Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Hit The Dec

THE industrious Bamftiger of IMFI Pty Ltd has laid his paws on Robert Kernohan's full stat dec, the one Andrew Bolt was forced to excise from his blog and which figures prominently in the events that inspired the post below.

Go. Read. And celebrate that the days when cowards,censors and the self-interested could sit on the truth are ending.As Glen Reynolds of Instapundit says, the bastards can't beat an army of Davids.

UPDATE: Reader Gab, whose sleuthing and link-hunting helps make Catallaxy's threads so informative, points out that Say No! Carbon Tax For Australia has a version of the stat dec that is somewhat easier on the eyes.

The ABC, Fairfax and Crikey have all been scoffing and chortling about all those "errors" in the Milne column. Well, there is the scandal's fountainhead, clear as day and now popping up all over the internet. So do your jobs, you, ahem, professional journalists with more degrees than a thermometer and the smell of  Jay Rosen still fresh in your brown-tipped nostrils.

Do your jobs, for God's sake. Tell the rest of us point-by-point where and why what Kernohan claims is wrong, disproven or impossible.

Who's kidding who? The only story those useless eaters want to develop is the myth of their own bravery and virtue.

13 comments:

  1. PhillipGeorge(c)2011August 30, 2011 at 6:51 PM

    Prof when Caesars ruled the world was there any more or less obfuscation, smoke, mirrors and intimidation than there is now.
    There is a powerful scene in Oliver Stone's JFK where a meeting in a park takes place and an anonymous informant deliver's this line:
    "They would have killed you already, but you got a lot of light on you."
    Wars are continually being waged. This is perpetual war - nationally on terror - personally on error.
    Do you think all the achievements and responses to Bletchley Park's successes will ever be published/ known.
    With all of the budget's devoted into black hole operations called PsyOps do you think people aren't continually being gotten at.

    A lot of Davids indeed. Well in the real history only one of them with that much light on them was required. How excellent it would be for a real David to stand up now.
    How Australia needs a few good men.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A clearer version can be found here, Professor:

    http://networkedblogs.com/mjQtZ

    ReplyDelete
  3. I guess everyone following this knows, but it appears as if News is not backing off. The news. com.au site reports: "The clash between the national broadsheet newspaper and the prime minister continued today with News Ltd describing Julia Gillard's complaints as pedantic and disappointing"


    Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/julia-gillards-comments-about-the-australian-are-pedantic-disappointing-says-john-hartigan/story-e6frfkvr-1226125773872#ixzz1WVWa0PC1

    ReplyDelete
  4. 'Tis a wonderful sight to see the peasants revolting. Whatever they have done to try to silence the likes of Andrew Bolt is more than likely going to be a greater thorn in their sides than if they had just tried to lay low!!!! The reaction I have seen to Andrew's post this morning has been nothing less than astounding.

    Internet blogging is a wonderful thing for allowing the maximum amount of information to flow but we might need to worry a bit about what could happen with a thing like the NBN.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Wow - interesting developments.

    I have a mate who's a laybore pardy insider here in blandberra and he made some interesting comments about the poisoned dwarf's ability to 'spring' a story when least expected, usually by 'sitting' (often for months) on some piece of info or some quotes obtained from various well connected sources.

    Gathered, one would presume, in his own surreptitious, unobtrusive manner...

    Oh and keep up the outrage, Prof.

    ReplyDelete
  6. PhillipGeorge(c)2011August 30, 2011 at 10:29 PM

    Anonymous,
    maybe you lecture in forensic evidence, documents, fraud and forgery.
    http://networkedblogs.com/mjQtZ

    here are some of those "role-the-eyes" nutters discussing serious problems with the document.

    Of course you can sort them out quite easily with your legal training.

    This doesn't of course mean Barack or Barry wasn't born in the USA. It may mean merely some very serious people are determined to create a great deal of doubt about "everything" that can be reliably ascertained. Why are they doing that is another set of questions that only a theorist would dare speculate on. And I'm not a theorist about non falsifiable assertions; or what must necessarily remain hypothetical.

    One's non falsifiable assertions might be construed as articles of faith - not so scientific. Not so convincing.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This evening PM Gillard addressed a bunch of tame luvvies chosen by the Inner West Courier at a community forum in Strathfield NSW. Peppered with friendly questions by Little Lord Fauntlroy, amongst others, she seemed wan.

    Apparently our debate is becoming "Americanised" with harsh words at No Carbon Rallies but it should be more like Carlton and Collingwood supporters at a game exchanging kind words in between barracking for their side. Yes, she said it.

    Our PM is retreating into a world of fantasy.

    ReplyDelete
  8. A certain PM got $17,000 gift for female clothing as well as house renovations.
    Victorian Hansard:
    http://tex2.parliament.vic.gov.au/bin/texhtmlt?form=VicHansard.dumpall&startpage=52&origquery&query=%28+data+contains+%27ALLAN%27+or+data+contains+%27ALLAN%27+%29+and+%28+members+contains+%27ALLAN%27+or+members+contains+%27ALLAN%27+%29&db=hansard91&dodraft=0&speech=10321&mem_selected=LEIGH&activity=Grievances&title=AWU%3A+funds&date1=28&date2=February&date3=2001

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's all a bit ... is "limp" the word I'm looking for? If I've understood the stat dec correctly, a third party, with no direct involvement, says that Gillard had renos paid for by the AWU. Is there any evidence to back this up? If so, we haven't seen it. If this evidence exists, someone should have uncovered it by now - it would be the year's biggest prize for a journalist or opposition staffer.

    I'd say Gillard's biggest mistake here is not letting this story die a natural death. Raising a ruckus is completely the wrong approach. IMO, just another example of her bad judgement or bad advice.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.August 31, 2011 at 4:50 PM

    Renovations, clothing shops. These are things that exist and are mentioned in Hansard. Ms. Gillard is clearly blameless of any wrongdoing because she has said so and as she is our Prime Minister and above suspicion I believe her. Doubting questionners intent on chasing what is obviously a red herring can ask locals about when renos at her address were done, who was around, who did them? Anyway, who would deny Ms. Gillard renos? I seem to remember a pic inside Ms. G's bleak kitchen causing a lot of comment in women's mags because it wasn't up to much in smarts and habitation. What did the photographers and journos on the shoot think? Maybe no work was done, which wouldn't really add up because she had a receipt for some, didn't she, and paid (or paid back) someone a lot of money for them (not sure who). So are there any visible renos? Any council applications for renos? Even new carpets and blinds? Those dreadful doubters could check if there actually WERE any renos. Who knows what they would think if there were none but she had a receipt for some? Now, about that dress shop with the naff name - Top Togs was it? (our PM wears Carla Zampatti now): anyone been to see if it's still there (replaced by a laundromat maybe?) and if so does anyone there remember a big spending customer (that's a lot of dresses in $ of 15 years ago and given our PM's unfairly maligned proportions, getting a good fit for that amount of clothing 'off the peg' would have been hard; any 'special orders?'). Who owns or owned this shop? Clearly, as I have said above, the Hansard story is not true and Ms. Gillard is falsely implicated. It's just that some senior guy in a stat dec links that address with receipt of a large amount of stolen money and says it was for clothes for Ms. Gillard. Nonsense, it was probably for something else altogether - the whole thing is just another red herring. I'm sure those wretched investigative career promoters won't get far. But you know these journos, they'll try anything for a story. Even smelly red fish.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Rubberduck ... perhaps you could ask Christine Wallace why she trashed her biography of Gillard. Might shed some light if she answered.
    http://www.news.com.au/national/no-explanations-as-julia-gillard-book-is-dumped/comments-e6frfkvr-1226073655327

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous, I would love to find out more about the Christine Wallace biography. I'm hoping it will be released in coming months, as a "rise and fall" narrative. But will anyone be interested? I don't think I'd bother reading a biography of Kevin Rudd, somehow.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Elizabeth
    It might not be a red herring, but rather a sockeye salmon returning to spawn.
    http://www.oceanlight.com/spotlight.php?img=26175

    Cheers

    ReplyDelete