Saturday, September 27, 2008

War, War what's it good for?

You may have been taught free thinking idealist are the problem clear thinking realists have to deal with; harden your reserve, don't listen to left-wing loonies or any of the multitude of saying that have been common-place over the years. Granted your mentor may have been correct on some occasions but looking at the big picture, knowing what we know today, how irresponsible was it to ignore their plea's for sustainable lifestyles. Now I'm not trying to get anyone to drop what works for them, without a realistic argument, just to be open minded; suffer the little children if you will.
My experience has been that idealism leads to persecution, rejection and even isolation from the crowd but still I tap on the door of a mainstream conscience that arbores what lurks outside. Consider me the rat-bag that sensible people have been taught to hate, the dreamer, the eternal optimist everyone can see would be better of forgetting about any alternative ideas and just getting on with it. Give me a moment, focus for a second on the 'fact' that just occasionally an idea comes out of left field that makes sense to everybody. Now and then the group conscience needs a jolt and serious issues need to be faced by all ,because all are affected. How many people do you know who thought global warming was an issue ten years ago? Should the average person who lived in pre WW2 Germany been aware of the consequences of Nazi-fascism? Wouldn't it have been wise to listen to Noah when he said it was going to rain?
My topic may not be taken seriously by some and my ravings, chicken little like by others but never the less I say we are standing on a precipice that is not adequate, on a speeding train and no-one seems to be taking the bridge out signs seriously. It's like an artery has been severed and all any one can do is offer an aspirin and what I would prescribe can not be put in a sentence, it requires in depth analyses. Let's not start from the beginning, that would be to tedious even for me, so where then? An analogy maybe, a parody possibly, a contradiction, O.K.
Supposedly, we all see that war is bad and everybody wants peace. Yet if we had peace there would be no need for weapons of war, no need for F-111's, no bullets or bombs, no aircraft carriers, no Admirals, no grunts, no tanks, no Generals and none of the multitude of factories needed to supply the many associated necessities. Now here's the dilemma, who wants that? Not the people who's jobs would be lost if it was all shut down. Is this style of thinking to radical for you, then what about no greenhouse gasses, no chopping down of trees, no running around in gas guzzlers, no coal fire power stations etc,etc. Who wants that? Not the people whose jobs depend on it!
So where's the answer, do we run around prescribing aspirins or start sticking on band-aids? What happens if the people who don't want to loose their jobs get their way and we all have to pay the price, is that acceptable in your mind? Eventually common sense dictates we come to an answer that solves the problem and here is where the dreamers, visionaries and yes, left wing loonies come into their own. Sometimes the answer is hitting us in the face and we don't want to accept it. We baulk, we back step, we do anything but take the medicine and is that sane? Is that the realistic thinking granddad would have advised rather than listen to the free thinker? Sometimes it is best to bite the bullet and do what has to be done.
Now we are all familiar with the arguments over solar verses nuclear, I could give you my opinion and you could throw in yours but sooner or latter it would end as it always does, in a difference of opinion. Instead I would throw you a curve ball in saying that the answer lay in a different type of thinking where we look at the problems facing mankind as a whole and come up with a complete solution. What if we began to put as much money, time and effort into putting an end to war-mongering as we do into propping it up? What if the same amount of energy and resources were put into sustainable practices as was planet raping ones? What if a computer program could show us how to run a peaceful, prosperous and eternal planet? Would we all sign up or would we still have to deal with the detractors?
Basically the clear thinking people of this planet of ours have been dragging the rest of us towards the sudden stop at the end and if you value your children's future then it's time to put an end to the bullshit and stand up to those who would value their jobs over a possible future. When we look towards the Military Industrialists that have been responsible for so much death and destruction in the past, for answers to our very real problems of today, placing them in the position of saviors of mankind, then we are placing the Abomination of desolation where it should not be.


