Welcome Jilli Baby, you too like the other commenter have only been a part of Google since...well since Jan 2014 with only one Profile View on the counter (ahhh that was me) Hope you have a blog, hope I can find it to see you chosen views on chosen subjects. People with views are good, people who express them are real good too.
Seriously, I think it is possible to make all your valid points easily without the digs, jabs and barbs. However that's your choice and although I don't agree with the choice, I can respect your right to go off like a raw prawn in the mid day sun no worries at all :-)
However does't mean I ain't gunna discet the comments, look at them closely in context and see what floats to the top. From here on in Jilli Baby's comments are green and I'll go red. Just two distinct colours, no hidden meaning expressed or implied in the two colours.
Seriously, think for a bit more than a minute, if you can manage it.
I did so & for much long than a minute, I can manage it. I think I can reply without slings and arrows, well ordinarily I can, I hope I can now. I think I can manage that, at least if I don't I will have tried. Therein is one distinction already I think :-)
This blog is a semi literate (at best) litany of self pity.
If its semi literate, then you would be very hard pressed to read it and understand it. This difficulty you have in comprehending the points made, it is possible some of that maybe a reading and comprehension difficulty of your own. Or indeed you may have no such difficulty at all and you're early setting of framework is one of denigration and belittlement...bit like folk who use swear words to fill the gaps they have where logic and good sense has long since escaped from. Self pity? Interesting, quite a truth claim there in itself, I haven't thought of my self as suffering self pity, in fact I think I am truly blessed by God to live in a quiet and safe part of one of the safest countries in the world. I've never been without work or income. Some of us don't have everything we want, but far more than we need so self pity isn't something I thought I had, rather I have an overwhelming gratitude to God for the innumerable blessings I enjoy. Of course I live a fairly simple life, no BMWs, no beach front villa but luckily no longing for that either. No, sorry I'd say I'm more blessed than anything & I live a very simple existence without many of the trappings of 1st world nation folk who are consumer driven and keen to outdo the Jones' :-)
Perhaps the blithering little cry baby behind it actually needs to go and experience something first hand before he can grasp a simple concept,
Blithering cry baby? Oh ok, my mistake. No wait, I'm content with life in general, feel blessed and celebrate despite my circumstance. No complaints here. Experience first hand you say, before I can grasp a simple concept you say? :-)
Yeah no worries, sounds like a great idea. If you mean go see Live Export, well I do know a little bit about it. I have produced livestock for both the domestic and export markets, some of it Live and processed actually. I have been up close on ship loadings long before much of the current popular issues surfaced but that was quite a while ago.
I like your idea, it is a valid point, go and see it, experience it first so one can grasp the simple concept. Yep that's ticked off the list already and long ago. I take no offence at how the comment was slanted...I'm blessed to know I cannot always control what others say, but largely I can control how I react. Vile Bile Free I hope :-)
but most other people of some intelligence can carry out their own research and get a very good grasp of what's really going on.
Well I guess that's true, however I hope no one would dare suggest nor say that people of some intelligence need no experience or understanding of an issue to know it fully, to know all the variables in play, relevant and otherwise...they just need "research". I get the feeling anything I say on the industry I've been involved with, base don my experience, knowledge and "research" is not a viable trustworthy source of "research" because it is biased and has some small skerrick of chance of not aligning with someone else's views which are based entirely on some one else's views???
I think this is the advertising industry's dream, people who follow the sheeple, people who make up their mind and then use their intelligence to try & back it up. Maybe that's not even the case.
Did Churchill have to visit Auswitz to validate his notion of insane brutality of the fascists behind it, or should he perhaps have sought their point of view first?
Lets look very closely at this comment, it has a number of flaws, at least to me. First thing is, Godwin's Law. To quote Wikipedia "Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies is an assertion made by Mike Godwin in 1990 that has become an Internet adage. It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches". In other words, Godwin said that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis."
So in the case of the reply comment, first comment on the topic from that person on the blog and it was immediate Godwinator.
