Should we allow David Icke into Australia

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/dec/17/david-icke-fans-say-his-australian-visa-application-is-being-deliberately-delayed?CMP=soc_567


Short answer is that in my opinion, even scumbags like Icke have the freedom of speech.

Who killed the PM?

And Now Our Nightmare Has Ended?

I haven't posted anything since Malcolm Turnbull took over as PM of Australia. The reason is simple. I had nothing to say you couldn't read hundreds of other places, including the mainstream media. I can change that now.

There has been a great deal of questioning of the media's role in Australian political life. Both traditional and social media have been blamed for the new unstable era of Australian politics. I think it's a nonsense pedaled by angry and scared politicians who barely comprehend what in happening and so blame the media, not their own behavior.

The day of 14/09/15 will always be remembered by political tragics as the day Tony Abbott fell, but whether it becomes a sea-change event in the life of our nation is still an open question.

The way the media in Australia treated this event was telling, best summed up by the reaction on Q&A when the results of the Liberal Party votes came through.

Listen to the audience reaction. First there is an audible intake of breath at the news the result was in, then a long sigh of relaxation as they realise the result has gone the way they hoped. Thank God for that they seemed to say. Even bearing in mind the bias of a Q&A audience (Malcolm Turnbull is the darling of Q&A crowd) it's pretty clear that Australia wanted this change. The voters of Canning that weekend certainly showed their appreciation, with election results rising 5% for the Coalition over predicted pre Turnbull levels.

Social media lit up with the #putoutyouronions hashtag going viral. This was an unpopular leader being given a bronx cheer on the way out. In short Australia wanted him gone.

Overseas the reaction was more concerned. Most non Australian media which covered the situation raised an important issue. Malcolm Turnbull was the 5 Australian PM in 5 years. What was causing this instability in a nation that has low(ish) unemployment, never entered recession during the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), a fairly low level of debt (although action was necessary) and reasonably good fundamentals.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipdFbtFVe7o

So what is going on here? After 3 PM's between 1983 and 2007, we have now had 5 between 2007 and today. Has the Australian public changed so much between 2007 and 2015 that new rules apply, or is there something else going on here?

I would suggest that while there have been many changes in Australian society since the turn of the century, social media has been the most powerful one. Many people now have their news filtered through Facebook. They wake up and check their account to see what has happened during the night and early morning. I know i do. My Facebook account is filled with stories from ABC, BBC, CNN and the Guardian to name just a few. What I don't see is The Daily Telegraph, The Herald Sun, Fox News etc. Why not? Well 2 reasons:

1. The News Corp sites all have a paywall, so I can see the headline and the 1^st paragraph mostly, but that's it
2. The News Corp sites all give me a headache when I try to engage with ideas I fundamentally dislike at 7am.

My Facebook friends tend to skew in a similar political directions, so they are likely to share and like stories of the same political persuasion as me. From the refugee advocate who works for a minor political party and shares the latest stories of the horrific things going on in Detention Camps on Nauru and Manus Island to the Labor Party local government Councillor who is globally aware and posts about interesting labor market issues in North America in particular given he has a spouse from Canada. Indeed it's quite jarring when someone posts something not from this mindset.

It's easy to be caught in an echo chamber under these circumstances. But here's the thing. I think one thing tends to pull us out of an echo chamber better than any other force. Employment. Employment in a non-political role means you must interact with people with all different types of political opinion. Sometimes you meet people vilified in the mainstream and social media. Personally I developed real affection for the sassy Muslim girl who was always 1 step ahead of me as her manager, or the refugee, who was my boss and was the most driven man I have ever met. Then there was the damaged conservative bloke who had seen it all before and used to roll his eyes at my crazy ideas, but was quick with a joke and would explain to me how my idea would screw up everything..... It's these interactions that are the antidote to the echo chamber. Real people.

So I don't think that the echo chamber effect is responsible for some massive change in the Australian voting public. There are some Australians caught in an echo chamber, but they tend to be career politicians and media types(only interacting with people like them), retirees and the unemployed/disenfranchised. It's no coincidence that the stereotype of the typical racist is an old racist bloke listening to Ray Hadlee and Alan Jones. He gets no other input. Of course he's going to fear muslims and refugees, he's never met either and all the voices in his echochamber are afraid.

Which leads us back to the political class and the echo chamber. These people don't have the balancing factor that is employment. They only interact with like-minded individuals. It's this that I see as the cause of all the instability in recent years. Take the ousting of Kevin Rudd.

The Rudd Government had been quite popular and Kevin in particular was well liked as a PM. The Rudd Government had made Climate Change Action a top priority. Rudd forced then opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull to back his plan for an ETS. Turnbull agreed, but was deposed in favor of Tony Abbott by the God fearing, science denying nutjobs that form the right in the Liberal Party.

How did these people become science denying idiots?

1. Self deception. If 97% of doctors say I have lung cancer and need chemotherapy, I should go to get the treatment I need. What i shouldn't do is up my cigarette intake and hope for the best.
2. The Echo Chamber. Everyone I know seems to agree with me that 97% of doctors are wrong and we should smoke more because we have bought shares in the tobacco company and a rising sea level lifts all boats....
3. The Death of Intellectual Curiosity. If you are deceiving yourself about the above, you won't want to hear anything about cancer at all because deep down you know you are deceiving yourself and any information that confirms the truth is both to be rejected and feared.

So the echo chamber can reinforce the self deception that we all indulge in from time to time. However when you are a powerful group faction in the Government it becomes highly dangerous and causes terrible damage.

Case One

Rudd has placed a great deal of work and hope on the Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen in 2009. He had even been given a special role by the chairman (The Danish PM) to rally support for real reform. Then the climate summit at Copenhagen happened. The world was not ready to come along with us. Rudd then fumbled around for some time before dropping climate change in the "too hard" basket. Voters were angry and his polling numbers dropped precipitously.

Most 1^st term governments become unpopular in Australia. John Howard in particular had a tough 1^st term with lousy polling, but was returned after laying out a plan for financial reform. The last public opinion poll of the 1^st Rudd Government had Labor leading 52%-48% Two Party Preferred (TPP). Rudd was still a popular PM in the prime of his power.

But Rudd had never been liked inside the party. He was abrasive, dismissive, made too many "captains calls" and became a hated man. An Anti Rudd faction began to form. They got there hands on some "dire" internal polling that claimed Rudd could not win the next election. So they gathered the numbers and rolled him. It was quick, clean and made Australia cry out in unison WHAT THE FUCK?

You will notice that the media played little to no role in Rudd's downfall. There was little speculation leading up to it, it was all the politicians. The Labor Party acted in a shallow, unprofessional, vindictive and immature fashion. So anyone counselling that the new instability since 2007 is the media's fault (be it mainstream media or social) has little evidence to back their theory from Rudd's demise.

Case Two

Julia Gillard took this shambles of a political party to minority government in the election of July 2010. Rudd refused to step down and resign from Parliament as deposed PM's are expected to do and his strategic leaking of sensitive information about Julia Gillard's positions in cabinet under his Prime Ministership. After the election he was appointed foreign minister, but he never really gave Gillard a chance to chart her own course because he was sniping and undermining her every step of the way. Which was his plan all along. Tony Abbott and Pete Credlin have both claimed credit for the defeat of Julia Gillard but the truth is the Liberal Party didnt defeat her. Rudd did. Of course the News Limited papers sniped every day and wore away at her, but without the underlying instability of having a highly popular PM doing everything he can to destroy her from the ministry and then the back bench, all the negativity from the media would have mattered very little. Julia's downfall was not due to the media reporting she was in trouble, the trouble was already there. Blonde bespectacled trouble. Rudd and his supporters are totally to blame for the instability from 2010-2013. Not Murdoch, not Twitter, but Kevin Rudd.

Case 3

Kevin Rudd took over again in 2013 in time for the 2013 election in an attempt to salvage the situation and "save the furniture". He got his wish. He defeated Julia Gillard and was PM again. For less then 3 months. He achieved his goal of destroying Julia Gillard's Prime Ministership but the fallout was completly predictable. The Australian voters were completly sick of the soap opera. Anyone arguing that the Labor Party deserved another term were kidding themselves and Australia gave them the kicking they deserved. Anyone blaming the media for Rudd's second demise really has issues with reality.