Steam is a useful commodity, try making a decent cup of coffee without it. Gray has a much more useful range of shades than black or white. Bi-polar attitudes, which observe only in the extremes of the full spectrum, can be disruptive or at best, limited in their overall view. Because we live in a world which incorporates all the above truths, it is understandable that conflicts arise and now, with Multi-Dimensional Awareness, we can begin to explore the infinite possibilities of using a plethora of extreme views to hopefully arrive at solutions which can benefit all. Take for example, a round table of religious or political extremists who have agreed to participate in discussions which, if successful, could improve everyone's lot. I can hear the cries of disbelief from here; not possible they say, it could never happen, no good will come of it, it'll end in disaster. Why?
In the past certain truths were held self-evident but with the passing of time became ridiculous, eg: the flat earth theory, if man were meant to fly he would have wings, it's as unreachable as the moon and women are the weaker sex. With this in mind, envisioning solutions to problems that previously were thought to be un-workable shouldn't be out of the question. A future generation of computer savvy kid's could possibly workout solutions to problems we couldn't even imagine and therein lies the answers to the table full of yesterday's hero's not being able to sort out their differences.
If there are no simple solutions, to say peace on Earth, then start working on complex solutions by compiling a matrix of everyone's perspectives at least then you would have a basis for everyone agreeing because their needs are being considered. A small computer can't work out problems to large for it's programing to handle but a super computer with unlimited memory has the capacity to solve any problem. Are not we entering an age where all the worlds problems could be solved, at least in cyber-space, and who wouldn't want that except those who make it their business to create problems?
Even troublemakers can be included in solutions if they are relegated to a group that has the right to their opinions but not to a monopoly on actions required. Fire has it's part to play in making the perfect cup of coffee but amazingly enough you don't have to get burnt by it to appreciate the brew and similarly water is essential but you don't want to drown in it.
For the first time in recorded history we have the tools at our disposal to form and run one planet, like our lives depend on it, for the people by the people and anyone that opposes that goal should not be considered worthy of calling themselves human beings, they are more appropriately human has been's. Educate yourself and you children to participate in real universal democracy not the half baked dough we are currently being fed, that makes a mockery of the original concept. Where everyone concerned has a say in the day to day running's of their world and not just the right to vote for Twiddle-de or Twiddle-dum once in a while.
An appropriately run Internet system could be our link to a fair and just future, without it our prospects are limited at least. If we can mix all the elements into an eclectic self governing tool for the benefit of all humanity, not just a privileged few, then war, starvation, poverty, discrimination, ignorance and the like can all become a things of the past along with the flat earth theory and the people who would promote it. All life as we know it has been threatened by fear, greed and ignorance; if we all pull together with love, generosity and intelligence we can win the war against war. Use the tool at your fingertips to have a say in your future, create a simulated paradise and it will become a reality but waste your time playing games, watching Big Brother, leaving it to others to look out for your interests and you may as well kiss your presently enjoyed freedoms goodbye.
Well, I feel as though if I've done my bit for the day; I might just mix some fire, water, a few other ingredients and kick back for awhile although I might just have ago at turning lead into gold, they said that was impossible too.

Friday, September 26, 2008


In it's original form religion had a very real value, it offered a way forward out of the chaos of survival at any cost. The first rule of survival was 'kill or die' and the first sign of being more than a self-centred animal was gaining the quality of self-sacrifice, for the benefit of the offspring or the tribe. This evolutionary milestone enabled Mankind to dominate over the other species and became the basis for the 'primitive' religious practices of ancestor worship and shamanism because it's only natural to want to connect with someone who died for you.
Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, Zoroastrians, Syro-Phoenicians, Egyptians, Mayans, Ancient Greeks, Celts, Africans and a plethora of other native groups, all participated in their own individual interpretations before today's Judeo/ Christian/ Islamic descendants of Abraham even started arguing over whose particular version of a monotheistic God is best.
We are all beholding to these religions for our connections to various cultural heritage groups but surely, in this day of mass communication and education, the more enlightened leaders could steer their hoards towards a new world view of an unbiased creator who cares for all the worlds inhabitants instead of just them; irregardless of their differences. This could be the next evolutionary step that allows mankind to continue to be the dominant species on this planet; along with a respect for the creation and if Jesus had any value other than as a human sacrifice, surely it was in his appraisal of the laws of his god into two commandments: Love your creator (by respecting the creation) and Love your neighbour (by respecting their right to exist).


Non-violent communication is an ambiguous term; that is to say it's meaning is up for discussion because not everybody agrees on what forms it can take. Some might say any kind of swearing is a act of violent communication, others would laugh at that kind of extreme view. Saying anything that offends a listener could be put in the same category, so who is ultimately the judge? Before we have a go at answering that, let's step back a fraction and look at the bigger picture.

In the past a person of lower class structure had a limited vocabulary and when lacking the appropriate word for the occasion, often would revert to a coarse familiarity. This was just as often used by the authorities as an opportunity for disciplinary action and the laws were put in place to support them. Now it is not so strict but still, a misplaced word at the inappropriate time can land it's utterer in hot water and I would suggest that the whole situation is a hang-over from a time when people were more aware of what side of the track they sprung from. Never the less the brunt of the burden was shouldered by the poorer end of society and the whip was cracked by the wealthier citizens.

Why I have described this is not to argue over who is right and who is wrong but to create a framework for discussion on what I see happening around me in today's Australia. If we want to participate in a modern way and close the gap that was our cultural heritage, then an understanding of this phenomenon is essential for both sides and all those caught up in the middle. It is not so difficult to see in hindsight, the way empowered advocates of polite society could abuse there power by inflicting a code of behavior on the unsuspecting, mostly uneducated masses, but if it was happening to you in the here and now; what form would it take and who would be your detractor?

To answer the questions raised in the preceding passages, let's focus on a microcosm of society at large;
the Internet community, a brave new world we are all thrust into courtesy of the most educated and wealthy participants, however they got there. If a unsuspecting surfer strays onto the web without a proper education of procedures and protocols, then it's not a stretch of the imagination to see what troubled waters lay ahead, just as we examined in our example of the coarse individual of the past. So without expanding this scenario out of proportion, we the people of cyberspace should be asking some basic questions about the governing body, of a somewhat obscure moral police force, lurking behind the screens of conscience we are all pouring over.

Should not there be some level of transparency in the electronic "democracy" we have bought into?
Do we have any right to know who carries the big stick that can rap anyone of us over the knuckles ?
Is there any avenue of appeal if you are unjustly dealt with?
Who decides what is just and how do they get themselves into that position?

Considering we have at our finger tips a tool aptly appropriate for informing us of the answers to those questions and any other concerns we may have, I suspect those that have the power don't want anyone to know who they are or how they got there. So even though I have probably raised more issues than addressed, the basic premise to the article that Non-Violent Communication can be used as a tool for bullies stands except I am more of the mind that No Communication can be used by even bigger bullies.

Toe-ing the line.

On pondering the big subjects, religion, poltics, best football codes and so on, the one that superceeds the rest for me is the nature of good and evil; personkind has mulled over that one since Adam stole Gods best buds from the fruiting tree of the knowledge. Eversince a mella felt the need to partake, peoples of all cultures, religions, political parties and even footy clubs have chewed till their gums have bled along with anyone who dared to disagree with their findings. When we masticate on these things we tend to set up judisharies, however unqualified the participants might be, police forces and armies to enforce our opinions; sometime to the extremes of exterminating critics, races or religions because we have deemed them evil.

Let's take the example of Hitlers mob wipping out six million Jews; where between good government, sencible economic policies, national defence and national insanity did they overstep the mark? After their defeat, at Nurenburg, some tried to justify their behaviour by saying they were only being good pest controlers but to consiencous people on mass, their behaviour was a manifestation of pure evil. Speaking as someone in their fifties, I have chewed on that particular piece of bitter fruit for far to long and after having watched every episode of Hogan's Heros twice, I can see both sides of the story; after all who could hate Sergent Shultz. Never the less my initial gut feeling that fasism was to blame never went away along with the bad taste in my mouth.

Recently we have had a dump of Eden's best, with the war in Iraq, neo-cons labeling radical Islamists as evil and Moslems countering with similar claims againt the Judao- Christian eliete, the cold war revisited as China and Nth Korea loom large, millions of Indonesians and Terrorists on our doorstep, genocide in Serbia and Africa, war in Lebonon not to mention Afganistan; I need a sedative, a laxative and a dose of saline for my belly ache. Luckilly it all came in one small package, a short story by Australia's Thomas Keneally 'By the line' or as it was called when first published in 1965 'The Fear'. It's highly recomended as the covernotes confirmed,'One of the most exciting events to arrive on the Australian literary front....what James Joyce did for Dublin, T.K will articulate for Sydney.' P.G the Bulletin. 'T.K's The Fear is clearly the most important Australian fiction to be issued this year.' Max Harris, Aust. Book Review and most amazingly 'The Fear is a novel of brilliant originality.T.K stands head and shoulders above the ruck of Aust. novelists a master of pace, realism, dialogue and a sinewy brand of lyricism. It's a book to exult over, one to press urgently on your friends.' Derick Whitlock, ABR.

If that wasn't enough to get me in then the linear notes were; 'the main character, called "The Comrade" was mesmeric and terrorfying as he dominates the lives of his wife, sons and the neighbours young son Daniel. His "tyranical zeal" has a devistating efect on the lives of the working class who live by the train lines in war time Sydney. T.K explores the effects of ridged adherence to Communist Dogma and the often fine line between inner-sence and guilt;' or as i was saying earlier, the line between good an evil. I wont comment much on the content of this story for it is suffice to say Mr Keneally takes a meat cleaver to "the comrade" or "Mr. Red" as he is somstimes calls him and leaves us beying for his blood by the end. I could see why you would want to recomend it to all your friends if you were a raving McArthyite, seeing reds under the bed, but as for the rest of us the story line was thin at best and the "realism" in a "sinuewy way" was only that if you didn't grow up "by the line" as I did surrounded by the "realism" of corrupt authorities and drunken returned soldiers.

What I had here, in this little book, was a panacea for my retchard condition; taken in a quick swallow with strong drink, I was transported backwards through time to where I was rewritting it in pre-war Nazi Germany just by changing "the comrade" into "the Jew" and setting it in lovely downtown Berlin. Hitler and his mates loved it; I got rave reviews, plenty of accolades and with an expediated "kristalnight" on its way, most importantly of all lots of money to buy a ticket to Australia where i could live out my life as a retired author. But enough of flights of fancy, in the real world today I would have to change his name to "Mohamed" and get it published by Random House so I better hurry or before you know it I will have to rewrite it again using the name "Ching Chong the CHinaman" and the way housing prices are going up around here that wouldn't leave me much time to live out my life as a retired author.

Seriously though, Thomas Keneally does deserve you attention; take for instance his larger, more widely known masterpiece, the award winning, Booker prize shortlisted "Chant of Jimmy Blacksmith." If you didn't get to read it when it first came out in the seventies, you got to see it on the BIG screen when the Australian Film Board handed over more money than it had ever done before to an ex-Victorian used car dealer come producer. Fred Schepsi's previously unknown tallent shines, in a Sullivan-styled way, as Jimmy and his black's camp mates hack their way through a perfectly lovely Aussi family over nothing more than an arguement over some suger and flour. The hunt is then on to "blow the brains out of those murderous black bastards" as Mr Keneally's particular brand of sinuewy lyricism so aptly put it.

If T.K's previously mentioned literary masterpiece had of recieved a similar treatment by Fred, then it could have been called "Fear the Commy" and this one sequelled as "Fear The Abo". They could have saved some of the people's money by using the same poster artwork for both, a black axe on white with red blood dripping. "Fear the terrorist is currently playing all around the country and if you are a contributing author, director, producer, actor or in anyway conected to this long running doc-u-drama then enjoy your wages, you deserve it. If on the other hand you are part of the paying public that are buying into it, applauding it, honoring it, feeding it, addicted to it like it was an episode of Neighbours or Big Brother, then keep up the good work and there will be plenty more where that came from.

