Saturday Salon

An open thread where you can, at your weekend leisure, discuss anything you like.

Posted in life
149 comments on “Saturday Salon
  1. Jack Robertson says:

    There’s a modern song/cycle/composition (for fullish orchestra), presumably American, the provenance of which has been bugging me for nearly a decade. A fragment of it was on one of the only tapes on a ketch I was boat-sitting one time. I played it over and over for months, but forget to nick it when the owner returned.

    I can’t really remember the orchestration of the fragment, except that it was repetitive, and dominated by an odd folkish harmonium tone, or maybe a bellows organ, or electronic version there-of. But the real hook was the repetitive loop, fading in and out, of an old-style male southern preacher, relating a small part of a parable about ‘the man with the withered arm’. Utterly hypnotic, rivetting. It sounded a bit like something Laurie Anderson might do. Does it cound familiar to anyone?

  2. Jack Robertson says:

    Oh. Frist, too. Scary out here on virgin white.

  3. anthony says:

    The man with the golden arm!

  4. David Rubie says:

    Jack, it’ll be “Oh Yeah” by Yello


    Actually, probably not.

  5. The Feral Abacus says:

    Jack Robertson – John Adams’ “Christian zeal & activity” at a guess.

  6. j_p_z says:

    Jack Robertson — Adams is a good guess. Or it might be something by Steve Reich, who did some things like that. At any rate it sounds like maybe it was sort of influenced by Reich’s “Come Out”. Though it also sounds reminiscent of Terry Riley.

  7. Graham Bell says:

    Seventh …. and it is a beautiful morning here in the Central Queensland bush [= boonies, backblocks, countryside, rural environment].

  8. Enemy Combatant says:

    Moir’s on song today.

    Up Coolum way steady rain has been falling all night to nourish our botanical doona. A gentle breeze is beginning to fluff it. Lorrikeets chatter and usually tone-deaf herbs are harmonising. We’re out to get amongst it. The bush smells so alive after a good soak.

    Bonjour, Mama!

  9. Paul Burns says:

    Am absolutely devastated by the news that Chrissy Amphlett has MS. But the courage of the woman. She has a gig with the Divynals very shortly and is going to appear, despite the fact that some mornings she hasn’t the strength to get out of bed, and frequently can’t walk down to the corner shop.She pibably doesn’t read LP but I wish her all the best, anyway.
    On a much lighter note, because I really don’t want to bring people down on the Saturday Salon, if you Google News you’ll see in the entertainment section that Scary from the Spice Girls is a lipsinger and frequently puts it on the other girls backstage. Is this new or has it been going on for yonks? I’m sure you’ll all entertain yourselves with it.

  10. Big week for The Worst of Perth. The Lord Mayor, embarrassed by seeing a post on The Worst of Perth vowed to remove a public sculpture. It got to the papers, and an ex govt minister stepped in to fight her decision, giving TWOP a spray for being “anti youth” at the same time. Nice to generate a fight between politicians from nothing. Nice that a blog might even change the look of the city, even if it is removing public artwork.

  11. Jack Robertson says:

    Whoo-hoo, Feral Abacus (and JPZ) you were dead on, misdirection and all. (T’was ‘the man with the withered hand’, btw.) Here’s an excerpt of the very bit that stuck in my brain. I was marooned in the voodoo tropics for several months, and on the playlist it was this, some Miles Davis Moroccan riffing, the BBC world service fanfare and half of one of Bach’s trumpet concertos.

    I love this kind of musical synthesis. Thanks for the responses.

  12. Paul Burns says:

    i don’t come from Perth. So I’ve never seen the offending sculpture. But from your picture it doesn’t look like a bum to me. More like a face, and the face of some awful Victorian sculpture made of plaster. But I’ve probably missed something, and I do come from the East.

  13. Jack Robertson says:

    What’s a bit weird is that several years’ sporadic enquiry at various specialist music outlets, orchestral organisations and even University music departments yielded only blank looks. Seems like Adams is hardly obscure, and that this bit was an extract on the first JA website Googled suggests it’s a not obscure segment of a not obscure work, either.

    Teh interwebs are only useful if you’ve got sufficient knowledge/keyword to get your leg in the search door. So again a thousand thanks for scratching a long-niggling itch, Feral. And Huzzah! for good old-fashioned human wisdom, I say.

  14. joe2 says:

    Jack Robertson the excerpt is very interesting. You got me thinking of this little gem.

  15. skribeforti says:

    @12 Paul:
    The sculpture is in the ‘dead zone’ of the train station. The place where people hurry through to avoid being assaulted by the bums that ‘live’ there or just to avoid the stink of festering urine. It’s long been a problem. I suppose Max Evans thought he was prettying the area up when he bought the monstrosity.

  16. Paul Burns says:

    Oh, you mean the homeless people? I didn’t get that.Sounds like this mayor would have been better off putting his money into a shelter for the homeless.
    However, I really appreciate your clarification. I was terribly confused after I read the piece. Thanks, heaps.

  17. Jack Robertson says:

    Joe2, thanks for reminding of JBNFMY. It’s of a piece, isn’t it. This from Bryers:

    “I took the tape loop [of an old homeless guy singing the hymn] to Leicester, where I was working in the Fine Art Department, and copied the loop onto a continuous reel of tape, thinking about perhaps adding an orchestrated accompaniment to this. The door of the recording room opened on to one of the large painting studios and I left the tape copying, with the door open, while I went to have a cup of coffee. When I came back I found the normally lively room unnaturally subdued. People were moving about much more slowly than usual and a few were sitting alone, quietly weeping. I was puzzled until I realised that the tape was still playing and that they had been overcome by the old man’s singing…

    For me those (rare) pieces of contemporary art that tap this well into the hot vein of unashamed Faith – in a proper God, I mean, a Nick Cave, omnipotent but non-interventionist, wrathful, tough love, don’t-jiggle-My-chain Goddy God – help ameliorate the increasingly (inexplicably!?) virulent disdain displayed towards us Believers by the current crop of too-smug God-bashers. Fine, let Teh Hitch write a million silky books fisking (sac)religious nutcasery into deflated irrelevance, good on him…but he’ll never produce anything that can stop a room of painters dead like Bryers’ old man did. I hasten to add, Joe2, that I’m not claiming that God’s the only decent artist around (OK, so I am, kind of, a little bit), nor that either Bryers’ or Adams’ work are even meant to be Godly as such. But neither work is taking the piss out of the ‘sonic found objects’ they use, rather, both contextualise God with great tenderness and care. They’re playing it straight; and if either is aiming to consign to some historical or even spiritual grave the kind of naive worship and artless Faith explicit in those taped quotations, then they do so with the gentle duty-of-care of the mortician…which in a really profound sense, breathes life (back) into the ideas, anyway. Explicit religiosity is really just aesthetic warm-up, a kind of sensual pump-priming of the soul before getting down with God…whoah, steady on, Jack…

    Alls I’m tryin’ to say is that both these works take capital G God seriously, on His terms, as a proper potential subject and potential source of unironic (ie creative) majesty and power and authenticity. And that…I do wish rather more Australian artists of all kinds had the bottle to ‘do’ God properly like this. Or have a crack, anyway. Thanks again for the link, Joe2.

  18. Jack Robertson says:

    Sorry, Bryars, with an ‘a’. (Also…me, I like Waits as much the next gravelly guy, but he really has no arty business being anywhere the hell near this one.)

  19. Enemy Combatant says:

    Possum has lured Pearson into his lair and given him a right proper touch up. Indeed, Teh Furry One has drawn blood. cf. comments at thread’s end.

  20. Katz says:

    Mark on a closed thread:

    It’s a notoriously difficult concept to define from a social scientific point of view, but I think you’ll find it has a relatively precise definition in law.

    Yes Mark. The legal definition of religion is broad enough to empty it of any content.

    In CHURCH OF THE NEW FAITH v. COMMISSIONER OF PAY-ROLL TAX (VICT.) [1983] Justice Brennan said the following:

    7. Hitherto the concept of religion has received little judicial exegesis in Australia, whether under s. 116 [of the Constitution] or otherwise.

    However, Brennan argued his way to this conclusion about Scientologists:

    45. The seeming vagueness of the supernatural beliefs and the obscurity of their expression renders difficult the perception of any connexion between those beliefs and the practices and observances followed by the general group of adherents. Yet, as Crockett J. found, adherents, who number between 5,000 and 6,000 people in Victoria, accord blind reverence to what Mr. Hubbard has written and it may therefore be inferred that they perceive some unifying thread which makes the whole intelligible, or which assembles sufficient of a jigsaw to allow them to see themselves and what they do as part of a supernatural reality. We think an inference should be drawn – though the material to support it is not compelling – that the general group of adherents practice auditing and accept the other practices and observances of Scientology because, in doing what Mr. Hubbard bids or advises them to do, they perceive themselves to be giving effect to their supernatural beliefs.

    In other words, under law, a religion is what an indeterminate number of persons blindly believe to be a religion.

    We Flying Spaghetti Monsterites are in with a real show to have our religion recognised!


    1. There is no difference at law between a religion and a superstition.

    2. Any laws that make a distinction between religion on the one hand and thought, conscience, and expression on the other, don’t understand the legal definition of religion.

  21. Jack Robertson says:

    Proving only (once again) that lawyers, like politicians, policy-makers, bureaucrats, scientists, Founding Fathers, athiests…are all mugs to waste their energies and expertise bothering about God at all (either way). Unless it’s on their own time, and they’re doing it for kicks. But hey – whosoever earthly wants to go blind agonising over Kirpans and such-like….go crazy.

    But FFS don’t rope God into it. ‘Coz He doesn’t give a fuck. No, really.

  22. Casey says:

    Justice Brennan?, the Catholic with a tribe of children, one of which is a priest right?

  23. Katz says:

    Except Jack, that the above-quoted case concerned itself with the most important religious concept of all — tax exempt status.

  24. Katz says:

    The very same Justice Brennan, Casey.

    He applied brilliantly the principles and precepts of secular enlightenment thought to accord religion its logical place in the order of things.

    As you can see, he definition has very interesting consequences for how we manage our civil society, especially in regard to the recognition we give to claims of the special status of religious beliefs and practices.

  25. The Feral Abacus says:

    Hi Jack – always happy to help reunite someone with an elusive obsession! Adams is a big deal in contemporary classical music, so I’m surprised you drew so many blanks. Though like j_p_z, Steve Reich was the first name to come to mind (he’s very interested in the musicality of human speech).

    Adams seems to be part of that strand of American culture that takes a transcendental approach to spirituality – his opera ‘El Nino’, based on texts by Latin American poets about the Nativity, is another example. j_p_z mentioned another in Terry Riley, whose compositions reflect his intense interest in music as a spiritual pursuit, and in how different cultures connect music and spirituality.

  26. adrian says:

    Once again Gummo Trotsky closes a thread for no other reason than people are disagreeing with him.

    Points for perservearance, Katz.

  27. joe2 says:

    Yeh, good on you Jack Robertson for setting the ball rolling in ever such a wonderful way. You will not be surprised to know that there aint much Cave not enjoyed around here. Still, on matters religous this bloke would be an agnostic if some bastard had not added the ism.

    You are a little bit tough on Tom Waits for his bathroom, recording sounding, addition to JBNFMY. The loop is supposed to go on and on and on and he just rings the conclusion bell. Kinda sweet and subtle, really, if the piece is played in its proper length.

    And Justice Brennan is one hell of a classy act.
    Right Cool Katz, hit it..

    lyrics down below..

  28. joe2 says:

    Katz last census I went for the Pastafarian option.
    Do you know how many there are of us?

  29. murph the surf says:

    This link picked up from Club Troppo’s recommendations – from the mad , bad, glad and sad section. As they say comments mke more sense than the post.

  30. murph the surf says:

    “Once again Gummo Trotsky closes a thread for no other reason than people are disagreeing with him.”
    Gummo is honest enough to say he thinks the thread stinks before doing so – we should consider it a mercy killing ?
    Oh and Gandhi – RIP .

  31. joe2 says:

    Murph may we presume you are about to set up a blog rather than just surf?

    Gandhi is still high on my favourites list and just hope he continues on, around the blogosphere, in whatever capacity he chooses. His voice is always a stimulating, interesting and important one. Even if he trys very hard, sometimes, to push commentators on his blog to vote Green when they already do that anyway.

  32. Rusell says:

    Sorry to see the kirpan discussion shut down – Katz clearly still had scope to develop arguments.

  33. kimberella says:

    I tended to think the Kirpan discussion had been going round in circles a long while. I don’t think Gummo was avoiding engagement – the whole thing had just got too repetitious and heated for any further good discussion to take place.

    As for gandhi, I hope he reconsiders and comes back here. I for one would welcome him and I’m sure others would too.

  34. kimberella says:

    Ps – I also note that Gummo said he might bring the Kirpan thread back after a cooling off period.

  35. Paul Burns says:

    Re. Kirpan.
    Being relatively new to LP, I was just amazed at how long the thread got. Does this happen often?

  36. kimberella says:

    Used to happen quite a bit!

  37. Apropos of the Kirpan thread, I bought La Belle Noiseuse on dvd today.

    And I just watched a really excellent Bollywood film:,curpg-1.cms

  38. silkworm says:

    Wearing a topknot to hide ‘neath a turban,
    Concealing a dagger, but calling it a kirpan,
    Moving to Australia for the freedom it brings,
    These are a few of my favourite Singhs.

  39. Alex says:

    For those interested in Gender issues, i’ve put up 4 posts on my little house you may be interested in. /shameless self plug

  40. Enemy Combatant says:

    Gandhi, sometimes you’ve gotta take Gummo with a handful of salt.
    I miss you too. Please reconsider. Besides, the cranky old codger’s not the only thread on the blog. But on a good day, he’s an irresistible blend of Einstein and Eddy Haskell.

  41. mbahnisch says:

    Those wishing to stoush with Kirpans have a renewed opportunity to do so:

  42. Helen says:

    Great articles Drumcounsellor. Your template appears to have gone AWOL! (but it doesn’t interfere with the reading pleasure.)

  43. Graham Bell says:

    Silkworm [on 38]:
    The tune seems familiar …. is it sung solo, as a duet or with the full choir [enturbanned or deturbanned]? 🙂

  44. silkworm says:

    Graham – It’s sung to the tune of “My Favourite Things” from The Sound of Music.

  45. Graham Bell says:

    😀 L-O-L

  46. murph the surf says:

    I was going to post this on the Rudd and the left thread but it didn’t seem appropriate – does the ALP have policy on this beyond the Garret quote ?

    this link -
    is from may 2007 .

    Is this an issue that has traction with the rank and file but the factions can’t decide if they are interested ?

  47. Paul Burns says:

    Highly enjoyable, joe2. But this will go beyond a recount if they can’t solve the problems of 1s that might be 7s or 7s that might be 1s. Thew Libs are going to take the thing all the way to the High Court. We may very well be facing a court-ordered by-election to solve it.Very expensive business, democracy, as somebody from the AHA once famously said.

  48. joe2 says:

    Yep, Paul Burns, nobody should doubt the wisdom of a spokesperson from the AMA. Fran is left wondering,though … what the bloody hell happened?

    She and the Libs really thought they had the sharks out of the pool.

  49. Paul Burns says:

    AHA, actually, joe2. They were donating massive amounts to the ALP in the form of the NSW Labor Government but are now somewhat regretting it as NSW Labor has brought in no smoking in enclosed areas in pubs, lecensed boutique coffee-shops etc to sell liquor without meals and put a cap on the number of poker machines in NSW. Not very happy chappies at all, our AHA.

  50. silkworm says:

    Stockhausen has died.

  51. Graham Bell says:

    Joe 2:
    7 votes? It’s down to five[5] now. “Recount, recount!” Actually, a funnier one was when 6 Communist Party preferences got Young Liberal, Jim Killen, in and hence the Menzies government re-elected [There is no evidence though that Menzies sent a thank-you letter to the Communist Party of Australia 🙂 L-O-L].

    Vale Stockhausen. Have never been keen on either Stockhausen nor Sculthorpe [bit of an Orff, Respighi and Brumby bloke myself …. and I’ll biff the first galah who says “kitsch”]. However, nobody can deny that Stockhausen was a musical genius [likewise Sculthorpe].

  52. Katz says:

    Joe 2:

    The Killen story is so good it should be true.

    Unfortunately, it isn’t.

    This extract comes from Andrew Bartlett’s blog:

    Christian Jarman Hagen – Democratic Labor Party (DLP)* 3 882
    Max Nordan Julius – Communist Party of Australia (CPA) 676
    Denis James Killen – Liberal Party 22 667
    John Edward O’Donnell – Australian Labor Party (ALP) 25 123

    (The total number of Informal votes was 1 921)

    In distributing the preferences of the 676 CPA votes, 390 (or 57.7% of them) went to the ALP, 193 (28.5%) went to the DLP and 93 (13.8%) to the Liberal. This left the tally as follows:

    DLP 4075, Lib 22 760, ALP 25 513.

    In distributing the DLP’s 4075 votes, 3479 (or just over 85% of them) went to the Liberal and 596 went to the ALP, leaving a final tally for Killen of 26 239 and for O’Donnell of 26 109.

    Thus you can see that the ALP received most of the CPA votes.

    Killen was saved by the DLP.

    No doubt the Killen/Communist myth will live on, however.

  53. j_p_z says:

    Jack Robertson — was about to share some notes on American minimalist composers, but now the news has come along of Karlheinz Stockhausen’s death. Was never a huge fan, mostly out of general ignorance (still less specifically informed about his individual works), but then again: Peace to all the strange 20th-cent artistic weirdos, says me.

    Can still recall high school subway commutes circa 1979-80, when it was still a kick for all us nutcase kidz to scrawl “Edgard Varese Eats Rock Lobster!” on the number 5 train, alongside the Keith Haring originals that were still being thrown up daily on the Lexington Avenue line stations, so what the feck. Man, do I miss ole Mister Keith. But for good or ill, NY punk rock would not have been possible without nutjobs like Stockhausen, so: “I salute you, brother!” (J. Carroll)

    Anyway, back to the point, a short list for people who don’t know a whole lot about minimalism (which is, rather justly, somewhat limited in its own right):

    Terry Riley, “In C” a must.
    Brian Eno, “Music for Airports” esp. the Bang On a Can All-Stars recording.
    Steve Reich, “Music for 18 Musicians” and “Drumming” at least.
    Wilson/Glass/Knowles/Johnson/Childs, “Einstein On the Beach,” (opera) esp. ‘Knee 1/These are the days’ and ‘Knee 5/Two lovers sat on a park bench,’ I defy anyone to listen to Knee 5 and not burst into tears.
    John Adams, “Nixon In China” (opera), esp. Chou En-Lai’s aria in the banquet scene, and his introspective aria at the close of the opera:
    “I wonder: How much
    of what we did
    Was good?”

    That oughta keep you buggers busy until the next Tex Avery retrospective is ready for release.

  54. joe2 says:

    Anyway, the good part is that Fran Bailey is showing all the characteristics of the sour/sore loser that the Libs are famous for. And thanks Graham and Katz… Killen history on other supposed close ones.

    Hope you saw the advertisement, above, that helped provide our Fran with a speedy trip to the old country, to defend our dangerous swearing. And sell our poorly paid hospitality labour as obliging, grinning, slaves.

    ps.. Whhoops, P.Burns, it twas a slip of the keyboard between the two legal drug pushers.

  55. casey says:

    Beyond belief. Youths who gang raped a 10 year old Aboriginal girl in Qld walk. Judge says she probably agreed to have sex with the 9. What part of 10 years old, doesnt she get????? What a f-wit.

    I cant believe it.

  56. mbahnisch says:

    It ain’t good to say the least.

  57. joe2 says:

    Yep, it “ain’t good” when the media starts frothing at the mouth about some ,supposed, failure of a member of the judiciary, as well.

  58. casey says:

    The fact that a judge sees fit to suggest that a 10 year old is somehow capable of consent beggars belief. Under any circumstances. Without knowing the details of the case or not. Whether the media is “frothing at the mouth” or not.

  59. mbahnisch says:

    Yes, I’m with casey. Hopefully the Qld A-G will appeal this.

  60. Su says:

    Agree; it beggars belief. That a member of the judiciary should be so ignorant about rape is horrifying but sadly, not at all surprising.

  61. casey says:

    OH well it seems frothing all round, starting from the AG, this from the :

    Queensland’s Attorney-General Kerry Shine says he will appeal sentences handed down against nine males who gang-raped a 10-year-old girl in 2005.

    Cairns-based District Court judge Sarah Bradley did not record convictions against six teenage attackers and gave three others aged 17, 18 and 26 suspended sentences over the incident at the indigenous Aurukun community on Cape York.

    The girl had “probably agreed” to have sex with the youths, Judge Bradley said during her sentencing remarks, The Australian newspaper reported.

