Arab conspiracies

U.S. forces behind deadly children bomb: Iraqi experts -

See the above link for stupid propaganda that Arab media is still prepared to promote. It's a worry.

By the way, although I initially thought this website was connected to Aljazeera TV, it seems not to be.

Anyway, this Aljazeera website even has a special area for conspiracy theories, where it would seem every possible rumour gets a run, without any serious commentary at all.

Are Arabs especially pre-disposed to believing rumour and conspiracy? Of course the West has its fair share of conspiracy nutters too; but it is distressing to see the websites like this (which, from its commercial advertising, looks at at least a little main-streamish) playing such a role in promoting damaging and ridiculous rumours.

Camel robot jockeys

The Australian: Robot jockeys saddle up [July 19, 2005]

Why haven't I seen this on TV yet? Robot sports, that's what the world is waiting for...

Mad Katter on IR reform

Damn. On ABC Radio News this afternoon, I heard a snippet from mad Bob Katter about why he will oppose the Howard government's IR reforms. Unfortunately, I can't see it quoted anywhere on the net yet, so you will have to do with my paraphrase.

Bob said he will oppose it because even though he was involved in Joh Bjelke Peterson's fights with union, he does not want to see us go back to not just the 1960's, but the 1860's, when mining companies owned the children who wore numbers around their neck as they were sent down into the mines. (I am not making this up.)

Gee, I wonder why the union's ad campaigns don't mention that? I can see the ad now. Mum gets phone call threatening the sack if she can't change her shift. "But there must be some way I can keep my job?" she asks. Cut to the kids in sackcloth in the mine elevator.

Update: OK the actual quote now:

"They say I want to go back to the 1960s, the McEwen era, the old Country Party era, well that's absolutely true," he said.

"But it's a hell of a lot better to go back to 1960 than where they want to go, which is 1860, where little children went down mines with steel collars with numbers and were actually owned by the mine owners."

Space shuttle coming near you (well, me)

According to this bit of fun news over the weekend, (RAAF Base) Amberley - about 40 km west of Brisbane - is on the list of potential emergency landing sites for the space shuttle.

Is the runway there long enough? Well, it seems the Florida runway is 15,000 ft, with an extra 2,000 ft of paved overruns and Amberley is close enough to 10,000. So I guess it would do in a pinch. However, if I lived at Leichhardt (Ipswich suburb more or less right on the edge of the base) and I heard the shuttle was on its way in, I would be outta there pretty damn quick.

Webdiary's unsurprising slant on London

As Tim Blair noted (somewhere, I've lost it now), Webdiary was mysteriously silent for a long time on the London bombings. Possibly the technical problems afftecting the site recently?

In any event, this article (subtitled "commentary by Margo Kingston", but containing simply her very brief introduction to an article by John Richardson) is an entirely predictable rant that blames all of Islamic terrorism on, you guessed it, the West. America in particular. London only gets brief mention, but the blame the victim message is clear.

One "new" thing I noted in it was this:

"Then this week, the much quieter voice of an Iraqi humanitarian organization reported that 128,000 Iraqis have been killed since the US invasion began in March 2003 (Civilian Casualties In Iraq)."

The link is to a website here, the "World Peace Herald", which apparently is owned by the Moonies and seems to run a suspiciously sympathetic line on Islamofacsism (see story here, headed " 'To stop terrorism, accept pious Muslims on equal terms' ".)

Anyway, there is next to no detail on the Iraqi source of this new casualty figure, and a quick Google search adds nothing. No one should take it seriously without some proper detail. But that's no problem for Richardson (or Margo, if its "her" commentary piece).

Admittedly, Webdiary follows with a piece by Darlene Taylor which briefly attacks this sort of crap, but is mostly devoted to a review of David Williamson's latest play.

I knew Webdairy would eventually come to the party.

Iraqi doctor and other troubles

Doctors in Iraq

The link above is about the trouble doctors in Iraq face regarding their personal security.

I could be wrong, but I would have thought that most of the kidnapping for money was being done by criminal gangs, rather than insurgents wanting to topple the government. But if that is correct, just how many criminals are there in that country? Perhaps 300 doctors have been kidnapped since Saddam fell? That's a hell of a lot of criminals to be in on this money raising scheme.