Case 4

Tony Abbott ran the worse government I can remember. He systematically destroyed his credibility with bizarre and ridiculous pronouncements. He had the most obvious case of echo chamber fever I have ever seen. Australia saw it to. He surrounded himself with like-minded individuals so much that his cabal seemed to regard anyone with slightly varying opinions to the norm as an enemy. Then he alienated anyone who disagreed with his bizarre views, picked fights with absolutly everyone and his administration blamed their mistakes on everybody but them. He had to go. Turnbull was the logical candidate to replace him, giving 5 PM's in 5 years. Once again, it wasn't Twitter, Facebook, the Fairfax Press or the ABC who brought Abbott down, it was his bizarre take on reality.

The Echo Chamber

To come full circle Turnbull was the PM change outside of the election that we wanted, indeed yearned for. Of course Turnbull's premiership was not universally greeted with joy.

http://www.ntnews.com.au/news/opinion/opinion-why-you-made-a-big-mistake-not-appreciating-tony-abbott/story-fnk0b216-1227549538389

Now Andrew Bolt can say we made a mistake if he wants, but that's because Bolt is a reality denying nutjob. He works in and actually contributes to the right wing nutty echo chamber. He says it's our fault, but he is wrong, it's not our fault we derided at Tony. He did dumb things. He deserved to be laughed at.

Of course, the fault lies with Tony. But there is one more thing. The fault of creating the echo chamber, that's Bolt and his mates at the Murdoch Press They are the enablers. They created the conditions where Abbott thought he was doing a reasonable job at reflecting the country's values, but people like Bolt, Ray Hadlee and Alan Jones don't speak for me. In fact they don't speak for the majority of Australian, they speak for a very small minority of Australia. That is the truth that Bolt, Hadlee and Ackerman forget, when they write, often it's not us the public at large they are persuading, its the politicians who are living in the echo chamber.

The Syrian Refugee Crisis

Syrian Refugee Crisis- How did we get here and what should we do now?

Its only now coming into the Australian public conscience that there is a refugee crisis in Syria. The war that caused this crisis started in 2011 within the context of the Arab Spring. However there is a wider context which should inform Australia's reaction.

From Rome to the Ottomans

Here is a map of the region in 1914. You'll notice that there is no Syria. The whole area of modern Syria was controlled by the Ottoman Empire. In fact no matter how far back into history you go, you won't find the state of Syria. You will find the area of Syria held by the Mamluks, Ayyubid, French, English and the Romans.

Anzac Day 1915

During WWI the Ottoman Turks aligned themselves with the Germany and Austria-Hungary. Winston Churchill conceived of a plan to knock the Ottoman Turks out of the war. So on April 25 1915 Allied forces landed on the Gallipolli Peninsula in Turkey.

A British led local campaign was also started against Ottoman holings in the Levant. This campaign was made famous by T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia).

Australian forces were also involved in another campaign, winning a famous victory at Beersheba and peeling it off the Ottoman Empire (the charge of the Light Horsemen).

Faced with this kind of pressure both to their Imperial holdings and to their homeland the Ottomans fell back. The British and the French were very keen to gain a foothold in this area. Britain in particular had decided the oilfields of Mesopotamia (Iraq) would benefit from British rule especially.

Treaty of Versailles

At the end of the war Syria and Lebanon were given to France. The border between Syria and Iraq was layed down arbitrarily. The border took no account of the local populace's needs, only the needs of France and Britain were considered. People were cut off from one another in the same way that Berliners were when the Berlin wall went up.

France Breaks the Deal

In 1936 France and Syria negotiated a treaty of independence, however France refused to ratify it. This didn't stop the Syrians, who duly elected a President. The momentum for a free and Democratic Syria was building.

WWII

Syria passed to Vichy France in 1940. It was then re-occupied in 1941 by the British and Free French forces during WWII. Sadly the French forces had no intention of leaving.

A Difficult Birth

The French forces bombed Damascus and tried to arrest the democratically elected leaders of Syria in may 1945. However world opinion had turned and on 24 October 1945 The United Nations was ratified with Syria as a founding member. This is the founding date of the Syrian Republic. Remember that France, Syria's last colonial power fought tooth and nail every step of the journey\ towards independence, but happily was unable to stop the founding of the Syrian nation.