    Mr Shine met with Director of Public Prosecutions Leanne Clare for urgent advice on Monday, and determined the October sentences would be appealed, even though the deadline had passed.

    “I am truly horrified by the circumstances of these offences,” he told reporters in Brisbane.

  62. casey says:

    sorry, from the SMH.

    With Qld State govt ordering a review of all sentences in Cape York, to see if there was a trend of leniency. And the State Opposition saying:

    Opposition justice spokesman Mark McArdle said the penalties the prosecution sought should also be investigated.

    “How did the DPP fail to put any evidence before the court, any submissions warranting a custodial sentence, and why didn’t the DPP’s office insist on a custodial sentence in these circumstances?” Mr McArdle told AAP.

    He was also concerned that the victim was said to have agreed to sex, as children could never consent.”

    Im not sure how to link on this site, sorry.

  63. Jack Robertson says:

    Ta for the list, JPZ. Gunna work me ma way through it.

    ‘Nixon in China’ as the title of a contemporary orchestral work is alone enough to whet your appetite to take a punt, isn’t it.

  64. joe2 says:

    So casey might we presume you are an expert on this subject?

    My inclination would be to imagine that magistrate went through all the evidence for more than the 3 minute, copyline, deadline. I would be inclined to back the magistrate.

    Though let us see.

  65. casey says:

    Who is this “we presume” you refer to?

    Am I an expert? in whether 10 year olds are capable of consent? Yes I am. No they are not.

  66. casey says:

    But, just in case you can actually take on board that the judiciary sometimes fail the people. Here is the Qld AG on the matter:

    KERRY SHINE: Under Queensland law a child under 12 cannot give consent to sexual intercourse and I wouldn’t have thought that that was a compelling or relevant issue to be taken into account but that’s a matter for the judge.

    That is why its being appealed. I presume.

  67. joe2 says:

    Thing is, casey, you presume to know everything when you have not seen the actual evidence. Good shock jock stuff though.

  68. casey says:

    I am commenting on one aspect of the case.
    10 year old girls cannot give consent. I have not presumed to know everything but one thing. 10 year old girls cannot give consent.

    But what do you know Joe2? Do you know about the case. Perhaps you do. Perhaps you can enlighten me as to why the judge would say this? Perhaps you can tell me why you are inclined to back the judge. Based on what?

    I am reacting to a documented statement offered by the judge as a mitigating circumstance. On what basis are you inclined to “go with the judge”? Cause if you know something I dont, Im all ears.

  69. casey says:

    Anyway, back on the topic, the denfendants all pleaded guilty to raping the girl. They walked free or received suspended sentences.

    Its the Indigenous reaction that takes centre stage for me: In the Courier Mail today:

    The decision and comments have drawn swift condemnation from prominent Aboriginal academic Professor Boni Robertson, of Brisbane’s Griffith University, who called for Judge Bradley to step down.

    “I think Judge Bradley should be asked to step down until a full inquiry is undertaken,” Prof Robertson told reporters today.

    There was nothing that would ever justify the outcome of the case, which had set back the cause of indigenous womens’ rights, she said.

    “It’s actually undermined everything we have worked for over the last 10 years to get our women justice in this country,” Prof Robertson said.

    “There is something even more sinister – it’s actually give a very clear message to perpetrators out there generally.

    “I don’t care that they are black, white or whatever, I think it’s allowed perpetrators to think if you can come up with a defence that she asked for it or she condoned it, then that gives them a sense of leniency.”

    I dont understand uncomplicated faith in a legal judgement, based soley on the basis that a judge has examined the evidence in detail. So what? They come to the bench human beings with their own subjectivities, as evidenced by the racism enacted by the instrument of the law since white occupation. The Stolen Gens report details this quite well.

    Rather, someone I would give more credence to Prof. Boni Robertson, who has a some kind of knowledge of Indigenous womens issues and sexual violence in Indigenous communities. I would be inclined to trust her experience, rather than the decisions of a white judicial system which has exhibited a long long history of racism and sexism in its judgements.

  70. joe2 says:

    Are you sure you are not running an old fashioned aggenda, here, casey?

    Mr Howard has left the room…

  71. casey says:

    Funny Joe2. Personally have never regarded the dawning of the Rudd era as the end of racism and sexism in Australia. Well, Joe2 I may say you are a dreamer, but you are not the only one I suppose…Anyway, as a matter of interest do you think that 10 year olds can consent to sex? Seriously, given that’s the aspect that has disturbed me, what do you make of that summing up by the judge? No I want to know what you make of that. Its documented. So what do you say? And really, do you have any detail on the case, that makes you inclined to back the judge? (second time I ask). Cause, it seems to me that the argument that teh media is teh nasty is not enough to stem the flow of critique (which comes from many quarters and not just the virulent MSM) on this deeply worrying statement.

  72. casey says:

    Actually, whatever, I dont care anymore. I find your continued insistence on winning your point (the media is sensationalist and the judge has the detail – you dont say!) in the face of the obvious – that 10 year olds cannot consent to sex, that 9 people were found guilty of rape and walked free – distasteful. But each to their very weird own.

  73. Jack Robertson says:

    Oh, bollix. The grump’s gone and dun it again. Curse Ye, Gummo Trotsky – curse ye to damantion, man. Hope no-one minds me posting this longy here. I’ll have wasted much valuable drinking time, otherwise. S’pose to be on the Kirpan II thread. Delete if redundant.


    “…that we militant secularists should just shut up?”

    Grateful nod back, Anna Winter, for the calm neutral nod my way. Yes, knock it off, Silky, y’dag…since 9/11 I’ve been verballed daily by the best in the biz, matey. Your lame straw-poke barely tickles. You know very well that I wrote, meant, dog-whistled or otherwise implied no such silly thing as that which you whittled up from the chip on your shoulder, using as a blueprint some odd truncated version of my general protest about anyone deploying Goddy hyperbole (pro or anti) to Trojan Horse their own fixations into this really rather banal non-ishoo. And…if you really don’t know that, then I’ll just politely leave you to keep arguing with yourself.