My advice, for what it's worth, is don't feed the fear; it's dangerous. Think about it for one second, did the people who fed Hitler's fear of the Jew do themselves or anyone else any good. Sure the machine went on to bigger and better things but the people that fed it got shit on. The only thing to do with a fear machine is starve it to death. What if the Germans had of be led to love Jews, if they had of been shown how to live together, labour together, build together, sustain together, then truely they would be a fomidable empire second to none and not a bunch of nasties afraid their past will one day be revealed.

Now, keep that thought going for just awhile longer, what if T.K had of taught us to love instead of fearing, what if we the paying public had of honored a book and film that showed a Jimmy that went on to become a great man who led his people to prosperity. A step by step guide to crawling out of poverty, providing a prosperous lifestyle to educate his family and refused to stop untill all his people were upstanding citizens of a modern day Australia. Alas there I go again drifting off to a fantasy past, in a Joe Bejelky Peterson led Queensland a literary critic possitivly reviewing that style would have been laughed off the stage, just as sure as a positive reviewist of "Love the Jew" in Hitler's Germany would have been shot.

So to the cold hard reality of today: What if I authored a masive work of pure genius and plastered it all over the net on how to run a politicaly correct, unbiggoted, unbiased, fair country where everyone irreguardless of their roots had an equal say in the day to day runnings of this fine tourist destination and could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt where an internet voteing system could provide the worlds first real democracy in which polititions were relegated to the status of check-out chicks. Where we the people could decide weather or not we wanted to become a repubilic without having to ask the polies permisison. Where we could decide whether or not to sell coal to the Chinese or Uranium to India. Would my heartbreaking work of staggering brilliance be well reviewed by the critics or ridiculed and removed from the net pending sedition charges?

Sadly I conclude that it would not matter how well I mastered pace, realism, dialogue, (even if it was presented in a sinewy lyrical style) you wouldn't be encouraged to exult over it, I wouldn't go on to do for you what James Joyce did for Dublin and most obviously you wouldn't be urged to press it on your friends. If I persisted in claiming my briliance, I could find myself worse off than David Hicks or worse still, diagnosed as having delusions of grandure and give some special treatment in the Richmond Clinic Mental Health Scheme. Anyway that's about all for now, I might just take a dose of Mylanta, a couple of prozak, hit the sack and dream of the Future.

Comments on the Australian literati.

If you wanted to fit in with the Guardians of literature and wern't content with writing in a style of populous pulp, then there were a few guidelines that should have been posted on the ivory walls of the Literary tower; if they had of been decent enough to have made themselves clear on the subject.

#When writing any thing likely to be read by the unwashed masses, it is a good idea to start with a meaniless show of your abillity to knit words together in such a way as to demonstrate your skill in hyptnotizing chickens. A simple prologue to transport them from their current missery, into your cozy world of a downy underwing.

#You are now free to guide them through your first chapter, which should be structured in such a way as to resemble a tour of ward three in the Royal Assylum of Writers with nothing to say but many words to say it with. You will be well judged by your peers if you platform yourself above the unfolding tradgedy of normality; which you are so skillfully describing.

#As you are developing your main characters,who will be (no doubt) hard to understand, make out like you can read their twisted (and perverse would help) thoughts.

#Don't try to feed your readers a sencible diet of three course predictability,instead make them a junket of tit-bits liberaly doused with the liqueur of discriptive prose. Serve up an intoxicating concoction studded with chocolate for the mind, full of little treats in the form of words they will assosiate with a smell or an emotion. Soon you will have them lining up for more, but take heed; if you try to educate them with facts about their unfortunate condition, they will run a mile.

#Don't make the mistake of thinking you can over-do the adjectival content of your efforts. One or two hundred words on the discripton of a flower we have all seen, is almost a page of plot or storyline you won't have to waste your time on. Multiply that phenomenon by a couple of hundred times and you have got a salient book.