United Arab Republic

Syria joined with Egypt in 1958 to form the United Arab Republic. Egypt President Gamal Abdul Nassar was extremly popular for standing up to Britain and was advocating for a Pan Arab identity and nation. The national merger was ratified by popular referendum. However this experiment did not work as intended. It was brought to a halt in 1961 when disgruntled army officers enguaged in Coup D'etat to bring back the Syrian Republic. This pan arab failure, was self inflicted.

Self Inflicted Injuries

The 1960's were a tumultuous time in Syrian affairs. Their were military coups in 1961, 1963, 1966 and 1970. This final Coup was instituted by Hafez Al-Assad. His son Bashar Al-Assad is president of Syria to this day.

One Party State

Hafez Al-Assad instituted a one party state. He promoted people of his own ethnicity (alawite) in the intelligence agency. By doing this the Alawites could dominate the Sunni's approx 70% of the population with 15% approx Shia. A mirror image of Saddam Husseins Iraq. Al Assad's regime was brutal, but it did provide stability in a nation that needed it.

George Bush

In 2003 George W Bush's USA invaded Iraq. There actually were 4 nations who provided troops. The USA, The UK, Australia and Poland. The invasion was nominally to disarm Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, but in truth it was a campaign to defeat Saddam Hussein and gain access to the same oil fields that the UK had coveted 85 years before. A third stated objective was to plant a western style democracy in the middle east.

Win The War But Lose The Peace

The Alliance had no problem brushing aside the forces of Saddam Hussein s Iraq. However, once the Alliance held the nation it was difficult thing to control it. As Saddam Hussein knew only too well, Iraq was a disparate set of peoples, who had no real bond to remain together in a nation. It could only be held down by violence and fear. Soon the country erupted into chaos.

ISIS in Iraq

Iraq was held down by the Sunni minority. Some 30% or so of the population controlled the other 70%. when the USA implemented a voting republic, it failed to conceive the danger. The majority Shiites formed by far the largest group in the Iraqi Parliament and elected the President. The Shiite President was unable to work with the Sunni's. Being in the minority, the Sunni's worried that it was only a matter of time until the Shiites (whom they had ruled since the treaty of Versailles) turned on them and committed genocide. This is the catalyst which makes ISIS so dangerous, they feel if they lose, they will be wiped out.

Back to Syria

Remember those borders between states laid down in 1919? When Syria was running smoothly, it could still manage to keep the undesirables out. But then the Arab Spring happened. Suddenly the majority Sunni's were marching on the streets. The government cracked down hard. The reason was simple and logical. They knew they were the minority and they believed that if they allowed the majority to rule there might well be a genocide committed on them. That's why chemical weapons were used so early in the conflict. It also destroyed Syria's capability to keep the border closed to the warriors of the civil war in Iraq.

Unification

So we had a minority Sunni militia fearing genocide in Iraq (ISIS) and we had a majority Sunni militia who had been the target of WMD's in Syria. We also had a porous border between the 2 nations so that the 2 wars unified into one enormous CLUSTERFUCK.

Back to the Original Question

So how are we in Australia to react to the refugee crisis erupting out of Syria now. Well I'd suggest some self reflection for a start. I would suggest that we have been used by the dominate empires of the day in their empire building. However, some nations seem to have a special responsibility to the Syrian people today.

Debt of Empire - France

France really should be taking a larger amount of the refugees. From 1920 until 1950 France fought for the right to exploit the Syrian people and land for it's resources. Now is the time to pay that debt.

Debt of Stupidity – USA

What in God's name George W Bush and his idiotic VP Dick Cheney thought they would accomplish when they invaded Iraq and de-stabilised the whole region will be a question that vexes historians thousands of years from now. The debt of stupidity has come due. It's time for the USA to pay through showing it's humanity, not its engines of war. 

Debt of Ages – Turkey

I would say that Turkey owes Syria a great deal and it's time to pay up, but then look at the nation doing the heavy lifting here.....

