43 thoughts on “Meme of the Day #20”

  1. The US elites have been engineering a Russia war for years (with the possible exceptionof the Trump term), now it’s happening. It was and is avoidable.

    It’s still a baddie vs baddie proxy vs baddie visible puppetmaster proposition


    Report comment

    8
  2. How much are the presstitutes being subsidised to be the media arm of the government? Is this why there is so much propaganda being published? Does the government now own the press?

    Shouldn’t someone in the senate petition to stop public money going to any press (and why stop at the press while they’re on it).


    Report comment

    10
  3. “You’d think that after four or five different renditions of Batman that audiences would want something new.”

    They determine what the audience wants by seeing how much the movie grosses. If it does OK, they keep making them. When they start losing money, they stop until they run out of other remakes to do, then try again.
    See: Superman, Spiderman, Rocky etc etc.
    It’s easy when it has been a generation of moviegoers who haven’t seen one before (eg Superman).

    You’d think that a new idea might get the odd play, and they do – but very few. Better to stick with what’s tried and tested, apparently. Might be “speeding up” as the Twitter generation seem to have the attention span of the proverbial goldfish…


    Report comment

    5
  4. Bazingasays:
    March 8, 2022 at 1:42 pm
    How much are the presstitutes being subsidised to be the media arm of the government? Is this why there is so much propaganda being published? Does the government now own the press?

    https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/media-technology-communications/television/relief-australian-media-during-covid-19

    “Commercial television and radio broadcasters will receive a 100% rebate on their Commercial Broadcasting Tax for 12 months.

    The rebate will provide the commercial broadcasting sector with $41 million in tax relief for the use of broadcasting spectrum, backdated to start from 14 February 2020.”


    Report comment

    7
  5. “The rebate will provide the commercial broadcasting sector with $41 million in tax relief for the use of broadcasting spectrum, backdated to start from 14 February 2020.”

    Because people stuck at home and/or jobless wont be watching more TV…
    Oh, that’s right – so much more “community service announcements” needed, to make sure you sanitise your hands, wear a mask, get jabbed etc etc.
    And it helps align them with that paragon of what’s good and right, TheirALPBC.
    So not all bad, eh comrades?


    Report comment

    7
  6. “Bazingasays:
    March 8, 2022 at 1:42 pm
    How much are the presstitutes being subsidised to be the media arm of the government? Is this why there is so much propaganda being published? Does the government now own the press?

    Shouldn’t someone in the senate petition to stop public money going to any press (and why stop at the press while they’re on it).”

    Yes, many governments now own the press. It’s a big problem in Canada and NZ. Not quite so bad here in Oz. The Turdeau government bailed out the mainstream media in Canada….so that now it’s completely beholden to the Liberal government. This was even more blindingly obvious during the Truckers’ protest in Ottawa. Not one….I repeat not one…mainstream media outlet came out in support of the Truckers…and instead parroted Turdeau’s line that they were racists, misogynists and Nazis.


    Report comment

    16
  7. Government in Australia does not own media aside from the ABC, which it’s fair to say isn’t exactly its mouthpiece. Herald-Sun, Telegraph, Courier-Mail and Advertiser plus The Australian are News Corp (Rupert Murdoch) and The Age, Sydney Morning Herald and Financial Review are Nine, which also owns the Nine Network and a string of radio stations. Seven (Kerry Stokes) owns TV and The West Australian. TEN is owned by Viacom-CBS.


    Report comment

    1
  8. “Killing the dreamsays:
    March 8, 2022 at 4:10 pm
    Government in Australia does not own media aside from the ABC, which it’s fair to say isn’t exactly its mouthpiece. Herald-Sun, Telegraph, Courier-Mail and Advertiser plus The Australian are News Corp (Rupert Murdoch) and The Age, Sydney Morning Herald and Financial Review are Nine, which also owns the Nine Network and a string of radio stations. Seven (Kerry Stokes) owns TV and The West Australian. TEN is owned by Viacom-CBS.