#Finally, make you women beyond criticism, your men beyond redemption and your heros' beyond belief. If there is someone to hate in your work, make sure they are your editors enemies and if there is some one to admire, your publishers friends. Leave everyone with the sence that your next work may very well be worthy and for Gods sake don't stray to far from this pattern; Lest we forget, that which keeps us above the mire.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

DE-RACY, taking the mock out of democracy.

The strange thing about the way we have come to think of democracy is that originally it was meant to be a system were all those involved had a vote in the day today decision making process of their nation. If a road was to be built or a war participated in then the concerned citizens gathered together and voted on what the united position would be, but somehow it has deteriorated into once every three or four years you get to vote for someone who makes those decisions for you. While it is not inconceivable that the definition needed to change to accommodate large uneducated populations, in this day and age with Democracy being forced upon people whether they want it or not maybe it's time we had a fresh look at what it is we are all agreeing to.

Politicians are a strange breed, they move forwards out of the ranks of daily life to take positions as paid employees of the people that voted for them, as well as those who didn't, and join in with all the others who are in the same boat to make decisions and laws for the people who liked them enough to agree to pay their wages and honor their elevated positions. So they inherit this from the people who have given up the right to participate because they are busy making the money that pays for the 'luxury' of having this type of arrangement, all well and good if that's what you want but what if that not what you want or they are making decisions that you don't agree with? You get a chance to vote for someone else in two or three years time who might or might not make decisions that you agree with and so it goes.

Let's take a closer look at this and how it works with an issue such as weather or not we want to become a republic, irregardless of what your personal opinion is. Before the Howard years in Australia there was much discussion on the subject and it was generally considered we would soon become one, even the Queen and Prince Charles thought it was an inevitability and not a bad thing. The newest member of the Royal Order of the Garter, Sir John was a just a monarchist in those days and even though nobody had voted for him to lead our great nation with that in mind, all thoughts of going in any direction other than Sir John,s were put and end to with an expensive talk fest and a rigged referendum. Now I am sure that if the people who paid the Howard Government for the next ten years had of got their way instead of yielding to Sir John's then we would have been waving an Aussie flag at the just past Olympics that represented Australia as a truly independent country, instead of looking like we are still an outpost of the British Empire.

What about the G.S.T, again irregardless of what you think of it, most people were anti-G.S.T when John Howodd assured us that there would be no G.S.T if he became Prime Minister. Never the less the first thing he did when he got into power was to give us the very tax system he assured us he wouldn't. What about the war in Iraq, again most people were against it but did that matter? No, we signed up anyway,not because we authorised anyone to make that decision for us, just because John and George thought it was a good idea at the time. Are you getting the gist of what I'm talking about here? It's not weather you are for or against any of these ideas it's the fact that our employees made those decisions for us while pretending to be doing what they were elected for, which was to be your voice on the matters.

Now there is a simple way around this dilemma for anyone who is interested, if you wanted to become a republic today with the tools for real democracy in our homes and at our finger tips, then all it would take is fifty one percent of the voting population to sign up on the Internet and it would begin to become a reality without having to ask your employees permission.If you didn,t want to buy a bunch of America's left over war planes and would prefer to spend all that money on your children's education, then all you have to do is collectively say so. Why isn't the program up and running that would allow this type of Democracy, maybe it's because your employees don't want you to have it.


Fishing for self aggrandizement is not an uncommon pastime; regularly I see people who must have spent at least fifty thousand dollars on there equipment, venture out to sea, catch a hand full of fish at best, then sit back and revel in the glory of what good fishermen they are. Now it's probably none of my business but let's take it apart for a change and realistically analyse the mentality.
Granted some people may have worked so hard in their life they feel justified in spending all that money, time and effort to molest sea creatures so let's leave them alone and focus on the variety who just inherited their wealth or maybe sold the family home in Sydney or Melbourne before high tailing it the Gold Coast. Here they are purchasing a fibreglass run about with an extremely overpowered Two-Stroke motor and they don't give two shits about all the toxic materials that went into the making of their purchase or the fact that if they actually want to use this thing, rather than park it at the back of their recently purchased canal front home, they are going to have to burn a lot of carbon. The oil that goes into the petrol of this planet f---ing machine spews directly into the very waters they have come here to enjoy and floats as a slick onto the sands that they will have to pump for their bait if they wish to be admired as true blue outdoors men. Although they will probably buy their bait from the commercial importers because all the locally available bait died ages ago from over zealous pumper's and the polluting oil from their engines.
After another stop at a retail outlet to buy some more toxic materials in the form of rods and reels, they get to donate stainless steel, lead and nylon to the already well stocked local supply laying at the bottom of our harbour before realizing there's no fish in the immediate vicinity. This however can be overcome with some long range tanks and a state of the art fish finder to get them to the last quarter of the worlds remaining stocks and before long they are landing the elusive creature they have gone to such extremes to haul from it watery home. Never the less they really should kiss it and let it go because if they take it all the way home without freezing it and finally cook and eat it, they will be lucky not to get sick from all the dioxins and mercury it probably contains.
If they overcome all the obstacles, bear all the expense, ignore all common sense and persist in becoming proficient at what they are doing, inevitably they could end up landing the big one. Sitting at home in their hunters den with the trophy fish mounted on a piece of wood or a framed picture of them holding up the savage beast next to the bigger new boat they had to buy, appropriately named Sally II, it will all seem worth the effort. They will be hooked for life, ready at a moments notice to sell you the line that Sally was the best investment they ever made or they could just do us all a favour and sink her.

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

NO GARY NO: Not a patch on legistation

I just don't get it, Nicotine patches to fight Nicotine addiction and targeting victims of the unscrupulous pushers with a concentrated form of the very drug that binds them to the state endorsed, tax paying, lobbyist empowered, capitalistically embedded merchants of death and disease. This is somewhat akin to asking inmates of Auschwitz to pay for cyanide laced band-aids or gum in the vain hope it will help rid them of the fascist state that imprisoned them in the first place. While I have no doubt some people have have success with the final solution, it occurs to me if you wanted to solve the overall problem you would outlaw the offending substance and those who were unscrupulous enough to participate its sale. As with everything else in this world of double standards the very same people who are adamant about Cannabis and it's pushers being outlawed and dealt with harshly by the law, don't seem to be similarly concerned when it comes to the Nicotine and Alcohol pushers even though they have been responsible for the biggest genocidal attack on humanity bar none. While we have outlets for the sale and distribution of the drugs that fill our hospitals with the bulk of their patients, openly plying their immoral trade on every street corner in the western world, I for one refuse to take them seriously when it comes to these half baked campaigns for me to spend the remainder of my meager pittance on the deadly chewing gum they say will fix me.
How hard could it be to legislate these corporate giants out of existence? Every time I have spoken about this to a fellow victim, of this insidious plot, I've had a positive response but it seems to me the only one's who argue for the rights of companies to continue their reign of terror are the non-smoking authorities who demand their right to continue to collect taxes; how evil is that? It's not as though the monies they make are clear profit, they have to pass it over to the 'health professionals' who are looking after the ones who were made ill by the initial sale. So in the end it seems to be about the rights of a small group of people who value their incomes over the health of the bulk of the people and they are the ones who are trying to ram poisonous chewing gum down your throat.
When do we get to the point were we insist our well paid public servant behave in a responsible manor and demand they put an end to this insanity once and for all? It would be in every bodies best interests if they just bit the bullet and put the plans on the table for the end to the era of state approved drug pushing; anything else is just inane posturing. Anyhow that's about all I have to say on the subject, I just might just kick back with a drink and a smoke and wait to see how long the joke can continue.

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

Our energy fields

Check this out, one sucks and one blows. The theory is; string these together and you have a ribbon of circulating counter-rotating energy. Not bad hey? Considering it was taken with a standard camera, no tricks! If you want to have a go you would have to know how to assemble stellated do-decahedron's and icosahedron's with circles and straight lines.
I triple double ya.

Waynes Main Stream

For interesting comments, alternative views, good Aussie indie and amazing images; Visit