Debt of Enabling – Britain

Britain helped France in peeling Syria away from the Ottoman Empire. It also helped the USA in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. A special mention for the nation who sent in soldiers in to take over Iraq in 1920 and then sent their great grandsons and daughters back there in 2003. Learning nothing in the preceding 83 years. This crisis comes at a time when Britain is troubled by isolationist ratbags(some of them in the government), but humanity needs to prevail and the debt needs to be paid.

Debt of Fear

Australia has meddled in middle eastern affairs almost since federation. A nation on the far side of the world, we fought hard to open up Syria for western plunder. We campaigned in Palestine, Turkey and Iraq for oil Britain and the USA. Why did we do this? Ultimately I think we did it because we were afraid of the world without our big protector, so were always at their beck and call. It's a shame we are so afraid, but also means we owe Syria. Suffering from a leader who makes George Bush look like Albert Einstein whether humanity will prevail here is definitely an open question.

Don't Tread on Me!

How do we Interpret Operation Fortitude?

On Friday 28^th August at 9:52 am Victoria Police issued a statement about an upcoming operation to crack down on anti-social behavior that weekend. These operations are nothing new and quite routine. The operation was to involve Victoria Police, Yarra Trams, The Sheriffs Office, Taxi Service Commission, Metro Trains and the Australian Border Force (ABF).

ABF is a relatively new organisation (it was formed by a merger in July 2015 of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service and the Department of Immigration and Border Protection. It was modeled on two organisations. Border Force UK and the American Department of Homeland Security.

At 10:14am The ABF released its own statement. It read:

ABF joining inter-agency outfit to target crime in Melbourne CBD

28-08-2015 - 

This weekend Australian Border Force (ABF) officers will for the first time join forces with a diverse team of transport and enforcement agencies to target crime in the Melbourne Central Business District (CBD) as part of Operation Fortitude.

Tonight and tomorrow evening (Friday 28 and Saturday 29 August 2015) Metro Trains, Yarra Trams, the Sheriff’s Office, Taxi Services Commission and the ABF will join Victoria Police as part of the inter-agency operation.

With a particular focus on people travelling to, from and around the CBD, the group of agencies will work together to support the best interests of Melbournians, targeting everything from anti-social behaviour to outstanding warrants.

ABF Regional Commander Victoria and Tasmania, Don Smith, is proud the ABF will be participating in the operation.

“While the ABF regularly conducts a range of compliance field-work, this is the first time we’ve been involved in an inter-agency operation of this nature and we’re very proud be able to support each of our organisations to achieve our common mission of promoting a secure and cohesive society here in Melbourne.”

“ABF officers will be positioned at various locations around the CBD speaking with any individual we cross paths with,” Mr Smith said.

“You need to be aware of the conditions of your visa; if you commit visa fraud you should know it’s only a matter of time before you’re caught out.” (Emphasis Mine)

The inter-agency outfit will continue to work together on an ongoing basis to target crime in and around the Melbourne CBD to make the city a safer place for everyone.

Media opportunity

Operation Fortitude will be launched by representatives from each participating agency at 2pm today (Friday 28 August 2015) on the steps of Flinders Street Railway Station.

ENDS

I have bolded the text which caused the issue. The Australian Border Force told Melbourne that they would be speaking to "individuals we cross paths with". Here it certainly sounded like Border Force were jackbooting around Melbourne, approaching anyone they meet and demanding "Papers Please".

Social media went into meltdown. The hashtag #borderforce trended worldwide. The ABF statement was both incredibly offensive and pointed to illegal behavior on the part of Border Force. A protest was organised at the spot the press conference was to be held. This was Flinders Street Station steps. The beating heart of the city. Traffic was stopped and rail commuters were confronted with placard waving leftist protesters screaming chants like "refugees are welcome, Border Force is not".

Border Force looked to clarify their position quickly and sent out 4 tweets to calm the storm they had created.

The ABF will assist Victoria Police in an operation to target crime in the #Melbourne CBD this weekend 1/4

ABF officers will assist partner agencies by conducting background visa checks on individuals who are referred to us 2/4

The ABF does not and will not stop people at random in the streets & does not target on the basis of race, religion, or ethnicity 3/4

@DIBPAus has regularly conducted compliance activity of this nature in the past. This responsibility will now be continued by ABF 4/4

ABF then tweeted a link to a longer statement.

