Friday, 30 May 2014

Of political cliches and friends - Wilders / Le Pen

Of political cliches and friends - Wilders / Le Pen

I read this morning in The Oz with some dismay; once again the sometimes useful political cliche ...The enemy of my enemy is my friend  is simply trite!

Then the WSJ google search elicited this: WSJ EX MAY 23:National Front's Marine Le Pen of Fr. 

I recall how Wilders was and possibly remains in good standing amongst those with conservative /  pro Israel  values -  basis the ancient political cliche as in WIKI and google on the Q society and Wilders!
Oh dear - much remains to be explained! Note the role of ABC and the humiliation of Tony Jones by Wilders!

Geoff Seidner


Monday, 26 May 2014

Corollaries and Jon Faine

From: g87
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 12:03 PM
Subject: Corollaries and Jon Faine

Hello Jon Faine
I note with some minor disappointment that you did not deem important to favour me with a response to my hurriedly – written email of 23/5.
Since then many people have held you to account for your behaviour re  the infamous ‘winking – Abbott’ chimera.
My question below – per my email to you extends the questions Andrew Bolt has on his blog:
And it also extends the comments on CH 10’s The Bolt Report on Sunday, when Andrew’s guest Rowan Dean asked the unanswerable. This has been also so cruelly appended by the evil empire at The Australian Cut And Paste  26/5.
All remain unanswerable.
But here I reiterate merely part of my question to you – part of my blog entry: – repeated again. Help me to understand the annals of your mind.
Tell me Jon – what happened between 8 35 am and 8 55 am?
You sounded almost  reasonable early on – merely to lacerate the PM within minutes by calling him a liar! Please explain how such a moderate, careful, considered person who has legal training – could become so .... inconsistent...??.... in such a narrow time span? Again – what happened Jon?
Did you get a threatening tweet from the twits at twiterati – world?
Did the hyphen  threaten you?
You could get the police in Jon – just like those climate scientists did a couple of years ago about their death – threats to climate scientists at ANU. I am sure you could persuade the police to reinvestigate the CC fraud / threat – and along the way encourage the Hyphenated Senator to behave herself?
Look what Google has dug up, Jon: think how much more I could find.
Think of how many of these I could dig up and ensure there is a permanent record of you?
So defend and /  attack, Jon.
  • ABC 'climate death threats' - Media Spinners - Blogger
    THE OZ 19/5/12: ABC 'climate death threats' reports undermined. ABC 'climate death threats' reports undermined .... threat. Posted by Geoff Seidner at 11:17 pm.
  • Media Spinners: Climate death threats fraudulent:OFFICIAL ...
    May 3, 2012 - Subject: Climate death threats fraudulent: OFFICIAL! ... The AustralianClimate scientists' claims of email death threats go up in ... Geoff Seidner
  • Socialist Dystopia: Eleven Classical ABC INEXCUSABLE ...
    Feb 6, 2014 - My other main blog: Geoff Seidner ... Some items like alleged death threats against Climate scientists a year or ...
  • Socialist Dystopia: TRUTH TO POWER: ANOTHER LEFTIST ...
    Aug 9, 2012 - Geoff Seidner ... productions canceled, books shelved by publishers, thought-crime tribunals in Canada, death threats over political cartoons.
  • BREAKING: Skeptics equated to pedophiles — Robyn ...
    Nov 24, 2012 - Climate Money Paper ...... Geoff, I think the offending sprech by Newman was more recent. ...... Geoff Seidner .... death threats and racist remarks it likes as a part of the “mandate” by the people by the “landslide” (under 1% ...
    I do not wish to recapitulate from the above sources – including my hurriedly – written earlier  email. [ which has found it’s way to my blog as you will appreciate.] i invite you to read it – remember that the police refused to investigate fraud made up by your buddies who waste taxpayers funds instead of doing something useful like inventing perpetual energy.
    No wonder Universities are in trouble!

    Cold fusion: A case study for scientific behavior

    Cold Fusion Is Hot Again - CBS News !!!!

    This email is also being posted on my blog virtually as soon as Isend it to you: my readers await a reply so we can understand you better. Aah – the wonders of being held to accound via technology....
    I have always wanted to understand the left better – some unkindly insist that the proletariat are indubitably wrong on everything they espouse. this seems unkind.
    Please help me to see your side of things. I beseech you – take this opportunity to show you and the comrades can be correct in any fair debate where words and corollaries count.
    I do recommend you get a link to the ‘Bolt – Rowan Dean’ conversation from the Bolt Report.
    Kindest Regards
    Geoff Seidner
    From: g87
    Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 4:07 PM
    Subject: Jon Faine I hold you to account
    Hello Jon Faine
    I frequently listen to your programme and have grown adept at ignoring all but your most outrageous anti conservative bias.
    Sure, you have regular guests from the centre right – but sadly they are mere masks and chimeras -  a guise to hide the real YOU - o you will be able to claim the obvious. that is the way of you people...
    You see Jon – sometimes, regularly come to think of it – you slip up.
  • Friday, 23 May 2014

    Jon Faine I hold you to account

    From: g87
    Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 4:10 PM
    Subject: Fw: Jon Faine I hold you to account

    A tip for your cut and paste, Chris Mitchell
    From: g87
    Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 4:07 PM
    Subject: Jon Faine I hold you to account
    Hello Jon Faine
    I frequently listen to your programme and have grown adept at ignoring all but your most outrageous anti conservative bias.
    Sure, you have regular guests from the centre right – but sadly they are mere masks and chimeras -  a guise to hide the real YOU - o you will be able to claim the obvious. that is the way of you people...
    You see Jon – sometimes, regularly come to think of it – you slip up.
    BADLY – like yesterday morning  8 35 am to 9 am then I think 9 30 am approx.
    You see Jon you demand that Abbott has perfect recall of your visage at a brief moment in time!! Which he at the time he had no reason to contemplate.
    Lunatics like the hyphonated  Senator and disparate comrades had not at that time made a foray into this world of tripe.
    All this is not only absurd – but contemptuous to any understanding of the basics of common decent behaviour!
    And having  failed in this – you unhesitatingly call him a LIAR!!!!!
    How on any scale of reasonableness – how could you think in view of your 8 35 am comments... how could you let your guard so badly slip? By 8 55 am and earlier...
    You really think that the world should be a rational free zone – where matters YOU admit to are ephemeral at 8 35 am ... you gainlessly , ignorantly use to abuse the PM?
    Shame on you: you let your guard down. What will the proletariat say?
    Why JF: you should really admit that thanks to completely disproportinate debate generated by fellow comrades – you allowed the leader of the opposition at least 30 – 40 cliched  tryped – up phrases? With ne’er a question to 95% of them, Shorten was abysmal: can you send me a transcript?  i will pick at least 40 discrete idiocies that you glibly allowed to sail past you in your tranquil word of social justice.
    It is so tempting to have  further have a go at you for adopting THIS MORNING the imbecilic analogous Labored line that there is no budget emergency and that why can’t they do it over 10 years [ which is such an insult to the colective’ intelligence]
    10 YEARS JON? What organs, tools appendages and economic irrationalisms do you hypothecate?
    I see in front of me a somewhat sickish cartoon of a man falling from a building – shouting ‘’STILL ALL RIGHT’
    Tell me – where do you place Oz in 10 years of Abbott was to taken your laissez faire line to yoor Labored friends’ disaster?
    Yours Sincerely
    Geoff Seidner
    Much of the below is shorthand:

    Subject matter: ABC RADIO 774
    JON FAINE  8:30 a.m. To 9 a.m. Thursday the 22nd of may
    Jon  Faine  started his program  saying that it all was [essentially] much ado about nothing... with respect to  Abbott and the allegations that ....the claim that Abbott claimed with respect to Faine  smiling. The exact language matters not – the above is a correct interpretation.
    Note how he moved gradually  from this reasonable position!
    The transcript will be generous to me – these notes are a reconstruction from my voice recording on my new Gallaxy 3.. which I am barely used to.
    Very rapidly he started  / had graduated to this:
    Faine started to attack Abbott’s office re above Abbott wink – claiming that he MERELY RAISED HIS EYEBROWS AT THE SALIENT MOMENT!
    A  liar claiming that the scenario that been had smiled at him was nothing more than a lie BECAUSE HE MERELY RAISED HIS EYEBROW and that it was INEXCUSABLE!!
    AND HERE IS THE ULTIMATE: a caller at 9 54 am pointed out that there wasn't much difference between a smile and a raised eyebrow, Faine  merely said that ‘’you can put whatever interpretation to it you like’’
     OR ‘’ susceptible to interpretation’’???
    I continue this matter with respect to FAINE  and his conversation with the incipient........ the incipient producer of the Insiders who discussed with same the same scenario again!
    They covered the same ground once again in went into it once again ... FAINE  .... together with a ... female conducted the modern day derivation of the BIB AND BUB SHOW AT 9 30 am approx.