    As it happens I think you and a few other ‘Kirpan sceptics’ have been treated pretty shabbily at times in these threads. (Don’t blame Groucho, though – he gets impatient and utsy with us all on his drawing days). In fact I think your (and others’) repeated point re: Kirpans as potential weapons can’t simply be dismissed as silly. Whether any specific potential weapon needs to be legislated against above and beyond the blanket legislation that already exists – ie it’s already illegal to stab someone, whatever the weapon – is a matter of, again, practical case-by-case analysis (context, circumstance, track history, and so on). As a rule, I’m sceptical about any law/rule that tries to criminalise/prohibit nouns rather than verbs, but that’s the dope-kooked God-fearing libertarian in me, I expect. Good cases can be made, and have been, to do just that. For example, cultural flags and thingies at soccer matches were banned because the experts with the expert specific knowledge and the honesty to admit there was a problem that needed action – not the ‘on principle’ ismists – correctly appraised that blameless bits of bunting or not, in practical terms banning them for a bit would likely, on balance, help preempt violence. That stats suggest there’s no analytical case whatsoever just now for a similar blanket ban on Kirpans in schools on violence-prophylactic grounds does not mean that a particular school, being better appraised of various peculiar local factors that raise the tensions in their case, shouldn’t have sufficient autonomy and breathing space under ‘our law’ to make just that call, anyway. Schools have to have the capacity to administer/run themselves on a daily basis, and autonomy over local-peculiar safety and OHP matters of all kinds are fundamental to this. The secular ‘right to freedom of …’ pedanticist who fails to recognise the need to relinquish this kind of breathing space to schools is kidding themselves, and, as Katz elegantly articulated (I meant to to hat-tip earlier, Katz), when they do so re: us Goddy types in (the rather condescending, harrumph) context of ‘privileging religion’ over human thought/belief/ideas generic, they’re damning themselves – and, the pricks, us, too – into exactly that circular purgatory whereby ‘religion’ becomes ‘anything we say it is’ and therefore ‘everything’, and therefore ‘nothing’. Likewise, ‘everything’ becomes religio-privileged, which in practical terms means either nothing at all ‘religious’ be allowed in schools, or Kirpans and everything f**king else that anyone says is religious must be. In other words, your only practical choice if you see these matters as matters of ‘principle’ is to end up catering to one or other fringe – the militant secularists or the religious-cult festishisers.

    So crucially, Silky – as Anna Winter generously suggested – my real point (as far as you secularists goes) is this: those of you who for some reason seem to want or need to deliver a knock-out blow to God and so can’t resist seeking to universalise these tawdry admin matters into matters of ‘principle’, actually risk going backwards in practical terms on your own secular autonomy front. If you insist on asserting ‘on principle’ that this or that religious bit n’ bob must have no place, ever, never, in a secular school (or guv’mint, or parliament, or law-making in general, or lobbying, or any ‘part’ of secular society)…I can guarantee you we’ll go out and git ourselves some legal ‘right to freedom of…’ fixin’s from the ‘right to’ pedanticists, to enshrine our bit n’ bob in secular law (to be on the safe side). Thus, stepping onto that tedious path above that ends up robbing all you secularists of any capacity to keep us gently in our Goddy place using commonsensical, administrative, personality-leadership and/or local bureacratic tools of social management. Even when it’s manifestly good for everyone (even us) that God be kept in His place, and irrespective of whether it’s only one single gobby, chippy, grandstanding God-botherer among us wot decides to avail hisself of that whizzy new blanket ‘right’ to make a pest of himself – on equally zealous but opposing ‘principle’ too, geddit?)


    The genuinely secular and the genuinely Faithful are natural allies, not inevitable enemies, Silky. Stop picking fights where there are none to be had. You won’t win them. You can’t. The thing about Imaginary Friends, mate, is that We can invent ’em faster than you can possibly ban ’em.

    Katz and JPZ, I’m late for the pub. Enjoyed both your comments immensely too, thanks so much for playing me straight. Will respond tomorrow properly if shoulder-sleeping bubba and ‘r’ & ‘f’-less keyboard don’t prevent!

    Ta for space as ever, LeProdders.

  74. joe2 says:

    Ok, Casey, you are on.
    Please tell me what “rape”, is in the legal sense?

  75. Anna Winter says:

    Joe2, seriously, it’s not even a case of enough rope now.

    The law says that 10 year-olds can’t consent to sex. Sex without consent is rape.

    Of course you’re right that one shouldn’t jump to the tabloids’ conclusions, but this isn’t a fight you’re going to win.

  76. joe2 says:

    Maybe not, Anna, but i would always prefer the judiciarcy rather than tabloid, lynchnmob.

  77. Anna Winter says:

    Unless you’re arguing that Casey is a part of the tabloid lynchmob, then your point isn’t relevant.

    We’re still allowed to question authority, and frankly, the only possible way the judge should get the benefit of the doubt here is if the facts as reported are incorrect.

  78. mbahnisch says:

    Unless you’re arguing that Casey is a part of the tabloid lynchmob, then your point isn’t relevant.

    Or Anna Bligh and Boni Robertson, for that matter.

  79. joe2 says:

    All i am saying, Anna, is that the ‘judiciary’ is the scapegoat at the moment. Cheers..

  80. mbahnisch says:

    There’s a good analysis at Talk it Out:

    Even so, Judge Bradley’s comments that the victim “was not forced” and “probably agreed to have sex” with the perpetrators reveals a staggeringly inappropriate approach to a child-rape case. A ten year old child is by definition unable to “agree” or consent to have sex with anyone for the very reason that makes the crime of child rape so heinous – because she is a child whose developmental stage is such as to disable her from making the choice, because she is incapable of understanding the nature of the act. That being so, talking about her “agreement” to have sex with nine men is nothing short of reprehensible.

    Furthermore, how is it relevant that the victim was not “forced”? Force is not an element of the crime of rape and lack of force does not detract from the seriousness of the crime. How does the rape of someone who does not need to be physically forced because she does not understand what is being done to her merit any less condemnation than use of brute force to secure the victim’s submission? Is a victim who is coerced into non-consensual sex by means other than physical force any less deserving of protection? Must she put up a physical fight or risk a judge (or a prosecutor) saying that she asked for it, that her rape was not all that serious? Must the rapists slap around a ten year old child as well as fuck her before they are considered sufficiently blameworthy to merit a conviction?

    The legal system is not well adapted to dealing with the crime of rape because of the problematic notion of consent, but one would expect that gang rape of a child would not raise such problems. However when a judge makes remarks like those made by Judge Bradley and when a prosecutor does not even bother to ask for a sentence to match the crime, it is clear that even when dealing with child rape the legal system is plagued by inappropriate attitudes.

  81. joe2 says:

    More on this case here.
    The reason the prosecution did not go further.

    Not good enough you would have to say in the case of a ten year old.
    But hell these legal folks have no doubt done their best on the basis of evidence. Politicians, media and arm chair experts do not have their difficult job.

  82. anthony says:

    and what’s a person gotta do to get a gravatar working round these parts?

  83. Su says:

    But hell these legal folks have no doubt done their best on the basis of evidence

    How do you work that one out? Doing their best would have involved prison time for all nine. Doing their best would have meant that the Crown prosecutor would have been able to distinguish between late adolescent and adult males manipulating an exceptionally vulnerable girl and “consent in a general sense”. This is why women want the right to legal counsel because the failure of women and girls in this situation is frequent and systemic.

  84. Katz says:

    There appears to be no difficulty with the evidence in the FNQ rape case.

    As others have rightly said, a 10-year-old is incapable of informed consent to sex.

    The difficult issue here is to calibrate the punishments for crimes committed. Assuming that all defendants, from earlyish teens to the age of 26, committed the same acts, it is reasonably clear that they should not receive the same sentence.

    A 15-year-old boy cannot form the same mens rea as a fully-functioning 26-year-old adult. Now, note that I have made an assumption about the 26-year-old which may not be true. He may not be a fully-functioning adult capable of a full understanding of the wickedness of his act.

