Tim Pool should probably shut up, listen to his lawyers and take a plea deal.

Or just wait for Trump to become President to get a pardon.

He’s in a mess of trouble.

I had something on that just before the fold, Pogria.

Comedy gold.

Old Faustus’ Almanac predicts: Goblin Shorten will be Dr Goblin Shorten before 2025 is done.

Delta A
September 5, 2024 6:05 pm

TBH, I believe there are many female (and male) airheads who should not be allowed anywhere near an election ballot.

But until you can come up with a way to to differentiate the ignorant from the informed, you’re stuck with both male and female idiots.

I totally agree with you but with a slight difference, I find males are a bit more pragmatic and not too much influenced by ‘feels’ and looks.

Admit, small number of sample.

I’m sure this will have been raised but I’ve missed the response. Does anyone know what’s happening with Tim Blair? He doesn’t seem to be writing these days.

Canadian multinational, Saputo, to close the King Island dairy “as the most viable way to strengthen SDA’s competitiveness based on changing industry and market conditions”.

Saputo’s products include the Cheese Formerly Known as Coon.

Concerning Sea Lion, this might already have been said, but here it is anyway.

Having read a fair bit over the years about the efforts the RN made, and the losses endured to evacuate armies from Dunkirk Greece and Crete, I find it impossible to believe that a lesser effort would have been made against a German landing in southern England.

How might the operation have proceeded? In the first few days, the south coast destroyers would have timed their runs up the Channel to pass Portsmouth about the time that German aircraft had to return to base as night fell. The destroyers then get among the German supply ships, doing as much damage as they could before turning for home as dawn approached.

When the heavy ships of the Home Fleet arrived down the west coast, similarly timed runs could have been made against the French Channel ports, which would have received shore bombardment by the eight to 15 inch guns of the battleships and heavy cruisers.

Not many days of that should have cut the German landing force off, no more fuel or ammunition getting through.

Would there have been heavy naval losses? Certainly, but the invasion would have been defeated.

https://www.skynews.com.au/business/cox-media-group-admits-using-your-phone-to-listen-to-conversations-report/news-story/6df0694ecda28e0affb6b737b86a8458

A marketing firm whose clients have included Facebook and Google has privately admitted it listens to users’ smartphone microphones and then places ads based on the information that is picked up, according a report.

..

Cox Media Group, the television and radio news conglomerate, admitted in a pitch deck to investors that its “Active Listening” software uses artificial intelligence to “capture real-time intent data by listening to our conversations,” according to the report.

If you were ever wondering why on Earth a phone would need an octa-core processor, now you know! It’s not for your benefit.

50,000 word descriptive thesis on NDIS reform

Ghostwritten, most likely. Chalmers seems equipped to do the job.

I do not expect European bureaucrats to understand the harshness of the Australian bush or the unique economic challenges facing Indigenous Australians.

Giving power to bureaucrats with not the faintest idea of how things work has been disastrous everywhere. Their expertise is in making rules and following them. Physical reality is not within their purview.

Henry Ergas from the Oz

Islamist barbarism exposes failure of West to tackle evil

In 1947, the International Military Tribunal described the execution of hostages as “a barbarous relic of ancient times”. Bemoaning the lack of an explicit prohibition on hostage-taking, the Tribunal urged the world’s nations to act, which they did in the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949.

The Convention is categorical: “The taking of hostages is prohibited.” Adding to the prohibition’s strength, the Convention defines hostage-taking, “which nothing can justify”, as one of the most serious offences against international humanitarian law, imposing on every signatory a duty to prevent it going unpunished.
Now Hamas has compounded the crimes it committed on October 7 by executing six hostages. Nor are those executions an isolated incident: as with al-Qa’ida and ISIS, seizing, abusing and murdering hostages has been part of Hamas’s strategy from the outset.

It would, however, be a mistake to view that strategy as resurrecting the “barbarous relic of ancient times”. It is, on the contrary, newer and grimmer – and grasping its novelty is crucial to understanding the nature of the conflict that is now under way.

