Labor has a plan to compell all internet service providers to offer 'family firendly' filters. Is this necessary and when do they plan to impliment it? There is already a voluntary program that allows ISP's to be certified as family friendly if they offer such a service. Compelling all ISP's to do so would slow down our connections and add little in the way of protection - parents can already choose a suitable ISP. They also plan to add terrorist websites to the list, though it is unclear why a would-be terrorist would opt in to the filtering scheme.

http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20070921-The-slippery-slope-towards-internet-censorship-continues.html

freediver wrote on Dec 18^th, 2007 at 9:58am:

Labor has a plan to compell all internet service providers to offer 'family firendly' filters. Is this necessary and when do they plan to impliment it? There is already a voluntary program that allows ISP's to be certified as family friendly if they offer such a service. Compelling all ISP's to do so would slow down our connections and add little in the way of protection - parents can already choose a suitable ISP. They also plan to add terrorist websites to the list, though it is unclear why a would-be terrorist would opt in to the filtering scheme. http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20070921-The-slippery-slope-towards-internet-censorship-continues.html

The dictatorship returns.  Hawke and Cheating demanded business and individuals complied with restrictive legislation which winds up punishing ordinary Australians while making the rich richer.  This would do the same.  Their policies are always tilted towards the wealthy while treating the average Aussie with disdain.

Euthanasia campaigner scents censorship

http://news.smh.com.au/euthanasia-campaigner-scents-censorship/20071218-1hv5.html

Voluntary euthanasia campaigner Philip Nitschke says he is prepared for more government censorship during a workshop in Canberra on Wednesday.

Dr Nitschke has been contacted by the ACT Department of Fair Trading about his plans for the Exit International workshop.

Dr Nitschke says he has been warned against playing an unclassified video entitled The Single Shot.

The attorney-general's department wrote to Exit International in October stating the screening of an unclassified film in a public place would breach the Classification Act.

The letter also warned Dr Nitschke of the penalties associated with the sale of a banned book - a $26,000 fine and a two-year jail term.

"The former federal government (often with the support of the Labor Party) have done all they can to remove elderly and terminally ill Australians' right to know about their end-of-life choices," Dr Nitschke said.

"This penchant for the selective censorship of the content of our private workshops not only tramples on our elderly members' right to free speech but is forcing our activities underground into people's garages and lounge rooms."

---

Tougher Internet harassment laws needed, mom of 13-year-old who killed self tells task force

http://news.smh.com.au/tougher-internet-harassment-laws-needed-mom-of-13yearold-who-killed-self-tells-task-force/20071219-1hyi.html

The mother of a teenage girl who committed suicide after being taunted online urged a Missouri task force on Internet harassment Tuesday to recommend criminalizing such behavior.

Gov. Matt Blunt formed the task force in response to the death of Tina Meier's 13-year-old daughter, Megan, who killed herself last year after being teased on her MySpace page by a fictional teenage boy named "Josh." A neighborhood mother and two girls played a role in creating the hoax because they wanted to keep tabs on Megan's gossip.

"I can start MySpace (accounts) on every single one of you, and spread rumors about every single one of you, and what's going to happen to me? Nothing," Tina Meier told the task force at its first meeting here. "People need to realize that this is 100 percent not OK, that you're going to go to jail."

A local prosecutor decided Lori Drew, her daughter and a teenage employee did not violate state laws against stalking, harassment or child endangerment. Drew's attorney Jim Briscoe has said the children designed the account and sent the messages to Megan. Drew was not aware of the hurtful messages sent prior to Megan's suicide, he said. A few other Internet users joined in with cruel taunts before her death.

And it is not just the internet where the tyranny returns.  Dorke and Cheating ran the country like dictators born to rule (Keating even boasted he was born to rule) and now Kevvy fronts up to the throne with his new plans to control the minds of the election fodder with propaganda designed by His Rudness.

Some (those without amnesia) will recall I said that Kevvy will reframe the government's control until he dictates everything that happens while the mushrooms just lay back in ignorant bliss and have their lives irrevocably ruined for them.  He did it before in Queensland and wrecked that state's economy.

It has started my guileless fiends . . . .


Quote:

Rudd takes control to new highs SOME of Australia's major institutions will have their media releases vetted by the Rudd Government to make sure they reflect Labor's "key messages". A directive was issued this week by the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research to about a dozen statutory agencies. Recipients include the CSIRO, the Australian Institute of Marine Science, the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, the Australian Research Council, the Co-operative Research Centres and Invest Australia. Even the Questacon science museum in Canberra was sent the directive. It says the Prime Minister's office has instructed that "all strategic media releases which relate to the Government's key messages" must be forwarded to the department which will then submit them to the office of the minister, Kim Carr. If necessary, Senator Carr would send the release to the Prime Minister's office. The department would contact the agency "regarding required changes". The directive says releases "of a more pedestrian nature" need not be vetted but anything to do with climate change, industrial relations policy, education and science reform, tax policy, national security and health must be submitted. It has caused concerns within the statutory authorities which were never subject to such conditions under the Howard government. If you want to be told how to think then vote for Liebor you plebs

And you were of the belief that the 'thought police' were a creation of fictional whimsy.

The Liebor Party are full on into porkies since bulltesticling the Australian people.  Take a look at this load of cobblers.



Quote:

The Prime Minister's Department will have the power to clear and approve media releases issued by the CSIRO. ABC Radio today reported that the Secretary of the Department of Innovation, Industry Science and Research, Mark Paterson, had issued a directive to the CSIRO that all future media releases be cleared through the office of the Prime Minister. The move is thought to be in response to other cases of conflicting messages sent by both the Government and the CSIRO in times past, and the want of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to ensure the research body is 'on message' for the new Government's environmental and research priorities. Mr Paterson said that the CSIRO and other agencies had requested guidelines for media dealings under the new Government, with the response a more 'managed' media unit. "It was something that we were asked for from those agencies so that they were certain as to how to deal with media releases," Mr Paterson told the ABC. Mr Paterson said that the clearing of media releases via the PM's office was "not unusual", and that the new guidelines would ensure the CSIRO was in-step with the new Labor Government. "The Government wanted to ensure a degree of consistency in message on key messages and therefore wanted to clear key messages through the Prime Minister's office," he said. Mr Paterson rejected the argument that statutory bodies such as the CSIRO were, or should be, independent of the Government, adding that he did not support the idea they all worked outside of the Government's priorities. "This is not about control of message, its about consistency. We were being asked be these agencies for guidance, and we've provided that guidance... its written in reasonably relaxed language." Mr Paterson said. The Government said that it would not "vet" the ideas or language contained within the media or press briefings, but that it wanted to continue its "consistency" in public communication. The Prime Minister was during his time as Opposition Leader criticized for an alleged 'over-management' of the media and a need to control political communication. Who's a hypocrite Kevvy?

Let's take a look at those lies.

"Mr Paterson said that the CSIRO and other agencies had requested guidelines"  -  Not according to the earlier reports which stated that it had "caused concerns within the statutory authorities which were never subject to such conditions under the Howard government".

"Mr Paterson said that the clearing of media releases via the PM's office was 'not unusual' "  -  Once again it has already been reported that the clearing of media releases "were never subject to such conditions under the Howard government".

"Mr Paterson rejected the argument that statutory bodies such as the CSIRO were, or should be, independent of the Government" - Perhaps Mr Paterson should familiarise himself with the meaning of 'statutory authority'.  While they still report to government each acts according to its own specific legislation.

"The Government said that it would not "vet" the ideas or language contained within the media or press briefings, but that it wanted to continue its "consistency" in public communication"  -  This is an outright contradiction within the same report by this bulltesticularating artist.  If they had no intention of 'vetting' the media release, they would have no need to address any inconsistencies.

The Liebor Party rules once more.  Just who do these dictators think they are?  Kevvy ramps up total control and locks down the government to a level not seen before in an allegedly democratic country.

d/t - rudd has had an undercurrent to me as being a micromanager.
One who controls everything very closely.

After a while, the pressure will tell.
But by then, the federals will have LOTS of power, and libs will be back :-)

Look at the big picture

Sprintcyclist wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2007 at 11:07pm:

d/t - rudd has had an undercurrent to me as being a micromanager. One who controls everything very closely. After a while, the pressure will tell. But by then, the federals will have LOTS of power, and libs will be back :-) Look at the big picture

Sprint, as a manipulator and controller, which is what Little Kevvy is, things can go horribly wrong, horribly quickly.  Witness his lies about the ANZAC service in Vietnam, his lies about his reasons for meeting with Brian Burke, his lies about the actual cause of his father's death in hospital and his lies about being instantly evicted from their home after his father's death.

He attempts to control truth by hiding it and feeding lies to the mushrooms.  Who for some odd reason believed the bulltesticulating in November.

Quote:

Sprint, as a manipulator and controller, which is what Little Kevvy is, things can go horribly wrong, horribly quickly.  Witness his lies about the ANZAC service in Vietnam, his lies about his reasons for meeting with Brian Burke, his lies about the actual cause of his father's death in hospital and his lies about being instantly evicted from their home after his father's death. He attempts to control truth by hiding it and feeding lies to the mushrooms.  Who for some odd reason believed the bulltesticulating in November.

Since when have ANY politicians NOT lied during a campaign.? Your kidding me right. You put yourself around here like some kind of sage and yet you are just plain stupid!!

You are  niave  I can tell you. You got him for 3 yrs ,s uck it up.!!!

boxingkangaroo wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2007 at 8:49am:

Quote: Sprint, as a manipulator and controller, which is what Little Kevvy is, things can go horribly wrong, horribly quickly.  Witness his lies about the ANZAC service in Vietnam, his lies about his reasons for meeting with Brian Burke, his lies about the actual cause of his father's death in hospital and his lies about being instantly evicted from their home after his father's death. He attempts to control truth by hiding it and feeding lies to the mushrooms.  Who for some odd reason believed the bulltesticulating in November. Since when have ANY politicians NOT lied during a campaign.? Your kidding me right. You put yourself around here like some kind of sage and yet you are just plain stupid!! You are  niave  I can tell you. You got him for 3 yrs ,s uck it up.!!!

I put myself around here like Parsley, Sage, Rosemary and Thyme mate.  Are you going to Scarborough Fair?

And I agree with you that Little Kevvy lies his bonce off.  But I find it unusual is all.  Most pollies make an effort to be honest whereas Kevvy doesn't appear to even try to pretend he's honest.  He even lies about lying.


Quote:

Liz Hayes: 'So you would never lie?’ Little Kevvy Liar: 'I would never knowingly lie’ Liz Hayes: 'You throw in ‘knowingly’ because you can accidentally lie?' Little Kevvy Liar: ’I’m just saying that’s the way in which I see it’.

This is DT at his very best, which makes his worst worth beheading.............


Quote:

Sprint, as a manipulator and controller, which is what Little Kevvy is, things can go horribly wrong, horribly quickly.  Witness his lies about the ANZAC service in Vietnam,

What lies were told by Rudd?  Specify with valid source, and without speculation.


Quote:

..his lies about his reasons for meeting with Brian Burke,

What lies were told by Rudd? Specify with vaild source, and without speculation.


Quote:

..his lies about the actual cause of his father's death in hospital

What lies were told by Rudd? Specify with vaild source, and without speculation.


Quote:

..and his lies about being instantly evicted from their home after his father's death.

What lies were told by Rudd? Specify with vaild source, and without speculation.

When answering, DT, I want you to attend to your allegation that Rudd LIED, ie. deliberately told an untruth.  And I want you to provide the evidence which establishes these lies.

When you do so, bear in mind that I live on the Sunshine Coast, and have read the local News quoting from his own family and others about his father's death, and his family's forced removal from their share-farm.

And in any event...............you and your Lieberal mates tried all this garbage on during the campaign, and the electorate rejected it.

Your are pissing into the wind for at least six years, and if you keep that tired old rubbish up, I will not be reading you.  I am reminded of Don Quixote, and you might be Pancho.

Aussie wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2007 at 9:33pm:

This is DT at his very best, which makes his worst worth beheading............. Quote: Sprint, as a manipulator and controller, which is what Little Kevvy is, things can go horribly wrong, horribly quickly.  Witness his lies about the ANZAC service in Vietnam, What lies were told by Rudd?  Specify with valid source, and without speculation. [quote]..his lies about his reasons for meeting with Brian Burke,

What lies were told by Rudd? Specify with vaild source, and without speculation.


Quote:

..his lies about the actual cause of his father's death in hospital

What lies were told by Rudd? Specify with vaild source, and without speculation.


Quote:

..and his lies about being instantly evicted from their home after his father's death.

What lies were told by Rudd? Specify with vaild source, and without speculation.