    On the face of it, it would appear that the defendants were treated far too leniently. But there may be other factors involved.

    And to say that the defendants have all been treated too leniently is not the same as asserting that they should all be punished with the same sentence.

  85. Su says:

    I’m not saying they should all receive the same amount of jail time; I’m saying that a suspended sentence is inadequate.

  86. Katz says:

    I’m not saying they should all receive the same amount of jail time; I’m saying that a suspended sentence is inadequate.

    For any of the defendants?

  87. Su says:

    For any of the defendants. Fifteen year old who commit rape should not be allowed back into the community without going through an offender program. They are at very high risk of reoffending. Exceptionally light sentences for rape are one of the cultural factors which contribute to the very high rate of rape in our society.

  88. Su says:

    ugh, should have been “Fifteen year olds.”

    Another societal factor is Rape Myth Acceptance. Rape Myths are commonly held beliefs about rape and rape victims which minimize rape and effectively absolve the rapist from wrongdoing. The prosecutor’s statements about “childish experimentation” and “consent in a general sense” are examples of this.

  89. Su says:

    Jail time = Offender can’t reoffend for the duration and receives a strong message that raping 10 year olds=bad, as opposed to the current situation where they received the very strong message that raping ten year olds = ‘childish experimentation’.

  90. Katz says:

    So you do want a fifteen-year-old in jail, as opposed to undergoing an “offender prgram”.

  91. Su says:

    I’m sorry you seem to have missed the first part of the original sentence;

    “Fifteen year olds who commit rape should not be allowed back into the community without going through an offender program.”

    Custodial sentences have numerous functions; “retribution, rehabilitation of the offender, particular or general deterrence, and protection of the community.” That’s from a NSW lawlink site but the principle is the same in QLD I am sure. Not so keen on retribution myself but I understand that for some victims it has that function. By saying they should not be allowed back into the community and by referring to the effect light sentences have on society as a whole I was making reference to the protective and deterrent functions of custodial sentences. I strongly believe that jails should have a rehabilitative function and there is a great need for more programs of that nature; but that is not their only function. Rapists are very difficult to rehabilitate and recidivism is high but at 15 there is a chance that there is still time to deflect them from the course taken by their 26 year old compatriot who already has another conviction for sex offenses.

  92. tigtog says:

    anthony @ #83, 1:13 am:

    and what’s a person gotta do to get a gravatar working round these parts?

    Normal gravatars don’t show up on blogs currently. To have an avatar show, here’s the steps.

    * Create a user account with (you don’t have to create an actual blog).
    * Upload an image to act as your avatar.
    * Then you have to be logged in to when you comment here, and the avatar will sit next to your comments.

    The parent company for WordPress has recently purchased, and they promise that making gravatars function automatically on blogs is going to happen Real Soon Now, but they have been saying that for months, and it should only be a couple of lines of code, so I dunno what they’re actually doing.

  93. Katz says:

    That’s from a NSW lawlink site but the principle is the same in QLD I am sure.

    Why do you assume that? The link I provided above suggests otherwise.

    It would appear that in Qld the 15-y-o we are talking about could be:

    a. Sent to jail.

    b. Sent to jail and compelled to do an offender program.

    c. Compelled to do a non-custodial offender program.

    Which is it to be?

  94. Su says:

    You are wilfully misunderstanding me Katz. The quote referred to the function of prison sentences. Those principles are universal. Jail time has all of those functions in all states. Your quote referred to the availability of offender programmes whilst on parole or probation; nothing to do with the function of custodial sentences. It is not contradictory at all. I think I have made it pretty clear what I think is appropriate and why. Protection, deterrance, rehabilitation.

    The Crown Prosecutor who did not apply for custodial sentences has been suspended and Bligh noted that his statement did not reflect community values BTW

  95. Katz says:

    So your answer is (b).

    If so, that is all.

  96. Su says:

    Oh I can go now can I? No lines, no six of the best?

    You haven’t explained why you thought that the provision of programs to parolees or those on probation had any bearing at all on the matter of sentencing.

  97. Katz says:

    Do you want lines or six of the best? How odd…

    There is such a thing as a non-custodial sentence which may have involved undergoing an offender program.

    As you may be unaware, the three youngest defendants did not have a conviction recorded against them. Our conversation had as its primary topic the youngest of those three offenders.,21985,22909935-662,00.html

    If there was no conviction, there could be no offenders’ program.

    So the next step up from no conviction could have been a non-custodial sentence. That non-custodial sentence may have involved submission to an offenders’ program.

    It therefore does not take an intellectual giant to recognise that:

    the provision of programs to parolees or those on probation had [some] bearing … on the matter of sentencing.

  98. Su says:

    My apologies Katx, rehabilitation is one part of the principles of sentencing, the others being proportionality, denunciation, incapacitation, deterrence, and restitution. If your only concern is rehabilitation then you are ignoring all of the other considerations.

  99. Gaz says:

    “it is clear that even when dealing with child rape the legal system is plagued by inappropriate attitudes.”

    Um amen to that! I really can’t see what all the fuss is about here,they should take the offenders out and stand them up against a nice brick wall,(limestone is nice me thinks)and then shoot them.But any one out there thinking this is a bit messy and may damage a perfectly good brick wall,and shit I can understand that,then I will concede hanging them would serve the same purpose.

    A nice video should be made of the proceedings and should be made available at,oh I dunno maybe the A.B.C. shops or some of the larger retail outlets mayhaps.Not available to minors mind you.

    Now I see a lot of people here are referring to lynch mobs,and shit that I should be accused of that.I mean the only problem I see here,is finding a nice timber beam to support the weight of ten arse wipes, that don’t deserve to live.

  100. Katz says:

    I’m not ignoring them at all.

    I began this conversation with the observation that I believe the defandants in this case were treated too leniently.

    I then raised some issues about the proportionality of the sentences.

    I came to no conclusions at all because I frankly don’t know the circumstances of the various defendants.

    I simply hypothesised that the 26-y-o may not be capable of understanding the wickedness of his act, and therefore his sentence may reflect his mental condition. The qualities of proportionality, denunciation, incapacitation, deterrence, and restitution need to be taylored to his individual circumstances.

    And I stated with a little more confidence that a 15-y-o might well be sentenced differently from an adult who did have, or should have, an insight into the wickedness of his act. The qualities of proportionality, denunciation, incapacitation, deterrence, and restitution will be applied differently according to, among other things, the age of the defendant.

  101. joe2 says:

    Which is precisely why we have a paid independent judiciary to administrate on these matters. What scares me is that every time some leak is made about a case, this one predominantly about minors, the one strike and your out fraternity come out to bat for a return to the dark ages of an eye for an eye.

    I blame our crappy press who whip up the troll lynch mob.

  102. Su says:

    “I then raised some issues about the proportionality of the sentences.”

    Fortunately the DPP who does know all of the circumstances has recognized the sentences are too lenient and they are being appealed. In regard to proportionality this is an horrendous crime; even without knowing the circumstances of the defendants this can be stated with certainty. The principle of proportionality has been seriously violated. There is a history of disproportionately light sentences for rape across all jurisdictions and this trend has yet to be reversed; hence my particular anger.