In effect, the Nuremberg Tribunal erred grievously in characterising medieval Europe’s widespread use of hostages as “barbarous”. The primary role of hostages in those centuries was as surety for the performance of treaties. Unlike prisoners, hostages were given, not taken; they were almost invariably of high rank and, more often than not, directly related to the party proffering the guarantee.

Because of their rank and role, hostages were treated as “hospes”, that is, guests. Protected by the laws of chivalry, viewed as equals rather than as captives, hostages should not merely be allowed to travel freely “around the country visiting ladies and lords”; they were, a 16th century German rulebook specified, entitled to a regular supply of baths, prostitutes and new shoes.

There were, for sure, egregious breaches of the chivalric codes. But over the course of the 14th century, with its dozens of hostage agreements, there were only two recorded instances in which hostages were executed. And those executions were regarded both as appalling sins and as manifestly illegal.
Thus, already in 1588, Alberico Gentili, the father of international law, denounced the punishment of hostages, who had themselves committed no offence, as monstrous. Emer de Vattel was therefore echoing a widely held view when his vastly influential The Law of Nations (1758) described executing hostages as “an inhuman cruelty” and “a barbarism offensive to human nature”, contrary to natural law and the law of nations.

By then, however, reliance on hostages as guarantors had virtually disappeared, with its last major use being in 1748. It was the rise, in the Age of Revolutions, of brutally authoritarian regimes that brought a new, more fearsome development in hostage-taking: the capture and execution of unarmed civilians as a way of cowering populations into submission.
Pioneered by the French Revolution, that tactic was exalted by Lenin, whose “Hanging Order” of August 1918 directed the Bolsheviks in wheat-growing areas to publicly hang hundreds of hostages “so that for miles around the people can see, tremble and cry: they are killing and will go on killing”. Imitated by the Nazis, to horrendous effect, in retaliatory massacres at Lidice, Oradour-sur-Glane and the Fosse Ardeatine, that approach prompted the 1949 Convention’s prohibition against hostage-taking.
Unfortunately, the rise of Islamic terrorism marked the start of a third period in the history of hostage-taking that the new instruments of international law proved utterly incapable of quelling.

There had, even before then, been plenty of instances of hostages serving as bargaining chips. In 1958, for example, Fidel Castro’s rebels abducted 50 Americans and refused to release them until the US forced Fulgencio Batista’s regime into a ceasefire that would allow the rebels to rearm and regroup – which the US did, helping condemn Cubans to decades of misery.
What changed, however, was less the terrorists’ demands than the mechanisms they played off. While the Islamists were descending into a cult of death, ever-growing weight was being placed in the West on the innate value and equal dignity of human life. At the same time, the rise of the internet vastly enhanced terrorists’ access to, and ability to manipulate, public opinion – just as the new technologies were making public opinion increasingly influential in democratic politics.
The potential that created was at the heart of al-Qa’ida’s directive on kidnapping, which highlighted the scope to sow division in the target country by showcasing hostages’ desperate plight and demonstrating a readiness to mercilessly butcher them. The more obviously innocent the hostages and the grimmer the fate that awaited them, the more likely the strategy was to succeed; and the more open and democratic the target country, the greater was the harm it would inflict.

In short, much as Walter Benjamin famously observed, a step forward of civilisation spawned a step forward in barbarism: in this case, a barbarism that fed off the information revolution and used it to undermine societies that increasingly recognised, and were willing to debate, conflicting values, including the tragic choice between saving lives in the present and jeopardising even more lives in the future.

It is consequently unsurprising that the impacts have been felt with devastating force in Israel, an open society marked by a passionately involved citizenry and suffused with Judaism’s emphasis on the duty to protect human life. But the stark contrast between that society and the apocalyptic barbarism it confronts makes the tepid response in Australia to Hamas’s crime all the more disappointing.

There was, predictably, deadly silence from the Greens. Equally, the protesters, who incessantly claim the mantle of humanitarianism, were curiously nowhere to be seen. As for the government, its comment was limited to a single tweet that rightly condemned Hamas but said absolutely nothing about bringing the perpetrators to justice.
And while the tweet’s final sentence – “Every innocent life matters” – may have been well-intentioned, it unacceptably implied a moral equivalence between the cold-blooded murder of innocent hostages and the unintended deaths (caused largely by Hamas’s use of civilians as human shields) arising from the conflict in Gaza.

In October 1941, two months before the United States entered the war, president Franklin Delano Roosevelt said the Nazi practice of “executing innocent hostages revolts a world already inured to suffering and brutality”. Yes, the executions could terrorise. But they would “never bring peace”, instead “sowing the seeds of hatred which will one day bring fearful retribution”. Soon enough, the Nazis – “desperate men who know in their hearts they cannot win” – would have to feel the unrelenting force and unswerving determination of the “civilised peoples” they scorned.
Today, as Israel mourns its slaughtered hostages, the “civilised peoples” Roosevelt relied upon are weakened, divided, poorly led. Unless we can once again find that resolve to stare evil in the face, and destroy barbarism rather than repeatedly granting it reprieves, it is barbarism that will ultimately destroy us.

Tough times. Tough times indeed, with people just trying to make ends meet (the NT News):

A Melbourne animal shelter worker has allegedly salvaged a human toe and bones swallowed by a dog to sell on the black market.

The Herald Sun can reveal Joanna Kathlyn Kinman, 47, has been charged with offensive conduct involving human remains following a six-month Victoria Police investigation.

And:

Police will allege Ms Kinman was volunteering at a shelter when a dog vomited up the single toe and other remains.

She is accused of putting the body parts in a jar with the intention she would try and sell them.

Also:

It is understood the dog had been taken to the shelter after being found in a home alongside its dead owner.

The man had died from natural causes, with his beloved pet gnawing on his foot before he was discovered.

This is fair enough. Suitably mounted, a toe would be an excellent centrepiece used for family special occasion dinners, and an outstanding conversation starter.

Wait, wot! The Poot supports KamelToe?

Here’s the story.

Vladimir Putin Endorses Kamala Harris for President, Praises Her ‘Infectious’ Laugh (5 Sep)

Maybe he means “infectious” in the way that herpes is.

From Cassie’s link:

Hence Cooper’s perverse moral inversion, in which Churchill is cast as the “villain,” while Hitler is a victim who was only seeking an “acceptable solution to the Jewish problem.”

That, in and of itself, is enough to make me run a mile from this person.

What the hell is “the Jewish problem”? What was it to Hitler? What is it to Cooper? More importantly, to my mind, does Carlson think there’s a “problem”?

I know the answer to the first question, but most people will shrug it off. It is a deep spiritual malaise that has existed from The Fall. The article touches upon it briefly. They like to dress it up in fancy words to hide the reality of this manic hatred. Some otherwise switched on Christians have fallen for it too.

I don’t give a good goddamn about how Aboriginal someone looks or not. I actually think it should be thrown out as a mode of thinking- we need to break the nexus between genetic aboriginality and cultural aboriginality. I ain’t aboriginal beyond 1/64, but I still know shedloads more about aboriginal culture than half the academics and zinc-slapped didge players around here.
What really does piss me off is the fact that so many of our moral betters, who would lecture us about the evils of whitefella ways, landuse change and mineral extraction, are fat, speccy-faced desk jockeys. Geoff Clarke, Pat Dodson, our local dusky duke here.
I’d love to say, one, British civilization is so good for you that you’d be blind without intervention, you don’t have to produce any sort of results for your salary, and you’re going to die early with obesity-associated complications.
No more taxpayer munni or contracts until your BMI is down to a sub-critical number, or else we’re all just further pushing out The Gap aren’t we?

I know this will shock some people but according to a couple of articles in Daily Mail USA NY has a corruption problem.

