Stuck with the Bastard, Thank God

There can be consolation in disappointment, although it sometimes requires a moment’s reflection to locate the pony in a room full of the most malodourous manure — in this case the bipedal ordure known as  Abdul Nacer Benbrika (above). For those whose memories have faded, the imam was arrested in 2005 with 16 of his acolytes and convicted three years later of planning attacks on numerous targets, including the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor, the AFL Grand Final and, swept away by vaulting jihadist ambition, the assassination of the infidel John Howard. At his Melbourne trial Benbrika made his contempt for Australia manifest. Rejecting any authority but Allah, he refused to stand when the judge entered or left the courtroom and thus put his contempt on the record for the institutions of the country that granted him residency in 1989 and citizenship nine years later.

Today the High Court ruled Benbrika is an Australian citizen — and an Australian citizen he must remain. The judgment, which can be read in full here, hangs on the majority view that stripping him of his Australian passport, as did then-minister Peter Dutton in 2020, violates the Constitution because only the courts, never a minister, can impose punishment, which the stripping of his citizenship was deemed to be.

So, like it or not, this preacher of homicidal hatreds can’t be packed off back to Algeria, where he also remains a citizen. A cheerful note is that, despite completing his sentence, Benbrika remains a bottled spider, held indefinitely in a maximum security lockup as an acknowledged danger to the country. Some will regret that bread, water and a touch of the cat are no longer part of the hard-cell treatment; warm surroundings, a comfy mattress and halal tucker must suffice.

But there’s a perhaps less obvious upside to the result of High Court’s deliberations, one that demands to be framed in memories of the past few years. Here thoughts turn to a general practitioner of my acquaintance — no name, he has been through enough — who copped grief from the authorities during the great COVID panicdemic. His offence was to advocate treating the Wuhan virus with ivermectin, which at the time was neither opinion nor option tolerated by bureaucrats and lawmakers. The Therapeutic Goods Administration, many will recall, almost immediately banned its prescription, with professional medical bodies no less adamant that the cheap, affordable and effective off-patent drug* was not to be advocated. So monolithic was the consensus of those who presume to know better and are empowered to enforce those views that the Pharmacy Guild instructed its members not to dispense ivermectin even when presented with a doctor’s prescription. That’s how crazy things became: pill-counting vendors of corn plasters and jellybeans were allowed to police the doctor/patient relationship

Well, my friend the medico hails from a foreign land, was at odds with official opinion and thus might have been decreed a menace to his fellow Australians. As he is in Victoria, it is also conceivable to imagine him charged by then-premier Dan Andrews’ praetorian guard, aka Victoria Police, and appearing in the dock before a Labor clubhouse judge. Convicted as a threat to the safety of the public, the same reason reason Benbrika remains behind bars, what might have stopped a stroke of the ministerial pen sending the dissident doctor on a one-way trip to Melbourne Airport?

Nothing, absolutely nothing if not for today’s High Court ruling.

The downside is that we’re stuck with Benbrika unless and until the Albanese government enacts what it has today promised would be legislation to tighten the law. Given form and the Albanese government’s limp and qualified condemnation of Hamas, it is reasonable to suspect few of Minister Tony Burke’s more volatile Lakemba constituents, plus those sure to arrive with the government’s 500,000-per-year population Ponzi scheme, will find reason to review their words, hatreds and conduct.

Just how the government intends to “strengthen”  the citizenship laws has yet to be explained, but one amendment springs immediately to mind.

What, say, if citizenship came with a ten-year probation period? That would have snared Benbrika, already known as a firebrand when naturalised nine years after his arrival. It would likely also snare quite a few other troublesome members of the New Australian-criminal community.

But that would be sensible, so it won’t happen.

* The editor of this site came down with COVID in January 2022, confirmed by three RAT tests, and immediately began taking ivermectin, plus daily antibiotics and zinc supplements, all of which were packaged in a single sheet ordered from India. That was on Sunday night. By Friday, he was playing nine holes of golf. Sadly, whatever its other recommendations, ivermectin has no observable effect on a player’s handicap.


102 thoughts on “Stuck with the Bastard, Thank God

  • lbloveday says:

    This pure-blood commenter was confirmed as having Covid via 2 tests by a nurse and immediately pummeled down ivermectin after the first positive – no bed-time let alone hospital, main problem was not going to the pub for a week.
    I’ve never had influenza to my knowledge to compare, but have had a hangover or 20, and the hangovers were far worse.
    Months earlier think I caught Covid (a younger person with whom I closely interacted was hospitalised with it and I wasn’t feeling 100%), so I took ivermectin as a precaution and within hours felt better and did not bother with a test, just stayed home for a few days.
    A doctor who has known me and my medical history for 20+ years said that anyone recommending I (specifically me) be vaccinated is either “ignorant, stupid or evil”.

  • rosross says:

    When citizenship becomes dependent on behaviour then we lay the foundation for many abuses of our freedoms. That which is done to others can and will be done to everyone.

    It would have been better if he had been convicted and imprisoned and served an appropriate sentence. That would have not compromised our freedoms as Australian citizens.

    • Botswana O'Hooligan says:

      Yairs rosross, Exactimo, he was found guilty, he was convicted, he has served his time and he is just about to be released into the community, so what next mate? The question is one of will he reoffend and thus urinate on the country that gave him residency and citizenship by being a recidivist, or will he recant and live as we live without extreme religious bias, and no matter how one looks at it his religious bias was way up there? The question is one of, why come to our country given that it a Christian country for all intents and purposes and attempt not only to stuff a differing religion and way of life down our throats, but to threaten some of us with violence. Were you or I to go to say Algeria and do what Mr. Benbrika did, do you think that we would be treated as well as he has at taxpayers expense. I think not mate for I have lived in moslem countries and they don’t work that way. I note that it is mentioned that Mr. Benbrika took nine years to get citizenship here, about the same time it took my Russian wife to get citizenship for she had all the wrong qualifications being a Christian, a Uni graduate, an engineer, and instant job to start on a six figure salary, and therefore an instant taxpayer PLUS she had to acknowledge that were she to break any laws of this country she would be deported immediately. Why rosross why, c’mon mate, why did the law apply to her and I assume many thousands of others and not Mr. Benbrika?

      • rosross says:

        I don’t disagree with what you are saying in general. I just feel concern at the ramifications of conditional citizenship. We have had examples in the past where Australians who came here as babies, but committed crimes, were to be sent ‘back. Such regulations are often the thin end of a very long wedge.’ And solutions which appear simple are rarely so. We saw that with the voice. Anyway, just one opinion and concerns expressed about where it might lead. It is clear such decisions contain elements of vengeance which appeal to some voters.

        Where do we ‘send’ someone born and bred here? There is nowhere. And ‘sending back’citizens in ways which would not happen with native citizens says migrant citizenship is different when citizenship should be citizenship.

        As to your wife, all I do know having been involved with DFAT quite closely as an expat over 30 years is that the system is complex and each individual case would be different. It is a frustrating system and department but they do work hard to try to get it right.

