dutchroll

I visit Indonesia a lot (no not the alternate universe of Bali on holiday, but the capital Jakarta). It's part of my job and the first time I went there was over 20 years ago. The most recent time was a few weeks ago. I have never been treated with anything other than respect and kindness by the people there. Period. People are quite surprised when I say that because they assume "Muslim country = everyone's out to kill you" but then they've never been there, so how would they know? Sure, they have some problems with religious intolerance and crime. I'd suggest we do too. There are parts of Jakarta I'd stay away from. There are parts of Sydney I would too. I agree that if there are "sharia courts" operating in the UK then by default they must be operating underground and they should be shutdown. They have no legal standing whatsoever. Here in Australia some people seem to think sharia law will be implemented but in fact the opposite is true. There have been several cases where Muslims have been charged and convicted over offences against our laws even though they protested it was "sharia". Also what is considered "sharia" in the Middle East isn't necessarily considered "sharia" in other parts of Muslim society. Sharia is decreed by clerics, and just like in the Christian world, the clergy seem to often get confused over what's right and wrong!

The only thing which would genuinely surprise me, would be if anyone was actually surprised!

Yeah, strong beliefs can make you ignore the facts. The human mind is an excellent filter which unfortunately works against us as often as it works for us. It's all about balance of evidence and credibility of evidence. Working that out is where many people stumble. In a sense I don't really care when people believe demonstrably untrue stuff or stuff which isn't credible, as long as they keep it inside their own little bubble. It's when it adversely affects others that I start having problems with it.

The only people I've ever heard call for a referendum are people who vehemently oppose it, because they know it can easily fail with a minority of the population opposing it and also offers them an opportunity to mount a socially divisive media campaign to try to ensure that happens. So......you would actually ask for clarification of why they want faces visible in ID photos on drivers licences? Their policy is like stating "we believe water should be wet". Great idea. Let's campaign for it! Or you could just accept that it already is and probably always will be. John Wayne Gacey was the manager of a small business. Well, up until he was convicted of being a serial killer and murdering 30 teenage boys. Some of the most virulently racist, xenophobic and misogynistic people I've known have run small businesses. Some of the nicest and most reasonable people I've met have run small businesses too. What does all this show? Absolutely nothing, except that we have a colourful array of people spanning the entire spectrum of intelligence and "niceness" running small businesses.

It is true Phil. Laurie Oakes is a veteran and well respected Australian political commentator whom I've heard slam both sides of politics at various times when they deserve it. He's respected by politicians as an interviewer too. He got wind of bookmakers taking bets on his tie colour on election night, so in his own words decided he would be the "punter's protector" against the bookies. When asked by his co-hosts about what was going on later in the evening, he replied "Sportsbet ran a bet on what colour tie I would wear in the election telecast — there were six choices: yellow, blue, black, green, gold or any other colour, so I thought “why should anyone miss out?” and wore all six colours."

"We will enact the following: Call for an inquiry or Royal Commission to determine if Islam is a religion or political ideology" From the One Nation website. That's right. Vote for Pauline Hanson to spend $50 million of taxpayer's money (the average cost of a Royal Commission) with the sole purpose of determining whether or not Islam is a religion or a political ideology. And she should be careful what she wishes for, because if they happened to redefine either "religion" or "political ideology" there might be many groups caught in her drag-net which she hadn't anticipated! Just reading it makes my head spin. Ban Halal certification. ........Companies may comply for export but no monies must be paid Right. So her official party policy is to ban it, but not ban it. Excellent. Driver’s licence cannot be obtained without showing the full face and having photo ID on driver’s licence So....her policy is to legislate something which is already legislated in every State. That's incisively brilliant. Wonder how many hours she worked on that policy?

From Jo Thornely's funny take on Pauline Hanson's policies: MAKE ISLAM ADMIT IT’S NOT A RELIGION It’s quite obvious that under Sharia law, Islam’s main goal is to make non-Muslims feel like second-class citizens in the country they were bloody born in, which is just wrong. One Nation knows that feeling like second-class citizens should be reserved for Muslims and other people who refuse to learn the language or eat proper food. The problem is, the Constitution says you can’t legislate to prohibit the free exercise of religion, so the [/url]solution is simple : make Islam admit that it’s NOT a religion, it’s a “totalitarian political system”, so we can legislate against it. Did you know that mosques don’t pay tax, and that Islam is a religion that wants to dictate how we live our lives? Disgusting. What does it think it is, the Catholic Church?

Not seen what happens in an everyday Australian abattoir then? I have. It's grotesque, as is pretty much everything from the moment they get on the truck. Sure I'm still a meat-eater, but I've not seen evidence that anyone in the more intensive slaughter industry goes to any sort of effort to make it remotely describable as "humane". That's not to say true Halal slaughter is either.

We pay all sorts of extras for all sorts of reasons which are "hidden" in the price of products. I never cease to be surprised by the ones which upset us and the ones we couldn't care less about, like Chicken McNuggets with a Heart Foundation tick.

Prediction: Conspiracy theorists will say the Halal certification books were doctored to make it appear that the money remained in Australia and did not go to terror organisations. No amount of evidence makes conspiracy theories go away. This is why they are conspiracy theories. Obama eventually produced his long-form birth certificate. What did the birthers then say? Yep - it was obviously forged, because naturally it's a conspiracy.

Well if you object to religious certification of food you open a total can of worms. Food is a free market, unless you believe in essentially marxist/communist principles where food is produced and allocated in accordance with full Government regulation. If a food producer wants to certify their food, at a cost, for consumption by the Church of the Temple of Psychick Youth (yeah that's a real religion), then that is entirely their business. You can object to buying it all you want, and refuse to buy it all you want, but to attempt to legislate against it is really going against all principles of free trade etc. The beautiful irony of Pauline Hanson is that in her anti-Halal crusade she basically wants the Government to control who sells what food to whom and at what price (she wants Halal certification banned), while apparently championing individual liberty and anything which benefits aussie workers. I don't know how you can contradict your own principles so much.

I understand what you're saying Willie, but I've met very few people who know the difference and I don't for one minute think Pauline Hanson does. I mean....she thinks we're about to be overrun by Asians. That's something I haven't heard since the anti-Vietnamese refugee sentiment when I was in high school in the 80s! Interestingly, according to some of the manufacturers themselves, the "Halal certification" costs a tiny (very, very tiny) fraction of the retail cost of the product, and if you were to exclude the market which becomes available with the Halal certification, the loss of market demand would be a huge impact to them. These are people employing aussie workers and selling aussie-grown products. A classic example is the call to cease certifying Australian beef as "Halal". This would cause a massive collapse in our export market and absolutely crucify Australian beef producers, ie, our own farmers. People are too emotive to realise this.

"There's no one who can seriously argue that Tony Abbott would not have done better...." Bolt-logic. "How can you possibly not like my friend the most far right conservative leader in recent Australian history who was elected on the back of a disastrously dysfunctional Labour Party which self destructed? I mean, how is that possible that my friend Tony was elected for any reason other than all of Australia adores him?" A few more of my brain cells self-destruct every time I hear Bolt speak. Pretty soon I'll need to be fed through a straw.

I have to admit that I find it difficult to listen to any opinions Alan Jones has, unless it involves one of his only two qualifications: rugby coaching, or high school English teaching. The anti-Halal crowd always make me giggle too. Strictly speaking, if you want to wipe Halal off the face of the Earth, then you must ban donations to charity, ban cricket and soccer, ban swimming, and ban eating out. All of which are strictly Halal in the Muslim world and have always been. Of course this requires that you have no clue what "Halal" actually means in the first place.

So there are scientists who oppose the idea that gravity exists, right? Eagerly awaiting you to post evidence of that...... Yet still it does. So we agree that a scientific theory can be both imperfect and have uncertainties, but describe an absolutely factual phenomenon, right? His early research on WW1 wounded showed antiseptics which were in widespread use sometimes worsened the condition of the patient because they only killed the surface bacteria, not the bacteria buried in a deep wound. His research was strongly supported by some eminent scientists such as bacteriologist Sir Almroth Wright, however it was army doctors, not "literally all his scientist peers" who refused to change their treatment. The Army did a lot of stupid and stubborn things leading to many deaths in WW1. This was one of quite a number. This was a massive discovery overturning a widespread principle at the time. Sometimes it takes time for a discovery like this to get around and overturn established thinking. Often several years. However if the science is good enough, it will, and usually a Nobel Prize is the result. Fleming is one example. Recently Australians Marshall & Warren are another example, overturning established wisdom on peptic ulcer treatment. Einstein did it with Newtonian Gravity too. Arrhenius published his initial work on global warming due to greenhouse emissions in 1896, so sceptics have had 120 years to disprove it to an acceptable and rigorous scientific standard, along with offering up a viable alternative explanation for actual observations of increasing temperatures under the sea, on the surface, and in the atmosphere. Which goes to show global warming sceptics are no Einsteins and won't be booking their dinner with the King of Sweden any time soon.

Well, Pauline Hanson is back (thanks a lot, Queensland), and she wants a Royal Commission into climate science and Royal Commission into Islam. Personally I'm going to raise her bet here, and call for a Royal Commission into cancer research, and a Royal Commission into Christianity. It bugs me that greedy scientists make money out of cancer research when no-one in my family has it. We also need to make them account for their scaremongering and the millions of dollars of our money they spend while the cure mysteriously doesn't eventuate (coincidence? I don't think so). On christianity, just like Pauline, I want a Royal Commission to investigate whether it's a religion or a political ideology. After all, hasn't she heard of Fred Nile and his Christian Democratic Party, as OME mentioned above? With an approximate total cost per Royal Commission of $50 million, I think these would be an excellent use of taxpayers money and would reap enormous benefits. Only $50 million to decide whether Islam is a religion or not - how can we not benefit greatly from that, I ask you? Ah Pauline.......you've done it again. You really are an "ideas" woman!

Is it just my imagination, or do the Tories seem to have developed a taste for cannibalising each other at the moment over the whole Brexit thing?

I've read the document. I see no threat to national sovereignty in it, but perhaps someone could point me to the paragraphs which do. "Superstate" is a scary sounding catchphrase, however when you actually read the document it seems to mostly want to reinforce current EU security and economic ties, as well as develop common refugee policies (sounds sensible, but even so, you're unlikely to satisfy everyone no matter what the policy is). They do suggest more cooperation over fiscal matters (not unreasonable if you have very close trade and economic ties), but using the already existing European Parliament. The talk of a "common border" is a bit vague but I suspect it's in effect what already exists, with freedom of movement between member states as well as developing common border security policies. Good luck with getting agreement on that, but not an unreasonable goal so everyone knows where they stand. I love the way columnists analyse these bureaucratic papers for the "masses". The only common military thing it talks of is the possibility of a jointly controlled "Coast Guard" in conjunction with the discussion on common border security. But lo and behold, the columnist turns this into a "European Maritime Force", and before you know it, the masses will be saying "European Navy", followed by "oh my God they're planning dismantle our proud national Navies and absorb them!" It's Chinese whispers at ten paces.

Yeah but that usually cuts both ways. You can rarely ever say it's "only the left" or "only the right". I've seen the left and the right both severely stirring up trouble. Then they go and beat each other up.

Phil it doesn't matter what you think of S&P (I hate them too, incidentally). That they and every other credit rating agency have downgraded your credit rating automatically means it becomes more expensive for your Government to borrow money, and every Government borrows money for various reasons just like everyday people do.This means that your Government will need to raise more revenue to pay it back, and guess how they do that? When I say "Britain" is vacillating, I by default mean your Government. That is what leads to financial and business instability which affects a broad range of things such as pension plans, investments, etc. The finance and business sectors couldn't give a crap what the average Briton does, but they do care what your Government does.

I'm not sure that resorting to a conspiracy theory that "Remain" voters are rigging any and all reports of adverse effects, and in particular racist behaviour, is necessarily a broadly supportable position. The predominant reports of hate crime increases have come from police themselves. I reckon they would probably know. I would totally agree it's unfair to label all "Leave" voters as racist morons, but I would contend that it's becoming self-evident that a fair number of them didn't think particularly hard about what the broader consequences of a "Leave" vote might be. Ultimately it might've been better for Britain to exert other types of pressure on the EU for reform - particularly immigration reform which is what this seems to be all about - which even the founding states have admitted is needed. But it's all too late for that now. The baby has been thrown out with the bathwater. Boris Johnson tonight: "The pound is stable, the markets are stable" Boris, get off the drugs eh?

I'm white, Australian born, English native language, descended from English free settlers in 1836, and grew up in a middle class fully employed Australian family with no foreign breeding influence. I shouldn't have any problems. What could they possibly not like about me? ;)

More disturbing reports (various mainstream sources) of the Brexit aftermath: Gibraltar in talks with Scotland to remain in EU Second referendum on Scottish independence "highly likely" Britain gripped by wave of racism in aftermath of vote. Police report hate crime reports have spiked by more than 50%. Polish embassy issues statement saying it is "deeply concerned by the recent incidents of xenophobic abuse directed against the Polish community". "No more Polish vermin" leaflets posted in letterboxes through Cambridgeshire. Standards and Poor last night stripped the UK of its AAA credit rating. Fitch then followed with a cut to the UK's credit score. There are now no credit rating agencies which have the UK at triple A. £40 billion more stripped off UK stock values yesterday Bank of England to meet today to offer emergency loans to British banks Leave campaigner and Tory MEP Daniel Hannan tells BBC last night that the leave campaign "had never promised to cut immigration numbers" (that'll go down well!) And these charming things: [ATTACH]47932._xfImport[/ATTACH] On the bright side, it's going to be very attractive to me to go on holiday over there soon!

A couple of British tabloids have reported this. Of course they took the information 3rd or 4th hand from Polish TV station TVP and a mystery "leaked" 9 page report from European Defence Ministers. In fact the Daily Mail is simply repeating "the Express reports that.....", which in turn is repeating that "Polish TVP reports that.......", etc etc. Aside from the fact that TVP's reputation for objective reporting isn't exactly stellar and they're renowned for being highly xenophobic, anti Semitic and nationalistic, I used to work for Defence and I have never, ever seen a Defence policy report on re-shaping the entire military force, let alone dismantling entire nations (I mean, seriously?) which was only 9 pages long. 9 long chapters or 9 volumes perhaps. So believe the report's accuracy at your peril. I personally highly doubt it and, allowing for mistranslation and taking things out of context, it seems exaggerated and a touch paranoid to me. But this seems to be the way of the entire debate. Do you honestly believe for a moment that France and Germany would relinquish control of their military forces to Brussels? Especially France with its nuclear arsenal? Do you seriously believe France would allow itself to cease to exist as a nation? This is pie-in-the-sky stuff. Meanwhile as Britain vacillates, the pound freefalls to a 30 year low, British bank, airline and property shares continue to dive, the nation appears rudderless, and it certainly appears the NHS won't see a cent of any extra money.

That's probably stretching it a bit........