    If the 26 year old cannot understand the seriousness of his crime, he has another conviction and so it is clear that he poses a continuing risk to the community and therefore should be given a custodial sentence.

  103. Su says:

    Joe 2 it matters little to a rape victim whether her assailant is 12, 15 or 50 the long term debilitating effects are the same. Asking for sentences in proportion to the nature and impact of the crime is not the same as “one strike and your out.” This child was already vulnerable by virtue of her disability, her lack of stable loving family and her prior history of abuse. She will live with the consequences of this rape for the rest of her life. A couple of years in juvenile detention is not a big price to pay for subjecting a child to rape.

  104. Jack Robertson says:

    (ditto, tigtog, ta re: gravatar advice…Katz & Su, pardon me while I quietly butt in for a test run…and butt out).

  105. joe2 says:

    “A couple of years in juvenile detention is not a big price to pay for subjecting a child to rape.”

    So what a great idea. Off to Brisbane, one would imagine, for people who have never left their land before so that they can get the ‘one size fits all’ legal retribution that you previously claimed you were not interesed in.

  106. anthony says:

    what Sir Cliff said!

  107. Su says:

    Protection, deterrence; are you at all interested in what happens to the people who share a community with the rapists? I am pretty surprised at the degree of rape apologia and in your comments. I find it disturbing to find that the rapist POV is privileged above that of the victim. What about the girl’s connection to her land; she has already been removed from her land once in an attempt to keep her safe. That in itself says a lot about the conditions on her land. Perhaps there are many women and girls in Aurukun who would be grateful if it were the rapists connection to land that was severed and not theirs.

  108. adrian says:

    Su, I don’t think that anyone is apologising for rape. Far from it! The sober voices above have just been stating the bleeding obvious- that none of us know the full facts of the matter, and should delay a rush to judgement until we do.

    Reacting to the media’s hysteria only encourages the bastards.

  109. casey says:

    “Exceptionally light sentences for rape are one of the cultural factors which contribute to the very high rate of rape in our society.”

    Su, I do think this is a very important statement from you. And when read in light of Boni Robertson’s statement on the matter, becomes a compelling one.

    “There was nothing that would ever justify the outcome of the case, which had set back the cause of indigenous womens’ rights, she said.

    “It’s actually undermined everything we have worked for over the last 10 years to get our women justice in this country,” Prof Robertson said.

    “There is something even more sinister – it’s actually give a very clear message to perpetrators out there generally.

    “I don’t care that they are black, white or whatever, I think it’s allowed perpetrators to think if you can come up with a defence that she asked for it or she condoned it, then that gives them a sense of leniency.

    When the dust settles on the interesections of race and gender at this particular site of sexual violence, Im pretty sure one thing will be very apparent – That a 10 year old girl who was raped, not once, but twice, was not well served here.

    While the detail of Katz’s comments are reasonable to me as I read them, it still remains the case, that statistically, sexual violence towards women is not treated with great seriousness in the court system (unless you are muslim and then you are jailed for many years on the basis of race rather than rape). So, based on those stats, if white women are treated appallingly, what chances do black girls have in an adversarial legal system which favours everything and anything they are not?

  110. casey says:

    Here’s a transcript of the case, for those interested:,23739,22911515-953,00.html

  111. Gaz says:

    “I blame our crappy press who whip up the troll lynch mob.”

    Your assumption that anyone who feels that ten males who would have sex with a ten yr old should have their bollicks cut off,or strung up, are a troll lynch mob, is a tag I wear with a pride you just couldn’t comprehend.So keep waffling on about the trolls wanting a bit of justice are somehow a lynch mob, it aint gonna wash.

    What irks you and the other pseudo intellectuals here is,notions of revenge, are reserved for the ignorant masses that according to you get whipped up by the press ummm.I gotta tell ya, I am whipped up by the fact these fucking dogs aren’t on the end of a rope.

    If I had my way, like most Australians, and I’ll run that by you again, most Australians, would reopen the gallows of every prison in Australia and it would be doing a roaring trade dispatching the scum bags of society.

    That anyone is discussing the facts of this case,and looking for an excuse for what a monumental cock up this whole fiasco has been should be ashamed of them selves.There is no room here for grey areas, these fuckers no matter what the circumstance, should all be removed from society end of story.

  112. Katz says:

    There ya go Gaz.

    Why bother with courts?

    Why not leave it up to Bolta, the Parrot and the late Stan Zemanek to tell us how high we should hang any vicious little bugger they care to condemn in their columns, on their radio show, or via a seance?

  113. Klaus K says:

    And that’s not even to mention the risks for victims associated with punishing rapists more harshly than we do murderers, Gaz.

  114. Gaz says:

    “Why bother with courts?”

    Yea I’ve asked myself the same question. What about a peoples tribunal? I could head it up like a modern day Judge Roy Bean.Katz you could be a defense lawyer, and I could keep interrupting you with, shut the fuck up ya don’t know shit.

    Yea a quick look at the facts or otherwise, and then a nice early hanging,sounds good to me.

  115. Gaz says:

    “And that’s not even to mention the risks for victims associated with punishing rapists more harshly than we do murderers, Gaz.”

    Look Bud I’ll need time to mull that little pearl of wisdom over.Give me about three months and I’ll give you a considered reply.

  116. Katz says:

    Hell yeah.

    It’s well known that men commit ten times more crime than women.

    Why wait? Drown ’em at birth.

  117. Gaz says:

    “Why wait? Drown ‘em at birth.”

    Yea well that’s good,but I thought more of knocking off the parents just before the point of conception.

  118. Klaus K says:

    “Look Bud I’ll need time to mull that little pearl of wisdom over.Give me about three months and I’ll give you a considered reply.”

    And that’s supposed to mean what? That you don’t understand the risks?

  119. Katz says:

    You’re a true visionary Gaz.

    Ever thought about doorknocking the good folks of this great nation of ours to publicise your policies?

    Who knows, you might even catch some of them “at it”.

    It’d be a case of killing two birds with one stone.

  120. Gaz says:

    “And that’s supposed to mean what? That you don’t understand the risks?”

    The only risk is,that you and the other do gooders on this here blog don’t get your way,and the courts make it mandatory to give scum bags a two week holiday in Bali or some other exotic paradise for rape pillage and plunder.

    Or the risk of another coterie of wanky do good psychologists, all losing their little earners trying to get into the minds of criminal shit bags.

    Yea lots of risks on this subject.

  121. Klaus K says:

    Okay, so you don’t understand my point. If the punishment for rape is as bad or worse than the punishment for murder, then rape victims are at greater risk of being murdered as well to prevent them testifying against an attacker.

  122. Gaz says:

    “Ever thought about doorknocking the good folks of this great nation of ours to publicise your policies?”

    Look Katz try as you may your on a loser here.Most of the plumbers,bricklayers,and candle stick makers I know already agree with me, so door knocking is a waste of time.

    Of course the exercise would do me good cos I’m a little over weight.

    “Who knows, you might even catch some of them “at it”.”

