Artwork for podcast The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove
Episode 454 - Banned from Mailchimp
2nd December 2024 • The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove • The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove
00:00:00 01:08:55

Share Episode

Shownotes

In this episode, the hosts dive into a variety of thought-provoking topics. Trevor kicks off with a story about Mailchimp banning his email service due to an article critical of Israel, sparking a discussion on the challenges of sharing controversial content. Scott then discusses President Biden's controversial decision to pardon his son, Hunter Biden, for tax and firearms felonies, comparing it to previous political scandals. Trevor shares an amusing anecdote about visiting an old-school barbershop. The conversation takes a serious turn as they discuss proposed legislation in Queensland to impose mandatory life sentences for children as young as ten, raising concerns about the impact on youth offenders and the justice system. They also satirically critique the Courier Mail's portrayal of youth crime and the LNP's economic recovery efforts. The episode wraps up with a discussion on France's decision not to arrest Netanyahu despite previous statements and a debate on the effectiveness of democracy versus dictatorship, reflecting on historical and current examples of political systems and their impact on society.

To financially support the Podcast you can make:

We Livestream every Monday night at 7:30 pm Brisbane time. Follow us on Facebook or YouTube. Watch us live and join the discussion in the chat room.

You can sign up for our newsletter, which links to articles that Trevor has highlighted as potentially interesting and that may be discussed on the podcast. You will get 3 emails per week. After the fiasco mentioned in episode 454 I can't use Mailchimp anymore so for the moment, send me an email and I'll add you to a temporary list until something more automated is arranged.

We have a website. www.ironfistvelvetglove.com.au

You can email us. The address is trevor@ironfistvelvetglove.com.au

You can send us a voicemail message at Speakpipe

Transcripts started in episode 324. You can use this link to search our transcripts. Type "iron fist velvet glove" into the search directory, click on our podcast and then do a word search. It even has a player which will play the relevant section. It is incredibly quick.

Transcripts

:

We need to talk about ideas, good ones and bad ones.

:

We need to learn stuff about the world. We need an honest,

:

intelligent, thought provoking and entertaining review of what

:

the hell happened on this planet in the last seven days. We need

:

to sit back and listen to the Iron Fist and the velvet glove.

:

Welcome back to this episode

:

454 Iron Fist, Velvet Glove Podcast. And I'm looking at the

:

screen and I'm saying, Scott is back. Scott, welcome back. How

:

are you? Not too bad things, Trevor Yourself. How good. A

:

little bit frustrated with MailChimp, but we'll get into

:

that in a moment. And Joe Jo online, ask how you are. Good to

:

see you, Joe. Dave. Neil. Yes. So. So, yes, the listener on the

:

agenda, we're going to talk about how MailChimp just banned

:

me from using their service,

:

simple email service that they provide. And then yeah,

:

mandatory life detention for kids in Queensland and stuff

:

going on around the world. Further questioning of democracy.

:

A little joking piece about

:

why you guys are so anti dictators and whatever people

:

want to talk about. Scott Whatever you want to talk about,

:

we could talk about that.

:

First thing I'll just get off my chest because it's

:

the headline item is Dear Listener. I've invited people

:

over time because the show notes have it to join an email list

:

and basically 40 people took up that offer. And the idea of the

:

email list was that three times a week anyone who signed up

:

would get an email automatically generated through this program

:

that I use the listener every morning and I'm reading news

:

articles in my RSS feed reader. If I see an article that's going

:

to be interesting and I think maybe I could use it in a

:

podcast, not necessarily because I agree with it, maybe I'd

:

disagree with it. Like it just just because it's of interest.

:

I'll put a little star on it in the RSS feed reader and three

:

times a week via a program, email gets sent out to people

:

saying, Here's the articles that Trevor has starred in the last

:

few days. Here's the links. You know, have a look at them if

:

you're interested. So there's no commentary by me. It's just

:

purely passing on the links. And and yeah, two days ago on

:

Saturday, I got an email from MailChimp, which is the service

:

I was using because it's free

:

saying that I had an automatic abuse prevention system.

:

Omnivore That's omnivore. Omnivore is something that eats

:

meat and it's base meat. Meat and vegetables. Yes. Yeah.

:

Reviewed your account with the username of his Velvet Glove

:

podcast. He detected content or actions which conflict with

:

section 18 of our standard terms of service and our acceptable

:

use policy. And I was looking through the content that I had

:

sent, and everything was very innocuous, like housing policy,

:

Reserve Bank inflation, blah, blah, blah. But there was one

:

article which was begging Israel and basically tearing into

:

Israel. This was an article from the John Menadue blog, and I

:

think that was the article that ran afoul of the of the rules

:

that they have. And I looked at section 18 of the policy and it

:

said hateful content. This means any statement, image, photograph,

:

advertisement or other content that in our sole judgment could

:

be reasonably perceived to harm or threaten, promote the

:

harassment of, promote the intimidation of promote the

:

abuse of or promote discrimination against others by

:

saying solely on race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual

:

orientation, gender, gender identity. So, um, you know, even

:

anti-Semitic. Again, I don't know if you provide material

:

that is critical of a nation, Israel

:

arguably, um,

:

it could be perceived to threaten, um,

:

based on that or promote the intimidation of, promote the

:

abuse of, promote the discrimination against others

:

based solely on that. Um, harm, threaten, promote, I don't know,

:

but it's very frustrating. There have been allegations of some

:

people harassed in the street, some Jewish. Yeah. That's true.

:

I don't know. Yeah. But providing a John Menadue blog

:

article. Mhm. By Guy where he rightfully outlines some of the

:

atrocious behaviour of the state of Israel against Palestinians.

:

And boom, it kicked off MailChimp. course I appealed and

:

said, Well, what's wrong? Tell me. No response. So, um. So yeah,

:

if you're on the email list, stand by as I try and figure out

:

some other system to let. Those news articles are mostly getting

:

archived onto the Discord server. Yes, except for at the end of

:

the month when I run out of tokens. Wrong post. Too many

:

links. And what happens? Enjoy. It just stops working till a new

:

month ticks over and suddenly it has enough tokens. Right. So. So

:

I think we do lose a number of articles at the end of each

:

month. Okay. The people who are currently on the list expect an

:

email from me inviting you to a different service. But, um, and

:

anybody else who wants to be on the list will have to email me,

:

direct, get to this one. It doesn't have an easy signup

:

anyway. I thought that was interesting that you just can't

:

provide content now that's critical of Israel. It's

:

annoying. Yes. I'm assuming it's a bit like when we got warned by

:

either Facebook or YouTube because of that land and hard

:

bottom skit. Yeah, we're going to strike because of a comedy

:

piece by Lane and Hard Bottom where he was in a joking sense

:

suggesting that Jewish space lasers would be living on on

:

Shai for fun for some reason, which I like, which I forget.

:

And I know he had threatened to he had threatened to put her a

:

suspender above the shark tank, didn't he? That. Yes. And but it

:

used the word Jewish space lasers, which if you're

:

listening, dear YouTube Santa was all in jest, nothing serious.

:

It was all to do with sort of a James Bond spoof type stuff. It

:

was a. Yes. It has no intelligence. It doesn't

:

understand sarcasm or humor is in. But when you appeal these

:

things, I don't think anybody listens. No, I just it just goes

:

to the bot again. So and so. Yeah. Alright. That was the

:

story then. So maybe at the end of the podcast or the audio

:

podcast, I think I'll read out what the article was saying.

:

It's a lengthy, a little slightly lengthy one, but it

:

ties into Israel for all its atrocious behaviour. So I'll

:

distribute it that way.

:

Scott, sorry to interrupt you. You were wanting

:

to talk about and I was just doing a little bit of a rant

:

about Biden, that's all, because he certainly made a song and

:

dance about he wasn't going to

:

pardon. Is it Hunter Biden or is it? Yes. Yeah. Hunter Biden. He

:

said that they weren't going to that he wasn't going to pardon

:

Hunter, but he made that big song and dance about it during

:

the election and that type of thing. Although he wasn't

:

running, he has done exactly what Trump said he would do. You

:

know, what did he do? Well, he actually pardoned he actually

:

pardoned Hunter Biden for his tax and firearms felonies, I

:

believe. Yes, it did. This happened. Did I Did it. Yeah.

:

Yeah, right. A politician lied to China. Okay. Yeah. Very

:

flagrantly abused the system for the benefit of his family. Now,

:

Trump has set a precedent, but even so. Yes. Yes. Well, he'd be

:

better than that. Yes, that is what the Biden would be. Yes,

:

Right. Well, I actually thought he was.

:

Doesn't surprise me in the least. It's one of those things, I

:

think to myself that now the Israelis, he's got nothing to

:

lose or anything else. Like, you know, he's a lame duck. Yeah. He

:

might as well go on and do it. I would have thought that is just

:

dumb and disappointing and you know what? He's going to rock up

:

to the inauguration and other ceremonies over the next few

:

years while he's still capable of it all. And nobody's going to

:

give him a hard time over it. None. So why not? He'll do

:

interviews and things. Nobody will say, You totally breached

:

your moral code. They might just get away with it anyway. So it's

:

exactly that he will do interviews. Well, I don't think

:

he will either. But even if he did, it's not going to you know,

:

he wouldn't be challenged. No, it's one of those things. I just

:

don't think that.

:

Anyway. I just think it's wrong. Actually, more than anything, we

:

used to have negotiations resigning over a bottle of wine.

:

Yeah. Over a teddy bear. Hmm. And a TV listener. Back in the

:

1780s, something when there was different sort of customs duties

:

payable on bringing stuff into the country. We had a minister

:

who failed to declare his Paddington Bear in his luggage.

:

Then he brought into Australia, which was dutiable, and he

:

resigned. And we had another minister who failed to declare

:

he declared a television, but he didn't declare that it was a TV.

:

And that was under, I think maybe Blackmore it was exempt or

:

the cover up was a higher right. And so there was a big I think

:

he resigned as well. So we had people resigning as ministers

:

because of maintaining a standard in appearance and being

:

beyond reproach. I think it was either it was either Hawke or

:

Fraser's government that that happened. And so I think it was

:

Hawke's game with the Paddington Bear with that Labor secretary

:

going Mitch something. Anyway, yeah, it was a long time ago. No,

:

no, it was very long because it was a different world, wasn't it.

:

It was 40 odd years ago, you know that Hawke was elected in

:

83 wasn't it. It was 41 years ago that he was elected.

:

Something like that. We're getting old. Well, I'm certainly

:

getting very old. Yeah. Mm

:

hmm. Um, one thing I came across well, actually, I

:

came across this via a barber. I needed a haircut down here on

:

the Gold Coast and walked into a classic old school barber shop,

:

sporting, sporting memorabilia on the wall for you and I think

:

for the weekend. For the weekend. You're not aware of that? No. In

:

the olden days, it was one of the few places you could buy

:

condoms was at the barber shop. And they'd say something for the

:

weekend, sir, and offer you a packet of condoms. Is that right?

:

Yeah. I didn't know that. No, he didn't. He did not offer me that.

:

But anyway, you know, beyond it, $19 gentleman's haircut was and

:

anyway, the guy before me was an old codger. Not like myself. And

:

I were ranting about the world and the price of Islam, whatnot.

:

I was thinking, Man, I could never be a barber because you

:

would just be inundated with boomers complaining about the

:

world.

:

This guy had a good manner about him, but he didn't mention

:

about these days.

:

Well, juvenile crime, huh? Yeah. But he did say, you

:

know, I've heard that this Chris Christopher Lee guy is bringing

:

in mandatory life sentences for kids. Hmm. And he said, I don't

:

see how that's make sense. That's not justice. That can't

:

be right. Doesn't not. Doesn't make sense. So, um, children as

:

young as ten will be subject to the same maximum sentence as

:

adults for 13 offences, including unlawful use of motor

:

vehicle and entering a premise and committing an indictable

:

offence. Under the legislation, children can be sentenced to

:

life behind bars for five offences, including manslaughter,

:

grievous bodily harm in a form of robbery and burglary. If

:

convicted of murder, they must be sentenced to life with a

:

minimum of 20 year non-parole period. We're talking about

:

children in grade four. Yes. So ten year olds? Yes. That is the

:

law that the LNP is trying to introduce. The vast majority of

:

children who do these serious offences at that age have foetal

:

alcohol syndrome and no doubt all sorts of crazy things going

:

on. Absolutely. It's insane. And even a barber in his later ages

:

inundated with boomers, could stop for a minute and say,

:

That's not right.

:

My God. Yes, it was sorry. It was also commented that because

:

he's promised to pass these laws by Christmas, they're being

:

rammed through parliament. There isn't time to debate them.

:

There's no

:

real

:

checking of what's what's actually in the law. It's just

:

being pushed through. We have to vote on this. We have to get

:

this through. The legislation will be debated in December

:

after an eight day inquiry by a parliamentary committee. Eight

:

days. It's only getting. It's insane.

:

Griffith University criminologist William Wood

:

pointed to research that incarcerating youth in prison

:

has little positive impact in reducing crime. It won't reduce

:

crime. It does teach them how to be better criminals, though. Yes,

:

prison makes kids tougher. And he says at least half of

:

Queensland's youth offenders have a history of trauma and no

:

amount of punishment was going to scare those kids straight.

:

Those kids at ten are not going going, Gosh, I'm up for a

:

potential mandatory life sentence here. Will I do what

:

I'm currently contemplating because I'm evaluating the

:

consequences of my action? Oh, they don't. Because is it the

:

frontal cortex or whatever it is that's not formed at that age?

:

That's why they were talking about pushing the drinking age

:

up, because kids don't think through the consequences of

:

their actions. Yeah. Oh, and it says here that it also removes

:

the long standing principles that detention should be, should

:

only be ordered as a last resort in the principle that a

:

non-custodial order is better than detention for promoting a

:

child's reintegration into the community. So even on just

:

various other offences. Hmm. That sort of principle that it's

:

probably best to keep people out of jail if possible. These jails

:

are the last resort. That principle is wiped out and

:

judges are not allowed, will not be allowed to rely on it. Just a

:

bunch of pricks. Yeah. And the throwing out the whole

:

independence of the judiciary by actually doing this, you know?

:

Well, it's up to the legislature to provide legislative

:

guidelines about what the community wants. Say, this is

:

what just say is mandatory. And we want judges to

:

abide by certain guidelines. But eh, making things mandatory just

:

removes all the discretion potentially the judges can have

:

that says, you know what, in this case, because of these

:

unusual circumstances, I should we exercise a discretion to be a

:

bit more lenient for whatever reason. Mm. But also, should we

:

be doing what the public wants or should we be doing what the

:

evidence says is best. Hmm. Well, and does the public even want

:

this? Well, I don't think you know. But they were given a

:

mandate. Yes. Isn't that always the argument? We were given a

:

mandate to do this. Yeah. Not. Not. People were pissed off with

:

labor. Yeah. You know, people wanted this. They voted for us

:

because they wanted this. Yeah.

:

Yep. That's where we're at. Hmm. Crazy, crazy shit. Well, you

:

know, it's just

:

I was the a Christopher Lee was not all he was claiming to be,

:

but he has started to unmask himself a hell of a lot earlier

:

than I actually thought. Mm. You know, and now I'm. I was called

:

up yesterday by a

:

politics

:

survey and that type of thing. And this woman was asked me all

:

these sorts of questions and all that type of thing. And she said,

:

How do you think the LNP government is going? And so on?

:

And I haven't been in long enough to stuff things up yet.

:

Seriously, they ask that. Mm. Yeah. And I said you know, then

:

they said you know, what are your hopes for the future with

:

your new member. I said well I hope that he actually remains

:

the genuinely decent bloke that I met and he actually manages to

:

keep away from the Christian nutters on his side of the

:

parliament. You know, it's one of those things now I actually

:

said to him, I said, Now you and I both know that this is a very

:

nuanced problem, youth crime and the you cannot just throw up a

:

simple slogan and say that adult crime equals adult time. Hmm.

:

Anyway, it's so simple, so sadistic. Yeah. You know,

:

actually, they're going to stop and being recidivists because

:

they're going to appoint prison chaplains for them. Yeah. And

:

Jesus will help. I think they're also talking about more school

:

chaplains as well as as part of the solution to this harassment,

:

because they are in some quarters saying, oh, but there

:

would be plenty of people out there who somehow think that

:

this is the way to do it, who's hardline approach. So exactly.

:

And they honestly do not. And they obviously think that you've

:

just got to throw away the key and that sort of stuff and

:

that's not going to work. Hmm. It is a very nuanced problem

:

that is going to take a long time for UFC to actually nut out

:

what causes it. And then after that you have to work out some

:

solutions and that's where it's going to take a hell of a long

:

time. Yeah. You know, and just to say that you can lock them up

:

and throw away the key, that is ridiculous. This is too many

:

people out there with knee jerk opinions. I'll give you another

:

example in their body corporate here, there's a little work

:

that's going to be done in this building in the surround. So

:

there's a bunch of sort of special levies in the pipeline

:

over the next few years because of substantial stuff that has to

:

be done that hasn't been done. And, you know, there are people

:

in this building who go, well, I was in the body corporate, you

:

know, X number of years ago, and we were really good because we

:

didn't spend any money. And the sinking fund was really full and

:

we knew how to run a body corporate and you go, you bloody

:

idiots. It's because you did nothing back then that all this

:

stuff is racking up now. So you weren't good. It's just common

:

sense. These guys pound foolish. Yeah, I think that is pennywise,

:

pound foolish. These are the stupid people you've got to deal

:

with at different times, saying, Well, there are a number of

:

dickheads out there. Travel. Yeah, don't even let me be a

:

politician because I just could help but keep my full and frank

:

opinion to them when necessary. You may be a dictator, but not a

:

politician. Yeah, Wasn't it Tom Hawk? You got into some. Some

:

guy accosted in the night in a shopping center. We call him a

:

silly old bugger. That's it. And he cop apes over that? Yeah. So

:

it was over the 75th, I think through the 65th anniversary of

:

the Gallipoli landings and all that sort of stuff. And I

:

remember there was a, there was a cartoon in the paper and it

:

said, you know, Prime Minister Hawke was off seeing them off

:

and he says, Yeah, goodbye you silly old buggers. Oh if not

:

well now. Well this other event was he was in a shopping centre

:

and some going Yeah. No I was in a shopping centre. Yeah I know.

:

And it said to that particular guy you're silly, listen to him.

:

And then basically dismissed him and said silly old bugger and

:

then muttered to the press. So yeah, yeah that would be me. He

:

got the ABC not to actually repeat that and I think to

:

states and everything like that, they didn't actually run that on

:

the television news, but the rest of the rest of the country

:

said no, we got to actually say it. So they actually had it.

:

Yeah.

:

Anyway, um, the I think this is the bit to to advocate

:

they know what's going on. They had an article headed Courier

:

Mail author to pivot from fictional stories about youth

:

crime to LNP's economic recovery. And the article is a Brisbane

:

based author has today spoken to The Advocate about the exciting

:

new challenge ahead of him, fresh off the back of a big 12

:

months, creating a fictional universe where youth crime is

:

rampant in the dystopian state of Queensland. Courier Mail

:

author Headington Adderly says he is excited for his next

:

project. The Liberal National Party resurrection of

:

Queensland's faltering economy. Yes, it's an ambitious project

:

but something I'm really looking forward to taking my creative

:

license to. Incidentally, his goal from his gorgeous Ascot

:

home.

:

Uh, it goes on here. This follows Emily's most recent work

:

where he managed to take record low youth crime statistics in

:

Queensland and use them as the genesis of a series of short

:

stories about an epidemic of young criminals terrorising the

:

states. Oh, writing little stories about cherry picked

:

incidents committed by juvenile offenders is much more colourful,

:

he laughed. And I think the public really liked it. So now

:

it's time to craft a story about the transition to a new utopia

:

led by an incredible government that rescue the economy from the

:

very brink. It could be my most ambitious work yet, and I can

:

assure you, Dear Leader, that is exactly what is happening in The

:

Courier-Mail now, where it's all positive stories about the

:

magnificent David Crisafulli. Articles calling him the Goliath

:

killer or something like that. And and just on and on.

:

So. And just things like you'll see an article which talked

:

about the LNP's 50% fare policy. This is public transport fares

:

which was a policy introduced by Labor. But if you read the media

:

it says

:

Westcott going there, it just disappeared because of the

:

connection, right? If you read the paper, it's now the LNP's 50

:

cent fare policy. So the.

:

Just the, the the propaganda narrative has just started. So,

:

um, although I did see one fair was going back to what it was

:

before motivation was the air train. I don't know. It was

:

behind a paywall, so I couldn't see. Right. He tried and never

:

made it to the 50 cent level, but it might have had some

:

discount that yeah, maybe it'd been removed. Yeah.

:

Yeah. So that's that. Um. Right. Um, we mentioned the

:

other week about the arrest warrants by the ICC for

:

Netanyahu and the defense minister, various countries that

:

said, yep, if he comes into our territory will arrest him and

:

various others said no, we won't hold.

:

France has said that they've reversed their decision and they

:

will not be arresting Netanyahu. Um, in America said invade the

:

Hague bill. Right. Well, France originally said they were going

:

to arrest Netanyahu and then they backpedal and said, Now we

:

won't. Right. Claiming that because Israel is not a party to

:

the ICC, then they immune from it.

:

I don't think that's how it works. France. Well, no. So the

:

ICC claims it's got jurisdiction because it's claiming the crimes

:

were committed in Gaza, which is laying control by the

:

Palestinians. And the Palestinians are members of the

:

ICC and therefore, they say they have jurisdiction. So. Okay. So

:

Palestine, along with the American sorry, Israel, along

:

with the Americans and and along with Russia and Ukraine, never

:

actually signed up to the ICC as members as member states. That,

:

of course, didn't stop France from saying, of course, they

:

would arrest Putin if he showed up in France. Well, and the

:

point of the ICC was that any country, whether they'd signed

:

up or not, oh, well, you've got to have jurisdiction, I guess,

:

in some fashion. And I mean, Israel has set the precedent

:

with the kidnapping of all those former Nazis,

:

the kidnapping and the assassination back in the

:

sixties and seventies. Right. So I think they've set the

:

precedent that an armed force can come into Israel, snatched

:

Netanyahu. That would be if you were maintaining sort of

:

consistent stance. Yes. Yes. People don't like to do that.

:

But it's just so hypocritical of France to say, oh, you know,

:

Netanyahu's immune because Israel didn't sign up. Meanwhile,

:

sure, we'll arrest Putin. Even though Russia never signed up.

:

The hypocrisy of these poly people is

:

astounding.

:

Yeah. So

:

Winston Churchill once said the best argument against democracy

:

is a five minute talk with the average voter. Apparently.

:

I've been a bit down on democracy lately. Yes, I've

:

noticed that. I'm starting to wonder whether a dictatorship

:

might be the way to go. I know it's not a good idea, but I'll

:

have a look at the data ship night. Have a look at this,

:

Scott, and see if this changes your mind about a dictatorship.

:

Are you guys so anti dictators? Imagine if America was a

:

dictatorship. Can you guys. He would let 1% of the people have

:

all the nation's wealth. You got to help your rich friends get

:

richer by cutting their taxes and bailing them out when they

:

gamble and lose. You could ignore the needs of the poor for

:

health care and education. Your media would appear free, but

:

would secretly be controlled by one person and his family. You

:

could wiretap phones. You could torture a foreign prisoners. You

:

could have rigged elections. You could lie about why you go to

:

war. You could fill your prisons with one particular racial group,

:

and no one would complain. You could use the media to scare the

:

people into supporting policies that are against their interests.

:

I know this is hard for you Americans to imagine, but it's

:

been a while since I've seen that. Yeah, There we go.

:

Yeah. The advantages

:

makes a good point. Well, he does, because that is actually

:

showing up. The failure of democracy right now. Yes, but at

:

least he could theoretically have someone come in and change

:

all that. Whereas under a dictatorship, you can't a

:

benevolent dictator could. You know, a benevolent dictator

:

could, but you can't actually get away with that because

:

benevolent dictators very few and far between. Mm hmm. Yeah.

:

Community blog. It was like a letter to the I think it was a

:

letter to the editor, the letters column. I think John

:

made you blog. This guy, what's his name? Liz McDonald. Wrote

:

something I thought was a really good summary or well, well

:

phrased. Let me read this to you, Dear List now from Liz McDonald.

:

The lesson that should have been learned from all this war

:

mongering is that democracy flowers from within and cannot

:

be imposed externally by force or arms. Another and more

:

profound lesson is that democracy, as promoted by the

:

West, is only one form of political organization, and the

:

one that the West promotes reflects the values and history

:

of those countries. Others have different histories and

:

traditions, and these have dictated other forms of

:

political organization, some of which have far outstripped the

:

West in recent times in providing vast improvements in

:

the living standards of the bulk of their people. The belief in

:

the West that our system is better than all the others.

:

Makes the arrogant assumption that the values of other

:

cultures and the systems they have built to reflect those

:

values are in some way inferior to ours. That is not only

:

arrogant but profoundly mistaken, and is preventing the West from

:

understanding the new multipolar world that is emerging. I

:

thought that was well-put. It sounds awfully like the French

:

thinkers, the all belief systems are equal and you can't

:

criticize one.

:

No, it's not saying you can't, but it's saying that different

:

cultures might. We shouldn't assume it's really saying just

:

because it's different to what we're used to doesn't mean that

:

it's bad.

:

That's what it's just because it's different and it's suited

:

to the culture of a different people and doesn't mean it's bad.

:

So but I mean, you look at the Islamic fundamentalists in

:

Afghanistan, do you think for the majority of their population,

:

whether they want it or not? And I'm guessing that at least half

:

of them don't. Do you think that's better than what they had

:

back in the sixties?

:

I have no idea. On the ground, I suspect probably not. Sorry.

:

What's the question? Is whether I think the system now in

:

Afghanistan is better than what they had in the sixties. Yeah,

:

I have no one side. I have no idea. On the average life of a

:

farmer in Afghanistan compared to the sixties I. Okay. But for

:

the average woman in Afghanistan, sorry, I suspect it's very, very

:

different and very, very much worse. Worse now. Hmm. Well,

:

yeah, but

:

this. This brief thing is saying it by imposing. I agree. I

:

cannot impose democracy system on people. It has to flow from

:

within. Yeah, absolutely. We should. We should have been

:

concerned more about hearts and minds. Hmm. In rather an

:

imposing a Western style democracy on people. It's a case

:

of making them want it. Yeah, but you could look at, you know,

:

again, China, for example, and what it has achieved in lifting

:

so many people out of poverty that you have to say, well, if

:

you're looking at the living standards and life of people,

:

then that's one way you'd say, well, you know, most people are

:

happier than they were in the sixties and seventies, for

:

example. Certainly, yeah. Yeah. So it doesn't mean that you

:

can't criticize other cultures, but I think you saying two

:

things is just because it's different. It's not a Western

:

style democracy. We shouldn't be so arrogant to say it's not as

:

good as ours. And secondly,

:

this has to come from within. Change has to come from within

:

and I think can't be imposed externally. If the last time

:

they tried that, they were gunned down in the streets.

:

Scott, How many bullshit stories have you heard over the years

:

about various events? Tell me what you believe that Tiananmen

:

Square was bullshit. How how many people died in Tiananmen

:

Square? I don't know. A thousand? I don't know to. I couldn't tell

:

you how many. How many other bigger atrocities have been

:

committed by every other country on the planet. Yeah, I know

:

that's on. But, you know, it's one of those things you're

:

talking about it flowering from within. The last time they tried,

:

they were gunned down in the streets. Scott It's it's not the

:

story that you think it is. Tiananmen Square I think so. So

:

they weren't actually killed in Tiananmen Square. It was in

:

surrounding streets. But but even if you took all of that as

:

gospel and you weighed up. What happened there with what has

:

happened in other countries, like no country is perfect to

:

just say, Oh, fucking forget about the millions of people

:

dragged out of poverty and the enormous changes in the country

:

because of 2000 people killed in a demonstration when thousands

:

are killed in every Western country every few years and

:

various things. It's just really unfair. I think that the Western

:

countries are probably involved in atrocities against our

:

countries, not necessarily against their own people. I mean,

:

America, the lack of health care kills millions, but yes, it does.

:

Killing dissidents in their own countries all over the place one

:

way or in one way or another. So why is that happening? Well, is

:

it so it's not happening in any Western countries? Well, I'm not

:

aware of it. Right. People are not getting locked up. Yeah.

:

You've got some people that are being locked up for sure. They

:

are being imprisoned here in Australia and that is wrong. And

:

then the fact that they're killing foreigners and not their

:

own people then is just okay. I mean, I just don't think that's

:

I don't think that's the same thing is what, what you, what

:

you're trying to do is you're trying to get a, an equivalent

:

argument there against the West compared to China. And I just

:

think to myself the two completely different things.

:

Yeah. So, like, I guess what I'm trying to say is

:

that if you hang your hat on, if Tiananmen Square didn't happen,

:

what would your view of China be? Well, my view of China would be

:

okay. You know, it's it's it's a it's a country that has moved,

:

you know, it has done incredibly well, dragging out hundreds of

:

millions of people out of poverty. There is no doubt that

:

they have achieved a hell of a lot. They have got themselves on

:

the road to being self-sustaining and everything

:

else. They have done all that and they should be applauded for

:

that. However, they are also involved in some questionable

:

actions in the South China Sea. They are involved in invading

:

Tibet. They I don't know what's happening with the wages, but

:

something is happening out there. It's one of those things they

:

are expecting perfection from them that you don't expect from

:

other countries. No, I'm expecting perfection from all of

:

them. Right. Did it. But you seem to hold them to a higher

:

account or. I don't think I'm more critical and more critical

:

of them for sure, because, you know, they they shot their own

:

students in Tiananmen Square. Mhm. You know, it was a very

:

brutal crackdown which was completely unnecessary because

:

all they're wanting was was democracy and they were shot for

:

it and they used their own army against their own people, which

:

is

:

not a very nice thing to do. Mhm.

:

All right. I'm going to do a Tiananmen Square episode. I can

:

tell you that if you want to, that's no problem at all. And

:

you're probably going to you probably get a piss over

:

everything I've just said, which is fine. You know, I, I just

:

think of all of the, uh, uh,

:

yeah.

:

The civil rights movement, the number of black people lynched.

:

Mhm. Yeah. That was banned by the government. Or was it. Well,

:

it was, but yeah, the police were certainly involved in some

:

of that shit, but not in any sport prosecuted by the FBI and

:

police. Just shooting people unnecessarily every day of the

:

week. Mm hmm. It seems. Yes. American police are definitely

:

trigger happy compared to other nations. Absolutely. There.

:

Having said that, they are also afraid for their lives because

:

there's a higher number of weapons in America. Oh, alright.

:

If if we'll do a Tiananmen Square episode at some stage

:

soonish,

:

anybody in the chat can say anything. No difference. No. No.

:

Stiffened silent in their who. Um.

:

Well. So we got a census question on religion.

:

So the guy in charge of the census being questioned by some

:

senators and some Senate committee hearing, I think it

:

was it will be announced in the new year. The format of the

:

religion question in the census. And it was made pretty clear

:

that it's up to the government to decide what the topics are in

:

a census. But once they've decided that, then it's up to

:

the professionals within the department to decide the format

:

of the question. And that was the Christians were lobbying

:

hard that the question be kept the same because otherwise how

:

could you compare one year to another? Is.

:

So by that logic, we should never change any of the

:

questions in the census.

:

Indeed. Could there pack a lunatic something? Yeah. Um, so

:

that's, uh. So that's the story there. Um. Uh, I think it's only

:

a small one, but, um, so another thing where

:

apparently, if they want to do work,

:

if warm, if the war memorial officials want to

:

engage a contractor to do some work at the War Memorial. Mhm.

:

There's a $1 million limit. If you go over that limit, you need

:

ministerial sign off or whatever the work is in. During this

:

Senate Estimates Committee hearing, they were referring to

:

a particular contract and guess what? The value amount of the

:

contract was

:

$999,000.

:

$999,999.99. I'm not sure about that.

:

Yeah.

:

And then there was a second contract. Was it idea? Yes. They

:

would split it. Yeah, exactly. That's that's the usual game,

:

isn't it.

:

Yeah. Uh, a ruling the other day. Priests are not

:

employees. Yeah, that's a horrible, horrible decision. Mhm.

:

To which I think. Fuck them for that. For that particular

:

decision, the High Court found that a priest could not be

:

legally considered an employee, which is bullshit. Absolutely.

:

It's bullshit. Yeah, obviously it was a case of sexual assault

:

claim and child sexual assault. The man was five years old at

:

the time of the abuse in 1971. Um, other common law

:

jurisdictions, including Britain, Canada and Ireland, have

:

developed the principle of vicarious liability to apply to

:

religious orders, basically. Hang on, hang on, hang on. If

:

this was a if this was a bus company, forget that it's a

:

church. If this was a bus company and one of the bus

:

drivers was raping children and the company knew about it and

:

moved them onto a different bus line every time they got caught.

:

Hmm. Could we not say that the bus company would be found

:

liable and would be sued into oblivion? Why the fuck is the

:

church still standing? I don't know.

:

Why have. Why have we not sold off all its assets to compensate

:

the survivors and just wound up the churches? Various. Mhm. Well,

:

we did have the problem of the Ellis defense previously and

:

that was that the Catholic Church does not exist in a legal

:

sense because it's property assets are held inside a special

:

trust structure that is immune to lawsuits. So the Victorian

:

State Government introduced legislation to get around that

:

and now they will introduce legislation to get around this

:

employee problem. French Revolution had it right. He's

:

done on this. I have to talk to you about this offer. Hmm.

:

Really? Now, I just don't know. No, it's not dangerous. Okay?

:

The French Revolution, they actually did actually lop off

:

the heads of a number of the clergy. But I don't understand

:

how you can start from there and end up with Notre Dame and

:

everything being owned by the French state. That was later on.

:

Yeah, I know it was later on. But how did that happen? Because

:

because the basically the French government said, we are buying

:

all of your churches. And they did give them they did give them

:

a payment, I believe. But they said these are national

:

monuments. And they belong to the French people. The French

:

people contributed to them. The French people own them, and we

:

will lease them back to you at a nominal fee. But it means that

:

the French government are legally and financially

:

responsible for national monuments. So the charge the

:

church can't make a decision about a thousand year old

:

cathedral because it's deemed critical to the fabric of France.

:

Hmm. So I'd like a mandatory resumption, basically. Hmm.

:

So in the same way that they grab your files. 05i think

:

so. In the same way that a government could just take your

:

house in order to put in a new roadway, something that they

:

could just take your church and decide to keep it for other

:

reasons. But but my argument has been a lot of the land that the

:

churches hold inside Australia was given to them for free by

:

the government on the grounds that they were a moral force for

:

good. Hmm. And I think that they've proved that they are a

:

force for good and we should be taking that land back from the

:

absolute. This is very valuable land in the middle of big cities

:

that was given to them 150 200 years ago. And I think the

:

people should be taking it back. It's not going to happen in our

:

lifetime. No. And I am. Yeah. Um, what are the topics you want to

:

talk about? I got. It's just the usual complaints I've got here.

:

I'm sort of finding myself repeating myself, so I'm happy

:

to talk about anything.

:

Um, Scott, I haven't looked at in detail this housing

:

scheme where the government is somehow going to be part owners

:

of houses with people. Yeah, I've got to look into it too.

:

It's state or federal. The Federal. ALBANESE The Federal

:

Government's going to take a position in the House that you

:

go in there, you buy a house and the Government owns 30% of it or

:

something like that. Yeah, I don't believe the Government is

:

on the hook for 30% of the rates. I still believe that has to be

:

100% borne by the main owner. Now that is all I know of it. I

:

couldn't tell you about it other than that it's just a that good

:

pass didn't get passed. Yeah. So there's about like 30 different

:

bills just got rammed through Parliament. Exactly. The Greens

:

finally got out of the way of a few of them and you know, they,

:

they realised that they had one hell of a load on housing and

:

all that sort of stuff. So they took the win and moved on and

:

allowed it to go through. Mhm. Whether or not it's a good thing

:

it's another story and I don't know whether or not it's

:

actually a good thing. It's just I suppose the biggest concern I

:

have is is this going to drive up the price of housing. Mhm.

:

Because it's going to be easier for people to purchase and that

:

sort of stuff. So they're going to just take out the whole

:

building. ALBANESE was saying people want with just like a 2%

:

deposit in my house. Um but it's the state of the world where

:

someone like myself is reading lots and lots of stuff every day,

:

you know, yet to come across an article that properly explains

:

how the system is going to work in terms of the contribution and

:

what you get out of it. So so James is saying there's only

:

10,000 places, right? It's just the same as the government being

:

the bank of mum and dad, basically. Yes. Yeah. But every

:

mum, unless the mum and dad's in every bank of mum and dad has

:

some deal under it. Yeah. Absolutely. Well usually the

:

bank of Mum and Dad is he's the money and good luck to you. I

:

hope you don't separate and have a divorce. Oh no. Mine was very

:

much I had to sign a uh,

:

whatever you call it, like a loan agreement or a loan

:

agreement. That said, my parents had a second claim on their

:

house after their mortgage. They again, lots of people don't, but

:

some do. So there's all different variations of how that

:

could happen. And I have yet to sort of see I can see this

:

explanation of how this scheme works and how it would all pan

:

out. So, yeah, I'm in the same boat. I haven't seen anything

:

that actually explains what it's going to happen. Only the you

:

know, the the government is patting themselves on the back

:

saying we've got 10,000 new owners and that's the stuff

:

coming into the market. Yeah. Unless you're going to build

:

10,000 houses to fit those owners, all you're doing is

:

forcing prices up. Exactly. Which is one of the problems

:

that I've got.

:

There my niece is looking at buying a property and everything

:

like that right now. And I happened to mention to her that

:

this scheme had just come into place and everything else. And

:

she says, Is it for existing homes or is it for building

:

homes? And I said, I don't know. Mhm. Now one would hope that's

:

only for building homes but we'll have to wait and see. Mhm.

:

I suspect it is only for building new homes but I'm not

:

sure. Yeah. Um, what else can I ask. Anything else that you

:

wanna

:

see. The social media. So I was asked questions by a

:

German acquaintance about the social media ban because

:

obviously it hit world headlines. Uh, so I've been looking at that

:

basically the law as it's passed is very light on detail. It just

:

says these all social media companies, they must check. So

:

you're over 16, but you can't use government I.D. to check

:

that a person is over 16 unless you're for some alternate method.

:

And any information you gather to check that the person is over

:

16 must be destroyed as soon as you prove that they're over 61.

:

61. Well, what are they going to do? Well, apparently there's a

:

government trial that the government has funded a trial

:

for age verification schemes, which was to look at porn and

:

social media. So to prove you're over 18 for a porn and over 16

:

for social media, you know, and they're looking at technologies

:

that they're looking at.

:

Social impact. And they're also looking at privacy concerns with

:

various representatives. And when that reports back and then

:

they'll look at how they're going to implement this. it's

:

putting the cart before the horse, before they even know how

:

they're going to do it. What did your foreign friend think of

:

this initiative, Joe? He said he was ambivalent. He doesn't see a

:

problem with or certainly he's

:

open to the idea of banning children on social media. Right.

:

But wanted to know more details and was still to make up his

:

mind whether this was a good thing or not. Did you run the

:

argument past him that perhaps educating about how to operate

:

safely on social media was a better mode of going then? I

:

don't know that we got as far as that because it was in the weeds

:

of how this was going to be implemented rather than whether

:

this was a good idea. MM hmm. All right. Um, any thoughts on

:

anything else?

:

Well, winding up and just going through the notes.

:

Glen Paul, Glencore paid $4.7 billion in tax from about $42

:

billion in revenue. I don't know what the expenses are of mining

:

operations and everything else. Mm hmm. 4.7 billion in tax could

:

be quite reasonable because you'd have to if you're talking

:

about a 30% tax rate or whatever it is. Corporate tax rates

:

around about 30%, so you'd end up with a profit there of around

:

about 12 million, $12 billion. I don't know whether it costs $30

:

billion to run a mining company. It remains surprise it's holding

:

company, paid no tax on 12 billion. I know that that it's

:

holding companies. Probably the only reason that they probably

:

didn't pay any income tax is because of the it's already

:

taxed the intercompany dividend the country what it's called in

:

section something rather than that. Now you the holding

:

company owns all those little companies that do all that sort

:

of. They make all their money and they distribute it back up

:

to the holding company because they've already paid income tax

:

on it. They don't actually have to pay income tax on that. Mhm.

:

Which is probably what they what they're talking about there. You

:

know on 12 points, $2 billion worth of income which is

:

probably all dividends from wholly owned subsidiaries which

:

is eliminated on the income tax. I had that note in there just

:

because again the Courier Mail had an article where they were

:

praising Glencore and how can we help Glencore open more mines

:

and employ more people And isn't it a wonderful company? Yeah, I

:

know. And that was one of the things that really gave me the

:

shits on Sunday when this lady rang me up and that sort of

:

stuff. You know, I do feel sorry for people that ring up and ask

:

me for my opinion because I do give it to them, you know. And

:

they actually said that she actually asked me about the

:

LNP's campaign and that sort of stuff. And then they got on to

:

the Minerals Council when they said that. Is it fair that they

:

have the highest coal royalties in the whole planet? Yeah. And I

:

said yes, because the coal price is historically high. That is

:

why they're paying historically high royalties. I said, that is

:

why. And can we stopped pretending that royalties were

:

tax? Exactly. They're not a tax. No. And people lie. I mean, the

:

Minerals Council lie and call it a tax. It is a tax. It's them

:

purchasing the minerals from the state of Queensland. Exactly. I

:

know. I think Crisafulli has, as agreed he's not changing that in

:

his at least in his first term. Okay. Well, he's not he doesn't

:

get a second, but is. Look, I think we just got to see how

:

badly they're going to fuck it up because they are going to

:

fuck something up. But talking of tax, did anyone see Rupert

:

Grint? He's Rupert Grint. Um, have you watched any of the

:

Harry Potter films? Yes. Yeah. Okay. So. Ron Weasley. Oh, yeah,

:

kid. Yeah. Yeah. So the actor who played him has not been, um,

:

tax writing found or found culpable in a court. He

:

basically had an argument with the Inland Revenue who said, You

:

owe us tax on this money you've earned? And he said, No, no, no,

:

it's.

:

Capital gains. So it's taxed at 10% rather than earned income,

:

which is taxed at 50%. 52%. Mm hmm. And the court found that,

:

no, it was actually earned income. It was probably

:

residuals from his film. And so he's I think, having to pay back

:

four or £5 million. I can't remember the number exactly, but

:

it's certainly in the millions. But to me, the shock was that if

:

if he'd got away with claiming it was capital gains, he only

:

paid 10% on it. Yeah. Yeah. Well we just here have the right

:

don't we. So we just having, we're having the profit on that.

:

That's all we're doing which is the capital gain. You know, the

:

capital gain is basically you've got a gross capital gain and net

:

capital gain. Know back in the old days when you had to

:

calculate the net capital gain, you would actually calculate

:

what the inflated property price was. Then you would pay tax on

:

the profit that you sold it less, the inflated capital gain. Then

:

that was how you calculated that. Now what you do is you take the

:

profit from when you sell it compared to when you bought it

:

and you cut that and to that becomes a net capital gain. Yeah.

:

So you buy a house? Well, for 600,000. Mm hmm. You send 12

:

months later, you sell it for 800,000. Yeah, well, I do it

:

flip. Yeah, 200,000. You got to actually hold it for more than

:

12 months to actually qualify for it. Okay, Let's say 18

:

months in one day or whatever. You've made $200,000. And as a

:

capital gain, you only pay tax only to tax on the 100,000. Oh,

:

makes no sense. It works on long term loans, on short term

:

between a year and whatever. Let's let's say you've got a

:

nominal 10% inflation per year per annum. Mm. As long as you

:

hold it between one and five years you made a profit on the

:

tax

:

paying. What are you saying. I'm saying in five years it would

:

have gone up 50%. What would have. So you buy a property that

:

goes up some percent per annum? Yes. You guys have 10% per annum.

:

Yeah. Okay. If you sell it within five years. Mm. You've

:

made 50% on the house profit. Right. Yeah. Mm hmm. So

:

basically you lose even more. Yeah. Because the ten per st is

:

cumulative saying it's like 110 and then you're making 10% on

:

the 110 and then 10% on the 121. The other saying be even more.

:

Yeah. Mm. But it makes no sense that somebody's income, whether

:

it's that it's capital gain, is somehow taxed less. It doesn't

:

make any sense. I agree with you. It's, it's one of those things I

:

just don't understand why the hell we had to do away with

:

indexation. Yeah. And it also seems that it's paid annually,

:

so there's an assumed capital gain. So it's the current value

:

of the the the asset rather than when you sell it. So you pay

:

your capital gains each year in the UK, say here you only pay it

:

when trigger it, you sell it. Yeah. James says in the chat

:

room, you're assuming it's not your primary residence. That is

:

correct. Of course. Exemption for principal place of residence.

:

Right. Okay. It's good around a few things on the audio version

:

of this. People will hear me read out the article that I

:

think I got banned from MailChimp for.

:

And um, yeah, and as I say, most of the articles end up in the

:

news items on Discord. Yes. So that's another place to see them.

:

Look, in the show notes, if you're interested in becoming

:

part of that defunct email list as it gets resurrected into

:

something else. Mm hmm. Right. Thanks for the chat room for

:

paying attention. We'll be back next week. Talk to you then. Bye

:

for now. And it's a good night for me. And it's good enough,

:

remember? You're not.

:

Okay, So this is the article in the John Menadue blog

:

written by Richard Hill on the 29th of November 2024, which is,

:

I think what got me banned from MailChimp. So putting a link to

:

this article was enough for its system to boot me out. So here

:

we go. The pre-meditated bloodletting in Gaza, the West

:

Bank, Lebanon and many other largely forgotten parts of the

:

world speaks hauntingly of the normalization of death and

:

destruction, largely for cruel, self-serving and illusory

:

reasons. What is occurring in Northern Gaza right now is the

:

most brazen and egregious example of a form of callousness

:

that knows no bounds. It is guided by the delusionary belief

:

that something called national security can be achieved when

:

the polar opposite is the case. The so-called war against Hamas

:

is, in fact the asymmetric and systematic eradication of

:

expendable UN people, so that the select few can live in an

:

illusory haven of peace. The Slaughter without Shame. As

:

Haaretz journalist Gideon Levy observes, is legitimated by the

:

flawed proposition that the demon other can be neutralized

:

and that the most moral army in the world is fighting a

:

righteous war when the reality is murderous, indiscriminate

:

killing. The contrived self appraisal of moral superiority

:

on the part of the Israeli state, supported by its propagandized

:

population, amounts to what criminologists refer to as a

:

technique of moral neutralisation, the aim of which

:

is to explain away culpability. This form of virtue signaling is

:

the culmination of the Zionist state's global marketing

:

campaign, predicated upon the idea that it is a victim state

:

in a war of existential survival. And yet, as Stephen Cohen

:

pointed out long ago, Israel is quintessentially a state in and

:

of denial, denial of its own role in ethnic cleansing and

:

racialized cruelty and denial of the historical circumstances

:

that have produced one of the most violent nations on earth.

:

Norman Finkelstein describes Israel as the lunatic state.

:

More accurately, perhaps it is sole sick a nation characterized

:

by moral pathology that privileges its own exceptional

:

needs above all others. Dear listener, I reckon that

:

paragraph enough was probably what got me banned anyway.

:

There's more to this article. I'll go on. The Zionists, the

:

Zionist states assertion of moral superiority rests on a

:

racialised retelling of history to serve a deeply chauvinistic

:

narrative. Bibi Netanyahu's infamous interview with the

:

Trump light intellectual Jordan Peterson reveals the full

:

spectrum of the self-delusion He claims that the lands now

:

occupied by Israel in 1948 were prior occupation, barren and

:

undeveloped. Assertion starkly at odds with historical reality

:

and deeply insulting. This sort of settler colonial trope is

:

part of the familiar rhetoric of conquerors. Israel's objective,

:

then around circa 1948 and now is to legitimize the

:

establishment of a greater Israel to the north, east and

:

west. It has pummeled, assailed and forcibly remove populations

:

to make way for air conditioned condos, hypermarkets and big

:

tech industries. The West Bank is already awash with such.

:

Meanwhile, the ethnic cleansing continues apace. Care of

:

settlers a.k.a violent occupies

:

a licence to finish the job of this brutal takeover has been

:

granted by the US President. All that remains is to ensure enough

:

weaponry to achieve this end for the Palestinian people. Those

:

who suffered the grotesque realities of genocide, their

:

rights, their dignity, their sense of humanity has been

:

vanquished for the supposedly noble aim of peace and property.

:

But there is nothing noble, decent or just about the

:

slaughter of innocents. We witness all this against the

:

benchmarks of history we've always known, have we not? Of

:

the doublespeak of nations who view themselves as the arbiters

:

of decency. But who. Moment less deploy the weapons and cynical

:

rationalizations. Oh, but who nonetheless deploy the weapons

:

and cynical rationalization of mass murder? Why should we be

:

surprised? These are the same nations that have now had covert

:

operations toppled, democratically elected

:

governments, funded death squads, and illegally invaded sovereign

:

states. When these same nations seek the moral high ground or

:

call for adherence to human rights, justice, whatever, we

:

will remember Gaza in the role they played in its destruction,

:

just as we remember Chile, Iraq, Vietnam, etc., we will look back

:

to and compare the current round of slaughter with past

:

atrocities which today's instigators so readily condemn.

:

I spent much of September visiting various villages, towns

:

and cities across Poland. I gazed at the ghoulish physical

:

reminders of largely vanquished people Polish Jews. Some

:

buildings remain, but the residents have long gone. They

:

were murdered and later expelled. The Jewish Museum in Krakow

:

bears testimony to the countless forgotten and abandoned remnants

:

of a disappeared people that the Polish nation has long struggled

:

to come to terms with. The ruins of synagogues, cemeteries,

:

houses now occupied by others, the death factories, now museums

:

and the killing fields deep in forests are reminders of a past

:

many would prefer to forget. But there is no forgetting.

:

Landscapes speak. Memories resonate through stories and

:

rituals. The UN people of Gaza may one day be wholly erased,

:

swept from their open prisons, but there is no erasing memory.

:

The state of Israel is literally built on the ruins of a former

:

society. New country, new condos, manicured lawns, fountains,

:

supermarkets and the rest will never erase the memory of what

:

has been lost and how this was enacted. There will be a

:

reckoning. It's already begun. Well, The Guardian is not

:

powerful commentary that pulls no punches and

:

can't spread that via MailChimp system because you will be

:

deplatformed anyway. Talk to you next week.

Chapters

Video

More from YouTube