The old are still alive – not praying for death | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

The old are still alive – not praying for death | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog.

A very important essay from Karen Hitchcock, resisting the pro-euthanasia push that risks putting the elderly under more pressure to just die and get out of our way:

I have had the same experience in my time in Intensive care. The old and decrepit rarely wanted to die; it was sometimes the wonderful old patients, people that would make wonderful grandparents who, aware of their lack of purpose, wanted to move on.

I do not recall a patient denied a serious request for a dignified exit, since morphine treats pain, and morphine is cheap, but I do recall that relatives are not always the best advocates for their elderly.


Earth scientists split on climate change statement

AUSTRALIA’S peak body of earth scientists has declared itself unable to publish a position statement on climate change due to the deep divisions within its membership on the issue.

After more than five years of debate and two false starts, Geological Society of Australia president Laurie Hutton said a statement on climate change was too difficult to achieve.

Mr Hutton said the issue “had the potential to be too divisive and would not serve the best interests of the society as a whole.”

The backdown, published in the GSA quarterly newsletter, is the culmination of two rejected position statements and years of furious correspondence among members. Some members believe the failure to make a strong statement on climate change is an embarrassment that puts Australian earth scientists at odds with their international peers.

It undermines the often cited stance that there is near unanimity among climate scientists on the issue.

GSA represents more than 2000 Australian earth scientists from academe, industry, government and research organisations.

A position statement published in 2009 said the society was concerned about the potentially harmful effects of carbon dioxide emissions and favoured “strong action to substantially reduce current levels’’.

“Of particular concern are the well-documented loading of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, which has been linked unequivocally to burning of fossil fuels, and the corresponding increase in average global temperature,’’ it said.

“Risks associated with these large-scale perturbations of the Earth’s fundamental life-support systems include rising sea level, harmful shifts in the acid balance of the oceans and long-term changes in local and regional climate and extreme weather events.”

Publication of the position statement caused an uproar among members and led to a revised statement, after wide consultation. The revised statement said: “Geological evidence clearly demonstrates that Earth’s climate system is inherently and naturally variable over timescales from decades to millions of years.

“Regardless of whether climate change is from natural or anthropogenic causes, or a combination of both, human societies would benefit from knowing what to expect in the future and to plan how best to respond.

“The GSA makes no predictions or public policy recommendations for action on climate beyond the generally agreed need for prudent preparations in response to potential hazards, including climate change.”

The revised statement was criticised as being too vague.

In a short statement published in the latest edition of the society newsletter, Mr Hutton says: “After a long and extensive and extended consultation with society members, the GSC executive committee has decided not to proceed with a climate change position statement.’’

“As evidenced by recent letters to the editor … society members have diverse opinions on the human impact on climate change. However, diversity of opinion can also be divisive, especially when such views are strongly held.

“The executive committee has therefore concluded that a climate change position statement has the potential to be far too divisive and would not serve the best interests of the society as a whole ,” the statement says.


The Left’s fear of diversity and debate | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

How about starting a drive for job equality for conservatives. End discrimination against conservatives in public institutions, similarly to gender equality.

Demand quotas, at least 40% conservatives by 2020.

Remove the political glass ceiling at the ABC.

Demand that public service, universities and the ABC report annually their percentage of conservatives vs lefties.

Start a Emily’s List for conservatives.

Protest in the streets.

Never give up !!!

via The Left’s fear of diversity and debate | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog.

Clare Lopez, ex-CIA: explains IS and global ambitions of Islam

On this day of anti-terrorist raids by 800 police in Australia, maybe it’s time to learn about what these extreme Islamic movements actually want and what they are doing.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s 100 year plan for global subjugation to a Caliphate and Sharia Law.

Step by step by step. So far, on schedule…

Did you know that since 2007, Britain has 80 Islamic Sharia courts with enforceable judgments.

The template of global Jihad was explained in 2005: The Future of Terrorism: What al-Qaida Really Wants

The Jihadist’s manual, carried by most jihadists: Milestones by Syed Qutb Shaheed

Labor ruthless dictators but for the glass cage of democracy

James Button, one of Rudd’s speech writers for 7 months writes of Kevin Rudd in The Age:

The truth is, Rudd was impossible to work with. He regularly treated his staff, public servants and backbenchers with rudeness and contempt. He was vindictive, intervening to deny people appointments or preselections, often based on grudges that went back years.

