiny part of the problem… it’s the whole society…” is nothing more than jingo singing, a euphemism for the political act of doing nothing. Nothing is done -EVER!- and nothing is done now, other than perhaps summoning all the “experts” to an endless, million dollar talk fest.

  38. Diannaart

    George

    All I have seen is you trying to bring Hinch into further disrepute. Maybe he deserves it, but that is not really looking at the problem which inspired Hinch to grandstand, nor, other men such as yourself to jump on the self righteous soap box. Any words about another rape/murder? Crickets.

    Also, pointing out that you have granddaughters is in the same pathetic dog whistle pile, as men who claim they have daughters, or maybe their mother was a woman. “Look at me, I know some females, I must be caring.”

    Jesus wept!

    I am hearing nothing about the continuation of violence to women and children. All other crimes except sexual predation and domestic violence have gone down in this country.

    Why?

  39. Michael Taylor

    Don’t go yet, nonsibicunctis. I’d like your appraisal on my article (that just went up).

  40. George Theodoridis

    Because the article was about Hinch’s act! That act! Hinch and his mindset! That’s it! Sorry if I didn’t cover your full wish list, which I see as superfluous since it is fully implied in my article.
    Please do your own writing and let us see your concerns in full away from other people’s articles.
    I shall gladly spend the time to read it!

  41. Joseph Carli

    Diannaart..Why is it that whenever I hear you demanding sympathy for ” the day to day lives of women”…I can only get a picture of you burning a candle more for YOURSELF than for the greater torment of women …”out there”.

    If you go to any number of old..now unused…cemetaries, you will see so very many children’s graves from the era 1895 – 1905…children from one month old to 3,4,5 years old and some a bit older…and many from the one family…the loss of life in those times would have been no easier to bear than these times…and in every cemetery there is a sadness..Everyone here feels the sadness for all tragic deaths..

    So unless you are holding some sort of “product placement franchise” for the tragic deaths of so many people and are just frustrated at the lack of purchasing of your “product”….perhaps you could hold off on the “look at me being the only sympathetic person in the village”…promo.

  42. helvityni

    This militant attitude towards men is not going to make the relationships between sexes any better, maybe worse….

    George’s article was about Hinch, but he also made it clear what he felt about the killing of Aiia Maasarwe….

  43. Michael Taylor

    I think we all need to be a bit more respectful of each other, especially as we don’t know each other’s life situation.

    After Whitlam was sacked by Kerr, me and a few footy mates were arguing with an oldish Liberal supporter, who we repeatedly swore at. Indeed, each time we saw him in the pub we’d always call him a stupid old f&c.

    About 15 years ago – one ANZAC Day – the nightly news interviewed a WW2 pilot who was shot down over Germany, and he told of his escape. It was a remarkable and inspiring story.

    Nonetheless, I probably felt more shame that night than I ever have in my life. This WW2 hero was the bloke we used to abuse in the pub 30 years earlier.

  44. George Theodoridis

    Many thanks Joe and Helvi.
    I would have thought that my views on women were made very clear; but not only on women. Men too. I would come to their defence also had they been attacked- by other men or by women.

    I am saddened by how this column has turned so toxic. That was certainly not my intention.

    In the article, I wanted to fight a common enemy because this dirt bag, Hinch constantly makes the process of fair trail impossible by setting himself above the law and by publicising details of cases that are sub judice – and then complains about how the law didn’t act properly.
    Let us know, Hinch, where you’ve got your law degree.
    Let us know Hinch who gave you the right to be so intrusive with other people’s grief. Criminally intrusive!
    Let us know Hinch who made you the arbiter of what the public should or should not know about anything.

    That was the main intent of the article.

  45. Marion R Hosking OAM

    I confess I cannot read all but it seems to me most of the outraged are male; protesting overmuch? I, as a grandmother(grt) and mother have often wondered the reason the facts are not presented . As cruel and dreadful those facts are they were committed and we should know of them. The cynical side of me sees it a protecting males. So to prevent people thinking that we should have ALL the facts but more importantly people MUST know their acts will be publicised. How is it that all those associated with these cases;police, lawyers, judges are more capable of handling horrible events than I; I am offended by that view. We MUST know of what people are capable!

Leave a Reply

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

Return to home page
Scroll Up
%d bloggers like this: