This Saturday Australia will vote for who will lead the nation for the next term of government. What disturbs me greatly is that despite all that Julia Gillard has done, she remains high in the opinion polls and seems to have come out looking squeaky clean; whilst Tony Abbott gets labelled negatively. This isn't to say that I think Tony Abbott is a great man or anything of the sort, and perhaps he does deserve how he has been labelled; what I am saying however is that Julia Gillard has done far worse and will do far worse again.

Lets think about this logically for a moment, Julia Gillard as the Minister for Education was directly responsible for the School halls rip offs, directly responsible for wasted tax payer funds rebuilding the exact same class rooms schools already had without room for expansion. As deputy Prime Minister, with Kevin Rudd out of the country on he's tax payer funded world trip, Julia Gillard was to blame for the stimulus blunder which seen millions of tax dollars paid to dead people or people living in other countries than Australia. Last I knew dead people and people in another country can't directly impact retail sales in Australia which is exactly what the stimulus package was supposed to do. Heck retail sales are still low even after 310 BILLION dollars of debt.

Julia Gillard voted against the increase to the pension. She voted against any form of government run/funded paid maternity leave. Then she claimed she was only saying wait we need to get the numbers first to make sure we can afford it. Sorry Julia but I need an explanation as to why you were apparently being so fiscally responsible with these two initiatives but took no care fiscally in the initiatives in the paragraph above. It all happened around the same time, so it's not like she had learned from her mistakes and grown as a leader. I can not accept her reasoning because frankly she's lying through her teeth.

And lets seriously not forget the historical event where for the first time in the history of Australia a deputy Prime Minister challenged the leadership of the current Prime Minister. Australia voted for and elected Kevin Rudd as our representative, I didn't like it but it's who the majority chose. Julia Gillard had NO RIGHT to remove him from his democratically appointed position! If Labor didn't want Kevin Rudd as their leader at this election, they should have had Kevin Rudd call an election and then trumpet Julia Gillard as the person who would take control if Labor won the election. Instead, there were whispers and secrets behind closed doors. Conversations that the Australian public is not being allowed to hear, and a two faced persona where up until the very day she challenged Kevin Rudd she was claiming full support behind him as the Prime Minister. Julia Gillard is clearly a self serving, manipulative, two faced person with NO INTEREST in the great good for the Australian public.

This election she has come to Australians and instead of announcing the FACT that she intends to pass an ETS if Labor is elected, she has come at us with this non-sense about a public forum to discuss whether we have an ETS in Australia or not. She has on countless times dodged the question by the Media, but has once on the sly answered it. On Q&A when the host pushed and pushed her on the issue she quietly and quickly noted that she never said the "citizens assembly" would actually count towards policy. In other words, it's a waste of time and a waste of tax payer money. Labor intend to bring in an ETS, without any evidence it will have a positive effect, and if their CPRS is anything to go by such a lower carbon reduction amount as to have NO (ie. NONE) benefit to fixing climate change.

She has also gone into this election and literally two days out, has still failed to announce who would be taking up which cabinet positions should Labor retain government. Who would be our foreign minister? Our minister for Defence? We don't know basically anything about who would be in what portfolio if Labor wins on Saturday. How can we honestly vote for Labor when we don't know who will be handling what sections of the community?

She has been talking up the NBN, but can't answer how many houses will be connected during the governments next term should Labor win on Saturday. But beyond that has out right lied about the speed of the NBN and has completely failed to mention the retail costs. In fact the NBN won't be delivering speeds of 1Gb/s as Julia Gillard and Stephen Conroy have claimed, it will be capable of a max speed of 1gbps per switch which contains 32 connections. In other words that 1gbps gets split between 32 houses, making the theoretical maximum 312mbps. While that's still super fast, nothing like those speeds will actually be on offer to the public anyway. If you visit any of the ISP websites who are providing retail packages for the NBN (iiNet, iPrimus, Internode, Telstra) you'll note that the top speed on offer is 100mbps download SPEED with a still slow 8mbps upload. That's the very top on offer. Ultimately though, those speeds count for nothing if you go over your data limit, so if you're after a 100mbps connection with a reasonable data limit you're actually looking at around $160/month! Go over your download limit and you're back to DIAL UP speeds anyway making the NBN worthless given it's costing Australians $43 BILLION and rising to build! Heck did you even realise that those speeds count for nothing if you visit a website hosted outside Australia?

Julia Gillard is a member of and supported and backed by Emily's List. I wasn't actually sure what this organisation was until recently when I did some digging. In fact Emily's list is a powerful pro-womens group with some pretty messed up thinking. Emily's List supports FULL TERM abortions; ie. Abortions right up until the moment the mother gives birth! So in a world ruled by Emily's List members if a woman got to 36 weeks pregnant and decided she no longer wanted to have a baby, no problem she could STILL have an abortion! Seriously! You can delude yourself all you like about a baby in the first trimester not being alive, but at 36 weeks gestation there is absolutely no question that baby is alive, fully formed and taking down memories. As a backed and supported member of Emily's List, Julia Gillard agrees with this stance on abortion! Emily's List also supports something that have dubbed affirmative action in the work place; ie. Where men will be actively discriminated against when it comes to promotions until there are an equal number of woman through-out all levels of business as there are men. This would make promotions based on gender rather than genuine talent. Again, as a backed and supported member of Emily's List Julia Gillard supports affirmative action in the work place!

Julia Gillard until very recently was the secretary of the Socialist Forum, an organisation devoted to turning Australia into a socialist country much like North Korea is. As the former secretary Julia Gillard shares this view.

As I've said, in the past Tony Abbott has done some stupid, odd and down right dreadful things, but if you compare everything he has done, to date next to Julia Gillard, he isn't even fit to stand in her sneaky, sleazy, manipulative shadow. I don't intend this post to sway your vote, we live in a free democracy where each and every Australia has the right to make up their own mind and vote for whoever they wish. But what I do want this post to achieve is a better understanding of who and what Julia Gillard actually is. So if you do vote for Julia Gillard in 2 days time, please remember what you are voting for and don't whine and cry bloody murder when she retains government and truly screws Australia.

We have now entered into a weird sort of a world, where the mere mention of the word paedophile causes hysteria, over-emotional reactions and most of all hatred. Yet on the other hand some of the same people feel that placing naked images of their children, say in the bathtub; on public spaces such as social networking sites is fine. The thing is, a naked image of a child in a public space is always a naked image of a child in a public space, regardless of where it came from or it's intentions. An individual example is a woman on Sarah's facebook profile whom has placed pictures of her 15 year old niece wearing ONLY her underwear, posed in a sexual way on facebook. When Sarah commented on the photo's negatively the woman claimed Sarah was just jealous of the 15 year old's body. Now I'm sorry but placing sexually explicit images of a minor online is a CRIMINAL offence. And yes that law applies to naked photo's of toddlers and babies as well.

So the question has to be asked, why do people whom are so strongly opposed to paedophilia posting photo's of children online which are in the legal classification as child porn? I think a small part of the answer lies in the fact that many people still haven't caught onto the realities and limitations of social networking. People treat their profiles as if they're a lounge room with their friends all sitting around chatting, when in actual fact social networking is much more like trying to have a private discussion with your friends on the busiest street on the planet, while someone takes notes, makes copies and spreads those copies to all the other streets on the planet.

That is to say, social networking sites aren't private places. You can be upset about that all you like, you can talk about how they should be, but the fact of the matter is they aren't, and due to the nature and function of the internet they CAN'T be either. We need to be aware of what about ourselves and more importantly our children we're placing online. Images of naked, or near naked minors should never, under any circumstances be placed online. It places those minors at risk and is a criminal offence.

It seems to me that there are an unusually high number of major things in the world RIGHT NOW which could, if continuing on their present course, spell either the downfall of humanity and in some cases other species of earthly life as well. This post is a list of those things.

1. Potential for World War III

There are a number of events happening in the world currently which could ultimately spark World War III, these include; rising tensions inside the world wide Muslim community as extremists call upon Muslims living in western countries to destroy democracy and instil Islamic law. With Muslim groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir rallying Muslims living in the west to revolt and create a transnational Islamic state. Heck, the USA has even received a fresh threat of attacks on America which will make 9/11 pale in comparison.

At the same time, North/South Korean tensions are rising, with the USA pushing the UN to act harshly on North Korea. Similarly Israeli/Palestinian tensions are increasing as well, with Israel ruling out any chance of an independent Palestinian state by 2012. Israel has even begun aggression against nationals from it's ally states such as the USA in the recent commando raids upon Turkish humanitarian aide flotillas.

Iran is definitely a threat to global peace as the UN steps up sanctions against the country, which not only has nuclear weapons but now has commercially viable autonomous humanoid robots. And lastly China, with their entry into the capitalist world is hungry for global dominance. The have an almost inexhaustible number of soldiers, more money than you can poke a stick at and well, they seem to own most of the world now anyway.

2. Climate Change

This one really is a no brainer. Our climate is clearly changing, defined sessions are quickly becoming a thing of the past in my neck of the woods. Seas are rising, and the world seen the first climate change refugee's in 2008. Climate change means some REALLY nasty things are headed our way.

3. The BP oil spill

While the fact the BP oil spill has been spewing 911,454,000 litres of oil into the sea per day for the passed 72 days is a bad enough ecological disaster which will likely see the Gulf of Mexico take decades to recovery, if ever. New evidence shows that the BP oil spill has also dramatically increased the arsenic levels in the ocean, and those levels are continuing to rise. In other words, as arsenic levels rise sea life will die. Take out key points in the oceanic food web and you'll end up with basically no life left in the sea. Guess what happens to life on the land if life on the sea goes extinct.

4. Self aware AI in a military robot

The University of Adelaide in collaboration with robotics company Strategic Engineering have created the worlds first robot to be able to fully think for itself, as part of a US Military Super-Smart robots challenge. Funnily enough this AI's primary mission is to search, target, "neutralise" an enemy. It's weird, they create a self aware robot, then expect programming it to kill "the enemy" isn't going to backfire on us.

5. Plague Squirrel

A squirrel carrying the plague has been found at a camp in California causing the closure of the park for the next 10 days. Now two points to note here

(1) The fact the plague is back in town, the squirrel can't have picked up the plague from nowhere!

(2) How do you find out a random squirrel has the plague if a human doesn't first become infected? Seriously...

I'd say we need worry a LOT more about the potential for another pandemic of the plague then we do about the almost harmless swine flu.

6. Global insanity

Maybe it's just me, but it seems the world is becoming far more violent. Everyday the newspapers are filled with increasingly more seemingly random and pointless acts of violence. Children now days seem to think it's fun to gang up on a random person walking down the street and beat them within an inch of their life. There are 10 year olds in the UK whom KILL homeless point for kicks. Everywhere it seems, people who used to be normal are randomly becoming violent.

I don't know about you, but when I think about cars I can't help but associate them with noise, pollution and rising petrol prices. It's enough that some people have even gone to great lengths to convert their cars to & refine their own bio-diesel. Sure I suppose there is a certain charm and novelty to having your exhaust smell like burritos and French fries but (1) could you imagine the smell on large scale? Or the price of oil? and (2) They're still just as noisy and they're not 100% pollutant free either.

Toyota's Petrol/Electric Hybrid the "Prius" won over a lot of green inclined people searching for a cheaper and less polluting alternative. But the 'Prius' had the fundamental flaw of still running on petrol. Which means you have to pay for 2 fuel sources, plus it's still just as noisy when running on petrol AND it pollutes. Sure not as much as a fully petrol based car, but sustainability means cars can't pollute at all.

Enter Nissan whom have announced the December 2010 US release of their all electric car; the 'leaf'. Nissan are working with other industry players to roll out commercial recharging stations first in the USA and then across other countries around the world. These recharging stations will make owning a leaf viable, as you can always recharge on longer trips. For most people though, recharging will only need take place every 2 or so days as the leaf can get around 160km (100mi) from a single charge, and can even be recharged from home.

Recharging gives you 2 port options, a smaller port for recharging from home which will take 12 - 14hrs on 110v and 8hrs on 240v, so leaving the car plugged in over night to recharge while you sleep would be viable. The second larger plug is for the aforementioned commercial recharge stations which are predicted to take just 30 minutes to fully recharge the car from empty. Of course the question of what would one do during that time comes to mind, and is really the largest flaw I can see with the Leaf. However there is talk of installing the commercial recharge stations in parking garages for work places, shopping centres and so forth, so recharging could take place while you're at work or doing the groceries which sounds somewhat reasonable, although only really suited in that model to suburban & metro areas.

The Leaf also, like the Toyota 'Prius' gets some of it's charge back when braking or coasting & even includes a solar panel to give some extra recharge for FREE! I can see the solar panel coming in handy if you run out of charge in the middle of no where, think about it, wait a day and you're car will be fully charged and ready to drive again. The head lamps are LED powered giving both brighter lights and better power efficiency. But some of the coolest features are inside the car. The dash for example displays not only how much charge you have left but an estimate based on your own PERSONAL driving history in that car, as to how much further that charge will get you.

That's right, you read correctly, this car remembers your driving history and responds. It even has a novelty feature on the dash where you can earn 'trees' over time depending on how efficiently you drive the car. The inbuilt satnav also connects to the internet via a Nissan exclusive wireless service updating the GPS with real time information such as the location of your nearest recharging station, which when you're running low on charge the car will politely suggest you should visit. 6 speaker stereo allows cd/mp3 playback, has inbuilt bluetooth and has ipod/mp3 player connectivity. Under the hood, it even packs 100hp, 210ft.ibs torque!

But above ALL that, the most impressive thing about the Nissan Leaf is the obvious facts about the car. It doesn't directly pollute, being electric it's whisper quiet and it ultimately SHOULDN'T cost the earth to run. Being electric also there are a lot less parts, and a lot less of those parts move, meaning less ware & tare and fewer trips to the mechanic saving you even more cash. The Nissan Leaf, definitely worth looking out for through-out 2011.

With worse than poor ratings in the opinion polls for both Labor and Kevin Rudd himself, at 9am this morning an Australian Labor Party (ALP) ballot seen Kevin Rudd removed as leader of the party, and thus from the office of Prime Minister, replaced by his deputy Julia Gillard. While I greatly contest this motion as undemocratic on the grounds the Australian people weren't able to decide if Julia Gillard was fit to lead them; this is not the topic I will be discussing. Instead I want to discuss why nothing will change under her leadership.

The thing about Kevin Rudd's term as Prime Minister is that a great deal of it, perhaps even a majority there of, was spent outside of Australia visiting leaders of other nations, going to overseas meetings and so forth. As during this time he didn't actually achieve anything, nor really intended to do so, lets call it a tax-payer funded holiday. Now for this and countless other reasons I certainly feel that Kevin Rudd wasn't fit to lead this country and of course should have been voted out at the next election, but so should Gillard. The fact is that while Kevin Rudd was out of the country, the Prime Ministers duties fall to the deputy, which until 9am this morning was Julia Gillard.

In fact, it seems that most of the major Labor screw ups which occurred during Kevin Rudd's term as PM, such as the misappropriation of Stimulus package funds, the insulation scheme debacle and so forth, all originated while Kevin Rudd was out of the country. Or in other words, they happened under Julia Gillard's watch. And the stuff ups which have occurred in Public Education funding relate DIRECTLY to Julia Gillard and her department, as the minister for Education. The simple fact of the matter is Julia Gillard is a spineless buffoon, completely unfit to be a minister at all, let alone lead the country. During her term as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Education, she has been marred by countless screw-ups and debacles, it seems even the simplest of political tasks escapes Julia Gillard's abilities.

So with this change of leadership, and expected continued party infighting, don't expect change for the better. Expect more screw-ups and a complete lack of direction. That is the Julia Gillard that we have seen as Deputy Prime Minister, and the Julia Gillard we will see as Prime Minister. It has come to a point, where Labor are completely not to be trusted with anything. They can't even be trusted to leave the guy Australia voted for in office until the next election. We can't trust them on reform, we can't trust them on education or health, we can't trust them on the environment, we can't trust them on whaling, we can't trust them with the economy & Australian Jobs, we can't trust them with ANYTHING. When it comes to election time in March next year, if Australia is going to have a safe, democratic, prosperous future we MUST vote Labor out of office.

Links;

News Article

For the last few years Nintendo have had somewhat of a monopoly in the motion sensor category in the console market through the Nintendo Wii; not anymore. At 2009's E3 we were introduced to Microsofts controller-less controller code named project natal and man did it look good. Although in early development the demonstrations where awe inspiring and the trailer left my jaw on the floor. But in 2009 we were given no details, no release date, no idea of actual playable games, nothing.

But now, a year later our questions are answered; well at least some of them. Renamed Kinect the device is set to revolutionise the way we play games, make calls and interact with our console in general. No longer are we tethered to a controller, needing to learn button combinations and making the battery industry rich, for with kinect your body, arms, legs and voice are the controls and it works however you move your body. After loads of internet rumours about a potential Q4 release date, Microsoft has finally confirmed a November 2010 release and announced the first 8 games to be launched along side the controller. Games launching in November will be;

• Dance Central
• Kinectimals
• Kinect Sports
• Kinect Joy Ride
• Your Shape: Fitness Evolved
• Kinect Adventures!
• Zumba Fitness
• Sonic Freeriders

And although I'm holding out to see the first shooters come to Kinect the launch line up looks creditable and definitely in the league to directly rival the wii with big names like fad sensation Zumba on board. That's right, no more trying to get the Sensor bar to pick up the Wii Controller, no more warnings about jumping on the Wii Balance board. With Kinect, go ahead and jump! Heck, kick, punch, dance, move however you see fit; it's all great with the Kinect.

But Kinect isn't just a game controller, it also enables you to make HD quality video calls from your TV when you have an Xbox Live Gold account. The camera in the Kinect automatically moves and traces you around the room, so you're always perfectly in frame, while multiple omni-directional microphones make sure everyone can be heard. Now it's possible for your whole family to keep in touch with grandparents, that nice family you met on holidays or whoever else, all on your TV! I'm sure more will be announced in the coming months, and I'll do my best to keep you up to date through this blog and twitter.

Links;

Official Kinect Website
Wikipedia Article
Project Natal YouTube Channel

It's always been my plan to establish a new federal political party comprising people from all walks of life (as opposed to the current major parties comprising the wealthy business elite) to truly represent Australians. It's always been the plan to bring back democracy and rid Australia of this elitist leadership whose interests lie with themselves. What wasn't planned was a decision I've made in the last week or so to attempt to run as an independent for the house of reps in this years election. I figure it will create awareness and give me some experience of the voting system from the candidate side.

Of course while I'd love to win and become the federal member for Oxley, and I would hope I would get a reasonable amount of support I don't expect that I will actually win. The primary function of running in this election is to gain experience so that the next election will run smoothly. But as I said, at this stage I'm only attempting to run, as I have a few discussions with the Australian Electoral Commission to have yet, so we'll see how it all turns out and I'll keep you updated. If I do get on the ballet and you live in the federal seat of Oxley, give democracy a kick in the pants and vote for me

Links;

Australian National Democratic Party (facebook fan page)

Section 5: History doesn't back the bible up

I'm sure most of you know the biblical story of Moses who spoke to the burning bush and freed the Jewish slaves from Egypt. He parted the red sea and drowned the Pharaoh along with his army, or so the bible would have you believe. The bible then talks about the Jews toiling in the desert until they came upon Jerusalem where they settled. Funny thing is, archaeology doesn't back this story up. See the important thing to note about this story as opposed to others in the bible is a matter of records. For most other civilisations around the time record keeping was spotty at best, and a lot of the records that were created have been lost to time as a result of wars or fires or other disasters. On the other hand, the Egyptians kept records about everything, and boy do I mean EVERYTHING! The good, the bad and the neutral, it didn't matter what it was or how it reflected on them, they recorded it. There were records for each years grain supplies, how many slaves they had, where each army was, who was in it, who did what, where and when. EVERY last little thing, recorded on stone no less, preserved for all of time.

Funny thing about the Egyptian records, they mention absolutely nothing about losing thousands of slaves, a parting of a sea or losing an entire army and the Pharaoh (who remember was to the ancient Egyptians considered a god himself) to drowning. We have a group of people who are meticulous about keeping records about everything and they mention not one word about something as huge as thousands of slaves escaping, or the drowning of a Pharaoh or the drowning of an entire army? I mean think about it for a moment, the Egyptians were so good at keeping records that we use them to help validate and get greater insight into other cultures at the time, with whom they traded. It really isn't reasonable to think they'd leave out such important events in history, and have those events as the ONLY events that are left out of record. So one can pretty safely conclude if the Egyptians didn't record it happening then it must be a little bit bullshit...

Nokia have recently announced the brand new N8 as coming soon on their Australian website and this is certainly not a phone to be snubbed. If when looking at the N8 you were confused as to whether it was actually a rather pointy looking iphone you'd be forgiven, and surely this is an outright attempt by Nokia to grab some of the smart phone market away from Apple. I must say that a lack of physical keyboard be it full qwerty or otherwise is a bit of a disappointment for me, there is something rather annoying to me about virtual keypads.

Another disappointing feature is that the N8 will only ship with a stylus in the box to SOME "SELECTED" countries, meaning those outside of the "selected" countries will have to either purchase a stylus separately or just use their fingers. And while the phone is purpose built to be able to use your fingers to control it, I find it unfair that some countries will have the stylus bundled.

But these two faults are where the negatives end and the N8 really starts to shine. Weighing in at just 135g (with battery) it's light enough to carry in your pocket, and comes in Silver, dark grey and green. The screen will auto adjust it's brightness depending on the amount of ambient light, there is an inbuilt compass. Home screens allow a custom mixture of shortcuts and widgets to make your experience completely personalised, but nokia haven't just stopped there; instead they have given you 3 home screens to customise for different times in your day/life. For example much like you can have different ring tones and sms alert tones for work or personal time on most modern mobiles, the Nokia N8 can now have different home screens for work and for your personal life. This allows you to have the widgets and shortcuts providing the information you need when you need it.

Network wise the phone has GPRS, EDGE and HSDPA (CAT 5 & 9) support with the GSM mode working on 850/900/1800/1900 bands and the WCDMA mode working on 850/900/1700/1900/2100 bands, and automatic switching between GSM and WCDMA modes means this phone can be used basically anywhere on the planet on any network making it perfect for those whom travel. There is support for the brand new Bluetooth 3.0 and HDMI, Micro USB (Data and charging), 2mm charging connection and 3.5mm AV connection ports. The phone has an inbuilt FM transmitter allowing you to listen to music from the phone in your car wirelessly. If of course has an FM tuner as well, although I think a digital radio tuner might have been more fitting. The phone even has Wifi b/g/n support.

With 16GB of internal memory and support for up to 32GB of memory with a MicroSD card there isn't a lot you can't fit on this phone. There is the flexibility to store almost as much music, photos and video as you like. The battery also boasts some pretty impressive stats, with 720 minutes of talk time and 50 HOURS of music play back, this isn't a phone that's going to be warning of flat batteries on that critical call. Software wise the phone comes with a full html (4.1) browser, Flash lite 4.0, Quick time 4.6.2, Java, OMA DM 1.2 and OMA Client provisioning 1.1. And there is of course all the usuals like calendar, contacts, Ovi Store, messaging etc.

Email is supported and rather predictably has a customisable home screen widget. WebTV is supported allowing access to your favourite web shows from anywhere you can get a signal. There is even an office document editor and a VIDEO and photo editor! Chat wise the phone has inbuilt support for Ovi Chat, Yahoo!, AIM, Windows Live, Google Talk and Myspace which covers basically everyone you know right? Get a Nokia N8 and you not only get both GPS and A-GPS receivers, but you also get FREE turn by turn navigation for, wait for it, LIFE! That's right, you never have to pay to update your GPS maps again! And where GPS isn't available, the N8 will attempt to locate you via wifi!

Now for the REALLY cool stuff; the phone comes with a 12 megapixel camera meaning you can take both photos and video in FULL HD!!! Right on your mobile phone!! In wide screen!!! Score!! There is also a second VGA (640 x 480 pixels) camera on the front for video calls. A dedicated camera button makes taking photos and video easy as point and shoot. But why only please your eyes when you can also stimulate your ears? The N8 comes with Dolby Digital Plus! Now music and movies will sound superb where ever you are. Gaming is another winner, with the phone boasting a dedicated graphics processor supporting openGL 2.0, or in otherwords, gaming on the mobile phone just got serious!

Green consumers will be pleased to note the phone 80% recyclable and the full user guide is displayed digitally on the device or on the web. The box contains the N8 smart phone (or mobile computer as Nokia are billing it), a Nokia BL-4D battery, a Nokia connectivity cable, a Nokia stereo headset, a compact travel charger, adaptor cables for HDMI and USB and for "selected" countries a stylus. No word yet on a release date, but the Nokia N8 is certainly a phone to keep an eye and an ear out for.

In part for I explore the nature of Jesus in relation to the Jewish faith and how it stacks up historically. Oh and I must apologise for the lateness of this entry.

Section 4: A Jewish God

You know Jerusalem, being the holey city of “god” isn't named that way by accident. In fact at the time Jesus was born Judaism was widely practised in the general region, and weirdly enough worships the same god as other Christian religions. Fact of the matter is the early factions of Judaism are the source of all modern Christianity, including Catholicism and Islam, so in actual fact all Christians worship a Jewish god. In the first 6 decades of the first century CE, Judaism was actually comprised of roughly 24 competing factions, one of which being the followers of Yeshua of Nazareth (Jesus of Nazareth in English). It is interesting to note that the Synoptic gospels and Gospel of John mention that the teachings of Yeshua (Jesus) very closely matched those of a rabbi named Hillel who lived in the second half of the 1st century BCE, generations BEFORE Yeshua's (Jesus) birth! On a quick side note, they also interestingly continue by stating that Yeshua (Jesus) was charged with what we today would called “aggravated assault” against merchants in the temple, which was considered treason or insurrection by the Roman forces. Both Gospels give that as the reason why Yeshua (Jesus) was crucified and not the outlandish jealousy and insecurity by the king, stated in most modern Christian bibles.

But back to the origins of Christianity in Judaism; in 70 CE the Roman army attacked Jerusalem and destroyed the temple. This devastating blow disrupted Jewish life and caused two new movements to emerge, that of the rabbinical Judaism which was centered in local synagogues, and the early Christian movement. Some of Yeshua's (Jesus') followers, and some who although never meeting Yeshua were inspired by his teachings, settled in Jerusalem. Others spread across what was the then known world, but all of whom, come even within the same city, taught very different messages and held vastly different views on who Jesus was and what he did. So there you go, if you're a christian, you're actually a Jew, because you worship a Jewish god. And the teachings of Jesus were both inline with those already established at the time AND distorted by his followers. Just another reason the bible is just a little bit bullshit...

Russian politician Kirsan Ilyumzhinov claimed on April 26ths edition of a popular russian Tv show that he had been abducted by aliens in 1997. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov has been the serving president of Kalmykia for the past 17 years. Without any further proof, the interview has sparked concern in Russian parliament with Russian MP Andre Lebedev calling on Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to conduct an inquiry into the claims with fears Kirsan Ilyumzhinov may have given away "state secrets" to his alien abductors.

Kirsan Ilyumzhinov claimed in his Channel One interview that he was falling asleep when he heard someone call him from the balcony. Upon investigating he supposedly found a "spaceship" which was a "half-transparent half tube". Somehow (he didn't explain how) Kirsan claims to have then entered the "spaceship" where he was greeted by "human-like creatures in yellow spacesuits". According to the eccentric politician the aliens then gave him a tour of their spaceship. When asked about communicating with them Kirsan stated "I am often asked which language I used to talk to them. Perhaps, it was on a level of the exchange of ideas".

On a personal note, while I certainly believe in life on other planets. And could be persuaded to believe in extra-terrestrial life visiting our planet, I find Kirsan Ilyumzhinov's claims completely laughable. It is interesting that this supposed event took place whilst under his own admission he was falling asleep. I think it is far more likely that Mr Ilyumzhinov dreamed the whole event and none of it actually took place. I find it both highly amusing and concerning that Andre Lebedev is worried about aliens gaining state secrets without any actual proof beyond his own word, that aliens ever visited Mr Ilyumzhinov.

Links;

News.com.au
The Sun

Part 3: Multiple Versions

As I covered back in Part 1, there exists multiple versions of the bible, and multiple interpretations of “gods word”. Even if you believe in God, you have to concede that it's impossible they're all right. For example if I say “If you're feeling sad, go jump in a lake” there a many many different interpretations that can be had on what I meant. Some people might think I meant to literally jump in the lake, then get out again, whilst others would think I mean they should commit suicide, whilst against others might thing I meant it as a turn of phrase meaning they should go away if they're feeling sad, and still there are other interpretations which I won't list here. The point is, I didn't mean all of these interpretations, I meant only 1 of them.

It seems to me that if “God” were the true “creator” then there wouldn't be all these different interpretations, I mean surely a being whom is apparently able to creature man kind with a simple point of it's finger is able to be clear enough in communication to get out the true meaning of what they have to say. I find the mere fact the bible is an interpretation cause for why it's a little bit bullshit, because lets say the text is really the world of god, the moment a human comes and “interprets” that text, and thus changes words around (potentially changing whole meanings of sentences) it ceases to be the word of god and becomes just another human written bunch of non-sense.

So the mere fact there are multiple versions, each interpreting the supposed word of god in their own way. But it's worse then just that, they each include only the scriptures and teachings they agree with interpreting only THOSE scriptures and teachings into the bible and leaving out the bits they don't agree. Again, if it's the word of god, then it's all the word of god and should all be included. It doesn't matter if bits repeat or if some things greatly differ from the general teachings, isn't that for each person who “experiences the word of god” to decide? It seems to me, anyone who is really seeking the true path to “god” and what “god” is on about, should learn ancient Latin, Greek Hebrew and Aramaic so they can themselves properly read the actual scriptures. It seems to me that if there is any truth to the bible it should be distributed including ALL of the scriptures, written in their entire original form, including original language, completely free from human interpretation. Anything less than that is just a little bit bullshit...

British pop singer M.I.A has sparked world wide criticism in the media over the video clip to her new song Born Free. The 9 minute video clip which depicts U.S authorities going house by house to round up all the red headed men for execution has even been banned on YouTube!

I'll be first to admit the video is over the top graphically violent, and honestly the song itself is none but a bunch of noise (maybe I'm just getting to old) but I don't think it deserves the sort of criticism it's getting if on the other hand we're going to say pop stars like Lady Gaga are allowed to have their extremely sexually explicit video clips and movies like Saw IV are allowed to exist. In fact if anything I'd have to say M.I.A's video clip is rather tame compared to any of the remade films Rob Zombie has done. And more over, M.I.A and ROMAIN GAVRAS were attempting to make a political statement with this video clip. Sure the clip does a clumsy job at making it's statement, but it quite clearly has hit people hard (otherwise it wouldn't have so much media attention) so one must assume it has at least partly fulfilled it's purpose.

Do I agree video clips like this should exist? No, of course not, but I disagree with video clips like those of Lady Gaga and movies like Rob Zombies remake of Halloween even more. None of this crap should exist, it's not art, it's not expressionism, it's not about complementing music or benefiting society. It's pornographic sexuality and violence for shear shock value and commercial gain. All of these types of videos should be banned, not just one video that has a bit of violence in it. I certainly don't think it's appropriate that I walk into a shop like Big-W and my children can see Lady Gaga half naked, dancing around like a whore on the LCD Tvs. We need to really take a long hard look in the mirror at the crap we're allowing Record companies to pump out and expose our children to.

Recycling, it's sold as one of the potential saviors of our planet. The idea of taking old things, reducing them to base resources and creating new products; sounds like a plausible solution in theory right? Wrong! Recycling doesn't make economic sense, nor does it make total environmental sense. But let me explain myself a little better.

Economically speaking manufacturers normally would pay for their raw materials. A drink bottle manufacturer for example would normally either pay per ton of plastic pellets or (if they process their own plastics) the going price per barrel of oil. Now throw recycling into the mix; suddenly the bottle manufacturer has a way of recovering their product without cost, then reworking it to produce a new bottle. Due it doesn't stop the need for raw materials, but that's down to lack of recycling volume, not concept. Essentially recycling means we, the consume provide to the manufacturer their raw materials, for FREE, which they then sell back to us. Can you name one other example of where a company is able to get product legally for free?

This I feel is the single biggest reason for lack of total adoption of the recycling schemes. If however the manufacturers were willing to pay for their product, that is to say they buy off of us the raw materials, this not only makes more economic sense, but would mean a greater take up of recycling. Think about it, if you knew your drink bottle, newspaper, catelogs, tin cans or other recyclables had a dollar value, you'd be more likely to recycle now wouldn't you? You'd also be less likely to litter. This simple change to the scheme would make a massive difference and would see landfill shrink dramatically.

Environmentally however, sure recycling cuts the amount of new raw materials needed, but it doesn't cut out the need for new raw materials all together. Even with 98% - 100% adoption of the recycling scheme we still need to use new raw materials in order to manufacturer recycable products; at best it slows the problem down it however solves nothings. Beyond that, recycling doesn't change the pollutants industral manufacturers produce; if anything it increases it. So on an environmental front, it only slows the consumption of new raw materials and does nothing to fix the problems caused by the manufacture process itself.

Recycling, a scheme that makes big claims, but makes no economic sense and little environmental sense.

My weekly series on the bible continues this week where I explore some of the Contradictions in the bible.

Section 2: Contradictions

The bible is absolutely filled with contradictions. It seems one moment it's telling us to or not to do something, or that things are or aren't a certain way, then suddenly and inexplicably takes the complete opposite stance. Lets take for example the 6th commandment (5th of your Catholic or Lutheran) “You Shall not Murder” (“You shall not Kill” if your Catholic). Think about that for a moment, here is a commandment which states very clearly that killing is a major sin, note the significant lack of the word Human in that commandment. That is to say the commandment itself makes no definition as to it referring to a particular species, and thus one can only make the generalised assumption from the text that murdering anything that is alive, be it human, other animal or planet is a sin under the bible.

But lets forget that a moment and for argument stake take it under it's traditional interpretation as to only applying to the killing of other humans. The bible still very much contradicts this stance in itself. Take the following verses taken from the bible for example, and please note that a reference to both where you can find the verse and in what version of the bible it will appear.

“Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel.” (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

“A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death.” (Leviticus 20:27 NAB )

“If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death.” (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB )

"If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare... See More or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst." (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB )

"Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death." (Exodus 21:15 NAB )

"A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death." (Leviticus 21:9 NAB )

Now of course there will be those who talk about old and new testaments but before you do, let me just say this. If the bible is the word of God, then how does it really matter if it's old or new testament? Think about it for a moment, if you believe the bible is the world of god, then the old testament has to be just as valid as the new testament, otherwise heck why would it be in the damn bible? I mean we've already talked about how each version of the bible includes only the scripture which that religion finds relevant to their own Christian values, so if it's in your bible then clearly your church wants you to believe in that stuff just as much as everything else in the bible. If it's all the word of the apparent divine creator then guess what, you have to believe in and practise the whole lot of it, you can't just pick and chose the bits that sound nice and leave the rest. It's one of those black and white things.

The Bible; Some people believe in what it says, even for some, when they haven't actually ever read the bible fully. Whilst others look at the bible as nothing more than fiction, a story book, or at best a cultural governance set by man. But whatever side of this equation you fall on, it might be in your interests to read these series on why I think the bible is just a little bit bullshit. If at any point you agree or disagree with something I have to say, I encourage you to comment on the post, or head over to our forum and discuss the matter there.

Section 1: The word of God.

The Bible would have us believe it is the word of “God”, a divine book descended from “Heaven”. But I have two main problems with this idea, the first of which being that the bible was not physically written by God, nor did it magically fall from heaven. Instead as we all should know, the bible was physically written by mere mortals, both men AND women. Now you can claim some divine entity came down from heaven and told them what to write all you like (I call a voice only you can hear telling you what to do a symptom of Schizophrenia nor divinity), but the fact remains it was actually written by human beings, not by divine entities and most certainly not by God. I find it most interesting that out of the hundreds of accounts, none of them were written by “Jesus of Nazareth” who the bible tells us is apparently simultaneously the SON of God AND God in human form. The mere lack of any accounts or scripture from “Jesus of Nazareth” is in itself most telling about the nature of the scriptures. That is to say if it was gods will to write them, surely god would have done at least some of the writing whilst in human form right?

Actually Christian testimony was originally entirely oral, and continued in this medium for roughly twenty years after the supposed death of “Jesus of Nazareth” before the “word of god” was written down as biblical scripture. These scriptures where in fact distributed secretly across early Christian regions that were under Roman rule. In actual fact Roman law at the time made it a capital offence to be Christian &/or to distribute Christian reading materials. Imagine for a moment you live in the year 25A.D. Villages are small, and cities while large compared to villages are still incredibly small compared to modern cities. There are of course no TVs, Radios, Telephones or Computers and there are no planes, trains or cars. This means that travel and communication between villages or cities is measured in days, if not weeks or months. If an Arab stranger rides into your village claiming to be from Egypt which is several months travel away, and tells of the destruction of an Egyptian city, then it's pretty likely, having nothing else to compare the claims against, that you're going to believe it.

So if you get this “secret” scripture proclaiming to be the word of a divine entity (“god”) that is filled with details about how enemy cities are crumbling, and how “god” is going to save his people from the Roman dictatorship, you'd certainly believe it. Instantly you're filled with hope for a better life, and future for your children who are probably currently slaves. Of course at the time there would be no way to verify how true the document is, or even who actually wrote it. In fact, a single document could have potentially been written by several people, as opposed to just one, and the author(s) weren't even necessarily Christian followers. In fact to this day, there is still no way of actually verifying who actually wrote any of these biblical scriptures. People have ideas about who wrote them, there are a wide range of theories, but there are actually no facts surrounding the author(s) nor their motives.

So while on one hand we have a book comprising the writings of unconfirmed authors, claiming to be the word of god, on the other hand there are far MORE biblical scriptures in existence than you will find in any bible. Each version of Christianity makes up their version of the bible from the scriptures it feels best represents their beliefs, but all leave more other then they put in. In fact there are some biblical scriptures which aren't contained in ANY bible. So we're meant to believe the people who wrote these scriptures were all influenced into writing the divine and infallible word of god, we're also meant to believe that some of those teachings should be excluded from our view? That some of them are irrelevant, or down right wrong? But wait, isn't “God” meant to be infallible? In fact, if the heads of the Christian churches honestly believed that all biblical scripture was the infallible word of god, and that god was our all knowing creator, then guess what; they would have no choice but to include each and ever biblical scripture as part of the bible. All of it, even the parts written by women.

Think about it, according to the bible, perverting the word of god is a sin, on you will go to hell for all eternity for. Guess what excluding some of the things “god” has apparently said through people in biblical scripture, in order to better show the word of god in the way you want it to be, would be called. Hrmmm. And guess what then spreading the teachings in such a perversion would be called. According to the beliefs of Christians themselves just by reading their bibles and spreading what they say as the whole word of god, all Christians are going to hell... :lol:

Links;

Wikipedia (Early Christianity)
Early Christian Writings
Religious Tolerance

Dodo would have to have one of THE most frustrating customer support and technical support services in the industry. I'm sure other customers of Dodo know exactly what I'm talking about. Today an idiot technician from Telstra stopped at the phone exchange in front of my house to set up the line for a house around the street apparently and in the process he's disconnected OUR line. I know pathetic right? Sarah even went out and told him and he just denied it, what a freak'in jackass.

So I've run up dodo to get the line sorted out, but instead of going, ok we'll get in touch with telstra and sort the whole thing out within the hour. Instead after explaining the situation to the girl on the other end she went to check the "backend" which took her about 10 minutes (I was on a mobile by the way, because well my line is dead), anyway she comes back and says ok we need to do some trouble shooting. Fine I said reluctantly. So she starts asking me how long my phone line is. 10 Meters I said, but that's not the problem.

It was at that point she started a great big spiel about how a line longer than 3 meters is going to cause problems and blah blah blah. That I have to use a longer ether cable instead of a longer phone line and blah blah blah. Annoying stuff that wasn't even relevant, which I pointed out to her, as well as the fact that I had, had this set-up for the entire term of the account without problems, and again explained that I was happily working away ordering new stock on the internet when the telstra guy turned up did whatever he did and our line died. She started going on about how they don't know what the technician was doing so they have to go through these trouble shooting steps.

Next she asked me to cycle my modem, which I had already done, 3 times before I called her, which I told her and she made me cycle it again anyway. Next was, check you check if there is a dial tone on the line. Sure I said, I already have, there isn't one, it's dead. It was at this point she decided she should reconfigure the ports associated to my account and put me on hold. :lol: lmao. Another 15 minutes later she came back and said ok please cycle your modem to see if that affected anything, and started saying how she said she doesn't think it will because of the length of my phone line. I said I don't think it will work either, because I don't have a line out, and thus the ports won't affect anything. Of course it didn't work.

It was at this point she informed me they were unable to go any further unless I had a 3m or shorter phone line connected to my modem, otherwise the extended trouble shooting steps wouldn't have an affect on anything. I informed her for a second time that my phone line is in the lounge room and that I don't have a shorter phone line. She asked about the phone line I used to see if the line had a dial tone, I said that line is about 4 inches long. She said use that then, so I asked if I use a power extension cable with the modem will that affect things? Yes she said :lol: well I said the closest power socket to my phone plug is too far away to power the modem, I'd need to use a power extension cord. She was stumped and tried repeating back to me that a phone cable over 3m in length wasn't going to work and would cause problems.

It was at this point I'd had enough and said, "look I understand and know full well that a longer cable can cause speed reductions, I'm sure it does so on my line but I am happy with the connection speed I get, it's not an issue. There is no excess noise on my line, the cable is kept in perfect order, everything is perfect here. That cable isn't effecting anything. This isn't a problem at dodo's end, you guys are doing things fine, this isn't a problem at my end, this is a problem because an idiot telstra technician pulled out my line and now it's dead"

Ok well we'll continue with the trouble shooting with your phone cable then. she replied :lol: She asked me if I knew how to get to the administration screen for my modem, I'm already there I said. She asked if I could tell her what the upstream and downstream was. "Zero" I replied. "Oh, you really don't have any connection there at all do you?" she asked. ROFLMAO That's what I've been trying to tell you for OVER AN HOUR I confirmed.

Well let me try reprogramming your line first :lol: Another pointless trouble shooting step, that doesn't relate to this in any way. Fine I sighed and she put me on hold. 15 Minutes later she's back and says ok, cycle your modem again. Fine I said, which is about where my mobile ran out of battery and I was disconnected. lol Of course reprogramming the line did nothing, because for it to have an effect I'd need to actually be connected to the telco network, which as it so happens, because of the idiot telstra technician I'm not.

So I ring dodo back, the wait time wasn't as bad this time and I'm connected to a guy this time, who after getting my account up said hold on I just need to check something for you and put me on hold. By this time I'm starting to wonder how much of my credit they're going to use up. So the guy comes back and of course the problem with having to a support line back is that you have to explain the problem all over again. He asked me a bunch of questions that I'd already answered that don't have anything to do with much of anything, had a slight disagreement with me about the length of my phone cable and put me back on hold. After a few minutes, he comes back and decides he's going to do a line test and puts me on hold. At this point I'm wondering what he's been doing all this time. So I'm on hold for another few minutes when he comes back, asks me to disconnect my modem from the socket, which I do and then puts me on hold again. :lol:

Appalling that this happened at 12:30 today, it's now 3:18pm and they still haven't started proceedings to actually fix the problem, which of course is on the street in front of my house. So he comes back from on hold, realises that the line test showed nothing, asks if I have another modem I can try, to which I of course said no. He then decides we've finally exhausted all trouble shooting steps and will send someone out. He tells me if the fault lies within my premises or with my equipment I will be charged $220 for a call-out fee. Fine I said, I know what the problem is. So back on hold I go.

Dear Senator Evans,

Can you please explain to me why it is that you are unable to grasp the issues around immigration, whilst the opposition shadow minister Scott Morrison has a great understanding of the issues? Can you please explain why the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) found that 300,000 immigrants lived in Australia for a period of 12 months or more during 2009, and how you, the relevant minister plan to reduce that number to a more manageable level?

Senator Evans, that figure might include international students here on temporary visas for a minimum of 12 months; but it is my understanding that those students still drink and use water while they are here, they still produce garbage, they still use our roads and public transport during there time in Australia and they still consume electricity. I do invite you to correct me if that understanding is in fact incorrect and they somehow manage to not do any of that during their time here, but I strongly doubt there is such a way.

In addition, it is my understanding Chris that these students also require housing from the general rentals market, and of course as they are students require a place at an approved learning institution, such as an accredited university. Again I invite you to make the same corrections of my grasp on the situation if I do indeed have it wrong. On the assumption however that the above statements are correct however (and I really don't see how they couldn't be) can you please explain why it is that you, as the relevant minister have set the immigration number so high?

As someone who lives in Queensland, were suspiciously the majority of immigrants seem to end up, I have seen a break down of basic and essential services in part as a direct result of immigration numbers being set above manageable levels. When a state starts running out of water, and begins water rationing, how does it make sense to dump tens of thousands more unskilled immigrants into that state? There is also a distinct housing shortage as a direct result of having to house all of these new immigrants, and Queensland is preparing for electricity rationing on top of water rationing.

Last I checked Senator Evans, the idea was to let in immigrants on the basis they would in some way improve our quality of life, whilst at the same time not taking away from it. I fail to see Chris how an immigration policy which both increases the number of immigrants allowed into the country whilst simultaneously directs focus AWAY from skilled immigration is in anyway beneficial to Australia. Sure we get an industry specific economic boom as a result of the international students, but at what price? Do you really feel the reduction in quality of life to your follow Australians is worth that industry specific economic boom?

As the Honorable Scott Morrison has pointed out, the idea of immigration is meant to be to supplement the natural increase in population, not override it. I would like to know what your thoughts are on these issues Senator Evans and what you plan to do about them.

So you went out and paid $800+ for your iPhone, or got jammed into a long term contract that sees you paying over $1000 for the device, you faithfully stood by Apple even though your iPod or iPhone exploded. Your even excitedly impatient for the release of the iPad near you so you can snap one up at $900, despite it's severe lack of features and general uselessness. You're a faithful Apple user, you buy apps by the dozen, you're addicted right?

You're even about to wet your pants over the release of the announced iOS 4.0 and the speculation over a new iPhone device. Well here is a feature in iOS 4.0 you may not have heard to much fan fare about, iAds. That's the name of course Apple have given to their new targeted advertising system, which will place targeted advertisements in your apps.

That's right you've paid for a device and an application that is going to spam the heck out of you every time you use it. I'm sure if you enjoy having ads all over the place this won't present the slightest problem to you, but for most people iAds might just be an iKiller. I mean we put up with the ads from Google, Facebook, myspace and the like because well, they're free services, ads are how they make their money. But apple make a hefty profit without ads, they're essentially asking you to pay for the privilege of being spammed. Apple CEO Steve Jobs has announced he plans to serve 1 BILLION ADS PER DAY

Sure you could just use the device in default and not download any extra apps, but seriously if you were going to do such a thing, why would you bother getting an iPhone or iPad? There are plenty of phones in the $100 - $200 range that have the same features as the iPhone minus the apps (Heck some even have the apps too now days).

So, why the sudden shift into advertising you might ask? Well firstly it isn't sudden, it's been planned for quite some time now. Apple plan to give 60% of the profits to the application developer and keep 40% to take care of the costs of serving those ads. It's a move that is meant to make iOS look like a more desirable platform to big name game and software developers, like Nintendo. Apple seems to think people will want to spend hours on end playing in-depth, graphic rich games on their iPhone or iPad as opposed to their Gaming Console or PC; I think Apple are a little delusional.

If Apple are so interested in gaming perhaps they should focus on making the MAC more gamer friendly, &/or developing a gaming console of their own. They sound like far more logical solutions to me, but of course in the world of Steve Jobs it's a better idea to attempt to get people to play games on a tiny screen (part of which will be taken up by ads while you're in the game) with poor user game controls. And of course the Telcos will love this idea, think about it. 17% of the mobile market in Australia owns an iPhone, each one being served data using ads, day and night! Oh yeah, get ready for your mobile bill to rise.

Which leaves just one question left, seriously, what is with Apple placing an 'i' before the name of every product they sell? Am I the only one who is getting annoyed at that? But I suppose if they insist on putting an 'i' before there advertising product, a more accurately descriptive name might have been "idontwantads".

Links;

iTWire Article
The Age Article
Nintendo USA President on Apple

Toward the end of 2009 and at the very beginning of 2010 I blogged about a growing trend of internet based advertising companies to invade out privacy in increasingly disturbing ways. I spoke about how Microsoft has teamed up with Facebook and Twitter to deliver automatic up-dates to the social web about what games, music and movies you were playing/watching, all of which information, used for profit by advertising companies like Facebook. It was at that time I predicted the next step in the line would be television, reporting back on the shows we watch, when and for how long, which would give invaluable information about our personalities, the make up and running of our households, our schedules, how much free time we have and so forth.

Guess what, I was right. Introducing the worlds first Android based television (Google TV) by Swedish firm "People of Lava". The television dubbed the "Scandinavia" is available in 42" 47" and 50" models, with both Ethernet and USB ports for connecting the TV to the internet and ships with a wireless keyboard and mouse. It plays TV like a normal TV, but it also has support for the millions of paid & free Android apps available, including an exclusive set of paid & free apps available only via the "People of Lava" web store. It ships standard with apps for YouTube, Google Maps, Email, the google browser (Chrome) and FACEBOOK AND TWITTER!

Now you can automatically stream directly into your Facebook or Twitter feed what you're doing on your TV, be it internet based, or TV watching. I told you it would happen, and it has. Just another action in your daily life that the big names in ads can take a peak at, giving a better more well rounded view of who you individually are. Some of you might remember I made several other predictions about the steps after Television in this invasion of privacy, perhaps now would be a good time to look back at those posts, don't you think?

Links;

People of Lava website
Scandinavia Google TV

Stephen Conroys great internet filter is clouted as the only of it's kind in the western world, and whilst that very well may be true (I'd like to hear from someone who knows), Australia isn't by any means the only country in the western world talking about censoring the internet. In fact, it seems we're a little late to the table with the U.S.A and Britain already censoring.

As free press reports, the fight for net neutrality is underway in the U.S.A with public figures on both sides of the debate. Interestingly however unlike in Australia where it is the government leading the charge on censorship through an ISP level filter, in the U.S.A it's the ISPs themselves who are leading the charge, with LIVE monitoring and blocking of undesirable content. That's right, for Americans their ISP is able to have a real live person look through your personal messages (including Instant Messaging and email), look at any websites you own &/or run, the people you communicate with, etc and determine whether action should be taken.

According to evidence given at the Federal Communications Commission by Michele Combs, American ISPs have been speed throttling and blocking content of political &/or social nature which the ISP itself doesn't approve of. For Americans there is no spin that it's "for the children" like it is here in Australia. There are no delusions about making a safer internet being propagated, nope it's just flat out social control and censorship by corporations held in broad daylight.

For the British it's worse, as ISPs have willingly teamed up with the Government to invade privacy and provide censorship. Calling no line ISPs will log every website, email, download and upload you make in a named account which is then passed to government. The ISPs are happy, they uses the data to better send you advertising, both through the browser and through email. In fact Britain has one of the highest rates of spam on the planet, and it's all down to this ISP level snooping.

The argument for a lot of people against the Australian filter seems to be that in other developed countries that filter internet, it is a voluntary system on behalf of the ISPs, but the fact is, in countries like the U.S.A and Britain these voluntary actions are being taken up by all the major ISPs in the market, giving the same blanket effect to the community that our Australian filter is meant to achieve through being mandatory. It seems in fact that ISPs and their corporate partners see the benefits to their organisation of such controls and censorship.

Imagine a world where no corporate entity, no government, no military, no public figure ever had to worry about a scandal or cover up story again? A world where if something, be it a download, a news article, a blog, a fan page on a social networking site, a video and any other material, was placed on the internet which exposed wrongful actions of a corporate entity, government, military or other public figure they could simply and explicitly block the content from being seen by anyone.

A world where the richest, most influential political parties are able to block out from national view, what opposing political parties have to say. A world where websites such as wiki-leaks can be blocked from view at an ISP level across the countries for which such websites are trying to expose wrong doings. A world where the giants of business can simply block out their competition, instead of having to beat them in the market place. That is the world we are fast moving toward. The days of freedom of speech and zero censorship on the internet are coming to an end.

So here is my prediction, one of two things will happen, either we will continue into this world of censorship, continuing to rely on and connect increasingly more of our lives to the internet, resulting in an incredibly ill informed, fascistly controlled community, bound into bondage and slavery to corporate brainwashing. OR, we as a people will decide that censorship and invasion of privacy is to high a price to pay for the "convenience" and "improvements in our lives" the internet has provided, and thus there will be a mass disconnect. Both of these options have their pros and their cons, so we as individuals, families and neighbourhoods need to decide which option best suits us.

It's happened to most of us at one time or another, you're walking down the street and someone walks passed wearing a T-shirt with a design, slogan or logo that you just have to have! You look everywhere for the shirt, in the designer shops, in the department stores, in the specialty boutiques but alas you're left shirtless and pondering where they got the damned thing.

Chances are they found it at one of the numerous online T-shirt shops, and with often reasonable prices why wouldn't you open yourself up to the 100's of millions of T-shirt designs on offer online, 24/7. Most fan based websites have their own store and merchandise, including even US! The TJandSarah.com webstore offers loads of great slogan T-shirts and other merchandise so you can show off your wit to the world. But of course, our products aren't going to be everyone's cup of tea, nor (unfortunately for us) would you want to shop exclusively with us for your T-shirt needs.

For the younger reader (or their parent/guardian) Emma-Lee Tee is a great place to start. They have a good selection of T-shirts for every type of teen; from the ultra hip to ultra hippie and with their Annabel collection they even have emos and goths covered too. As a bonus if you live in the USA or Canada shipping is free, but here is the best part if you're an international customer shipping is a flat rate $8! No more nasty surprises at the check-out.

After a T-shirt to make passes by laugh? T-Shirt Hell & CharGrilled are two places to find some pretty funny shirts. They offer a wide range of hilarious T-shirts to suit most styles of humor, from the in your face, to the most subtle satire. But of course they are only 2 of many websites offering hilariously slogan tees, so you also might want to hit your preferred search engine if you can't find what you're looking for there.

Of course for some of you the creative bug might hit and you'll want to design your own T-shirt; there are services that offer that too. Zazzle is a printing service which offers a wide range of product, style and colour options on which you can place your own designs, slogans or logos. Incredibly reasonable prices to! And if you feel so inclined Zazzle will even let you SELL your designs to the public too! Custom your shirt is another fantastic service offering things like stubby holders that Zazzle don't. The only draw back is you have to submit for a quote instead of the whole process being DIY.

So there you have it, a new window into the world of T-shirt design. Now you only need go forth and find that T-shirt you've been looking for, for the better half of a decade.

As some of you might have noticed I've been the victim of Cyberstalking for quite awhile now. They take breaks when they get bored, but for some reason they always come back. They are of course made up of ex-lovers who seemingly can't get over the ex part. I suggest that some of them are also made up of the misguided friends of some ex-lovers. At any rate, while it isn't life threatening or anything, it does get rather tiresome. So as I have taken steps to squash the matter today, legally once and for all.

The following are some ideas if you are the victim of cyberstalking, on how to squash the problem once and for all! Of course it all leads to the police and court in the end, with a cyberstalking conviction resulting in up to 10 years imprisonment (depending on where you are) for the fool who tried to mess with you online;

(1) SAVE EVERYTHING! If it's emails, make sure you keep them and print them off. If it's comments on a website, hit the print screen button on your keyboard (prt scr) then paste the resulting screenshot into MS paint or whatever imaging program you prefer. Make sure a record is kept of EVERYTHING! Including any replies you might make.

(2) IF it's on a website you own, or it's through email, be sure to save their IP address as well, this is VERY important. IP addresses can eventually help police find out exactly who is doing it and show a pattern of harassment. It doesn't matter if the IP is static or dynamic, ISPs keep logs of what accounts hold what IP addresses at what dates and time periods. You can find someone's IP address from an email by looking in the email source information.

(3) Buy a exercise pad. You know the type you wrote in at school? No, not the text books you drew all over, the lined exercise books you wrote in. You need one. Everytime your cyberstalker interacts with you record the date, time, what was said (for longer comments/emails subject lines will do), their IP address (if known), their email address (if it's an email), where the contact took place (email/URL of the website/etc) and the file name(s) of any screenshot(s) you take to document the contact.

(4) Join a group; there are plenty of groups around for people who have been cyberstalked. By joining a group not only do you know you're not alone, but they can help you with other ideas on how to combat the problem.

(5) After a few months, when a pattern of cyberstalking and harassment can definitely be shown it's time to bring in the law. For this you want a two pronged attack if possible, comprising both the Police and a lawyer acting on your behalf. When it comes to the Police don't take no for an answer, cyberstalking is against the law, if you've been able to get a lawyer they will be able to help you get the police involved. Once you have the police involved they can watch the activities of your cyberstalker (and find out their IP address if you don't already have it) which will further show the pattern of cyberstalking and harassment. Make sure though that you continue all the other steps even after the police have become involved. Your lawyer will be able to help keep the police on track with the investigation and perhaps even lodge their own private investigation into the matter.

If you follow these steps, then it should be easy for the police to get a conviction on your cyberstalker, sending them to jail and giving you some peace and quite.

This week there has been a bit of hoo-har in New South Wales state politics; with one politician turning anothers words into a declaration that women are responsible when they are raped. But the seat of the real argument is the over sexualisation of our youth and culture. A culture where young boys and girls are being taught to look at girls as objects only suitable for sexual pleasure.

While a certain state liberal MP seems incapable of understanding what youth of today are doing, the facts of reality are Rainbow parties (where all the girls take turns giving the boys headjobs leaving different coloured lipstick; like a rainbow) happen almost every weekend. Teen pregnancy is through the roof and still escalating, heck children as young at 10 YEARS OLD are having sex. Seriously! TEN! You can buy G-Strings (thong) for girls as young as TWO (2) YEARS OLD, and mini skirts from only a few months old.

Our children are not only becoming increasingly exposed to sex in the media, but they're becoming increasingly exposed to sexualised children in the media. Lets take Lady Gaga for example, the woman who started the media coverage of this political debate. Here you have a woman who is clearly high on drugs for most of her performances, whose lyrics would make a sailor blush and whose "dance moves" equate to little more than a stimulated lap dance. And yet we let 12 year old girls go to her show? I've seen girls as young as 6 listening to Lady Gaga.

But beyond that we have a systemic problem where sex is conveyed as love. While schools may teach the mechanics of sex to children, they are ill equipped to teach the emotions of it. Where as music and their video clips portray it as love, as the begin all and end all. Sure in a loving relationship sex is important to the longevity of said relationship as a bonding tool. But sex with some guy you've known a week and break up with 2 days later... not so much. And someone you just met, yeah sex isn't an expression of anything in that case, other then of course the fact you're easy.

But perhaps this is part of the point, women are becoming WAY to easy. Their sense of self respect and dignity out the window when their idols and role models are people like Paris Hilton, Britney Spears and Lady Gaga. At what point did being a slut become cool? I know when I was a kid being a slut was a recipe to social suicide, now it's the complete opposite! And you only need go stand in front of a club on a Saturday night to see the over the top revealing clothes women are wearing now days.

So to answer the question, no women aren't responsible when they are raped, they're not asking for it. BUT that said, women who dress in a provocative way then go on to flirt and present as somewhat of a slut certainly aren't helping matters. In cases where women have dressed and acted in this manner and been raped; their presentation and actions did play a role. That of course isn't to say it is an excuse for the rapist or in any way taking any of the responsibility off the rapist. We all own our own actions, and at the end of the day, no means no. But you can't shake the fact that acting and dressing like a slut did play a role, however small, in the outcome. Even more so when alcohol is introduced into the equation.

Of course none of this is to suggest that I think we should strip sex from film and all women should dress in burkers. That would just be an over reaction; what I am saying though is young people need good role models. They need to be taught the emotions of sex AT HOME. We need to ban over sexualised video clips from TV screens at times our youth may be watching. We need to make it harder for our youth to get hold of these sorts of songs. And women of all ages need to re-equate themselves with self-respect and dignity.

I think honestly, a systemic lack of self-respect, dignity and self-esteem amongst our women is one of the leading causes towards male attitudes objectifying women. We need to teach our women and young girls that acting like a cheap hooker is not cool. Of course you can have sex (once you've reached maturity) with someone you're dating and want to continue dating. Of course I'm not saying you should only have sex after marriage. But honestly if you give it away on the first night, why should I bother seeing you again? Sex is not love and neither is spreading STDs.

The next day in my holiday started at 9am (local time) with us all very tired from travelling and having a late night. None the less we decided to have a walk through Launceston and get some breakfast. With a few brief exceptions it must be noted that it is near completely flat; and with the tempered air made for a lovely walk. It's important to note there are an astoundingly absurd amount of cafes in East Launceston, all of which I'm sure a brilliant; but one must wonder how they all managed to keep the doors open and the rent paid when you consider how small the population here is. After pondering this thought for a few moments we made our way to locating a Coles supermarket to gather some supplies for later and food for Hades.

We then decided to stop at a cafe` named “This Cafe” for breakfast. We both ordered a triple stack of pancakes with ice-cream and maple syrup; with Sarah getting berries included. Despite the fact we only got 3 pancakes each (I was always under the impression a stack was 4 pancakes and a triple stack was 12) they were nicely cooked and went well with the superbly creamy ice-cream and perfectly sweet syrup. After our leisurely breakfast we walked back to the apartment to plan our day.

After looking through the the assortment of pamphlets and travel guides we found inside our room we decided we didn't want to travel far today and settled on going to Tasmania Zoo. After a brisk 15 minute drive we rolled up to what in all honesty looked like some ones house with “Tasmania Zoo” written on it. As we entered through the sliding glass door we were greeted with a mostly open space, comprising of a ticket/food counter to the right and a small amount of merchandise to the left. We paid our $18 each to enter the park and an extra dollar for a map and exited the building through another glass sliding door. In front of us a large dirt area with wooden swings classified as “playground” on the map. To either side of the playground a series of what look like standard sized garden sheds although green in colour, with the front cut out and replaced with fencing wire.

Inside we found everything from all manner of birds and monkeys, a little further down a fenced area with emus, kangaroos and a deer; and some pits bordered with tin roofing sheets holding rabbits and Tasmanian devils. Right down the bottom we found some goats, a pony and we found 2 massive eagles in a tree. Needless to say we found somewhat ripped off by this whole experience. Even more so when we found out upon returning to our apartment and looking through a previously undiscovered travel newspaper that Tasmania actually has 2 other zoos both of which FAR better than the over advertised “Tasmania Zoo”. Unfortunately we won't have time to visit the other zoos while we're here, but I promised dee that we'll go to Taronga Zoo in Sydney on another trip.

When we made it back to the apartment our thoughts turned to dinner and we had already planned on trying this burger joint called “flip burger” who home deliver. We were excited because they have an option between a large or small burger with a large costing $12.50 and a small $10 so we were expecting something special. I ordered a double cheese burger with bacon, chips and ketchup and Sarah ordered a house special. Within 10 minutes there was a knock on the door, good sign right? $29.50 later we found out the story wasn't so great. I really wanted something to rave about, I wanted Flip Burger to shatter my conception of a burger in Australia, but it unfortunately wasn't to be.

Our “Large” burgers were actually the same size as a standard burger; which makes me wonder what the heck a small looks like. The meat also was chock filled with onion, which I'm sure to some people is a good thing, but to someone who is allergic to onion it's a terrible thing to happen. The cheese wasn't even layered correctly, instead the to meat patties where just on top each other then came 1 piece of cheese then a tiny piece of bacon, FOUR chips another piece of cheese and then some TOMATO! TOMATO, not ketchup, sliced tomato. There was no ketchup to be found. After removing the tomato and meat patties I was left with a standard white bun with a piece of cheese, bacon and 4 chips. Sarah's burger was meant to come with pancetta but they gave her standard bacon!! Another rip off. Lets hope tomorrow is a better day.

Today, Sarah, Dee and I left for our week long holiday in Launceston, Tasmania. First I must make special note of what an amazing trooper Dee has been today, through the entire 9 hours of travel. He has barely issued more than the slightest of grizzles; lasting not longer than a few seconds; through-out the whole day. I am entirely proud of him. So our flight took off from Brisbane without delay and for the most part the flight was peaceful, however somewhat cramped and we touched down in Melbourne for a hour and a half stopover at 6:25pm (local time). Unfortunately the Melbourne domestic terminal didn't have much in the way of choice towards a meaningful meal, so we made do with what we could. I managed to find a ham & cheese croissant and Sarah got what looked like a bunch of leaves in a plastic bowl with less than a handful of cherry tomatoes tossed together. Thankfully we had the forethought to pre-purchase and pack food for dee so he was fine.

We boarded from Melbourne with a surprise as we hadn't adjusted our clocks to daylight savings. The flight to Launceston from Melbourne was less cramped and somewhat brief. Dee was also far happier to just sit for this leg of our journey, where as earlier he wanted to stand and jump around. We arrived at 9:05pm (local time) and disembarked to a far smaller terminal then we are used to. There was a distinct lack of shops, and the one store that sells food was quiet obviously closed. After collecting our bags we walked out of the terminal to meet with the lady from the car rental place. What a shock we got when she delivered a 1999 lantra hatch when we had booked a 2005 Magna. Our bags of course barely fit in the car having to take up both the entire boot and most of the back seat.

Lo-Cost Auto Rentals are most certainly low cost, the car we received, not only wasn't what we ordered and booked (and the only car they had left so we're sort of stuck with it now) but it lacks any power; which I suppose might be a good thing give the distinct lack of braking capability. None the less we managed to find our way to our hotel by 10:30 (local time) thanks to google maps with GPS and were in for a real treat. While our hotel lacks pay tv and internet, it is visually stunning. It is a converted mansion from the 1800s and our lodgings are to die for. The stressed timber flooring, the rendered stone walls, the antique buffet at the entrance. Not to mention of course the full kitchen, laundry and spacious bathroom. The only problem now being of course that while dee has had a proper diner, Sarah and I have not. But I'm sure going to bed hungry tonight will work out ok. We can wake in the morning and find somewhere to get a bite. And so with that I am off to bed to hopefully get some sleep and rest my rumbling stomach.

Queensland police a completely useless, getting involved in civil matters, for which they hold no powers, while real crimes are being committed. A level of sexism exists in that they will respond to a female, but if a male is in the same situation they won't respond at all.

My personal example of this is as follows; A few years back my eldest son was living with me, happily when his mother snatched him from my house when I made the mistake in hindsight of leaving her alone with him. I immediately called emergency 000 but was told it isn't an emergency and that I should call my local police department. So I did just that and was told it's a civil matter, and as such they can't do anything. That they wouldn't be sending out a car, that they wouldn't be doing anything about it. They further advised me that I could not lawfully take one step in her yard. I of course ended up taking the matter to court but that's a whole different story all together.

Flash forward to tonight when Sarah and I ended (over what isn't important) and of course I wanted to take Dee with me. What happened in between is of no importance to the story other then to say no criminal action took place. I sat in the bedroom with dee trying to put him to sleep, quietly. At 8pm police arrived at my door to attempt to deal with the civil dispute. I very quickly put the two responding officers in their place and they left as they had no business getting involved. Sarah and I were still in the same house, dee was not in harms way nor neglected in any way.

Clearly this shows that if you're a man and your ex takes your child, the police don't care, but if your a woman and it happens the police respond and make up a bunch of lies. Thankfully I understand the law very well and called them on their lies, put them in their place and they left as they should have. But how many fathers don't know the law, how many fathers get stitched up by the police? That is an utter disgrace!

Now ask yourself this, while they were here arguing with me over the fact they had no right to be here, how many ACTUAL criminal offices took place? Ask yourself, while they were hassling me with my civil matter, how many children in ACTUAL danger went unheard? How many people were assaulted in that space of time on a FRIDAY NIGHT? Heck in the space of that time I heard no less then FIVE (5) people SPEED passed my house.

The Queensland police need to get their freak'in act together. The law clearly states they have no power or right to intervene in a civil dispute. None! They only have the right to become involved when someone commits a criminal act, or threatens to do so; which of course includes an act of violence. Where so such criminal offenses have taken place, or are likely to take place they have NO POWER nor the right under the law to become involved in the situation. They need to go out their and fight crime and stay out of civil matters. Civil courts are for civil matters, not police.

War, human suffering, industralised land clearing, climate change, over population...the list goes on and on and on and one thing unites them all. They're caused by money. I'm sure when money was introduced it seemed like a good idea, a standardised unit of value to create a "universal" valuing system; and in that purist form it's a brilliant idea. The problem is it's a system which doesn't account for emotions like greed.

Humans have a huge tendency toward greed and it never ceases to amaze me how even a relatively small sum of money can absolutely change an otherwise kind, generous person into an arrogant, selfish monster. Oh yes, the statement money is the root of evil is entirely true. Think about it.

Ever war in recent history was fought over money, heck some of those wars were only fought so the arms dealers could stay in business. Think about how many 100s of MILLIONS of lives have been lost due to wars fought over money. Not freedom or defending territory or anything like it's made out to be, but pure cold hard cash. This Iraq war being fought at the moment for example, all over oil and keeping a few big name arms dealers in business. It makes me sick to think all those soldiers are dying or coming up with mental disorders, all their families worrying and suffering, so a few rich blokes can make some more money. That is disgraceful and disrespectful to the soldiers and their families.

And climate change, geez. Industralisation occurred to produce products in greater numbers so the business owners could make more money. From Industralisation green house gases were released setting in effect a chain reaction for which we are seeing the beginnings of the results now. Massive land clearing, logging, mining and so forth, all spurred on by money, all adding to the climate change effect. And when presented with the climate change data over the passed 40 years the excuse to not do anything about it? "It will to strongly negatively impact on our economy" or in other words, money.

Without money there would be no poor, homeless or starving people in the world. Not less! NONE! Think about it. If you got rid of money over night what that would mean for these people. Even over population has it's roots in money, for with money as an incentive larger and larger farms have been developed making an abundance of readily available food. As food becomes easier to obtain population booms. It's basic biology 101. Yep, there really aren't many problems humanity is having today that don't have their roots in money.

Now defenders of money might say "it's not a perfect system, but it's all we have". That is a complete cop out. Before money it was barter, if the advocates of the barter system had copped out like that money would never have been invented. What we need is to develop further on the system of money, to advance forward in our system of trade. I mean money, as a system was created thousands of years ago, isn't it about time we brought our trade system into 2010?

Today I received an interesting request from one of my readers; they wanted to be able to subscribe to my blog by email. I thought about it for a while and realised it could be a valuable service. So I'm proud to announce that not only can you now subscribe to my the RSS/Atom feed, the twitter feed and the facebook feed but now I'm pleased to announce you can receive blog posts directly to your email!

The service is supported by the wonderful people over at FeedBurner (Now a google asset) who are transferring my RSS feed directly to email subscribers. Never miss an update again, subscribe by email today and get posts in your inbox at 9am (AEST) every day!

Of course if anyone else has suggestions or requests I am open to them and happy to receive them. If I think it's a good idea I'll implement it. Thanks again to all my readers, I hope you continue to enjoy reading this blog.

Yes you read the title right, being a vegetarian is bad for the environment. I've long stated this fact to any vegetarian and vegan continuing their doctrine that it's better for the environment. Well now I have scientific back-up in this department by way of a study commissioned by environmental group WWF; but more on that later.

The vegetarian/vegan argument goes something like this. 1 cow used to produce meat will produce [x] amount of methane and consume [y] amount of food and take up [z] amount of space. On contrast vegetarians argue that a wheat plant takes up [a] amount of space and doesn't produce methane and doesn't eat food.

This on the surface when said quickly and not thought about to much might sound like a reasonable statement. But just think about it for a moment, actually read over it again and think about it. It's actually a rather illogical statement, in that you're comparing a whole cow which will feed 20+ people to a single wheat plant which will feed, wait for it... NOT EVEN ONE (1) person. Add to that the pesticides, herbicides and other chemicals required to grow any large sized crop and it quickly becomes clear that, being a vegetarian is more harmful then good.

While you're at it take this on board as well, it takes 14.5 KILOGRAMS of broccoli to equal the same amount of iron content as 500g of steak. Not only is it near impossible to eat that amount, but can you consider the amount of land it requires to grow 14.5 KILOGRAMS of broccoli? Let alone enough for everyone in a country to eat that amount of broccoli every day! But there is more and this is where the study kicks in.

UK's Cranfield University was commissioned by the WWF to conduct an independent study on the effects of a vegetarian or vegan diet on the environment. The study found that meat substitutes such as soya, chickpeas and lentils where MORE harmful to the environment because they are imported into the UK from other countries. This is also true for countries like the USA, Australia and New Zealand. The study found that the carbon footprint left by importing these products was far greater than the environmental harm caused by livestock.

The study, agreeing with my argument also concluding;

"A switch from beef and milk to highly refined livestock product analogues such as tofu could actually increase the quantity of arable land needed to supply the UK."

and went on to say that meat substitutes are often highly processed foods, requiring vast amounts of energy to produce. Energy which runs on coal power. So here you have a raw product which was imported from overseas, was then processed using vast amounts of energy, and it's apparently meant to be more environmentally friendly then a cow in a field? A cow which I might remind you is an animal which is meant to exist. When you really think about it, it's laughable that anyone ever really thought being a vegetarian or vegan is better for the environment.

So now with the claim about the diet being beneficial to the environment gone, and piles of other evidence that the diet is also really bad for your body; one can only wonder why anyone is continuing this diet, let alone promoting it. I've included some interesting links at the bottom of this post which may help you to see clearly when next a vegetarian friend tries to guilt you into their way of life.

Links;

Telegraph Article on WWF study
The Independant Article on Vegetarianism making you ill
29 Common Reasons Why Your Vegetarian Diet Isn't Working
Beyond Veg
Pavlina: Why Vegetarians are unhealthy
Disadvantages of going Veg

I got through a 419 scam today, so keeping in the same vain as my previous post about scammers I figured I'd play around with him. This is what he wrote.

From: "Roselyn J. Ghang"

Reply-To: joernestine@aim.com
Subject: Important: Reference Number: 87K4/336/T071/0010
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:04:01 +0700
Received: from smtp.saigonnet.vn ([221.133.1.3]:34579 helo=mailserver.saigonnet.vn)

Reference Number: 87K4/336/T071/0010
E-mail: BALIWANE@aim.com
Dear Winner,
This is to officially inform you that you have been approved for a lump sum pay out of Five Hundred Thousand U.S Dollars in this year GLOBAL INDEPENDENT E-LOTTERY PAYMENT RECONCILIATION BOARD UK,Reference Number: 87K4/336/T071/0010.
You are advice to Contact: Dr.BALI WANE, Foreign Service Accredited Attorney Overseas Subscribers Agents EMAIL: BALIWANE@aim.com

1. Full Name : ........................................
2. Address : ..........................................
3. Marital Status : ...................................
4. Occupation : .......................................
5. Age : ..............................................
6. Sex : ..............................................
7. Nationality : ......................................
8. Country : ..........................................
9. Telephone : ........................................
10. 1Fax Number : ......................................
11. Email Address : ...................................

Congratulations on behalf of the entire managment.
Yours faithfully,
Roselyn J. Ghang
Online National Co-ordinator,
Global Impact Lottery.

What I find very interesting is how ANYONE could possible fall for these scams. I mean the English is incredibly poor, there are NO LESS than THREE different email addresses associated with this email. It's sent from a server originating in Vietnam and more over NO ONE entered the "GLOBAL INDEPENDENT E-LOTTERY" because well, it doesn't exist. If you didn't enter a lottery draw why would you believe it when someone emails you of all things tell you that you've won. Especially when they ask for a bunch of details that lets face it if you'd entered it and forgotten you would of already had to have given them. It truly amazes me that there are people out there with so little common sense as to fall for this sort of scam. Anyway I replied twice to different email addresses. The first reply is to the listed replyto address joernestine@aim.com

0 12:54:02 +1000
From: my email
To: joernestine@aim.com
Subject: Re: Important: Reference Number: 87K4/336/T071/0010

Hi Joe,

Was nice to hear from you. How's Nancy and the kids going? All good I hope. I see your English still isn't doing very well, but if you keep practicing I'm sure you'll get there in the end. It was interesting that you mentioned Dr Wane, I haven't spoken the him in agers, how is he going? It's strange the a man who has worked so tirelessly to restore peoples gentiles after they've been attacked by swarms of hungry sand flies; would now be working for a lottery draw. Are you sure he's working there now? At any rate can you tell him I said 'hi' next time you see him and ask him how his transgender surgery is going.

All my love to Nancy and the kids,

Peter.

I wrote this email to see if there is actually life on the other end of joernestine@aim.com if there is this opens up new possibilities for fun. The second email is addressed to the one the scam said to reply to BALIWANE@aim.com and provides the details requested only in fake form.

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:25:32 +1000
From: my email
To: BALIWANE@aim.com
Subject: Reference Number: 87K4/336/T071/0010

Dear Rev Wane,

It was so good to hear from Jackie that I had won the national dependent e-lottery with a sum of half a million dollars. Of course I make several times that amount of money each week but I've never been the type to snub my nose at free money. I have provided my details below as Jackie requested.

1.Full Name : Peter Frapton
2.Address : 810 Whickermore Drive, Branson Missori
3.Marital Status : Married
4.Occupation : Senior stock analysist at First Canada Capital Inc.
5.Age : 38
6.Sex : Male
7.Nationality : Canadian
8.Country : Canada
9.Telephone : (417) 334-3300
10.Fax Number : (417) 337-9246
11.Email Address : I don't have one, sorry.

I am very excited, will my picture be in the paper? I am very much looking forward to the big ceremony where I am presented with the giant cheque. I've been given one of those before and it was a great day. The giant cheque still decorates my penthouse as a bit of a joke ey. Anyway thank you so much for letting me know I have won, I will be awaiting your reply.

Regards,

Peter

Things to note about my reply. I referred to him as Rev and not Dr. I referred to the person who wrote me the first email as Jackie instead of Roselyn and I gave the impression I was extremely rich so their greed would take over completely. In my details you'll know that I said I'm from Branson, Missouri and purposely misspelt Missouri. I then claimed I'm from and live in Canada which of course isn't near Branson Missouri. The best bit about the lot is of course I'm in Australia so if they fall for it, it shows how computer illiterate they are and opens up more opportunities for fun.

The most important thing however to note is that the phone numbers I have provided both originate in Branson Missouri, one at the Branson Police Department the other (fax) at the White Oaks Police department. When the scammer calls he is definitely in for a surprise. I'm hoping though that he will chose to email me back first so I can lure him in a little deeper before he calls, meaning his more likely to say something incriminating when he calls the police.

Is it just me or has anyone else in the area I live in noticed the sudden over whelming smell of curry? Seriously it's everywhere, I went for a run just before and the air was sickenly thick with the smell of curry. What happened to the smell of backyard barbecues? Of burnt meat, open flame and seafood? That's my Australia, not a land of curry.

Have the amount of immigrant Indians really reached such a number already that the place stinks like India does? This is Australia, we have our own culture here, I don't agree with the number of Indian immigrants coming into the country but if they're going to come in they could at least have enough respect to take on our culture. If they wanted to live in a country with the culture they grew up with, smelling the way the country they grew up in did and everything like their native land, DON'T IMMIGRANT!

If you're going to immigrate to another country then seriously have some god damn respect. You don't need to try and make my country the same as your country. No only is that disrespectful, but it's illogical. You move to a new country because you like the culture, lifestyle, etc of the new country and thus you assimilate into the new country. If you're not willing to assimilate into Australia then LEAVE and take your stinky curries with you.

Ok so it's 3:16am and this aboriginal show called "message stick" is on the ABC. This Aboriginal woman was just on and tried to claim that aboriginals are *cough* invisible to Australia. Excuse me? How do they figure that one? Invisible people don't get their TV shows aired on the government run ABC. They don't have special warns put at the front of TV shows which have people who have died in them because that effects their culture. Invisible people don't have land rights like in the Northern Territory and Western Australia. Invisible people aren't counted as citizens and aren't allowed to vote. Invisible people aren't given special payments from the government and invisible people aren't allowed government provided lawyers even when everyone else isn't allowed one.

Fact of the matter is Aboriginals get a LOT of liberties afforded to them, a LOT of them. There is a great inequality going on which is now in the favour of Aboriginals and they have the nerve to complain and say they're invisible? WTF? And they want a treaty allowing them to take some powers away from the state governments because they were here first? They're not even joking, they're being serious..

Seriously, how many of them where alive in 1788 when Australia was colonised by the British? Oh right that would be zero. Ok, so what about the generation immediately after that, how many of those are alive today? Oh right, that would be zero. So what they're saying is NO LIVING Aboriginal has EVER lived in an Australia which wasn't colonised by the British. But beyond that, NO LIVING Aboriginal has EVER lived in an Australia which didn't contain WHITE AUSTRALIANS, that is to say white people BORN in Australia. Excuse me but if you've never known a world other then the one you live in now outside of stories, then seriously what makes you think for a second you have a right to go back to it?

EVERY country on the planet has at some stage in its history had people who invaded and took over. Deal with it. Stop living in a past that you've never known, we're talking about something almost 300 years ago here!! Seriously! You don't deserve ANY special rights at all, NONE!

You're an Australia, no better than any other Australia. Stop making excuses to get special treatment, because nothing is going to make all the white people pick up and leave, nothing is going to turn the clock back 300 years and NOTHING is going to make Aboriginals in charge of Australia. Deal with it.

I'm getting fed up with all this nonsense, it's seriously time to move on with yourselves. Stop beating each other up and breaking the law. Stop getting drunk off your head all the time and chroming. Stop all the anti-social behaviours and blaming white people for them. Take some responsibility for your own damn actions. GET A JOB! And don't give me some crap about no one will give you a job because you're Aboriginal because that's just utter bullshit now days. Sure there was once a time that was true, but now days it's an utter lie. Not only will employers give Aboriginals a go if they have the right skills, but there are even employers and jobs that ONLY aboriginals are allowed to apply for, which in itself is absolute bullshit. Apparently the anti-discrimination laws don't apply if you're a healthy, normal, fully functional white person who is discriminated against.

I'm tired of the excuses from Aboriginals, and I think most Australians are getting fed up with them too. There were a lot of people 10 years ago who were behind the Aboriginals, who helped fight for their rights and junk who now can just see a lack of movement by the Aboriginals themselves to better themselves. People who once backed Aboriginals, can now just see Aboriginals are all about excuses and getting something for nothing. It's stupid and it needs to end.

And I'm sorry but none of this is racist. Racism means that I am prejudice against someone because of their race. I don't dislike Aboriginals, I'm not trying to harm them, I'm not saying they shouldn't have equal rights, I'm not trying to belittle them or anything else along those lines. What I am saying is that they are getting ridiculous in their claims and their demands. What I AM saying is that instead of talking about something from 300 years ago, instead of talking about how different they are and their delusional land rights, they need to accept themselves as AUSTRALIANS. They need to accept the COUNTRY THEY LIVE IN and they need to focus on how they are the same as other Australians, what they have in common with other Australians and just become productive, useful members of society.

That's a decision each individual person in the Aboriginal community will need to make for them self. That instead of sitting around fighting to have more power and junk, put all that energy into bettering the country for ALL Australians not just a select minority. If we want to stop racism to stop then those who feel persecuted against have to stop making themselves out to be so different. Stop going on that you're black, you're aboriginal, you need this special treatment or blah blah blah. Just get on with it and people will follow suit. Geez, common sense much.

So I know I don't normally talk about my personal life but I thought you might like to know that I'm going to an intake session tomorrow to decide if mediation between Tanase and I would be of benefit in getting her to agree to let me see Z and AJ again. I know I could take her straight to court and have her found in violation of a court order. But the consequences could be jail time for her and what sort of a parent would I be to my sons if I had their mother put in jail? I have to try all other options first and mediation is the last on that list before court. Fingers crossed people, I have a feeling I'm going to need it; Tanase isn't exactly the most stable person on the planet after all.

As a growing number of elderly and obese people purchase mobility scooters one can't help but notice the extreme public nuisance and safety risk they cause. Here we have vehicles which have some pretty powerful electric motors in them these days and are built very sturdy; mix that into a pedestrian situation and you have a recipe for injury.

I've noticed a growing trend of those using mobility scooters to both hog up the entire foot path. In addition the trend includes have no consideration or regard towards the safety of those of us who aren't so lazy as to be using one of these vehicles. There have been many times when I have been walking along the foot path, or even at the store when someone in a mobility scoot will come hooning along full pelt and force me out of the way unless I want to be run over. There has even been an incident when such a person clipped the side of Dee's pram.

These are vehicles plain and simple; anything capable of moving faster than the AVERAGE person can walk shouldn't be allowed in pedestrian situations. Any vehicle capable of moving faster than the average person can walk should be confined to ones personal residential property and the bike lane. Honestly the only thing that has stopped me from punching some of these people square in the face is the fact that the ones I've come across are elderly. I was always brought up to respect elders, so I have no choice but to just

What's even more concerning and somewhat puzzling is the looks people using these things give you. It's like they look down at anyone who walks. It makes you wonder if we're actually developing a society which far from wanting to slim down, actually looks down on people who live active healthy lifestyles.

A reminder for parents to stay vigilant while their children are on the internet came this week from a somewhat unexpected source. It seems a Pennsylvania school is being sued after the deputy principle went ahead and punished a 15 year old student for "inappropriate behaviour" while he was in his BEDROOM. The "inappropriate behaviour" is of course rumored to be in the context of self pleasure.

How did the deputy principle even know about this event taking place you ask? It seems the webcam in the school provided macbook was remotely turned on allowing live, remote viewing. The deputy principle was certainly all to happy to furnish the boy with photographic evidence.

The FBI have now been called in to investigate the potential breech of multiple federal and state laws. The scary thing is it isn't isolated to this one child. There have actually been rumors going around the school between students that the teachers were spying on them through the webcams with a large amount of students claiming the little green activity light on their webcam would turn itself on randomly.

But beyond the obvious privacy issues this sparks off I fail to see where any one at the school thought that had not only the right, but responsibility to discipline a child for actions taking place in their own home. Their authority ends at the school gate as far as I'm concerned. What a child does whilst in the care of their PARENTS is certainly none of the schools business. The school district board now claims to have disabled the feature, but given they had denied it's existence for months, and are trying to cover up this whole indecent I really don't believe much they have to say.

This is certainly a case in proof that you really CAN'T allow your child, even teenager, alone with a computer that is connected to the internet. Of course that doesn't mean you have to sit next to your teenager while they muck around online like you would a younger child, but it does mean computers with internet access should be in high traffic walk ways of the house. In this way you can glance at their screen (and the activity light of the webcam) every time you walk passed. If they're rushing to close something down when you do, then you know you need to investigate further.

The internet can be an utterly powerful tool, which enables better education, flow of truth and friendships. But it does need to be understood properly BEFORE you mess with it, and children (and teenagers) need to be supervised while using it and taught proper, responsible usage skills.

iTWire Article 1
iTWire Article 2

It's funny to think I spent my childhood until I was 5 in Missouri, I've been to every capital city in every state of the USA, plus much more of the country. But I'd never even heard of the quaint city of Branson Missouri until today. I actually stumbled across it quite unexpectedly, but from what I can see it's a pretty nice place to visit. Peace and quiet, a rest from the busy rat race. Boy could I use one of those, how about you?

If I lived in Missouri still I reckon I'd have to check out some Branson vacation packages or perhaps even just take a random drive there one day. I mean what's not to love about a place that has more than 40 theaters, showing musicals, magic acts and comedy shows? Fishing, swimming and just hanging out in that peace I was talking about earlier. Wow, I think I might shut my eyes for 10 minutes now and imagine being in Branson,

I don't know if I've mentioned this before but I'm actually a fan of post modern furniture, I find the whole design concept pretty snazzy. So it should come as no surprise to you that now I've found a website dealing specifically in such furniture that I'd want to share it with you. There is something about the clean sleek lines, mixed with some pretty outrageous colours that just looks really cool.

I'm sure when Sarah and I move to the Farm and start making the guest houses I will have to decorate one of the houses in a modern theme. So, given my excitement at finding such a website I'd love to hear from you on what you think about the style. Is it for you? Not for you? Likes and dislikes... just comment it all below

When it comes to the health of your unborn baby you want to do everything in your power to ensure nothing goes wrong. Unfortunately there is so much confusion out there these days about food, that it's hard for most people to know if they're doing the right thing; nutrient wise for their baby. The good news is that most nutrients the baby needs will go to it, before they go to you. Your baby is also capable of stripping nutrients from you body to ensure it has everything it requires. But there are some nutrients which your body may not contain enough of that the baby will suffer for.

Nutrients like folic acid are important for good brain and nervous system development, including healthy spinal fluid. Iron carries blood around both your and your babies bodies, of which without you're both doomed. Unfortunately most pregnant women are deficient in both of these nutrients. It is for that reason that all pregnant women are recommended to take prenatal vitamins. The old thing is however, even though doctors have been giving out these recommendations for years the rate of uptake aren't anywhere near where they should be.

It's very telling to note that by taking a simple vitamin tablet daily the chances of your baby developing a birth defect such as autism drop to incredibly low levels very close to zero percent. Yet still we have percentages of these birth defects which show people simply aren't taking the medical advice to take a vitamin during pregnancy. It's almost unfathomable to me that anyone could be that careless in today's world.

As the number of obese and morbidly obese persons begin to rise and the United States of America even have to create a new category called SUPER morbidly obese for those people who weigh in the vicinity of a TON (that's as heavy as a small car!) you have to wonder, does the government have a roll to play?

While we all like to think we're in charge of our on destinies, our past influences our decisions far more then we'd like to think. If for example you grew up in a household where it was junk food every night and sports weren't encouraged, then guess what you're likely to be like as an adult? Even more so, guess what you're likely to be like as a parent?

I do agree that the individual needs to make their own decisive changes in their life. Over weight and obese people need to exercise, with an active lifestyle. If you feel self conscious about exercising in public or like Sarah you have in your head that walking places is "scummy" (which of course it isn't, I walk a lot and I'm certainly not scummy) then you could always buy a treadmill or other at home exercise equipment until you feel more self confident. The families of Morbidly and super morbidly obese people; people who can't even get out of bed due to their shear weight; need to stop enabling their food habits. If you can't get out of bed then you'll eat what you're given. People need to get up and move around, they NEED to exercise, daily and develop an active lifestyle so that exercise becomes a part of every day things instead of a chore they have to schedule in separate to everything else.

But I also think government has a role to play. It is clear at this point people are NOT going to change on their own, they need a good hard kick in the right direction which is where government comes in. There are several measures governments in the western world need to take.

(1) P.E. before school for pre-school, primary school and high school students. That used to be a part of schooling in the 70s and it worked well. Governments cut it to free up money, but it was actually a very valuable tool. Not only will it mean every child exercises daily, but it means they will be able to concentrate better in school, be more confident and are far more likely to carry on the approach into adulthood.

(2) The development of more Parks and sporting fields. There are some areas where there is a distinct lack of these sorts of facilities and without them people are unable to include certain activities in their lifestyle which would aide in the weight-loss problem. Sports are a major part of combating obesity, so without a facility to hold sporting events people can't expect to be healthy for very long.

(3) Proper dietary and exercise education. For far to long people have been going on about diet. About cutting foods out and limiting calories. This is a MAJOR factor in why we have the obesity problem the western world is facing today. Our bodies have evolved in a way that requires us to move around and use energy. But our society has evolved in such a way that we don't really move around and use energy anymore. This is the BIGGEST systematic problem of all and the REAL cause for the obesity problem.

You can attempt to blame fast food all you like, but the fact of the matter is the average diet in the 50s contained FAR more calories and FAR more cholesterol then we consume today. Our lack of movement is the huge problem. Food isn't the enemy it has been made out to be, it's simply food. ALL food is perfectly find in MODERATION. Too much of anything even carrots will cause you problems. In this way government should educate at the primary school, high school and adult levels about the importance of MODERATION and ACTIVE LIFESTYLE.

(4) Legislation making it a crime for gyms and weight loss services to give INCORRECT information on weight loss or to misrepresent the facts should be brought forward. It should be a crime for a weight loss service to continue the lie that it's all about diet and you need to cut out foods and calories.

(5) Cooking classes should be reintroduced to schools. One of the biggest reasons fast food has become so popular is people have lost the skill of home cooking. If we teach it to our children in a proper way they are more likely to make good food choices.

(6) Amendments to the child protection laws to include obesity. Children can only become obese through ineffective and neglectful parenting. If you are teaching your child the correct eating and exercise habits then there is no possible way you child can become obese.

(7) Legislating more strongly about the advertising of food. NO FOOD products of ANY kind should be advertised during children's television viewing times for example. Children shouldn't be in the drivers seat, that's the parents job, therefore children shouldn't be advertised to.

(8) Parenting classes, perhaps mandatory, for people with new babies. These classes would address general issues like diet and exercise, conflict negotiation, basic first aide, child development, looking at things through your kids eyes on their level and ideas about games that can be played with your child at different stages of development.

(9) The banning of gastric bypass surgery. It doesn't do anyone any good in the long run and is bound to have some undesirable long term side effects.

I read an article today in iTWire which suggested that Google were hypocrites by opposing the Australian governments planned mandatory internet filter. The article claims that because Google filter their YouTube videos (or more over what they actually do is selectively take down videos which violate their Terms Of Service) that they are no different from the proposed nation wide mandatory internet filter. What an absolute joke of so called reporting that was. They couldn't have gotten that piece anymore wrong and have just made their entire publication look ridiculous as a result.

Google are a single company, a company from which you have a choice to use or not to use. If you don't like the terms of service on YouTube there are literally thousands of other video hosting sites on the internet, all with their own spin on acceptable terms of service. So if in fact you want to post something that YouTube doesn't allow there is always a place somewhere else on the internet that does. And heck if you really can't find someone to host your video, you can always host it yourself. So my first point of order is CHOICE! You as the consumer have a CHOICE as to which websites you frequent with your views. If the Terms of Service for a particular website weren't acceptable then they wouldn't become very popular, but the CHOICE for those who DO want to engage that site remains.

The ISP based GOVERNMENT internet filter in Australia however is MANDATORY. ALL ISPs will have to engage it into their system and ALL Australians will have to suffer through it. Meaning that you have NO CHOICE. The government gets behind the wheel of the drivers seat telling you what is and isn't acceptable and whether we like it or not we are forced to accept their decisions. This is dangerous for a number of reasons, not just because of the censorship it hales but also because it dangerously gets people hooked on not having to make a decision anymore or take responsibility for the consequences. Under such a scheme it would no longer be the parents fault if little billy looked at a porn site because his parents failed to supervise him adequately whilst he used the internet, instead it would now be the governments fault for not blocking the site out in the first place. Dangerous territory folks.

The second thing that differentiates google from the internet filter is that YouTube is NOT googles only asset. They have literally hundreds of them now. Their biggest asset being their Search Engine which the iTWire article strangely lacks mentioning. Google Search and it's variant Google Image Search both have the option to turn off "safe search" filtering allowing FULL access to the internet. Type in any keyword from the internet filters "Restricted Content" list into Google Search and you'll get back thousands if not millions of results. Google don't make judgments about your character or effect how you use the internet. They don't squash your voice.

The mandatory internet filter on the other hand does squash your voice. The Australian Media & Communications Authority (AMCA) which is currently in charge of rating TV and radio content would be in charge of rating and blocking out INTERNET content as well in much the same way the rate TV. The government have failed to realise that the internet is a vastly different medium to TV and can not and should not be subject to the SAME rating policy. If Senator Conroy has his way the internet will be G rated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Websites engaging in legal adult services like legal pornography will be blocked if they don't verify your age first by asking for your credit card details. Gone will be the free porn sites from Australian views. In addition, any pornographic content, even those who do verify age which can be classified as X-rated (that is shows full frontal sex scenes instead of hiding away the action) will be blocked.

This same strategy applies to legal gambling websites, and any other content you wouldn't want a 9 year old child seeing. If someone in a forum somewhere discusses how valid for example the terrorist nature of the 9/11 attack that forum page can and probably will be blocked under the filter. In direct contrast Google would still serve that page up indiscriminately. Anything the government deems to be racist, prejudice or discriminate in nature ban and will be blocked under the filter. So for example if you don't like the immigration policy Australia is currently engaging and the flood of Indians it has brought into our country and you write about it in your blog, it can and WILL be blocked by the filter because someone could wrongly view that as racism.

And while I don't in anyway agree with or endorse their politics or views, even sites which hate certain groups in society have their place on the internet. I don't agree with what they have to say, so I would never visit such a website, nor would the majority of our community. In fact the only people who WOULD visit such a website would be those who ALREADY feel that way. But just because I don't agree with their point of view doesn't mean they don't have a right to it. Who is Senator Conroy to say what people CAN and CAN'T talk about?

This is a filter which contrary to what the iTWire article claims will NOT be transparent. The blacklist used in the filter will NOT be publicly available. Think about it, why would you not make the list publicly available if you are innocently blocking out ONLY content which the community could understand why you blocked it. Not only is there the clear historical danger of this turning into a filter which blocks out everyone who speaks against the government, it's political, social or economic views or anything else they don't like; but it also has the fowl whiff of such an event in the making. China ringing any bells to anyone?

And while I will admit I do NOT agree with everything Google do (some of their privacy policy models for example spring to mind) in general they genuinely seem committed to a better working, more accessible and easier to use internet which sponsors freedom of speech and expression for all. It is because of this reason, and the millions of dollars Google has to put into lobbying the government for changes to the filtering legislation that I am glad to have Google onside. So thank-you Google for joining the fight to keep the internet free for everyone.

Links;

iTWire Article

As we move closer to March we approach the time when High school and University begin for the year. And whether you're in High school or university you are to be commended for education is of the highest order. Through education we understand our world further and can do great things with our lives. Take for example cures to aliments like cancer, perhaps someone entering university this year or even high school will be the one(s), through building on past knowledge to find it.

Education is after family, one of the most important parts of a persons life. Indeed perhaps education is even more important than family, as it can influence your entire life path, from your career and annual salary, to your our outlook on life and society, the type of house you own, heck it can even influence the type of partner you attract. And it all starts with study, textbooks, a great teacher and an open yet analytical mind.

The long talked about and much contested Australian mandatory internet filter has new opposition in the form of the "Australian Library and Information Association and Inspire Foundation". Dubbed the 'Safer Internet Group' and with members such as web giants Google and Yahoo! the group actually stand a good chance at achieving their objectives, which would see a revision of the legislation to better target illegal acts such as child porn while leaving the rest of the internet open, uncensored and free to use.

The filter works in the same way any home blacklist software on either your modem/router or home PC does. The government plan to place URLs of websites they and the public find which you wouldn't want a child to see onto the black list. Once on the black list no one in the country will be able to view the site or any pages listed on it. This I believe is why companies Google and Yahoo! are stepping in, because at the end of the day it would hurt their bottom line.

Take for example if the URL to a specific YouTube video was placed on the list, this would have the effect of causing ALL users who visit YouTube to pass through the filter leading to YouTube videos that aren't blacklisted under the filter not loading and a general slow down of the site. Independent testing by the government in Tasmania in 2009 showed the filter would also significantly slow down general web usage, dropping your speed by 30% during normal usage periods and during high traffic periods by up to 70%!

The Safer Internet Group is points out something I have argued since the inception of this filter, stating

"As a large proportion of child sexual abuse content is not found on public websites, but in chat-rooms or peer-to-peer networks, we know the proposed filtering regime will not effectively protect children from this objectionable material,"

and continuing

"In fact, the policy may give parents a 'false sense of security' encouraging them to reduce their supervision."

Under this filter arrangement websites of a criminal nature will NOT be mandatory passed on to the police, they will ONLY block the content under the filter and leave the matter there. The AMCA (the government body responsible for rating commercial TV and radio) will manage the filter and attempt to apply the same guide lines to the internet that apply to TV. Meaning if they find something you wouldn't want your 9 year old to see, then no one in Australia can see it either, regardless of age.

As I have already previously stated, if the goal is ultimately to stop cyber crime there are FAR better and more effective ways of achieving that goal than instituting a mandatory filter across the internet. Education is key, explaining to the general public internet safety, about email scams, phishing and so forth. It troubles me that there are still grown adults who will today fall for a Nigerian 419 scam (The ones where they say you've won a stack of money, but you need to give them a few grand to collect it). And the filter isn't designed to combat these types of problems, in fact it really isn't designed to combat ANY kind of truly harmful cyber crime.

Kiddie porn will still be just as prevalent as it is now, but legal porn won't be viewable. Everyone will still get just as many spam and scammer emails as they are right now, but watching a legitimate video YouTube will become slow and tiresome. Phishing websites will still continue to exist as often by the time anyone figures out it's a phishing website the phishers have already abandoned the site in search of the next prize. Yet internet banking will take forever (opening people using wireless internet to even future hacking attacks and fraud).

The ONLY criminal activity that I can see the filter would actually combat is the downloading of copyrighted materials such as music, movies, games and software through bit-torrent sites and so forth. But again, that will only stop the use of it in a web based way, it will NOT stop peer-to-peer downloading using software like LimeWire. Beyond that, it will all be business as usual to the cyber-crime world. The ONLY people who are impacted by this filter are the law abiding Australian public whom will lose their right to freedom of information. Not only will legal porn sites be blocked, but so will any sites which even so much as TALK about things that are "undesirable". This includes NEWS sites and BLOGS which are seeking to educate on the issues surrounding a criminal activity or just talking about a criminal activity in a negative light.

Think about it, all those websites giving you tips on how to avoid pedophiles getting in touch with your children, clearly community education groups, being added to a blacklist that no one can visit. How does that make logical sense?

Thankfully with the "safer internet group" lobbying the government, combined with the legal action the Australian Internet Services Association are taking to try and block the filter things should hopefully change on this front. Hopefully someone amongst this group can get Senator Conroy to understand he does NOT know what is best for Australians better than they do themselves, nor does he know what is best for our children better then we their parents do. Lets hope they move fast on this though, as the legislation only needs to pass through the senate before it's law and is already scheduled to be in place by the end of THIS YEAR!

Links;

iTWire Article

I stumbled onto this site the other day which suggested ways to have fun with those annoying email scammers. I seem to get one or two of them in my email a week so I thought I'd give it a try with my own little sense for flare on the whole idea of messing with them. I got two of them through today. The first one is from some man, claiming to be a girl wanting to "tell me something important".

From: hassa10nababy@katamail.com
Reply-to: hassanababy@gmx.com
Date: 16/02/2010 8:15 PM
To: My email
Subject: Hello,

Hello,
How are you? hope fine, I Want to introduce my self to you before I go further, My Name is Hassana lsaac. I will like to have a good relationship with you, if you wouldn't mind, I will like to hear from you soon through this email address (hassanababy@gmx.com) because, I have something very important I will like to tell you. Thanks and God bless you,
Miss Hassana lsaac.

I thought for a moment of doing my usual rutine of simply clicking the junk mail button and never having to hear from "Miss lsaac" again. But then I thought again and decided to mess with "her". First I replied to the email address she sent this from (the one she didn't want me to reply to) saying simply "Hi, how are you?". I though I can certainly do better than that, so I then emailed the address she DID want me to email to (hassanababy@gmx.com) with the following reply.

From: My email
Date: 17/02/2010 2:27 PM
To: hassanababy@gmx.com
Subject: RE: Hello,

Hi Glenda,

It's nice to hear from you, it's been awhile. What happened with that gentile warts problem? I hope it's all cleared up now, or is that the important thing you wanted to talk to me about? It's weird that you've turned into a Christian, I always thought you were a committed satanist. I should let you know we're having a sacrifice next week, you should come along. It's a nun this time, it'll be great.

Looking forward to hearing for you,

Peter

I'm awaiting "her" reply and I'll update you when it comes through. lol

It's important to note that when ever I sign up for things online which I think will give me spam, or indeed I reply to a scammer/spammer I use the name peter. This helps to distance me so no spammers or scammers know my name or details. This will become apparent in the email from the next scammer which I received a few hours later.

From: Paul_Meyers@mytopdealbrands.com
Date: 17/02/2010 2:47PM
To: My email
Subject: Partner with an online guru Peter

Hi Peter

My Name is Paul and I’m an internet professional. For almost 10 years now I have been working in
online advertising and last I will show you verified proof of how I made $136,808 in a single month.

Over the years I’ve seen it all, from the top opportunities on the web to the absolute scams. I’ve helped
my good friend Mike to make money online and now I’m going to help you. Truth is I’m no saint, I need
your help just as much as you need mine.

I’m not here to fill your head with false promises about myself or what you can achieve. Let me show you how.

Click here to learn more:
[insert stupid spam link]

Noting how well I figured the last email had gone I figured I should try something similar on this guy.

To: Paul_Meyers@mytopdealbrands.com
Date: 17/02/2010 3:01 PM
From: My email
Subject: RE: Partner with an online guru Peter

Hi James,

It's great to hear from you. It's been what 2 months since you emailed me last? How is Nancy and the kids? Well I hope. It's been awhile since I've spoken to Mike, tell him I said 'hi' and ask him if he ever found out which one of the prostitutes he was banging gave him Venereal Disease?

It's great to see your new job manually picking leeches off the rare and engaged Swap Camel has netted you so much revenue in the last month. Sadly I must tell you that the life of a Camel Leecher isn't for me, I'd miss the city far to much. Anyways it was great to hear from you james. I hope to hear from you again soon. All my love to Nancy and the kids

Peter.

I like the idea of purposely getting their name wrong, because when they reply it lets me know in the first sentence whether or not they're a real person or a robot. IF they're a real life person they'll correct their name and the rest of the details in my reply. If it's a robot it'll go on telling me a bunch of non-sense. Of course if it's a robot it'll end up straight in my junk mail pile. If it's a real person however I'm going to have lots of fun playing with them. I'll be sure to continue to post the fun I have with scammers into my blog for you all to read.

The other brilliant thing about posting this up is that I've included their email addresses. By doing so all the email address collection bots that spammers and scammers deploy across the internet will collect their addressed from my posts and end up spamming and scamming them. lmao. I've also decided to produce a new page on TJandSarah.com where you can enter in the email addresses spammers and scammers use to contact you. But instead of creating a black list like most people would I figure I can make this list HIGHLY visible to spammers sniffing for email addresses. In this way it's likely that they'll end up spamming themselves as well as all their other colleges

Sure it won't fix the spam problem, but it'll certainly be a laugh knowing their spamming themselves. Keep checking back on TJandSarah.com for updates on when the list will go live.

It seems in todays world just to get your foot in the do for a job interview you must have a university degree; in fact as your career progresses you're expected to constantly be upgrading your skills. The problem is how do you keep your full time job and yet manage to go to university so that you have the desired skills for that big promotion you're hoping for?

Enter the age of the online university, were you can continue your studies online regardless where in the world you are. And these aren't some fly by night institutions either, in fact some of the biggest universities on the planet have realised the power of the internet and offer their courses online. In Australia the most well respected universities have joined forces even to offer a university program called "Open University".

Not only is this of benefit to those already in the work force looking to up skill, but also to those who live in rural regions and thus would otherwise not have access to universities. People like farmers are now able to access higher learning courses which benefit both the farming business they run and the environment they utilise (through better farming methods) to carry out their farming business. Even I am considering doing another degree through online university, this time in journalism.

Of course there are however certain courses which due to practical reasons can not be done by online university, like for example "med school". But there is certainly no denying the fact that online universities are certainly a very positive part of the community.

Links;

Online Degree
Open University

In 2009 the Australia Federal Police raided 20 residences across Sydney and Melbourne after a massive operation looking for terrorists. 5 immigrant men were arrested and charged with conspiracy to commit a terrorist act. This is the FIRST recorded time in Australia's history that ANYONE has attempted to commit an act of terrorism on Australian soil. A HUGE stock pile of tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition was found at the homes of the men as well as stock piles of chemical agents used in the production of explosives.

The 5 men subsequently CONFESSED to their terrorist plot, explaining to Australia Federal Police offices (ON RECORD) that they had planned to attack the Hollingsworth Army Barracks in Sydney, take the complex over and hold Australia at random with it. That's right, they wanted to take over an entire Army base, and with the amount of ammunition and explosives they had stock piled, it was certainly something that they were likely to have achieved should they have been able to execute their plan.

Fast forward now to earlier this week when the 5 men were sentenced to jail. Individually the men received sentences ranging from as little as 17 years to a measly 21 years MAXIMUM jail time! That is to say, that is the MAXIMUM amount of time they can be held for these crimes, but can be paroled much earlier. With such like sentences it isn't any wonder the men were laughing and smiling in court while their sentence was handed down. The men have maintained the whole time that they HATE Australia, resiting exactly that publicly as late as just before they were sentenced.

To me this is absolutely INSANE! How can people convicted of conspiring to murder Australian soldiers on Australian soil, to hijacking an ENTIRE military base and holding it for ransom be give such absolute light sentences. These are the sorts of people you either want to execute under the treason act (They're immigrants who have undergone citizenship of all things) or jailed for their ENTIRE life without chance of parole.

Was the judge off his rocker with this one or what? Does the judge honestly think they're going to come out of jail and not want to commit another act of terrorism? I'm sorry but these are the sort of people who hold conviction to this sort of plan. Sticking them into an Australian jail is only going to make them more angry with Australia and more committed to killing Australians. This is wrong on so very many levels and puts our nation at risk in the future.

I don't even get the logic of the terrorists here; I mean they're a group of men who have immigrated to Australia with their families from a poorer country. They have been given multiple opportunities they would not have been granted any other way. We have welcomed them as citizens and they have undergone at their own free will that process. And yet they hate Australia? I'm sorry but why is that exactly? And more over, if you hate us so freak'in much the answer is simple, don't come here And if you get here and then realise you don't like Australia...LEAVE! Is it really that hard a concept to get? I think it's an easier concept to grasp then learning how to make complex explosive devices and do surveillance on a military base.

The government needs to step in here and declare this a matter of national security. The men need to be remanded in custody for the remainder of their natural lives. Unless this happens (and honestly I can't see it happening) expect a terrorist attack on Australia in around 21 - 22 years time.

The Queensland state government has now lifted a ban on Homosexual couples and single people accessing surrogates. Apparently it's the state governments policy that everyone should have a baby, regardless of nature. Perhaps they should just send out roving vans handing out free babies or something? What part about a SINGLE person, that is someone who has no relationship, being able to have a baby does Anna Bligh think is logical? Do we not have enough out of control kids living with single mothers as it is, that Anna Bligh feels she needs to give them access to more, without needing a man or even having to go through pregnancy? That is TOTALLY INSANE!

Contray to what Anna Bligh seems to think it isn't backward to not want to give single people the ability to have babies; that's something called common sense. I know it seems to be something that is very thin on the ground now days and a concept that is certainly new to Anna, but common sense is this magically thing where you actually use your brain to figure out that your actions are going to have negative consequences before you do them, and then decide not to.

How is the state government going to justify the removal of this ban to all the children who result? Children born into a world with only 1 parent, ever! Doesn't matter which gender the parent nor the child is, it's a proven bad idea. If the government actually knew even the slightest about child psychology they'd know just how bad an idea this truly is. They'd know that children model behaviour from both gender parents, as well as learn how to function, interact with the opposite gender and even gather part of their self identity from BOTH parents. That is to say a MOM and a DAD are both EXTREMELY important. You only need to look at the last 30 years worth of psychological data, psychologist reports, medical intervention, suicides, crimes and other statistical data which stem from children of broken homes to see my point made. But perhaps and far more likely, they do know that, but simply don't care.

This is clearly a bid to grab some minority votes by a government which have burnt more bridges than you can poke a stick out. Anna Bligh is undeniably the WORST premier Queensland has EVER had. This is just another in a long line of REALLY bad decisions that the Bligh government have made, crushing our once great state into the ground. And what a waste of time and tax payer dollars the 3 days of debates over this issue where, when the Bligh government always had the majority of the house so it was always going to be passed. What was the point? To make us think like it was debated and this was the best idea that came out of it? Or to give an illusion that Australia still operates democratically? All I can hope is that the Bligh government will be voted out at the next election and the resulting new government will have enough sense to repeal the new law so that no more children will be hurt in this sick political game.

I recently seen a guy by the name of Jonathan Safran-Foer (No, not John Safran the mega awesome comedian, another guy), on The Colbert Report and again at 1am on Big Ideas on the ABC. He's written a book, which I must say I have not read, and he has started on a bunch of keynote addresses as part of a book tour. It's from these keynote addresses that I want to talk about today. See Jonathan has decided eating meat is really bad, but instead of taking a confrontational stance like PETA would, he's trying the buddy buddy, logic path to try and turn people vegetarian.

A vegetarian human race would be a terrible thing, and I hope I don't live to see a day when the majority of people are sustained on a vegetarian diet. I've actually downloaded one of his keynote addresses, and I'll prove you with a link to download it yourself and watch it. Does Jonathan seem like a nice guy? Sure, he seems like a great, normal guy. Does he present a halfway logical argument, sure I'll concede that too. But that doesn't mean some of the things he says aren't lies? No, it certainly doesn't. Does that mean that his way of thinking is the only way of thinking, the most logical or the best way of thinking? No. And I also MUST point out that MOST of his arguments are for things happening either solely in the USA or only in small scale in other parts of the world.

So the major thing Jonathan talks about is how bad Factory farming is. How it's bad for your body, bad for the environment, bad for the animals involved. I'm not arguing that point, in fact I agree totally with him, factory farming is bullshit and should be banned. But that doesn't then mean the only option in vegetarianism, nor does it mean that vegetarianism is better or healthier or that the same sorts of problems don't exist in the fruit and vegetable farming world. I don't know how much research Jonathan has put into fruit and veg, but he certainly isn't talking about all the bullshit happening there.

He makes great repetition of the fact that turkeys can't reproduce naturally anymore because their bodies are so distorted; but fails completely to mention that MOST of the fruit or vegetables you buy in the supermarket now days (and this IS a global issue) are genetically altered so they can't reproduce anymore. Their seeds are sterile, due to what is known as a terminator gene which has been introduced to all the grains and most fruit and veg so that farms have to continue to buy seed each year.

He talks about how animals in factory farming require antibiotic shots to survive their conditions, but fails to mention the genetically altered crops which now produce and excrete their own insecticides and herbicides. For a man who claims to want a balanced discussion on the issue, he doesn't seem to be talking much of a balance argument. Indeed there are countless genetic modification to the fruit, veg and grains you eat every day and in much larger quantities than you do meat. It is a LIE to say that fruit, veg and grain is healthy for you when there is evidence starting to come through connecting these wide spread genetic modifications with numerous health issues.

And while there MAY be a couple of factory farms in Australia I know very confidently they are very uncommon. I know extremely confidently that when I go to woolies, coles, IGA or even my local butcher that the meat I buy will come from an animal which has been able to graze, which was fed grain and grass/hay. I've seen the process, I know how it works over here.

Which leads me to my first main point; Just because factory farming is a bad idea, doesn't make eating meat a bad thing. In fact as I've talked about in previous posts meat, particularly red meat is an important part of your diet. Your human body has evolved in an omnivorous way, and without meat in your diet there are loads of things that can go wrong. Your iron levels plummet (unless you eat huge amounts of veg; eg 14.1Kg of broccoli has the same iron content as 500g of steak), you won't have any animal protein in your diet (which actually your body has evolved to use best), amongst a number of other things which I've already talked about in previous posts.

To me a FAR more logical stance to take to factory farming, far from deciding to not eat meat anymore (which lets face it would be nothing more than some sort of deluded protest) is to fight to have those commercialised and industrialised farming practices BANNED. THAT is the logical conclusion, to fight for farming returned to sustainable ways. Jonathan touches on that for only 20 seconds in response to someones question and remains impartial to it.

It is a LIE to state that humanity needs to become vegetarian in order for our continued existence. We don't. What we DO need to do is control our population and our wastage better. Explain to me how ANYONE thinks it's reasonable that 1/3 of the global human population lives in the tiny country of India. Clearly over populated countries like India and China need to look at how to stop their population problems (and no immigrating to other countries is not a solution, we need LESS births). Explain to me also why ANYONE thinks it's reasonable that the USA uses 1/4 of the GLOBAL resources, and WASTES in the quantities it does.

Drop the population to sustainable levels and the amount of wastage to almost zero; if not zero itself; and you immediately need to produce far far less food to feed them. And the thing is that over population of humans plus wastage are major problems not just for food production but in every part of the environment. If we don't fix those 2 fundamental things then the earth will die taking us and every other creature along with it. So it is a MASSIVE lie to say if we all turn vego everything will be ok, because that simply isn't the case.

I also reject entirely the comment made by Jonathan that humanity is the stewards of the earth. That is perhaps the BIGGEST lie propetuated by humanity, particularly animal rights groups. It is a LIE to say that humanity is special, different (in a way that makes us superior) or separate from other animals. And is certainly a lie to say that humans are the only animals capable of choosing what their diet will contain. My best example of why that particular point is a lie is that my dog is currently experiencing a moment in time where he is choosing NOT to eat the dog food I provide him and instead trying to get hold (by whatever means necessary) foods like crisps and pizza.

That is a conscious choice HE has made. In fact I have no doubt that any animal when presented with a seemingly endless choice and variety of food would be capable of making dietary choices on their own accord (and yes sometimes good choices and sometimes bad choices, just like humans). The biggest lie ever invented is that you're somehow special. You're NOT! If for example human only disease wiped humanity off the planet tomorrow, no other creature would blink an eyelid, except perhaps in relief. The fact of the matter is humanity is as far from special as it gets, humanity is also as far from good for the planet as it gets too.

Humans have NO extra rights, no special responsibilities, none of that. It's all LIES! We do not have the right nor responsibility to "cull" (which is a polite way of saying massacre) the populations of other animals; especially when ours is so over populated. If we want to cull animals, lets start with ourselves. If everyone who thinks culling other animals simply picked up a gun, stuck it to their head and pulled the trigger, then we'd at least be on the way to getting our population in check . That isn't to say I think we should cull humanity, but we certainly shouldn't be culling another species. The day that humanity realises just how far from special they are, how intelligent other animals actually are and honestly how stupid and insane humanity actually is will be the day the earth moves forth.

I also reject Jonathans idea that the only reason humans hunt is for thrill. That's absolute bullshit. THAT IS A LIE! What's to say a hunter doesn't grow his own fruit and veg? In fact hunting is natural, it's how humanity was built. It's fairer on other animals, much fairer than penning animals in and then killing them. It also means you can get close to nature, close to your roots. You can most certainly kill to eat. Think of it this way, a vegetarian or vegan makes a conscious decision to only eat plants, even when that means going out of their way, even when there is plenty of other food down at the local supermarket. A hunter can be the same, in that they may sure have a supermarket within shopping distance, but they can make a conscious decision to hunt their meat instead of buying it from the supermarket.

In fact Jonathan Safran-Foer introduces NO new arguments to the table. He is the same old vegetarian coming with his arguments why everyone else should be the same way as he is. He pretends to not try and get other people to be like him, but if this was truly the case there would be no book, there would be no keynote addresses and this post wouldn't exist because I would never have heard of him. Fact of the matter is, yes the people who operate factory farms lie and yes the state of the food system (like basically EVERY OTHER SYSTEM) in the United States of America is broken. But it's also fact that Jonathan Safran-Foer is trying to convert you, it's also fact that he (like all vegoes) tells as many (if not more) lies than the people who run the factory farms.

Links;

Jonathan Safron-foer's keynote @ Sixth & 1

If you ever wanted to see justice come to missionaries, this story it is. The 5 Male and 5 female Christians from Ohio, USA who entered Haiti and stole 33 children have been denied bail. The group of 5 couples attempted to take the Haitian children across the border into the Dominican Republic with the idea of setting up an orphanage. The ill equipped group failed their duty of care with all 33 children suffering dehydration and hunger when they were stopped by border authorities. Some of the children also were injured and required urgent medical attention.

But perhaps even more scary is the fact the Christians seeming had forgotten (or perhaps they simply didn't care) to actually check the children they took really where orphans, with most of them actually still having living parents. A Haiti court has denied the group bail, ordering them to be remanded in custody; charged with kidnapping minors and criminal association.

In situations like this you just have to smile at the fact justice has actually prevailed. But you can't help but feel bad about all the millions who didn't have justice go their way. One would think by now Christian missionaries would be outlawed, I mean consider this; In the USA it was Christian Missionaries who stole native Indian children and denied them their culture. In Canada Christian missionaries did the same to the Inuit people and here in Australia they stole aboriginal children and trained them as servants. Now look at all the pain, suffering and money this has cost those countries? Yet we allow Christian missionaries to go forth from those very same countries and cause ever more havoc around the world.

At what point do our governments see the harm this is doing, at what point do they see that by allowing this practise to continue it costs governments more in tax payer funded charity. At some point surely our governments will see sense and benefit from ruling it illegal to go over seas as a missionary. Personally I think anyone who does such should be stripped of their citizenship and their actions dealt with in international court as crimes against humanity. Just remember, the worst acts in history were ALL perpetrated with the "best of intentions".

At any rate, I want to see more of these poor, third world countries standing up to missionaries, charging and imprisoning them for crimes like those of the 10 Christians in Haiti. If all third world nations did this, then perhaps just that would be a big enough deterrent to stop missionaries entering those countries in the first place.