When answering, DT, I want you to attend to your allegation that Rudd LIED, ie. deliberately told an untruth.  And I want you to provide the evidence which establishes these lies.

When you do so, bear in mind that I live on the Sunshine Coast, and have read the local News quoting from his own family and others about his father's death, and his family's forced removal from their share-farm.

And in any event...............you and your Lieberal mates tried all this garbage on during the campaign, and the electorate rejected it.

Your are pissing into the wind for at least six years, and if you keep that tired old rubbish up, I will not be reading you.  I am reminded of Don Quixote, and you might be Pancho.


[/quote]

You know as well as I do that Little Kevvy owned up to his lies about Vietnam, that he pretended he was bumping into Burke by accident yet was actually the guest of honour at one of Burke's 'soirees', that he reckons the doctors were negligible in the hospital where his old man died when the truth is his old man died of the injuries he received when he totalled his car while driving home drunk and he ruthlessly lied when he said his family was booted out of their share farmer home when the truth was they were given as much time as they needed but left straight away of their own accord.

He lies mate, and you know it.  For some reason you like to pretend he is honest.  You're fooling no one though.  Not even you.  Little Kevvy Liar is the worst liar we have seen in opposition or government since the last Liebor PM - Paul Cheating.

Quote:

You know as well as I do that Little Kevvy owned up to his lies about Vietnam, that he pretended he was bumping into Burke by accident yet was actually the guest of honour at one of Burke's 'soirees', that he reckons the doctors were negligible in the hospital where his old man died when the truth is his old man died of the injuries he received when he totalled his car while driving home drunk and he ruthlessly lied when he said his family was booted out of their share farmer home when the truth was they were given as much time as they needed but left straight away of their own accord. He lies mate, and you know it.  For some reason you like to pretend he is honest.  You're fooling

Ferk me.  How's your insurance freediver?  

DT, he never owned up to any lies about Vietnam.  You probably meant Anzac.  And even there, the very best you have is Rudd confessing that some of his staffers stuffed up without his knowledge.  Feel free to PROVE me wrong.

DT, you say he 'pretended bumping into Burke.'  Where is your evidence of 'pretence?'  Feel free to PROVE me wrong.

This one, DT is right out of left field.  Even being a local, I have never heard of it...........


Quote:

he reckons the doctors were negligible in the hospital where his old man died when the truth is his old man died of the injuries he received when he totalled his car while driving home drunk

Nasty that, DT.  Produce the evidence.

And, to round it off......this DT is a beauty....


Quote:

and he ruthlessly lied when he said his family was booted out of their share farmer home when the truth was they were given as much time as they needed but left straight away of their own accord.

Mate, I'd just love to have you in the Witness Box quizzing you about "ruthless," "lying" etc.....when the local evidence will prove the K. Rudd version of the story totally correct.

Aussie wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2007 at 10:15pm:

Quote: You know as well as I do that Little Kevvy owned up to his lies about Vietnam, that he pretended he was bumping into Burke by accident yet was actually the guest of honour at one of Burke's 'soirees', that he reckons the doctors were negligible in the hospital where his old man died when the truth is his old man died of the injuries he received when he totalled his car while driving home drunk and he ruthlessly lied when he said his family was booted out of their share farmer home when the truth was they were given as much time as they needed but left straight away of their own accord. He lies mate, and you know it.  For some reason you like to pretend he is honest.  You're fooling Ferk me.  How's your insurance freediver?   DT, he never owned up to any lies about Vietnam.  You probably meant Anzac.  And even there, the very best you have is Rudd confessing that some of his staffers stuffed up without his knowledge.  Feel free to PROVE me wrong. DT, you say he 'pretended bumping into Burke.'  Where is your evidence of 'pretence?'  Feel free to PROVE me wrong. This one, DT is right out of left field.  Even being a local, I have never heard of it........... [quote]he reckons the doctors were negligible in the hospital where his old man died when the truth is his old man died of the injuries he received when he totalled his car while driving home drunk

Nasty that, DT.  Produce the evidence.

And, to round it off......this DT is a beauty....


Quote:

and he ruthlessly lied when he said his family was booted out of their share farmer home when the truth was they were given as much time as they needed but left straight away of their own accord.

Mate, I'd just love to have you in the Witness Box quizzing you about "ruthless," "lying" etc.....when the local evidence will prove the K. Rudd version of the story totally correct.[/quote]


Good God man, where have you been?  In a coma?


Quote:

For instance, the official coronial record makes it clear that Bert Rudd was involved in a single car accident in late December, 1968, after spending an afternoon playing bowls and drinking beers and whiskies and a dinner at which he had more beers before he attempted to drive the 120km home. About 3am his car swerved to the wrong side of the road and hit a power pole. He suffered massive internal injuries and despite a number of major operations over a seven-week period, died on February 12, 1969, in the Royal Brisbane Hospital. Kevin Rudd's memory, however, is that "there were great concerns about the calibre of the surgeons who were operating on him toward the end of his period in hospital". Indeed, he told Channel 9's Ellen Fanning he'd like to know exactly what their skills were and what happened to them professionally "because I've heard reports that some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice. I'd like to know the truth of that one day but I've not had the time to check it out." It's a pity he did not check because the coroner's report contains no suggestion of medical malpractice. Little Kevvy Liar has been telling porkies for yonks

I rest my case, DT.......................you rely on a newspaper article with contains no referenced source about the death of Rudd Snr.

Well, shame Rudd Jnr cannot sue you about defaming his father, as the dead are fair game under our Laws, if I recall.

However, it is far more noteworthy that you have no issue with my other challenges.

Aussie wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2007 at 10:34pm:

I rest my case, DT.......................you rely on a newspaper article with contains no referenced source about the death of Rudd Snr. Well, shame Rudd Jnr cannot sue you about defaming his father, as the dead are fair game under our Laws, if I recall. However, it is far more noteworthy that you have no issue with my other challenges.

Perhaps you didn't read it.  It actually does reference the official coronial record obtained by Channel Nine.  May I suggest reading it for the first time while wearing specs?


I know you know he lies his head off.  Tell me Aussie - do you want me to keep proving it?  I'm happy to you know.  I enjoy watching you squirm.

Denial is not a river n Egypt Aussie- All of DT's points have been raised in newspapers across the country and Kevvy has brushed them  off as staffers mistakes or his 'interpretation' of events.

Seems the buck doesn't actually stop with Kevvy after all

deepthought wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2007 at 10:37pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 23rd, 2007 at 10:34pm: I rest my case, DT.......................you rely on a newspaper article with contains no referenced source about the death of Rudd Snr. Well, shame Rudd Jnr cannot sue you about defaming his father, as the dead are fair game under our Laws, if I recall. However, it is far more noteworthy that you have no issue with my other challenges. Perhaps you didn't read it.  It actually does reference the official coronial record obtained by Channel Nine.  May I suggest reading it for the first time while wearing specs? I know you know he lies his head off.  Tell me Aussie - do you want me to keep proving it?  I'm happy to you know.  I enjoy watching you squirm.

Produce the 'Official Record,' not Nine's version of it.

And also, address the other challenges I have made.

Aussie wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2007 at 10:43pm:

deepthought wrote on Dec 23rd, 2007 at 10:37pm: Aussie wrote on Dec 23rd, 2007 at 10:34pm: I rest my case, DT.......................you rely on a newspaper article with contains no referenced source about the death of Rudd Snr. Well, shame Rudd Jnr cannot sue you about defaming his father, as the dead are fair game under our Laws, if I recall. However, it is far more noteworthy that you have no issue with my other challenges. Perhaps you didn't read it.  It actually does reference the official coronial record obtained by Channel Nine.  May I suggest reading it for the first time while wearing specs? I know you know he lies his head off.  Tell me Aussie - do you want me to keep proving it?  I'm happy to you know.  I enjoy watching you squirm. Produce the 'Official Record,' not Nine's version of it. And also, address the other challenges I have made.

Then you will apologise as you concede Little Kevvy lies?   ;D

IQSRLOW wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2007 at 10:41pm:

Denial is not a river n Egypt Aussie- All of DT's points have been raised in newspapers across the country and Kevvy has brushed them  off as staffers mistakes or his 'interpretation' of events. Seems the buck doesn't actually stop with Kevvy after all

As usual Aussie is right.

As usual Aussie is right.

as usual an endorsement from you = a win for his opposition

wrote on Dec 24^th, 2007 at 8:52am:

IQSRLOW wrote on Dec 23rd, 2007 at 10:41pm: Denial is not a river n Egypt Aussie- All of DT's points have been raised in newspapers across the country and Kevvy has brushed them  off as staffers mistakes or his 'interpretation' of events. Seems the buck doesn't actually stop with Kevvy after all As usual Aussie is right.

Really?  So Kevvy was surprised to discover he had air tickets to Vietnam and his staff arranged the whole thing without his knowledge?  He really did accidentally attend a function which Burke was at and instead of taking off decided instead it would be fun to enthrall everyone there with a speech?  His father really did conk out after neglect by hospital staff?  And his family really did get tossed off the property virtually the day after they buried his father and they had nowhere to go?

Wow, how could everyone, including Kevvy (who admitted his staff really did know), and including others who were at Burke's function by invitation to see Little Kevvy, and including the coroner who put the cause of death as injuries received after a car crash, and the Lows who said it was not true Kevvy's family had to move at once as the house sat empty for quite some time after they bolted . . . . .   how could they all be so wrong?  While Aussie alone is right?

Even Kevvy himself contradicts Aussie!  Is Little Kevvy wrong oceans?

No doubt Aussie will be right when he says this is bullstesticles too oceans.  But he'll still be wrong because he chooses to be, because he knows as well as I do that Kevvy lies.

But it seems Kevvy has been sprung openly lying here.  The whole world watches in amazement as Kevvy bulltesticulates the Iraqis.  But Kevvy doesn't care - he reckons he never knowingly lies!  It's an accidental porky.




Quote:

Rudd accused of being misleading on Iraq withdrawal Queensland federal Liberal MP Peter Lindsay has labelled the Prime Minister's decision to bring troops home from Iraq by June as just smoke and mirrors. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has told the Overwatch Battle Group in Iraq they will be home by the middle of the year and will not be replaced. Mr Lindsay, the former parliamentary secretary for defence, says training teams and a security detachment will remain (in) Baghdad, which is still the most dangerous place in the Iraq. "I'm disappointed because our troops do such a wonderful job with the Overwatch Battle Group, where they're helping Iraqis re-establish their lives," he said. "That's what we Australians do we help others." Mr Rudd is expected to arrive back in Canberra this morning, after surprise visits at the weekend to Iraq and Afghanistan. He held talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, pledging to keep troops in the war-torn country for the long haul. Why wouild the Afghani President believe you Kevvy?

So those dudes won't be replaced but some other dudes will?  Isn't that a bit of a sly way to tell a porky Kevvy?  Why not tell the truth and say you will just shuffle blokes about a bit while doing sweet crappity phuqsmack all?  And why don't you like Iraqis but give the impression you like Afghanis?  Why is it you feel disinclined to help out Iraqis while attempting to seduce the Afghani chappy?  Look like a better sort?

deepthought wrote on Dec 24^th, 2007 at 2:07pm:

wrote on Dec 24th, 2007 at 8:52am: IQSRLOW wrote on Dec 23rd, 2007 at 10:41pm: Denial is not a river n Egypt Aussie- All of DT's points have been raised in newspapers across the country and Kevvy has brushed them  off as staffers mistakes or his 'interpretation' of events. Seems the buck doesn't actually stop with Kevvy after all As usual Aussie is right. Really?  So Kevvy was surprised to discover he had air tickets to Vietnam and his staff arranged the whole thing without his knowledge?  He really did accidentally attend a function which Burke was at and instead of taking off decided instead it would be fun to enthrall everyone there with a speech?  His father really did conk out after neglect by hospital staff?  And his family really did get tossed off the property virtually the day after they buried his father and they had nowhere to go? Wow, how could everyone, including Kevvy (who admitted his staff really did know), and including others who were at Burke's function by invitation to see Little Kevvy, and including the coroner who put the cause of death as injuries received after a car crash, and the Lows who said it was not true Kevvy's family had to move at once as the house sat empty for quite some time after they bolted . . . . .   how could they all be so wrong?  While Aussie alone is right? Even Kevvy himself contradicts Aussie!  Is Little Kevvy wrong oceans?

I dont take anything you have to say seriously Little  Deepy..your hysterical, biased and like FD said, a monotonous  drama queen.
I think you got caught in a tropical shower just outside Shady Pines ,your hat has shrunk and now you have  brain cramp.