He made crushing demands on his staff, and when they laboured through the night to meet those demands, they received no thanks, and often the work was not used. People who dared stand up to him were put in “the freezer” and not consulted or spoken to for months. The prodigious loyalty of his staff to him was mostly not repaid. He put them down behind their backs. He seemed to feel that everyone was always letting him down. In meetings, as I saw, he could emanate a kind of icy rage that was as mysterious as it was disturbing.

Why can’t people see that Rudd is the quintessential personality of a ruthless narcissistic dictator. Button’s description could be that of the court of Saddam Hussein or Josef Stalin minus the killing, but that is only for want of a mechanism to ‘re-educate’ or ‘remove’ enemies of the dictator and thus enemies of the people.

What should be terrifying Australians is that Rudd (and Gillard for that matter), bursting with entitlement to rule through narcissistic megalomania and utter shamelessness respectively, are potential ruthless murderous dictators, held back only by their inability to remove fast enough, the all too delicate shackles of democratic processes. But how strong are these restraint? How well do Australians understand them and value them. I have met young people not only ignorant of the mechanisms of democracy but openly contemptuous  of democracy – an autocracy (by their choice of benevolent leader) would at least get things done. The madness of utter ignorance.

At the very least, Labor is working towards running Australia like a union. And look at how democratically unions are run or want to be run – disdain of secret ballots, backroom deals, standover men, intimidation of members and rampant corruption – just like the communist regimes. Australians should elect leaders and politicians who truly believe in democracy and will fight for it.

Ask yourself, if this leader was given the option of ruling without an effective free parliament and without effective elections. Would he decline it and destroy such a process in the name of democracy, or would he grab it and rule in a corrupted regime. I know what Rudd and Gillard would do. I am not sure what Abbott would do, but that is probably the best one can expect.

Union brawl at the TAU – The Australia Union

Having suspended blogging in November to reclaim my life and my work, Labor’s amazing suicide demands a relapse.

The Election Now shop, however has lived on, and enjoys steady patronage.

Democracy requires more that just elections every 3 years – under communism, we had elections a plenty. You need viable alternatives, decent people with decent ideas to choose from  and you need at least two parties to preserve keen competition.

So even as a Liberal voter, I am angry…for Labor. How low has this mighty Labor party fallen. How dare these pathetic men destroy a great Australian institution, which has served Australia for a hundred years with men like Hawke and Keating, whom many disagreed with, but who commanded respect. There is no joy in seeing Labor disintegrate – Australia needs two able alternative governments, two parties to compete and therefore come up with best in governance.

But this Labor party, consisting of union officials, union thugs and their lawyers, has apparently mistaken Australia for one great big union. They have descended into the usual union brawls over their ill gotten spoils, the hateful self-interested factional in-fighting, the ego wars, the massive profligacy with its members dues, the secret deals amongst faceless men, the corruption, the intimidation of members and businesses. And all the while wearing the thinnest veneer of morality in pretending to be representing their member’s interests.  Craig Thompson was an angel compared to his colleagues. And all the while, the host businesses and Australia of course go bust. Unions leaders are the only parasites who, having less intelligence that a malaria larva, happily destroy the host they occupy.  And so they are doing to Australia and their own party.

Where can we expect Australia to end up over the next 17 months?  Fights on the steps of Parliament? Horses heads in MP’s beds? The violence and anarchy of the building industry unions spread nationwide?

The media and the public are being seduced into a popularity contest between Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd. It’s like arguing which of Goerring or Himmler were more popular. Both are flawed sociopathic people, Rudd for being a deluded narcissistic emperor and Gillard for being an incompetent shameless liar.  Don’t fall for the anyone but Abbott meme. Pity Tony Abbott and the LNP adults who will struggle a decade to clean up the mess Labor made in just 4 years.


Word-clouds generated by the Herald Sun’s call to readers 23 Feb 2012.

Australia’s Stockholm Syndrome

The PM and Foreign Minister fighting to the death for their own self-interest on the international scene instead of governing? We should be outraged, but we have exhausted it all, so it’s just another day under Labor.

Just like Africans respond to corruption with resignation “That’s Africa”, we now respond to our mal-governance with “That’s Labor” and accept it as normal.

And we are slipping into the Stockholm Syndrome: our lives are controlled by a lying and hated Prime Minister but we are helpless, and we gradually gratefully accept and reward in the polls any morsel of kindness or sanity from her.