28-08-2015 -

The Australian Border Force (ABF) will not be ‘stopping people at random’ in Melbourne to ‘check people’s papers’ as reported in media this morning regarding Operation Fortitude.

As stated in this morning’s press release, the ABF will be assisting in a joint operation led by Victoria Police in Melbourne this weekend.

To be clear:

• This is a joint agency operation led by Victoria Police. 
• The ABF will assist other agencies in this operation by conducting background visa checks on individuals who are referred to us by Victoria Police and other agencies.
• The ABF is but one of eight agencies assisting in this operation.
• The ABF does not and will not stop people at random in the streets and does not target on the basis of race, religion, or ethnicity.
• Joint operations of this type are common and were previously conducted by Departmental immigration officers.

ABF activity will occur at only two of the numerous locations where Operation Fortitude will be carried out in the Melbourne CBD this weekend.
Media Operations:
(02) 6264 2244

Very quickly Victoria Police (who were in charge of the operation) cancelled the press conference and then cancelled the whole operation. The tone of the comment on social media changed quickly as well. The hashtag #borderforce was replaced by #borderfarce. People were no longer angry, but poked huge amount of fun at the bungled operation.

Border Force went from looking like Heinrich Himmler to Sgt Shultz in minutes. But in the cold light of day, how should we react to this event?

What Went Wrong?

This operation was led by Victoria Police. The legality of Operation Fortitude is quite solid. These operations are routine and legal. Border Force were only part of the operation behind the scenes where Vic Police would bring people they picked up to check visa status. This is Legal. In my opinion it's also a reasonable use of resources.

But Mr Don Smith the head of Victoria and Tasmania Border Force in writing the offending media statement massivly overplayed both Border Force's role in Operation Fortitude and issued the type of menacing statement more expected in Soviet Russia than Liberal Australia.

Either Mr Smith believed this is how the operation would be undertaken, which as an illegal operation would be either grossly incompetent or show an astounding indifference towards the law which is quite explicit that Border Force require "reasonable suspicion of violation of immigration law", or he knew that he described an illegal operation, but hoped no-one would notice.

Law Enforcement agencies always push legal boundaries. It is in the nature of the job. We tell Law enforcement officer to do a job, but in the name of freedom, we make it harder for them by requiring them to get warrants etc. This is the tension Law Enforcement and Legislative Government are required to balance. It is a balance that the Abbott Government has tipped massively against freedom and towards Law Enforcement.

The Abbott Government has flat-lined almost terminally in the polls. Only one issue raises a murmur in the polls from the dead heart of the voting public. National Security. It didn't go unnoticed by Abbott and his colleagues that the more he makes Australia scared, the more votes he gets.

According to Laura Tingle Tony Abbott is trying to capitalise in this fact by delivering one defense/security "announcable" per week until the election. This Operation Fortitude participation is one of those announcables. I think it's quite likely that Don Smith was told to overstate Border Force's role in Operation Fortitude by his management under pressure from the Federal Government.

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/tony-abbott-is-creating-a-whitlam-government-of-our-time-20150814-giyzku.html

So the Border Force press release and the press conference were intended to make Melbourne feel safe from the scourge of immigrants, by threatening immigrants. They showed such an amazing tone deafness to a city of immigrants that one immediately has to suspect the Abbott Government's hand.

Most of the commentariat fell into their well worn rolls talking about this issue. The right wingers laughed at how anyone could imagine jackbooted thugs on the streets of Melbourne. This was all just a beat-up about a badly worded press release. They were right. The left wingers railed against the militarism of Border Force and their leaders. They were also correct.

DON'T TREAD ON ME!

Something significant occured on friday. Border Force collectivly threatened Melbourne. They told Melbourne they would be checking visa's at random. The press release not only could be read that way, but In my opinion was intended to be read that way. Melbourne Said "No". A line was drawn in the sand that will make it more difficult for another government to cross. When push came to shove Melbourne stared back at the bully and declared "DON'T TREAD ON ME"!

Why Tony Abbott Must Resign

Why Tony Abbott Must Resign

This blog is intended to say something original. I don't post every day because I cant always come up with an original idea every day. But today i'm going to echo the blogosphere and the people at large and call for Tony Abbott to step down as PM. We all know he won't go willingly, but in the end he must go.