I find it really hard to fathom the depravity of some of the actions against Iraqis recently. Today's suicide bombing in Baghdad, in which a suicide bomber is prepared to take out about 24 kids for the sake a killing one or two US soldiers, is especially appalling.

How can they possibly think that actions like these will ultimately help their cause? I mean, even if the USA just up and left tomorrow , the behaviour of the terrorists has surely already completely alienated them from the great majority of the Iraqis who have had their first taste of democracy and freedom. Are they not smart enough to know they have lost already? Is no one getting on Iraqi television and telling them this each night?

Iraq/al Qaeda

For anyone who missed it, via Powerline I found this useful summary regarding al Qaeda and Iraq. I am waiting for it to appear in The Age. Any decade now, it might.

What I find most disturbing is the wilful blindness of the MSM to this side of the story. And those on the Left who refuse to budge in their original belief that there is was connection. It seems very similar to the "fake turkey" meme so riduculed over at Tim Blair. Some ideas just get stuck in the MS media's little mind, then in some of the MSM's consumer's mind. Reading a wide range of blogs is the cure, but some refuse to take it.

Journalism is only the very roughest first draft of history, but how many people appreciate that?

Terror Blogging

Domestic duties will likely make my blogging rate slow down quite a a bit this week.

As to London, it seems that there is little left to blog about given the great flood of blog entries on the story. If another Sep 11 scale attack happened, would all the blog servers cope, I wonder. I am not implying any criticism of blogging on this; in fact it is amazing how much interesting and high quality commentary there is from pure "amateurs" in the blogosphere.

I like what Christopher Hitchens has said on this, both on Slate and on ABC Radio National on Friday morning. (I figure there is no need to link, as I presume most people of conservative leaning follow him pretty closely since his dramatic break from the "let's blame the victim" Left after 9-11.)

Paul Sheehan in the Sydney Morning Herald today is good too. I find he can be rather hit or miss in his commentary, but this seems a pretty solid "hit".

Of course, the SMH can't let his views uncontradicted, so they also feature Tariq Ali in the same edition blaming the West for its "state terror" against such nice people such as Saddam and the Taliban. Interestingly, Tariq uses the phrase "Islamo-anarchists" for the terrorists, as opposed to "Islamo fascists" as per Hitchens. But surely "anarchy" is exactly the opposite of what Islamic fundamentalists want in a government of their creation. "Fascism" as defined on dictionary.com, is exactly the right word.

While I was at dictionary.com, I just had to double check the correct meaning of "fatuous" to make sure if it was the word for Ali's column. (" Vacuously, smugly, and unconsciously foolish.") Yep, that's it!

Webdiary: technical problem fixed; mental problems continue

Over at Webdiary, the entry on the government's intended IR reforms has this (unremarkable) comment from one Jay White:

"I have noticed a constant theme from Howard haters since the last election. That is that somehow the Government lied about adverse interest rate rises under a Latham Government.

This is another myth and blatant mistruth. The Government never claimed that Latham's policies would cause interest rate rises. What they did claim was that interest rates have always on average been lower under a Coalition Government measured post world war II against a Labor one. Truth, do the math if you do not believe me." etc

The response from another Webdiary reader, Peter Woodforde:

"Achtung, achtung! Deeply disturbing, typically nasty and sarcastic post.

Jay White: (muttering about J Winston Howard’s quite dishonest election campaign interest rates smoke and mirrors fandango) “do the math if you do not believe me” Indeed.

Yeah, and we Australians are always talkiin’ about “the math” Young Republican Roto-rooter Jay.

You wanna come here, then learn the bloody lingo sport. All the other refugees do, or at least have a go.

If it’s good enough for people running from Saddam, Tienanmen or the Taliban, then it’s also good enough for the Boys from Brazil or Kalifornia uber Alles.

And kindly leave your flaming “math” behind you. It’s not just a cultural-linguistic glitch, Jay-low. It’s boots-and-bloody-all, hated tele-imperialism.