But giving back what your captor took away in the first place, is not kindness, or competence in the case of our government. Reversing the ban on exporting uranium to India, after they banned it for irrational ideological and anti-Howard reasons in the first place, is not a triumph of foreign policy. Attacking the Greens for living in fairyland is not strength after you got in bed with them and implemented their fairyland carbon policies. Getting tough on unions and getting Qantas back in the air by our PM is not competence, after your own FWA laws let the unions off the leash in the first place. And even in the unlikely case that they fix the illegal boat problem, that is no triumph if they were the ones that opened the flood gates in the first place in 2007.

No, all is not well in Australia, even should Labor mend a few of their disasters. As you go to work each day to secure your and your children’s future, every reform not undertaken by this government (and I don’t mean carbon tax), every billion dollars wantonly wasted, is not something we can simply do later, or just someone else’s money, so who cares. It is an investment not invested in our country, a lost opportunity taken away from your children’s future.

While you struggle to gain control over your future, this government is taking it away from you and is working hard to take away your very ability to know it from a free media or speak out against it. But it is subtly done and we won’t care until we lose it. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, but not while Masterchef is on.

I can only hope, come election time, we gain insight and courage enough to escape these our captors.

The core of democracy is not elections, it is freedom of the press


The relentless attacks by this government on our press is a far more serious danger to our country than people realise. These attacks include:

Repeated references to the Hate media and right wing shock jocks, attempting to delegitimise reasonably argued criticism in opinion pieces in newspapers.

Julia Gillard’s “News Ltd has questions to answer“, referring to British phone hacking investigation, unrelated to Australia.

Ms Gillard’s personal allegedly demanding phone calls to media management (chairman and CEO of News Limited, John Hartigan) relating to coverage of her past affair and legal dealings with an allegedly criminal Union Official.

Claims that Murdoch owns 70% of media when they own only 32% of titles, it is people who chose to buy one of their papers 60% of the times. 

Now the unnecessary and dangerous Media Inquiry chaired by Ray Finkelstein, QC, flirting with regulation, licensing and fit-and-properperson test for proprietors – decided by whom, on what criteria.

The ex-judge Finkelstein sending a letter to editors, impudently asking them to explain to what extent “you subscribe to the view that the press has social responsibilities.

Why is this frightening? Because this is the road toward authoritarian non-democratic state. You say – c’mon that’s being over-dramatic. But you don’t have to have absence of elections or people being shot in the square to be deprived of democracy. You only need to be mislead into voting for the wrong party, for example by government propaganda or by undue influence by a political party over the media.  Intimidation of opposition parties, legal restriction of opposition parties, prosecution of opponents for trumped up charged during election time – all these are the tools of non-democratic governments. But unless you really have totalitarian regime with tanks in the streets, all of these can thrive only if they are hidden from the bulk of the population by compliant media.

The core of democracy is not elections, it is freedom of the press.

Under the communists in Czechoslovakia, we had multiple parties and elections, but no free press – it was government controlled and was very “socially responsible”. We did not have democracy.


Murdoch negative press on Labor is in agreement with Gillard’s own assessment Labor ‘lost it’s way”.

There is no problem with Murdoch press. It is dominant because more people chose to read the 35% of the titles it owns. There have been an unprecedented series of Governmental failures by Labor and thus the Murdoch press media has reported an unprecedented number of negative reports about Labor. Where is the problem.  In fact, the Murdoch media’s predominant criticism of the government over the past 4 years is in agreement with Labor government’s own assessment that it had lost it’s way when Gillard knifed their first term Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd. What is wrong with that. The country’s worst government ever gets predominantly bad press. Where is the problem?

NBN ‘most extreme’ broadband plan: EIU

Described as the most ‘extreme’, ‘expensive’, ‘anti competetitve’, ‘completely crazy’ and ranked eight of 13 nations on the EIU’s government broadband index.  You’d think with the billions of dollars it’s costing (and will cost into the future), the Government could have spent our money more wisely.  
An NBN that no-one wants, forcing Telstra to accept a deal they cannot refuse and to shut down competition.  Due for completion in 2021, Gillard will be long gone.  But our children will be paying the price for this expensive and unwanted telco white elephant.