Deputy and aides to the Mayor been raifed as well as Police Commissioner and some of his top officers. Phones seized. Mayor matter seems to be Mayor election related. Not sure what cop story about.

Comes after assistant to NY Gov arrested for being Chinese spy.

Sky just had one Shamikah Badra a Gaza on complaining he can’t get his mother out of Gaza, Australian Government needs to do more blah blah blah. Asked about Israel and he pauses the spits out some weasel words that the kiddy jisimist didn’t press on.

Rat smelt, I googled him. Well well well been here 2 months (Thanks Albo), been involved in protests already and is on record of accusing Israel of Genocide. Could this fit the definition of rhetorical support for HAMAS?

https://www.clcnsw.org.au/arlia-fleming-new-clcnsw-chairperson-interview

Over to you Burgess…

Excellent detective work, Rockdoctor.

Perhaps we should give you the top job.

Trump announces Elon Musk will head audit of ‘entire federal government’

—-

The deep state must be disinfected of wokeness

I wonder how many Australian visas have been issued to Gazan Christians and Jews?

A rare Australian sea snake’s new status as an endangered species could threaten the future of Woodside Energy’s $30bn gas project in Western Australia, with an “urgent review” into energy projects nearby ordered by environment minister Tanya Plibersek’s department.

Telling that she’s kicking the can down the road: killing gas development = problematic for the Bowen Masterplan.

But the girl has to do something:

Stop Woodside’s DrillGreenpeace:

We need to act now to make sure Tanya Plibersek acts upon the warning from the WA EPA and other experts to stop Woodside from drilling for dirty gas in WA.

Use our simple tool to email Tanya Plibersek and your MP now.

Help save extraordinary Scott Reef from Woodside’s dangerous gas plans.
Marine Conservation Society

The future of Scott Reef is in the hands of Federal Environment Minister, Tanya Plibersek, and WA Environment Minister, Reece Whitby.

They will decide whether one of Australia’s riskiest and dirtiest oil and gas projects goes ahead.

Add your name to email the Federal and WA Ministers, calling for them to reject Woodside’s plans.

Andonandon…

Another endangered snake.

By 2030ish, there will be two classes of people, those using AIs to make money and the unemployed.

AI will certainly spread widely into professional practice – it already is well on the way.

Looking at this trend (through my narrow prism of engineering) a couple of interesting things to consider:

1) AI is based on learning and inference from human knowledge piled up on Tinternet – so very far from perfect. Who then is going to be legally responsible for the resulting fcukups – crashed aircraft, fallen structures, blown control logic, and huge economic blunders?

Expect a AI lawyer beanfeast and a scatter of cockroaches – very similar to politicians escaping consequences.

2) Given AI will largely be replacing entry-level engineers and technologists, after 10 to 15 years there will be a tragic lack of experience able to apply judgement and sense checking to whatever AI thinks is the right answer.

In 40 years, next to none.

For those interested the Committee members were as below. Interesting to note all 6 members are female and Chair a Green.

Members Chair

Senator Penny Allman-Payne (from 27 March 2024)
AG, QLD

Senator Janet Rice (until 27 March 2024)
AG, VIC

Deputy Chair

Senator Marielle Smith
ALP, SA

Members

Senator Wendy Askew
LP, TAS

Senator Hollie Hughes
LP, NSW

Senator Maria Kovacic
LP, NSW

Senator Louise Pratt
ALP, WA

Participating Members

Senator Ralph Babet
UAP, VIC

Senator the Hon Matthew Canavan
LNP, QLD

Senator Gerard Rennick
IND, QLD

Senator Malcolm Roberts
PHON, QLD

Minor point but why is Canavan “the Hon” ?

“Managed to embarrass a whole continent” It turns out it was our fault for not understanding break dancing and, anyway, they just need more money. A fabulous insight into the scam that is modern academia. Raygun interview with commentary . 10min youtube. Don’t miss the comments.