What might add up in Wall Street, the Ozarks and Hollywood don’t work here, mate. Despite all appearances, we have a crack at being civilised on our day. Have a crack yourself.

And hand in your guns, White Supremacy and market liberalisation to the bloke at the door, who will lodge them in his furnace for safekeeping."

And remember, this is a moderated commentary site. Take your medication and lie down for a while Peter.

Problems in Uganda

I don't want to decry efforts to help Africa, but when you read articles like this one (concerning one particular problem in Uganda) it just boggles the mind as to how that continent's ongoing governance problems can ever really be addressed by the West. Well, short of colonial rule again.

I hope the article is accurate, as I notice that the same magazine (the Tablet) also has an article from Madeleine Bunting, who I criticised about 4 posts ago.

Feeeed me

CNN.com - Baby girl weighs in at nearly 14 pounds - Jun 29, 2005

No comment necessary. (But the parents do look normal- check the second picture in the box.)

Gone North by Northwest

Telegraph | News | Ernest Lehman

A little sad to see the passing of one of the best screenwriters of last century. For me, he is most noteworthy for the extremely witty and entertaining original script for "North by Northwest", for which (as I recall, and as the above article indicates) he spent a lot of time personally researching the trip Roger O Thornhill (Gary Grant) was to make in the film. I think I have a book on the shelf that contains an extended interview with him. Must look it up.

10,000 Pharaohs?

From this story (Rampage before dawn ignites protest chaos) in The Scotsman on the rabble riots in Edinburgh, can someone explain this:

"In the Springkerse area of Stirling, protesters pulled the protective iron grill from the windows of a Burger King restaurant and smashed its windows. The wall was dubbed in graffiti: "10,000 Pharaohs Six Billion Slaves.""

Where does the magic figure of 10,000 come from?

Maybe it's the deodorant

This article Ovulating women favour dominant men's smell - Sniff test suggests when, and with whom, women are most likely to cheat suggestst that women can be just as shallow as men.

But really, if it is all based on how attractive women find the smell of armpit sweat, I hope the study took adequate account of the possible lingering effect of different deodorants. Maybe more "dominant" men buy stronger lasting deodorants, even if they were told not to use it for a few days before the trial?

I also question what use this sort of research really is. It has a certain level of interest, but basically we all know some men get more than other men, don't we? Do we have to do studies to really work out precisely what it is that gives some men the edge?

Unhelpful commentary on Africa

Still bearing the white man's burden - Opinion - theage.com.au

This column, by a Guardian writer, is of interest for a couple of reasons. She complains that the Live 8 and G8 events don't help Africans much to the extent that they re-inforce a perceived status of Africans as passive victims. On a certain level, I can more or less agree.

But then, being a Guardian columnist, she can't help herself and has to come back to arguing that they really are, after all, victims (of capitalism):

"The West, in its rapacious and impatient greed, destroys with contempt or indifference all that it can't appropriate for its own aggrandisement. Africa exposes - like no other continent - the hubristic arrogance of the Western industrialised countries that dominate the globe and are forcing an entire species into one model of human development - a model with catastrophic shortcomings."

What does she think the West can learn from Africa?:

"Now is precisely the point at which we need to learn about the genius of Africa's own history of development, which, Lonsdale suggests, lies in the extraordinary resilience and self-sufficiency to survive and adapt in habitats not always conducive to human life. The resilience is derived in part from an investment in relationships (rather than things); partly it lies in the qualities of self-disciplined willpower that sustain individuals against all the odds. These are skills we've forgotten or may never have had, but the coming centuries suggest we'll need to learn them from Africans."

Wow, she can tell us what we need to learn from Africa not just now, but for centuries to come. I guess she is talking about global warming, and perhaps suggesting that when the heat goes up we will be best served by going back into little clan based villages re-learning how to scratch around the deserts to find a bit of sustenance?

But seriously, this is useless commentary at its best. At heart, it is a whinge about history and another attempt to ascribe a degree of moral superiority to indigenous populations. (Africans are so much more into relationships than, say, Italian families, or Asian countries. That was sarcasm by the way.)

