Nothing in this blog can be believed. If you think that anything in this blog is true or factual, you'll need to verify it from another source. Do you understand? No? Then read it again, and repeat this process, until you understand that you cannot sue me for anything you read here. Also, having been sucked into taking part in the mass-murder of more than 3 million Vietnamese people on behalf of U.S. Big Business "interests", I'm as mad as a cut snake (and broke) so it might be a bit silly to try to sue me anyway...

Saturday, December 31, 2005

More from Craig Murray...

Craig Murray has drawn our attention to another document, this time one that is already in the public domain, but it is pertinent to what so many of us are posting.

It is not secret, and not new, but gives a valuable historical context to the relationship between Uzbekistan and the West..

View document here >>>

Happy New Year...

Happy New Year

To all of you whom I haven't yet offended.

(To those I have offended... raspberries...)

Friday, December 30, 2005

what tony blair does not want you to see...

Craig Murray used to be the UK ambassador to Uzbekistan. He became a thorn in the side of the Blair government when he went on record exposing the Uzbeki regime as one which regularly used torture. Information obtained under torture was finding its way into the UK and being used by the government, despite claims to the contrary from Tony Blair.

Mr Murray has documents proving that Blair and Jack Straw have lied consistently over the last two years. He is being threatened with prosecution under the (UK) Official Secrets Act if he publishes these documents.

In his own words:
I am in discussion with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) over what I am and am not allowed to publish in my book. The FCO is seeking to gut the book of all evidence of complicity with the Uzbek regime.

With Blair cornered on extraordinary rendition, they are particularly anxious to suppress all evidence of our complicity in obtaining intelligence from Uzbek torture.

In particular, they have demanded I do not publish the attached documents, and that I hand over all copies of them.

The obvious answer to this is to post these documents as widely on the web as possible. This is also potentially very valuable in establishing that I am not attempting to make money from these documents - you don't have to buy my book to see them, they are freely available. If you buy the book, you are only paying for the added value of my thoughts.

This will only work if we can get the [documents] very widely posted, including on sites in the US and elsewhere outside the UK ... there is a chance that those who ... post this stuff will get threatened under the Official Secrets Act.

In March 2003 I was summoned back to London from Tashkent specifically for a meeting at which I was told to stop protesting. I was told specifically that it was perfectly legal for us to obtain and to use intelligence from the Uzbek torture chambers.

After this meeting Sir Michael Wood, the FCO's legal adviser, wrote to confirm this position. This minute from Michael Wood is perhaps the most important document that has become public about extraordinary rendition. It is irrefutable evidence of the government's use of torture material, and that I was attempting to stop it. It is no wonder that the government is trying to suppress this.

The website Blairwatch has asked those of us who responded to the al Jazeera memo story to publish these documents. I am only too happy to do so. They expose a government which has such contemt for its people it now lies as a matter of routine. Compare and contrast the government's public position on Torture, with the information they were recieving at the time from their own Ambassador, and the legal advice they were seeking. Please read them. Please publish them on your own websites (being mindful of the possibility that in doing so you could be breaking the law.)

The first group of douments are Mr Murray's telegrams to the UK government, the first from September 2002, in which he first expressed his concerns as to the tactics employed in Uzbekistan.
Letter #1
FM Tashkent
TO FCO, Cabinet Office, DFID, MODUK, OSCE Posts, Security Council Posts
16 September 02
SUBJECT: US/Uzbekistan: Promoting Terrorism

US plays down human rights situation in Uzbekistan. A dangerous policy: increasing repression combined with poverty will promote Islamic terrorism. Support to Karimov regime a bankrupt and cynical policy.


The Economist of 7 September states: "Uzbekistan, in particular, has jailed many thousands of moderate Islamists, an excellent way of converting their families and friends to extremism." The Economist also spoke of "the growing despotism of Mr Karimov" and judged that "the past year has seen a further deterioration of an already grim human rights record". I agree.

Between 7,000 and 10,000 political and religious prisoners are currently detained, many after trials before kangaroo courts with no representation. Terrible torture is commonplace: the EU is currently considering a demarche over the terrible case of two Muslims tortured to death in jail apparently with boiling water. Two leading dissidents, Elena Urlaeva and Larissa Vdovna, were two weeks ago committed to a lunatic asylum, where they are being drugged, for demonstrating on human rights. Opposition political parties remain banned. There is no doubt that September 11 gave the pretext to crack down still harder on dissent under the guise of counter-terrorism.

Yet on 8 September the US State Department certified that Uzbekistan was improving in both human rights and democracy, thus fulfilling a constitutional requirement and allowing the continuing disbursement of $140 million of US aid to Uzbekistan this year. Human Rights Watch immediately published a commendably sober and balanced rebuttal of the State Department claim. Again we are back in the area of the US accepting sham reform [a reference to my previous telegram on the economy]. In August media censorship was abolished, and theoretically there are independent media outlets, but in practice there is absolutely no criticism of President Karimov or the central government in any Uzbek media. State Department call this self-censorship: I am not sure that is a fair way to describe an unwillingness to experience the brutal methods of the security services.

Similarly, following US pressure when Karimov visited Washington, a human rights NGO has been permitted to register. This is an advance, but they have little impact given that no media are prepared to cover any of their activities or carry any of their statements.

The final improvement State quote is that in one case of murder of a prisoner the police involved have been prosecuted. That is an improvement, but again related to the Karimov visit and does not appear to presage a general change of policy. On the latest cases of torture deaths the Uzbeks have given the OSCE an incredible explanation, given the nature of the injuries, that the victims died in a fight between prisoners.