        • Botswana O'Hooligan says:

          We need a fair dinkum Royal Comission on Immigration for in general the public servants and politicians are babes in the woods when it comes to immigration. I have some knowledge on refugees as an ex surveillance aviator who never ever ever did meet a genuine refugee and as a bloke who flew aid into some places, usually the hell holes of the World where politicians and public servants never venture and where some of the supposed “aid” workers spread the pox and worse stuff (excuse the language but it is a hard cruel World out there) and our politicians are either completely ignorant of it or are on the “take” so we are got at big time, at least we taxpayers are. Were I to go to say Algeria and start preaching Christianity I wouldn’t have a head to hang my hat on for too long and so the bottom line is one of “what to do with the likes of Mr. Benbrika” if we can’t deport him and he won’t take the hint and leave, a bloke who hates our country and the way of our life, so do we keep in in the slammer forever at 100K or more a year cost to the taxpayer OR do we refuse religious zealots entry OR allow them in here to bring their mores and turn our country into a type of country they fled? Cocky Caldwell and Enoch Powell were men before their time as it has turned out.

          • cbattle1 says:

            I once saw a clip of Menzies (Sir Robert) saying, in regard to immigration, that “We need more British people!”. Having to subsist on meat and three veg (boiled of course) is a small price to pay for maintaining or increasing what was the status quo. When the self-loathing cultural-cringers fled like refugees to London and other places where they could finally get food and drink to suit their delicate and sophisticated palettes, they should have had their citizenship revoked so they could never return and commence their transition of Australia. A case in point is Jeoffrey Robertson, who comes down periodically for a visit and have a chin-wag with his old Lefty mate Phillip Adams. Last time I heard him on LNL was around the time of the 250th anniversary of Cook’s 1770 landing at Botany Bay, and Robertson said words to the effect of: “Cook arrived from New Zealand after killing nine Maori, and the first thing he did was shoot two Aboriginals, one of whom later died of his wounds.” Sounds like he is describing the first documented case of drive-by shootings!

            • lbloveday says:

              I went to Wikipedia to see how old Philip Adams was – it’s generally fine for facts such as that (he’s 84) – but I further read that he’s described as a “public intellectual” which is defined as “a person who engages in critical thinking, research, and reflection about the reality of society, and who proposes solutions for the normative problems of society.
              OMG, how different to the way I see him.

    • PT says:

      Ross, I agree with the sentiment. But this POS is a blowin. And he clearly migrated under false pretences. In my state we have had McGinty (another POS) release child sex offenders from prison before their sentences were served and had them deported to the UK, smugly saying he wouldn’t have released them if he couldn’t deport them. These are people who came when they were 18 months old or younger. If they can be deported, then this murderous traitor should be.

  • Phillip says:

    Yes Roger , I totally agree and sympathise with a shared disappointment that good medications are just not available today to improve your golf handicap….maybe the shelter of the 19th hole to temper disappointment is a mild remedy…?

    But to the grief of the High Court decision; to grant citizenship to a mad evil person who promotes death and destruction. Appalling. I’m surprised to hear the bastard is still living in Australia.

    It wasn’t that long ago that one of the fittest sportsman in the world landed in Melbourne to bring joy peace and entertainment, and a decent game of tennis, to Australia. But what happened? he was deported !

    Ah the new Australia; “You hit that tennis ball mate and we’ll deport ya…but you threaten to blow up our infrastructure and kill our people, well then you are worthy of citizenship…..welcome to country.”

  • Tony Tea says:

    Speaking of welcome to country. As I’ve mentioned before, we of the public service endure them for everything from workwear sales to morning teas. But yesterday, at the very first opportunity post referendum to pay our respects to a stationery vendor, NO wtc. Well done, Straya.

  • seagull says:

    The only problem for your argument, Roger, is that well conducted clinical trials showed that Ivermectin was of no benefit in patients with Covid. Ivermectin was yet another fantasy of the Anti-Vax. mob.

    • lbloveday says:

      Just maybe Ian MacDougall is sort-of-right about comments going into limbo, albeit for different reason(s) than he claimed.
      I spent too much time preparing a comprehensive rebuttal of this rant, replete with links to reports on the proven effectiveness of ivermectin by NIH, primarily as a prophylactic, but NIH and others also report positive results as a therapeutic, as experienced by Roger Franklin and me
      I hit Post Comment and POOF, it disappeared, not to the usual sensible “Awaiting moderation” when a comment contains a hyperlink, but gone.

      • lbloveday says:

        Hindsight is of course wonderful and I should have saved a copy but didn’t – I’ve saved hours not doing so previously and saw no value in doing so this time.

      • Jack Brown says:

        Trolling for entertainment value was the orginal post, no links to said trials but just an ad hominem assertion.

        Interestingly the first group to note the prophylactic effect of Ivermectin were US vets working with large farm animals, ie cattle and horses. They can’t shy away from having to have their arms poking around the tail end of their ‘patients’ intestinal tracts and nearby anatomical cavities so faced the hazard of worms from such places. Knowing that Ivermectin is widely and safely used by humans as a prophylactic in Africa for managing this risk in the wild US large animal vets used Ivermectin not just on the farm animals they attended but took to administering Ivermection off label to themselves from their own veternary stocks of the liquid injectable form which they would take orally, prorating the dose from that for a 600kg horse to a 100kg human. What they found as a side effect was that from when they commenced doing so their frequency and length of common colds and influenza infections dropped markedly.

        Come COVID this common knowledge became known to others and Ivermectin was tried as part of treatment protocols which were associated with success. Now what was always part of the treatment protocol was the necessity for commencing treatment at the first sign of infection, a point usually ignored by ‘studies’ declaring Ivermectin to ineffective.

        However what was the advice from the health czars once other antiviral pharmaceutical products were developed and allowed to be used: https://youtube.com/shorts/ZopyO6ULr50?si=Qm9IWnuFsesxvuFN where the Prof very clearly says they *must* be taken as soon as symptoms present, the inference being that taking them later will be ineffective. This ineffectiveness did not stop the TGA from allowing them to be prescribed.

    • rosross says:

      And other well conducted clinical trials showed Ivermectin was effective. Many doctors certainly thought so. Unfortunately today most clinical trials are funded and managed by the Pharmaceutical industry. It would be necessary to look at all the trials you cite and establish there was no conflict of interest and do the same with trials which showed Ivermection was effective.

  • Paul W says:

    So Australian citizenship is effectively permanent unless you get a court’s permission. In that case they should apply for permission.

  • Katzenjammer says:

    The judge got it back to front. He hates Australia so losing citizenship isn’t punishment. Making him retain Australian citizenship is punishment.

  • STD says:

    And cobber he certainly looks Australian. And Roger how exactly does this type of garbage wash up on our shores?
    “I had always hoped that this land might become a safe and agreeable asylum to the virtuous and persecuted part of mankind, ‘to whatever nation they might belong’ -George Washington.
    We can’t deter people fleeing for their lives. They will come. The choice we have is how well we manage their arrival, and how humanely.- Antonio Guterres( left wing acolyte) – socialist edict.
    “Migration is an expression of the human aspiration for dignity, safety and a better future. It is part of the ‘social’ fabric, part of our very make-up as a human family- Ban Ki-Moon – United Nations chief migration racketeering agent.
    After the WWII the Jews wanted a life-nowadays a terrorised Algerian Subject wants a better material life on our terrible shores.