Second thing about the Nazi analogy is its flawed look at history. Nope Churchill didn't need to visit Poland, he was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and was ALREADY at war with Germany over the invasion of Poland. And just to take it to the next level of clear sunlight on the absurdity, Churchill entered office on the 10th of May 1940 which was a year before the first brutal mass murders of innocent Jewish people at that Polish camp. "ACTUALLY"
Sorry, Godwin's Law is generally the first red flag that a person's argument is failing, doesn't mean they're right or wrong about what they're championing, just means they don't know enough about their chosen cause and the rebel without a clue has to grab material from unrelated heinous, indefensible atrocities from a different time to help bolster their flailing position. I'm happy to be a supporter of the Friends of Israel. I've listen to a number of Rabbis publicly speak on a range of topics, and anyway, who would be so base and vile as to support the Nazi regime? No one sensible so smart deal...somehow crudely staple it to whatever failing debate one has a given easy. But not everyone is given easily to flawed approach of Godwin's Law type approach.
FWIW I also have German friends, I mean real wonderful folk who as friends I rate among the most wonderful friends. I hate Godwin's law popping up because it must cause wonderful decent folk of the modern Germany to cringe over something they were not a part of.
Anyway, apparently based on the Godwin's folly, some folk don't need to go look...but I do. Even though I already have, which doesn't count, because I'm on the wrong "side".
Monty Python is looking decidedly non comedic all of a sudden.
Should Matin Luther King have attended KKK meetings in order to verify his knowledge of the depth of racism in the US was reasonable?
Well to answer a silly question, no. Had he done, depending where it was he would have stood a pretty good chance of being killed. He was born in 1929, grew up in Georgia. Think its fair to say no he wouldn't have needed to visit a KK meeting. As an African American growing up in the south, racism would have been a everyday part of his life. He would need no convincing of it, it was there, he was there seeing, experiencing it every day of his life, a life that did not even make it to 40 years of age. His knowledge of racism, the brutality, the hate, the violence was based on personal experience and knowledge... NOT "RESEARCH" So again extremely poor analogy and rather insulting to the struggle of African Americans and the legacy of Dr Martin Luther King Jr. But yeah, who would argue in favour of the horrible institutionalised race hatred that he and others went through? No one person in their right mind...quick staple that to help bolster as well.
Should Eddie Mabo have sought an audience with Queen Elizabeth II in order for him to feel his understanding of the word invasion was fair?
The Queen is the Head of State, its a constitutional monarchy so this is why his huge legal victory was in fact a legal victory through the High Court of Australia. Why would he have taken his case to the Monarch to try & overturn the legal doctrine of Terra Nullius? He took it to the High Court because it was a legal issue, not something Elizabeth could be involved with even if she'd wanted to.
Not even sure how this long bow is drawn. Eddie Mabo was pointed as being Australian of the Year by a prominent newspaper in the early 90s, think it was after his death. However to my knowledge he was never awarded the official Australian of the Year honour. There's a pity. Again who can have any sort of valid argument against Mabo, after all according to Common Law, before white man the land belonged to no one, yet the Mabo case showed land inheritance. Well no one, its a perfect type of Godwin's Law to pull across to unrelated fields to make a point that is unconnected.
Just an opinion, despite the facts, anyone can dispute or refuse to accept anything. Free will :-)
Just because Geoffrey Robertson was not present at Camp Delta was it unreasonable for him to be considered eminently capable of comprehending the level of human rights abuses which took place there ?
Well I can't really comment a great deal on this except to say I have read the opinion piece by Geoffrey Robertson on what was the summary execution of Bin Laden. I guess I could go into great depth but injustice is injustice...and like the other three examples, not really comparable with Live export unless one is trying to overlook the unconectiveness and try to build an opposable scaffold to tie live export to. Sorry I think its intellectually corrupt.
The answer to all of the above is NO, of course, and in essence, there's not a lot of difference to the LE trade.
In essence, if there's anything it would only be essence as in a faint whiff, not a core set of parallels. I know, I know some folk are gunna disagree and hold different views. Some of you will no matter what. But all of this WAS NOT THE CORE AIM OF THE ACTUAL POST (yep we'll get there soon) :-)
Wilkie went to the NT to shut you all up,
Well that's not what he said. I cited the ABC as the transcript source and I did hear his words too.
If he just went there to shut us up, it was failure but really that couldn't possibly be the case. He would not go there genuinely thinking he would then, by virtue of FINALLY heading north after 2 failed private members bills and a lot of media bandwidth, that he'd shut anyone up.
The core premise of the blogger post was quite clear, he went there not to roll over or change his mind, he went there to see what improvements could be made to the system that's already there. That's a bit of a step away from his continual line prior to his trip. Seems to be some sort of step back.
Will he back down completely and finally back Live Export? I seriously doubt that, in fact if I were a betting man I'd dob $50 on him staying his ground for the most part and most likely ramping his trade abolition calls the 8 months prior to his re-election campaign.
He is not a stupid man, he's pretty bloody intelligent. He's from an information background. He is politically savvy and career wise he's in a great position. He's never going to bring the trade down and as such any ongoing failure he has won't be attributed to him, rather he'll be the boy with the sling shot up against Goliath. Except in his case win lose or draw his electorate will love his popular stand. Goliath will be the villain even if Wilkie never lays a glove on him.
Politically, that is in regards the next election he is in a good position for re-election and some of that is on his LE stance...win lose or draw in that issue.
Wilkie said it was important to head north to see what improvements can be made...not to shut farmers up (they're pastoralists & station owners up there BTW). I think his trip has more to do with keeping the issue alive in his electorate to enhance his re-election chances. Now if its important as he says...why is it important now? The issues, the problems LE has had are arguably happening but the point of the blog post was, what was waning, what was slipping was Mr Wilkie's connectivity to the issue in his electorate. I see no trip to the SPC Admona factory, no trip to offshore detention centres, no jaunts to foreign peace keeping missions or combative involvement areas we probably shouldn't be a part of. Nope...just to the bread maker, deal maker for the next Denison bi-election. Live export. Sorry it might be wrong, but anyone would be a fool, an outright blind fool to think some advisor hasn't been in his ear to keep stoking this fire because its his game changer for re-election. Personally I think he's a very very clever man, politically savvy and no bodies fool at all. I think he would not have needed an advisor to steer him down that path. To think otherwise is to paint Wilkie as an idiot and I for one think he is exactly the opposite. Sorry if he went there to shut anyone up, he would be an idiot...no, its re the re-election :-)
but do you really think all the first hand bullying and whining would somehow affect his already excellent grasp of what cruelty to animals is?
First hand bullying and whining? Who said Wilkie copped that? The member for Denison never said nor suggested such a thing. No he didn't...pleased to stand corrected though. Think its false and misleading to say such a thing. I think most of us have a good grasp of what cruelty to animals is. I am not in favour of cruelty to animals, thankfully neither is Wilkie. Nor is any producer I have ever met. Longing to see the producer that says no such thing as cruelty or if its an animal any low act is fair. Not actually heard of such people.
I actually said heads up in the original he's not Bulldusting when he says he's not rolling over, not backing down. I knew that the second I knew of his trip. I mean I wonder who actually thought Wilkie's trip would result in a back flip of Russian Olympian Champion magnitude? No one I know of.
He says he went there to see what improvements could be made. Pity he didn't do that in the first place instead of putting forward 2 private members bills that were regarded as a bit of a joke. Yeah I know some are going to say they were great intention bills...maybe, still fell as flat a pancake and gathered very poor support. I cannot see how even Andrew Wilkie thought they would get past, he is a clever man, they were intentional efforts with outcomes outside the passage of parliament. Didn't do his political support any disservice, but otherwise "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"
Now, just because he hasn't changed his mind, you call him a hypocrite, amongst other things.
No, he didn't change his mind, never expected him to, don't know of anyone who did. He was true to form. However, some folk have a deep love for Andrew Wilkie, and its quite possible that love is type of love that is a strange emotion allowing them to see things as they clearly are not. He's not a law breaker or a fool, he is a savvy, smart political warrior. I dunno how he'd go career wise were he to leave parliament today. Not a lot of work for an Army Officer and Intelligence Analyst in the private sector. Funny enough, he thought there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (but thought they were contained). Don't know if he went to Iraq prior to the invasion...or whether he relied solely on "RESEARCH" - And to my knowledge, while he thought there were WMDs but they were contained, seems they were so well contained no one's bloody found them yet. Anyway that's another story & don't want to go all Godwin like now do we? If I were the member for Denison, I'll milk that (LE) cow for everything its worth. At 52 years of age, he's got a good wicket and he needs to stick to it.
You can try to stand over everyone, and maybe some will buckle,
No stand over here...its a blog, just blowing smoke into the ether. You have just set up a Blogger account you can do likewise. You can ignore or say what you like. Its the internet, there are no sticks here that leave bruises, scars and broken bones. It means nothing. My name is real. Press on it doesn't really matter if someone agrees or disagrees with me or anyone else. I do side with those who want the trade and want cruelty stamped out. There is the true division...I don't think any trade is cruelty free, don't think free trade is free. Don't think Fair Trade products are all perfect either. Its a constant trek of improvement.
but those who really understand what this is really all about won't be put off by a bunch of selfish, loudmouth farmers who are so absorbed with their own obsessive greed, they have the gall to tell other people that something isn't cruel, when it it most patently is.
Ka-Pow, Ouch ;-) selfish, loudmouth farmers, obsessive greed? When you can cite those reflections from Wilkie I'd say the transformation is complete hahaha Did he say that? I mean he went there, up north. I mean finally ventured beyond the northern fringes of outer Canberra and went and saw these "farmers". Who says all of the footage shown on a Bloody Business wasn't cruel? It might be correct to those perpetrators culturally, in their country, but to me it was still cruel, vile and wrong in every sense. If things were exactly as you portray then the entire industry from top to bottom, Darwin to overseas kill rooms would be saying stupid things like "No, its not cruel, its all ok, nothing to correct or improve. Nothing needs changing, the Tofu set are off their rockers, killing like that is actually soothing to the animals" When instead the industry from the far back paddock upwards saw the problems on the TV, some for the first time they were shocked...I know I was shocked and appalled. Some had assumed the trade was world's best practice from paddock to plate. It was not, it was a heart breaking realisation. There was no denial by me, nor anyone I know. There was however a concerted effort by subterfuge and deception to destroy the trade, rather than help improve it. Still that's life & coincidentally where the votes are for some middle affluent metro electorates with no jobs at stake. Wilkie is a very astute political player. I bet he has been all his life. He is not an idiot, but he might be gently caressing a good many rebels without a clue. :-)
You can froth and stomp about with your chest puffed up as much as you like,
What, you can see these physical attributes? WOW!
Hahaha, no of course you can't, you're not here, you've done your research so that's factual
Bwhahahaaaa!!! (or did Andrew tell you that? Of course he didn't)
but the fact of the cruelty to animals in the live export trade stands as a clear and damning truth.
No Shirt Sherlock, what do you think the industry has been doing, now if I scroll up, it would seem the industry does nothing except...no wait, hang on lets go the quote from above and repeat it again...
"they have the gall to tell other people that something isn't cruel, when it it most patently is. "
Somehow that doesn't actually tally up squarely with the truth actually.
Somehow that doesn't yet tally up squarely with Andrew Wilkie's trip report yet either.
What he said in yet another convenient out is that the government is going to have to solve the problem of business going broke if the trade were halted. If the government has to solve that problem, it must be a serious problem. One he hasn't fleshed out yet...he just got in early and delegated blame, if there's a miracle up north guess who'll be gifted hero status? He's good - win lose or draw...in fact politically he's win, win, win no matter what happens. Did I use the word savvy yet? Or enough? ;-)
It cannot be denied,
It isn't
it cannot be excused
Dunno who has, I haven't...
and it is very well understood.
Well maybe, but some things do seem to get glossed over or ignored. And some footage resurfaces, some 3 years old, no longer current or relevant...but that's another story, worthy of "RESEARCH" :-)
Again, the blog piece was to shine the sunlight on a different angle, nowhere did I say cruelty in the trade was a lie. It was about Andrew WIlkie's trip north and looking very closely, in context to what he said.
I'm not going to tell anyone to re-read anything. Sometimes think some folk need to get a creative hobby, maybe go on a trip and get away from it all...if its upsetting. If not, at least stick around the issue and get the facts and don't be bull dusted by either side.
Cheers
No comments:
Post a Comment