But allowing a single NGO, a token prosecution of police officers and a fake press freedom cannot possibly outweigh the huge scale of detentions, the torture and the secret executions. President Karimov has admitted to 100 executions a year but human rights groups believe there are more. Added to this, all opposition parties remain banned (the President got a 98% vote) and the Internet is strictly controlled. All Internet providers must go through a single government server and access is barred to many sites including all dissident and opposition sites and much international media (including, ironically, This is in essence still a totalitarian state: there is far less freedom than still prevails, for example, in Mugabe's Zimbabwe. A Movement for Democratic Change or any judicial independence would be impossible here.

Karimov is a dictator who is committed to neither political nor economic reform. The purpose of his regime is not the development of his country but the diversion of economic rent to his oligarchic supporters through government controls. As a senior Uzbek academic told me privately, there is more repression here now than in Brezhnev's time. The US are trying to prop up Karimov economically and to justify this support they need to claim that a process of economic and political reform is underway. That they do so claim is either cynicism or self-delusion. This policy is doomed to failure. Karimov is driving this resource-rich country towards economic ruin like an Abacha. And the policy of increasing repression aimed indiscriminately at pious Muslims, combined with a deepening poverty, is the most certain way to ensure continuing support for the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. They have certainly been decimated and disorganised in Afghanistan, and Karimov's repression may keep the lid on for years – but pressure is building and could ultimately explode.

I quite understand the interest of the US in strategic airbases and why they back Karimov, but I believe US policy is misconceived. In the short term it may help fight terrorism but in the medium term it will promote it, as the Economist points out. And it can never be right to lower our standards on human rights. There is a complex situation in Central Asia and it is wrong to look at it only through a prism picked up on September 12. Worst of all is what appears to be the philosophy underlying the current US view of Uzbekistan: that September 11 divided the World into two camps in the "War against Terrorism" and that Karimov is on "our" side.

If Karimov is on "our" side, then this war cannot be simply between the forces of good and evil. It must be about more complex things, like securing the long-term US military presence in Uzbekistan. I silently wept at the 11 September commemoration here. The right words on New York have all been said. But last week was also another anniversary – the US-led overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile. The subsequent dictatorship killed, dare I say it, rather more people than died on September 11. Should we not remember then also, and learn from that too? I fear that we are heading down the same path of US-sponsored dictatorship here. It is ironic that the beneficiary is perhaps the most unreformed of the World's old communist leaders.

We need to think much more deeply about Central Asia. It is easy to place Uzbekistan in the "too difficult" tray and let the US run with it, but I think they are running in the wrong direction. We should tell them of the dangers we see. Our policy is theoretically one of engagement, but in practice this has not meant much. Engagement makes sense, but it must mean grappling with the problems, not mute collaboration. We need to start actively to state a distinctive position on democracy and human rights, and press for a realistic view to be taken in the IMF. We should continue to resist pressures to start a bilateral DFID programme, unless channelled non-governmentally, and not restore ECGD cover despite the constant lobbying. We should not invite Karimov to the UK. We should step up our public diplomacy effort, stressing democratic values, including more resources from the British Council. We should increase support to human rights activists, and strive for contact with non-official Islamic groups. Above all we need to care about the 22 million Uzbek people, suffering from poverty and lack of freedom. They are not just pawns in the new Great Game.
Letter #2
Fm Tashkent
18 March 2003

1. As seen from Tashkent, US policy is not much focussed on democracy or freedom. It is about oil, gas and hegemony. In Uzbekistan the US pursues those ends through supporting a ruthless dictatorship. We must not close our eyes to uncomfortable truth.

2. Last year the US gave half a billion dollars in aid to Uzbekistan, about a quarter of it military aid. Bush and Powell repeatedly hail Karimov as a friend and ally. Yet this regime has at least seven thousand prisoners of conscience; it is a one party state without freedom of speech, without freedom of media, without freedom of movement, without freedom of assembly, without freedom of religion. It practices, systematically, the most hideous tortures on thousands. Most of the population live in conditions precisely analogous with medieval serfdom.

3. Uzbekistan's geo-strategic position is crucial. It has half the population of the whole of Central Asia. It alone borders all the other states in a region which is important to future Western oil and gas supplies. It is the regional military power. That is why the US is here, and here to stay. Contractors at the US military bases are extending the design life of the buildings from ten to twenty five years.

4. Democracy and human rights are, despite their protestations to the contrary, in practice a long way down the US agenda here. Aid this year will be slightly less, but there is no intention to introduce any meaningful conditionality. Nobody can believe this level of aid– more than US aid to all of West Africa is related to comparative developmental need as opposed to political support for Karimov. While the US makes token and low-level references to human rights to appease domestic opinion, they view Karimov's vicious regime as a bastion against fundamentalism. He and they are in fact creating fundamentalism. When the US gives this much support to a regime that tortures people to death for having a beard or praying five times a day, is it any surprise that Muslims come to hate the West?

5. I was stunned to hear that the US had pressured the EU to withdraw a motion on Human Rights in Uzbekistan which the EU was tabling at the UN Commission for Human Rights in Geneva. I was most unhappy to find that we are helping the US in what I can only call this cover-up. I am saddened when the US constantly quote fake improvements in human rights in Uzbekistan, such as the abolition of censorship and Internet freedom, which quite simply have not happened (I see these are quoted in the draft EBRD strategy for Uzbekistan, again I understand at American urging).

6. From Tashkent it is difficult to agree that we and the US are activated by shared values. Here we have a brutal US sponsored dictatorship reminiscent of Central and South American policy under previous US Republican administrations. I watched George Bush talk today of Iraq and "dismantling the apparatus of terrorism" removing the torture chambers and the rape rooms". Yet when it comes to the Karimov regime, systematic torture and rape appear to be treated as peccadilloes, not to affect the relationship and to be downplayed in international fora. Double standards? Yes.

