a terrorist blast from the past

Pity the poor Australian Federal Police. The headline on today's front page of the Murdoch broadsheet The Australian is about as damning as it gets. 'AFP - no evidence against Haneef'. Haneef was the terrorist we had to have. He had brown skin, a funny name, and a ticket out of the country. As evidence the AFP presented a scrap of paper on which one could clearly read the letter 'p', a half eaten strawberry yogurt containing Haneef's DNA, and a shoelace. Just joking. They didn't have any evidence at all. Actually there was a shoelace but it belonged to a cop. It was on his shoe. And give the guy a break. It's not easy trumping up evidence.

AFP footwear aside, it was all bullshit. Just like Bill Keelty, the head of the AFP. I doubt there's a single man in Australia who deserves the sack more than this bullshit artist. Please imagine the following yelled at top volume - "KEELTY! Hang your head in SHAME! You are an abject DISGRACE! Who needs criminals when we have FUCKERS like you running around?! I call you CORRUPT to your face! RESIGN KEELTY RESIGN!"


Fucking arsehole... sorry, where was I? Oh yeah, in honour of Haneef's innocence (and because the original piece copped a hit in my statcounter thus reminding me of its existence) I'm reprinting a thing I wrote way back when. I apologise to long-timers who've read it already. But I got a laugh out of reading it again and maybe they will too. Yoroshiku.

---

I make a very serious terrorist threat

Attention - Australian Federal Police, ASIO and other assorted terrorist-hunting task-forces of Australia. This is not a hoax - It is precisely as real as everything you've ever been told about terrorism.


I have planted a bomb - lots of them actually. Don't laugh. This is serious.

You may now rejoice. Finally a real terrorist! Let the hunt begin! So that you may know that I'm for real I shall precisely adhere to your long experience of real terrorists. Which is to say, what you've seen in the movies and on the telly. To this end I am leaving clues just like a real cinema-terrorist leading you to an impossibly complicated cinema-bomb. Er... bombs, sorry.


In the spirit of these impossible villains of Hollywood I will make impossible demands of you. You must run around and do them all or EVERYBODY DIES! Here is my list of demands -

Google - bomb in san lazaro
Google - michael meiring bomb philippines
Google - john martinkus dateline abdurrahman wahid bomb
Google - liquid bomb myth
Google - july 7 bomb peter power
Google - charles menezes witness discrepancy
Google - 911 senior military intelligence law enforcement
Google - al qaeda threat adam gadahn pearlman

I demand that you read every article on the first google page. And the second. And the third. Feel free to follow other links and pursue you own lines. These articles contain all the clues as to the certain reality of the threat that I represent. Do not wonder, not for a second, that nothing makes sense. Do not wonder that it's all bullshit. Do you wonder at the WMD's in Iraq? Of course not.

Don't think, just do what I command. Lives are at stake! And certainly do not ask yourself - 'When was the last actual terrorist attack in this country? Surely it couldn't have been that stick of gelignite in a garbage bin outside the Hilton Hotel thirty years ago?' That was before half of you were even born. Dismiss it as a dim memory. Know that the terrorism you have been told is real - IS REAL. The lack of any actual terrorist attacks in this country, or even half credible plots, is neither here nor there. You are not running around wasting your time and the taxpayer's money for nothing. You are not part of some insane fear-mongering hoax. It's all real.


I am real. I am here. Making threats! I am proof-positive that your government, or whoever the fuck it is, is not making this shit up. I demand that my file be named - TERRORIST THREAT HEFFALUMP. Clues as the very real nature of the Heffalump threat can be found in the pages of the subversive terrorist manual Winnie the Pooh by AA Milne. So that you may know what Heffalumps look like, the manual contains precise depictions by Ernest Shepard. Study them hard and know that terror is real. I demand that you write long detailed reports on the precise threat of Heffalumps. I demand that you sit in meetings and make contributions about how we might address the Heffalump threat. I demand that you contribute to the WAR ON HEFFALUMPS.

As the impossible mad bomber, I will now taunt you in a cinematic fashion. I laugh at all your mad capering around, arresting people on trumped-up bullshit charges. That bullshit Haneef case! Ha ha ha ha ha. Were you not ashamed by that? Was that not a slur on you and your whole organisation? Look to your boss, Bill Keelty, he has the answer to such embarrassment - Secret Trials! Feel proud that you are doing your bit to have your country join that hallowed list of 'Nations That Conduct Secret Trials'. Follow your leader. He has secret knowledge. Trust him. He is leading you to a new place. It's called Australia apparently. Who knew?


Whatever you thought Australia was, you were wrong. The new Australia is, bravely, all about fear. You know that fear. It's the fear a man has that if he stands up and says, 'This is all bullshit!', he'll get the sack. Do you know what I'm talking about? I suspect that you do. Ask Andrew Wilkie. Alright for him, says you, he doesn't have a mortgage. Between the fear of being sacked and of not making the mortgage payments, and the fear of me, the impossible terrorist - you can choose both! I, the terrible Heffalump, will keep you in a job. Of course you will chase me. Even if I didn't exist you would do so anyway. You have no choice.

Or do you? What is that nagging voice in your head? It's annoying isn't it? It says maybe all this is bullshit. It picks at inconsistencies in what the government tells you. Don't listen to it! It's only common sense. It's only you wondering at what kind of people we are becoming and what kind of place Australia is now. All those ads and posters telling us to dob in our neighbours - Is that us? Is this my country?


Pay no attention to that questioning voice! Stuff it back in its box. Relax safe in the knowledge that if you pursue these impossible terrorists long enough, they will appear! Kick in enough doors, raid enough mosques, humiliate enough people and lo-and-behold they will fucking hate you! Finally you'll be able to take that idiot phrase 'They hate us for our freedom' and smash it, bend it, stretch it into shape to explain their behaviour. That no man ever hated another for their freedom, only for their oppression, can be consigned to the scrap heap of common sense in your head. Like I said, Forget Common Sense. It will do you no good and certainly not pay your mortgage.

It will certainly not assist you in chasing me. Nor in finding the bomb. Er... bombs, sorry. It's important that you view everything I've written here as being a Very Serious Threat. I am not taking the piss. Dismiss that thought from your head. I am real. I am nobody. I am the mad terrorist Heffalump of your imagination. If you want to know how mad and irrational I am, know this - I Have No Fear. In a nation full of fearful people I am clearly insane and must be stopped.