THE Australian Shareholders Association has given its blessing to Telstra’s $11 billion deal to hand its fixed-line monopoly to the National Broadband Network because it believes the telco has “no other viable alternative”.  Telstra has also gained support from its independent expert, Grant Samuel, which sanctioned the deal by concluding the Telstra would be $4.7bn worse off if it tried to compete with the government-owned network. 
Waldo Ralph Emerson is often attributed of saying “Build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door”.

Customers’ decisions to buy depends on their perception of the product and its value.  That’s the golden rule in Marketing:  find out what people want, then develop the product accordingly.

In this NBN fiasco, the Government has done the complete opposite by developing an NBN that will end up being more expensive than what’s currently available and where the uptake is abysmal – even when they’re giving it away.  The Government have closed down the competition.  The ACCC should find that the NBN is anti-competition (how could they not?) and shelve this white elephant for good.

As the NBN uptake is so low, it appears the Australian people are not tempted by the promise of a Government-owned monopoly that will cost them more money to connect and end up more expensive than their current internet supplier.  And lock them into a technology that will be obsolete in a decade.
Maybe Malcolm Turnbull was correct when he said, “it’s like the telecommunications version of Cuba”.  With the carbon dioxide tax and other wasteful spending, the Gillard Government seems determined to remodel Australia into a country Castro would be proud to call home.

NBN ‘most extreme’ broadband plan: EIU

Ed Logue – AAP

October 10, 2011 – 4:34PM

Labor’s national broadband network (NBN) strategy has been branded the “most extreme” example of government intervention in high speed broadband planning in the world.A report by the UK-based Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) makes the claim based on the amount of money being spent on the national network, saying such expenditure is linked to greater government intervention in owning and operating broadband networks, thereby reducing competition.Australia’s plan was also the most expensive in the world to implement, with the cost of providing broadband per household at $3455, followed by Gulf state of Qatar at $2299 and Greece at $1167.Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said Australia’s NBN was the “telecommunication’s version of Cuba” due to its reliance on the government to provide the necessary infrastructure.”Cuba is the last communist state … I stand corrected, there is North Korea too,” Mr Turnbull told reporters in Canberra on Monday.Mr Turnbull, who has just returned from Europe, said he had met people in the telecommunications industry who thought Australia’s NBN plan was “completely crazy“.The report by the EIU, a specialist publisher which is part of The Economist Group, was released on Monday.
Read the full article here:

Network cost to public ‘makes Greece look thrifty’

Annabel Hepworth and Ben Packham
From: The Australian
October 11, 2011 12:00AMA report by The Economist’s Intelligence Unit concludes that Australia had more government intervention in broadband planning than any other country — including China.The report — which Communications Minister Stephen Conroy last night dismissed as “right-wing dogma that struggles to get the facts right” — found that the project would soak up more public funds for each household covered than any other similar project.Total public funds pledged for the project were 6.34 per cent of the government’s yearly revenue, the report found.This equated to 249 per cent of yearly fixed-line telecommunications revenue in Australia — more than 2 1/2 times more than Greece.Read the full report here:

Consumer body hits gag on Optus in NBN deal

Annabel Hepworth
From: The Australian
October 11, 2011 12:00AM

A CONSUMER group whose funding is controlled by the federal government has attacked plans by the company rolling out the National Broadband Network to gag Optus from criticising the $36 billion project, warning that this will dampen competition.

The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network has said a controversial provision in the NBN Co’s $800 million deal with Optus, which stops the country’s second-largest telco from criticising the NBN for 15 years when marketing its own wireless services, would be bad for consumers.”Restraints on marketing practices that are part and parcel of a healthy competitive market would have a negative effect on consumers by dampening the competition that would otherwise occur,” ACCAN told a competition regulator review.The warning came as Australian Competition & Consumer Commission chairman Rod Sims yesterday raised concerns about the potential for competition to be distorted while the NBN is being rolled out.NBN Co has struck a deal with Optus to shore up traffic on the ultra-fast network, under which the company will migrate its hybrid fibre coaxial cable customers on to the NBN.Under the deal, Optus has agreed not to conduct a marketing campaign that is disparaging about the performance of the NBN in areas where Optus is shutting down its cable network, which passes 2.4 million homes.Telstra has signed a deal to transfer its fixed-line customers to the NBN, under which it has agreed not to promote wireless internet as a substitute for the NBN for 20 years.Read more here: