Android link FREE!!!
Redphone allows you to use your own phone number and is very easy to install and use.
More privacy apps including secure text and chat available at:
Jonathan Moylan had his own Mega Mosque moment when he created a parody email system called ANZcorporate and sent out fake press releases claiming a col mining project had lost it line of credit from ANZ, of course the share price when tumbling because all this is fake money and can disappear in an instant. Then the banksters got angry that people were figuring out their dirty tricks, his ‘roumortrage’ (rumor and arbitrage) had done real damage, but he unlike banksters had refused to take monetary advantage from it all.
Court case ensues, found guilty but unlikely to face jail because these kinds of finance crimes always have precedent and are usually accompanied by light sentences.
Amazing the kind of damage you can do with a few dollars, a clever idea and stone cold bluff.
Because absolutely nothing can be a real cool hand.
The garden variety lefties don’t want to admit it, but the biggest threat to Tony Abbott and his insane posse of neoconservatives is the wealthy mining magnate Clive Palmer.
Having clearly shown that political office can be effectively bought by throwing sufficient money at carefully chosen electoral and senatorial seats, he has now chosen to do something unexpected, caring about anybody else apparently. It’s fair to say Palmer is doing something slightly more honest that the typical billionaire, in that he is in office himself rather than buying a hollow man (politician). But in this sense you really see the agenda for what it is, rather then filtered and massaged through through a puppet. Hearing Palmer say ‘bullshit’ on a TV interview is refreshing and demonstrates that with enough money you can really say what you like.
So what did Palmer get for his investment?
One house of representatives seat. Palmer admits he often doesn’t attend parliament unless there is a division, declaring his one vote is often useless.
Three Senate seats, this is significant political capital in a very divided senate. This voting block give PUP effectively a kingmaker position. Palmer has used this to strike down the carbon tax repeal until electric price reductions have been added to protect the pocket of the lowly voter.
Can you hear it? The roars of ‘man of the people’?
Nope, the political left typically are deadly silent when a ‘rich bastard capitalist’ does something good for everybody. That’s the typical dishonest and blinkered thinking you can expect from the left.
So now Abbott and his mad ideology have been put in the cage by someone a bit more real. Perhaps Palmer now has another dinosaur to add to his theme park, an Abbottosarus, extinct since people starting calling bullshit.
We stole this picture from The Age, its grouse mate, nice work.
Anthony John Carolan 61, now indefinitely imprisoned (since 2000) after numerous indecent assaults on children spanning back to the 1970′s.
A false dichotomy is a logical fallacy ( an illogical argument) which states there are only two option option A or option B. Clearly there are many possible choices for most questions. A perfect example is in every bottle store when one decides which drink one might like to have. If a situation is painted as having only two choices it is possible a false dichotomy is being offered. Given the choice of beer or wine, one might wonder why vodka or whiskey (or anything else) are not being offered. Some times political situations are deliberately polarized to create the idea of a false dichotomy where such a binary choice is neither real or even helpful.
In Australian politics for a significant period of time the false dichotomy of Liberal(+National) vs Labour(+Green) has been not only offered, but even reinforced by the STV voting system. The classic response to this has bee the third option the donkey (informal) vote. Of course this is people either disenchanted with politics or not fully understanding the system, but clearly represents an additional option. Funnily enough in the recent Australian senatorial president election there were two donkey votes, clearly they were deliberate as you couldn’t really expect two senators to not know how to vote. Well one donkey vote maybe was possible, but I’m not looking in my rear view mirror at anyone in particular. Sometimes such donkey votes are a protest at the futility of voting against such large voting blocks or even a subtle insult to an expected last place getter.
Sometimes geopolitical situations can be described at a false dichotomy by the puppet masters, particularly if it suits their purposes. Here is the last two ‘world’ wars and the real false dichotomy that was an likely still is in place. Of course if you attack the false dichotomy both sides of the dichotomy will be instructed to attack you, which ironically proves that it is a false dichotomy for all those awake enough to see through the cognitive dissonance.
Of course sometimes the situation is so complex that making a dichotomy of it is not possible, though some people will try very hard and often limit and distort information in order to do so.
Once again Facebook being used against its users, looking more and more like the matrix all the time.
Are you going to wake up once you have to plug a cable directly into your brain to use Facebook?
The frog boils slowly.
Here are some of the main articles of the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights to which a number of countries, including Australia, India , China , most of Europe and South America voted in favour.
- All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
- Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
- Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
- No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
- No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
- Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
- All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
- Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
- No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
- Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
A number of Islamic countries originally also voted in favour of the declaration (whereas Israel did not), however, since the Eighties they have declared that the UDOHR contradicts Sharia Law (No surprises there, having your right hand chopped off for adultery is a violation of articles 2 and 5 , for example.)
“In 1982, the Iranian representative to the United Nations, Said Rajaie-Khorassani, said that the Declaration was “a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition” which could not be implemented by Muslims without conflict with Sharia.“
“What needs to be pointed out to those who uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to be the highest, or sole, model, of a charter of equality and liberty for all human beings, is that given the Western origin and orientation of this Declaration, the “universality” of the assumptions on which it is based is – at the very least – problematic and subject to questioning. Furthermore, the alleged incompatibility between the concept of human rights and religion in general, or particular religions such as Islam, needs to be examined in an unbiased way.“
Interesting that countries like China or India have also signed up and last time I checked they were not Western countries, however, their spiritual traditions like Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism would be very much in accordance with the declaration of human rights, therefore refuting that it is a Western concept.
Of course every country is guilty of acting against the declaration of human rights, human nature being what it is.
What follows on Wikipedia is a good example of moral relativism :
A strong argument can be made that the current formulation of international human rights constitutes a cultural structure in which western society finds itself easily at home … It is important to acknowledge and appreciate that other societies may have equally valid alternative conceptions of human rights.”
What rights are we talking about here? The right to kill unbelievers and apostates? The right to hurt, oppress and subjugate women in the name of religion and law? the right to imprison and torture people for private transgressions like “adultery” or marrying a person your family did not choose?
Why not the right to eat people and sacrifice babies for “Satanists”? Why not the right to rape 5 year olds for paedophiles?
Of course moral relativism in many ways is a good thing, as it allows people to express their individuality, creativity and culture.But when take to extremes, moral relativism becomes a license for harm, torture and murder.