Now boys, get to work and arrest me. Don't forget the requisite and absurdly expensive government media campaign telling us how fearful we should all be. I demand the following slogan -

Australia! Nobody Wants To Kill You!

lexicon of nobody

Regulars will know I use a lot of obscure words and phrases here. Certainly I can choose to do so or not. I understand the appeal of not doing so. Foreign readers would be less confused if I stuck to some variation of international English. But I view this as a soft form of dumbing down. And besides, no one ever did this for me, ha ha.

I've been reading English and American writers all my life and none of them saw fit to narrow their vocabulary or explain anything for the sake of Antipodeans. So I would grab a dictionary and figure it out for myself. Often as not I just had to guess. Well now I get my own back, ha!

But don't worry. In a spirit of helpfulness, I have come up with this brief lexicon. It's a simple glossary of Australian English, archaisms and other unlikely words. It's not any variety of exhaustive. If I use a word that I suspect foreigners will be unfamiliar with, I'll whack it in here. Mind you, this is not such a simple matter. I'm constantly surprised to find words that I thought were universal, were no such thing. Just lately I discovered that 'offsider' is an Australianism. Who knew?

Further, it's not my intention to replace the dictionary. You won't find 'Jesuitical' there, for instance. Every English dictionary has it already (and what a marvellous word it is too). Rather, my purpose is to cover words that foreigners won't find in their respective dictionaries. And don't write to tell me that you do in fact have a given word in common use. It may still be unknown to other native, and second-language, speakers of English.

So! Let's exciting English! Yoroshiku.

---

Aergia
noun - the Greek goddess of idleness. (Daughter of Aether and Gaia. She guarded the court of hypnos in the underworld. When she could be fagged that is...)

abo
noun - a derogatory word for an aborigine. (Racist epithets aside, in Australia aborigine and aboriginal are interchangable as nouns. It's meaning is simply that of 'original inhabitant')

Antipodes
noun - Australia; Australia and New Zealand (Literally - the far side of the world. Technically for Australia, the 'antipodes' would be Europe, but let's not confuse things)

arvo
noun - afternoon. (As in - 'Seeya this arvo'. This follows in the hallowed tradition of Australians taking words, shortening them, and adding 'o' or 'y' to the end. See telly, below)

Aussie
noun/adjective - Australian. (I understand everyone knows this word. I put it here to make clear the pronunciation, which is 'ozzie'. For some reason, Americans pronounce it 'ossie' with a hard 's'. For Australians, this grates like you wouldn't believe. See 'Oz' below)

bag out
verb - deprecate, derogate. (As in - 'He never missed an opportunity to bag out George Bush.' Is this Australian? Possibly)

bags
verb - to reserve a thing before anyone else has the opportunity. (As in - 'I bags the couch.' Or - 'You can't bags it because I bagsed it already.' Ha ha ha. It looks ugly written doesn't it? Never mind, it is what it is)

bloke
noun - man, fellow. (apparently derived from Shelta, the language of Irish and Welsh gypies loosely based on Gaelic)

Boggo Road
noun - a notorious jail in Brisbane, now closed.

bra
noun - bro, mate, pal. (Short for 'brother', sure enough. This is New Zealander/Pacific Islander English. I always found it curious that 'bro' is pronounced the way it's written. For mine, this makes more sense)

burl
noun - whirl, as in 'give it a whirl'. (I've heard vague rumours that this was originally Scottish. Maybe, maybe not)

c'arn/carn
imperative verb - Come on. (Made famous by Australian playwright David Williamson with his play The Club. The play was about the dramas within an Australian Rules football club, The Crows. The team was urged forward with the cry, 'C'arn the Crows!')

catholic
adjective - embracing many things; of, or catering to, wide tastes. (As in - 'Country and Western, hip-hop, easy listening, you name it, it's all good. My tastes are perfectly catholic'. As for the Catholic Church, it's no accident that it was named thus. For mine, it's a declaration that it is for all, and is an emphatic rejection of any sense of exclusivity)

chestnut
noun - an old story or gag that we know too well. (As in - 'Not that old chestnut!')

chook
noun - a chicken. (Australians, when feeding chickens, will inevitably say - 'here, chook, chook, chook.' I certainly do.)

clacker
noun - rear, derriere. (As in, 'That bloody tailgater was right up my clacker'. I would declare that on the scale of things this word is less rude than 'arse', mostly on account of its comedic resemblance to some kind of sound effect. Without being certain, I'm convinced it derives from cloaca a primitive physical arrangement found in many non-mammals that functions as both waste tract and sexual organs. Okay, so that's pretty yucky, but since nobody has ever heard of a cloaca, clacker is safe to be used in front of children, grandmas, etc)

cooee
noun/interjection - a high pitch cry used in the Australian bush to attract attention or denote one's location to those distant or unseen. (Used in conversation to indicate great distance. Thus - 'We broke down in the middle of nowhere. There was nothing within cooee')

cove
noun - man, fellow. (Dated English but originally from the Romany kova meaning 'thing or person')

crack the shits
verb - throw a tantrum. (As in - 'When he was told there were only light beers left, he cracked the shits.)

cracker
noun - a really marvellous thing, a shining example. (As in- 'Don't miss that new flick. It's a cracker!' Crackers are also small fireworks of the Chinese New Year's variety, as well as those paper things one pulls apart at Xmas to find a paper hat and small toy inside. Do Americans have those? And what do they call them?)

crawl up one's arse
verb - to behave in an obsequious or sycophantic fashion. (As in - 'I'm sick of that bloke, he's always crawling up the boss's arse)

dill
noun - a silly person.

dips me lid
verb - 'take my hat off'. (This is a quote from CJ Dennis' 1919 poem, 'A Sentimental Bloke'. Dennis along with Henry Lawson, Banjo Patterson, and others featured in the then culturally significant 'Bulletin' magazine, and were the first Australians to write in a distinctly Australian vernacular. Whilst not quite reaching his genius heights, they are to the Antipodes what Mark Twain was to the US)

dob in
verb - inform on someone, rat someone out. (This used to be an arch sin in Australia. But under that shit Howard, the Australian Federal Government began running a campaign urging Australians to dob in their coloured, jibber-jabbering neighbours. It wasn't quite that explicit, but everyone got it. PS - Under Rudd, the campaign continues to run. No surprises there.)

fag
noun - a cigarette.

fagged
verb - bothered, as in a tiresome chore. ('The picture fell down but I couldn't be fagged putting it back up.' This is clearly derived from the English public school tradition of 'fagging' whereby younger boys would do the chores of older boys. This doesn't exist in Australia and subsequently the word persists only by way of the past participle)

feeding the chooks
verb - addressing, or otherwise answering the questions of, the media (This was coined by the famous, long serving, populist State Premier of Queensland, Joh Bjelke Petersen. It was a clear statement of contempt for the media on his part, and still holds that connotation. Whilst I share his contempt for the media, that's not to excuse him. He was an arsehole)

full stop
noun - a punctuation mark denoting the end of a sentence. ('period' in American English)

furphy
noun - a falsehood, a piece of scuttlebutt, a red-herring. (Furphy and Sons were the manufacturers of water carts in WWI. These carts served the precise function of the scuttlebutt (water barrel) on a ship, ie. a place to stand around and chat whilst having a drink of water. Scuttlebutt is considered to be gossip that may, or may not, be true. A furphy, on the other hand, is never true, as in - 'The WMD's were a complete furphy')

gaijin
Japanese, noun - foreigner. (What I am in Japan. Literally 'outside country person')

g'day
phrase - Hello. (Actually 'hi' would be closer to the mark in terms of the casual nature of this greeting. Neither the Prime Minister, nor any newsreader, would ever begin any formal address with 'G'day'. It is emphatically not 'good day' which would, if anything, denote the end of the conversation and that one were leaving, presumably in a huff. To be honest, no one in Australia says 'good day'. Ever. Otherwise by way of pronunciation, it's closest relative would be 'Gdansk'. The elision of the vowel between g and d should be utter)

get on the fiddle
phrase - to be up to something of a lewd or sordid nature. (Another neologism of Roy and HG. See 'have a spray')

git
noun - a worthless or contemptible person. (I find this word useful as it's fairly gentle and makes no comment on one's birth, sexual orientation, intelligence, physical shortcomings, or race)

gweilo
Cantonese, noun - foreigner. (What I am in Hong Kong. Literally 'foreign devil' or variously 'ghost man'. Cool, huh?)

guernsey
noun - a jersey. (Jersey and Guernsey, both Channel Islands, became synonymous with the distinctive variety of knitted tops traditionally made there. Both words are now loosely used to describe the pull-over tops worn by football players of all codes. Thus, to get a guernsey means to 'be picked for the team' or otherwise 'make the grade')

have a spray
verb - to have one's say, to express an opinion. (I suspect that this is a neologism created by Roy Slaven and HG Nelson, two Australian radio and TV personalities famous for their singularly perverse sports commentary. More than a few of their expressions have entered the vernacular and most of them smutty, albeit in a cryptic fashion)

haiku
noun - a Japanese minimalist poem of three lines. (This is explained in more detail on the haiku blog. I merely mention it here to reiterate its pronunciation, which is 'high-koo'. Also the plural of haiku is haiku)

heffalump
noun - a creature which inspires fear but exists only in one's imagination. (Heffalumps appear in 'Winnie The Pooh' by AA Milne and illustrated by Earnest Shepard. Whilst the characters in Pooh are convinced that heffalumps are very scary things, any children reading the book (or having it read to them) will clearly understand, by way of the illustrations, that heffalumps are merely elephants and not scary at all. Disney later anthropomorphised heffalumps into yet more cute singing characters. I expect AA Milne rolled over in his grave. For mine, the Disney version of Pooh is execrable, a real piece of shit. The original on the other hand is a masterpiece of children's literature)

lamington
noun - a simple cake made from sponge that is cut into cubes (approximately two inches square) and covered in chocolate icing and sprinkled with dessicated coconut. (These are famously made at home and then sold at churches, or school fetes, to raise money for charity. This is known as a 'lamington drive'. Lamingtons taste pretty good. Fancy lamingtons are cut in half and have red jam smeared in the middle before being coated)

lizard of Oz
noun - a reference to the then Australian PM, Paul Keating, who had the temerity to place his hand on Queen Elizabeth's shoulder at an official function (This was the precise headline from an English tabloid. The media's tone was - How dare a commoner touch our Queen! Sure enough, there are commoners and there are commoners. I suspect if the right sort of commoner (Michelle Obama comes to mind) were to replicate the act, no one would say boo. As colonials go, Americans are infinitely preferable to Australians)

laowai
Mandarin, noun - foreigner (What I am in Mainland China. Literally 'outside country person')

mate
noun - friend, pal, buddy. (It's my considered opinion that none of these quite hits the mark. 'Mate' has within it an implicit solidarity, as in 'shipmate' or 'cellmate'. Officers and government officials aside, nearly all Australia's early settlers were one or the other. Subsequently, calling someone 'mate' is an unspoken acknowledgement that one is not a member of the ruling class)

moniker
noun - a name. (This is informal and operates thus - 'Just whack your moniker and address at the top of the form.' Do Americans use this? I only seem to hear Australians say it)

nisei
Japanese, adjective - second generation. (Used solely for Japanese who have settled abroad. 'Ni' means 'two' and 'sei' means 'life' or 'generation'. Ichi, ni, san (one, two, three) thus becomes 'issei, nisei, sansei', ie. 'first, second, and third generation')

offsider
noun - partner, assistant, a person comprising a third party connected to a second party. (Thus unlikely to be used to describe one's own friend. 'I talked to the bloke while his offsider had a cigarette')

onya
phrase - congratulations, well done, bravo. (Short for 'good on you', possibly present in other Englishes but certainly common coinage in Australia)

Oz
noun - Australia. (This was coined in the seventies by Richard Neville (who occasionally still lobs up on counterpunch) in a magazine of the same name. It's an obvious name given the correct pronunciation of 'Aussie')

packed to the gunnels
adjective - very full. (gunnels, a corruption of 'gunwales', are the upper sides of a ship, so called because they had cannon bowsed up against them. A 'wale' was a particularly heavy plank used for the hull)

Pat Malone
adjective/pronoun - alone, on one's own. (There's precious little true Australian rhyming slang but this is one of them. I suspect that there was no actual Pat Malone as such. Under the rules of rhyming slang, this should more correctly be shortened to 'pat', as in, 'He was all on his pat'. Me, I find this somewhat unlovely and prefer the full expression)

piker
noun - a person who backs out of a deal or otherwise chickens out. (In the verb form this functions exactly like 'chicken out' as in, 'He was going to help us move house but he piked out.')

pollie
noun - a politician.

Pom
noun - an Englishman. (The adjectival form being 'Pommy'. I suspect that English people have by now calmed down about this word. I notice The Times Crossword recently had a clue, 'Sounds like English stone fruit', with the answer being 'pomegranate'. Significantly the clue was not 'Sounds like English put down stone fruit', which is to say the clue acknowledges that 'English' and 'Pommy' are interchangeable and that the latter lacks any sense of derogation. Mind you, one can fix that by modifying 'Pommy' with the suffix 'bastard'. But that says more about 'bastard' than it does about 'Pommy', ahem)

Punt
noun - a small bet.
verb - to lay a small bet.

Punter
noun - the average man in the street, literally 'one who bets'. (I don't know about other places, but in Australia the age-old entertainment of the lower classes was to follow the horses. The majority of betting was through the government-run TAB (Totaliser Agency Board). No shopping street in any Australian town is without a TAB. Sure enough, it is now being pushed to the sidelines as gambling is being legalised and put into corporate hands. Who'll give me odds on the inevitability of corruption? Any takers?)

rapt
adjective - happy, pleased. (Who knows why this magical word assumed such a mundane role in Australia? Not me)

rort
verb - to bilk a system (in all likelihood the government) by fraudulent or dishonest means. (The insurance companies had been rorting the system for years)
noun - as above

same same/same-same
adjective - the same as. (Thai-glish usually delivered as 'same same, different' meaning 'just like that, but not quite'. Part of the vernacular of Asian expats)

sansei
Japanese, adjective - third generation. (See nisei, above)

shank's pony
noun - one's own legs as a means of transport, ie. walking. (Shank is not a fellow who owned a pony, it merely means leg)

shat
verb - past tense of shit. (Australians and the English have the irregular verb 'shit' follow 'sit' by way of past participle and past perfect. Thus, sit/sat/sat - shit/shat/shat. Americans have it follow 'hit'. Thus hit/hit/hit - shit/shit/shit. Which is a pity because it's a marvellous word, shat. Oh, 'spit' functions in the same fashion - spit/spat/spat)

stoush
noun - dust-up, brawl, kerfuffle.

telly
noun - television. (Australians have a habit of shortening words and adding a 'y' or an 'o' to the end. Thus 'Christmas presents' become 'Chrissy prezzies'. Foreigners view this as infantile but they fail to understand that it's done in a spirit of archness, which is to say that it's a joke and we all get it. To object to it is to not get the joke)

tuck-shop
noun - a shop, usually by way of a counter, where school students can buy food and drink. (The tuck-shop is usually run by volunteers, invariably known as 'tuck-shop ladies'. The 'tucker' sold in tuck-shops usually consists of pies, sausage rolls, chips, sticky buns, and soft drinks)

tuppence ha'penny
noun - two and half pence. (which is to say, a trifling amount. As in - 'I wouldn't give you tuppence ha'penny for anything he has to say'. In Australia, we shifted from pounds, shillings, and pence over forty years ago but the phrase lingers)

wakarimashita
verb - Japanese for 'I understand' or 'I get it'.

wowser
noun - a prude, a killjoy. (No one knows where this comes from. It's a great word though)

yoroshiku
Japanese, technically an adverb - regards, best wishes. (literally the 'well' from 'please consider me well'. Whilst functioning as 'regards' it does so in a backwards fashion by asking that the second party have regard for the first party, if you can dig it)

Annexing the Sudetenland

Perhaps we were all blind-sided? Perhaps the Middle East is a distraction? And a penny-ante one at that. Perhaps the main game is elsewhere, and we've all been taken for fools.


Only hardcore Monty Python fans would remember the sketch where a caller phones in to the programme and, apropos nothing, says, "Yes, I'd like to ask the panel what they would do if they were Hitler?" Graeme Chapman, as stentorian intellectual, says, "I should annexe the Sudetenland." Applause follows and Terry Jones leaps in, dressed as a woman and screams, "Liberal rubbish!" Cut to the next scene.

---

Here's a history no one cares for. Germany was just another participant in WWI. Like every other country they were trapped in the mindset of empire - Napoleonic, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, Hapsburg, that kind of thing. But against the hard reality of the machine-gun, the old ways were finished. And by 1915, all the states of Europe were exhausted and ready to call it quits. The war was going nowhere. But the bankers knew that they could push things further. Their propaganda machine went into hysterical mode with absurd stories: lampshades and soap made from humans; six million Jewish victims (yes, in WWI); and unambiguous depictions of Germans as befanged, slavering, baby-eating Hun. It was all nonsense of course. Finally by way of the Lusitania scam, the US was brought into the war and Germany was crushed. (Not forgetting of course that Woodrow Wilson had sold his own country out on the eve of the war by way of the shiny, new, family owned Federal Reserve.)

The war ended with Germany broken. Actually, every European state was broken. An entire generation lost (even in Australia, believe it or not). Finally it was time to divide up the spoils at the Versailles Conference. The invisible but outsize participant at Versailles was, of course, the bankers. They ensured Germany was cut up, with swathes of its population the subjects of other countries, these being the Sudeten Germans in Czechoslovakia and the Silesian Germans in Poland. The bankers now owned Germany and ran the printing presses night and day. In amongst hyper-inflation, they stole whatever wealth was left by way of 'reparations'. The Germans starved. And those of Silesia and the Sudetenland got it worst.

Finally, the Germans freed themselves of the yoke of the bankers. And sure enough, ten years later were strong enough to unite the German people. Well, that's them fucked. It didn't help that Hitler was such a caricature, nor that he was a Social Darwinist motherfucker. But then again, is it possible to throw off the bankers and be a nice guy at the same time? If anyone knows how to do this, I'd love to hear it. I suspect it's the equivalent of finding the question to which '42' is the answer (for those who know their Douglas Adams).

---

In retrospect, Germany was always going to be crushed. Anyone asserting their independence from the bankers will be shown what happens to smart guys. The Romanovs learnt that lesson in the woods of Yekaterinburg - likewise Presidents Jackson, Lincoln, and Kennedy. And then there's Putin. If the Bolshivik revolution was designed to install Jewish control of Russia and WWII was designed to restore control in Germany (and as a twofer, impose it on that powerhouse of Asia, Japan) what might be in store for Putin? Why not a war between the US/NATO and Russia, with everyone else piling in? Just like a World War. The bankers wouldn't even bat an eyelid. The more dead the better. One hundred million - no problems.

Sure enough Russia has been painted as an enemy by the Jewish media ever since Putin got in and threw out the Jewish oligarchs. Think of the farcical nature of the Litvinenko poisoning. He was killed (with the most absurd poison in history) so that we might hate Russia. And then the Jewish catspaw Georgia trashes the ethnic Russian city of Tskhinvili. This attack was never meant to achieve anything apart from provoking Russia. There was no purpose to it otherwise. Tskhinvili had no strategic or tactical value. The Georgians turned tail and ran instantly. Well, you would, wouldn't you, if the point of the exercise was to have the Russians attack you.

Let's imagine we're bankers and we want to kick off a world war with Russia as the villain. Don't forget we control the bloc-media and can ignore our own provocations and can depict the response in isolation. How might we frighten everyone with the bogeyman of a rampaging Russia? Why don't we attack ethnic Russians and then act surprised and horrified when Russia responds? Can you dig it?

And now NATO is coincidentally having naval exercises in the Black Sea. Yeah right! Ha ha ha ha ha. Good timing! Are they that obvious? And honestly, what the fuck is the 'North Atlantic Treaty Organisation' doing in the Black Sea? I redub them NABSTO. 'BS' stands for 'Black Sea'. Or something else if you'd rather.

Think of the beauty of a world war for the bankers. Crushing what remains of the independent Muslim states becomes far easier. With Europe plunged into war who would even notice when Tehran got bombed? How easy would it be to declare martial law in the US? Those internment camps would make a lot of sense. Internment is what you do with enemies in time of war. Ask the Nisei Japanese of fifty years ago. Even China's destruction enters the realms of possibility. And then there's the CFR's stated desire to have a world population of less than a tenth of what it is now. (Let's scratch that 'hundred million' I mentioned earlier.)

Think also of the inexplicable kowtowing of every single figure of authority in the US and Europe. They all know something is coming. Whatever it is has to be big. How about world war big? Would that do it? Would that explain a few things? Remember - The Bankers Think Big. Their ambition is greater than God's. And it's not like they haven't done it before. It worked a treat last time. Why not a Take Two?


"Yes, I'd like to ask the panel what they would do if they were Putin?"
"I should annexe South Ossetia."

ten short years

Lately it's all been about Russia. I shan't go into the Ossetia/Georgia thing. There's been tons written about it. It seems the thoughts run the gamut from it having been a neocon/Israeli trap for the Russians (that they fell into), to it being a huge misstep by the neocons with Putin tearing their playhouse down. I'm inclined to the latter but stand to be corrected. I don't think the Georgians did anything that they weren't meant to do. The slaughtering of the people of Tskhinvili was always the plan. It served no purpose at all beyond its role as provocation. Did the neocons/Israelis expect some different response from Russia? Or did Russia behave precisely as they expected? Frankly, I don't know.

But to hell with that. What struck me was the constant description (in all of the coverage, mainstream and alternative) of Russia as resurgent and newly powerful thanks to its oil revenue. Sorry, I'm going to have to call bullshit on this one.


The logic is that since oil prices have been high for the last couple of years, Russia's coffers are full and it can throw its weight around. But oil has always been a coffer-filler, recent bullshit prices or no. Were other oil rich countries poor ten years ago? Is oil a new thing in Russia? Did they only just discover it? Or perhaps they only just got round to refining and pipelining it? I'm being rhetorical, sure, since these questions have obvious answers.

The huge, glaring, and frankly unmissable difference between the Russia of ten years ago and today is who is running the joint. Ten years ago under the drunken Yeltsin, Russia was ruled by the Oligarchs, otherwise idiotically known as the Russian Mafia. I say 'idiotically' because to describe this Mafia as 'Russian' makes as much sense as describing the Mafia in the US as 'American'. Who does that? The Mafia in America is Italian and everyone knows it. Same-same in Russia where everyone knows that their Mafia was, and is, Jewish.

Of the seven oligarchs in Russia under Yeltsin, six were Jewish and the seventh wasn't worth tuppence ha'penny. In fact he was only on the list so that people could pretend it wasn't an all Jewish affair. (Much like how North Korea was only in the 'axis of evil' to hide the obviousness of a bunch of Jews telling us all our enemies are Muslims. Truth is, no one actually gives a toss about North Korea.)


Anyway, the big difference between Russia of ten years ago and today is the fact that Putin threw out the Jewish Mafia. It's so fucking obvious. And as ever, the bloc-media misses the elephant in the living room. Well, shit, eh? No surprises there. But never mind the media, the truly extraordinary thing here is that within the space of a mere ten years a country can go from bullshit to bullish.

Gosh! A light-bulb goes off in my head. Has this happened before? Has there been another country that went from basket-case to world power after deposing Jewish control of their economy? Anyone? Can we think of a country, a few decades back, that was busted on its arse with everyone taking their weekly pay home in a wheel-barrow, and a mere ten years later was strong enough to stand up for themselves? Might they, like the Russians, have insisted on the rights of their countrymen trapped behind arbitrary borders? Might they also, like those Russians again, have been depicted by the Jewish media as villains? Ha ha ha ha ha. Sorry, but with the shit we've been fed by the media all our lives, if you didn't laugh, you'd have to cry.


So it seems we have two recent examples of countries throwing off the yoke of bankers and money-men, and in the space of a mere ten years going from zero to a hundred. As a writer, I do detest presenting examples in pairs. Pairs are good for dichotomies and symmetries and such. But ordinarily, to prove a case it pays to present examples in threes. If you pay attention, you'll find I very rarely break this rule. Subsequently I racked my brains looking for a third example. And I couldn't think of any. Not in the past anyway. The future is another matter. What country has the potential to shed its busted-arse status and return to economic powerhouse (and complete my rule of three)?

Here is the salutary lesson - If a country throws off the yoke of Jewish control of its economy/money supply, it can rebuild itself in ten years. Roll that thought around in your head because it's a mind-fucker. Only ten years...


What one man can do, another can also. Is the US really incapable of doing what the Russians did? I don't see why not. If the US was to throw off the bankers, it would join Russia and China as a free sovereign nation. Could those who wrote the Protocols survive in the face of the biggest three powers in the world not being under their control? There's hope yet, you know.

I save Israel's bacon

My heart bleeds for Israel. And never more so than now. Israel currently faces a dilemma unlike any it has faced before. Previously Israel's enemies adopted various battlefield strategies, only to see them all fail. This is because they picked the wrong battlefields. Only one battlefield counted, and that was that of public perception.

Israel, by way of the Jewish bloc-media, always held that theatre. They set the terrain, made all the rules, and decided all the outcomes. Thus Israelis were ever the blameless victims whose evil enemies deserved whatever spectacular viciousness the Israelis inflicted upon them. The US congress would applaud and send yet more money in honour of Israel's plucky selfless gallantry.

But lately an extraordinary thing has taken place. The Israelis face a battlefield not of their own contrivance. They don't own the theatre anymore. A group called Free Gaza has seized the initiative. They will sail their boat 'The Free Gaza' into Gazan waters and deliver relief supplies to the Palestinians. The Israelis are faced with a situation that will attract world attention and in which they cannot cast themselves as victims. Regardless of what they do they will lose. Do they stop the boat, board it and arrest everyone? Do they let it sail on? It's the cleverest thing since Octavian sent Mrs Antony to visit Mr Antony at Cleopatra's Palace. The Israelis are, like Antony was, shit up a creek.

Of course this goes against God. It certainly goes against his chosen people. And God pity any people who have the temerity to deny Jewish people the right to control how others view them. Death is the least they deserve. With this in mind, and in a spirit of wishing to do my humble best for the greatness of the Jewish nation and people, I have come up with the following cunning plan. By my best count it is a three-fer and, by way of money, everyone should make out like bandits. Israel will sink the Free Gaza and blame it on Iran.

Here's the plan -

1 - Find an old F-14 Tomcat and transport it to a secure Israeli air-force base. Ideally it'll be in going condition. Paint it up in Iranian Air Force colours. This will be packed with explosives and flown into an Israeli coastal town after the attack. Make sure you have cameras on hand. This should provide spectacular footage.

2- Tell the Americans to provide two Stealth fighters to fly 'stealth' into Iran and 'non-stealth' out of it, crossing Iraq to coincide with the attack. They don't go anywhere near the ship and actually land in Israel. Find out what kind of payload a Stealth can carry. Perhaps you can use them to fly some drugs in? I'm just trying to maximise the profit aspect of each part of this exercise. Ideally each compartment will pay for itself. And when the US Air Force comes for free, so much the better.

3 - To ensure the stand-down of the US military, announce the first annual 'Israel Congratulates America' holiday and gala performance to fall on the day before the Free Gaza is to be sunk. This year's honorees are to be the brave US military personnel who've done so much to heroically bring freedom to the people of the Middle East. The US can fly them in from Iraq and any other places where they might be able to put a stopper in the plan. Organise a gala performance with Barbra Streisand and a host of A-listers. This will provide brilliant media footage of thousands of ecstatic US military personnel in full-dress rig waving Israeli flags. All military personnel are to be provided with a 'personal assistant' for the duration of their stay. I'm thinking the individual officers can fill out a preference questionaire beforehand asking about whether they prefer a male or female PA. The PA's will be responsible for the date-rape drugging of their charges who will then be photographed in bed with children. They'll each wake up to the news of the Iranian attack and a quicktime of their own personal child blowjob. Ever the loyal servants of Israel, they.

5 - Before the bombing, jam all the Free Gaza's radio frequencies. The Israeli Air Force now bombs the Free Gaza. The first target should be its communications ability. Then napalm the decks. Have helicopter gunships machine-gun the lifeboats and any survivors. Finally, fire a missile that will definitely sink it. Just in case it doesn't sink keep John McCain on hand to handle the cover up. His father did a cracking job last time round in '67.

6 - Launch an hysterical media campaign about Iran's shock sinking of the Free Gaza. The line will be - Iranian militants violently opposed to the Free Gaza's spirit of non-violent resistance, and in support of their terrorist Hezbolla allies, have sunk the Free Gaza killing all on board. One Iranian plane will be nominally shot down at sea by the Israeli Air Force, heroically doing the job that the Americans seemed incapable of doing. The pilot of the other F-14 will take the role of suicide bomber with his plane crashed by remote-control into an innocent Israeli town killing six million people (just joking. Would 600 people be about right? I'll go with your call on this.)

7 - Casus Belli Mission Accomplished! There's nothing for it now but to have Israeli kids write their cute messages of hate on the nosecones of the Iran-bound nukes.

And there you have it! A public relations disaster turned into a public relations victory. The battlefield initiative retaken. Those who thought they could take on the Jewish state in the theatre of public perception will have been taught a lesson. And anyone out there thinking they might do likewise, will know the price to be paid. And all it took was ambition to the point of hubris, a preparedness to kill innocents and sacrifice one's own people, a mastery of blackmail and it's subsequent control of a US military golem, a millenia-long superior ability to play the victim, and finally, the utter certainty that God's chosen people can do no wrong.

The Pedophocracy and the Media

God I hate the media. And sure enough, that was the angle I took when I wrote about this topic previously. The point of that piece was to wonder at the nature of the media's discussion of paedophilia. Did you get the gag in that sentence? It was the word 'discussion', ha ha ha. How droll I am. There is no discussion. Well, there might be, but who can hear it with all the high-pitch screaming?


I vaguely concentrated on the media's role in making us hysterical about penny-ante pervies (and particularly a famous non-pervy artist) whilst astoundingly having nothing to say about the plummeting age of pubescence amongst girls. And they do this whilst also encouraging these ever younger girls to dress and behave sexily. It struck me that they were simultaneously debauching the victims, and the victimisers, whilst having the rest of us lose our wits at the prospect of this debauchery. But what did it all mean? And to what end?


Certainly the media desires us all to be fearful. Between toilet germs, appearing uncool in the eyes of teenagers, and those foreigners who hate us for our freedom, there's a lot they'd have us fearful of. But in the fear stakes, paedophiles win. It's every parent's nightmare that their child might be taken. But truth be known - there are paedophiles, and there are paedophiles - if you can dig it.


It seems that lately, the most numerous targets of our fear (certainly in the news) are those sad fuckers with hard-drives full of jpegs and mpegs. Every couple of months there'll be a big bust and dozens of guys will be hauled away. We've no idea if these people ever actually get away from their computers and fiddle with kids for real. Maybe they do. Maybe they don't. Who knows? Has anyone heard a 'discussion' by the media about paedophiles who started with computer porn and then progressed into sexual assault? If there were such creatures, could the media pass up an opportunity to crucify them in public?


The other targets are less numerous. They're those sad fuckers who probably don't know how to use a computer and are the traditionalist playground pervies. You've seen these people. The media loves to tell us where they live so we can go and burn their houses down. Keep in mind that the media does not distinguish between the traditionalists and the digitally literate. That's just me. Just like I'm the only guy who'll ask, how many of these old-fashioned street-wandering pervies are there in our communities? Half of fuck-all? Just curious.


Oh yeah. I nearly forgot. There's a third category. These are the basilisks - the monsters of our nightmares - those creatures that beggar the imagination. Like Mark Dutroux. What sets basilisks like Dutroux apart is the fact that he operated as part of a 'network'. Perhaps it was just me, but when the Dutroux story was on the news, I recall saying to whomever I was with, 'How do these guys meet each other?' It's a fair question. Can we imagine a social event where one fellow casually says he spent the weekend kiddy-raping and another fellow says, 'Hey, me too. We should hang out.' The best I could figure was that they might meet in jail. But Dutroux hadn't been in jail and somehow he knew a lot of people. How does this work? What the fuck is going on?


As ever, the man with the answers is the mighty Dave McGowan. Dutroux is not an anomaly. If anything he's a cog in a machine. And it's a big machine and has cogs beyond counting. This child-abduction ring is not only massive, which is to say, global - it is also untouchable. We know this because occasionally a local branch would be busted - Dutroux in Belgium, the 'Finders' in Florida and Washington DC, the McMartin pre-school scandal in New York, military child care centres in the Presidio and West Point, the Country Walk Babysitting Service in Florida, etc, etc, ad nauseam. These were too big for the media to avoid. McGowan follows the trajectory of the media coverage of each of these busts as they slowly but surely sink beneath the waves. With the utmost diligence, the media would ensure that trails were not followed, facts were not uncovered, and questions were not asked. All these stories disappeared with barely a trace. In the media, these rings were not interconnected. There were no links connecting the paedophiles with the local police and government, the FBI, the CIA, the Pentagon, or the Whitehouse. Same, same, internationally. There were no links between the US and Belgium or any other countries. Like the US News said, in discussing the 'Finders' - "The group's practices, the police said, were eccentric - not illegal.” Story? What story? Apart from some crazy parents led astray by crazy child therapists, nothing happened. None of it ever was.


In the face of this third category it seems like the first two are barely different at all. Fine, let's start again: there's two paedophilias. One's amateur, small-time and the subject of much media screaming. The other is huge, professional, sanctioned, and untouchable. Ideally, never the twain shall meet. Not in real life, not in the media. Further to these differences, the individual sad fuckers we see in the media do not grow their numbers. It's a movement almost completely incapable of self perpetuation, certainly not of flourishing. I'm guessing they'll never go beyond a tiny decimal point of the population. The Pedophocracy is something else. It can reproduce and swell its population. It has defence mechanisms to combat environmental depredations such as getting busted. Provided it stays in the dark, it fears nothing.


The media is an inverse perception machine. The tiny threat is made huge. The huge threat is shrunk down to nothing at all. If you want to know how big the pedophocracy is, you need merely look to its treatment in the media.

Are we suprised? Does any of this differ from other things?
-Muslims, a tiny 'threat', are enlarged into Al Qaeda. Zionists (Who? Aren't they, like, out of fiction or something?) perpetually pop up in all over the globe (Georgia, this week!) and yet seem not to exist. Small threat - Big. Big threat - non-existant.
-Small-time drug users and sellers get busted in huge numbers. Massive sanctioned drug operations, from the Sassoons of yore, to the 'Russian' mafia of today, carry on unconcerned about exposure. Small problem - Big. Big problem - non-existant.
-Taxpayer pennies for welfare mothers is ever the standby bogeyman while the staggering amounts of taxpayer bazillions as interest to privately-owned reserve banks are... are... what? What privately-owned Reserve Bank? Small money - Big. Big money - non-existant.


Is there a pattern here? Sure, of course. But the three examples immediately above make sense in terms of money, power, and geo-politics. Where's the logic in the pedophocracy? What purpose does this huge machine serve? How does raping kids further someone's agenda? Agenda for what? More kiddy raping? What's the point? And why does the media expend energy on the penny-ante end of paedophilia at all? Why not hush it all up? Why are there two parallel paedophilias? Why not have just one and keep it secret?


These are all good questions and I'm glad you asked them. But there are other questions too. Subsequently I've split this thing up into three. Next I'll have a go at the bigger picture of what purpose it all serves. Following that, I'll ask what it means in terms of Charles Darwin. You know the guy - beard, Beagle, behaviour. If a thing doesn't get his tick, it doesn't fly. Does paedophilia get a tick from Darwin? Really?

The Pedophocracy

Hi Folks - Sorry I've been slack and idle. I took a week off in honour of the Greek goddess Aergia.

But I'm on the job now and shall be back shortly to post a piece under the above title. If you want to get a headstart, read this. This gives you the first six chapters of Dave McGowan's Programmed to Kill, one of the most singular books ever written. I never tout things, but this is worth spending money on. It's on amazon.com.


These six chapters collectively titled 'The Pedophocracy' might just be the Rosetta Stone in explaining the means by which today's wickedness is conducted. Or that's my angle anyway. Back soon.

Dear Anonymous

An anonymous recently left this comment on the McGowan thing I wrote a little while ago. It struck a chord with me and I reprint it here with my thoughts on the matter following after.


Anonymous said...
I enjoy the works of McGowan very much and as an ex-southern fundamental christian, the more truth I find the better.

The sad truth about that for me is what difference can it make? I have no doubt that ALL religions are lies for the purpose of deceiving the masses and the few getting richer, but if there is no right or wrong, god or devil, why should any of this matter?

If I try to live and do good to my fellowman and someone else lives a life only to hate and destroy and we both get the same at death..nothing...what does it matter what we do?

Why should we try to make things better for the following generations if there is nothing beyond this life? We should steal, kill, lie or anything we can do to get all we can get while we are here!!!!

Hundreds of sweet precious children are abused mentally, emotionally and sexually almost every 30 seconds and few people care. What difference does that matter is there is nothing better beyond this life? If a man strives to do good and be kind to children and another man only lives to rape a child and yet they both get the same at the end of life why should we strive for the 'good'?

What kind of world is this and what does anything matter at all? Maybe this is the jumping off place of the universe but in the religious pious stupidity we are led to believe we are better! I want no part of any religion for as long as I draw breath.



Dear Anonymous,

Whatever pathetic consolation it may be, I know precisely how you feel. In fact, I suspect that most of the regulars here would be nodding their heads. Mate, you are not alone. A lot of us have been there. Everything that had once comprised the bedrock on which we based our understanding of ourselves and the world, has turned to shifting sand. Actually it was always thus. But now it's become so obvious that none of us can miss it. We've all learned that nothing was what we thought it was. And with nothing firm beneath our feet, it's hard to know who one should be.

It is my conceit here, to I think I have something to tell you. Maybe I do, maybe I don't. I'm going to write it regardless and hope that it's of some use. If it isn't, and you don't care for it, feel free to dismiss it. I will not take it personally.

Professionals might disagree, but I reckon you are undergoing a slo-mo variation of a nervous breakdown. I say this because your words were mine and 'nervous breakdown' was how I chose to define the complete disconnect I experienced. But don't be afraid of the word 'breakdown'. You may as well embrace it. When a thing is built wrong at a foundational level, invariably there's no point fiddling around the edges. You may as well break it down and start again. It is a good and necessary thing. And I'm not talking about society here. I'm talking about you.

If you're like me, your understanding of yourself was based majorly on your understanding of the world. And now you've realised you've been had. It was all a con, a load of shit designed by vicious greedy bastards. Religion is a con, banking is a con, tax is a con, the media is a con. All of these things told you who to be and what to do. And now the scales have fallen from your eyes and you know it's all bullshit. So! Who are you? Who should you be? How should you behave? Where is the firm ground on which you can say, 'This is who I am'?

Well, I hate to tell you that you will never find this firm ground - certainly not externally. The only firm ground you'll find will have to be yourself. That which is outside us, is not us, and nor should it define us. You say that there is no right and wrong. Actually there is, but so far you've pretty much let others define it for you. I'm not attaching any blame to you for this. You, me, we all did it. The main thing, in rejecting this definition-of-others, is that you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Which is to say, don't throw yourself out too.

Let's start with the wrong end of the stick. Clearly there is wrong behaviour. And you identified it quite eloquently. But rather than making sense of it with a thicket of complex rules, why don't we distil it into its single essence? All wrong behaviour is merely an expression of selfishness. Every 'sin' is only so, if it is carried out as an act of selfishness. All of the ten commandments can, believe it or not, be done selflessly - in which case they are no longer a 'sin'. Who knew?

Think of Robin Hood. He would lie, cheat, and steal, but all in a spirit of selflessness. Who cares what the reality was - he's mythologised for this selflessness. Had he robbed to enrich himself, there wouldn't be any myth. His heroic stature doesn't come from his breaking of the rules but from why he broke them. The rules were, and still are, bullshit. They were there to serve the selfish, which is to say, the wealthy and powerful. Forget the rules, the only thing that counts is the selflessness. The ten commandments, the seven deadly sins, whatever, only make sense in terms of their selflessness. If you view them in this fashion, idiotic discussions about white lies etc. are instantly resolved. Contradictions, clever tricks and self-serving loopholes all turn to a puff of smoke.

The rules are, and always were, bullshit. Given that the only certainty is change, they must fail. And they do. And you've seen it, you said so. So let's chuck them out. The only thing that counts is the question of 'for whom was the action done?' Did a person act out of narrow self-interest, or for the benefit of all?

It won't take much of a prompt from me to get you to wonder at the religious power structure of which you were a member, and why they never put things in terms of selflessness. Ha! The question answers itself. If an organisation was governed by the simple rubric of selflessness how, or why, would it's leaders amass all that power? How would they explain all those mansions with their hot and cold running blowjobs? These organisations, in refusing to discuss things in terms of selflessness, are telling you where the answer lies.

Let's not forget the government and the media. Of course the media tells you that greed is good. The media is run by the powerful and wealthy, which is to say selfish, and unsurprisingly they want you to revere the powerful and wealthy. Sure, of course. And here am I telling you, media-style, how to behave. But I'll also tell you - don't take my word for it. Do not believe me. Belief is what led you, and the rest of us, astray. Instead take this thought of selflessness (it's not mine you know. I merely echo others) and roll it around in your head. Apply it to anything you like. See for yourself if it makes sense.

For no particular reason, the Beatles song 'Money Can't Buy Me Love' came to mind. As did the old phrase, 'You can't buy happiness'. Wonder at these again. What are they apart form simple discussions of selfishness and selflessness? Simple things are easy to see. Complicated things are not so easy. This simple template of selflessness is not some magic key that will do your thinking for you. You've already had people hand you all the answers and you know what that's worth. Nothing.

You will have to be your own bedrock. You will have to struggle to embody what is right. Not only will you have to struggle to understand the right thing to do, you will have to struggle in the face of all those who will tell you that you are wrong. Stand firm. Don't be distracted by the selfish end of the continuum, regardless of how many people tell you that sins are virtues. Being distracted by the selfish and their selfish behaviour will serve no purpose. It's arguable that any religion (or society, same-same) basing itself on what one shouldn't do, was always doomed to failure. Forget what's wrong. Aim for what's right.

By defining yourself by what's best for others, you can find a strength that is unimpeachable. If a man cannot be accused of acting selfishly, he cannot be accused - period. He need not fear the lies of others. To shed fear is to shed the confusion and unhappiness that the lies are designed to instil. The selfish do not have this option. Those with the most to lose will live lives of fear. It stands to reason. And sure, they wish you to be fearful. Hell, do they ever! Reject them. Reject their falsehoods. Reject their fear. Turn away from all of it. Find yourself. You are all that you have and all that you need.

You have already come a long way. The path you are on is difficult. The main thing is that you knew to start it. I salute you. Here I will not discuss what I think you will find at the end of this journey. That would merely be my opinion, whatever that's worth. Not much, since I haven't found it yet. And I may never. But it doesn't really matter. With each step, one casts off fear and knows oneself better. The ground beneath one's feet become ever firmer and each footfall more confident. Eventually you will find the solid bedrock of yourself. Godspeed.