    Monday, 19 May 2014


    From: g87
    Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 11:05 AM

    Attention Foreign Minister / Deputy PM Julie Bishop,
    Attention Education Minister  Christopher Pyne
    Attorney General George Brandis,
    And my local Member Michael Danby

    Julie Bishop and Gentlemen,
    I draw your attention to a range of articles in today’s The Oz and others per links here under.
    1. I wish to draw your attention that the boycotts against Jews and Israel – secondary or otherwise are probably illegal. CERTAINLY RACIST. Certainly humbug as well.
    2. Furthermore these entities are wasting government funds in using YOUR / OUR resources for outrageous politicking – instead of furthering the indubitable interests of our youth.
    3. No wonder university research has such a bad name that universities are reduced to begging the public... funding / research / etc as you can see in the papers. They ruin the HES policy.. no time for more..
    4. And worse – Mr Brandis should immediately warn them – as Julia Bishop has done. Indeed perhaps Mr Brandis has probably done as well – that not only are they acting in a way that is immoral, and arguably illegal – but they risk being declared personae non – grata. A new word methinks?
    5. Oh – and if morality or it’s obverse does not move them – then let there be the law that could declare them an undesirable organisation in a similar league to terrorists. INDEED THEY SUPPORT TERRORIST – SO WHY NOT DECLARE THEM NEFARIOUS?
    6. And if that does not do ‘it’ – then let them be crippled / starved of funds in their peace and conflated studies. [this is no typo]
    Any careful reading of merely these documents elicits more questions than answers.
    I am outraged that the evil of the boycotts has reached the stage that these quasi – intellectual racists can claim that railing against anti semitism as parliamentarians did last year is ‘’childish... but populist’’ see link and below.
    How could Der Sturmer be any worse?
    I cannot get around to indexing my blogs re the BDS: but enough links are provided which will lead to many articles.
    It is a source of annoyance to me that this can only be done after our return from a visit to Israel and Europe – June – July.
    I do not have time to properly edit this but i doubt if any great errors are resident herein.
    Yours Sincerely
    Geoff Seidner
    East St Kilda 3183

    MAY 19 all these 3 links:

    MORE than 40 members of the federal opposition banded together yesterday to sign the London Declaration on Combating Anti-Semitism after they were incensed by comments from the head of the Sydney Peace Foundation, Stuart Rees, attacking the document.
    The Australian yesterday reported Professor Rees had lashed Julia Gillard for signing the declaration, calling the gesture "childish, thoughtless but easily populist".
    Professor Rees is on the staff of the university's Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies - which supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement that explicitly equates Israel with apartheid-era South Africa.
    The Prime Minister last month became the first Australian politician to sign the declaration.
    She was joined last week by opposition frontbencher Christopher Pyne.
    Professor Rees dismissed their action in emails obtained by The Australian as "childish, thoughtless, but easily populist".

    Sunday, 11 May 2014

    Corrected ver...Outrageous Lyons / Xenothon / The Australian

    Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 1:26 PM
    Subject: Corrected ver...Outrageous Lyons / Xenothon

    I write to voice shock at the outrages and manifest anti – Israel bias of The Australian’s Middle East correspondent, John Lyons .

    Reference is made to page 8 of The Oz on Saturday May 10 2014. Lyons uses his contacts relating to his multi – discredited recent ABC / Lyons 4 Corners abomination!

     I note that Lyons has now introduced Australian Senator Nick Xenophon  to Lyon’s  buddies ex the above programme; what a list! And the below are merely the ones the writer admits to.
    1. Breaking The Silence

    2. B’’Tselem

    3. Barister Gerard Horton.

    4. Military Court Watch

    5. UNICEF

    6. International Court of Justice.

    It is the contrived / self – censored photograph that gets to me: Lyons is good at the setting up of fraudulent set pieces like the

    hysterical Palestinian woman in a cage.

    My files are replete with similar fraud. IT IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THE AUSTRALIAN TOOK DOWN THE ON - LINE VERSION OF

    And look who has fallen for all this? Why it is the oh - so – respected Senator Nick Xenophon who clearly refuses to open his other eye!
    The good senator has essentially admitted that he saw no one other than JL’s cronies.

    ‘’He was briefed by Australian barrister Gerard Horton from Military Court Watch about a Unicef report that found ill treatment
    of Palestinian children appeared to
    be “widespread, systematic and institutionalized”. Mr Horton said MCW had found that since the report there had been some
    improvements but 90 per cent of
    detained children were still tied
    and 55 per cent reported physical abuse.’’

    Just how many times are these travesties; not just lies and distortions – but inversions of victimhood going to recur?
    Without the remotest suggestion that Rupert Murdoch will intervene? Does the current editor think that the wonderful efforts of other journalists re the BDS offsets the Lyons entity? 

    I reckon the word Pilgerized should be joined by an appropriate JL aphorism.

    There are dozens of matters in merely the current article: mendacities that the informed reader will be able discern.
    What concerns is that there are plenty of ill – informed people in this wonderful country of ours who are regularly fed anti – Israel tripe
    through the tools, appendages and acolytes of probably the only real – live enemy at The Oz of tiny Israel - the only democracy in the area. Thus evil thrives!

     Sometimes  one feels there is no morality extant anymore.
    Post modernism and the refusal for decent people to rail against true injustice – I reckon today Richard Nixon would have
    survived Watergate – no one would have cared – or had the attention span....

    Geoff Seidner
    13 Alston Gr East St Kilda 3183
    03 9525 9299

    Tuesday, 6 May 2014



    No wonder people many people have little interest in politics and less appreciation for the arcane arts of broad humbug via politicians. Why - even journalists are guilty of bringing democratic processes into disrepute.

    Take the current issue de jour - the government's proposed repeal of section 18C of the Human Rights Act.
    Most of the players trying to defend the proposal via the 'Freedom Of Expression' perspective have deliberately distorted the issues lest they concede to those who disagree with them. Arguably this is the way of politics. it has always been so.

    But worse; try reading editorials, articles and letters espousing ''sacrifices in the pursuit of freedom and free speech'' published in The Australian for example on merely Tuesday 6/5. Such grandiose verbiage.
    Remember the infamous quote:

    Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel: Samuel Johnson

    And The Oz not for the first time, continues the ignoble loosing fight in the editorial of 6/5.

    Indeed - it has been obvious for a good while that they will have to get used to 18C; it will remain more or less as is.


    Note Warren Mundine wrote on April 1 in  The Australian.

    ''As it happens, under the new laws people can incite hatred against Jewish people while participating in public discussion of a wide range of subjects. Holocaust deniers will have a wide berth to peddle their misinformation. Evidently, the drafters didn’t manage to find a form of words that would allow Bolt’s comments on the one hand but prevent public hate speech on the other.''

    The key is the  last sentence. So much rubbish has elsewhere been  promoting the idea that freedom of speech trumps the responsibility for same! Why have we seen three letters from The League of Rights promoting unilateral freedom?
    Will the next debate be the above or whether the Nazis should have finished the job? The new  Thin edge of the wedge? Who would have believed a mere few years ago that Jews would be attacked in the streets?
    Mundine was unfairly lacerated by a professor of law a few days later. A travesty.

     Note the op ed in The Oz on 29 March, 2014

    Comment from gs:this article is imbecilic

     at best! My extreme language is justified 

    - not the least because of this:

    Nor, in Australia, has the controversial Section 18C of the RDA prevented a
     21 per cent increase in the number of reports of racist violence directed at
     individuals or Jewish facilities in the past year. That disturbing trend is a 
    good reason for open debate and the airing of grievances, to allow
     them to be dealt with by rational, sensible argument.''t 




    Note that Jews are now encouraged to believe that being attacked requires them to accept that it is their fault, we should debate it with criminals - and LO! Even the 18C is being blamed for not preventing the attacks!

    And on 30/4 the editorial of the Oz wrote:

    ''Unfortunately for Jewish Australians who hold a multiplicity of views, the main organisations dedicated to the defense of Israel, the Middle East’s only functioning democracy, have taken a narrow approach. On its website, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, published a rebuttal to Professor Dershowitz’s Wednesday article. The rebuttal, by Peter Wertheim, said all the peak Jewish national bodies in Australia were united in opposition to plans to alter the RDA. Their stand, paradoxically, is in line with many of Israel’s most trenchant critics from the left of the Australian media.
    Some within the Jewish diaspora disagree with the organisations’ official line. Such individuals know that majority or official opinion among any group is not necessarily always right. Many racial and religious groups, including Jews, have learned, that lesson at vast and painful cost through history. Free choice, including opposition to cultural coercion, was one of the 10 founding principles of Israel, which is also a good reason for respecting dissenting views.''

    Anyone should be able to see that those troublesome creatures have no rights 

    1. To majority opinion [''majority are ''not necessarily right'']
    2. Free choice.. but some have been guilty of ''cultural coercion''!
    3. The what about breaking ''the founding principles of Israel?
    These are virtually blood libels!

    The reconfiguring of bigotry via the comment from George Brandis was irresponsible. I think he realizes it now.

    'People have a right to be bigots': PM defends Attorney ...

    No they do not, Mr Brandis! Because in front of our eyes we already have the long silent 'League' gleefully claiming  glory by their publications in mainstream media. Writers have also shifted the arena by claiming that we can defend ourselves in a debate. 
    Oh the dozens of cliched twirpery in disparate articles insisting the that there exists a ''marketplace of ideas''
    that will not skew t

    Is that all there is to it?

    The reader should note that the mid point has already shifted.

    But - to set a new mid - point - ANY debating point of debate for the greatest tragedy / mass - murder in history, is unspeakable!

     This mid point is as follows. Yad Vashem is still struggling to find the names of the 6 million who perished. So, is there anyone who wishes to debate that there were only 5,950,000 Jews murdered?
    Is the mid point agreed to be agreed to - to be 5, 975,000?

    AND in the act of debating the holocaust - THAT is exactly what happens!
    An inevitable by -  product of allowing this will indubitably, invariably set up the very idea that the fact of the matter is debatable! I suggest that there has never been a greater obscenity than this newly - created 'mid - point' in vulgarism.
    This mid point is as follows. Yad Vashem is still struggling to find the names of the 6 million who perished. So, is there anyone who wishes to espouse there were only 5,950,000 Jews murdered?
    Is the mid point agreed to as 5, 975,000?

     Or will the next debate be the above or whether the Nazis should have finished the job? 
    Heck NO! I withdraw this corollary - this mere cliche -  in the sense that it will never come to that, never.
    Surely there will always be decent people who will never allow it to descend to hypothesizing about how Hitler could have murdered 10 million? Then there would be no - one to have written this. But the twirps could debate what a victorious Hitler would have done?

    May be those same cavalier people who today ignorantly espouse freedom of speech for incipient defacto Nazis on the AXIS of the contextually - untenable 'freedom' of speech moniker, should become aware what the ill - thought consequences will be. It is essentially decreptitudinous and dastardly.

    Oh - I make this comment_ people should be wary of getting into proverbial bed with the League of Rights: The Australian has published 3 letters in the last few weeks to the editor by these entities. Beware ye all!
    And The Australian has been disgraceful in all ways!
    I do a partial  cut and paste from their astonishing editorial from early April as here.

    1. understood by few; mysterious or secret.
      "arcane procedures for electing people"

    1. Amity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

      Amity, a word which means "friendship", can refer to: Look up amity in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. Contents. 1 Places in the United States; 2 Education ...

    2. enmity

      noun: enmity; plural noun: enmities
      1. a state or feeling of active opposition or hostility.
        "decades of enmity between the two countries"