    Firstly, I’m not aware that anyone here said that the government here in Oz owns the media, except for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. You’re making up stuff again.

    Secondly, well done for admitting that the government owned ABC isn’t a mouthpiece for the government, because what the ABC is now is a mouthpiece for progressive green left ideology and ideologues.


    Report comment

    13
  9. Good God…..
    but then Bat Man is the alter ego of the concealed eccentric but yet still super rich and ultra woke Bruce Wayne.

    As for the media…… extremely tiring, like the politicians they support, childish at the best of times.
    So incredibly tiring that the only beat that ever changes is when they swap hands

    Absolute wankers in reality and action….


    Report comment

    5
  10. In 1991, on the dissolution of the Soviet Empire, Ukraine was left in possession of Soviet nuclear weapons based on Ukrainian territory.

    In an effort to reduce nuclear proliferation, the US, Britain and Russia guaranteed Ukrainian independence and sovereignty – including the right to make alliances and sign treaties – in return for the Ukraine relinquishing those weapons.

    Russia is in breach of that commitment – as are the US and Britain.

    Russia is acting illegally and without justification. No amount of disdain for the Biden administration justifies ignoring this or abusing those who point it out.


    Report comment

    4
  11. No amount of disdain for the Biden administration justifies ignoring this or abusing those who point it out.

    Who’s doing that again?
    The US State Dept Maidan Revolution ended Uke independence and sovereignty, Zelenskyy and his Oligarchs lit out for parts unknown on Valentines Day.
    Uke is now a failed State and Putin has a Responsibility to protect Russians and Russian speaking Ukes from the HeadChoppers now pouring in over the Polish border.
    End of story.


    Report comment

    3
  12. PeterW, the eastern “provinces” of Ukraine, (Donetsk and Lughansk), have paid a massive price, in lives, since 2014. (At least 14,000 dead from Ukraine Govt Military action).

    Despite the shutting down of three TV stations and imprisioning of political opponents, the msm are attempting to show Ukraine as “Brave little Belgium”. They and, Zelensky in particular, are not.
    Even the day before, the shambles of an invasion, the Muscovites have managed to conduct, the Ukes shelled the east 29 times in 24 hours.
    moderated

    2
  13. If that is the “case”…. then I expect you to endorse the US invasion of Canada to protect English-speaking Canadians from Trudeau.
    A common language does not mean common nationality.

    But no, under no law whatsoever does either the US or Russia have the right to cancel Ukraine’s independence as a sovereign nation. Putin’s legal responsibility to Ukrainians is to get Russian forces the hell out of Ukraine.


    Report comment

    2
  14. then I expect you to endorse the US invasion of Canada to protect English-speaking Canadians from Trudeau

    What a weird analogy. There is no disputed territory between the US and Canada.

    Why not try picking an analogy from one of the many actual territorial disputes that exist in history? Is it that the example of any actual territorial dispute destroys your case?


    Report comment

    4
  15. PeterW says:
    March 8, 2022 at 5:48 pm

    ..
    Thanks Peter.
    This site has gone nuts. I think two years of media lies and COVID bullshit have broken everyone’s brains, including the blog owner.
    No one held a gun to Putin’s head.
    Good on Dot for giving this utter bullshit a miss.
    I might not contribute anymore, but I still like to look in every few days.
    What a bloody disaster. Fucking sort yourselves out.
    Dickheads.


    Report comment

    1
  16. Did the guarantees of Ukrainian sovereignty the US, Britain and Russia when they gave up nukes extend to guaranteeing that sovereignty against rebels and revolutionaries arising from with Ukrainian territory?

    Yes or no?

    If yes, then it was incumbent upon them to suppress the Orange revolution. Russia is finally getting around to its obligation with respect to that.

    If no, then Russia was perfectly entitled to recognise the breakaway separatists in Crimea and Donetsk as independent states after their revolt. It was and is not constrained from admitting these states to their federation if they so choose. And in the event that these members of their federation are attacked by the remainder of Ukraine, it has an obligation to take action against Ukraine in their defence.


    Report comment

    4
  17. What a weird analogy. There is no disputed territory between the US and Canada.