My Charges Against Mr Abbott

He has used executive power against political opponents:

Tony Abbott has broken convention in using the power of Royal Commissions to attack his political opponents. Royal Commissions are established by the Governor general on the advice of the Government of the day. They are controlled by the Prime Minister.

The first Commission I have a problem with is the Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Scheme. Abbott dragged Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd and Peter Garrett into a quasi court in a bid to punish them after their time in Government. Their only crime? To be on the left of the political spectrum.

The Home Insulation Scheme was a policy of the Rudd Govt to insulate home free of charge in an attempt to reduce heating costs, lower greenhouse gas emissions, stimulate the economy after the global financial crisis and lower unemployment. In order to overcome the looming recession caused by global financial crisis this programme had to move quickly.

Mistakes were assuredly made. Contractors cut corners. Some roofs were accidentally electrified and some homes were burned down. 4 people died in this programme. But Mr Rudd/Ms Gillard and Mr Garrett most certainly didn't light those fires or electrocute those workers. That was shoddy work from contractors breaking the law.

Even John Howard was uncomfortable with this kind of political punishment.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/john-howard-uneasy-over-royal-commissions-into-labor-policies/story-fn59niix-1227058304540

But making his former mentor uncomfortable didn't deter Mr Abbott from a second Royal Commission. This one was into the union movement. There was some evidence of corruption in the Union movement, more has been brought to light by the Royal Commission, but the real reason behind having it was to get Bill Shorten on the stand and make him look untrustworthy by flinging mud at him. It was working to a degree until news of the Commissioner Dyson Heydon's agreement to speak at a Liberal Party fundraiser. The fact that he hasn't recused himself yet is just dumb. Because as the illustrious Judge has proclaimed himself:

"It is fundamental to the administration of justice that the judge be neutral,.......It is for this reason that the appearance of departure from neutrality is a ground of disqualification … because the rule is concerned with the appearance of bias, and not the actuality, it is the perception of the hypothetical observer that provides the yardstick."

So in my opinion, this Royal Commission was set up to smear Bill Shorten. It's fundamentally a political operation of the Liberal Party and no High Court Judge should have taken the job. The judge they got was biased because you have to put good party men in the job if you want the correct outcome I.E. The smearing of the opposition leader.

So Mr Abbott is misusing executive power to attack his enemies.

Why does this matter? The misuse of executive power to attack political opponents is a reoccurring theme throughout history and almost always leads to dysfunctional governments. It was a large part of the reason that the Roman Republic became ungovernable as a Republic and led to the installation of the Emperors.

 In France the atrocities committed by the Committee for Public Safety began as attacks on their enemies through highly legal means.

I'm not saying that Tony Abbott is a dictator (far from it), but that he is planting seeds that the next PM and the next and the next might abuse.

A second problem is that it leads to an arms race. Abbott will probably lose the next election. Do you think Bill Shorten might retaliate in kind? It's highly likely. I'd suggest a Royal Commission into the Nauru detention centre allegations is likely to happen. As it should. But it should happen because of the groundswell of public opinion as was the case over the Royal Commission into the Catholic Church's abuse of children.

Soon I can foresee a time where PM's will be faced with the prospect of jail time after they lose power. That's the very threat that lead Julius Caesar to cross the Rubicon and bring civil war to the Roman Republic. A war the Republic did not survive.

It's not the next few years I worry about, but a steady escalation of the political arms race. That leads to disfunction and blockage. I hope 50 or 100 years into the future historians won't look back on the Abbott years as an Australian crossing of the rubicon that led to Parliamentary disfunction and years of turmoil.

None of this will happen if Abbott admits he was wrong to prosecute politics by judiciary and hands over the reigns of leadership to someone else.

Roger Ailes - Losermaker

Who can save the Republicans?

Last week in the build up to the 1^st set of Republican Debates I opined that the American Right have tied themselves a Gordian Knot. The Gordian Knot was tied by the king of Phyrigia. Whoever untied the knot would be king of Phyrgia. This mythical knot was impossible to undo. However when Alexander the Great arrived in Phrygia he simply pulled out his sword and cut the knot. It's a metaphor for lateral thinking. It applies to the Republican Party in the 2016 election.