  • STD says:

    And Roger you are completely right. A culturally viral contagion that is not subject to the laws of quarantine-Cultural blight.

  • Sindri says:

    The law in question permits the Minister to cancel an Australian’s citizenship (but not if it would render the citizen stateless) if the citizen has been convicted of a specified offence. The idea that such an exercise of power by the Minister constitutes criminal punishment, and therefore intrudes on what is rightly the function of the judiciary under the Constitution, slips the tethers of both commonsense and appropriate judicial restraint. The only member of the Court who got it right was Justice Steward.

    • Sindri says:

      I tend to doubt we would have got rid of the wretched man even if the decision had gone against him. As a last resort, a deft 11th hour renunciation of his Algerian citizenship would have made him stateless and it’s difficult to think he would have been thrown out.

      • Sindri says:

        Moreover, sorry to hog, but a person deprived of citizenship in this way automatically gets a ex-citizen visa which entitles him to remain in Australia lawfully provided he doesn’t leave. That visa would have to be cancelled before he could be thrown out.

  • pgang says:

    You play golf? And there I was thinking you were sensible.

  • call it out says:

    My experience with Ivermectin…cooped up in an overseas hotel room, with a mild fever and a positive RAT test. Went down to the local pharmacy, bought Ivermectin for a few dollars. Back on my feet the next day.
    Who knows? But no more covid shots for me, and a drawer full of Ivermectin at the ready.

  • Older and Wiser says:

    The creation of DUAL citizenship is the cause of many problems. It should never have been allowed.
    You cannot have two masters, you will hate one and love the other.
    Australia has far too many dual citizens.
    They should be made to choose. Renounce your other citizenship if you want an Australian one.

    • STD says:

      Great comment
      United Nations Socialist equality and equity in action. Mixed loyalties = disloyalty.

    • cbattle1 says:

      Umm, would you be including Australians with Israeli citizenship?

      • STD says:

        Umma. Umm, would you be including Israelis with Australian cultural compatibility and values and negligible to non existent terrorism threat risk?
        No probably not, if they are fair dinkum, remembering that Jews are foreigners in their own land and most Muslims that come here have bypassed many Islamic countries and like minded people in their hankering for face value secularism and the welfare system (jizya), albeit in a culture with other suburban people they openly loath and despise according to the Hadith of hatred.
        Thank you for your impartiality .
        “In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful

        Islam teaches us to beware of hatred, malice, and the intention to harm others. They are spiritual diseases of the heart whose consequences are destructive to the individual, the community, and the religion.

        Anas ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

        لَا تَبَاغَضُوا وَلَا تَحَاسَدُوا وَلَا تَدَابَرُوا وَكُونُوا عِبَادَ اللَّهِ إِخْوَانًا

        Do not hate each other, do not envy each other, do not turn away from each other, but rather be servants of Allah as brothers. ‘( I think he is talking about his Muslim brother as he reads the Hadith)’

        Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2559, Grade: Sahih

        Abdullah ibn Amr reported: It was said to the Messenger of Allah, “Which of the people is best?” The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

        كُلُّ مَخْمُومِ الْقَلْبِ صَدُوقِ اللِّسَانِ

        Everyone who is pure of heart and truthful in speech.”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        “Hadith are considered by many to give direction on everything from details of religious obligations, to the correct forms of salutations and the importance of benevolence to slaves.”
        I guess benevolence in this case is kindness that is finitely ( begrudgingly)given in dhimmitude.
        “Dhimmitude is a polemical neologism characterizing the status of non-Muslims under Muslim rule, popularized by the Egyptian-born British writer Bat Ye’or in the 1980s and 1990s. It is a portmanteau word constructed from the Arabic dhimmi ‘non-Muslim’ and the French (serv)itude ‘subjection’.[1]
        Bat Ye’or defines it as a permanent status of subjection in which Jews and Christians have been held under Islamic rule since the eighth century, and that forces them to accept discrimination or “face forced conversion, slavery or death”. The term gained traction among Bosnian Serb forces during the Balkan wars in the 1990’s and is popular among self-proclaimed counter-jihadi authors. Some scholars have dismissed it as polemical.”
        Equity-the quality of being fair and impartial. (?)

        Equality -the state of being equal, especially in status, right’s or opportunities.(?)
        Fair dinkum (of article or person!) being genuine, honest or true? ( true to what exactly)!

    • lbloveday says:

      “Renounce your other citizenship if you want an Australian one”.
      Indonesia, and I presume other nations, goes one further – not only must you renounce your existing citizenship(s) before being granted Indonesian citizenship, but if an Indonesian is granted, eg, Australian citizenship, the Indonesian citizenship is cancelled (if the Indonesian authorities are informed of course).

      • cbattle1 says:

        You have raised a good point lbloveday; many countries take their citizenship seriously, and that particularly applies where there is a dominant culture/language/race, etc. Indonesians know who is an Indonesian, same as per the Philippines, Vietnam, etc. And I think it is the case in those countries that a foreigner cannot purchase property, as in the case of the Philippines, where the title holder must be a citizen or an entity that is Philippine owned. (or so I understand). Of course in Australia, any foreigner can buy up as much property and homes as they wish, and evict any Australian living there. Australia, like many Western countries, is now only one boutique café among a string of others along Woke Way!

        • lbloveday says:

          Indonesia recently legalised the purchase by non-citizens of property then loosened the restrictions.
          From the Jakarta Globe 9/8/23:
          The government set several stipulations in place on the type and price of housing available for foreign buyers. For instance, in Jakarta, foreigners must spend a minimum of Rp 5 billion ($US330k) on a house or Rp 3billion ($US200k) on an apartment. There’s also a cap on the land area for individual foreign homeowners, which is set at 2,000 square meters.
          Drawing a parallel with global practices, Rusmin said foreign property ownership should help Indonesia attract global talent. “We are the last country in Southeast Asia that allows foreign property ownership. ***We are behind Thailand and Vietnam already***.”
          Further, to “attract global talent”, Indonesia has devised a new category of Visa for foreigners who WorkFromHome in the aftermath of the COVIDiocy.

          • cbattle1 says:

            Well, then those countries are now on the slippery slope that we are now reaping the rewards of. I’ve heard of Chinese nationals buying up several Australian homes per go, no wonder that practice and “open-door” immigration has let to the steep increase in housing. Back when Hong Kong was being handed back to China, there was a surge in Hong Kongers buying up “bolt-holes” in Vancouver Canada, and now that city is one of the most expensive in the world to live. The more foreign investment that Australia receives, the less Australian we become, and the more dependent we are on foreign “stuff”, and the need for ever more foreign investment.

        • Sindri says:

          No, cb, it isn’t the case that foreigners can buy up as much property as they please. All such purchases need approval, but newly constructed dwellings are generally approved routinely, which is perhaps what you’re getting at. Of course, it’s a very proper subject for debate. This randomly-found website sets out the position more or less accurately I think:

      • STD says:

        Islamic citizenship ( global caliphate) cannot be renounced- the penalty for ( disloyalty’)Apostasy is Death.
        Apostasy in Islam (Arabic: ردة, riddah or ارتداد, irtidād) is commonly defined as the abandonment of Islam by a Muslim, in thought, word, or through deed. It includes not only explicit renunciations of the Islamic faith by converting to another religion[1] or abandoning religion,[1][2][3] but also blasphemy or heresy by those who consider themselves Muslims,[4] through any action or utterance which implies unbelief, including those who deny a “fundamental tenet or creed” of Islam,[5] (such as suggesting jinn are not real).[Note 1] [7][8] An apostate from Islam is known as a murtadd (مرتدّ).[1][9][10][11][12]

        While classical Islamic jurisprudence calls for the death penalty of those who refuse to repent of apostasy from Islam,[13] what statements or acts qualify as apostasy and whether and how they should be punished, are disputed among Islamic scholars,[14][3][15] while punishment is strongly opposed by Muslim, Non-Muslim and secular supporters of the universal human right to freedom of faith.[16][17][Note 2][19][20] (Death or the long game).

        Until the late 19th century, the majority of Sunni and Shia jurists held the view that for adult men, apostasy from Islam was a crime as well as a sin, punishable by the death penalty,[3][21] but with a number of options for leniency (such as a waiting period to allow time for repentance;[3][22][23][24] enforcement only in cases involving politics),[25][26][27] depending on the era, the legal standards and the school of law. In the late 19th century, the use of legal criminal penalties for apostasy fell into disuse, although civil penalties were still applied.[3]

        As of 2021, there were ten Muslim-majority countries where apostasy from Islam was punishable by death,[28] but legal executions are rare.[Note 3] Most punishment is extra-judicial/vigilante,[30][31] and most executions are perpetrated by jihadist and “takfiri” insurgents (al-Qaeda, ISIL/ISIS/IS/Daesh, the GIA, and the Taliban).[13][32][33][34] Another thirteen countries have penal or civil penalties for apostates[31] – such as imprisonment, the annulment of their marriages, the loss of their rights of inheritance and the loss of custody of their children.[31]

        In the contemporary Muslim world, public support for capital punishment varies from 78% in Afghanistan to less than 1% in Kazakhstan;[Note 4] among Islamic jurists, the majority of them continue to regard apostasy as a crime which should be punishable by death.[22] ( the long game- caliphate)-Those who disagree[14][3][36] argue that its punishment should be less than death, should occur in the afterlife,[16][37][38][39] (human punishment being inconsistent with Quranic injunctions against compulsion in belief),[40][41] or should apply only in cases of public disobedience and disorder (fitna).[Note 5]

        • rosross says:

          There is no Islamic citizenship. Islam is a religion. You are a citizen of a country not of a religion.

          • STD says:

            Tell that to the Chief Muslim – the Caliph- Calip-hate.
            Run that by the people who have their heads removed in Saudi Arabia every year in overt dis-play of public executions-EXAMPLE.

            • rosross says:

              Fanatical Muslims do not represent all Muslims anymore than fanatical Jews represent all Jews. Regardless of the nutter elements Islam is a religion not a nation and it does not confer citizenship.

              • STD says:

                You are entitled to your opinion and so are those Australians eligible to vote. Put immigration and multiculturalism to the Australian people and see if they want it. At the moment the only people who get a say are the Elites of the international Labor organisation affiliates that occupy the halls of power in the United Nations, WHO, World Bank, the International Monetary Fund ,the European Union ect ect……these are the only people who get ‘their’ say on matters of immigration. We the Australian people do not want large scale immigration or the lunacy of Multiculturalism. Tell the Albanese Government and the United Nations to go to buggery with all their diverse agendas.
                Immigration it’s a no from me because I do not want to be swamped by Chinese or Indian or Islamic culture for that matter- if we the Australian people wanted this we would have said YES to division by Race.

                • rosross says:


                  And there we are on the same page. I think multiculturalism is a disaster and should be dumped. I think migration should be kept to minimal levels and we need to work harder to get people to assimilate.

                  I would severely limit or reject those who belong to any fundamentalist form of religion, all of them and I would be cautious about how we assimilate refugees who have come from countries which have no cultural connection.

                  However, as signatories on refugees we are obliged to take some. But we need to ensure that assimilation is the outcome.

                  What I will never support is demonising anyone because of their religion, culture, race etc.

                  • Botswana O'Hooligan says:

                    Now you are talking rosross for even blind Freddie can see the enclaves of foreign born people in places like Bankstown as an example, or in Brisbane’s Inala where one would think he was in the sandpit countries, or in parks on weekends where one observes all sorts of ethnic groups mixing exclusively with their own kind and not with Australians. The problem doesn’t exactly lie with the genuine immigrants or even the country shoppers, it falls on the shoulders of we Australians as well for just as the foreign born people think that we are “different” many of us think that they are way off the planet and shun the poor buggers. The problem is simply one of “oil and water don’t mix” and that is why immigration on the whole doesn’t work and cannot work and that is amply demonstrated by all the differing countries and creeds in the World instead of the one creed and the one culture on the whole planet. Another question arises about multiculturalism and is one of –what will the immigrants on the whole do if our country is embroiled in an armed conflict, will they do as my Irish/Russian/Polish forebears did only twenty years after they arrived here and went off to the Boer War, later WW1, and then their sons in WW2, and blokes like me in later years to SE Asia and other places — OR will those multi cultural immigrants and country shoppers flee as they have fled their own countries when things got a bit tough? Politicians care about covering their own ample backsides and thus those in electorates with large ethnic populations pander to them to get votes and of course want more immigrants so they will get more and more votes and of course, more power.

                  • STD says:

                    “What I will never support is demonising anyone because of their religion, culture, race etc”.
                    Ok then tell me how you rebut this.
                    Hamas are Muslim Arabs that are funded by the Iranian Islamic cultural regime, are they not?
                    These lowlife’s butchered innocent people and in one case they cut an unborn baby from its mothers womb before decapitating it then putting a bullet in that poor kids mothers head-in other words they anaesthetised both mother an child after they felt pain- these people, I was going to say are animals but they are lower way lower than that. To top it off you have the religion of peace’s head muller in Iran actually sanctioning this depravity with continued funding and moral support for these heathen.

                    • rosross says:


                      Hamas is a Palestinian political party and an important part of the Palestinian Resistance. I do not see how you can condemn the Palestinians for support from other Muslim or Arab nations given the massive support Israel gets from the UK and other Western nations. Same rule applies to everyone.

                      Like it or not, the precedent has been set by the West.

                      The true tragedy is the terribly debased nature of Israeli society and for that beyond feeling sickened one can only feel deep compassion for the Israelis who live within a culture of such poisonous racism they dehumanise themselves.

                      And that has happened because of all those who have cheered, supported and enabled the Israelis to commit the most terrible atrocities for more than 75 years in the name of bigotry.

                      This is the Israel you have created. This is the psychology of evil which promotes genocide.

                      Quote: By Patrick Lawrence

                      Diego Ramos, ScheerPost’s managing editor, forwarded me a video clip last week he thought I ought to see. Sending it under the subject line, “Disturbing trend in Israel,” my colleague must have reckoned I have not been sufficiently shocked by the events in Israel and Gaza since Hamas mounted an assault into southern Israel on Oct. 7 and the Israeli Defense Forces began a purposely disproportionate response to the incursion — purposely disproportionate as a matter of official policy since David Ben–Gurion put it in place during his premiership in the 1950s.

                      Diego did his disturbing work. The video he forwarded outdoes it all so far by provoking a disgust as profound as any I have ever felt. It features a number of scenes wherein Israelis record themselves sadistically ridiculing Palestinians in the most cravenly cruel manner. They imitate Palestinian children dying or starving. They apply racially offensive makeup. They laugh and dance while switching lights on and off and while ostentatiously drinking water from taps — this last to mock Gazans as Israel deprives them of power, potable water, food and much else.

                      And I am describing the children in these videos, ranging in age from, maybe, 6 or 7 to somewhere in their teens or early twenties. The mothers stand behind them, smiling with approval and delight. Here is the video as posted by Al Jazeera English last week. I have since seen several others like it.

                      By common agreement among many lawyers, scholars of international law, special rapporteurs and the like — including Israelis in these fields — what we witness daily now is by all acceptable definitions a genocide. Whether or not Israel is committing war crimes by the hour is not even worth debating.

                      But I am taken up now by the spectacle of human beings who have allowed themselves to be destroyed in the name of an ideology that proves every bit as racist as it was when, in 1975, the U.N. General Assembly declared Zionism to be so. Resolution 3379 was revoked in 1991; it should not have been.

                    • rosross says:


                      And you believe what Israel says about the Palestinians? That is like believing the German version on the Warsaw Ghetto.

                      Israel has a long history of being caught out on lies and most of the hysterical claims made about the Palestinian Resistance have already been proven to be wrong.

                      The more fanciful they are the more likely they are propaganda. The beheaded babies story was debunked by the journalist who first reported it. And she apologised. As did other journos who repeated it.

                  • STD says:

                    I think it’s time to pull out of the UN it’s agenda is corrupt and deceitful just like the UN sanctioned First Nations Voice agenda that Albanese tried to dish up and scam the rest of Australia with.

                  • STD says:

                    Yes indeed ros.
                    We don’t need immigration.what the Government should be doing is enticing girls, women to want to become wives and mothers, this is a job isn’t it. Make Abortion unattractive by comparison. And finally instead of enticing immigrants from totally alien cultures with all the same rights as real Australians from the get go make the taxation system and banking system friendly to families and motherhood.

        • cbattle1 says:

          There are extremists and moderates in all cultures and religions. I am of the understanding that under Muslim rule there was traditionally an “unbelievers tax” that was levied on those who didn’t want to convert.
          Certainly there was a laissez-faire attitude under Ottoman rule, as long as revenue streamed into the pockets of officials, governors and of course the Sultan. Let us not be ignorant of the Islamic cultures that thrived in the Middle Ages, from Spain to Persia, architecture and science, etc. We owe a debt to Muslim Scholars for preserving the ancient learning of the Greeks, etc.
          Islam was not only spread by conquest; the Koranic philosophy of equality brought by the Arab traders to the Malay Peninsula and Archipelago found fertile ground in the minds and hearts of the servile masses labouring under the rule of Hindu and Buddhist rulers, and so they rose up and overthrew those regimes (some Hindu princes and priests fleeing to Bali). From a selfish point of view, I would prefer if those countries were still Hindu or Buddhist.

          • David Isaac says:

            ‘Muslims preserving Greek scholarship’ I know this is, as the young say, ‘a meme’ but is it a real thing? First of all said Muslims must have found themselves in possession of the relevant artefacts by dint of bloody conquest, secondly the Eastern Roman Empire (d. 1453) was a very large and powerful state until the eleventh century and the intelligentsia spoke Greek. One would think the Byzantines must have preserved copies of much of the scholarship of the ancient world. Can anyone elaborate?

            • rosross says:

              Muslims were among the more enlightened in their day and great scholars. As Christians did later the Muslims gathered together the knowledge of the world and the greatest minds to encourage and support science, literature and art. They are a critical part of the development of Civilization.

            • cbattle1 says:

              Algebra was apparently developed by Muslim scholars, and indeed the word is derived from Arabic. We are still using numerals derived from the Arabic culture, a damn sight better than Roman numerals! The list goes on… The Byzantine culture used both Greek and Roman letters as numbers. Classically, the Pax Islamia (if I can use such a term) was nothing like the extremism that we are seeing today.

    • rosross says:

      @ Older and Wiser. You make a very good point.

      One does wonder at the split required for dual citizenship, particularly when there is religious investment in it as well. That of course applies to all religions.

  • Peter Smith says:

    Leftism is a disease. It eats away at truth, objectivity and common sense. Once it infects judges, which it surely has, the game is well on its way to being lost. We just don’t know it yet. We revel in a victory in a distracting skirmish – the Voice – while all around our civilisation is being dismanted from within.

    • pgang says:

      Agree with you, it is a disease of sorts. It’s called socialism, which is the symptom of a condition of spiritual madness caused by nihilism, as explained by Solzhenitsyn and Shafarevich.


    The Benbrika incident shows where Australian society figures with Islam. Fanatics like Benbrika get their permissions from relevant verses in the Quran, like Quran 5:33:
    “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,”. For non-Islamic countries like Australia there are Four Stages of Islamisation: (1) Infiltration; (2) Consolidation of Power; (3) Open War With Target Non-Islamist Societies Leadership & Culture; (4) Islamic Theocracy. We seem to be at Stage (2). Perhaps Benbrika thought it was time for Australia to get to Stage (3).
    For a comprehensive treatise on Islamic tactics in non-Islamic societies see:

  • Alistair says:

    ” … violates the Constitution because only the courts, never a minister, can impose punishment, which the stripping of his citizenship was deemed to be.” Is the TGA allowed to punish? Stripping a right to practice medicine?

  • cbattle1 says:

    We have had a few testimonials above about the efficacy of Ivermectin, but they are of course examples of anecdotal evidence. Apparently Ivermectin has no harmful side-effects or any downside whatsoever, which makes me wonder if it is any better than a Homeopathic remedy, Ginseng, Gingko Baloba, or Snake Oil? Problem is that people have different responses to Covid19; with some there is barely a symptom, with others they quickly die. One thing that we can agree upon is that the virus had a serious toxic reaction on governments!
    “Multiculturalism”: The gift that keeps on giving! We should erect a statue in honour of Al Grasby, who opened our gates to all the wonderful diversity which we celebrate everyday! Actually, I am in favour of deporting people, regardless of citizenship, in fact, I am drawing up a long list of names! (ha, ha, joke only)

    • lbloveday says:

      Here are a couple of conclusions from clinical trials published on NIH’s web-site (there are others coming to different conclusions – my main whinge is the Australian governments effectively banning a drug that, as you say “has no harmful side-effects or any downside whatsoever”, physical at least.
      Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.
      Prophylaxis for COVID-19 Led Up to a 92% Reduction in COVID-19 Mortality Rate in a Dose-Response Manner: Results of a Prospective Observational Study of a Strictly Controlled Population of 88,012 Subjects
      I’ll try again posting a link that may be why my previous post vanished.

    • STD says:

      Sound as though you need a bit more choke there at the end.

    • rosross says:

      All medications have a placebo effect. And yes, everyone reacts to disease differently.

      Having studied and made use of Homeopathy over many years I can assure you it is more than placebo unless plants, animals and unconscious humans react to placebos.

      • cbattle1 says:

        A moot point regarding Homeopathy. In the end it is difficult to prove anything, and some will always find some error, real or imagined, that they will use to disqualify any test or trials. What about Rudolf Steiner and his “Remedies” used in Biodynamic farming? Wasn’t Uri Geller tested by scientists at Stanford as to his ability to bend metal objects with his mind? Some say he was a master magician, and that scientists are the easiest to fool. And what about those perpetual machines that generate Free Energy? The Unexplained!

        • rosross says:


          It is difficult to prove Homeopathic efficacy using methods to test Allopathic medicine certainly. The greatest proof is the testimony of the patient and as the second most used medical modality and having survived and thrived for two centuries, there is clearly something going on which is of benefit.

          Interestingly there has been research done in Italy where scientists are looking into using Homeopathic methodology for Allopathic drugs to remove the side effects. In other words, to turn them into medicine working at an energy as opposed to material level. Whether that could work remains to be seen because the materials used in Homeopathy are natural and those used in allopathic pharmaceuticals are artificial, or synthetic.

          There is good evidence for biodynamic farming and it is used in Australia. As to Geller, in my reading he was validated. He could do things which could not be explained in conventional scientific terms. That of course is only because modern science/medicine has restricted itself to the purely material and mechanistic. That has proven to be highly successful in surgery and some other areas, but not so effective for drugs.

          But we humans are on a process of discovery and much if not all is trial and error.

          • cbattle1 says:

            Indeed Biodynamic agriculture is practiced in Australia, but has it ever been rigorously tested by impartial trials and experiment? Yes, we have lots of anecdotal evidence for lots of things, and people may believe what they will. If Homeopathic medicine works for you, that is great, particularly because it does no harm! The problem with understanding Homeopathy and Biodynamics, by conventional or orthodox modalities, is that there is no testable theoretic principal. Sure, just because something is unknown or unprovable doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
            Personally, I can accept the possibility that some can bend spoons or move objects with their mind; who knows what is possible and what isn’t?
            In recent years, I have become sceptical of the hypothesis that life on earth has evolved, at least according to the Darwinian and Post-Darwinian philosophers. It appears that life has evolved, but we cannot find credible or substantial evidence to elevate the hypothesis to that of a scientific theory (like gravity), nor can we recreate the past to test the hypothesis. The more we learn about this universe, with science, the more we don’t know! And maybe an infinite amount of stuff will always be unknowable.

            • rosross says:

              I agree the more we learn we do not know and science is now so profit and power driven it is increasingly unreliable.

              The Americans and Russians have done a lot of research into what is called paranormal and I think both tested Geller.

              As to Darwinism, it has holes in it a mile wide and the logical conclusion is that evolution is a part of the answer but not the complete answer. This does not mean that Religious Creationism is the answer either but, that there is more unknown than known and materialist and mechanistic science has a problem in exploring beyond its very serious limits. But that too will change. Humans are adaptable and as the maxim goes:

              Science advances one funeral at a time. The old die out and new minds break new ground. Eventually.

            • lbloveday says:

              Decades ago Paul Davies, then at the University of Adelaide use to write in the Sunday Mail, and his articles on Intelligent Design made sense to me. He wrote once along the lines that he did not know one natural scientist who did not believe in a higher power (no link, too long ago, relying on memory),
              Intelligent design is a theory that the universe and its complex life forms cannot be explained solely by natural causes, and thus an intelligent higher power contributed to the origins of the universe

              • lbloveday says:

                used to write

              • rosross says:

                I have been meaning to read Paul Davies for a long time. Will make sure I do. I agree that there is intelligence and design at work in the world and I read a lot written by physicists who do appear to see intelligence and design at work in the world.

                Darwinism does not answer all questions and can therefore only be a part of the answer and the world and all life is so complex, wonderfully so, that intelligence at work is a given.

          • David Isaac says:

            Uri Geller was always on the same TV shows, which were legion in the late 70s and early 80s. as dowsing, psychosurgery and Bigfoot. Bending spoons by willing it is slightly less impressive than rising from the dead but it’s in the same category .As for spooks studying the phenomenon I suspect they were more interested in the phenomenon of getting us to believe this stuff.

            Homeopathy is incredibly easy to test for its possible superiority over placebo. I am aware of no well-conducted study that purports to show this. As already stated, the placebo effect can be very strong in some people and these people are likely to swear by the therapy. To me it is snake oil but at least it should be harmless.

            • rosross says:

              The American and Russian ‘spooks’ studied it because they believed it could be useful. And it often was. Modern technology has however to a large degree superseded such use. Or so they think.

              • cbattle1 says:

                Humans need to have some explanation as to who they are and where they came from, and that is the role of the myth; to explain the unexplainable. Evolution is a secular myth for the secular industrialised world, to serve the same purpose that the traditional myths of religion fulfilled. “Intelligent Design” is another kind of myth, trying to explain organic life using human analogies; just as a complicated mechanical device has a human designer, therefore, by anthropomorphic projection, a really super intelligent being must have created living things! Whatever or Whoever created Life, the Universe, etc, must surely never be discoverable or understood by the human mind, and I can live with that!

                • rosross says:


                  Yes, I agree. We are storytellers and we create stories all the time to make sense of ourselves and our world. We just need to be careful with the stories we choose to believe.

                  Darwinism, something Darwin never intended, is the result of science become a materialist and mechanistic system of enquiry. That closed many doors. One could argue that was necessary given the advances in that which could be reduced to the material and mechanistic. However, it was and remains also very dangerous.

                  While religions had their flaws and still do, all of them incorporated a moral/ethical aspect and a call to conscience. Science has lost that which is why I believe it is the most dangerous force at present at work in the world.

                  I also agree our mere mortal minds are not going to be able to understand any intelligence which is at work but perhaps that is the point. It is the search for meaning and knowledge which is the point of this world and not understanding all that it is.

                  All of which is why I believe principles of reason, justice, law, decency are so important as we muddle around trying to make sense of things. Without such things we become mere mindless animal organisms. It is our humanity which is so unique and so easily discarded.

                • rosross says:


                  Given previous conversations about how we humans tell stories and one could argue how we inherit and live out stories unconsciously I thought you might find this interesting.

                  It explores the dangers of Israel’s blindness to itself and the realities in the world around it in light of an ancient myth. Sadly Israel has been encouraged in its blindness by many supporters.


                  1. Blindness to the existence of the Palestinians; deafness to their claims. On my many visits to Israel/Palestine, it has struck me how little Israelis know about the Palestinians who live among them or under their military occupation in Gaza and the West Bank. When one asks about “those people,” roughly a quarter of the population of Greater Israel, a frequent response is that they do not see them, and they wish they would just be quiet and leave us alone. We just want peace. Why do they have to make trouble?

                  2. Blindness to their occlusion of the consequences of their policies on the Palestinians. Palestinian scholar Saree Makdisi has documented the way Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians constitute a kind of “double blinding,” in two stages: first the erasure of Palestinian towns and villages and the expulsion of their inhabitants; second the erasure of the traces of erasure, and their replacement by forms of reassuring camouflage. The most conspicuous example of this practice has been the “Trees for Israel” program, which conceals the ruins of destroyed Palestinian villages with the veil of “ecological improvement.” The myth of “a land without people for a people without land” is the verbal counterpoint to this visual occlusion. Some Israeli officials, decrying the way that Hamas mingles with the civilian population of Gaza, using them as human shields, are now portraying the unfortunate murder of over 8,000 Gazans by Israeli violence as “collateral damage” in a just war. The next step has been to portray the mass murder of Gazans as a war of liberation from the rule of Hamas. Perhaps to be followed by a parade through Gaza City?

                  3. Blindness about the failure of their own surveillance technologies. Israel’s confidence in its invulnerability to attack from Gaza was based in its extensive network of cameras along the security fences and watchtowers that surround Gaza’s border with Israel. Israel’s state of the art intelligence services had supposedly created a system of surveillance so complete that there could be no possibility of a surprise attack. Hamas “put out the eyes” of this system in the early hours of October 7, using drones and snipers to destroy all the cameras simultaneously, while the supposedly impregnable wall was breached on scores of places with bulldozers. The spies who were supposed to see everything failed completely, asleep at the monitors.

                  4. Blindness constituted by the waging of war on an invisible enemy. Hamas is an underground army, operating from hundreds of miles of tunnels under a densely populated urban landscape. It only emerges to launch rockets or (rarely) sorties into Israel. Hamas fighters do not wear uniforms to distinguish themselves from the civilian population. When Israel bombs an apartment building, hundreds of young men gather to dig out the victims. Are any of those young men Hamas fighters? Impossible to tell. As in any asymmetrical war between a regular, uniformed army and guerilla fighters merged with a population, the soldiers without uniforms are denounced as terrorists for refusing to obey the laws of war. Israel admits that it is “difficult” to distinguish Hamas fighters from civilians. A better word would be

                  5. Blindness of rage and the lust for revenge. Perhaps the most important blindness in Israel’s current attack on Gaza is the understandable rage that was provoked by the Hamas atrocities on October 7. Hamas deliberately staged scenes of mutilation, rape, and child-murder designed to appall anyone who saw or even heard them described. Israel’s leader, his eyes and ears already shut to the ominous threats from Gaza, promptly became the blind leader of a blind population motivated by instant revenge. The possibility of negotiating for the release of hostages was consigned to the back burner, to be replaced by fantasies of retribution. Gaza, its over two million people already under siege for the last seventeen years, its border controlled by Israel, is subjected to collective punishment (a war crime), mass expulsions of people who are already refugees with no place to go (a war crime), and mass deprivation of the basic necessities of human life (a war crime). The bombing and destruction of entire urban neighborhoods and next, the house-to-house fighting that will take numerous Israeli and Palestinian lives, make it clear that the vengeful policy of “an eye for an eye” leaves everyone blinded.

                  6. The refusal of foresight. Finally, there is blindness involved in the refusal to foresee the consequences of one’s own actions. Even the U.S., a thoroughly complicit partner in Israel’s apartheid policies against the Palestinians under its control, tried to suggest gently that Israel think carefully about what it would do next, after it had destroyed Hamas “once and for all.” Would it try to set up a replacement government for the devastated millions of survivors? Would it try to recruit the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank? Would it pay reparations and try to rebuild the cities it has destroyed? Or would it wash its hands of the entire disaster, rebuild its security walls, reconnect its surveillance cameras, and ask to be left alone? And what if its actions produced the foreseeable result of setting off a wider war that would bring Hezbollah and other military organizations into the battle? Israel’s blind leader of the blind tells his followers that it is too early to ponder these questions. Vengeance comes first; then we will see what follows.

                  Although I cannot help but be horrified by the actions of Hamas on October 7, I am struck by how perfectly it diagnosed the weaknesses of its enemy. They capitalized on its blind arrogance, and then put out its eyes with a spectacle of violence designed to produce blind rage. This leads us to ask how things then turned out for Samson. The answer is: suicide. Samson, taken to the Temple of Dagon for a spectacle of humiliation, pulls down the temple, killing himself and the triumphant Philistines. I am reminded here of a visit some thirty years ago to the ancient fortress of Masada overlooking the Dead Sea. The guide informed us that Masada is an allegory of Fortress Israel in its refusal to surrender to the Romans, insisting instead on collective suicide rather than defeat. The modern meaning, the guide assured us, is embodied in Israel’s nuclear arsenal, which guarantees that if Israel faces defeat, it will not merely commit suicide, but take the rest of the world along with it. Perhaps it is time for Israel to open its eyes and its ears.

                  W. J. T. Mitchell is Professor of English and Art History at the University of Chicago and Senior Editor of Critical Inquiry. He is the author of numerous books on media, culture, and politics.

                  • cbattle1 says:

                    Interesting to consider the Samson story and destructive blind rage.

                    • rosross says:


                      Yes, pondering such things in light of Jungian psychology and the role of archetypes at work in our minds, even more so when unconscious can provide insights into why people, cultures, nations, religions sometimes do the most terrible of things.

                      There is such a thing as mass psychosis and a culture being captured by the power of an archetype and never more so than when it is unrecognised.

                      When humans can process internally and understand that any projection out onto another is about what is at work within rather than what the outer coathanger is doing or being, then we have some hope of resolution in the psyche and of healing.

                      The more rabid the beliefs about the ‘other’ regardless of the reasons for why the other exists, the more it reveals the power of the unconscious and of archetypes at work. That power will destroy those who hold such beliefs more effectively than it will those upon whom they are projected.

                  • Paul.Harrison says:

                    There have been many valid points raised in this piece. The question remains: What would you have done?

  • Jack Brown says:

    Regarding Ivermectin and its acceptance/ rejection the classic framework applied to this study has been the statistical one of a controlled experiment and a tendency to dismiss as anecdote other forms of evidence ignoring that there is a discipline known as Operational Research (or Operations Research) that emerged in WW2 to give structure to looking at data generated operationally to judge effectiveness of techniques in the field. This was the situation with data emerging during COVID from treatment oprions being applied in the real world.

  • Maryse Usher says:

    Benbrika in solitary (for how long?) has evidently not revised his original attitude – “Any country silly enough to make me a citizen deserves what it gets”. If Common Sense (O, wherefore art thou?) keeps him locked up and alone with no access to any other Muslim, prisoner or jailer, for the rest of his natural, thank God. But is our Trotskyite system capable of justice?

    I gave a course of Ivermectin to a 90-year-old friend with severe Covid. After having been being sick for weeks with the designer virus, he recovered in a couple of weeks and was back to his normal good health, apart from a small degree of short-term memory loss. I didn’t catch the virus from him, either.

  • lbloveday says:

    From Konstantin Kisin:
    “Say what you like about Hamas supporters, at least they know what a woman is”.

  • Ian MacDougall says:

    Abdul Nacer Benbrika (see photo above) appears to me to be perhaps arguably just possibly perhaps not exactly the brightest candle on the tree, and easily dudded. Thus perhaps arguably just possibly perhaps the type that gets dudded (no other word for it) into believing that if he can just bring about the demise of one infidel (and Australia is chockers with them) then when his own time comes, and not before, he will go straight to Paradise with his due allocation of 72 beautiful top-quality virgins. for him to amuse himself with for ever and ever amen.
    I hope he has good financial links to Saudi Aradia, because I have a lovely money-spinner of a Harbour Bridge up in Sydney going cheap. So he should not delay. He should RING NOW!

  • rosross says:

    “We will expel the Arabs and take their place. In each attack, a decisive blow should be struck resulting in the destruction of homes and the expulsion of the population.”

    David Ben-Gurion: Zionist and first Prime Minister of Israel–Letters to his son, 1937

    In Gaza, some of us cannot completely die.
    Every time a bomb falls, every time shrapnel hits our graves,
    every time the rubble piles up on our heads,
    we are awakened from our temporary death.”

    ~ Mosab Abu Toha, Things You May Find Hidden in My Ear: Poems from Gaza

  • lbloveday says:

    By Gemma Tognini, the Weekend Australian
    Transcribed from the words Secretary of State Antony Blinken to the US congress and to the world.
    A family of four. Two young children, a boy and a girl, six and eight years old. They sat at their breakfast table and were made to watch as their father had his eyes gouged out in front of them. Then someone cut off their mother’s breast. The same savages turned then to the little girl, the eight-year-old, and cut off her foot before turning to her little brother. Just six years old. They sliced the fingers from his hand. Only then was this family killed. After their execution, the Hamas terrorists sat down and helped themselves to a meal.

    • lbloveday says:

      I wonder what this Australian Senator would think of the above.

    • cbattle1 says:

      Your descriptions of violence reminds me of historic claims by Palestinians, where the perpetrators were Israelis. Sirhan Sirhan, the Palestinian who assassinated Robert Kennedy, had a brother killed in the 1947-1948 war, and his family was displaced to East Jerusalem, becoming Jordanians. Born in 1944 in Jerusalem, Palestine (as it was then), the family were Arab Christian Palestinians, Sirhan’s mother, Mary, being born in Bethlehem. The family later migrated to the USA, but Sirhan remained much troubled, and his mental state was much aggravated by the 1967 “Six Day War”, and he apparently witnessed an anniversary celebration of that event in L.A., prior to the assasination. Because Robert Kennedy had apparently said that, if elected, he would send 50 Phantom fighter/bombers to Israel, Sirhan later said that he was motivated to act. So, probably the first case of Palestinian “terror” in the West, was not perpetrated by an Islamist or Muslim, but by a Christian! Sirhan Sirhan is still alive and living in a State Prison in California.

      • rosross says:


        The Christians get forgotten in Palestine because the modus operandi is to pretend it is a war against mad Muslims.

        There is much research done on traumatised children subjected to violence and the Palestinians in Gaza are no doubt a testament to that.

        I would also like to see research done into children who live as part of an occupying society for that too involves violence, emotional and mental, if not physical. I wonder if that does more psychological harm because it is not recognised or addressed but treated as normal?

        All we do know is that children who experience violence, mental, physical or emotional are often severely damaged both as children and as adults.

        Studies into children raised in cults would offer some insights. Understanding is the only path to healing and change.

    • rosross says:

      Study the two World Wars and you find the same sorts of stories invented about the enemy. It is common practice. Generally if a story is very colourful and hyperbolic it is wise to remain a sceptic. It is propaganda tactics to demonise the enemy.
      One presumes Hamas had better things to do targeting the IDF which is what one Israeli soldier who was interviewed said. And the testimonies of Kibbutz survivors and released hostages have concurred in that the fighters treated them humanely.

      But the truth will out. It generally does and more so as Israelis of conscience take a stand.

      • cbattle1 says:

        It is probably impossible to ever get a clear understanding of what happened on Oct 7. It appears that there was almost no opposition by the IDF, which is hard to believe, enabling the Hamas militants the time and freedom to capture hostages and take them to the Gaza Strip, as well as performing a number of elaborate atrocities. In this era of “Fake News”, all one can do is pick a story that resonates with one’s preconceptions and prejudices, and go with that!

        • rosross says:


          Yes, agree the fake news is problematic. However, a good understanding of the situation, human nature and the history of the story means an application of common sense can yield dividends.

          Any reading of military history reveals that demonising the enemy is automatic and no hyperbole or exaggeration can be too great, i.e. drinking the blood of babies or cutting them out of wombs sort of thing. There is a solid record in past wars of such fanciful fabrications. It is almost as if a bunch of kids get together to write horror stories.

          And it is harder to fabricate in this age. Israel has come up with some supposedly recorded Hamas conversations which have been rejected by the experts as not credible.

          I saw one video, supposedly, of an IDF soldier saying that Hamas had not targeted civilians but had only attacked soldiers. He also said that following the break in the prison wall civilians, young men of course, had poured out and some of those had targeted civilians. Which sounds more plausible although may not be true either.

          Those young men are the result of 16 years of mental and physical torment and torture inflicted by Israel from when they were very young. The chances of them emerging as psychologically healthy adults would not be great as any psychiatrist would tell you. So, some of them may have committed atrocities.

          There was another video, supposedly, of IDF soldiers pushing handcuffed men into a pit filled with tyres and shooting them once they fell. Who can say if the footage was real, fabricated, of IDF soldiers or indeed of Hamas fighters or lifted from some other horrible war elsewhere.

          All we do know is that everyone commits atrocities in war and that 75 years of cruel subjugation and oppression is not going to win hearts and minds.

          But we also have to remember Israelis come from a culture immersed in deep and irrational fear and a longtime believing they are the victims and the Palestinians are the subhuman aggressors.

          Apply scepticism to all accounts of violence for both sides. And compassion for no-one wins in war and the savagery of Israel’s onslaught will lose it support globally. It may be a far higher price paid for revenge, in the name of fear, than anyone expected.

  • lbloveday says:

    Lee Kern flew to Israel and joined a press screening that included footage families have asked not to be released to the general public.
    He made notes during the screening, which lasted forty five minutes – footage shot by Hamas terrorists on their bodycams and mobile phones, footage filmed on dash-cams, CCTV cameras and by the victims with their mobile phones.
    His notes are here:

  • nfw says:

    Albanese live up to a promise, tell ’em he’s joking. Maybe Nathe could have a word with the vermin in ermine when they are all next in the Qantas Chairman’s Lounge. Nathe being a super business man for Qantas and obviously a confidant of the judiciary.

Leave a Reply