7. I hope that once the present crisis is over we will make plain to the US, at senior level, our serious concern over their policy in Uzbekistan.
Letter #3
OF 220939 JULY 04

1. We receive intelligence obtained under torture from the Uzbek intelligence services, via the US. We should stop. It is bad information anyway. Tortured dupes are forced to sign up to confessions showing what the Uzbek government wants the US and UK to believe, that they and we are fighting the same war against terror.

2. I gather a recent London interdepartmental meeting considered the question and decided to continue to receive the material. This is morally, legally and practically wrong. It exposes as hypocritical our post Abu Ghraib pronouncements and fatally undermines our moral standing. It obviates my efforts to get the Uzbek government to stop torture they are fully aware our intelligence community laps up the results.

3. We should cease all co-operation with the Uzbek Security Services they are beyond the pale. We indeed need to establish an SIS presence here, but not as in a friendly state.

4. In the period December 2002 to March 2003 I raised several times the issue of intelligence material from the Uzbek security services which was obtained under torture and passed to us via the CIA. I queried the legality, efficacy and morality of the practice.

5. I was summoned to the UK for a meeting on 8 March 2003. Michael Wood gave his legal opinion that it was not illegal to obtain and to use intelligence acquired by torture. He said the only legal limitation on its use was that it could not be used in legal proceedings, under Article 15 of the UN Convention on Torture.

6. On behalf of the intelligence services, Matthew Kydd said that they found some of the material very useful indeed with a direct bearing on the war on terror. Linda Duffield said that she had been asked to assure me that my qualms of conscience were respected and understood.

7. Sir Michael Jay's circular of 26 May stated that there was a reporting obligation on us to report torture by allies (and I have been instructed to refer to Uzbekistan as such in the context of the war on terror). You, Sir, have made a number of striking, and I believe heartfelt, condemnations of torture in the last few weeks. I had in the light of this decided to return to this question and to highlight an apparent contradiction in our policy. I had intimated as much to the Head of Eastern Department.

8. I was therefore somewhat surprised to hear that without informing me of the meeting, or since informing me of the result of the meeting, a meeting was convened in the FCO at the level of Heads of Department and above, precisely to consider the question of the receipt of Uzbek intelligence material obtained under torture. As the office knew, I was in London at the time and perfectly able to attend the meeting. I still have only gleaned that it happened.

9. I understand that the meeting decided to continue to obtain the Uzbek torture material. I understand that the principal argument deployed was that the intelligence material disguises the precise source, ie it does not ordinarily reveal the name of the individual who is tortured. Indeed this is true, the material is marked with a euphemism such as "From detainee debriefing." The argument runs that if the individual is not named, we cannot prove that he was tortured.

10. I will not attempt to hide my utter contempt for such casuistry, nor my shame that I work in and organisation where colleagues would resort to it to justify torture. I have dealt with hundreds of individual cases of political or religious prisoners in Uzbekistan, and I have met with very few where torture, as defined in the UN convention, was not employed. When my then DHM raised the question with the CIA head of station 15 months ago, he readily acknowledged torture was deployed in obtaining intelligence. I do not think there is any doubt as to the fact.

11. The torture record of the Uzbek security services could hardly be more widely known. Plainly there are, at the very least, reasonable grounds for believing the material is obtained under torture. There is helpful guidance at Article 3 of the UN convention; "The competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the state concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights." While this article forbids extradition or deportation to Uzbekistan, it is the right test for the present question also.

12. On the usefulness of the material obtained, this is irrelevant. Article 2 of the Convention, to which we are a party, could not be plainer: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture."

13. Nonetheless, I repeat that this material is useless– we are selling our souls for dross. It is in fact positively harmful. It is designed to give the message the Uzbeks want the West to hear. It exaggerates the role, size, organisation and activity of the IMU and its links with Al Qaida. The aim is to convince the West that the Uzbeks are a vital cog against a common foe, that they should keep the assistance, especially military assistance, coming, and that they should mute the international criticism on human rights and economic reform.

14. I was taken aback when Matthew Kydd said this stuff was valuable. Sixteen months ago it was difficult to argue with SIS in the area of intelligence assessment. But post Butler we know, not only that they can get it wrong on even the most vital and high profile issues, but that they have a particular yen for highly coloured material which exaggerates the threat. That is precisely what the Uzbeks give them. Furthermore MI6 have no operative within a thousand miles of me and certainly no expertise that can come close to my own in making this assessment.

15. At the Khuderbegainov trial I met an old man from Andizhan. Two of his children had been tortured in front of him until he signed a confession on the family's links with Bin Laden. Tears were streaming down his face. I have no doubt they had as much connection with Bin Laden as I do. This is the standard of the Uzbek intelligence services.

16. I have been considering Michael Wood's legal view, which he kindly gave in writing. I cannot understand why Michael concentrated only on Article 15 of the Convention. This certainly bans the use of material obtained under torture as evidence in proceedings, but it does not state that this is the sole exclusion of the use of such material.

17. The relevant article seems to me Article 4, which talks of complicity in torture. Knowingly to receive its results appears to be at least arguable as complicity. It does not appear that being in a different country to the actual torture would preclude complicity. I talked this over in a hypothetical sense with my old friend Prof Francois Hampson, I believe an acknowledged World authority on the Convention, who said that the complicity argument and the spirit of the Convention would be likely to be winning points. I should be grateful to hear Michael's views on this.

18. It seems to me that there are degrees of complicity and guilt, but being at one or two removes does not make us blameless. There are other factors. Plainly it was a breach of Article 3 of the Convention for the coalition to deport detainees back here from Baghram, but it has been done. That seems plainly complicit.

19. This is a difficult and dangerous part of the World. Dire and increasing poverty and harsh repression are undoubtedly turning young people here towards radical Islam. The Uzbek government are thus creating this threat, and perceived US support for Karimov strengthens anti-Western feeling. SIS ought to establish a presence here, but not as partners of the Uzbek Security Services, whose sheer brutality puts them beyond the pale.
The letters can also be found here.