    Look my bag is in the participating of the “Act” I will leave the watching of it, to the visionaries like you.

  123. Gaz says:

    “then rape victims are at greater risk of being murdered as well to prevent them testifying against an attacker.”

    I would not usualy reply to a comment like that,but please feel free to show me some statistics.

    If my auntie had balls she would have been my uncle.

  124. Katz says:

    Gaz, maaaate, get your brane outta your dacks.

    The whole idea is to stop them having boy children.

    Unless, of course, you’re firing blanks. If you catch my drift.

    (You can fire blanks, can’t you?)

  125. Klaus K says:

    “I would not usualy reply to a comment like that,but please feel free to show me some statistics.”

    So you don’t think it’s a risk, then? Have you given the matter any thought at all? Since rape is not punished as harshly as murder, there are by definition no statistics on what happens when that is the case.

  126. Gaz says:

    “So you don’t think it’s a risk, then? Have you given the matter any thought at all? Since rape is not punished as harshly as murder, there are by definition no statistics on what happens when that is the case.”

    My friend please do a little research,in the U.S. men have been put to death for rape,and the laws are still on the statute books in many states, so if you look hard enough I am sure you will find some evidence to back up your theory.

    That we do not punish the crime of rape the same as murder,is a reality,that does not make it any less an act of violence.I will reiterate,most people believe that crimes of extreme violence, should be dealt with by extreme violence,sad I know, but that is also a reality.To deny that fact is unmitigated bollicks, admitadly opinions of that nature will not be found in wine bars and other trendy establishments, where pseudo intellectuals can while away the hours, quaffing chardonnay debating crime and punishment.

    That “Capital Punishment” is now an out of date(for some)method of punishment,was never decided at the ballot box,a bit like work choices.But by all means lets have a referendum on it.

  127. Gaz says:

    “Gaz, maaaate, get your brane outta your dacks.”

    The great Katz informs me I have a brain,my God I’m over the top with joy.Your cutting wit and repartee is so special Katz,I wish I could be as smart as you.

    Spare me your condescending clap trap, just admit that you and your ilk are out of your depth on this matter, and you will escape with some semblance of common dog.

  128. Klaus K says:

    I’m still not convinced that you understand my point at all. I struggle to see how your assumptions about what ‘ordinary people’ do or don’t believe, and what ‘pseudo intellectuals’ do or don’t debate, have anything to do with what I’m suggesting.

    In light of that, I’m going to stop feeding the troll now, so you’ll have to find someone else to pester.

  129. Gaz says:

    “In light of that, I’m going to stop feeding the troll now, so you’ll have to find someone else to pester.”

    The only Troll here is you!And it is you pestering me, with your asinine comments.

  130. casey says:

    Stan Grant has resigned from SBS. To be replaced by Anton Enus. YES!

  131. adrian says:

    No one has proven more asinine on this thread than your good self, Gaz.
    Your quaint belief that you, and you alone have access to the views of the majority of Australians on this or any other issue only illustrates the depth of your self-delusion.

    Looking forward to a nice Sauvignon-Blanc after work, at that trendy establishment known as home.
    Hope you enjoy whatever is your poison. Just say off the bile.

  132. mbahnisch says:

    I’m a big fan of Anton!

  133. casey says:

    Meee tooo!

  134. adrian says:

    Yes things are looking up!

    New PM and government.
    No more Trioli on radio at least.
    Gerard surely on his last legs.

    And this is just the beginning…

  135. Paul Burns says:

    Good to see Anton’s back. (If he went.) Hardly warch SBS nowadays. Hope they go back to not interrupting programmes with ads, but I sauppose that’s equivalent to hoping capital;ism will no longer be triumphant.

  136. joe2 says:

    Maybe, Gerald Stone, SBS deputy chairman, needs to have a good hard look at himself and his position in the wake of a new political era. The man who wrote “Who Killed Channel 9?” would surely not wish to be the subject of a book called “Who Killed SBS?”.

    Yep, we like Anton very much but sad for Stan. Too much was put in his basket.

  137. casey says:

    Yeah Ive been on SBS strike for a while now. However the move to Anton for the main bulletin is a good move. Hopefully Shaun Brown is looking for a job too.

  138. Gaz says:

    “Your quaint belief that you, and you alone have access to the views of the majority of Australians on this or any other issue only illustrates the depth of your self-delusion.”

    Well I see Klaus is not the only other Troll on here.

    There is no quaint belief that most Australians do not agree with the clap trap that has appeared on this thread, that justifies in any way shape or form, what happened to the 10 yr old concerned, or indeed the decision and comments from the judge involved .It is a bloody fact!It is unfortunate you can’t grasp that reality. I don’t have any such “self -delusion on what other people are thinking,the facts speak for them selves.

    If self delusion is what I have,then I suggest that more than half the population of Australia is suffering the same complaint.

    While you are quaffing down your Savignon – Blanc after work, think about engaging your brain, instead of your mouth for a change.

  139. joe2 says:

    If SBS is smart they will go back to the old news programming.
    World news at 6.30 till 7.00. with no advertisements.

  140. casey says:

    Aw, aint love grand? Noel Pearson is in love with Rudd again. He has detected empathy from the new Aborig. Affairs Minister he says, and the Rudd govt supports his community commission program. 7.30 Report tonight.

  141. mbahnisch says:

    So Rudd’s not a snake anymore?

  142. joe2 says:

    Paul Walter i hope you have been watching, as well.

    Famous windbag Noel Pearson and Ally McBeal have continued the Mal Brough conservative rear guard action against decency in regard to aboriginal affairs.

  143. casey says:

    Well he made clear his previous criticisms had to do with Rudd’s refusal to support Howard’s consitutional proposals. However he was feeling the empathy coming from Rudd;s support of the community commission plans he has for the Cape.

  144. […] There’s been considerable discussion of the case of the rape in Aurukun of a 10 year old girl on the Saturday Salon thread. While I agree with those who are arguing that the decision of the judge (and the submissions of […]

  145. Enemy Combatant says:

    Good-bye, Ike Turner. Loved your music, man. The unbelievable concert you put on with Tina at the Hammersmith Odeon in 1972. Loved the way you put your arm around Pinetop Perkins at the Chicago Blues Fest after a sensational performance a few years back, tears streaming down your face, two old survivors from Muddy’s band. But most of all I loved you for reminding Sam Phillips on the floor of Sun Records at Memphis (Scorsese’s Fathers and Sons, 2005) precisely where the music came from. Sam didn’t dig it but you told him the truth and did so with respect. You may have been an honery bastard most of the time, but when the blues had a baby and called it rock n roll, you were right there in the delivery room; one of the obstetricians.
    And the kid’s doin’ fine. Just keeps on keepin’ on.
    Ride your Rocket 88 all the way to the big juke joint in the sky.
    Vale, Ike Turner.

  146. […] Zeal and Activity‘ just now, part of ‘The Chairman Dances’ suite. Feral Abacus over at Larvatus Prodeo pointed me in its direction, after I wondered out loud about the provenance […]

Comments are closed.

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
%d bloggers like this: