Australian Value #1

Oct 27, 2020 | Australian Values, Border Security, Citizenship, Cultural Values, Democracy, Freedom of Speech, Humour, Immigration, Legal, Media Values, OzPol Values, PedoPriests, Religious Values, Values

Australian Value #1

Values Australia’s Aussie Values T-Shirt on display and immortalised in Museums Victoria

Ellen Sludge Breaks the Cardinal Law

Many moons ago, Sir Roger wrote the First Law of Australian Values. 

Australian Value #1:

 

Politicians do NOT own Australian Values

 

The fact that John Hunt, the Coward, and “Slim” Beazley had engaged in a battle to hijack Australian Values was the reason that Sir Roger had himself taken up arms against this anti-social piracy and became a global celebrity. 

The least qualified human beings to be aware of, to understand, or to protect Australian Values are, of course, bloody politicians. Politicians have continually attempted to kidnap our values and debauch them into the authoritarian beliefs of the alt-right, the international catholic paedophilia ring and the born-again theocratists. 

Values are not created by fiat, by law, by act, charter, legislation or decree.

Real values are organic, historic, and always evolving. Values are created by the mass of free, individual humans. (Unless they’re members of the Hillsaralive Church of the Sound of Music, in which case they’re just the brainwashed living dead.)  

This said, Sir Roger was delighted to see a delightful piece of work by the Grauniad’s Frant which asked all the right questions and provided some excellent answers:

So the latest dickhead in charge of controlling Australian Citizens and what they are required to believe is Ellen Smudge, Acting Mincer for Denizens, Immitation, Migraine Surfaces and Multicuntural Affairs, including responsibility for O’Pears.   

What are Ellen’s qualifications for nurturing Australian Values? Well, mostly fudging: 

“In June 2017  Smudge, and Liberal Party colleagues Greer Kunt and Michelle Sucker, faced the possibility of being prosecuted for contempt of court after they made public statements criticising the sentencing decisions of two senior judges while the government was awaiting their ruling on a related appeal. They avoided prosecution by, eventually, making an unconditional apology to the Victorious Court of Appeal. Conviction could have resulted in their expulsion from the parliament under Constitution s 44(ii) and, as a result, the government losing its one-seat majority in the House of Representatives. 

 And of course more recently there was this: 

“In March 2020, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal ordered that an Afghan asylum seeker who had previously been a part of the Afghan National Army be granted a temporary protection visa. Smudge, who was Acting Immitation Minister at the time, instantly appealed the judgement of the AAT to federal court, which failed. However during the 6-day appeal process, the asylum seeker had been kept in the detention centre. Six months later, the Federal Court found that Grudge, “engaged in conduct which can only be described as criminal,” and that Drudge had deprived the asylum seeker of his liberty, which has prompted calls for his resignation. 

As you will be unsurprised to learn, Ms Nudge (full name Nudge-Nudge-Wink-Wink-Saynomore)  is an old hand at dog whistling and, as Joe Biden said of the Trump, “This guy has a dog whistle about as big as a foghorn.” She doesn’t really like anyone who is not a white christian who speaks English. The Western Suburbs love it.  

Miss Judge wants it to be very clear that her government deeply believes in and supports Australians’ Freedom of Speech.  This is presumably why there is no actual statement in the Australian Constitution permitting or mandating Freedom of Speech, and why no government has ever proposed any referendum to establish this right, and why freedom of speech is a thinly technical presumption devised by a few narrow majorities of High Court Judges, and only with respect to political speech. You might say that all speech is in a sense political and you would be right but you might not wish to be the one to fork out the cash to run a case in the matter in the High Court. All citizens are equal under the law and have equal rights of access to justice as long as they have the funds to afford a decent lawyer.  

The Australian government’s tolerance and its attitude to free speech are demonstrated by its amendments to Wikipedia, and its action to kindly inform Values Australia in March 2007 that if it didn’t pull the site down it would send it to gaol on the basis of a variety of laws. This was in addition to its actually closing down a parody site of the Prime Minister. So aspirational immigrants need to understand that by “free speech” the government means you can say anything you like, anything at all, that agrees with the government and does not hurt its feelings.

Mateship of course is the value most often and most fiercely promoted as the essence of being Australian . . . because no other country has such a value. Australia is so mateship-oriented that we even celebrate it as a black grease called VEGEMATE.

You might think that Mateship is just a kind of friendship and other countries have friendship so what’s so special. But no. Mateship is something far more deep and complex.

Here’s what Sir Roger says about Mateship:

1) Mateship is the one and the only Central Pillar of Australian values;

2) Only men are permitted to have mates;

3) Women are banned from having mates because women have actual meaningful interpersonal relationships with actual friends. which is against the Rules of Mateship.

4) Mateship is not the same as Shipmate, which suggests a different kind of relationship.

5) Mates do not touch each other.

5a) unless they are pissed, when a mate might use the term “Matey” and profess an unseemly level of affection. This transgression is only tolerated because the mates are so pissed they won’t remember it in the morning. This is the evolutionary function of the hangover. 

So what is mateship?

Mateship is pretending to be friends with someone who doesn’t want your job.

A mate is someone who won’t sleep with your mistress without asking you first.

A great mate is a rugby league footballer who invites you to a gang bang with the other members of his team.

 

Ruby Murdocraci will be your TRUE Mate if you are a biddable politician and you stroke him just the way he likes it, at least for as long as you are useful.

A mate is what men have who are incapable of attracting actual friends (see “Politician”), or of forming any kind of vaguely intimate relationships, particularly in their own families (ibid).

As Sir Roger says, the only strange thing about mateship is that the people who have promoted this value most loudly over the last several decades—and now, as we see, Minister Bludge—have never had a real mate in their lives because they are such dorks and bogans. (Minister Sludge is a certified Bogan, being from rural Victorious.) The people who call them mates only do it because they have useful stuff they can give them, like TV stations, or Australia (they gave that away to their “mate” Ruby Murdocraci). 

TAKE THE VALUES AUSTRALIA MATESHIP TEST

Values Australia has prepared a special alternative Mateship Test which we guarantee no Australian politician or fat-arsed bureaucrat would pass, particularly the Minister for DIC and his silly pen-pushers.

Take it yourself. Use it for trivia nights. 

There is more about Australian Values here.

 

Let Us Prey

Sep 18, 2010 | Australian Values, Cultural Values, OzPol Values, PedoPriests, Religious Values, Values

Let Us Prey

Sunday Sacrilege — Early Edition

 

 

 

Leader of the World’s Largest Organised Paedophile Ring Visits Britain

The leader of the world’s largest organised ring of paedophiles has been greeted by Queen Elizabeth with all the courtesy and panoply that the British could gather in her eagerness to do appropriate honour to the celebrity confidence trickster¹ who leads an enormous, globally-tentacled society of professional rapists and child molesters which enjoys worldwide political patronage, legal protection and financial privileges.

 

 

 

Cue Geoffrey Robertson:

“For 30 years, as Cardinal Ratzinger, from 1981 on, he was in charge of what to do about paedophile priests and he declined on the whole to even defrock them,” Mr Robertson said.

[ … ]

Mr Robertson also argues that the Vatican should stop protecting paedophile priests by abandoning canon law – the laws and regulations made and adopted by the church.

“Canon law is not law at all,” he said.

“It has no punishment. The problem with the church is that it’s been treating paedophile priests as sinners and not as serious criminals.

“Canon law is a medieval procedure. There’s no cross-examination, there’s no forensic testing and it’s run by priests who judge priests so not many get convicted.

“It’s a biased court, and … there’s no punishment. The Pope even said last week that he thought penance was quite sufficient for child molesters.

“[Penance] means being asked to go away and pray for your victims.

“Of course, victims don’t want their abusers to say prayers for them. They want justice and they want to make sure the abuser doesn’t offend again.

“Canon law is hopeless. The church has got to give it up if it’s going to deal with this massive crisis.”

Thousands of catholic priests, ordered to do penance, are reported to have rushed to their cells, fallen on their knees and begun to pray for little boys.

Reacting to the first remarks of the Pope on his state visit, the British Humanist Association has expressed its disappointment.

‘The notion that it was the atheism of Nazis that led to their extremist and hateful views or that somehow fuels intolerance in Britain today is a terrible libel against those who do not believe in god. The notion that it is non-religious people in the UK today who want to force their views on others, coming from a man whose organisation exerts itself internationally to impose its narrow and exclusive form of morality and undermine the human rights of women, children, gay people and many others, is surreal.’

An Open Letter to the Pope has been signed by 50 British “celebrities” and intellectuals including Stephen Fry, Richard Dawkins, Professor Susan Blackmore, Terry Pratchett, Baroness Blackstone and A C Grayling, along with lots of Drs, Profs, Baronesses and Sirs. The letter is at the British Humanist Association website. Here are the main points:

The Pope is a head of state and the state and organisation of which he is head has been responsible for:

  • opposing the distribution of condoms and so increasing large families in poor countries and the spread of AIDS
  • promoting segregated education
  • denying abortion to even the most vulnerable women
  • opposing equal rights for lesbians, gay, bisexual and transgender people
  • failing to address the many cases of abuse of children within its own organisation.

 

Meanwhile Queen Elizabeth has met the Pope and kissed papal arse … sorry? … sorry, kissed the papal ring.

And here’s the excuse of His Saintliness, as well as the head of the British chapter of the paedophile ring:

Pope Benedict XVI acknowledged flawsa in the church’s handling of the child abuse scandal as he as arrived in Scotland for the opening of his four-day visit to Britain.

The head of the Catholic Church in England, Bishop Vincent Nichols, also addressed the scandal as he waited for the Pope to arrive in Edinburgh.

“We have said, I think quite consistently, ‘Yes we did let you downb. Yes, we did. We did not get these things rightc,’” Nichols said. “But we’re learningd, and I hope everybody is learning that child abuse is not an easy thing to deal with, and we all have to deal with it, sooner or latere.

“We’re learning and we’re in a good placef. And anyone who entrusts their children or their elderly people to the care of the church can be quite sure that they’re safeg.”

 Notes:

The two greatest liars, sophists and spinners internationally (now that Bush’s Press Secretaries are out of a job at the White House) are Israel’s Mark Regev and the Catholic Church corporately. Note how Ratzinger and Nicholls have done it here.

PR Trick #1: “Reframe” the problem from shocking to mild and even forgivable.

a. “Flaws?” It’s not that serious, it’s merely a flaw. We’ll just get O’Brien in to fix that little crack (Oh, no, for god’s sake don’t mention little cracks! It makes me think of rock spiders.)

PR Trick #2: Admit to and show touching contrition for a much lesser crime, for which the penalty is, you know, penance, not prison. In Rugby League the usual script is something like [strike out whichever does not apply]: “I’m real ashamed of meself. I know I shouldn’t of done it. I let me wife down, I let me kids down, I let me family down, I let me mates down, I let me club down, I let me fans down. I let meself down. All I can say is it was out of character. It wasn’t really me. Now I wanna put the past behind me so I’d like youse all to respect me family’s privacy so we can hopefully get back to living a normal life.”

b. “We let you down.” No, you didn’t “let you down”. You buggered little boys up the arse. You did it constantly, systematically and systemically. You knew about it. People at the highest levels in your paedophile organisation knew all about it. You didn’t do anything about it. You concealed it. You protected the perpetrators. Constantly, systematically and systemically and as a matter of official policy. You protected each other from any consequences and you moved your rapists to other parishes full of juicy crops of fresh new innocent little victims. (You know they want it.) There is no difference between you and your paedophile ring and any other paedophile ring – except that other paedophiles often get to go to prison and the Queen of England doesn’t welcome them with gifts.

c. “Get these things right?’ Yes, of course it’s not about a systemic corruption of everything your organisation pretends to stand for, it’s a simple matter of minor adjustments to “get things right”. Really, the whole thing has been blown out of proportion.

PR Trick #3: Say you’re already taking steps to fix the problem, and that you’re already improving, as long as that doesn’t involve anything anyone can test.

d. “We’re learning.” Of course, learning is good, education is good, everyone knows that, so if you do education that means you’re good and we forgive you. And this way you don’t have to actually do anything that we can see.

PR Trick #4: Identify with your audience. Insist that you both share the same problem. This way you can suggest that they are no better than you are. This way they should cut you some slack. “Hey, deep down, everyone’s a paedophile, aren’t they?”

e. “Child abuse is not an easy thing to deal with, and we all have to deal with it, sooner or later.”

We “all” WHAT!!!????   No we don’t. You do. Contrary to what you seem to think, most of us aren’t even vaguely tempted to sodomise boys as young as two, or to rape little girls. You have to deal with it. And you don’t.

PR Big Mistake #1: Don’t tell people your personal comfort is important. Remember BP’s Tony Hayward saying “I want my life back”? The guy who was spotted having a nice day out sailing during BP’s biggest crisis? Where is he now? Siberia.

f. “We’re in a good place.” No you’re not in “a good place”. You’re in a bad place. You’re in hell. You as an organisation bring hell to young, trusting, powerless people. You are evil people.

PR Big Mistake #2: Never claim anything that everyone knows is a lie.

g. “Your children are safe with us.”One thing we know for sure is that no-one is going to trust you and your paedophile organisation with their children. We know they are in danger and we know that your paedophile ring will protect the perpetrators and not the children and that you continue to delay taking the action which is required. Your offers of counselling and prayer are laughable, cheap and totally free of accountability. We know who  and what you are and you should not tell us our children are safe with you. That’s what you told us before and then you went and fucked our babies.

 

in nom-nomine patris et filii succulenti …..

 

Time Magazine reports the latest Catholic buggery news:

In the past few months, harrowing tales have emerged from almost every congregation in [Belgium] about priests raping and assaulting young parishioners. This week … church investigators published an explosive report on 475 claims of sexual abuse over a 50-year time span.

[ … ]

The commission, headed by respected child psychiatrist Peter Adriaenssens, found that most of the cases concerned young boys and teenagers, but there was one incident involving a 2-year-old boy. Assaults on boys usually ended by the time they were 14, but abuse of girls — who accounted for about a third of all the cases — sometimes continued into adulthood, the report found. About half of the abusers have died, and 13 victims are known to have committed suicide.

[ … ]

The bulk of the revelations in Belgium were triggered by an especially shocking case involving the veteran bishop of Bruges, Roger Vangheluwe, who resigned in April after admitting to raping his own nephew in the years between 1973 and 1986. Vangheluwe’s confession came just before his nephew was expected to go public, and that appears to have motivated other abuse victims to come forward and contact Adriaenssens’ commission.

At the same time, the church seemed to confirm widespread suspicions of a cover-up when Léonard’s predecessor, Cardinal Godfried Danneels, was caught on tape urging Vangheluwe’s victim to keep quiet. As for Vangheluwe, he is still part of the priesthood and is staying in a monastery near Bruges. The Vatican — which has the ultimate power to defrock bishops — has yet to impose any disciplinary measures on him.

The Catholic Church promotes the power of prayer. It purveys a brand of metaphysical legerdemain which posits a god which can — from its place in some imaginary immaterial dimension which is separate from the physical universe — see what every single person in the world is doing and hear every prayer that is prayed and answer every single one of those prayers by controlling the natural laws of the phenomenal world to materialise the supplicants’ desired physical outcomes.

“And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.”

Matthew 21:22

 

All things. Whatsoever. Ye shall receive.

This is the sacred, unqualified, unconditional promise of the church. The “divinely inspired” word of god. The very words of Christ himself.  It cannot be parsed, or modified, or analogised. Whatsoever ye shall ask; no mention of “as long as it’s reasonable, or you’re not being greedy, and if we have it in stock”.

It is in stone, immutable and undeniable. According to them. And they swear the bible is 100% authentically written by this god (or his various ghost-writers).

If I want a Ferrari I can have it.

If I want a 15-inch dick it’s mine overnight.

So you can imagine thousands of tormented priests around the world on their knees every night praying to the lord jesus and whatever other supposed saint they can think of to make them stop drooling to sodomise little boys, praying that their dicks might fall off, or anything, anything, to stop them sinning and harming people, to save them from hell.

But it doesn’t work. Their prayers aren’t answered.

So apparently:

  • The bible is bullshit.
  • Or there’s no god.
  • Or he’s not as clever as they claim.
  • Or of course there’s that rider: “believing”. Do their prayers go unanswered because they don’t truly believe?

In that case the church is a secular international paedophile ring no different from all the others, and catholic “priests” are no different from your ordinary neighbourhood child rapist.

So which is it? The bible is bullshit? god is bullshit? or priests don’t believe all that bullshit? It has to be one or more (or all) of these.

 

And just a related local political note:

 

 

The local representative of the worldwide patron of the paedophile ring is the fatuous, unctuous and cavernously stupid Cardinal Pell who is the moral mentor of Tony Abbott, MHR

Just saying

 

 

¹ Confidence tricksters of course don’t need to own the bill of goods they “sell” to their victims. But a disgruntled victim might want to extract revenge, or get their money back, or call the police.
The brilliance of the religious confidence tricksters is that the very absence of their product is its major selling point and they never have to deliver any product at all.
“You will get your reward in heaven.”
So you have to die to take delivery of the goods.
If I’m right?   Another satisfied customer.
If I’m wrong?   You’re never coming back to get revenge.
Meanwhile I’ve got your money! (and access to your little children) —here and now, where it counts.

Who wouldn’t start their own religion if they had no conscience at all?

 

UPDATE:

At the risk of offending against Godwin’s Law, we note that the man whom christians constantly claim to have been an atheist was in fact deeply and fanatically christian as you can read at Pharyngula. For example,

“ I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.” [Adolph Hitler, to Gen. Gerhard Engel, 1941]”.

But Hitler also said this, which explains something about catholicism:

“ For how shall we fill people with blind faith in the correctness of a doctrine, if we ourselves spread uncertainty and doubt by constant changes in its outward structure? … Here, too, we can learn by the example of the Catholic Church. Though its doctrinal edifice, and in part quite superfluously, comes into collision with exact science and research, it is none the less unwilling to sacrifice so much as one little syllable of its dogmas… it is only such dogmas which lend to the whole body the character of a faith.”

[Adolf Hitler, “Mein Kampf” Vol. 2 Chapter 5]

 

 

Why NOT Benny Condoms?

Jun 1, 2010 | Australian Values, Corruption, Lifestyle & Life, Media Values, OzPol Values, PedoPriests, Religious Values, Science Values, Values

Why NOT Benny Condoms?

 

Okay, it can’t be avoided.

 

Sir Roger wrote this in a fit a few weeks ago and he was in a variety of minds as to whether he ought to publish it. Was it intemperate? Of course. It was Sir Roger. Anything else? Was it wrong? Sir Roger, on reviewing it, has determined that he does not resile from its sentiments and so directs its publication. Here then is his response to the

Foreign Office Pope Flap …

Someone at the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office made what appears to be a joke memo about what the Pope could do when he visits Britain and before he gets arrested.

The FCO is wishing it had a hole to jump into. The Government doesn’t know where to look. The poor author of the memo has been “assigned to other duties”. And the “Vatican” is effecting to be deeply mortified by the “insult”.

Really?

The true obscenity is that while many of the suggestions are, in an enlightened world, actually rational and reasonable, they are characterised by the FCO as “far-fetched”. Commentators are calling them “astonishing”, “foolish”, “clearly ill-judged, naive and disrespectful”. A Catholic Bishop says, “This is appalling”, “outlandish” and “outrageous”.

So what were the abominations that the poor little 20-something Oxbridge Foreign Office boy proposed?

[ Be careful. You may go to hell just for reading this list.]

It includes:

• Launch ‘Benedict’ condoms

• Review vatican attitude to condom use

• Bless a civil partnership

• Reverse policy on women bishops

• Ordain a woman

• Open an abortion ward

• Training course for all bishops on child abuse allegations

• Announce sacking of dodgy bishops

• Vatican sponsorship of AIDS clinics

• Launch helpline for abused children

So all of these things are done by other religions and/or secular groups in advanced 21st Century society around the world. Done by grown-ups, by rational, thoughtful people, by mature, socially-concerned human beings dealing with actual problems in the real world.

Nevertheless, the “Vatican” (whatever that is a metaphor for) is not part of 21st Century society. nor is it any of those other things. It is anchored in 6000 year-old anxieties of desert tribal culture, was hijacked into a militaristic system by a mad emperor in the 4th Century who appropriated it to his imperial service and decided its beliefs, and for millennia has been so wrapped in archaic, cannibalistic, irrelevant ritual that it has lost even the vaguest connection to the “true” orgins of the cult.

If Christ were to return today it is the Catholic Church which would most vehemently be clamouring for his murder – because he would threaten to collapse their cosy, now entirely temporal, globally-tentacled, fear-mongering, parasitic apparatus, emasculate their power structure and reduce the fraudulent façade of their unctuous piety to rubble.

What the “Vatican” is doing now, must do and always does do is to desperately try to prop up the flimsy cardboard and canvas of the awful illusion they call their “authority”; patch it, stitch it, retouch it. And scream obscenities at – and, as they have so frequently done, kill – those who too clearly see their fakery and their flagrant lies and refuse to pretend it is real.

The more the church screams injustice and victimhood the more you know they are lying and afraid and protecting their livelihood whatever the cost to the real people in the world.

Because that is the problem; the catholic church through its pope is literally – and I mean literally – responsible for the deaths of millions in Africa, millions who are dying right now.

The catholic church is harming lives around the world. It is causing endless misery on a daily and hourly basis with its so-called “beliefs”. The pope’s “beliefs” are not merely irrational, illogical, deeply stupid and pathologically detached from reality; they are caustic, toxic, savage and inhumane. They are putrid, repugnant and rotten. They are fundamentally anti-life.

The catholic church for at least 1700 years has been, in its deepest nature, dishonest and utterly debauched. The establishment — which supposedly honours a simple, plain man who blessed the poor and the downtrodden — smells like a brothel and is painted up like a cheap, toothless harlot. (Metaphorically.) It remains debauched, like a syphilis-ridden hag, because those who have attached themselves like crabs into its stinking knickers don’t understand that they cannot continue to get away with what their predecessors have done for so very, very long.

 

Here endeth the lesson.

 

 

‘I’m Sir Roger and I’m Fucked’

Oct 5, 2008 | Arts, Australian Values, Border Security, Capital Punishment, Citizenship, Corruption, Cultural Values, Democracy, Economic Values, Fame, Freedom of Speech, Global Warming, Humour, Immigration, Indigenous, Legal, Lifestyle & Life, Media Values, OzPol Values, PedoPriests, Racism, Religious Values, Science Values, Terrorism, Uncategorized, USPol, Values, War

‘I’m Sir Roger and I’m Fucked’

 

This is not for you

 

Really. We just want to acknowledge ourselves privately but publicly (it makes sense to us, anyway). It’s not meant to be onanistically self-congratulatory, except in the sense that we have achieved some things and we want to record them.
So this is a stocktake for posterity, if you like, that marks a moment, a milestone.

Yes, ValuesAustralia is two years old. This is our 712th post. Singlehanded, eh, Clubtroppo, Larvatus Prodeo, RoadtoSurfdom etc. etc.? That’s almost one a day. (There used to be a billboard for One A Day vitamin pills at the corner of Victoria Rd and Rowntree Street at Blackwattle Bay in Sydney. There was a picture of a man and a woman. The woman was saying, “I’m Jenny and I give John One A Day.” Soon a graffiti artist had added, “I’m John and I’m fucked!”)

And, yes, we’re just about fucked, ourselves. We’ve got a rotator cuff from all the typing and mouse clicking, especially during October and November last year.

(We went to the radiologist. “What seems to be the problem?” “I’ve got a sore shoulder.” “Hmm…we’ll do an ultrasound and an x-ray…… Hmm…. Hmmmmmm, our expert analysis of the ultrasound and x-ray indicates you have a sore shoulder. You’ll have to stop using it for a while.” “Thanks….What?)

We’ve never paid for any advertising. We’ve never submitted ValuesAustralia to any search engine. Nevertheless, we got ourselves listed on Google within 24 hours of launching the site. We tried to register the site with dmoz.org (The Open Source Directory) – as you do – but it wasn’t taking orders, and by the time it came back on line months later, ValuesAustralia was already magically listed!

We’ve been #1 for “Australian Values” on Google, Yahoo, Live and Ask most of the time for more than a year and a half. We’re #12 for “values” on Google worldwide, out of 314,000,000 results and on google.com.au we’re #2 for “values” out of 307,000,000. We’re #1 on google worldwide and Australia for “Australian political values” out of about 400,000 results.

Our Google Page Rank is 4 (used to be 5 but they changed the algorithm) which is respectable but we’d prefer a 5 or a 6.

We’ve had over 300,000 aggregate visitors and more than 75,000 spam messages (thank you, Akismet).

Earlier this year we were consistently getting more than 1000 visitors a day – over 30,000 a month, which is okay, although nothing like the big guys.

We’ve made friends all over the world and especially in Australia. We are in the top 1% of websites worldwide. We are popular in Saudi Arabia – amongst the top 42,000 favourite sites for Saudis. (That worries us just a bit…Say hullo to Al for us…) We appreciate our readers and those who choose to comment from time to time. We thought a scarcity of comments was a Bad Thing, a Failure, but we noticed that one of the most popular, most entertaining bloggers we know of, Whatever It Is, I’m Against It, doesn’t get heaps, either – a few, but not tens like Possum or hundreds and thousands like William the PollBludger.

In May 2007 ValuesAustralia was picked up by the “Stay In Touch” column at the Sydney Morning Herald, accusing us of “rhetoric”.

One of Sir Roger’s posts was selected by ClubTroppo and On Line Opinion in January 2008 as one of the top 40 posts in Australia for 2007. We’re very proud of that.

But it’s a post we made early in 2007 that we are still most proud of. Ken Parish at ClubTroppo called it

“quite possibly the best piece of passionate, angry polemic I’ve ever read, certainly on a blog. ‘Roger Migently’ is roused to extraordinary heights of eloquence… ”

Yes, Troppo has been good to us and we mourn the passing of Missing Link and Ken’s prolonged work-induced(?) absence. We were also congratulated by Richard Neville (HomePageDaily) and Steven Poole whose Unspeak blog is our benchmark for economy, clarity, style and wit.

We have enjoyed the journey so far and we have no intention at this stage of stopping, although we have slowed down (work, you know).

Bobbo the Clown

Our favourite person in the world, of course, is the clown, Bob Correll (above), Deputy Secretary of DIC, OPM, because he wrote us the letter which inspired our outburst. As we discovered he was (and appears still to be) the person who had taken over departmental responsibility for “Borders, Compliance, Detention and Technology”, or in other words, perhaps, for keeping innocent kiddies locked up in the desert, deporting Australian citizens, supporting the failed state of Nauru, making the lives of genuine refugees a misery, doing it to please the Minister, and all at the touch of a computer key. Previously he had been the driving force behind developing and implementing Job Network, or “how to design exquisite, personalised punishment for people who are already struggling with the stress of being unemployed”. Godluvvya, Bob! How’s the Volvo? How’s the kids? How do you sleep at night?

One of the most satisfying things is how we always beat the Immigration Department on Google.

Our second favourite person is Mick Keelty, just for being such a hopeless buffoon and continually making appalling stuff-ups for us to make fun of. G’bye, Mick.

Anyway, just for the record.

(And a special “hi!” to Lang!)

Hell, Pell

Oct 3, 2007 | Australian Values, Global Warming, OzPol Values, PedoPriests, Religious Values, Values

Hell, Pell

Cardinal Pell after Bacon

 

To Hell, Pell-Mell

 

C ardinal Pell has claimed on PM today that Global Warming is not happening.
He has “studied the science”, he says, and come to the rational conclusion that there is no evidence for global warming. In fact, he said, he was speaking to a “scientist” only the other day, and he said that the rise in CO2 follows warming rather than preceding it. Case closed.

He’s talking about the Milankovitch cycles which in fact do not debunk human causes for global warming. Skepticalscience covers this and pretty much all the other arguments against anthropogenic causes for global warming.

But hey, don’t put George down. It’s good that he’s a sceptic. That’s scientific, right?

He’s always totally rational and that’s why he should be trusted. He uses a special textbook called The Bible, which was written by his imaginary friend in the sky, so it must be true, right?

That’s why he believes:

  • that a virgin gave birth to a son after being visited by a winged humanoid from another dimension and then being impregnated by an immaterial spirit;
  • that a man actually walked on water;
  • that a man actually rose from the dead;
  • that a man actually floated bodily up into the sky and went to heaven.
  • that there really is a place called heaven where physical bodies go and are re-animated after they die;
  • that a woman was created from a man’s rib;
  • that a man actually divided two loaves of bread and five fishes such that there was sufficient to feed thousands of people with some left over;
  • that wine and bread become the real and actual blood and flesh of a man who lived—if he did live—two thousand years ago,
  • and who left the earthly realm altogether in the most dramatic and unequivocal way imaginable,
  • and that despite being actual blood and flesh the ex-wine and ex-bread still taste like wine and bread.

George Pell’s rationalist credentials are obviously unquestionable.

So let’s put the future of the planet in his hands. Okay?