A reasoned unbiased arguement free from the melodramtic and just plain 'made up ' stuff would see you having rational debates DT

IQSRLOW wrote on Dec 24^th, 2007 at 10:19am:

As usual Aussie is right. as usual an endorsement from you = a win for his opposition

an endorsement from you = a total trainwreck  for all involved. ;D

wrote on Dec 24^th, 2007 at 5:23pm:

I dont take anything you have to say seriously Little  Deepy..your hysterical, biased and like FD said, a monotonous  drama queen. I think you got caught in a tropical shower just outside Shady Pines ,your hat has shrunk and now you have  brain cramp. A reasoned unbiased arguement free from the melodramtic and just plain 'made up ' stuff would see you having rational debates DT

Pssssst oceans, I'm a forum contributor - not a topic.  That freediver is heavily into personal insult as a form of debate is no reason to join in.

So back to the topic.  Aussie still right even though Kevvy himself has admitted he lied?

I think you will find you will be on your own in this as Aussie's usual modus operandi is to plop in, deny everything in the face of awesome evidence to the contrary, keep shifting the goal posts all over the field then clear off when he sees he has nowhere else to go.

I'm not a 'topic' either DT.


Quote:

Really?  So Kevvy was surprised to discover he had air tickets to Vietnam and his staff arranged the whole thing without his knowledge?

Probably.  Produce the evidence he wasn't.  Do that and I'll agree Rudd lied on that occasion.


Quote:

He really did accidentally attend a function which Burke was at and instead of taking off decided instead it would be fun to enthrall everyone there with a speech?

Sure, he went to a function, as guest speaker.  Some bugger wit was there.  Was he supposed to walk  out?  If that is how things are supposed to work, I'd better leave this place.


Quote:

His father really did conk out after neglect by hospital staff?

If you say so, DT.  


Quote:

And his family really did get tossed off the property virtually the day after they buried his father and they had nowhere to go?

That word 'virtually' is weasel room, and you used it quite deliberately.


Quote:

Wow, how could everyone, including Kevvy (who admitted his staff really did know),

.....yeah, but where is your proof Rudd knew.........


Quote:

.....and including others who were at Burke's function by invitation to see Little Kevvy,

What's the problem DT.  He conceded he was there. Why not?  It was a fact which he never denied.

[quote......]and including the coroner who put the cause of death as injuries received after a car crash,[/quote]

......I have asked you to produce the official record, and you have not.


Quote:

........and the Lows who said it was not true Kevvy's family had to move at once as the house sat empty for quite some time after they bolted . . . . .

I live here where the Lows etc all live.  That is rubbish DT.


Quote:

Even Kevvy himself contradicts Aussie!  Is Little Kevvy wrong oceans?

No he doesn't DT.  You are wrong, but you are always right, it has to be said

Quote:

I dont take anything you have to say seriously Little  Deepy..your hysterical, biased and like FD said, a monotonous  drama queen. I think you got caught in a tropical shower just outside Shady Pines ,your hat has shrunk and now you have  brain cramp. A reasoned unbiased arguement free from the melodramtic and just plain 'made up ' stuff would see you having rational debates DT

Pssssst oceans, I'm a forum contributor - not a topic.  That freediver is heavily into personal insult as a form of debate is no reason to join in.


your  bias , innacurracy and innuendo makes you the topic.!!!

Maybe you could find a way to reason a topic without overshadowing it with your personality defects.?

Aussie wrote on Dec 24^th, 2007 at 6:10pm:

I'm not a 'topic' either DT. Quote: Really?  So Kevvy was surprised to discover he had air tickets to Vietnam and his staff arranged the whole thing without his knowledge? Probably.  Produce the evidence he wasn't.  Do that and I'll agree Rudd lied on that occasion.

No worries - let's deal with Kevvy's lies one at a time.  We'll have more fun that way.


Quote:

Rudd admits gaffe over TV dawn service in Vietnam THE office of Kevin Rudd was warned more than two weeks ago that plans for a stage-managed pre-dawn service at Long Tan, Vietnam, in which the Labor leader was slated to take part, risked "seriously offending" veterans and others. A series of emails obtained by the Herald also reveal Mr Rudd had booked flights and was confirmed to attend the event, which was scrapped only four days ago when it became public. Kevvy lies

Your concession Kevvy lied if you will.  Though I expect you to start immediately scuttling about with the goal posts as is your wont.


wrote on Dec 24^th, 2007 at 6:35pm:

Quote: I dont take anything you have to say seriously Little  Deepy..your hysterical, biased and like FD said, a monotonous  drama queen. I think you got caught in a tropical shower just outside Shady Pines ,your hat has shrunk and now you have  brain cramp. A reasoned unbiased arguement free from the melodramtic and just plain 'made up ' stuff would see you having rational debates DT Pssssst oceans, I'm a forum contributor - not a topic.  That freediver is heavily into personal insult as a form of debate is no reason to join in. your  bias , innacurracy and innuendo makes you the topic.!!! Maybe you could find a way to reason a topic without overshadowing it with your personality defects.?

Psssst oceans, I'm a forum contributor - not the topic.   Care to comment on Kevvy's lies?

Quote:

No worries - let's deal with Kevvy's lies one at a time.  We'll have more fun that way. Quote: Rudd admits gaffe over TV dawn service in Vietnam THE office of Kevin Rudd was warned more than two weeks ago that plans for a stage-managed pre-dawn service at Long Tan, (Vietnam, in which the Labor leader was slated to take part, risked "seriously offending" veterans and others. A series of emails obtained by the Herald also reveal Mr Rudd had booked flights and was confirmed to attend the event, which was scrapped only four days ago when it became public. Kevvy lies

Where is Rudd's lie?

Provide particulars, please.  Specify, with source.

(......tamarind please, I like tamarind............. ;D)

So, which lie of yours do you want do deal with next?

Aussie wrote on Dec 24^th, 2007 at 8:41pm:

Quote: No worries - let's deal with Kevvy's lies one at a time.  We'll have more fun that way. Quote: Rudd admits gaffe over TV dawn service in Vietnam THE office of Kevin Rudd was warned more than two weeks ago that plans for a stage-managed pre-dawn service at Long Tan, (Vietnam, in which the Labor leader was slated to take part, risked "seriously offending" veterans and others. A series of emails obtained by the Herald also reveal Mr Rudd had booked flights and was confirmed to attend the event, which was scrapped only four days ago when it became public. Kevvy lies Where is Rudd's lie? Provide particulars, please.  Specify, with source. (......tamarind please, I like tamarind............. ;D) So, which lie of yours do you want do deal with next?

Errrr the gaffe he admitted dude?  As in the report there dude.  He lied and said he knew nothing about it and neither did his staff.  He claimed he was never going to be a part of it.   He had no idea what was going on but he wasn't a party to it.  

In fact he compounded the lie by saying on the day the strory broke while he was feverishly denying it "Vietnam veterans and their families would be justifiably outraged if the traditions of Anzac Day were anyway being undermined at Long Tan – or anywhere else – on a day which is sacred to all Australians."  


Yet later he had to own up because too many people already knew that he was a part of the fabrication, he freely admitted his staff did know about it and in fact he had tickets to go to Vietnam to front up at Long Tan for the Dawn Service after the trek from Nui Dat.  It had been booked old feller - through the Long Tan Trek company.  Everyone knew that - except you and oceans.

How about them apples Aussie?  That apology old son - then we can move on to the next installment in the thrilling tale of Watch Kevvy's Nose Grow.   And put down that goal post and apologise like a man.    You know you want to appear human.  ;D

Quote:

Errrr the gaffe he admitted dude?  As in the report there dude.  He lied and said he knew nothing about it and neither did his staff.  He claimed he was never going to be a part of it.   He had no idea what was going on but he wasn't a party to it.   In fact he compounded the lie by saying on the day the strory broke while he was feverishly denying it "Vietnam veterans and their families would be justifiably outraged if the traditions of Anzac Day were anyway being undermined at Long Tan – or anywhere else – on a day which is sacred to all Australians."

Can I have hard evidence of all this?

IQ, that was inappropriate. Don't be ruining Christmas again.

Oceans et al, please don't respond to that sort of thing, it makes deleting much more of a hassle.

Aussie wrote on Dec 25^th, 2007 at 11:10am:

Quote: Errrr the gaffe he admitted dude?  As in the report there dude.  He lied and said he knew nothing about it and neither did his staff.  He claimed he was never going to be a part of it.   He had no idea what was going on but he wasn't a party to it.   In fact he compounded the lie by saying on the day the strory broke while he was feverishly denying it "Vietnam veterans and their families would be justifiably outraged if the traditions of Anzac Day were anyway being undermined at Long Tan – or anywhere else – on a day which is sacred to all Australians." Can I have hard evidence of all this?

No worries dude.


Quote:

Rudd admits gaffe over TV dawn service in Vietnam THE office of Kevin Rudd was warned more than two weeks ago that plans for a stage-managed pre-dawn service at Long Tan, Vietnam, in which the Labor leader was slated to take part, risked "seriously offending" veterans and others. A series of emails obtained by the Herald also reveal Mr Rudd had booked flights and was confirmed to attend the event, which was scrapped only four days ago when it became public. Kevvy lies

Your concession Kevvy lied if you will.  Though I expect you to start immediately scuttling about with the goal posts as is your wont.

No, you still have not proven your assertion that 'Kevvy lied.'  You have window dressed, with garnish, as is your want.  

Hayseed tested these waters pre-election, and abandoned the issue, yet you, Don Quixote, and your silly 'Pancho' mate 'IQlessthanfruitandvege' can keep banging away if you want.  

Seems silly to me.

You have left weasel room everywhere...................but, dude, mate, will you ever come to realise that these allegations failed the ultimate test...........the ultimate..........the test of the people on the 24th November, 2007?

The people believed "Kevvy," and rejected hayseed nationally, and locally.

Suck it in.

Despite the evidence put if front of your face Nazi, you refuse it. Please change your screen name to Nazi...it will reflect your character better and be less demeaning to 'real' Aussies

IQSRLOW wrote on Dec 25^th, 2007 at 9:48pm:

Despite the evidence put if front of your face Nazi, you refuse it. Please change your screen name to Nazi...it will reflect your character better and be less demeaning to 'real' Aussies

Your not a real Aussie- your a whining pox ridden cr ack wh ore!!  Debate or p155 off.





http://www.picpop.com/gallery/albums/userpics/attention/attention_whore4.jpg

Quote:

Please change your screen name to Nazi...

Nah.  Is that okay if I say 'no?'

8-)

Debate or p155 off.

Oh look...it's BK contradicting herself  by adding nothing to the discussion ::)

Aussie wrote on Dec 25^th, 2007 at 9:39pm:

No, you still have not proven your assertion that 'Kevvy lied.'  You have window dressed, with garnish, as is your want.   Hayseed tested these waters pre-election, and abandoned the issue, yet you, Don Quixote, and your silly 'Pancho' mate 'IQlessthanfruitandvege' can keep banging away if you want.   Seems silly to me. You have left weasel room everywhere...................but, dude, mate, will you ever come to realise that these allegations failed the ultimate test...........the ultimate..........the test of the people on the 24th November, 2007? The people believed "Kevvy," and rejected hayseed nationally, and locally. Suck it in.

No worries Aussie - so even though everyone, including the national broadcaster, knows he lied, you still wish to deny it.


Quote:

From ABC - The World Today GILLIAN BRADFORD: The one issue nobody was talking about was the Anzac Day debacle. Channel Seven has all year been trying to organise a live broadcast from Vietnam on Anzac Day, and in the process was trying to convince veterans to stage an earlier dawn service at Long Tan to better fit in with Sunrise's peak viewing time, just after 7:00am. The problem for Kevin Rudd is that he was planning to be at this service, and despite initially denying it, his office had been informed by an official within Veterans' Affairs that this idea to bring the dawn service forward would outrage veterans. Kevvy Lies

So let's move on as you are obviously going to continue to make excuses for Little Kevvy about his ANZAC porkies until the cows come home, or they and you die trying.

Wanna do Kevvy's lies about Burke next mate?  I love to watch you shift those goal posts and squirm mightily, it's kind of cute in a heavily blinkered apologist

Cab you produce even one scintilla of evidence that Rudd knew, as opposed to his staff?

Aussie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2007 at 8:59am:

Cab you produce even one scintilla of evidence that Rudd knew, as opposed to his staff?

No worries Aussie


Quote:

Rudd admits gaffe over TV dawn service in Vietnam THE office of Kevin Rudd was warned more than two weeks ago that plans for a stage-managed pre-dawn service at Long Tan, Vietnam, in which the Labor leader was slated to take part, risked "seriously offending" veterans and others. A series of emails obtained by the Herald also reveal Mr Rudd had booked flights and was confirmed to attend the event, which was scrapped only four days ago when it became public. Kevvy lies

Shall we look at Burke now mate?

No, produce the evidence that RUDD, himself, had booked the flight, and not his staff, on his behalf, that is assuming a flight was, in truth, booked.

You will not be able to do so, DT, so maybe you better move on.

Aussie, I think people tend to know when flights are booked on their behalf, especially when it involves on overseas trip that is only four days away. I would be more concerned if he didn't know what his own plans were.

Aussie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2007 at 10:40am:

No, produce the evidence that RUDD, himself, had booked the flight, and not his staff, on his behalf, that is assuming a flight was, in truth, booked. You will not be able to do so, DT, so maybe you better move on.

Oh I get you - you think Little Kevvy has no idea what's happening.  It's all orchestrated on his behalf by his staff?  How does he know what to pack in his port?   Or maybe you think someone does that for him too?  And ties his laces?   ;D

Possibly you are right - after all he can't work a dishwasher, he drove a gas eating Ford Territory because, he said it wasn't possible to get a hybrid (though other ministers drove them) and he reckons he can't cook (maybe his mummy always did).

Burke now Aussie?

deepthought wrote on Dec 26^th, 2007 at 3:14pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 26th, 2007 at 10:40am: No, produce the evidence that RUDD, himself, had booked the flight, and not his staff, on his behalf, that is assuming a flight was, in truth, booked. You will not be able to do so, DT, so maybe you better move on. Oh I get you - you think Little Kevvy has no idea what's happening.  It's all orchestrated on his behalf by his staff?  How does he know what to pack in his port?   Or maybe you think someone does that for him too?  And ties his laces?   ;D Possibly you are right - after all he can't work a dishwasher, he drove a gas eating Ford Territory because, he said it wasn't possible to get a hybrid (though other ministers drove them) and he reckons he can't cook (maybe his mummy always did). Burke now Aussie?

No, I have the view that his staff plan poo.  They test water.  Just like hayseed's mob did.  Assuming, and that is a huge one, that his staff had been beavering away on this project, booking flights.........when the poo hit the fan, Rudd was able, CREDIBLY.......note the election outcome.......to distance himself from it.

Now, tell us how/where/when Rudd LIED about that event when he and Burke ended up at the same place at the same time.  I wanna know the full particulars which establish he LIED.  

So far, the score is DT nil, truth 1.

So far, the score is DT nil, truth 1.

No...so far the score is
DT= 1
Nazi twisting the truth=0

Again- denial is not a river in Egypt

IQSRLOW wrote on Dec 26^th, 2007 at 7:57pm:

So far, the score is DT nil, truth 1. No...so far the score is DT= 1 Nazi twisting the truth=0 Again- denial is not a river in Egypt

Aussie is the only one who knows what the hell hes talking about!

Aussie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2007 at 6:20pm:

deepthought wrote on Dec 26th, 2007 at 3:14pm: Aussie wrote on Dec 26th, 2007 at 10:40am: No, produce the evidence that RUDD, himself, had booked the flight, and not his staff, on his behalf, that is assuming a flight was, in truth, booked. You will not be able to do so, DT, so maybe you better move on. Oh I get you - you think Little Kevvy has no idea what's happening.  It's all orchestrated on his behalf by his staff?  How does he know what to pack in his port?   Or maybe you think someone does that for him too?  And ties his laces?   ;D Possibly you are right - after all he can't work a dishwasher, he drove a gas eating Ford Territory because, he said it wasn't possible to get a hybrid (though other ministers drove them) and he reckons he can't cook (maybe his mummy always did). Burke now Aussie? No, I have the view that his staff plan poo.  They test water.  Just like hayseed's mob did.  Assuming, and that is a huge one, that his staff had been beavering away on this project, booking flights.........when the poo hit the fan, Rudd was able, CREDIBLY.......note the election outcome.......to distance himself from it. Now, tell us how/where/when Rudd LIED about that event when he and Burke ended up at the same place at the same time.  I wanna know the full particulars which establish he LIED.   So far, the score is DT nil, truth 1.

Alright, I'll settle for your admission that it's not Little Kevvy running the country but his staff doing it all without him having any idea what's going on.  

While everyone else knows he lied, you seem happier accepting that he hasn't a clue what he's going to do next and winds up visiting places like Afghanistan without any foreknowledge.

To the lies about Brian Burke now Aussie?

wrote on Dec 26^th, 2007 at 10:52pm:

IQSRLOW wrote on Dec 26th, 2007 at 7:57pm: So far, the score is DT nil, truth 1. No...so far the score is DT= 1 Nazi twisting the truth=0 Again- denial is not a river in Egypt Aussie is the only one who knows what the hell hes talking about!

Between he and Little Kevvy Aussie does appear to be the only one who knows what he's talking about.  Little Kevvy categorically denied his staff had any knowledge of the Vietnam thing and according to Aussie that's the way it is with Kevvy - they just do it and Little Kevvy goes along for the ride while wearing a puzzled look.

Quote:

Little Kevvy categorically denied his staff had any knowledge of the Vietnam thing.......

Did he?  Show me.

Aussie wrote on Dec 27^th, 2007 at 8:42pm:

Quote: Little Kevvy categorically denied his staff had any knowledge of the Vietnam thing....... Did he?  Show me.

No worries Aussie.


Quote:

More Rudd staff knew of fake service ANOTHER Kevin Rudd staffer knew of the plan to stage a fake dawn service for TV's Sunrise - but failed to tell him, it has emerged. Mr Rudd has vowed to get the matter investigated further and said he was extremely disappointed he did not found out about what happened until today. ``Significant and painful lessons are being learned as a result of this entire matter,'' he said. The Labor leader yesterday quit a regular spot on the Channel 7 favourite after becoming entangled in a proposal by the program to hold a dawn service at Long Tan in Vietnam earlier than normal to fit into its program schedule. Veterans and bureaucrats raised concerns about the propriety of the idea but Mr Rudd denied that he or his office had any knowledge of the plan when it was first revealed over the Easter weekend. Mr Rudd was later forced to backtrack when emails emerged indicating one of his staff was aware of the details. Kevvy Lied

Brian Burke now mate?   ;D

The full article DT.......the lot, without your edits:



Quote:

April 17, 2007 12:00am ANOTHER Kevin Rudd staffer knew of the plan to stage a fake dawn service for TV's Sunrise - but failed to tell him, it has emerged. Mr Rudd has vowed to get the matter investigated further and said he was extremely disappointed he did not found out about what happened until today. ``Significant and painful lessons are being learned as a result of this entire matter,'' he said. The Labor leader yesterday quit a regular spot on the Channel 7 favourite after becoming entangled in a proposal by the program to hold a dawn service at Long Tan in Vietnam earlier than normal to fit into its program schedule. Veterans and bureaucrats raised concerns about the propriety of the idea but Mr Rudd denied that he or his office had any knowledge of the plan when it was first revealed over the Easter weekend. Mr Rudd was later forced to backtrack when emails emerged indicating one of his staff was aware of the details. He has now instituted a new policy to ensure more senior staff monitor email traffic within his office. While he has copped a hammering in the media over the issue, a Newspoll published in The Australian newspaper today appeared to indicate Rudd hadn't suffered any major fallout. The Labor leader, however, isn't so sure - admitting the issue could still ``take paint'' off him. And tonight he revealed another one of his staff had been told about the dawn service concerns by Opposition veterans affairs spokesman Alan Griffin on March 30 but forgot to pass the information on because they were busy with the climate summit being held the following day. ``I am advised this came to light as the office had been undergoing an audit of administrative procedures over the last several days,'' Mr Rudd said. ``I take full responsibility for this further omission.''

Where is the Rudd lie?  There isn't.  Instead, there is candid admission, and immediate remedial action.

On to Burke, and please, don't just tell us that Burke and Rudd were in the same room at the same time, or that Rudd was making a speech there..........  Over to you, DT.  

So far, you are coming a very bad second in this attempt to re-write history.

Aussie wrote on Dec 29^th, 2007 at 9:28am:

The full article DT.......the lot, without your edits: Quote: April 17, 2007 12:00am ANOTHER Kevin Rudd staffer knew of the plan to stage a fake dawn service for TV's Sunrise - but failed to tell him, it has emerged. Mr Rudd has vowed to get the matter investigated further and said he was extremely disappointed he did not found out about what happened until today. ``Significant and painful lessons are being learned as a result of this entire matter,'' he said. The Labor leader yesterday quit a regular spot on the Channel 7 favourite after becoming entangled in a proposal by the program to hold a dawn service at Long Tan in Vietnam earlier than normal to fit into its program schedule. Veterans and bureaucrats raised concerns about the propriety of the idea but Mr Rudd denied that he or his office had any knowledge of the plan when it was first revealed over the Easter weekend. Mr Rudd was later forced to backtrack when emails emerged indicating one of his staff was aware of the details. He has now instituted a new policy to ensure more senior staff monitor email traffic within his office. While he has copped a hammering in the media over the issue, a Newspoll published in The Australian newspaper today appeared to indicate Rudd hadn't suffered any major fallout. The Labor leader, however, isn't so sure - admitting the issue could still ``take paint'' off him. And tonight he revealed another one of his staff had been told about the dawn service concerns by Opposition veterans affairs spokesman Alan Griffin on March 30 but forgot to pass the information on because they were busy with the climate summit being held the following day. ``I am advised this came to light as the office had been undergoing an audit of administrative procedures over the last several days,'' Mr Rudd said. ``I take full responsibility for this further omission.'' Where is the Rudd lie?  There isn't.  Instead, there is candid admission, and immediate remedial action. On to Burke, and please, don't just tell us that Burke and Rudd were in the same room at the same time, or that Rudd was making a speech there..........  Over to you, DT.   So far, you are coming a very bad second in this attempt to re-write history.

I didn't edit it.  I quoted part of the article (unchanged) and linked to the full one dude.  How is that an edit?

However I am intrigued by your belief that it is not a lie to state one thing categorically then state the opposite and both are true.  

How is it so?

I was always of the understanding that a lie is when you state something to be true then later state the opposite to be true.   Both simply can not be the truth.  And that is what Little Kevvy did.

But you obviously think that it's OK for pollies to say whatever they feel like saying hey, no matter whether it is the truth or otherwise?  No lie is involved as long as at some time in the future you contradict yourself?

I'm taking a break from painting the house at the moment so I'll get stuck into Kevvy again for you soon.  You seem to be enjoying seeing his lies exposed mate.  Can't say I blame you.  He's entertaining with it.  I have never known another pollie lie so readily.

Little Kevvy lies vs Aussie denials in the next thrilling episode of 'Head In The Sand'.

Here's the analogy, DT.

You are asked if your girl friend is cheating on you.

Because you have no reason to expect/suspect otherwise, you say, "No."

Then later, when she admits to you that she has been cheating on you, and you make public the admission, does that make you a 'liar?'

No, it does not.

Now, let's move on to Burke, and I hope your evidence will improve, significantly.  I am not willing to be a party to your crap for much longer.

I agree. Being wrong doesn't make you a liar. You have to know you were wrong. This whole thing is a storm in a teacup. Does anyone really care where he would have been?

freediver wrote on Dec 29^th, 2007 at 8:12pm:

I agree. Being wrong doesn't make you a liar. You have to know you were wrong. This whole thing is a storm in a teacup. Does anyone really care where he would have been?

Kevvy maintained that neither he nor his office had any knowledge of the plans.  Yet his office did know.  And so did he as he had plane tickets.  If he did not know would he not say he wasn't aware of any plans?  Would he just coincidentally have decided to go to Vietnam at exactly that time?

But he categorically denied it.  That is not lack of knowledge - it is an assertion of fact.  A fact which he later admitted was false.

Is it just being wrong to make a false declaration while being in full possession of knowledge which would enable you to make a true one?

According to you he would have to know he was wrong.  As he said he was wrong you would have to concede he is a liar - by your own definition.

Aussie is of the belief that his staff determine his whereabouts without his knowledge.  Do you believe that to be true as well?  Did Kevvy know he was going to Vietnam?  Did he know why?

I do not expect a politician of any colour to state something to be true which may not be.  Kevvy lied.

I reckon the best example of Kevvy's duplicity was his statement that he was in Perth as a guest of some dude who suggested they pop along to a restaurant for a bite to eat.  For some odd reason Kevvy thought he would jump up and make a speech to the assembled throng - one of whom just happened to be Brian Burke.  Yet others at the restaurant maintain that they were invited by Brian Burke to come along and meet the guest of honour - a certain bespectacled nerd from Queensland, name of Little Kevvy . . . . .



Quote:

Rudd was Burke's 'star guest' THERE was nothing incidental about Kevin Rudd's starring role at the Brian Burke special-invitation dinner in Perth, one of the guests revealed last night. The cross-section of influential businessmen, trade union leaders and industry representatives seated in the private dining room at the swanky Perugino Restaurant on August 1, 2005, were there for one purpose only - to meet Labor's rising star Kevin Rudd, then the party's Shadow Foreign Affairs spokesman.  The guest said: "My general observation would be that everyone knew why they were there - that was to meet Kevin Rudd.  "And if Kevin Rudd didn't know that and he thought it was an accidental dinner, then he would have been the only person in that room who would have thought that.'' Brian Burke had prefaced the lavish meal with an introduction to Mr Rudd, that the guest recalled was quite flattering. "I don't specifically recall whether he was introduced as a future Labor prime minister,'' he said. "But I wouldn't argue against someone else's recollection about what may have been said.'' Rudd sat close to Mr Burke at one long dining table. There were 25-30 people there. Mr Burke and Mr Grill picked up the tab for the banquet - though another guest has claimed he was asked to pay $1000. "If it wasn't Brian next to Rudd, he was sat one person away from him,'' said the guest, who agreed to speak about the evening on condition of anonymity. "It was certainly a lavish dinner, I don't know what it would have cost.'' At one point during the dinner, someone cracked a joke about then-Premier Geoff Gallop's edict, banning his ministers from having any dealings with Mr Burke and his slippery business partner Julian Grill.   "It was a collective joke. The chances of Rudd hearing it were very high I think,'' said the guest. "I recall at the time being somewhat bemused there were such a large collection of indivduals there with Brian Burke.'' Mr Rudd did address the assembled guests.   "He said he had a very strong message with respect to China and the booming economy there and Western Australia's important role in the context of China,'' the guest said. "`I read today (yesterday) that he made comments about the strife within the Labor Party (at the time) and leadership issue. I remember something (along these lines) but I just couldn't be specific about what it was to be honest with you.'' Guests who attended the dinner included Mr Burke's daughter Sarah, a member of Labor's national executive committee; director-general of health Neale Fong; Fortescue Metals Group chief executive Andrew "Twiggy'' Forrest; mining entrepreneur Tony Trevisan;  Australian Hotels Association (WA) executive director Bradley Woods and Precious Metals Australia managing director Roderick Smith. Union officials present included Australian Wokers Union state secretary Tim Daly and CFMEU state secretary Kevin Reynolds. Labor politicians present included Senator Mark Bishop and Victoria Park MLA Ben Wyatt. Whether Rudd thanked Mr Burke and Mr Grill at the end of the evening, the guest said: "I don't recall any specific words, but he certainly showed appreciation towards his hosts. "My general impression was that he showed appreciation, but I don't want to recreate memories based on what I have read in the paper.'' Mr Rudd's honesty has been brought into question after evidence surfaced that the dinner was not the chance encounter the Opposition Leader has painted it as. It appears the dinner was organised specifically so that Mr Rudd could address a group of high powered business leaders and trade unionists handpicked by Mr Burke. Mr Rudd was severely embarrassed yesterday when the contents of Mr Burke's e-mailed invitation to guests to attend the exclusive dinner were revealed. The invitation said: "Julian Grill and I would be delighted if you would be our guest at dinner with Kevin Rudd, the Opposition spokesman on Foreign Affairs in the Federal Parliament at 7pm on Monday August 1st at the Perugino Restaurant Cnr Murray and Outram Streets in West Perth.  Those who have accepted are business people and it should be an interesting evening.'' Asked about the event on Thursday, after a blistering parliamentary attack by the government, Mr Rudd tried to characterise the evening with Mr Burke as a decidedly casual affair.  The Opposition Leader appeared to imply that he simply tagged along with Federal Labor MP,  Graham Edwards, with whom he was staying in Perth at the time. "Graham Edwards was invited to this dinner,'' Mr Rudd said. ``Graham Edwards in turn invited me and we attended it and it was a general discussion around the table with a whole bunch of people.'' Bull

Aussie wrote on Dec 29^th, 2007 at 5:58pm:

Now, let's move on to Burke, and I hope your evidence will improve, significantly.  I am not willing to be a party to your crap for much longer.

deepthought wrote on Dec 24^th, 2007 at 5:42pm:

Aussie's usual modus operandi is 1) to plop in, deny everything in the face of awesome evidence to the contrary, 2) keep shifting the goal posts all over the field 3) then clear off when he sees he has nowhere else to go.

See ya mate.   :D

[quote author=deepthought link=1197935939/45#56 date=1198960716]I reckon the best example of Kevvy's duplicity was his statement that he was in Perth as a guest of some dude who suggested they pop along to a restaurant for a bite to eat.  For some odd reason Kevvy thought he would jump up and make a speech to the assembled throng - one of whom just happened to be Brian Burke.  Yet others at the restaurant maintain that they were invited by Brian Burke to come along and meet the guest of honour - a certain bespectacled nerd from Queensland, name of Little Kevvy . . . . .


[quote]Rudd was Burke's 'star guest'


THERE was nothing incidental about Kevin Rudd's starring role at the Brian Burke special-invitation dinner in Perth, one of the guests revealed last night.

The cross-section of influential businessmen, trade union leaders and industry representatives seated in the private dining room at the swanky Perugino Restaurant on August 1, 2005, were there for one purpose only - to meet Labor's rising star Kevin Rudd, then the party's Shadow Foreign Affairs spokesman.  The guest said: "My general observation would be that everyone knew why they were there - that was to meet Kevin Rudd.  "And if Kevin Rudd didn't know that and he thought it was an accidental dinner, then he would have been the only person in that room who would have thought that.''

Brian Burke had prefaced the lavish meal with an introduction to Mr Rudd, that the guest recalled was quite flattering.

"I don't specifically recall whether he was introduced as a future Labor prime minister,'' he said.

"But I wouldn't argue against someone else's recollection about what may have been said.''

Rudd sat close to Mr Burke at one long dining table. There were 25-30 people there. Mr Burke and Mr Grill picked up the tab for the banquet - though another guest has claimed he was asked to pay $1000.

"If it wasn't Brian next to Rudd, he was sat one person away from him,'' said the guest, who agreed to speak about the evening on condition of anonymity.

"It was certainly a lavish dinner, I don't know what it would have cost.''

At one point during the dinner, someone cracked a joke about then-Premier Geoff Gallop's edict, banning his ministers from having any dealings with Mr Burke and his slippery business partner Julian Grill.   "It was a collective joke. The chances of Rudd hearing it were very high I think,'' said the guest. "I recall at the time being somewhat bemused there were such a large collection of indivduals there with Brian Burke.''

Mr Rudd did address the assembled guests.   "He said he had a very strong message with respect to China and the booming economy there and Western Australia's important role in the context of China,'' the guest said.

"`I read today (yesterday) that he made comments about the strife within the Labor Party (at the time) and leadership issue. I remember something (along these lines) but I just couldn't be specific about what it was to be honest with you.''

Guests who attended the dinner included Mr Burke's daughter Sarah, a member of Labor's national executive committee; director-general of health Neale Fong; Fortescue Metals Group chief executive Andrew "Twiggy'' Forrest; mining entrepreneur
Tony Trevisan;  Australian Hotels Association (WA) executive director Bradley Woods and Precious Metals Australia managing director Roderick Smith.

Union officials present included Australian Wokers Union state secretary Tim Daly and CFMEU state secretary Kevin Reynolds.

Labor politicians present included Senator Mark Bishop and Victoria Park MLA Ben Wyatt.
Whether Rudd thanked Mr Burke and Mr Grill at the end of the evening, the guest said: "I don't recall any specific words, but he certainly showed appreciation towards his hosts.

"My general impression was that he showed appreciation, but I don't want to recreate memories based on what I have read in the paper.''

Mr Rudd's honesty has been brought into question after evidence surfaced that the dinner was not the chance encounter the Opposition Leader has painted it as.

It appears the dinner was organised specifically so that Mr Rudd could address a group of high powered business leaders and trade unionists handpicked by Mr Burke.

Mr Rudd was severely embarrassed yesterday when the contents of Mr Burke's e-mailed invitation to guests to attend the exclusive dinner were revealed.

The invitation said: "Julian Grill and I would be delighted if you would be our guest at dinner with Kevin Rudd, the Opposition spokesman on Foreign Affairs in the Federal Parliament at 7pm on Monday August 1st at the Perugino Restaurant Cnr Murray and Outram Streets in West Perth.  Those who have accepted are business people and it should be an interesting evening.''

Asked about the event on Thursday, after a blistering parliamentary attack by the government, Mr Rudd tried to characterise the evening with Mr Burke as a decidedly casual affair.  The Opposition Leader appeared to imply that he simply tagged along with Federal Labor MP,  Graham Edwards, with whom he was staying in Perth at the time.

"Graham Edwards was invited to this dinner,'' Mr Rudd said. ``Graham Edwards in turn invited me and we attended it and it was a general discussion around the table with a whole bunch of people.''

.....and, where is the lie?

Aussie wrote on Dec 31^st, 2007 at 11:49pm:

.....and, where is the lie?

Merry New Year to you Aussie.  And I guess by that question that indicates you must be having a merry old time on New Year's Eve.

First Little Kevvy said he had just been invited by his buddy to pop out and have a bite to eat.  How could Brian Burke have known to invite gentlefolk along to meet Kevvy if Kevvy had just tagged along with his buddy?  How could Brian Burke possibly have known in advance of Little Kevvy's attendance?  Is he psychic?   Why was it that Burke apparently picked up the tab for those at the restaurant?  Has he got too much money?

Second Little Kevvy said it was quite an informal thingy with a bunch of dudes around a table having a general discussion.  Why then did another guest describe it as a 'private dining room' and what could have prompted Little Kevvy to lurch to his feet and start making a speech to all the other diners who were, presumably, attempting to enjoy an informal meal too?  Was Kevvy pissed?

Third if Little Kevvy thought it was all above board to meet up with Brian Burke on three occasions why did he cancel a fourth meeting with Brian Burke?  Three meetings good, four meetings bad?

Fourth if Little Kevvy had no foreknowledge that he was ever meeting Brian Burke, he reckoned it was just incidental to hanging about with his mate, how did he know to cancel that fourth meeting?

Fifth Kevvy actually admitted he was wrong to meet up with Burke - he conceded that when all the details of his secrets and lies were revealed and he could deceive you mushrooms no longer.   If it was wrong to have done so later why was it OK to have done so earlier?

Sixth Little Kevvy even went so far as to discipline a couple of Liebor Ministers for hanging about with Burke.  Why do that if Burke was just a regular chap and it's OK for Little Kevvy to hang with the dude?  Had they met more than the permitted three times?

I must say you are a funny one Aussie.  Do you think pollies are immune from the usual tests of honesty?  Or do you think telling porkies is OK as long as you give a big 'whoopsy' at some point in the future and claim you made a mistake?

His lies about his father's death now Aussie?  Or are you getting on your bike now you have seen your hero fall?

Quote:

First Little Kevvy said he had just been invited by his buddy to pop out and have a bite to eat.  How could Brian Burke have known to invite gentlefolk along to meet Kevvy if Kevvy had just tagged along with his buddy?  How could Brian Burke possibly have known in advance of Little Kevvy's attendance?  Is he psychic?   Why was it that Burke apparently picked up the tab for those at the restaurant?  Has he got too much money?

Who gives a bugger what Burke did, or not.  Isn't this supposed to be you proving that Rudd lied?


Quote:

\Second Little Kevvy said it was quite an informal thingy with a bunch of dudes around a table having a general discussion.  Why then did another guest describe it as a 'private dining room' and what could have prompted Little Kevvy to lurch to his feet and start making a speech to all the other diners who were, presumably, attempting to enjoy an informal meal too?  Was Kevvy pissed?

Who gives a bugger about what some other bugger said?  Isn't this supposed to be you proving that Rudd lied?


Quote:

Third if Little Kevvy thought it was all above board to meet up with Brian Burke on three occasions why did he cancel a fourth meeting with Brian Burke?  Three meetings good, four meetings bad?

Probably, but still, no evidence of a Rudd lie.


Quote:

Fourth if Little Kevvy had no foreknowledge that he was ever meeting Brian Burke, he reckoned it was just incidental to hanging about with his mate, how did he know to cancel that fourth meeting?

You tell me, and we'll both know......as opposed to speculation.


Quote:

Fifth Kevvy actually admitted he was wrong to meet up with Burke - he conceded that when all the details of his secrets and lies were revealed and he could deceive you mushrooms no longer.   If it was wrong to have done so later why was it OK to have done so earlier?

Maybe a timing issue?


Quote:

Sixth Little Kevvy even went so far as to discipline a couple of Liebor Ministers for hanging about with Burke.  Why do that if Burke was just a regular chap and it's OK for Little Kevvy to hang with the dude?  Had they met more than the permitted three times?

Argumentative, and thus, ignored.


Quote:

I must say you are a funny one Aussie.  Do you think pollies are immune from the usual tests of honesty?  Or do you think telling porkies is OK as long as you give a big 'whoopsy' at some point in the future and claim you made a mistake?

When you, on behalf of your mate hayseed, confess to his lies about matters genuinely affecting international and domestic affairs, maybe then I'll begin to take this trivial poo seriously.........but given that Australia had no interest in any of it, I probably won't either.

But, do carry on DT.

The death of Rudd's father seems to be next.

Thank you Aussie.  It appears the gentlemen who prove Little Kevvy to be a liar should not be heard according to you - after all it is what the 'other bugger' said which proves it hey?   :D

And that "Australia had no interest in any of it, I probably won't either" is not a reason that everyone should abandon hope of honest dealings by pollies.  I care even if you are happy to be a mushroom.  

But on to the next thrilling installment of 'Head In The Sand'.


According to Little Kevvy Liar when speaking of his father's demise -


Quote:

"there were great concerns about the calibre of the surgeons who were operating on him toward the end of his period in hospital". "I've heard reports that some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice. I'd like to know the truth of that one day but I've not had the time to check it out." Watch the video of Little Kevvy lying

And the truth?  There were no concerns about the calibre of the surgeons at all.  And there are no reports that "some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice"

Kevvy lied.

deepthought wrote on Jan 1^st, 2008 at 8:23pm:

Thank you Aussie.  It appears the gentlemen who prove Little Kevvy to be a liar should not be heard according to you - after all it is what the 'other bugger' said which proves it hey?   :D And that "Australia had no interest in any of it, I probably won't either" is not a reason that everyone should abandon hope of honest dealings by pollies.  I care even if you are happy to be a mushroom.   But on to the next thrilling installment of 'Head In The Sand'. According to Little Kevvy Liar when speaking of his father's demise - Quote: "there were great concerns about the calibre of the surgeons who were operating on him toward the end of his period in hospital". "I've heard reports that some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice. I'd like to know the truth of that one day but I've not had the time to check it out." Watch the video of Little Kevvy lying And the truth?  There were no concerns about the calibre of the surgeons at all.  And there are no reports that "some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice" Kevvy lied.

Where is the lie of Kevin Rudd?

Aussie wrote on Jan 1^st, 2008 at 8:37pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 1st, 2008 at 8:23pm: Thank you Aussie.  It appears the gentlemen who prove Little Kevvy to be a liar should not be heard according to you - after all it is what the 'other bugger' said which proves it hey?   :D And that "Australia had no interest in any of it, I probably won't either" is not a reason that everyone should abandon hope of honest dealings by pollies.  I care even if you are happy to be a mushroom.   But on to the next thrilling installment of 'Head In The Sand'. According to Little Kevvy Liar when speaking of his father's demise - Quote: "there were great concerns about the calibre of the surgeons who were operating on him toward the end of his period in hospital". "I've heard reports that some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice. I'd like to know the truth of that one day but I've not had the time to check it out." Watch the video of Little Kevvy lying And the truth?  There were no concerns about the calibre of the surgeons at all.  And there are no reports that "some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice" Kevvy lied. Where is the lie of Kevin Rudd?

According to Wordnet a lie is "a statement that deviates from or perverts the truth".

Is it true that "there were great concerns about the calibre of the surgeons"?

Is it true that there are "reports that some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice"?

Perthaps you can satisfy your own puzzlement.  But not the Kevvy way, the honest way.   :D

Quote:

According to Wordnet a lie is "a statement that deviates from or perverts the truth".

Wow!!


Quote:

Is it true that "there were great concerns about the calibre of the surgeons"?

Buggered if I know.  You are the bloke alleging lies by Rudd.  You prove them.


Quote:

Is it true that there are "reports that some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice"?

Buggered if I know.  You are the bloke alleging lies by Rudd.  You prove them.


Quote:

Perthaps you can satisfy your own puzzlement.  But not the Kevvy way, the honest way.

On all counts, you have failed to satisfy the burdon of proof that Rudd lied.

Any more, DT?

Aussie wrote on Jan 1^st, 2008 at 8:54pm:

Quote: According to Wordnet a lie is "a statement that deviates from or perverts the truth". Wow!! [quote]Is it true that "there were great concerns about the calibre of the surgeons"?

Buggered if I know.  You are the bloke alleging lies by Rudd.  You prove them.


Quote:

Is it true that there are "reports that some of them were subsequently removed from medical practice"?

Buggered if I know.  You are the bloke alleging lies by Rudd.  You prove them.


Quote:

Perthaps you can satisfy your own puzzlement.  But not the Kevvy way, the honest way.

On all counts, you have failed to satisfy the burdon of proof that Rudd lied.

Any more, DT?[/quote]


It's simple to a rational mind - if there were no concerns then there is no evidence old fellow.  If there are no reports then there is nothing to produce old fellow.

As nothing exists there is nothing to produce.  QED.

It is Kevvy (or his apologists) who need to produce evidence.  And there is none.  Kevvy lied.

The lies about the Low family next old boy?

Why not?  You've failed on all counts so far.  Another can't hurt.

Aussie wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2008 at 5:57am:

Why not?  You've failed on all counts so far.  Another can't hurt.

No worries Aussie, the mournful sound of your defeat is pleasing to me.



Quote:

Kevin Rudd was 11 years old and his dad had just died. What happened next is an often-told story - an emotional story - where Mr Rudd says he and his mother were evicted from a share farm in Eumundi on the Sunshine Coast. They were forced to hop between relatives' houses, relying on the "bleak charity of the time", he has been reported as saying, and had to bed down in the family car at least once. As is often the case, there are two sides to a story. And while Mr Rudd's account of his struggles have helped shape his political profile, there is another family - that of the late Aubrey Low who owned the farm - struggling to contain its anger. Until now, the four daughters and son of Low say they have "suffered in silence" at Mr Rudd's recollections. But now they have had enough. They feel each time Mr Rudd speaks of that time, it is a free kick at their father, portraying him as a heartless man without compassion for a widow and a fatherless young lad. But yesterday Mr Rudd said: "My mother was told that she had to leave the farm - and that was that." Breaking their silence, five members of the Low family claim that, far from "evicting" the Rudds, their father went out of his way to accommodate them. Acting as spokeswoman for her sisters, Daphne, Desley and Joyce, and brother Neville, Jill McCahon said: "He's dragged our father's proud reputation through the mud time and time again. "Dad was a caring, compassionate man with terrific family values. What pains us most is the fact that he thought the world of the Rudds." Mrs McCahon said the family disputed Mr Rudd's version of events.. "He's taken the Low family for fools. We are now seeking legal advice on the matter," she said. Long-term Eumundi residents who spoke to The Sun-Herald last week said they had become increasingly mystified at the eviction stories. Daphne Greer knew Aubrey Low most of her life and regularly socialised with the Rudds. "The Aubrey Low I knew - and the Aubrey Low everyone else around here knew - would never have evicted Margaret Rudd," she said. "He was a decent man. The whole tale is bizarre, to say the least." Put the boot in Kevvy, trample all over people

What do you think of your hero now Aussie?

deepthought wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2008 at 7:56pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 2nd, 2008 at 5:57am: Why not?  You've failed on all counts so far.  Another can't hurt. No worries Aussie, the mournful sound of your defeat is pleasing to me. Quote: Kevin Rudd was 11 years old and his dad had just died. What happened next is an often-told story - an emotional story - where Mr Rudd says he and his mother were evicted from a share farm in Eumundi on the Sunshine Coast. They were forced to hop between relatives' houses, relying on the "bleak charity of the time", he has been reported as saying, and had to bed down in the family car at least once. As is often the case, there are two sides to a story. And while Mr Rudd's account of his struggles have helped shape his political profile, there is another family - that of the late Aubrey Low who owned the farm - struggling to contain its anger. Until now, the four daughters and son of Low say they have "suffered in silence" at Mr Rudd's recollections. But now they have had enough. They feel each time Mr Rudd speaks of that time, it is a free kick at their father, portraying him as a heartless man without compassion for a widow and a fatherless young lad. But yesterday Mr Rudd said: "My mother was told that she had to leave the farm - and that was that." Breaking their silence, five members of the Low family claim that, far from "evicting" the Rudds, their father went out of his way to accommodate them. Acting as spokeswoman for her sisters, Daphne, Desley and Joyce, and brother Neville, Jill McCahon said: "He's dragged our father's proud reputation through the mud time and time again. "Dad was a caring, compassionate man with terrific family values. What pains us most is the fact that he thought the world of the Rudds." Mrs McCahon said the family disputed Mr Rudd's version of events.. "He's taken the Low family for fools. We are now seeking legal advice on the matter," she said. Long-term Eumundi residents who spoke to The Sun-Herald last week said they had become increasingly mystified at the eviction stories. Daphne Greer knew Aubrey Low most of her life and regularly socialised with the Rudds. "The Aubrey Low I knew - and the Aubrey Low everyone else around here knew - would never have evicted Margaret Rudd," she said. "He was a decent man. The whole tale is bizarre, to say the least." Put the boot in Kevvy, trample all over people What do you think of your hero now Aussie?

About the same as the rest of Australia, and may he long enjoy those Sydney Harbour views.

Abbot was sent to the Sunshine Coast pre-election, and while this furfie was rife.  The issue was closely examined by the local media as well.  

After Abbot's visit, hayseed et al dropped the 'story' like a hot potato.  The local paper, which initially ran hot with the slur you adopt DT, began to publish stories from elders of the Rudd side of the family, confirming what Rudd had said.  That rag now gushes at any opportunity to embrace Rudd as the local hero.

Got any more, DT?

Aussie wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2008 at 8:17pm:

About the same as the rest of Australia, and may he long enjoy those Sydney Harbour views. Abbot was sent to the Sunshine Coast pre-election, and while this furfie was rife.  The issue was closely examined by the local media as well.   After Abbot's visit, hayseed et al dropped the 'story' like a hot potato.  The local paper, which initially ran hot with the slur you adopt DT, began to publish stories from elders of the Rudd side of the family, confirming what Rudd had said.  That rag now gushes at any opportunity to embrace Rudd as the local hero. Got any more, DT?

No they didn't.  In fact a month later Little Kevvy's family were still scratching their nuts wondering why he lied.


Quote:

KEVIN RUDD has again come under attack over the truth about his background — this time from within his own family. Mr Rudd's first cousin has emerged to dispute the story that he and his mother were evicted from their home and forced to sleep in their car when Mr Rudd was 11. Chris de Vere, Mr Rudd's cousin on his mother's side, said no one in the family knew the story of the Opposition Leader being evicted from his childhood home until the story appeared in the media. Mr Rudd has told how following the death of his father, Bert, he and his mother, Margaret, were forced off the Eumundi share farm on Queensland's Sunshine Coast, where they lived and worked, by the farm's owner, Aubrey Low. Mr Rudd's version of his childhood story was also challenged last month by Mr Low's five children, who told the Fairfax-owned Sun-Herald newspaper in Sydney that Mr Rudd had "dragged our father's proud reputation through the mud time and time again". Mr de Vere told The Sunday Age yesterday that he "didn't know a thing about it until it broke in the paper and I saw it on television. You would have thought there would have been something said about it somewhere. That's not to say that it didn't happen, but I have no knowledge of it, and my father has no knowledge of it." Kevvy lied

Got any more apologies for Little Kevvy Aussie?

Quote:

No they didn't.

Yes, they did.  

Google a bloke whose name is Tom Hulett.....................all will be revealed!

(Mind you, as far as I am concerned, Hulett is a tool of the very first order, but there ya go.  He clings by marriage ...de Vere....into the Rudd story.....)

Fact is DT, hayseed dropped it after the visit by Abbot, as did the local rag, which initially ran hard against Rudd.....but, then, after balance arrived, they now run stories about how hard done by local boy Rudd, is now PM.

Only you cling to a debunked piece of rubbish.

Aussie wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2008 at 8:40pm:

Quote: No they didn't. Yes, they did.   Google a bloke whose name is Tom Hulett.....................all will be revealed! (Mind you, as far as I am concerned, Hulett is a tool of the very first order, but there ya go.  He clings by marriage ...de Vere....into the Rudd story.....) Fact is DT, hayseed dropped it after the visit by Abbot, as did the local rag, which initially ran hard against Rudd.....but, then, after balance arrived, they now run stories about how hard done by local boy Rudd, is now PM. Only you cling to a debunked piece of rubbish.

Kevvy knew the Lows were right.  Why else would he work so hard to have the story killed?


Quote:

Rudd phoned between 2pm and 3pm. It was the first of five calls to the Sun-Herald editor - seven calls in all, including the calls by Secord and Jordan, in a span of four to five hours. Rudd's first call lasted at least 30 minutes, some would say as long as 50 minutes. Some harsh things were said. What the paper was doing was "a disgrace", Rudd claimed, the "wrong thing for yourself, and you're kicking my dead mother in the guts". He started to argue as if it was all a point of law, on the technicality of what was an eviction. Dulhunty responded that obviously to anyone who'd heard his story, it was that "basically he was marched off the farm with his mother the day after his dad died", and that was the interpretation that was being questioned, not the meaning of "eviction". Rudd kept insisting the story shouldn't run. He hung up, but called back again, asserting that to publish would be "a serious mistake", it wasn't right, it was "an assault" on his character. "Cut to the core, Simon," he said. "This is nothing about anyone else, it's not the story of a family's interpretation of events, this is an assault on my character. Cut to the core." Dulhunty would say later: "He just went ballistic about this." Rudd made, it seems, at least three more calls. If Dulhunty was convinced he was going to run the story, what could he say? Rudd asked. He was told, yet again, that the paper would like his response. He said he would email a reply, then called again to say he would dictate his words. "He sounded like he was in a cupboard," Dulhunty told others later. Where Rudd was, in fact, the paper learned that night, was at lunch at the Sydney home of the Murdoch columnist Piers Akerman. Dulhunty thought Rudd's response was a "good one" and he was "happy to have it". But then Rudd phoned again, wanting to know where exactly the story was going to run in the paper; it would be "a disgrace if this is the splash", and was it going to The Sunday Age in Melbourne - "I want to know right now." In fact, Rudd or his office rang The Age's Canberra bureau and its Melbourne office to be told the Sunday paper was not carrying the story. I phoned Dulhunty this week to confirm Rudd's calls. He said: "There were seven calls between him and his team, maybe only six, perhaps even eight, to try to have that story pulled. There was a bit of pressure to me, there was certainly pressure to KA to roll or she was [expletive] in Canberra, and all of this bullshit language. I think his minders were heavier to KA than they were to me. There is no doubt they did not want that story in the paper." Kevin Rudd has a dangerously glass jaw. Kevvy lied like a Rudd

I guess you like that kind of dude though Aussie - you keep apologising for the liar.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/12/30/australia-joins-china-in-censoring-the-internet/

The Australian Government has announced that they will be joining China as one of the few countries globally that broadly censor the internet.

The Labor Party’s policy was announced prior to the Australian Election in November (release here) and was justified on the basis that the previous Government’s policy of providing free copies of NetNanny to all Australian households who wanted it didn’t adequately protect children.

As recently as the week prior to the election, Labor Party candidates were telling those concerned about the proposed law that the censorship wouldn’t be compulsory, and that the “clean feed” would be opt-in, not opt-out. Today’s announcement by Telecommunications Minister Stephen Conroy states that the censorship regime will be mandatory, although people will be able to opt-out of it. The problem of course then becomes if you opt-out questions will be asked as to why you want out, which in itself may lead to Government monitoring.

To be censored by the Australian Government is “pornography and inappropriate material.” X rated pornography is illegal online in Australia, as are casino style internet gambling, certain forms of “hate” speech and R rated computer games. BitTorrent would be a possibility, even if certain downloads for personal use may be legal under Australian law, sharing those downloads would not be. How far “inappropriate material” may extend was not made clear, for example questioning Government policy where it comes to Aboriginal people could be deemed to be discrimination under Australian law and hence blocked by the censorship regime. Worst still, bloggers or those (such as forum owners) who allow users to comment or post could find themselves blocked under this proposal should someone say or post the wrong thing. If there is one certainty in any country that implements broadscale censorship, once they start blocking content it doesn’t stop, and certainly every do-gooder group and special interest lobbyist will be wanting the Government to add to the list.

There is also a potential cost involved to Australian Internet users. The previous Government regularly cited feedback from ISP’s stating that the cost of implementing a “clean feed” would be passed onto internet users, who already pay some of the highest internet access costs in the Western world for on average slow services.

Notably Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was a former Australian Diplomat in China, and speaks fluent Mandarin; given Australia’s boom is fueled by mineral exports to China, it would seem that Australian Government policies are now by China in return. This video from before the election may have foretold some of the future.

:o :o :o :o :o :o :o

Kevvy will lay a huge cable to every house in Australia and, like North Korea, feed content of his choosing through it.

You will adore your glorious leader or it's off to the Gulag.

http://news.smh.com.au/australias-plans-to-filter-internet-under-fire/20080102-1jwl.html

An Australian government plan to filter the Internet Wednesday drew criticism from privacy advocates who said it represented the start of state censorship.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy, a member of the Labor team which ousted conservative prime minister John Howard in a November election, wants filters in place to shield children from online porn and violence.

"Labor makes no apologies to those that argue that any regulation of the Internet is like going down the Chinese road," he told national radio on Monday.

"If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd Labor government is going to disagree."

But chair of the Australian Privacy Foundation Roger Clarke said the plan would not only be ineffective but could have substantial side-effects.

"Many pages will end up getting blocked that shouldn't be blocked," he told AFP. "We don't need that, we need an open Internet."

Clarke said it was the role of parents and guardians, not the government, to protect children from inappropriate material.

Peter Coroneos, spokesman for the Internet Industry Association, said providers were already providing free filters and the industry was unsure whether the plan would work.

"At the moment we don't know what the extent of it will be, what it will cost, and whether it will set a precedent for other changes.

"We just don't know if it is feasible," he told Sydney's Daily Telegraph.

Conroy said Internet users would be able to access uncensored material by opting out of the service and that the government would work with industry to ensure the filters did not slow down the service.

"There are people who are going to make all sorts of statements about the impact on the speed," he said.

"But that is why we are engaged constructively with the sector, engaging in trials to find a way to implement this in the best possible way and to work with the sector."

As usual the Dictators love getting up to the trough.  Liebor supporters will be rubbing their hands with glee at this no doubt.  They knew what they would get and they are getting it.

I voted Liberal.  I detest Liebor's thought control, preferring freedom for Australians.

deepthought wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 6:10pm:

As usual the Dictators love getting up to the trough.  Liebor supporters will be rubbing their hands with glee at this no doubt.  They knew what they would get and they are getting it. I voted Liberal.  I detest Liebor's thought control, preferring freedom for Australians.

No......you voted for hayseed, head of the Lieberals.  As for thought control = propaganda.....hayseed is leap years ahead of Rudd.

i.e. Tampa, kids overboard, the AWB, haneef, no gst, IR....ETC ETC......ETC...ETC...

Aussie wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 8:34pm:

deepthought wrote on Jan 3rd, 2008 at 6:10pm: As usual the Dictators love getting up to the trough.  Liebor supporters will be rubbing their hands with glee at this no doubt.  They knew what they would get and they are getting it. I voted Liberal.  I detest Liebor's thought control, preferring freedom for Australians. No......you voted for hayseed, head of the Lieberals.  As for thought control = propaganda.....hayseed is leap years ahead of Rudd. i.e. Tampa, kids overboard, the AWB, haneef, no gst, IR....ETC ETC......ETC...ETC...

I'm not sure I understand you.  I don't recall those things being force fed by screening information or the vetting of media content.  I do not remember the censoring of facts.  Can you explain how Johnny censored the web and make it clear what you mean dude?

He not only censored the web........ferfuxsake......he censored the truth.

(BTW.....Rudd's mob have acknowledged my dissent with a promise that they'll get back to me.  Did I read something in today's Press which suggested a change in emphasis?)

Aussie wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 9:09pm:

He not only censored the web........ferfuxsake......he censored the truth. (BTW.....Rudd's mob have acknowledged my dissent with a promise that they'll get back to me.  Did I read something in today's Press which suggested a change in emphasis?)

A few facts wouldn't go astray mate.  How did Johnny censor the web?  And how did he censor the truth?

I don't believe there is any change to the New Rudd Order.  Adults may not decide what to watch - Little Kevvy will decide for you.

Did I read something in today's Press which suggested a change in emphasis?

What does the change in emphasis really mean? The same thing iwthg a different name.

As for Howard, lets not forget his attempts to gag public servants and undermine the ability of journalists to expose the government,

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1182677363

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1173068900/378#378

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1185878720/4#4

---

China limits Internet video to state-controlled companies

http://news.smh.com.au/china-limits-internet-video-to-statecontrolled-companies/20080103-1k2p.html

China has decided to restrict the broadcasting of Internet videos _ including those posted on video-sharing Web sites _ to sites run by state-controlled companies and require providers to report questionable content to the government.

It wasn't immediately clear how the new rules would affect YouTube and other providers of Internet video that host Web sites available in China but are based in other countries.

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 9:36pm:

Did I read something in today's Press which suggested a change in emphasis? What does the change in emphasis really mean? The same thing iwthg a different name. As for Howard, lets not forget his attempts to gag public servants and undermine the ability of journalists to expose the government, http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1182677363 http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1173068900/378#378 http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1185878720/4#4 China limits Internet video to state-controlled companies http://news.smh.com.au/china-limits-internet-video-to-statecontrolled-companies/20080103-1k2p.html China has decided to restrict the broadcasting of Internet videos _ including those posted on video-sharing Web sites _ to sites run by state-controlled companies and require providers to report questionable content to the government. It wasn't immediately clear how the new rules would affect YouTube and other providers of Internet video that host Web sites available in China but are based in other countries.

I see nothing in there which impacts on an ordinary citizens right to view content on the net.  Can you explain please.

It is an analogy thaing DT.  

:o

Aussie wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 9:48pm:

It is an analogy thaing DT.   :o

Do tell.

from crikey:

Why government internet filtering won’t work
Stilgherrian writes:

Broadband minister Stephen Conroy proposes to clean up the internet. It won’t work. But Senator Conroy has framed this as “fighting child p-rn-graphy”, so rational debate is unlikely.

If this was only about “prohibited content”, the emotive rhetoric from Child Wise would be bearable. Indeed, if such magic devices as “filters that would prevent access to child p-rn-graphy” existed I’d buy three. I’d also buy a perpetual motion machine and an elixir of eternal youth.

However ALP policy says “the ACMA ‘blacklist’ will… be made more comprehensive to ensure that children are protected from harmful and inappropriate online material.”

Inappropriate according to whom? What’s “appropriate” depends on a child’s age and the views of their parents. One household might need different levels of filtering. Individual filters are the go, if you want them, available free through NetAlert (though few people are interested).

So why hand the government a comprehensive mechanism for blocking internet content? As Democrat Senator Andrew Bartlett says, “I have little faith that the current government will… be unable to resist the urge to continually increase the scope.”

Fortunately, a “clean feed” is impossible. There’s two ways to block “bad stuff”: keep a list of “bad sites” and block them, or look at the content “live” and figure out whether it’s good or bad on the fly. Both are used in spam filtering and that’s 100% effective, right? Right.

Tools like the Storm botnet use literally millions of hacked computers, and the data source changes every second. A bureaucratic “blacklist” simply can’t win this arms race.

Even with legal distribution like YouTube, some content is kid-friendly, some not. Do you monitor thousands of uploads every day, or just block the lot — and stop children participating in any social networks?

Trying to identify “inappropriate” material automatically generates false positives. Those naked br-asts, are they part of a s-xual act or tonight’s renaissance art homework? Is that naked child someone’s fantasy, or just a proud parent sharing a family photo?

The very fact that Crikey has to modify “bad words” (note the hyphens scattered through this item) shows how stupid these filters are.

Perhaps Tim Dunlop is right: “It is not beyond the realms of possibility that this is all a sop to Family First in order to garner their support in other matters.”

A “substantial trial” of ISP-level filtering, says Senator Conroy, “is proposed to be completed at the end of June 2008.”

Once that’s done, why not ask the police how many p--dophiles they’d round up if they received the $189m Howard allocated to NetAlert.

---

UK Says It Wants to Tackle Net Terror

http://news.smh.com.au/uk-says-it-wants-to-tackle-net-terror/20071115-1acr.html

Britain's top law-and-order official wants extremist content off the Web, saying Thursday she intends to deny Islamist ideologues the use of a key recruitment tool.

But Internet service providers and experts say they could be accused of corporate censorship and face a mess of lawsuits if they must carry out any government order to aggressively police the Internet.

British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, giving the keynote speech at a conference on radicalization and political violence, said "the Internet is not a no-go area for government." She compared her government's plan to counter extremism on the Internet to its long-standing campaign against pedophiles and child pornography online.

deepthought wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 6:10pm:

As usual the Dictators love getting up to the trough.  Liebor supporters will be rubbing their hands with glee at this no doubt.  They knew what they would get and they are getting it. I voted Liberal.  I detest Liebor's thought control, preferring freedom for Australians.

I don't see any difference between the two parties. The problem with our political system is that it is Party Politics. This is not Constitutional. Further, our Constitution is null and void and most important matters are run on "Conventions" which are agreed to informally (backroom) by the two parties.

I totally avoid falling into the trap of this false left-right diatribe. As Alex Jones puts it: "Two sides of the same coin".

I'm not going to sit around and argue about who are the biggest fascists - Liberal or Labor?. Labor would have taken us into the war and you know it. Their job at the time was to put up a bad opposition to entering the war in the middle-east. And meanwhile 80% of the Australian population did not want our military getting involved. - You call that democracy? Well you do when you try to argue over Liberal versus Labor.

So in a way you are guilty of your own criticisms - you have this victim of authoritarianism mentality - a victim of Thought Police. You actively promote engaging the time wasting space of tit-for-tat Liberal versus Labor. They are both the same party. They are one. Liberal is just as much Thought Police as Labor. Look at Howard's Sedition Law amendments where he removed "Intentionality" -previously you had to establish that a person Deliberately brought harm on Australia. Howard removed that requirement such that now it didn't matter whether you meant to or not, whether your actions were noble or not.  And the wordings were so vague that "bringing harm to Australia" could mean anything for whichever Thought Police gang wanted to bring you down with those charges.

Actually Howard became guilty of his own new sedition laws because its an established case that Australia's involvement in the middle-east has increased the threat to our national security. (Look up "Forest Fire Jihad"). And for nothing - not for Australians. Maybe for Global Corporations who have no care for our country other than to exploit it at the expense of the citizens.

I'm looking for a Direct Democracy. In Australia the first step towards that must be citizen initiated referendums. If you can get X number of voting citizens to sign a petition calling for a referendum on a given issue then you should be able to have the referendum. Currently in Australia the only form of this we have is where Petitions are read out in parliament imploring MPs to take note. All MPs consider this a waste of time and pay very little attention during the readings.

Having the internet forums will make that very efficient compared to the old days. There can be much debate about the exact wording and meaning of the Referendum Petition. There can be internet/sms referendum voting systems set up which employ the same systems that banks currently use to transact billions of dollars securely.

And I haven't even mentioned the mainstream media's role in this either. Look up ["Amusing Ourselves to Death" serendipity] There are two good quotes from that book about how authoritarian regimes would come to use the mainstream media and HAVE come to use it today to oppress and control the mind's of the body politic by drowning them in pleasure-filled inconsequential diversionary trivia:


Anyway......

Setting up a codified censorship infrastructure  - for controlling the content of the internet getting into Australia - will not stop the DO KNOW Activists from communicating and getting what ever information they want, will not stop the paedophiles and "terrorists" from targeting their audiences and sharing their smut, but it WILL stop the Sheeple Class from having access to the enlightenment that the internet has surrounded us in. It will maintain a critical mass of Sheeple Class who the Government in power needs to run their faux democracy, who the Government in power needs to come to the polling booths and Vote like blind little monkeys chasing pig rolls.

If the Government in power doesn't censor the internet, there will be political revolution in the next ten years - major political revolution in including an Inquisition and the likely trial and execution of Howard, Rudd, and all the caucus MPs who led us into this HELL we are now in.

.....meanwhile the Sheeple watch the television and the feelie-goodies and think that everything is rosie fine except for their childish like wants and needs being catered for ALL the time.

In the last 2 years full time on the internet I have seen more evil that this western regime has perpetrated than I could otherwise have ever imagined. In fact I think its given me heart disease. And 90% of the people in this country Australia haven't even got a clue what their leaders are really up to and what is happening.  This Internet Censorship deal is about banning websites that people post in forums which are contra-mainstream media status-quo. The problem so far for the Government has been the extraordinary success of the 9/11 Truth Movement in cross-fertilising the forums and getting the facts out there to people with eyes to see them if only they'd known.

Welcome aboard mate.  Thanks for the input.

Could you answer a quick question for me.

If you propose an "internet/sms referendum voting systems set up which employ the same systems that banks currently use to transact billions of dollars securely" for a direct democracy referenda style government, what will stop "the DO KNOW Activists from communicating and getting what ever information they want . . . . and "terrorists" from targeting their audiences"?

Why will they suddenly start acting appropriately inside such a system?

deepthought wrote on Jan 20^th, 2008 at 8:35am:

Why will they suddenly start acting appropriately inside such a system?

Ok, could you elaborate. I don't think I get the question.

Here is a good example of the false left/right diatribe I'm referred to above.
Term 'war on terror' ditched by ministers
By Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/17/nterror117.xml#form

I could say alot about this article. Notice that only a paragraph into the article there is a link that says
"Have your say".
So I went and had a look and there are mostly only very articulate responses but they are all based on the premise that there is in fact a western War on terror.

I wanted to point out something else to all these otherwise articulate and thoughtful respondents. So I posted my response which was more or less:

["The War on Terror was nothing more than a catch phrase amongst many as part of the propaganda campaign in the west to instil a culture of fear in the western electorates which would then be compliant and supportive of the western Governments leaders' desire to start up the war machine and invade the middle-east and secure all its resources. Hitler did exactly the same thing to start up the Nazi war machine. You only have to look at what his righthand man, Goering, had to say at the Nuremberg trial. Look up the quote: "All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism." Then remember, "You are either with us or you are with the terrorists"(GWB)]

Its half as long as some of the comments in there.

But notice that it totally undermines the false diatribe within which all the comments have been accepted?

So you see when the Telegraph say "Have your Say". They really mean, "Have your say and then we will allow comments that fall within our controlled spectrum of reality".

Notice that the author of the article is Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor?
What, you think he isn't chin wagging with the Ministry of Home Affairs ministers? Going to dinner and drinking wine with them and having a good old laugh?
He's just one of their media embedded propaganda megaphones. But really it works the other way. The Politicians are just the government embedded corporate executives. And the media is just one of the arms of propaganda of the corporatations.

We live in a corporatocracy. And most Australians, especially those working in the corporations trying to climb the ladder, they are just going to go along with this because they are all cowards. The street beggers in Britain work well to remind everyone what will happen to them if they challenge the legitimacy of powerful elite.

What really bores me today about our society is that its all been written. The resistance to fascism have written and observed this for centuries. Satarists have mocked it in the face of the Kings disguised as flattery all the way back to recorded time. The fascists themselves brag about their acquired skills, such as at the Nurmeberg trials.

So when we talk about Liberal or Labor its like we are voluntary slaves. Its like we are saying "O.k., so there are 12 teams in the AFL and I am allowed to barrack for one of them. The differences at a glance are just colours. We all get propaganda toys and pride and the heeby jeebies and sometimes we get to feel as though WE WON, even though we did nothing but stand on the sidelines or run a drink out to the Officers on the field who take orders from that box up there from guys I've only heard good things about but really couldn't say I know them enough to be a judge of their character".

All I'm saying is that there is no left or right now. We are living under full blown tyranny - Brave New World with Orwellian controls being installed to progressively greater invasion of our free lives  - and most of us don't want to get coronary heart disease so we try to pretend and avoid the blatant fundamental contradictions to ALL the rhetoric. And thats where the Post Modernists come in and say "So what? There is no reality. The people have their new religion that unites them like fans at a footy match. "War on Bogeyman."

And you are going to say to me but those muslims strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up places is fake? No, I'm going to say to you that those western planes and soldiers that dropped bombs on their families leaving them orphaned and homeless are real. And then I'm going to say to you that when the muslims arn't incensed enough, the Western Death Squads go round just blatantly shooting them up to get them murderous. And I'm going to tell you that the civil war in Iraq was deliberately poked and provoked by Western Death Squads dressing themselves up as Shi'ah or Sunni and going around streets bombing the other ones - so as to incite civil war and divide the resistance in Iraq. Its called "Divide and Conquer". Apparently no-one in Australia has heard of it since 9/11 shocked their sense into surrender to their "Leaders".

I don't know. But if you're capable of just sitting down and watching this documentary about facts surrounding the bombings in London in 2005, then you will realise, if you don't already, what I'm talking about:

Innoncent god-fearing people who have lived through peaceful times, don't understand the nature of evil. They turn their heads from it and run. Evil must be confronted in order that it be destroyed.  
http://jforjustice.co.uk/77/

...anyway I'm off on a MTB tour-cycle adventure for a week in Brazil. I might see you when I'm back in cyber space. i

Hi Digger and welcome to OzPolitic. It's refreshing to see another member who doesn't approach every issue from a Labor vs Liberal perspective.

I don't see how the party system is unconstitutional. Just because the constitution does not specifically endorse something does not make it a violation of the constitution (whatever it may be - I'm not exactly an expert). The constitution allows people to elect representatives based on whatever criteria they want. If they want to elect a local rep along party lines, that is fine. Is there something in the constitution that forbids this sort of freedom of association among candidates? Remember, it is not the parties that are responsible for the situation you describe - it is the people who freely voted for them.

DiggerUnderground wrote on Jan 20^th, 2008 at 9:13am:

deepthought wrote on Jan 20th, 2008 at 8:35am: Why will they suddenly start acting appropriately inside such a system? Ok, could you elaborate. I don't think I get the question.

You suggest people in the know can bypass normal controls on access to the internet, presumably due to some clever skills, yet expect they will not bypass normal controls on utilising the internet to manipulate referenda.

Why is it so?

Because people in the know can bypass normal controls on access to the internet, presumably due to some clever skills, yet expect they will not bypass normal controls on utilising the internet to manipulate referenda.

Like you DT....................................

8-)

Aussie wrote on Jan 21^st, 2008 at 9:16pm:

Because people in the know can bypass normal controls on access to the internet, presumably due to some clever skills, yet expect they will not bypass normal controls on utilising the internet to manipulate referenda. Like you DT.................................... 8-)

I am an illuminating beacon in the world of internet scammers.  As I know what's possible, I scream out against it becoming easy.

from crikey:

Senators caught up in the Fielding Filth Filter
Bernard Keane writes:

Steve Fielding, the Senate choice of 1.88% of Victorians, is obsessed with p-rnography. Since he arrived in Canberra, no Estimates session has been complete without Fielding earnestly declaring that Australian families weren't safe from the flood of p-rn ready to roll out of their PCs. His greatest direct contribution to public policy since he was "elected" was to badger the Howard Government into wasting tens of millions of dollars on the ludicrous Netalert internet filter scheme.

Now he has managed to impose the views of his bizarre monotheistic cult on other Senators and their staff. Since 28 March, Senators have been prevented from accessing "inappropriate" internet content at the request of Senator Fielding, who has convinced Senate President Alan Ferguson to impose the same filter as that in place for bureaucrats, though not the Parliamentary Library.

Accordingly, anything related to s-x, drugs, weapons or other "inappropriate content", regardless of what it actually is, is blocked.

Senator Lyn Allison has written to Ferguson demanding to know why Fielding was permitted to impose his own reactionary view of the online world on other Senators, who determines what is "inappropriate" and how Senators are supposed to do their job properly.

Allison reels off a number of topics now blocked by the Fielding Filth Filter: reproductive health; s-xualisation of children; drug abuse and rehabilitation, the opium crop in Afghanistan, weapons trading – all issues of legitimate interest to those engaged in the policy process, and all now blocked as "inappropriate".

Perhaps Ferguson is concerned that Australia’s Senators are a bunch of s-x-crazed, coke-snorting would-be terrorists. Of course, this only describes the Australian Greens. The only available evidence that any politician has been using the Parliament House network to look for inappropriate content comes from the culprit himself – Senator Fielding, who last year boasted of his ability to obtain p-rn from his Parliament House computer with two (presumably one-handed) clicks.

Strangely enough, Fielding will be one of the senators critical to the passage of the Government’s legislation after 1 July. But only a conspiracy theorist would think the Government had caved in to Fielding in the hope of attracting his support for its bills later in the year. After all, the Government itself wants to replace Netalert with an even sillier ISP-level filtering scheme to stop people from accessing "inappropriate sites". Maybe the Senate is a trial run for the entire country.

Meanwhile, net nerd Stilgherrian on how to bypass those pesky filters:

As the Internet censorship wiki explains, "to bypass Internet censorship you first have to know what kind of censorship you are suffering from." Reporters Without Borders has a good tutorial , especially their links to lists of "open proxies" -- that is, websites which will relay your connection to the sites you can't reach.

You also need to know you're engaging in an arms race. Filter-makers will block open proxies as they discover them, but new ones will pop up to replace them. Google searches for "open web proxy list" will help you find the new ones, though you may need to run that search from an unfiltered internet connection.