The second document is a copy of legal advice the UK Foreign Office sought, to see if they were operating within the Law in accepting torture intelligence, and according to Michael Wood, the FCO legal adviser; it is fine, as long as it is not used as evidence.
From: Michael Wood, Legal Advisor

Date: 13 March 2003

CC: PS/PUS; Matthew Kidd, WLD

Linda Duffield


1. Your record of our meeting with HMA Tashkent recorded that Craig had said that his understanding was that it was also an offence under the UN Convention on Torture to receive or possess information under torture. I said that I did not believe that this was the case, but undertook to re-read the Convention.

2. I have done so. There is nothing in the Convention to this effect. The nearest thing is article 15 which provides:

"Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made."

3. This does not create any offence. I would expect that under UK law any statement established to have been made as a result of torture would not be admissible as evidence.


M C Wood
Legal Adviser
This letter can also be found here.

This entire post has been lifted from here (with only very minor editing on my part.)

Update: - A message from Craig Murray (via email from BlairWatch):
Can I pass on my thanks to everyone who is posting the documents and making
them public. You are striking a real blow for humanity and against the
appalling decline in our civil liberties and standards.

We have also proved that, as long as we have good people out there,
technology now makes it impossible for Western governments and political
establishments to bury the truth, no matter how much they control the
mainstream media.
Question: Is Diogenesian Discourse the only Australian blog publishing Murray's documents?
How tragic that would be... Get with the program, Aussie blogscum!!! ;-)

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Jesus was a communist...

I thought I had Jesus nicely sorted out in my own head. Now it seems I have to redefine him yet again. Drat.

I had convinced myself that Jesus was a lefty rising up against the capitalist Jews of his time. In my naïve way, I had this mean that he was rejecting Judaism and I figured that his Jewish followers (to whom he was the Messiah), had hijacked his teachings and corrupted them to conform to their beliefs, thus giving rise to the Jewish sect known to us as the Christians.

I quite liked this theory.

Then my Google bumped into Manfred Davidmann whilst I was seeking support for the theory that Christianity was a Jewish sect. And I got a whole lot more than I bargained for. It seems that I was right about Jesus being a communist, but his communism comes from the Torah. In other words, that the Torah had taught communistic ideas for a long time before Jesus came along. Davidmann argues that Judaism had become corrupted (by Hillel) just prior to Jesus's time and that Jesus was trying to bring Judaism back on track. Davidmann further claims that Paul corrupted Jesus's teachings and that Matthew tried to correct this.

So, if Davidmann is right, it seems to me that Jesus was a follower of the Shammai (communist) school of thought at a time when Judaism had become dominated by the Hillel (capitalist) school of thought. It seems also, that Paul was a follower of Hillel and Matthew a follower of Shammai. My reading of things is that eventually Hillel's evil influence corrupted not just Judaism as a whole, but Jesus's teachings (Christianity) as well.

And the rest, as they say, is history...

If you want to get more into this, read this, and also this.

The Rev. Albert Edward Smith also thought of Jesus as a communist. As did Reagan Youth. It's not a new idea. Just a good idea...

I'm off to bed now...

Sunday, December 25, 2005

Gerry's sermon to mark Jesus's birthday...

Today's sermon is directed at the hypocrites preaching in the Christian churches throughout Australia, Britain and America on this day.

Today is the day they truly put their collective feet in their mouths.

They will be preaching "Peace on earth and goodwill to all"

These are the same charlatans who "bless" our troops when they are ordered to go off to other lands to murder megathousands of people in order to make these lands accessible to our corporate greed.

These are the same charlatans who say "God is on our side" as we send our troops to commit mass murder on our government's orders.

These are the same charlatans who glorify our war dead (whilst "forgetting" to condemn war).

They are such moral fraudsters, these puppets of the establishment...

"Peace on earth and goodwill to all" indeed!!! I wouldn't buy a used car from these shysters!!!

Enjoy your Christmas turkey...

Thursday, December 22, 2005

boat people...

now and zen...

Heres's a lovely zen site for those who are enlightened enough to benefit from it.

The rest of you need not trouble yourselves...

It is not for you...

Me? Who said I was talking about me?

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

here's lookin at ya, kid...

i didn't start the fire...

Harry Truman, Doris Day, Red China, Johnnie Ray
South Pacific, Walter Winchell, Joe DiMaggio

Joe McCarthy, Richard Nixon, Studebaker, television
North Korea, South Korea, Marilyn Monroe

Rosenbergs, H-bomb, Sugar Ray, Panmunjom
Brando, "The King and I" and "The Catcher in the Rye"

Eisenhower, vaccine, England's got a new queen
Marciano, Liberace, Santayana goodbye

I didn't start the fire
It was always burning
Since the world's been turning
I didn't start the fire
No I didn't light it
But I tried to fight it

Joseph Stalin, Malenkov, Nasser aand Prokofiev
Rockefeller, Campanella, Communist Bloc

Roy hn, Juan Peron, Toscanini, dacron
Dien Bien Phu falls, "Rock Around the Clock"

Einstein, James Dean, Brooklyn's got a winning team
Davy Crockett, Peter Pan, Elvis Presley, Disneyland

Bardot, Budapest, Alabama, Krushchev
Princess Grace, "Peyton Place", trouble in the Suez


Little Rock, Pasternak, Mickey Mantle, Kerouac
Sputnik, Chou En-Lai, "Bridge on the River Kwai"

Lebanon, Charlse de Gaulle, California baseball
Starkweather, homicide, children of thalidomide

Buddy Holly, "Ben Hur", space monkey, Mafia
Hula hoops, Castro, Edsel is a no-go

U-2, Syngman Rhee, payola and Kennedy
Chubby Checker, "Psycho", Belgians in the Congo


Hemingway, Eichmann, "Stranger in a Strange Land"
Dylan, Berlin, Bay of Pigs invasion

"Lawrence of Arabia", British Beatlemania
Ole Miss, John Glenn, Liston beats Patterson

Pope Paul, Malcolm X, British politician sex
JFK, blown away, what else do I have to say


Birth control, Ho Chi Minh, Richard Nixon back again
Moonshot, Woodsto/ck/, Watergate, punk rock
Begin, Reagan, Palestine, terror on the airline
Ayatollah's in Iran, Russians in Afghanistan

"Wheel of Fortune", Sally Ride, heavy metal, suicide
Foreign debts, homeless vets, AIDS, crack, Bernie Goetz
Hypodermics on the shores, China's under martial law
Rock and roller cola wars, I can't take it anymore


I didn't start the fire
But when I am gone
Will it still burn on, and on, and on, and on...