    Why not try picking an analogy from one of the many actual territorial disputes that exist in history? Is it that the example of any actual territorial dispute destroys your case?

    1. War of 1812….

    2. There was no disputed territory between Ukraine and Russia until Putin decided to make up a dispute.

    3. Independence and sovereignty means that UKRAINE gets to decide what happens inside Ukrainian borders, not Russia.
    Especially not issues that have been fomented by Russia in order to create violence, conflict and dissent.
    To pretend that Russia is acting as a neutral benevolent over territory that Russia claims is a high level of dishonesty.


    Report comment

    1
  18. 1. War of 1812….

    So use that as your analogy instead of present day US/Canada.

    2. There was no disputed territory between Ukraine and Russia until Putin decided to make up a dispute.

    False. You appear to have a total disregard and contempt for the people who live in the disputed areas of Eastern Ukraine.

    Unless you have personally asked each of them, you might want to consider the possibility that the revolt was genuine, instead of overdosing on Western propaganda.

    3. Independence and sovereignty means that UKRAINE gets to decide what happens inside Ukrainian borders, not Russia.
    Especially not issues that have been fomented by Russia in order to create violence, conflict and dissent.

    To pretend that Russia is acting as a neutral benevolent over territory that Russia claims is a high level of dishonesty.

    So, you’re picking “no” on the revolt covered question then?

    An honest take on this issue would find it is not as clear cut as you insist. If you were honest, you would realise that you have no strong basis for your conviction that the Crimea and Donetsk revolts were not genuine.

    This isn’t the first time a territorial dispute has arisen in history. An adult might evaluate the way such disputes have been peacefully resolved in the past and try to emulate such a resolution. I’d recommend in this case trying to create something similar to the Good Friday Agreement which has greatly settled down the conflict in Northern Ireland. Russia does seem quite willing to enter into negotiations in relation to this dispute. Are there any adults on the other side?


    Report comment

    3
  19. 4. Invading , killing thousands of Ukrainians and destroying the homes and businesses of millions more is acting as Peacekeepers, how?

    4b. I have already raised the standard of Proportionality that is required to justify war.

    5. The Ukrainians are not reacting like a people being liberated and saved from a corrupt and tyrannical government. They are fighting like people with a long memory of Russian oppression, and a desperate desire to avoid more of it.

    6. Putin has not acted like a peacekeeper securing the peace and order of disputed territories, but like an invader intending to absorb an entire country. There is no evidence of limited aims. No evidence of a desire for a disinterested solution. No attempt to involve the other parties in the treaty that Putin has just torn up…. except threats to go nuclear if they get involved militarily.

    How many obvious incongruities, inconsistencies and breaches of good faith – not to mention law – are required before we conclude that Putin is not acting benevolently, here?


    Report comment

    3
  20. Cassie: I’m not aware that anyone here said that the government here in Oz owns the media, except for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. You’re making up stuff again.
    What Cassie wrote: “Yes, many governments now own the press. It’s a big problem in Canada and NZ. Not quite so bad here in Oz. ”
    Cassie dissembles.


    Report comment

    2
  21. “Killing the dreamsays:
    March 9, 2022 at 8:49 am
    Cassie: I’m not aware that anyone here said that the government here in Oz owns the media, except for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. You’re making up stuff again.
    What Cassie wrote: “Yes, many governments now own the press. It’s a big problem in Canada and NZ. Not quite so bad here in Oz. ”
    Cassie dissembles.”

    Killing the dream dissembles….I wrote “not quite so bad here in Oz”. Because it isn’t.

    It isn’t me who dissembles.


    Report comment

    2
  22. 2dogs…
    I consider you dishonest.

    The War of 1812 was resolved by a treaty. There is no issue between the US and Canada because both parties have held to that treaty. Russia could have held to their treaty, but have not.
    There have been violent separatists in Canada. That was never treated as an excuse for breaching the treaty.