Remember that this party has won one presidential election legitimately since 1988. That of 2004. And that was during a time of war. In 2000 Al Gore won both the popular vote and after all the votes were counted in Florida won that state, but Florida's Supreme Court (installed by Bush's brother) ruled that counting was to stop before all votes were counted.

Basically there are 3 factors stopping the Republican Party adapting to a changing and latinising America.

1. The Echo Chamber:

It has been consistently shown that people who watch Fox News are far more likely to be badly informed and factually wrong. Of course it isn't just Fox News, the radio is full of conservative Rush Limbaugh wannabes reverberating to whatever tune the echo chamber is singing today. 

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/study-watching-fox-news-makes-you-less-informed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5

Sadly this applies to lawmakers as well as voters. Witness Mitt Romney repeat Fox News talking points about Benghazi as fact in the 2012 presidential debates and feel the cold sting of reality seconds later.

2. Gerrymandering:

The Republican voter lives in this Republican Echo Chamber. The continued Gerrymandering of seats by both Republican and Democratic Parties means that Republican House members almost all sit in safe districts, which means they cant lose to Democrats, but they can lose their seat to other Republicans. Other Republicans who live in a fact averse echo chamber. This ultimately pushes the party to the right far beyond the American populace.

3. Free Trade Effect

As America pursues Economic Liberalism and worldwide level playing field it's workers wages have not grown in real world terms in 40 years. The Republicans white working class core voter has not done well under this regime. Bad times always push voters to the political right. A right wing fact averse echo chamber tells them who to blame. Pushing them furthor right. They then reinforce the feedback those in the echo chamber recieve and the whole process becomes a vicious cycle.

The problem for the Republican Party is that these factors are driving them further and further from the American mainstream.

Fox News is a money making concern and lobbying tool. If you think Rupert Murdoch's thinking about whats best for America you're sadly mistaken. Everything he does is for Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation.

Back to the Gordian Knot

Republicans are watching the country they know and love slip slowly away from them. It's a distressing feeling. Every elections minorities become more and more powerful. The voting power of non whites increased from 24% to 26% between the 2008 and 2012 Presidential elections. Women make up 50% of the population, but Republicans struggle to speak to minorities and women.

Last presidential election Republican Candidates failed atrociously to speak about women and minorities. Watch Todd Aitkin completely blunder his way through this interview and talk about "Legitimate Rape" whatever that is and completely fails to understand biology, seemingly believing in magic vaginas.

Who can Untie the Gordian Knot?

While this far right culture predominates in the Republican Party the party itself will continue to dominate the mid-terms, but completely fail to win the Presidency. What is needed is a new type of Republican who can carry the bulk of the party, but bring large numbers of women and minorities back to the party of Abraham Lincoln. Then the established party needs to accept these new recruits. This needs to happen, because a 2 party democracy with only 1 healthy party leads to an unhealthy country.

.

Roger Ailes-Losermaker

It was notable that Fox News chose the 10 candidates in the 1^st debate. The debate's, makeup was ultimately chosen by Roger Ailes, the head of Fox News. Fox of course is seen as a natural home for the Republican Party Debate. But Fox News will lose out if someone breaks the echo chamber. They have no incentive to back reasonable candidates and every incentive to ensure the status quo. While the candidates in the debate were fairly chosen, they included 2 former Fox talking heads and did not include Carly Fiorina, who's performance on the under-card debate might just have won her promotion to prime time for next time

Carly Fiorina

Carly Fiorina performed well during the under-card debate, which Fox happily filmed inside an empty stadium to make these candidates look irrelevant. Despite that, Carly Fiorina (ex Hewlett Packard) exec. might be the one able to move the Republican Party back into health. Hopefully as a no-nonsense businesswoman, she recognises an echo-chamber when she see's one.

Marco Rubio

Marco Rubio performed well enough in the debate to earn a slot in the next one. As a Cuban American, he might just have the lightness of touch to bring Latino's in without alienating the party establishment.

As for the rest.....not an original thought amongst them. None of them will beat Clinton next year. None of those can untie this knot.