Most importantly, it suggests nothing practical about how anyone really can help poor dying Africans in their current plight. Just having the West stand around and agree that the African continent is not completely a bunch of passive losers won't much help those who need food, modern drugs, clean water and less bullet holes in the head today.

Optimism in science and life

All regular readers (all 3 of you?) know that I like popular science magazines. I see a new Aussie one has started, called Cosmos. Unfortunately, the website is nothing but an index to their first edition, and the "news" section is just all of the company's press releases about the magazine.

I have not (yet) bought the first edition, but from my quick browse of it in the newsagent, its style reminds me very much of the dear departed Omni magazine. For the first few years, I really liked Omni. (I think I still have a cardboard carton's worth, waiting for the day I need to find some old half remembered article.) I enjoyed its short fiction, its speculative science, and (most importantly) its optimism.

An optimistic view of the potential for science and technology to solve many of the problems of the world is now sadly lacking. Know-nothing (or know-very-little) teachers from the 1970's onwards have trained young students to be pessimistic, aided and abetted by an environmental movement with a romantic and completely incorrect belief that, left alone, the world would never change and be perfect. Indeed, there is little optimism for the potential of human kind to even be around for any cosmologically significant time.

Anyway, no magazine keeps the same quality forever, and Omni gradually became worse and finally died.

I wish Cosmos some luck if it is going to go with an optimistic world view. But I guess one thing I am pessimistic about is the limited potential readership for a glossy science magazine in Australia.

Incidentally, while I have not really thought this out very extensively, I am of the view that the modern conservative is well and truly the optimist compared to those on the left of politics. Optimistic that people can treat each other well without the need for over-regulation by government or thought police. More optimistic on technology and science too. Certainly, it is less beholden to the environment movement, for which the only approved technology seems to be noisy ugly wind mills.

The little black dog

The little black dog that colours your life grey - Opinion - theage.com.au

The link is to Greg Barnes' article in The Age today going on about his apparent perpetual dark mood.

While he gives anti-depressants a mention (they don't solve his problem), he says nothing about cognitive therapy, which for some years now has been seen as a real success story for treating depression.

I am no expert, but sounds to me like cognitive therapy is exactly the sort of thing he should be trying.

Criticism of Critics - War of the Worlds

I saw War of the Worlds yesterday. I don't have the time or inclination to do full movie reviews here, but as I enjoy reading movie criticism even if I don't see the movie, I like to point out good and bad criticism I have found.

Reaction to this movie seems to be pretty divided between those who found it extremely tense and scary, and those who claim to have felt nothing. Science fiction is a bit problematic for some people who can just never imagine themselves in an alternative situation other than the present or historic world. Never understood that myself, but I can't be too harsh, because I happen to belong to a relatively small sub set of people who like science fiction but are left cold by most fantasy (including, dare I admit it, Tolkien in both book and cinema versions.)

Anyway, count me in the group who found the movie emotionally gruelling and a wonder to behold. But, I found it so tense and affecting that I find it a little hard to strongly recommend to a non science fiction fan as an enjoyable night out.

Now to stupid criticisms of it. Roger Ebert's just about takes the cake. I have rarely seen a stupider review, especially from someone who is well read, knows the source material, and is capable of liking science ficition. He attacks the lack of apparent (or explained) logic of the aliens. (Seems bleeding obvious to me that it is a terraforming project going on. But this is simply not the type of movie that needs an explanation spelt out too bluntly. Its angle - to show an other-worldly attack simply from the point of view of an ordinary man trying to escape it - has rightly been much praised for being more realistic than something like the woeful "Independence Day".) He likes nothing about the tripods. To quote:

"All of this is just a way of leading up to the gut reaction I had all through the film: I do not like the tripods. I do not like the way they look, the way they are employed, the way they attack, the way they are vulnerable or the reasons they are here. A planet that harbors intelligent and subtle ideas for science fiction movies is invaded in this film by an ungainly Erector set. "

This is not serious movie criticism, in my books. And basically, it is attacking a movie for being too faithful to the fundamentals of the original book.