    Don’t lie about me having “no regard” for the people in the named territories.
    Starting an actual war in those territories is not and never has been an attempt to “resolve the matter peacefully”. Let alone proportionately. Russia was involved in fomenting those “rebellions”. You talk about “asking” the people in those territories, while ignoring the fact that anti-Russian sentiment has gone through the roof n those territories

    Don’t piss on my leg and tell me that it’s raining.
    Putin is an oligarch with a history of military adventures inflicting disproportionate casualties. He has a history of oppression and jailing dissenters in his own country. He is on record as admiring two of the great military expansionists in Russian history, and desiring to recreate their empires.
    Nothing about this is good.


    Report comment

    3
  23. the fact that anti-Russian sentiment has gone through the roof n those territories

    Source? I suspect propaganda. You really have no filter for Western propaganda, do you?


    Report comment

    4
  24. “Don’t lie about me having “no regard” for the people in the named territories.”

    OK, fine.
    What about all the other on-going wars around the place – like, oh… Yemen. Several 100 thousand dead because of that war, people literally being starved to death. Sponsored by Saudi Arabia and the US. Virtually NO media coverage.

    No (or certainly very little) media coverage of Russia’s reporting of thousands being killed or injured and/or discriminated against in those “named” territories either. No mention of them being disenfranchised. No mention of a Soros funded “colour revolution” there either. This despite the fact that almost everywhere Soros has has sticky fingers involved in a “colour revolution” or politics, things turn to shit for the “plebs”, while Soros gains more assets, more cash, and more “influence” by installing his puppets (eg, US District Attorneys like in LA).

    As I’ve said, I don’t support what Russia/Putin have done in the Ukraine, but I also accept that they have been making noises about this for along time, as well as their own security interests. Soros and his leftist political mates have been strip-mining Ukraine of assets and cash and have not been shy in offering bribes and dong “whatever it takes” either. Now they seem to be supporting a continuation – even a ramping up – of war, rather than listening to what Putin has to say and negotiating with him to find a mutually satisfactory outcome.
    Meanwhile, all the wokerati companies (eg, Visa, Msastercard, Paypal, SWIFT) are cutting Russia out of the world’s economy. What happens when Russia decides they have nothing left to lose? What happens to Europe if Putin says “If you don’t pay me, you don’t any ANY gas, I’ll sell it to China instead” and literally cuts off 50-60% of Germany’s gas supply overnight? And if that happens, whose “fault” is it? You can bet they will all be screaming “Russia is the devil!” over something like that.


    Report comment

    7
  25. Wet Dreams wrote

    What Cassie wrote: “Yes, many governments now own the press. It’s a big problem in Canada and NZ. Not quite so bad here in Oz. ”
    Cassie dissembles.

    Wet Dreams seems unaware of the adage “He who pays the piper calls the tune”. Government advertising is the only thing that keeps the legacy media going. The legacy media knows that, and will do, in the words of a famous man, “whatever it takes” to survive.

    Ownership does not always come with title deeds.


    Report comment

    6
  26. Cassie: It seems clear that you don’t really care what you write.
    Boambee: there is no medium where government is the dominant advertiser. The only actual favour done by Government to media was the tenders ads given to The Australian (which otherwise has never had much advertising support).
    Of course the really big favour was when Murdoch bought the HWT and there was no Trade Practices inquiry. But that’;s evidence of power flowing the other way.


    Report comment

    2
  27. Wet Dreams

    Boambee: there is no medium where government is the dominant advertiser.

    Government doesn’t have to be the dominant advertiser; it just has to be the one which guarantees survival.


    Report comment

    6
  28. 2dogs says:
    March 8, 2022 at 9:24 pm

    then I expect you to endorse the US invasion of Canada to protect English-speaking Canadians from Trudeau

    What a weird analogy. There is no disputed territory between the US and Canada.

    A better analogy would be the disputed territory of Kashmir in India. It is a majority Moslem state and it wants to leave the Indian federation and be incorporated with Pakistan. India wishes to retain it in its federation.

    Does Pakistan have a right to invade India and seize Kashmir? Obviously not, nor does Russia have a right to invade Ukraine and seize territory there. There’s one very important difference between these situations though, India doesn’t send its army to indiscriminately fire its artillery into Kashmir.

    Russia offered a peace deal with Ukraine some time ago, they offered to recognise Ukrainian sovereignty over its eastern provinces and end support for the separatists movements, and offered five years free gas supply to Ukraine. In exchange, they wanted Ukrainian acknowledgement of Russian sovereignty of the Crimea, and an undertaking the the Ukraine would be a non-aligned neutral nation.

    The major obstacle to peace is that the Ukraine is controlled by non-Ukrainians, people who aren’t concerned with the fate of the people who live there but use them to further their own obscure agendas. There will be no peace in that part of the world till the Ukrainians remove their puppet masters and make a deal with their neighbours that is satisfactory to all parties.

    Until that happens I can’t see a Russian withdrawal, and it doesn’t appear that they are interested in extending their footprint beyond the ethnic Russian areas they presently hold. The Russian tanks aren’t in Kiev, not because the brave babushkas with Molotov cocktails are holding them out, it looks more like they don’t want to go there.


    Report comment

    6
  29. Yes, Kashmir is a better analogy.

    The thing about Kashmir, though, is that it is not a resolved conflict either. Tensions continue. There is still violence there, as well.

    Those demanding Russian withdrawal seem to not know or care that it doesn’t solve the problem. The violence will still continue if Russia leaves.

    What is needed for Kashmir and Eastern Ukraine is a negotiated settlement. Like we have in the Good Friday Agreement for Northern Ireland, where violence has all but abated.


    Report comment

    2
  30. Wet Dreams

    Boambee: you’re making that up. Not even the Canberra Times is in that position.

    Checked their financials, have you? They are making a motza from subscriptions (many of which are from government bodies)?


    Report comment

    1
  31. Boambee: there is no medium where government is the dominant advertiser.

    The Littlest Anklebiter clearly does not listen to commercial radio or TV, particularly in Melbourne or Perth. Every governmental Quango and slogan is on at least once every ad break. Smoking, safe driving, toxic fat is toxic, etc.

    Heck, here in WA, the WA Health quango Healthway sponsors the WA Opera company. In 2014, it de facto banned the performance of the opera Carmen because it is based in a tobacco factory. This was apparently too much of a risk to impressionable opera-goers, who might take up smoking, and Healthway forbids any mention of tobacco in any production that takes government money from it.

    I am not entirely that Healthway or the WA Opera has ever lived down the scorn and public mockery that ensued.

    I do wish you’d be more competent in your shilling, Littlest Anklebiter…


    Report comment

    1
  32. Rex, Boambee: You guys are clearly very fact driven. Here’s a fact: Canberra does not make it in any list of top 20 advertisers. Wankers.


    Report comment

    1
  33. Wet Dream

    You might not be aware, but there are also other governments in Australia, state and local. The all advertise, and wise recipients of such largesse make sure not to offend the Golden Goose.


    Report comment

    2
  34. Boambee: So how does that work? WA Government and Feds walk down to the West Australian and say: we want you to be nice to both the ALP and Liberals? (And if they did, what would be the threat? We will pull 1% of your advertising? )
    Do you know what they’d do? They would take a photo and plaster it over the front page for a month. Governments would have to invent advertising spent to shut them up.
    Don’t be ridiculous.


    Report comment

    1
  35. Depending on the medium, yes. Certainly anything substantial.
    The only time government ads become a big share is around elections., usually with some giant program. The budgets that influence are banks, telstra, supermarkets, dog food and mars.
    In any case there is zero evidence that media political content is government influenced. They more often choose it.


    Report comment

    1
  36. Rex, Boambee: You guys are clearly very fact driven. Here’s a fact: Canberra does not make it in any list of top 20 advertisers. Wankers.

    And? We are not talking about ‘Canberra,’ Littlest Anklebiter.

    We are talking about ‘Governments,’ you know, on whose behalf you are shilling?

    GetUp! is really not getting its value out of you, is it?


    Report comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.