*Apologies to Billy Joel for my slight editorial alteration to his lyrics.

Monday, December 19, 2005

while we're being frank...

Here's what you get when you send out uncalled-for emails whilst "self-medicated":
You are a loud-mouthed, drunken, miserable, paranoid old sod.
Spot on, wouldn't you say? I have no idea why this person, or any of you for that matter, still link to this blog. I woudn't.

Also, I did one of those online psych tests and here's how it described me:
messy, irritable, depressed, fragile, worrying, emotionally sensitive, does not like to lead, phobic, weird, suspicious, low self control, paranoid, frequently second guesses self, dependent, unproductive, introverted, weak, strange, unassertive, submissive, familiar with the dark side of life, feels invisible, rash, vain, anti-authority, heart over mind, low self concept, disorganized, not good at saving money, avoidant, daydreamer, unadventurous
That might explain some of my behaviour, eh?

I was a bit surprised by "vain", unassertive", "submissive", "unadventurous" and "feels invisible" though... I must have fudged, because it didn't pick up on my glaringly obvious misogynist traits.

Ah well, just goes to show none of us is perfect...

But don't worry, to spare you any future embarrassment or offence, I won't be commenting on other people's blogs unless expressly invited to do so. I think it's only fair...

I wonder if people like me should be blogging. Or even allowed out unchaperoned, for that matter...

Oh, and there's another trait the test missed: I don't give a rat's arse, really...

I do like using ellipses... I don't know why...

Note: Since I'll be using the comments to this post as a blogroll of blogs where I'm welcome to comment, it might be best if we keep it clear of any chit-chat. And for that reason I won't actually reply to your comments. Also, if you notice the new link in the disclaimer at the top of the blog (where it says "I'm as mad as a cut snake"), you'll be able to use that to get back here anytime to delete your previous comment (if I'm no longer welcome) or to add one when you wish to make me welcome. How anal retentive is that, eh? ;-) Wanna chat about it? See the previous post...

so you want to chat ???

This post is for the express purpose of providing a comment-space for those needing to waffle-on about the _next_ post ("while we're being frank"). Those with an IQ so low that they are incapable of figuring out what this means should visit other blogs. Immediately !!!

Saturday, December 17, 2005

reminders for the advanced soul...

From the Messiah's Handbook*

"You teach best that which you most need to learn."

Of course, none of that has anything to do with me...

*Illusions by Richard Bach

Friday, December 16, 2005

become a nonviolence trainer...

It must sound hypocritical coming, as it does, from someone as verbally aggressive as myself, but...

I want to interest you in the idea of becoming a nonviolence trainer. People from all walks of life and from both genders have been known to get committed to training others in the art of nonviolent resistance. I'm talking to you. Yes, you!

There is a four-day skillshare being conducted in Victoria in February 2006.

Who knows, I might even be able to get my shit together enough to get myself there...

Read all about it >>>

misandrists can go and get...

I've had it with misandry. Get stuffed all you man-hating FemiNazis. Piss off!
Don't come here. You are not welcome! Go!

If a man goes around bad-mouthing women all the time, putting them down all the time, ranting about the evils of women all the time, blaming women for all his woes, you call him a misogynist and a psychopath. And you'd be right.

But listen to yourselves some time! You're doing the same to us men, ya bloody misandristic psychopaths!


Note: I previously used the incorrect spellings "misandryst" and "misandrystic" and unfortunately these mistakes recur in my comments. Please forgive... If it makes you feel better, I offer to kill myself...

Thursday, December 15, 2005

after action report...

Dammit, I know some of you will have already seen it, but my ego insists I do this.

Update #1.5: The windmills proved to be a hard day's tilting. One of them, emulating the dismembered knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, just plain refused to admit defeat. It was tragic to observe. The other cunningly managed to negtiate a truce, sensing, no doubt, that he too was about to be annihilated by my superior logic.

Merry Jesus's Birthday Festive Season...

Davo, it saddens me to reiterate that you are completely wrong. A sect is branch of a religion. The religion of which Christianity is a branch, is Judaism. Christianity is that branch of Judaism which believes that Jesus was their Messiah (the christ). This is why The New Testament piggy-backs on top of The Old Testament (The Written Torah).

GreenSmile, come here and tell him. He won't believe me but he'll believe you!

I disagree with the idea that Jesus was The Messiah, because I reject the God of Judaism and I believe Jesus was a healer, a spiritual teacher of a more Eastern religious flavour, a pacifist, and I believe that his views regarding wealth and commerce make him the first Lefty in recorded history. And that was a combination guaranteed to get you killed if you started to attract a huge following back in that time and place. Even in today's world you'd probably be locked up for sedition...

I wish you all a Merry Jesus's Birthday Festive Season...

Addendum: If we truly have a separation between Church and State, how come the Christian holy days are the only religious holy days which are also official National holidays? Go figure...


Anarchy is generally a completely misunderstood political doctrine. I've been meaning to get acquainted with the basics of this doctrine for some time now, but I've bee too lazy. Since Mother Damnable sings its praises, I asked her to explain it to me:
I believe that if we were all take responsibility for our own selves and work collectively together there would be no need for laws or "leaders" That's it in a nutshell, I lived at Greenham Common at the Peace Camp and it was total Anarchy there, yet we managed to make strong and positive moves. Yes, there would need to be a massive sea change for this to happen, I suppose a start would be to admit that we're all control freaks, yet the only person we can ever really control is our own selves :>)
Hmmm... Starts thinking....

Wednesday, December 14, 2005

achtung baby !!

I'm not going mad at anyone here, so please don't get me wrong. And I don't want anyone to take any of this personally, OK? And I do like this blog to have a chatty, informal feel to it. But... I also want it to be serious about serious issues.

So I'm asking people who wish to comment on this blog to follow these commenting guidelines:

On serious topics, please try to keep your comments on-topic. A bit of banter is fine, but let's not derail the discussion, eh?

Needless to say posts of a trivial nature are open to full spectrum frivolity and unbounded banter.

Fair enough?

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

the sydney race riots...

I really don't want to lead into this any particular way, so I'll just thow it open to comments. And yes, I delete comments if I think they're crap. My blog. My privilege. Don't like the rules? Go say it on your own blog. What could be more democratic than that whilst at the same time safeguarding individuals rights. Perfection.

Ok, what have YOU got to say...

mountain murmurs is back again...

Sunday, December 11, 2005

people are dying every day...

I've just finished watching The Quiet American (Michael Caine) on TV. Again. The line that hit me like a ton of bricks was: "There's a war on. People are dying every day."

Like that somehow makes deaths in war unimportant. Inconsequential. Expected even. A mere detail... Without ever questioning the evil that war is... Or the evil of those who commit us to war... Especially when they're clearly economics driven ones. Mass murder in the interests of our economy?

Get f*cked, Bush! Get f*cked, Blair! Get f*cked, Howard!

Sedition? I think it's a GREAT idea... An idea whose time has come...

Australia, RISE UP !!!! (Or spend the rest of eternity on your knees...)

Friday, December 09, 2005

ambush blogging...

What is Ambush Blogging? It's War On Bullshit...

I'm a Leftie Pinko Scumbag. And proud of it!

We Lefties howl in protest at the bullshit coming at us from The Right. But we do Sweet Fanny Adams about the bullshit pumped out by our Leftie comrades. There seems to be a tacit agreement among Lefties not to challenge each others' bullshit.

Well, that's all changed now...

Ambush Blogging (c) (TM) has arrived. It has been reified into existence by my good self. I hereby charge every Leftie to help me clean up The Left by challenging Lefties everywhere who appear to be peddling crap.

I want rigorous debate! I want no prisoners taken! I want the truth, and I want everything which is not the truth to be laid waste! There is no room for bullshit in Leftie rhetoric!

Capiche paisano?

Update #1: For the more voyeuristic among you, I'm currently engaged in two ambushes: [Here] and [Here] Enjoy. It is unknown yet how these battles will go, but I see windmills...

Update #1.5: The windmills proved to be a hard day's tilting. One of them, emulating the dismembered knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, just plain refused to admit defeat. It was tragic to observe. The other cunningly managed to negtiate a truce, sensing, no doubt, that he too was about to be annihilated by my superior logic.

Update #2: Although it cannot be said that either of the windmills being tilted at are actually defeating me, it might be argued that Ambush Blogging should only be a bi-annual affair... The Aussie blogosphere is a fragile little flower... And the spotlight of truth tends to have a withering effect on some of the delicate little blossoms... So here's the policy: Every six months, two likely suspects will be selected for some character building exercises... That's pretty fair, isn't it?

when I snap my fingers you will awaken...

Harold Pinter, writing in The Age (Melbourne), has this to say:

The US supported and in many cases engendered every right-wing military dictatorship in the world after the end of World War II. I refer to Indonesia, Greece, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay, Haiti, Turkey, the Philippines, Guatemala, El Salvador and Chile.

The crimes of the US have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.

Read the whole article here >>>

Further reading:

Killing Hope by William Blum
Hegemony Or Survival by Noam Chomsky
Rogue States by Noam Chomsky

Get back to me after you've digested the contents of those books and I'll give you a few more. But please, please stop your misinformed prattle about America giving the world freedom and democracy. The more you crap on like that the more you're waving a big flag telling the whole world that you're an ignorant fool.

(Heads-up for The Age article: Ron the Mountain Murmurer)

Thursday, December 08, 2005

blogging and depression...

Is there a link between blogging and depression? Does blogging cause some people to become depressed? Does blogging aggrevate depression? Should depressives blog? Could blogging reduce depression by providing an opportunity to "vent"?

Very interesting topic. I think there's a PHD thesis in there somewhere.

Want more? Go [here] and [here] and [here].

Sorry I didn't crank it up into a proper article. Maybe one of you guys might like to do that...


I totally misunderstood one of Davo's comments here and deleted it. And then I sent him two angry and offensive emails.

Davo, I hereby publicly and unreservedly aplologise to you.

So there you go, kiddies, let that be a lesson to you. Don't try blogging when you're drunk out of your skull.

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

dropping like flies...

Margo Kingston's quit.

Robert Corr has quit (apparently selling out to capitalist urges).


I wish them both well.

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

get with the program...

Heard the Word of Blog?

Get with the program here >>>

First noticed the button here >>>

Button designed by Red One.

Addendum: To the best of my knowledge, only one other Australian blogger has gotten with the program. Where are are all the dissidents? Terrified to stick your heads up? Chardonnay activists? Bah! The spirit of the Australian larrikin is dead.

Monday, December 05, 2005

polish activists persecuted...

Get this!
Friends Worldwide,

We sent a report about situation of activists from Poland. One memeber of Anarchist Federation was arrested two days ago, two squats have been evicted, around 80 people have suits in courts.

It is getting harder and harder here.

Read in enclousre if you are interested, in solidarity with your struggles, Anarchist Federation of Poland (Poznan section)
In the past months, a wave of repression has struck Poland with double force. We assess the number of people currently or lately under police repression to be about 80.

Of course it is not only because right-wing and neoliberals have won last parliament and president elections. For several years actions of many different political and social groups that openly protest against the Polish government’s policy are submitted bigger and bigger repressions, with the use of the police and a machinery of court.

This phenomenon is not an incidental, but on a mass scale. For the past 3-4 years many activists of anarchist, antiwar, radical left wing, social worker and ecological movement, have been put on trial. The reason of the government’s repressions is undoubtedly an increase in number of social conflicts (for example a number of demonstrations, according to the police statistics, raised from 315 in 2001, to 2054 in 2003, and 1476 in 2004). The government apparently is not able to manage with so tries to restrict the freedom of assembly and speech. But we know that not only we have a r i g h t to protest, but we are f r e e to protest!

We announce 8.11.2005 a day of protest against the state and the police repressions! That day demonstrations are going to take place in few Polish cities (Poznan, Warszawa, Katowice, Wroclaw, Lodz). If you can do anything to protest and to support us- do it! You can help us by sending a donation for costs of lawyers, suits etc.

We are collecting money through the Anarchist Black Cross’s bank account:
PEKAO BP XX o/Poznañ ul.Stary Rynek 44 61-722 Poznañ Poland swift code: bpkoplpwapoa for USD: 10204085-5999100-270-44787 // owner: Marek Piekarski
For more on this email, see this UK Indymedia article >>>>
Lifted from here >>>

Sunday, December 04, 2005

feed my ego (again and again and again)...

Blogging is frequently self-indulgent. Narcissistic even. Add to that a broad streak of self-doubt, anxiety, and insecurity, and you have my profile down pat.

So why do you (yes, YOU) keep coming back here? Is there something seriously wrong with you? Are you in need of some radical therapy? And if you're a chick, is this blog a chick magnet for you, and if so, why? What!?!? I want to know who's responsible!!!

Chumpsrock has set the ball rolling with this comment (lifted from elsewhere):
OK I'll bite.

10 reasons diogenesian discourse
is supreme:

1. Stolen discourse used to represent your own log (Why I Hate Weblogs)

2. Chosen news links

3. Your mysterious relationship with Martha Wainwright

4. Application of insta-knowledge acquired from Wikipedia

5. Regurgitating rants from the past in an effort to further initial profoundness

5. I keep a low profile, but I beg the question: what will save Americans and the rest of the world from America?

6. The disclaimer

7. Veteran status

8. My own personal curiosity of the world outside of America

9. Accurately accounting for thought mazes via words alone

10. You look great in a straight-jacket
So now, if you're a regular reader, it's your turn to explain yourself!

american foreign policy 101...

America's foreign policy for the last 100 years has been based on these two noble ideals:

Freedom: If freedom in another country is good for America's (business) intere$t$ then America fuels such a freedom movement. If freedom there would be bad for America's intere$t$, then America ignores the plight of those people and supports or installs a dictator or other totalitarian regime there.

Democracy: If democracy in another country is good for America's (business) intere$t$ then America fuels such a democracy movement there. If democracy there would be bad for America's intere$t$, then America ignores the plight of those people and supports or installs a dictator or other totalitarian regime there.

Now you understand why America has been "saving the world" for the last 100 years.

But what will save us from America?

globalisation 101...

There's a nice little article here if you want a beginner's guide to globalisation.

OK, so let's see if I got it right...

When globalisation tilts the playing field in America's favour it's a good idea, when it tilts in favour of other countries it's a bad idea... Is that about it?

"Free trade" is good when it's in America's (business) interests and it's bad if it's not in America's (business) interests. Is that about it?

Nothing wrong with American thinking, is there...

dancing in the dark...

Bruce Springsteen... The film clip...

Who was the chick on stage?

What is she doing these days?

Don't you ever wonder about these things?

26 years ago...

Oliver's Army

Don't start me talking
I could talk all night
My mind goes sleepwalking
While I'm putting the world to right

Called careers information
Have you got yourself an occupation?

Oliver's army is here to stay
Oliver's army are on their way
And I would rather be anywhere else
But here today

There was a checkpoint Charlie
He didn't crack a smile
But it's no laughing party
When you've been on the murder mile

Only takes one itchy trigger
One more widow, one less white nigger


Hong Kong is up for grabs
London is full of Arabs
We could be in Palestine
Overrun by a Chinese line
With the boys from the Mersey and the Thames and the Tyne

But there's no danger
It's a professional career
Though it could be arranged
With just a word in Mr. Churchill's ear

If you're out of luck or out of work
We could send you to Johannesburg



According to Wikipedia... Oliver's Army is a song written by Elvis Costello, originally performed by Elvis Costello and the Attractions and appearing on the album Armed Forces in 1979. It is an anti-military song, attacking the British Army for targeting disadvantaged young men leaving secondary school (when the song was written in the late 1970s, England had a record high unemployment rate). The title refers to Oliver Cromwell, who as Protector of the Commonwealth created the New Model Army, an earlier version of the modern British Army. The song also mentions specific "trouble spots" in the world, such as South Africa (at the time experiencing turmoil over Apartheid), Palestine, and most prominently Northern Ireland. In reference to the latter country, Costello included the controversial lyric "It just takes one itchy trigger/One more widow, one less white nigger", referring to the Irish, as they have historically been oppressed by the English, much as black people have been oppressed in many countries.

Saturday, December 03, 2005

Martha... Oh Martha... OH MARTHA !!!!

And now for a bit of LIVE blogging...

I'm watching RocKwiz on SBS TV...

Martha Wainwright's on the panel...

So I Google "Martha Wainwright" and up pops her website, so I go there and what does it say?

It says "Martha on RocKwiz. For all you Australians, Martha will be appearing on RocKwiz with Dan Kelly on December 3rd."

Well, I never....

a bit of a blog hop....

It started out as a harmless little visit to Brownie's, but she was warning about blogs getting hacked so I had to go over to Norm's where I got redirected to Scott's till I ended up at Harry's where it said "Liberty, if it means anything, is the right to tell people what they don't want to hear." Now, I could really really relate to that, but now I had to find out who had originally said that. So, off to Google I went... and it turned out to be George Orwell.

There! You're wiser now... Be happy...

Friday, December 02, 2005

there'll be no barricades...

In a forum far, far away... I ranted as follows...

>> (I said:) Wanna scare yourself shitless? Consider this: We try to break away from the
DeathGrip Of The Bloodsucking Yanks, and they quietly whisper the magic
>> words "Military Aid" in the ears of the Indonesians, and bingo, there goes
>> NW Australia.

> (He said:) Dodgy, you keep doing this, you align yourself with these emotional
> little bits and you keep aligning yourself with a party that hasn't got
> a clue, far left or far even far right is bull crap.

I align myself with no-one unless it happens that they are aligned
with me. Get a clue, (name withheld), and treasure it...

> Listen to yourself:

> -----------------------

> DeathGrip Of The Bloodsucking Yanks
> ----------------------

> Emotions are nice but in the end there will be no long term support for

> those sorts of extreme positions..

I'm not looking for support... I analyse things, I say what I think.
If you have a problem with my analyses, no wories, they're not
"professional" opinions... Disagreeing with me is fine...

> Anyway, do your thing, you've already run out of medals, and don't think I
> wasn't proud of you, ...

Why the f*ck would you be proud of a ranting lunatic?

> ... but maybe discard your Australian nationality next ... ?

I'm sure Ruddock (our Attorney General) and the R(eturned) S(ervices) L(eague) are working on that very idea as we speak. No worries. Death is a welcome release from those arsewipes.

> My problem is that I do agree with some of your opinions, ...

Careful, you'll soon be arrested for that...

> ... but I'll be buggered if I am going to stand next to you on the barricades
> looking stupid.

There'll be no barricades in this country of subservient, compliant
sycophants. Oh no, there'll be no barricades in this country.

And anyway, most in the protest movement are hotheads. If they're not
actually engineering violence, vandalism or sabotage, then as soon as
they face a bit of argy-bargy from the stormtroopers, they'll try to
do the eye-for-an-eye, violence-for-violence crap, thereby playing
straight into the hands of the authorities and giving them the excuse
to use massive force. A loser's game plan. Result? Another discredited

Globalisation is the enemy, but look at who's the main force out against
them: S11. S11 are a bunch of warmongering vandals and thugs. Lunatics.

There'll be no barricades in this country because the protest movement
is not TOTALLY committed to nonviolence AS ONE. And they don't have
the self-disciplined membership to keep it nonviolent - no matter what!!!
The guts of the movement are young hotheads who want to out-do each
other to antagonise and provoke violence so that they can get their heads
kicked in by the stormtroopers, and thereby become heroes to their
friends. Losers. So last century.

There'll be no barricades.

We'll just silently slip into fascism just as Germany did in 1936.

the even better truth loop...

"Reality" is what we take to be true. What we take to be true is what we believe. What we believe is based upon our perceptions. What we perceive depends upon what we look for. What we look for depends upon what we think. What we think depends upon what we perceive. What we perceive determines what we believe. What we believe determines what we take to be true. What we take to be true is our reality.

The Dancing Wu Li Masters (ISBN 0-00-654-030-9) by Gary Zukav

the truth loop...

Man keeps looking for a truth
that fits his reality.

Given our reality,
the truth doesn't fit.

...Jack Rosenberg

the joys of globalisation...

The story will be a familiar one to many of you. An employer, fed up with paying union wages, decides to import a few hundred non-unionized workers from poorer countries. Security guards are brought in to "escort" the new contract workers into the workplace as hundreds of unionized workers are about to get the sack.

This is what Irish Ferries was attempting this week when they ran up against the determined resistance of union members who barricaded themselves onto ships. Those workers and their union, working together with the International Transport Workers Federation (ITF), have turned this from a simple cost-saving move by a heartless management into a major struggle for social justice. The Irish unions have called for a national day of protest on 9 December. By Eric Lee,
Story in The Guardian >>>

Send Brendan a letter...

Our Education Minister, Brendan Nelson, is big on Intelligent Design and wants it taught in schools.

Join the Spaghetti Monster Revolution.

Send Dr Nelson a letter.

His contact details are:

Suite MF24
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Fax: (02) 6273 4116

Thursday, December 01, 2005

shit happens...

They forgot this one: Atheism - shit equals em cee squared.

Image contributed by JahTeh.

dai ippo zen...

I need to make you aware that I am the First Patriarch of Dai Ippo Zen.

I explain:

In the light of many past discussions with people and more recently comments on this blog and in private emails, I thought I'd get on the arrogance and conceit bandwagon and claim to have some searing insights which are denied lesser mortals.

And thus I have appointed myself to the the lofty pinnacle of a brand new Zen sect which I have called Dai Ippo Zen.

I do not claim to be enlightened or to have attained satori. I have no special insights which you cannot also obtain by staring long enough at a picture of a chimpanzee. Any picture of a chimpanzee. But it must be a picture of a chimpanzee. No other picture could possibly have the same effect. I can teach you nothing you don't already know.

Future followers of mine will make up wildly exaggerated stories of my wisdom and perspicacity, adorned with endless items of "evidence". It is the nature of the way...

May the stench of the Buddha be with you...