I have just gone and checked what Ebert thought of Independence Day. He gave it 1/2 a star more, although also questions the logic of much of the film! Really, for me this has blown all of his credibility when it comes to science fiction reviews.

Now my other point is that I have read 2 Australia reviewers (will link later) who have mentioned a "logic" flaw that is given an explanation in the film.
(Slight spoiler warning for what follows)

This is to do with the fact that the car the Tom Cruise character gets in to drive away from the mayhem works, when all other cars are disabled due to electro magnetic pulse.

Do these critics pay no attention at all? The explanation (that the car had just been repaired, a fact Tom knew because he had earlier had a conversation with the mechanic) could only have been clearer if the script writer had come into the cinema, stopped the movie and gave them a personal recitation of the (already perfectly audible) lines again. (Now I admit, the nature of the repair explained in the film may not be perfect - it referred to a new solenoid being put it, whereas the other cars stopped on the road presumably had more wrong with their electronics than that -but at least it is a semi-plausible explanation towards having this car work when others had stopped.)

These critics seem to suggest there is simply no explanation given in the film. I just cannot believe they missed it.

Update: I have been trying to think of a good analogy to Ebert's dislike of the tripods. Maybe it's like complaining that the film of "The Old Man and the Sea" spends too much time in a boat.

Doctors and abortion in Australia

eMJA: Abortion: time to clarify Australia's confusing laws

The link is to a Medical Journal of Australia article from last year talking about the muddled legal position in Australia for abortion. (The article calls for a debate, and arose from the same abortion for dwarfism case that is in the news at the moment.)

Disturbingly, the report says:

"A survey of Australian clinical geneticists and obstetricians specialising in ultrasound showed that about 75% believed that termination for fetal dwarfism should be available as a clinical option at 24 weeks."

This is a sign if ever there was one that you don't leave medical ethics up to the doctors alone to decide.

Meanwhile in England, the doctors are talking about the general issue of late term abortions. It would seem that the UK legislation does actually do the tough job of setting time limits, although it is still possible "in extreme circumstances" to get an abortion after the first 24 weeks. It is not clear from the MJA article, but I presume that it should be at least harder for a woman there to abort for dwarfism after 24 weeks.

One of the most irksome things about this issue in Australia is the resistance to even discussion of time limits that comes from some of the pro choice lobby. I may add to this later.

Bosler Alert !

Margo Kingston's Webdiary - smh.com.au

The link above is to another very deep and meaningful - yet typically obscure - entry by Margo's artist in residence Robert Bosler.

This entry is reflecting on Latham's legacy, told from the poetic view point of a very confused person coming home:

"You are a spouse. It’s been a long day, they all are, even the days off feel long now.

Your own spouse will be home soon."

As opposed to someone else's spouse?

Then on to Mark Latham:

"He was never to be Prime Minister, we know that now. Yet he was about creating a new Prime Ministership, and this he may well yet achieve."

He's already "achieved" leaving us with a PM who isn't mad, which is something to his credit. And as to meta meaning of Latham:

"The Latham message is still working through."

Yes, like a dose of salts, as they used to say.

" It is not so much a message we can receive of words, nor of actions. It’s one of inner belief."

The message is that you must be - read that again - you must be - who you are. Yours is not to go through the motions of life, nor to have life happen to you. Yours is to live it."

Preferably in a calmer way than Mark, though.

Robert's picture of our life in the burbs then gets decidedly schizophrenic:

"John Howard is on the news. You don't support Howard, and your feelings are sure of that. You do support John Howard, and, equally, you feel sure of that. You are sure, too, that it’s now well into the national time of ne'er the two shall meet. In these things, you feel secure, and having long ago arrived at your conclusions, you can now relax."

And to summarise:

"Before Latham, something within us slowly died. John Howard appealed to that part of us. He does it still. He appeals to the deadedness within us.

Mark Latham burst onto the scene and appealed to the life within us. We raged at him. We saw hope in him. One way or another, we were motivated once again by real life in politics, and we responded."

Yes indeed, by voting against an immature, unstable, bitter and twisted character and setting back his party's hope of return to government even further.