The APEC conference is being held in Sydney later this year. Virtually everyone who's anyone (the who's who of world leaders) is going to be there.

Security has been stepped up, perhaps understandably as potential terrorists may see this as an opportunity to big to miss.

So the whole city's to be locked down for the duration. Of course, no-one has told the city traders yet. They are all still in the dark in terms of road closures and opening/closing times for their businesses.

And in another security measure, mobile phone signals will be blocked during Bush's visit to Sydney to prevent any bombs being set off remotely. This raises an issue.

What if someone needs to contact emergency medical services and they're in an area where public booths aren't immediately accessible? If someone has a heart attack for example. The time it takes to find a public booth and call for help may be all it takes to see the victim run out of time.
As opposed to having a mobile phone present with which the emergency services can be contacted immediately.

Why do you think ambulances have lights and sirens and race through red lights and such? Because sometimes seconds make the difference between life and death.

But no, in order to protect the glorious president, the ordinary man has to settle for second best and trust to luck. His life, potentially, is being sacrificed to protect the life of someone considered more important. That this person of importance is waging war on whomever he chooses, we'll just forget for the moment.

And as further protection for 'Der Fuhrer', there is now legislation to be passed allowing body searches to be employed on persons within a certain 'zone'. Whether this comprises 'pat downs' as in airports or full 'empty out the pockets', hasn't yet been clarified.
My first response to this, and perhaps no surprise to those who know me, was get fucked, pal, you're not searching me like I'm some sort of criminal. On further reflection though, I reconsidered airports and found that the priniciple of pat downs as a security measure wasn't actually offensive to me.
However, what IS, is that this new law (a new law, for God's sake) is at the bequest of George Dubya.
And that, dear readers, is what returns me to my intial reaction and the one I shall embrace while the big nobs are in town. I'll do a few nights in lock up before I'll let someone search ME!!
What's more disturbing is that I, and probably many more people, am not surprised at this.

*Sound of trumpets*

Well, this is the hundredth post. I feel like I should make it special in some way; mark the occasion as it were. Hmmm...

I know - a nice story.

I was driving down the road the other day when I happened across a crested cockatoo sitting in the fast lane in obvious stunned distress. I supposed it had been winged by a car as it had its right wing lying loosely on the road. As I pulled over and the traffic roared past I watched the bird sway under the wash and knew the stricken animal's days were very shortly numbered.

So out into the traffic I raced, waving at the drivers to slow down while I rescued the unfortunate cockatoo.
Which wasn't happy and started squawking like it was being murdered as I lifted it and started back to my car, dodging horn blaring irate drivers (I so wanted to give them 'the bird' but my hands were full so I just yelled obsenities). Reaching the car, I must have looked a sight trying to hold onto this panicked bird as it frantically beat its (rather large actually this close) wings in a desperate attempt at flight. Several times in the subsequent seconds I took a full wing to the face. Then, discovering it couldn't flee, it turned on the offensive and clamped its beak round a finger. I was thinking right about now that it might just do having the damn thing for dinner.
Opening the door with one hand while attempting to control the freaked bird with the other wasn't easy I can tell you as the feathered one went totally apeshit when I held it tight to my chest while I opened the door.
All the while - SQUAAWK, SQUAAWK, SQUAAWK!!!
But, I managed and got the door open and proceeded to set the bird on the seat. Charlie, as I named him/her/it, (I'm not sure, we weren't THAT close) was still attached to my finger and with me spitting feathers. The only way I could get the vice-like grip off was to force open the jaws with my other hand amid screeching that would do your average aviary proud.

Anyway, I managed to get Charlie back home where I called WIRES, an Aussie wildlife rescue service. They told me to take it to a prearranged vets the next morning. Okay said I and left the, now calmer, bird in the car for the night and retired to see to my wounds.

Next morning, I opened the doors to find him down in the footwell. Next thing he jumped onto the seat and just sat (and crapped actually - luckily there was a paper there - one of those times my general untidyness worked for me!). Seemingly, despite freedom being a mere step (or flap) away, uninterested in leaving.

So I just observed for a while, wondering if I should 'shoo' him or what. I just decided to leave him there by the open door and let him go when it suited him. The closing of the other door decided it. With a flap of his (now rested and strong enough again) wings he was off.

Watched by yours truly with admiration at the ease with which he just flapped and rose into the sky.

Fly Charlie, fly and be free (We'll not mention the bite - our little secret).

Lord Protector of God's creatures, that's me.

This isn't a new occurence.


Another infant has been left at a hospital by a new mother who just couldn't cope with the enormity of it all.

What drove this girl to abandon her child (assuming it was hers) I can't know but it must have been a terribly hard decision.
However, the fact that she left the child at a hospital, beyond any doubt a location where the infant would be taken care off with all science's benefits shows she didn't actually just ABANDON the baby per se. More, left it with someone who could look after the child better than she.

Enter the 'Daily Rag', aka, the Daily Telegraph, Australia's premier tabloid, with a headline so saturated in nauseating sanctimony it sent me straight for the bucket.

"How could you do this?" or something similar, it screamed. I didn't read the report, even in the name of research - the headline was enough for me, but I can just imagine how it went. Shame, shame, shame etc!

Well, I'll tell you something, if this public shame tips the already mentally anguished young girl over the edge, it's all on you, David Pemberthy, as editor of this toilet paper!
But ironically, nothwithstanding the outrageous, self serving santimony, this paper, and all papers who indulge in the same insidious practice, is guilty of much more malignant a sin. That being - the motivation for this offensive headline is financial; the desire to sell more papers - to increase bottom line - to make SOME fat cat (and shareholders), money.

N.B, The PM came out and defended the rag, remarking, it was just business and that "if you were to ask people on the street, they would say the same thing". That would be all fine and dandy if not for the fact I happen to know the man on the street, as he puts it, is a moron whose led around by the nose. So that doesn't hold much water, frankly.

Further evidence confirming my decision to desist buying that rag!

Sly was prosecuted today. On the radio the newsreader reported (with noticeable, though misplaced pride)that he hed been " given a criminal record and fined 20,000 dollars"

Oh no! Poor old Sly'll have to file for bankruptcy.

First, what's he worth? How many millions (and US millions for that matter)? 100? 75 even? Do I need to compare his net worth and 20,000 Australian?

And second. Having a criminal record in Australia for a high profile American film star is akin to being awarded Australia's highest honour. People will still watch his films (if they're any good, obviously, although 'good's relative!), a 'record' won't change that.

So, what we have here is a small in stature country trying to appear strong in its laws by imposing punishment on a celebrity who couldn't care less and who, most probably, is having a good old chuckle at all of this as he pays the pittance from his fortune (and probably writes it off as a tax break) and carries on making films that people are going to watch.

Sly 1: Australia 0

secret to life #1

Shoes:

Specifically, new - shoes, and the breaking in thereof.

We've all felt the pain; on the heels and toes. The bad news is that you'll never NOT feel that pain from new shoes but there is a way to make it bearable.

Double socks, or for ladies, just socks, though for street cred's sake, it's not advisable to be seen in public in heels and socks! Though we're talking about fashion here so...well, just look at some of it! (How does this self proclaimed 'man' know so much about women's fashion? - *reader*). (Just another insight into what is Mutters inc - Ed.)

It has a two fold effect. The first, most obvious, (and arguably ultimate) is the cushioning benefit on the feet but second to that is the effect of stretching the shoe, therefore ensuring a more comfortable and spacious second fit.

Next time you have on a new pair of shoes and don't take this sage advice, please get in touch so I can laugh.


Ravings of a Mutter

This kidnapping in Portugal is a disturbing event. This young girl was kidnapped from her bed as her parents ate dinner not 100 feet from where their infant daughter lay.

The young girl's photograph has been plastered everywhere in the hope of pricking someone's memory. So far it's been unsuccessful. The picture shows a very pretty young girl who would be prime fodder for the types of scum who would perpetrate such an act.

Sir Richard Branson, and in an indication of the huge success of her 'Potter' novels, J K Rowling, have offered large sums of reward to anyone with information leading to the girls rescue.

The most recognizable face in football, David Beckham has also joined in, appearing on TV with a picture of the girl, and pleading for anyone with any information to go to the police. Even a biker group has got involved, riding all over the country with the picture of Madeline stuck over their bikes. The kidnapping seems to have galvinized the world.

And rightly so, it has to be said. I can only imagine how the parents must feel as every nightmare scenario they can imagine runs through their already tortured minds.

How the person responsible for this heinous act, when he's caught, won't be executed is another beggaring belief.

And in another example of anti-dog behaviour, Baulkham Hills Shire Council has recommended banning dogs from 4 parks and bushland areas. A council spokeswoman said the proposal was an effort to stop the growing problems between dog owners and people in public spaces.

In the six months to December 06, the council received 36 complaints about dogs, 9 of which related to 'attacks'. (Attacks, it has to be said can be anything from the dog sticking its snout in one's groin to a full fledged mauling - the report doesn't specify - my, my, there's a surprise.)

What happened to man's best friend? This courageous beast that stands by man, with loyalty and love? The humble doggie serves man (and has done for many centuries) in many fields, in war and peace; from being his eyes, his nose and his ears.
From putting itself in harms way to protect us; providing us with comfort in times of lonliness. Putting smiles on the faces of sick children.
Our furry friend has surely earned better treatment than this.

Yet just because of a weak council combined with the narky and poor of spirit individual, our friends are being denied access to the ares they love so much - outside, sniffing and running and otherwise living it up. As they should.

I would offer, too, that most if not all the complainants are cat owners. Says it all really.

Page 5 of a Sunday newspaper has the headline "Kids log on to grog on". Hoho, how witty I'm sure.

The article beneath reports how young girls (I am woman, hear me roar) have now become the new face of underage drinking. Through the all-powerful and far-reaching internet and phone text, kids are rounding up their peers to meet in parks and beaches, where they drink the night away.
Hospitals are reporting a significant increase in the amount of young girls presenting to emergency departments with the problems that come with over drinking.

It has become and ever more so, a huge problem for society. It is thought this underage drinking reaches a point where, in adulthood, the habit continues and is thus passed down to their kids, perpetuating the cycle.

THEN:

We turn to page 32/33 of the same paper and what do we see? A double page spread advertising all sorts of booze for very little money, some of which is clearly aimed at young people. (Passion pop. 3 for 10 bucks). It's not clear whether these kiddie labelled drinks are alcoholic or not but their very existence along side actual alcoholic drinks is reason enough to be mildly concerned.
And then on page 38 and 39, yet another double page ad for more booze, this time the hard stuff, whiskey and vodka. With more wine for an incredible 3 dollars. Three bucks! Is it any wonder there's an alcohol problem here?

Yep! The Australian drinking culture - gotta love it.

How you expect to curb underage drinking while agressively promoting the product almost as a right of passage is beyond me (and most others it would seem).

Well, you pissheads should be worried. In an effort to curb the rising alcohol related violence, public bars in Newcastle (2HRS North of Sydney) have banned high alcohol drinks such as tequila etc. And you will no longer be able to buy double shots of anything.

People in their 30's have been ringing radio stations declaring their horror at this imposition on their freedom of choice. And I can sympathize with that - it is a typical reponse to most problems nowdays. Just stamp on it and set the bar to catch the lowest denominator and to hell with those who are responsible.

It's exactly the same approach as used when drawing up the road rules handbook. Such rules are for the complete idiot - the sort of bonehead who shouldn't be allowed out on his/her own - period, never mind in (alleged) control of a vehicle.
And the competent are treated likewise.

It's the same paradox again, on the one hand we have a society where drinking is considered a way of life, where it's considered a given that one sees 'a beer at the end of the day' as an obligation almost (then they'll go on to cite Slim Dusty or someone equally high-esteemed as the typical hard working 'sup at the end of the day' type of Aussie); on the other, new legislation controlling just HOW much we're allowed to drink.

There is a certain type of young men who when full of drink quickly resort to violence. It has always been that way and banning double shots isn't going to stop drunkeness. For a start, how do you stop someone ordering 2 singles and downing them one after another? Or tipping them into the same glass? Or slamming an extra 5 pints down?
Just another desperate grasp of thin air from a society bereft of any real answer.

Anyway, at least they're...(you know what comes next)

Ho ho, check this out if y'fancy a laugh:

In this, the 11th day of May in the year of our Lord, 2007, New Yorkers (who else Hoho) have instigated the occurence of...canine testicular replacement... is a nice way of putting it.

It seems the ultra-rich, (because, really, who else would be carrying on like this), after castrating their male four-legged friend, have taken to replacing the removed items with, well, prosthetic ones. Apparently, they 'look and feel just like the real thing'. My first thought was - how does one qualify for that particular quality control position? Experts on canine genitilia must be scarce one would imagine.


Of their dog, a Rottweiler named Truman (after Harry S. I suspect), the owners remarked - "we feel the replacement of the testicles with artificial ones gives him a sense of pride, it's good for his phsycological well-being".

Sounds like Truman's feeling a bit less than a real dog. Butch (WITH the testicles) must be the big dog of the neighbourhood now.

Hey lady, why stop there?

Are we looking at a potential statement of status when some socialite decides to, in an attempt to outdo her competing socialites, to colour the nads - maybe pays a reknowned artist to 'customize' them, hang trinkets off them.

Hey, look at the balls on MY dog! Ho ho ho! Absurd? you betcha. Getting carried away? more than likely. But I'm not the one attaching fake nuts to my dog because it increases his sense of self worth.

Moreover, I think his 'phsycological well-being' was shot to hell when you cut off the originals, lady (has to be a lady saying this - or a metrosexual, no 'man' could possibly condone such a act without some regret and I can't believe he would consider this wacky idea).
And a couple of replacement marbles isn't going to cut it.

Truman was unavailable for comment, though his best friend, Buck, was reported to be less than impressed with the new appendages.

In another demonstration of how the mollycuddling of our kids has gone to far (and how in a fashion typical of man, someone has leapt to exploit the niche), there now plays on national radio, a commercial where the orator attempts to persuade the parent (read 'customer') that homework, utilizing this system 'can be fun'.

Well, two things:

* a. When did homework become fun (when I was a boy it was nothing but a chore!)
* b. Has our nauseating, almost whispered in hushed tones, kid gloves approach to our 'little ones' (God, how I despise that term) become so infected with sensitivity, that we have now lost all trace of authority, instead resorting to the expedience of covert persuasion.


"Shut up, sit down, and do your homework!" "You finished your homework yet?" "Why haven't you done your homework?"
These and many more where barked at me as a boy.

What we have here is another microcosm of the bigger picture concerning the young and the protection society has foolishly given them through various governments' acquiescence to the bleeding hearts and tree-hugger types.
All, ultimately, for votes, for votes make money and money leads to power, and power is what man seeks more than anything else. That's the tragedy of it all.

Homework's not meant to be fun, but it IS an essential part of education and to remove it from curriclae, I fear will just hasten the advance of the ignorant.

Watch out for pass marks being lowered again to compensate.

Young Casey Stoner, the 21 year old Aussie, currently leading the MotoGP World Championship ahead of the 'Doctor', Valentino Rossi, has come out to ask people to stop comparing him to Mick Doohan and Wayne Gardner. (Mighty Mick - because he probably feels slightly embarrassed to be compared to a legend, and Gardner, because he's crap).

Very commendable. And he does seem like a personable young fella, despite the slight wobbler he threw when remarking that some overtaking moves were a little harsh. I thought at the time he was going to be one of 'those' types. Constantly looking for excuses as to why he didn't perform.

Because in racing, especially two-wheeled, sometimes the only way past is to shove your machine in someone's face, even forcing them out of the way. Think Rossi and Gibernau a few years back (Gibernau cried like a baby too - Rossi laughed).

It's a tough game and nobody's going to hand you a win - you have to take it. If that means getting a bit physical then so be it. It is a man's sport after all.

Today was just like any other day really - doin m'thing, listenin to the radio as the fodder ring in to air their views. Thrilling stuff!

The program started off with a segment on child abuse, and as is the normal reaction, it was unsurprisingly disturbing.

This led to a mother calling in to describe how her 16 year old son's female school teacher had 'abused' him. Also known as, 'having a sexual relationship with', in deference to the fact that it's only barely abuse and only within the terms of the law.

My first thought was - lucky, lucky bastard!!

And it reminded me of the case some time ago in America when the pretty blonde teacher was jailed for having a sexual relationship with one of her students - a 16 year old also.

Maybe the young lad was warned not to showboat under the threat of some kind of prosecution or some other such order, and that's why he remained quiet and silent throughout but let me tell you something, on the sly - he was 'high-fiving' every one of his (jealous) peers. "Heyyyy, look what I was nailin".

When you're 16, bedding an older woman is the thing fantasies are made of.

Now if this was inverted and it was a male teacher with a female student, then all hell'd break loose as he would be classed almost a peadophile. And nobody would have a problem with that; it just illustrates a point I've been attempting to convince women of for years.

Fundamentally, the male is seen as the aggressor. And the female, slightly subservient - passive even. This is, always has been and always will be, the fundamental difference between the sexes.

I didn't make it like that - it just is.

Well, it's in the news again. And again it's the poor Staffy that's getting the abuse.
This time some dopey bint got her face nearly ripped off after putting it in harm's way.

On the Central Coast, just north of Sydney, the attack occurred. It turns out, according to reports, that she intruded in the animals space, DESPITE WARNINGS TO STAY AWAY (from whom or what isn't clear - only that she was warned in some unmistakeable fashion).

The dog was a 12 month old Staffordshire terrier, sitting in a basket with her pups. It's reported that the dog growled at the woman when presumably came to close. The owner of the dog too, voiced a warning

But here's the bottom line: if ever one enters a house with a dog one should always ask the owner about the animal's temperament It's simple common sense. And if that wasn't enough, then study the animal - it's not hard, there are many signs to indicate the general mood of a dog.

And a growl isn't a good one.

But still, this buffoon dropped to the dog's level, presumably to pet the puppies as cute as they are at that age, and the mother saw this as a threat and reacted as mothers do. Idiot. It's like...putting your hand into a lions cage and wondering why you lose it. (Unbelieveably and quite incredibly, some knuckleheads have ACTUALLY done such a moronic thing - several somebodies, as a matter of fact!)

And now? Well, you KNOW what - the dog's been executed. All cause some f**kwit couldn't read the signs. Hope it hurts love, hope you learned a lesson cause for damn sure the dog did!

And in another screaming example of the degradation of the English language, and similar to the 'vor' pronuciation of 'voir', the latest offering from the dull, lazy, and ignorant is, wait for it...amb-bul-ance.

Yep, the articulation of the 'u' (phonetically, 'ewe') has been reduced to the rather brutish and mongol-like 'uh'. So amb-uh-lance. The same way Americans now refer to the big cat as a 'pooma' instead of 'pyooma'.

Is it just me? Tell me it isn't - please. This dull-witted utterance I heard on national bloody radio from someone who really SHOULD know better - a newsreader for God's sake!

Far out! I mean, far FAR out!!

There was a story late last week concerning a woman and her raucous child in a charity shop. Apparently the woman was asked to leave because the racket from the wailing child was disturbing the patrons.

So she left - and seemingly called a radio station almost direct to sound off her story in the hope of sympathy.

And it worked. The show host couldn't have been more sympathetic and berated, on national radio, those who would voice a complaint about this lady and her child.

But let's just consider this for a moment. There are few things more ear-shattering than a wailing baby and I for one am right with the other shoppers who thought it selfish that the woman stayed for - AN HOUR - while the child wailed on and on.

Is it asking to much to have a little peace while we shop? I don't think so.

And let me put it this way - if one was in the same shop and had, say, a small dog - a Jack Russel maybe, that was 'yipping' constantly, how long do you think THAT particular woman would bear the racket before complaining with much vehemence? Not long at all, I'd hazard a guess!


This woman stayed in the shop in question for an hour - the whole time the kid was going off. Didn't she think that just maybe, it would be irritating for others? Didn't she once think maybe she should leave, settle her kid, and then return when all was quiet?

No, she didn't. Apparently this woman believes she has the right by virtue of having a 'golden child', to just impose such shattering noise on anyone and everyone.

But that's life and the whole 'we've got to look after the children' mentality. Look, it's like this - if I happen to be out at a shop or restaurant or wherever, I don't think it's too much to ask ro not have a wailing kid giving me a sore head. I don't impose my life on you - I thank you to extend me the same courtesy.

Much as with a dog, if you can't control your brat, leave it at home, or make other arrangements. I didn't put a gun to you head to get knocked up. And if you can't manage your child without forcing its out of control behaviour on others - DON'T BLOODY HAVE ONE!!!

The Bureau of Statistics has released its annual MAP report (Measures of Australia's Progress). Apparently:

We're getting healthier
We're better educated
We're comfortable at home
More of us are working - and for longer
We help each other
We're more egalitarian

(Of course, I say 'we', but not actually me, I'm an Irishman).

If I can draw your attention the second in the above list - better educated. The claim is that 59 percent of 'us' now hold an after-school qualification such as a diploma/degree etc, compared with 48 percent in 1995.

Notwithstanding that one can almost achieve a diploma in 'sitting on your arse on the sofa', and various other trivial past-times, the important point that's been conveniently forgotten is the lowering of pass marks required to achieve such a diploma.

And letting loose on society a generation of sub-educated idiots, some of whom pass their low standards onto the young, therefore perpetuating the rot.

And as far as the first on the list - getting healthier? I...don't...think so, Mr Bureau. Sixty percent of the Australian population (70 male, 50-female) are classed as obese.

Her Majesty's over in the States currently, celebrating the settlement of the first English in Jamestown, Virginia.
The first time in 400 years since a British Queen (any monarch actually) has set foot on the Land of the free.

And the Bushes are holding a white-tie dinner in her honour. A bit of class for the Yanks - do them good. George dubya's never been too impressed with fancy dinners and this will be only the fifth in six years. This will also be the most elaborate, due to its 'white tie' tag.

Men in 3/4 length coats; women in evening gowns. How very proper, m'dear.

It's funny actually as the Americans hate partaking in anything 'non-American' and especially anything British as they see them as stuffy and stiff, in stark contrast to the raucous and lax way they themselves approach life.

But with the Iraq situation still very much in the forefront of international concerns, ole George doesn't have a choice. If ever he needed the support, it's now. So much so that he sent Chaney Down Under recently to inform the Australians how very appreciative the US is of their support. And that was just of the moral kind.

Scanning through another paper, I came across this article:

It concerns primary school kids' ballooning weight and the creation of a new size. Get this - it used to be s/m/l/xl and somethimes xxl, now it has spiked to an enormous xxxxxl (man, I had to chech the report again, thinking I'd added one too many ex's - but no, unbelieveably, that's the correct amount!)

That equates to a massive 122cm chest and 130 cm waist - an INcredible 52 inches). A 52inch waist on an adult MAN would be considered quite large. We're talking about school children here.

And that's added to the bigger seats required on all forms of public transport, and the larger ambulances and helicopters to carry the Fatties to and from their hospitals where they attempt to fight their gluttonous and sloth-like ways.

Simple extrapolation paints a worrying future for us as a species.

And that's pretty much it as far as comment goes in this weekend's edition of The Daily Rag.

Tune in next week for more pearls!

Hmmm...this is interesting...

44 percent of US combat troops condone torture as a means of obtaining information from an insurgent.

A study by a mental health advisory revealed this disturbing thought. It further claimed that soldiers were constantly fighting against bad morale and that acute mental health issues were increasingly prevalent.

War is hell! These troops have seen some disturbing things and in a country where potentially around every corner is your killer, it's perhaps unsurprising that they should feel this way.

Hoowever, what's more disturbing is the article's assertion that although the report was completed in November 06, the results were only released now - and in censored form.

Looks like even this medical report is being used in this war where propoganda is nearly as vital as the fighting itself.

Gun crime's up in the city of Sydney again.

I'm not really sure what to say to that. I could I suppose, complain about there not being enough police on the beat (I think there are enough - however the majority seem to be sitting at the sides of roads with their hair dryers or slowly cruising the highways like sharks looking for prey), and I could accuse the Pollies of mismanagement (of which they are unquestionably guilty, but hey - fair's fair, with one's nose in the trough, one can't be expected to keep an eye on things!)

But unfortunately it's a problem not easily fixed and it began with the invention of the firearm. That there are almost as many weapons as people in the civilized world, is the guarantee that they will continue to be used illegally in robberies and assaults.

I have always said to those espousing man's greatness at inventing benign weapons in the fight against illness - we also invented the gun!

Hahaha - this is class.

The Fatties (I give this a capital because they are now an oft-alluded to group), are getting it in the neck again. This time researchers have concluded that there's a link between waist size and the dreaded cancer.

A Cancer Council sturdy involving 40,000 Australians has revealed a waist size of more than 100cm for men and 85cm for women "can significantly increase the risk of cancer".
By 13 percent it claims.

I wonder, firstly, if this isn't just more scare tactics based on VERY remotely linked evidence. Because remember, it costs a virtual King's ransom to treat the Fatties nowdays, and as we all know - money talks.

Then I think, again, 'well, at least they're leaving the smokers alone for a change'. Hoho.

Tucked away at the bottom of page 18 of the "Daily Rag", as I've come to to name it, is this morsel of vital significance:

"BEER WITH YOUR BLOW WAVE"

This little piece reports of a new 'men-only' hairdresser. For the moment, we'll forget that any man proud of being a man, wouldn't be seen dead in a 'hairdressers'.

This 'salon' boasts 'the Ferrari of hairdressing chairs' and vibrating massage lounges. It's a place where 'cool guys can go for a haircut, have a beer and just chill out', (presumably with their metrosexual boyfriends with whom they can gossip and compare hairstlyes).
The owner of this moneyspinner states - "it's not so poofy for men to look after themselves any more". Well, if by 'looking after oneself', you mean manicures, petticures, eyebrow plucks, and 'hairdressing' etc, then yes, Mr Hairdresser - it is.

I don't care whether you're sporting a beer, a handsaw or a power tool. If you have cotton wool between your toes, you're no man I want to know.

And in another equally as blatant bribe, Peter Costello has offered families eight grand from the budget to 'reduce the cost of childcare'.

Yep, he's using MY money to bribe voters. Just buy the support, that's the way.

I thought there were important issues around - well not if you're Australia's Daily Telegraph editor. No, if you're he, a drunken proposition from an MP is what tops the list of grievances concerning our society today.

"RUDD MP ASKED DRIVER FOR SEX", the headline screams. The article goes on to, in not much detail I'd have to say, describe loosely, the events; the obligatory sanctimony laces the article's proponents' remarks.

My question is - with all that's really going on, from the climate change argument (argument, because it's been in no way proven that we, in fact are, causing the predominant damage) to the child abuse problem to the war in Iraq (and the plethora of other issues), why is it considered important to print some MP's inebriated amourous antics across the front page.

The answer, of course, is point scoring due to the upcoming federal election, a mere five months away. Here we see the politicians at their manipulative best as they creepily attempt to gain public favour with their slippery smiles while knifing their opponents with a false sincerity-cloaked vehemence. All the while the smile never fades.
But does having this reason justify a front page? I think not - not in my house of morals and ethics. Course, we're talking about politicians here, to whom the aforementioned standards are an expedient sacrifice. Politics, as is beautifully demostrated by the local rag, is a dirty game.

And in my opinion, this blatant exploitation of a woman's alcohol-fuelled utterance (that I'm sure, the next morning in the cold, sober light of day, she regretted terribly - after all, who amongst us HASN'T regretted our actions the 'day after the night before' as it were), sinks the Telegraph into the relams of that most tabloid of tabloids, the British comic, "The Sun". (At least the Sun had the decency to offer up scantily clad young women to compensate for their gutter reporting).

Why not just go with the 'fart' jokes? At least we'd all get a laugh.

Further to the previous post:

And in fact, the piss has been responsible for thuggish drunken behaviour (specifically assault) for a long time. I can remember as a young man two decades ago witnessing such thuggery often.
It became a night's entertainment, actually, when we (the non-drunks) would park near an intersection where the outflow from bars would meet, to watch the festivities. Young men with a skinfull would stuff some food into them and proceed to beat the shit out of each other. Like a gladitorial arena.

Every weekend.

But for the main, the only weapons were fists - and sometimes feet, never did I see a weapon of any kind.
But in modern times, the predeliction towards the use of knives and other such tools (machetes, hatchets etc.) has become disturbing. However this can't be attributed to just alcohol. No, the apparent increase in the viciousness of attacks in the modern day is motivated by a much more malignant inspiration. This betrays an underlying feeling of apathy with life, probably brought on by the ever increasing drift toward dissatisfaction, and rebellion.
And to that, the emergence of the seemingly (and if so - frighteningly) powerful PC lobby and we have a recipe for disaster.
Do what you want, get a slap on the wrists, and do it again.

This much is obvious and the authorities, too late, are cracking the whip in a desperate, but futile, attempt to control the situation. Heavier sentences are imposed on the violent and CCTV watches us from everywhere. It's interesting that the cameras seem to be the busiest as they record the assaults regardless of their very precence.

The screaming irony is, that it is all self imposed. Bad decisions made by governments quite some time ago (under the accusation of discrimination) have led us to this place.

No, cracking down on binge drinking, while it will probably have AN effect) won't solve the problem, it runs much deeper than that.


But at least the smokers are being left alone!

Binge drinking's in the news again and this time the financial cost is being cited as the latest fear.
Haha - it makes me laugh actually as the much-maligned tobacco has slid to third place now, behind obesity and now, binge-drinking.

And I really have to wonder at the paradox that is Australian drinking culture. The nation embraces alcohol, in fact one is considered to have something wrong with him/her if they don't join in such an acceptance.
And of course, let's not forget the ourageous amounts of cash that flow through the system. From taxes to political donations, the money flows from one fat cat to another. Yeah, right, like THAT'S going to be given up just cause a few youngsters are getting ripped!

Paris Hilton's just been locked up for violation of her sentence after being caught drink-driving.

"So?" is the first thing springs to mind.

When you're as rich as Ms Hilton, jail isn't jail - at least not for a penny-ante DUI charge. A month (forty-five days to be precise) in some country club, with resources that can buy all types of friends...?

And she turned up at the court 'fashionably' ten minutes late, striding in, shaking her booty, just knowing that it was all a game.

Shit, I could do with being locked up myself!

I've just watched a program on Britain's MI5 and it's performance during and in the lead up to, the London bombings of 7/7.
In a surveillance operation involving approximately 70 suspects, MI5 watched and recorded hundreds of hour of footage of the suspects meeting and talking. They managed to bring to trial some of the men on terrorism charges with varying levels of success.

Now, after the bombings in London, they're being forced to defend their actions. And part of that defence, in fact ultimately their ONLY defence was that they didn't have the resources to adequately watch all the suspects, 2 of whom turned out to be the actual bombers on that fateful day in July. MI5 claimed that they were almost extraneous in their involvement with the actual suspects on whom the surveillance was targeted and that it was nothing more than an almost chanced meet between the two groups.

Ultimately, it's impossible to know what's in a man's mind and that's what makes the current threat from the terrorists so alarming

I find it fascinating actually; this whole world carrying on as we lead our daily lives in ignorance. Brings a spark of excitement to an otherwise rather mudane existance.

Some time ago I wrote of how the public hospitals had banned snack foods high in unhealthy ingredients from their buildings in an attempt to curb the rapidly rising rate of obesity among the public.

Well, it now transpires that some months later, the State government has been caught flooding the health system's vending machines again. A government tender has called for bidders to supply "chocolate, sugars, sweeteners and confectionary products to more than 130 machines in hospitals, and medical centres.

They haven't admitted as yet, why they are invoking this cause of obesity but I'll hazard a guess it has something to do with money.

There was a siege situation in Sydney recently; a policeman had decided he'd had enough and was threatening to shoot himself while barricaded into his station. It was solved by talking him out of it.
The next day it was a big story on talk radio. One caller in particular called in to describe how hard it was for her husband as a policeman. How he was withdrawn and depressed at times by his work.

Boo-hoo, my poor wittle hubby. Did you make him warm cocoa and tuck him into bed? Of course policing can be a difficult job - at times, it has to be said. Doesn't seem to be too hard sitting in your, provided at the public's expense, air conditioned vehicle zapping unsuspecting battlers trying to get from A to B.

It's just another example the nanny state intruding into areas in which it has no business.

This seems to happen a lot; people complaining about how hard it is - that they need counselling, that things are 'just too much'.

Word is soldiers, too, aren't as tough as they used to be. And after incidents they are offered 'counselling'. Look, it's a soldier's job to be shot at; they know this when they sign up and don't forget they're provided with the means to return fire.
I'm getting so sick of the way people in dangerous occupations are treated with kid gloves. Hey! If you can't handle it, don't join up - simple as that really. Frankly, I don't want sissys in these positions. Policemen and soldiers should be hard. Often in the case of police, I'll see this tiny little woman on patrol around the city drunks. Exactly what is she goin to do when a fight breaks out between 4 or 5 men, tanked up on the sauce? I'll tell you what. Nothing. In a case like that we need big men. Tough men who can intervene with equal ferocity to break up such a melee, not a tiny woman who'll get flattened in about 5 seconds.

And then of course she'll- seek 'counselling' resulting in a tax payer holiday for however many months while she recuperates from her 'traumatic' experience. This applies to weak men as well.

If you're not prepared to see and act upon traumatic incidents, then don't join such a force.

It official. Women drivers are better than the men - at least that's what the geniuses at AAMI, an insurance provider, have deduced form their research which states that 84% of males are involved in accidents vs 77% of females.
What's initially startling about these figures is the significant increase in the female percentage. The women on the roads used to be much more law-abiding than their male counterparts but no more it would seem.
And actually, I have witnessed such females, usually teenagers or in the low twenties, zipping through the traffic like wannabe racer girls.

The report also claims that the males' accidents are typically more serious, meaning serious bodily harm, even death/extreme vehicle damage.
The girls by comparison tend to reverse into things and slowly shunt other vehicles with the worst result being embarrassment and an insurance claim.

Well, while you're sitting there in smug satisfaction at this new evidence suggesting your superiority, you might want to hear this first.

The whole report is nonsense; total and utter nonsense. It has no more effect than any statistic does. Lies, damned lies and statistics, remember. Put no stock in this.

Observe:

The reason why males are involved in more serious accidents is because the second they get in a vehicle (and driven by that most uncontrollable of chemicals, testosterone), the majority imagine they're Michael Schumacher. What often follows is they invariably overstep their limits resulting in the significant damage (collaterally and to life and limb).

Women, on the other hand, crash into things in a minor way, not because they imitate the males and push beyond their limits, but rather, because they don't know what they're doing (not helped by the gossiping away to their girlfriends on the mobile)
.
And then there's the screen-hogger; we've all seen them. These women, (and pensioners too, in fact but rarely if ever young males) with their seat as far forward as it'll go and their noses mere inches from the glass, staring intently, directly ahead, completely oblivious to what's going on around them.
Their hands gripping the steering wheel at the ten past two position, as if their very life depended on it. It's almost like they're afraid to be there.

These types are much more dangerous than any hooligan.
Better drivers indeed! What tripe.

I wrote a while back about how the conflict in Iraq qas spurred by a knee-jerk reaction to the Trade Centre attacks. I have repeated this opinion several times and for the most part it has fallen on deaf ears.
Well, it now transpires that George Dubya, made that particular decision within one day of the attack. He was quoted as saying that "Iraq deserves to shoulder some of the responsibilty for the attacks". At the time (and currently for that matter) there was , nor has there been since despite the US's puppet inspectors best efforts to uncover, no evidence to suggest any connection between the Middle-Eastern country and the attacks save for the shared religion.
Could this just be a continuation of Bush senior's attempt to control that uncontrollable land? A family affair as it were?

It's been quite a price for keeping something in the family. The man would put you in mind of a mad sientist, drunk on his unfettered power.

Who's the bigger terrorist?

"UM!"

Todays um, lesson, readers, concerns the um, rapidly developing occurrence of um, dead-air fillers in um, everyday speech.
This emerging predeliction is disturbing as it illustrates sloth of mind with an equally dumb sounding 'doh!' type utterance.
While listening to talkback radio, I sometimes count the 'ams' during interviews and general talkback. The record is an amazing 47 in a 1 minute, 30 secs period. About every fifth word.
Has society become so lazy that we no longer care if we sound like grunting apes, or a society of Homers? (The cartoon idiot - not the poet).
I recently read a friend's son's English homework and although it was demonstrably understood, there were fifteen errors, in spelling and grammar (I can just hear the 'cool kids' guffawing in derision).
If this is, as I suspect, a slide, and not a one-off then what future intelligible speech. Is the world going to communicate via electronics and cease conversation? An entire language created around 'ums and ams'? Like a binary language?

Todays paper

There's quite a lot in it today.

I'll start with the Prince Harry story. The young Prince is to act as troop leader with the Blues and Royals regiment of the Household Cavalry. And the insurgents are awaiting his arrival. As soon as it was made public, they came out threatening to 'send him home to his grandmother without his ears'.
An Iraqi militia commander claims he has soldiers whose job it will be to capture the young prince. He claims he has people within the British bases who will inform when the prince arrives.
A huge scalp indeed.

There's a small piece on the teenage drinking culture. And how assault has dramatically risen in the group of 15-19 year olds. It seems to me that alcohol and assault have been inextricably linked since Adam was a boy. So nothing unusual there. Part of the problem Down Under at least is the almost obligatory way Australians are expected to consume quantities of 'grog' as they bluntly refer to it.
One is considered a freak, to have something wrong with them if they don't embrace the culture. Even the PC, sanctimonious radio hosts espouse with regularity the benefits of alcohol. Depending on the class of host, the more respectful 'wine' is exampled instead of the 'ockey' beer.
But it all means the same thing - drink piss, it's great. Essentially that's what they mean. Well, look at the results.
Forget drugs, there has been nothing as socially destructive as alcohol. Complete strangers, eons in separation from the imbiber of the fluid, can feel its effect.
But it's a HUGE business and as per usual - money talks so for as long as the powerful keep getting rich of its back, the culture will remain.

I've spoken often of the general decline in standards of English and the following headline may go some way to explaining why:

"It's true, mum, we don't have any homework".

A Sydney high school has stopped giving homework to the younger students (year 7 and 8. Ages 9-12). The theory is that the only homework they do get is work they didn't finish in class. Parents say, "it gives them time to be kids". I suspect it may be laziness on the part of the parents (that and the fact that even the parents who have probably not been educated that well and therefore can't help with their kids' work, are perhaps feeling a bit stupid so remove the issue rather than face it.)
Homework is practice. One learns in class but sometimes it can be overwhelming and it rarely locks in immediately so homework is a way of 'pushing it home' as it were. Take that away, instead letting the kids go out and play and completely forget about the subject can result in the next day almost having to start again.
I'm convinced it's detrimental to learning.

Furthermore

People who choose cats over dogs are a bit strange, too. A bit like those weirdo vegetarians who always appear pale and a bit sickly like they're not eatin right or somethin.

Freaks.

Why do dogs chase cats?

And why am I made to feel like a bad owner when I let mine chase them?

Well, no more. For a start, cats are bastards. Y'ever seen how they torture rodents? Letting them run a bit away, like they have even some chance of escape before leaping on them and continuing the torture.
Eventually they get bored and just remove the head.
Moreover, cats will go where they're fed - no matter who 'owns' them. They sit in comfort on laps or cushions by the fire in the house while their canine cousins are banished outside in whatever weather meets them.

There's a cat in my street that sits and watches with this look of superior contempt as I walk my dogs past. Man, I swear, one of these days I'm goin to let 'the big fella' of his lead. That'll take the smug look of its face when it sees the dog comin at it.

See, we have nothing to learn from cats - at least nothing good. Selfishness and exploitation, the ability to slyly feign interest to achieve an end (usually gettin stroked or petted or fed).
From dogs, on the other hand, we can learn honesty, trust, bravery, loyalty and an unconditional love. Man's best friend is apt. We get companionship from them; they lead us, work for us and provide us with a sense of happiness. The great explorers of the ice world used the humble dog to pull sleds. Police forces use them to enforce law and otherwise protect the public.

Cats? Well, like I say - selfish bastards and if my most trusted of friends want to succumb to the pull of nature then tough shit on the cat. If you don't like it, keep your scrawny moggie inside. Any cat out after 5pm is fair game in my book.

I've just watched the Brumbies beat the Crusaders in the super 14. A hard game. Well deserved win.

I'm back

Far out, I've been ignorin this corner of late. But I'm back now, armed with reams of research and ready to put it out there.

Think I've maybe mellowed a bit - have to wait and see 'bout that though.

The pollies have been at their infuriating best again, especially that twat Iemma. And his obvious manipulation concerning the Lane Cove tunnel. This roughly 2 K tunnel which runs between Epping and the Warringah freeway, is facing the same future as the disastrous cross-city tunnel (which has recently fallen into receivership after the public turned away in droves when the RTA closed virtually every other access road around it, in a failed attempt to force traffic into said tunnel).

The toll-free period has just finished and the goverment expect a reduction of about 10%. Interestingly and promoting suspicion of conspiracy in yours truly, radio broadcasters that previously were against the ill-fated CCT, seem to be attempting to persuade the public of THIS tunnels benefits.
I wonder if any behind the scenes manipulation has been goin on. A few bucks changin hands maybe? A little favour coaxed? Hmmm.

This would come as no surprise considering the protagonists and the worlds in which they exist. (Politicians and media people - their whole world's a sham).

And the idiotic public voted Iemma dilemma (as a radio host in a, rather poor I think attempt at humour, often referred to him) and his party of incompetents back in. I'm still astounded (though, actually, not particularly that surprised as it just confirms my suspicions that Joe Public is indeed a cretin).

I feel surrounded by the incompetent and deceitful.

Tch! That'll do for now

Experts (in inverted commas)

I haven't written expert without the commas for some time now. I'll explain why:

We join the tale about ten years into it. Joe public (hereafter known as 'dopey Joe') is happily eating/drinking away at a given substance. Then suddenly, out of the blue, one of the aforementioned 'experts' claims in the public forum that the particular food isn't good for you. It gives you cancer/makes you go blind or any other of a million reasons (all of which are complete nonsense - see later).

So dopey joe, as is his/her wont, blindly follows the instruction and ceases forthwith to consume the offending material, safe in the knowledge that he/she dodged the proverbial bullet, and carries on with their lives in blissful ignorance.

Fast forward a number of years (it varies - but usually between 3-5) and some other 'expert' from the same field normally, and in fact often the exact 'expert' who made the original claim, comes out with - "wait a minute, hang on, we made a mistake - it's not bad for you after all. It doesn't give you cancer blah blah. Quite the contrary he goes on to claim, if you DON'T consume this particular substance, you'll be missing out on some important vitamin/nutrient".

And like so much sheep, dopey joe swallows this new contrary information and resumes eating/drinking the once offending consumable. This time breathing a sigh of relief and wondering if they've missed out on something healthy.

Okay - got it so far? Good, so, fast forward another number of years and yet another 'expert' makes himself heard.
"No wait - hang on", he says, "it turns out that we'd got it right first time and the second claim was actually wrong. Stop eating/drinking it again because it IS bad for you - we mean it this time. It definitely gives you cancer/liver damage/heart problems etc."

And on and on it goes. Give it enough time and it'll swing back the OTHER way once again.

Tch! Experts indeed. I swear they just sit in rooms bored, and when it gets too much for them they make these riduculous claims that dopey joe swallows hook, line and sinker.

The definition of scum

Skye Banning was walking with her guide dog near her home in Sydney's suburb of Bondi. A lady in her latter years, and bereft of sight, (a sense most of us take for granted) a more defenceless person one would be hard pressed to find. As she strolled, all of a sudden she was thrown against a wall and had her handbag stolen. The attack left her with significant facial injuries.

Robbery and theft occur in any major city on an almost daily basis but to commit such an act against a blind person, especially one of mature years (and female) is delving to the depths of depravity.

If hell does exist, these cowardly thugs are surely on the fast train there!
What is as digusting and shocking is that this has happened to the lady six, that's right - SIX - times before. To use that tired but nonetheless pertinent old cliche - 'what is the world coming to?'

Pieces of shit. Hell holds a special place just for you.

Bloody Tony Abbot's at it again!

Yep, the rabid catholic of whom I've written is at his work again. First it was the attempted blocking of an abortion drug without considering the possible effects on either mother or child, just because it goes against his religion (what happened to the church and state being separate?)
Then in an almost nepotistic fashion, it was the award of a pregnancy counselling contract to his buddies in the Roman Catholic church.
And now this heinous creature has the gall to suggest Kevin Rudd is 'trying to shame christians into voting Labour'.

Not only that, he's said these things at the young Liberals convention in Melbourne. Talk about getting them when they're young.

Has this man no shame? Is no-one going to stop this zealot?

God Almighty - what has happened to men?

In a Sunday magazine someone called Kathy Buchanan has somewhat crowingly written a piece entitled 'Have you noticed...men are looking better than ever'?
If that means men are looking more like women then she's hit the nail right on the head.
Turns out, according to Ms Buchanan, that skincare products' sales for men have taken off. Manicures; pedicures; facials; eyebrow plucks etc. are being sought by the male of the species like never before.
The author goes on to quote a Jo-Anne Mason, director of BU Australasia, a company responsible for tracking sales of such products as saying 'This market growth has been driven by a more image-concious man who does not consider grooming a compromise to his masculinity. Hence the emergence of the metrosexual market with role models such as David Beckham'. Well, there y'go.
Except, would this be the same Mr Beckham who openly admitted to wearing his wife's underwear and whose testicles are in the grasp of said wife?. Hmmm, if he's the typical modern man, we're in BIG trouble, fellas!
Of course, it's no surprise that the world is changing in favour of the fairer sex. Maybe not in the corporate boardroom, but in the average household women are the targeted audience of advertisers. The average man, conversely, is seen as a bumbling idiot who can't do anything and who's treated like a stupid child by the spouse. I am woman hear me roar!
I'm a man. I smell nice, I'm trim, and I dress well. I'm intelligent (no Einstein but no Mr Bean either) and I'm sensitive. And that's about it. I don't exfoliate, I don't pluck my eyebrows and I don't get manicures. I have no desire to be some sort of hybrid - a mixture of man and woman. I have body hair, I have scars from years of motorcycle riding (or tumbling off same) and I sometimes look rough. But, I'm unmistakenly a man. And proud of it too. I have a feminine side, which I keep securely hidden from all but my most trusted colleagues and I can watch soppy films. After which I'll take the lady with whom I've watched the film to dinner where it will be absolutely clear who the man in the relationship is. Why? Well just use your bloody eyes!

Australian pride?

The Big Day Out was held over the last few days. It's a big outdoor concert that runs every year. Never been at it myself (probably because I'm not a teenager anymore) but by all accounts it's a popular gig amongst 'those in the know'.
This year, however, there was a bit of controversy. It would seem that the organizers of the event called for Australians not to bring the national flag just in case it upset some of the non-Australians.
Joe public (understandably) nearly had kittens and voiced such most vehemently. Of course, the commercial radio stations, seeing this anger as a great revenue spinner, exploited it to the full. Disgusting behaviour. I've spoken of these types before - that is - the kind of people who (under the cloak of self-serving sanctimony), manipulate and exploit the dopey public patriotism into a frenzy to achieve a given end. And THAT end is their masters' bottom line. Honestly, these people make me nauseous. But I'm drifting again.

The reason for this post is to comment on the fact that the so-called leaders of this allegedly free nation have done nothing to object to this suggested banning of THEIR flag at an AUSTRALIAN concert in an AUSTRALIAN city.
Where in the name of God is their backbone? These invertabrates are scared to stand up and say - 'hey, this is our country; this is our flag; and if we want to wave our flag in our country, we're damn well going to. If you don't like it then fuck off!
If I was an Australian I'd be ashamed at what I'm witnessing. I'm finding it hard to believe that these weak and pathetic leaders are just going to lie down and let whomever likes dictate to them.

These spineless characters are supposed to be running your country. During the second world war, many Australians fought beside the British to preserve the freedoms we all now enjoy (though those freedoms are being whittled day by day, but that's another post - stay tuned). These men fought bravely and cultured a reputation of Australians that any country would be proud to have. They must be turning in their graves at this cowardly response to an obvious 'throwing down' of the metaphorical gauntlet.

I'm so glad I'm not Australian!

And so it goes

Another sheik is in trouble - this time for preaching jihad and encouraging parents to teach their offspring the same.

92% off people, according to a Sky news poll, think the sheik should be banned from preaching.

Banning freedom of speech is much more frightening than anything anyone can say. This kind of arbitrary oppression of freedom is becoming more prevalent of late and signifies the beginning of a 'police state' mentality.

And it at best only adds pressure to the cooker, in turn aggravating the whole issue.

Society heads interminably towards a train wreck. Like rats in a corner, it turns on itself out of desperation.

Scary stuff eh? Orwellian almost? That's the future. Get used to it.

3000 American souls

More than 3000 Americans have now died since the start of 'the war on terror'. This after Bush's triumphant declaration 3 years ago that 'We've won'.

To put it in layman's terms - it was a terrible mistake going in, it's a mistake to stay, and it's a mistake to leave. These are facts that are being confirmed every day another US soldier dies (and that's not to mention the hundreds of innocents caught in the middle who are also dying in droves).

The countless billions being spent on this folly is going to have terrible ramifications for the once mighty USA. It could well sound the death knell for this superpower. And as hard as it may be to believe at this time, it could bring her to her knees.

The middle east and it's denizons will not back away from this.

3000. And counting. Prepare yourselves for that number to double, treble, quadruple. There is absolutley no telling when this will end. What price American pride?

Fat tax

As spoken of in a previous post, obesity is now a bigger strain on various nations' economies than tobacco products.
Now the Government of Australia has suggested a 'fat tax', where all fast food is taxed more to prevent those of a weak mind from stuffing themselves to oblivion.
That's all well and good - except, what about me, and people like me; that is people who aren't fat and who like a burger now and again - or a can of soft drink.

How about this? Similar to the frames they use at airports to gauge the size of cases one is allowed to take onto the aircraft, why don't we utilize the same thing in fast food restaurants? Sort of - 'if you can't fit through this space, you can't eat our burgers'

Course, there will be the inevitable uproar from the bleeding hearts, citing discrimination. 'Fatties are people too', they would vehemently claim. Yeah, well, so are smokers and nobody gives a stuff about the shocking way they are treated. (Remember the modern lepers forced into the background where they can't disgust the sensitive public?)

Once again I say - fairs fair; what's good for the goose...

Turning point

Oh oh, heads up, this looks like it could be the turning point. What the hell is he rabbiting on about now, I hear you ask. Well, I'll tell ye.

Some big-shot doctor who's got a 'God' complex, has proclaimed that smokers (remember those vile people deserving of vitriol - the lepers?) - should be denied elective surgery because they smoke. Hey Doc - when are ye gettin the black shirt and boots?

The public are outraged, some going as far as asking - who's next? Fat people, extreme sports seekers, etc? Concerning the fat, I've been saying that for years. 'That' being that burger wrappers should have as equally disgusting pictures on their wrappers considering obesity has now overtaken tobacco related products in economic costs.

Maybe the rest of the planet will now see what a witch hunt it's becoming.

Hang on! I have an idea. Smoking booths - better still mobile smoking booths. Instead of funking up the atmosphere with the disgusting habit, they could all wear this...fully enclosed umbrella type thing with a special filter within to protect the fragile public from the smoke. We could all then walk around bumping into each other like weebles. Yeah, the anti-smoking lobby would be all for that. And! it'll identify the offenders so they can be avoided. 'Don't go near the smoker! Stay away from the smoker', mothers would tell their 'prey-shus'.

God! I need a smoke!

WOOOOOO - HOOOOOOO!!!!!

BEWILDERMENT

IS ALL THIS REALLY NECESSARY?

I heard curry-muncher on the radio tonight. It refers to people of the sub-continent (Indian, Pakistani etc.) and who also, as it happens, eat curry, hence the nomenclature
It’s an arguably offensive and irreverent moniker, used predominately by Anglo Saxons.
A well-know radio presenter, in his bumbling attempt at shock-jock humour (think Howard Stern but not as successful), cast it out there this evening. It’s a favourite of this man.
On occasion, callers may have a go at verbal sparring, to be cut down with much self-satisfaction by his superior wit and dismissal (with the added safety of the cut-off button should he meet his equal).
Some do consider it offensive; some are driven to the extreme by its irreverence.

This same presenter earlier in his show, with equal triumph, alluded with his razor-sharp repartee, that the Irish by nature were stupid. This particular slur has been around for centuries. Yeah, let’s all laugh at the dumb Paddy! The Paddys don’t seem too bothered by it – of course, they’ve had other things commanding their attention.
Consider the following:

PADDYS AND TOWELHEADS



Yep – you heard right – I said it. The ‘T’ word. It’s the new ‘C’ word y’know! Sue me! But first let me say this; the ‘T’ word is a pet name/nickname for those that wear the headgear a certain persuasion wear.
Just like most have a nickname for their wife – and dog. In fact, here in Australia they have nicknames of a sort (more accurately shortening of words) for everything. Afternoon becomes arvo; Jonathon becomes Jonno and sausage becomes sanger. (How they came up with that particular one I’ll never know).
Moreover, they are referred to in such a way based on logical analysis of a familiar sight – they wear cloth in such a way that resembles the towels women, fresh out of the shower, wrap around their head while it dries – or something – not absolutely certain.

This headgear has a significance for the wearer, based in a fervent belief. And to discriminate against those of this (in fact, all) belief is of course unacceptable. No-one is disputing that. But we mustn’t become so over-sensitive that becomes farcical.
And, it doesn’t alter the fact that the image it promotes is of the aforementioned woman/shower thing.
Now, if you want to wear this particular head-dress, go right ahead, I’ve no complaints; in fact it’s infinitely preferable to baseball caps – especially white ones – worn backwards (by wee bastards who’d stick a knife in you as soon as look at you).
And if you want to believe in a particular deity – that’s okay too. That is your undeniable right and one I won’t be opposing. You’re not called towelhead because you worship Islam; or because you’re considered inferior; that you’re in some way less a person because you believe in something different.
You’re called it because of a sense of humour. Just like the ‘Paddy’ reference in jokes.
How many – wait, better this way – is there a man on the planet that doesn’t know or hasn’t heard a ‘paddy’ joke? They’re older than I am; the stereotypical red-haired, freckled dumb Paddy. A virtual career for many a comedian.

Wogs, Lebs, Pakis, Yanks, Pommies, Whiteys, Canucks, Chinkys, Abos, Frogs, Eyties, Nazis, Redskins, Palefaces, Hippys, Tree-huggers – and these are only some of the printable ones.

And I know there are many more. To have a nickname for most things is human nature and while some may be overtly derogatory, the majority are said (without prejudice.

Frankly, I couldn’t care less who’s offended at my term of endearment uttered with innocent indifference. My conscience is clear.

It could be that these extremists are simply unstable and like a drunk man with an imagined umbrage, (God, I’ve encountered a few of those in my time) they seek reasons to be offended in order to act out their ways.

I stand by this argument and invite anyone to present an alternative.

POLITICIANS

Ahhhh…that special breed of individual. Found predominately tangled in a web of lies, they gravitate towards political opportunism like the proverbial flies round a cow pat.
In the beginning, they were men of wisdom; of fibre; of honour. They championed the common man with heart and fervour; and if they ever slipped, the ethically high standard bearing opposition were there to keep ‘em honest.
A visiting English professor is conducting several lectures on these fine protagonists.
Turns out they’re not like that at all! Gadzooks!
They still claim to have our best interests at heart; and sure enough if ‘best interests’ means filling their pockets and taking tax payer funded jaunts around the globe, then they deserve medals.
And the rot has sunk so deep that the once upright opposition now are like the manipulators they once sought to keep true.
The typical opposition leader, bereft of any alternative policies, now resorts to banal dirt-slinging and infantile denial.
Recently, one such (insert chosen adjective here) crowed with righteous belief – ‘if we were elected, we would performance-base MP’s wages’.
Further, he claimed (now on a wave of the earlier righteousness) that, ‘if they don’t make the grade, they’ll get docked wages – even sacked’. Oh, he was roaring along by the end!
Well, isn’t that fantastic? Judging by the ineptitude of one’s average politician, that should cut half the average cabinet. And we’ll have the cream of the crop left, I suppose? Foolproof.
Except, what actually would happen would be more akin to – they would be voted in, screw up as per usual, then cover up and misdirect. A senior member would strenuously defend – ‘well, we really can’t just arbitrarily withhold funds from the minister. He did his best, but there were extenuating circumstances’.
On he’d rattle with misdirection and avoidance until we all get bored. Soon it would fade away as the next crisis superseded it.
I mean, does anybody, seriously believe that anything politicians say during election time (especially election time but pretty much always) is ‘money in the bank’.



They so obviously say what they think we want to hear, get elected, and subsequently ignore it all.
And every time the voters fall for it. I am often left stunned at the gullibility of the average voter.
Politicians should be wise and intelligent; their aim should be the competent management of the country they represent. Instead, nowadays, they appear to do nothing but fill their pockets and manipulate the public to extend their own personal powerbase.

The same professor’s research has shown the public’s opinion of politicians is bordering on apathetic. In short, the public feel they aren’t represented. They feel as above that the ‘honourable members’ are ignoring their wishes and demands. That they simply no longer have any interest in serving anything other then themselves.


The problem begins with the election of incompetents into the various portfolios. Some of these…people have no actual training in the chosen field. They’re often just ordinary Joes, thrust into an arena in which they have zero experience. They have a go; they inevitably fail and they’re shifted around to another position – where, surprise surprise, they fail again.
Eventually they find themselves on the backbench where they exist on the public purse permanently. And such a purse it is. Lordy! Where do I get a job like that?

These people wouldn’t last to the end of the week in the public sector; wouldn’t get the job full stop actually, truth be told. I mean, would you employ these buffoons?
Performance basing wages of these cretins would certainly be effective (and frankly save an absolute motza) but as it is they who will legislate such a law, we’ll just have to keep hoping an honest man gets elected. Good luck waiting for that!
Like our porcine friends with their noses in the trough, they snort and bite as they manoeuvre for the perfect position. To quote a dear friend of mine – ‘it’s just wrong’. And so it is.

CHRISTMAS -THE WORD I DARE NOT UTTER

Well folks, that time’s coming round again. December the 25th. Christmas – or (I’m loathe to say) Xmas; a time of joy and family. A time when kids’ eyes light up at the expectation of the jolly fat man with his big bag of goodies.
I remember the pure excitement as a young boy myself, of this time. Sent to bed early, I could never sleep. I would try – try sooo hard, but the thought of what waited for me when I got up the next day prevented it for some time.
Eventually I would drift off and when I awoke the next morning, I’d jump out of bed (a rarity itself – and the only time that happened) and race into the lounge to the waiting presents beneath the Christmas tree, and my bleary-eyed parents. (My father, suspecting a night-time excursion to the tree, more specifically the wonders underneath, would sleep on the sofa to guard against such action).
I ignored my mother’s pleas to ‘be careful with the wrapping paper, we could use it next year’ as I ripped the covering off, my eyes lighting up when I discovered the treat within. This joy was followed by the obligatory visit to church to celebrate the true meaning of Christmas
This was Christmas as I knew it. I would offer that it’s how most would remember it.
Unfortunately, it would seem, it is no more.
Christmas is under attack from the politically correct, fearful of offending those who don’t share such beliefs.
It started some time ago actually, with the removal of Christ from the title (that Christmas is Christ’s birthday and roughly translates as ‘Christ’s Day’ seems to have been lost on these people) and replacing it with the, oh so inventive X, and now has been further reduced to – wait for it – holiday. Merry/happy holiday? Nah, it just doesn’t have the same ring. Why? You know why – to placate some minority.
Further, Christmas isn’t just a holiday. Actually, Christmas isn’t even a holiday – it’s a celebration of the birth of a historical figure; a figure whose influence on society for the past 2000 years is hard to quantify, so colossal it’s been.
Now, you may not believe – that’s your undeniable right, and til the day I die, one I’ll vehemently defend on your behalf, however it’s



also the right of whomever to believe what he or she wants and to arbitrarily deny this by your absurd censorship of its true title is an infinitely worse act.

An example (one of many as it happens): a friend of mine works as a graphic artist and one of her recent jobs was to design a flyer for her company’s Christmas party. Simple, yes?

Afraid not.

She was told she wasn’t allowed to use the word Christmas; she could use a star – as long as it wasn’t the Star of David; and no tree.
So basically, design a card for a Christmas party without any mention or reference to Christmas or the fact that it was a religious holiday.
Oh – my – God (or should that be ‘divine being’ whomever you believe him – or her to be – gotta keep the feminists happy too!) – what’s got into these people?
If you PCs are so upset with Christ (whose birthday it is) being used in the title of the holiday, because it offends some minority (easily bloody offended if you ask me), then don’t take advantage of the Christ’s Day. You keep working throughout, believing in whomever or whatever you choose. Meantime those who do accept it as it is and should be can enjoy it.
Christmas is a religious festival and is it not a constitutional right to believe in whichever religion one chooses? Almost God-given?

I’m dreaming of a white …holiday? Aargh! Gimme a break! Bing would be turning in his grave.

You better watch out; you better not cry; you better be good; I’m telling you why; a large, sveltely-challenged, person is coming to town.

It’s getting a little bit silly, no?

BIG DOG, BIG MAN?

We’ve all seen them; bull-necked, snarling creatures, straining at the leash, aggressively intimidating those with whom they come into contact.
With names like Spike and Biff; Killer and Sheba, they wear their leather collars sporting the pointed spikes like a badge.
People avoid them like the plague, fearful of being attacked by such vicious beasts.
How frightening they are as they strut, proudly, their way through the public domain, threatening anyone within reach with untold horrors.

And then of course, there’s the dog!

But if I may be serious for a moment, this issue is one of great importance. Dog attacks on people (mainly children) result in horrific injuries, both physical and emotional, often leaving the victim with a sense of perpetual fear towards all our four-legged friends.
This is followed by condemnation from the ‘good people’ of such violent animals, and the suggestion that they should be ‘wiped out of existence’ to quote a talk show host.
Let me say at this point, I don’t subscribe to this ‘wiping them out’. I love animals, especially dogs, and find them to be loyal and friendly. I’ve encountered vicious ones and have found the experience to be unnerving at times but not frightening.
Personally, I’m more concerned by the thug on the other end of the chain.
We must realise that dogs (all animals, in fact) are ultimately driven by nature, and as such are not subject to civilization’s laws. We can of course train most of the ‘nature’ part out of them but never will we be able to completely erase it.
Once accepted, the onus is on all of us to take responsibility for our own actions (and those of our inquisitive children) when in the presence of dogs.
Point in fact: recently on one of those anal TV shows based on people’s desperation for fame (and blatant stupidity), a perfect example of how a given dog can snap was shown.
We enter the scene to see a mongrel-type dog sniffing at something in a kitchen. In walks a small child, who proceeds to walk up to the unaware animal and insert her finger into the dog’s anus. The poor dog near jumped out of its skin. Funny stuff – har-dee-har-har!
Wouldn’t have been so funny had the animal snapped (which surely wouldn’t surprise any one of us – I mean, have you ever had a finger inserted without warning in your orifice? A sure way to get a punch in the mouth if you’re the owner of the finger). The little girl may have sustained a significant injury and doubtless the dog would’ve been put down.
All because we as adults were remiss in our responsibility to supervise our children. In this case, not only remiss in supervision, but actually videoing, therefore condoning the act.
And herein lies the bigger problem. We let our children clamber all over dogs, pull their ears, even kick and punch the animal while we watch and claim ‘oh, he’s such a well natured animal’. Well, well natured or not, dogs, just like people, have a limit and young children are surprisingly adept at finding these limits – to their horror and pain when they receive a vicious bite or worse, serious mauling.
And the typical reaction to it – execute the innocent party with a self-satisfied sanctimony.
Of course no-one wants to see vicious animals prowling the streets (if only we could put all these types down – see first paragraph), but a certain amount of perspective must be applied instead of resorting to the arbitrary extermination of anything that threatens humans, regardless of provocation.
Recently, I watched a Discovery Channel programme concerning the ASPCA. In one case an owner of a mongrel-type dog had kicked and jumped on the animal because (he claimed in order to justify and prevent his arrest) it had bitten him. Thankfully no-one bought his quite obviously manufactured excuse and did indeed arrest the offender. Bravo for the ASPCA!
But it just goes to show the way we treat our pets is nothing short of criminal. And when they inevitably turn we exclaim shock and outrage and execute them.
There are no such things as bad dogs – just bad owners and careless people.

HAVE WE REALLY DONE IT?

As I write this piece, I’m sitting in my back garden, the sun’s shining and a gentle breeze caresses my face.
Ahhh, it’s a beautiful world – it really is.
But, not according to the nearly President, Al Gore; according to him, and his recent movie, An Inconvenient Truth, we’re just about at the end. The damage perpetrated on the Earth by human pollution of all kinds is wide-ranging. Seas are rising; glaciers are melting; forests are dwindling (and CO2 is increasing).
Well, that may well be true, however there is a certain belief that this is simply a cycle; a cycle that occurs every 10,000 years (remember we and our detrimental influence have only been here for about 2 of those 10).
Many scientists believe this (at least the non-prophetic ones). Furthermore, if this is the case then the cycle, if it occurs every 10,000 years, could well last for, what, a thousand, five hundred, one hundred? Any way you look at it, it’s a long time to put up with El Nino type weather.
We’re told that we must reduce our emissions; that it’s not yet too late, that if we all pull together, Kyoto-wise, we’ll be able to pull it back from the brink.
With a population of six billion and rising, finding a way to exist in such numbers is proving to be the challenge to end all challenges.
The Dead Sea is now a trickle according to reports. The once holy Dead Sea is getting smaller and smaller. What’s left is being ‘plundered’ to use the actual term in the report, by a huge minerals company. Before our very eyes the Sea is dying. And for those whose only concern is financial, the report goes on to assert that buildings’ foundations on the edge are in danger of collapse. Tch! It’s a sad indictment that the final persuasion comes down to the ‘cold, hard stuff’.
An unstoppable force, man’s desire for wealth and power, consumes all.

Moreover, what if it’s too late and we can’t actually pull it back no matter what we do? No-one in any government is going to admit to such a thing because if they do, well the response will undoubtedly be one of apathy. Well, if it’s too late, what’s the point in trying anymore?



Or maybe Mother Earth and her weather patterns is just so big, (and we’re so insignificant) that nothing we do makes the slightest difference.
We as a species are destructive – it’s as simple as that and if as some believe, Mother Earth is a living single organism with countless parts, she may just step in and take control.
A recent report from the WWF, claims that in the last three decades three hundred – that’s right – three hundred species – have become extinct. Soon the only place to see certain species will be in a zoo. The report goes on to claim that we are living a ‘three world existence’, meaning that the rate at which we are using the planet’s commodities would take three planets to sustain. And still, man’s eternal quest for the mighty dollar supersedes all else.
And in this never ending search for the mighty dollar, we’ll rape and pillage the Earth and all it’s commodities until there are none left and the planet,s own sustainability will be affected.
Then, dear readers, we’re really screwed. Similar to trying to ‘put the genie back in the bottle’, it’ll be too late.

Y’know, as I was researching the subject of the article, I came across some disturbing information, illustrating frighteningly the danger we now face. I myself know how this’ll end. (But people write me off as some sort of doomsayer – rich really, considering these same people have their collective heads firmly ensconced in the sand).
Now, according to Sir Michael Stern, the author of the Stern report, a recent economic report on the current effects and solutions, we all know.
A 20% shrinkage of the global economy was one point. 100 million displaced by rising sea levels another.
Melting glaciers resulting in water shortages for 1 in 6 people and the advent of climate refugees will see tens, likely hundreds of millions more displaced.
Where will these people go? Well, to the only places left to them – unaffected countries. Potentially mass exoduses from the blighted land to the more prosperous (which actually won’t be prosperous for long once the millions find their way there).
A bleak picture indeed and one that calls for immediate action to prevent the eventual costs exceeding trillions of pounds.

However…

Previously, it had been recorded, that this El Nino effect was simply part of a cycle experienced by Mother Nature herself. A theory I chose to believe as it happens.
This latest report seems to offer an alternative theory; that our outrageously high level of taking and polluting is actually the culprit. The Stern Report offers, when considered (and typical of the English) the only realistic answer.
However, the sort of shift required to cease and repair the problem means we would have to return to something resembling caveman times. That, simply will not happen.
So we’re left with the choice of taxing the polluters to stop them polluting. Of course the actual guilty (the rich), won’t pay a cent under the ‘powerful protecting their own’ theory and the ordinary Joes (you and I) will be harassed because they don’t recycle their plastic.


Although what if, as mentioned earlier, this is as some less alarmist scientists believe, just a cycle?
Y’see, we have to understand, we’re looking at this from a human scale; this is happening on a global scale and perhaps we have ideas above our station. Let’s say, for example, the Earth is a billion years old and civilization’s been around for about 2000.
According to the boffins, this cycle occurs every, what, 10,000 years?
If we compress Earth’s existence into a year, the cycle then occurs about once a week and we’ve been here about 20 mins.
Now, with that in mind, we can now see our place in things.
The scientists who make these claims also assert that our pollution is so small in global terms as to be insignificant. And that being the case, the billions we need to spend in a desperate attempt to stem our filth, will result in bringing a plethora of economic disasters to society. And given the actual scale of the event, have absolutely no discernible effect.
Those of you with a nervous disposition had better sit down and grab a stiff drink.
Our civilized planet is unravelling. It won’t make the slightest bit of difference to Earth; it’ll be here for several more billions of years, regardless of what happens. Some species will dominate, some will falter (that would be us), but ultimately, life will go on.
‘What can we do?’ I hear you ask. The short answer – nothing, nothing whatsoever. And the long answer, well, it’s not much longer – we can enjoy our lives while we’re here, because if they’re right and this is merely the cycle of a much mightier entity, man, despite all his intelligence and brilliance will perish. If you’re Christian, you’d better start praying!



One thing I know for certain – if we keep stuffing the planet with humans, nature will step in, as it has done in the past and the results will be Armageddon-like. Never mind Katrina. In the words of Jack Nicholson’s Joker in Batman – ‘you ain’t seen nothing yet”! Are you ready?

HEROES?

The headline in today’s Daily Telegraph reads – ‘OUR ASHES HEROES’. Apparently the Australian cricket team have regained the Ashes, a minute trophy held in high esteem by those who crave it.
Faan-tastic – that cricket rates right up there with watching paint dry is neither here nor there. Fact is, I would really like to know exactly what it is that makes a team of grown men playing sport, (a sport may I add, that has virtually no risk of even remotely close to serious injury), heroes.

I’m getting really tired at the frequency with which the word ‘hero’ is tossed around these days. And it’s not just cricket. From all sportsmen (and women) to… bloody cooks almost –everyone’s a hero. Hero this and hero that. Is there an ordinary Joe around anymore? Not if you listen to the media nowdays.
‘Football heroes’ was the term when Australia reached the third round of the World Cup to face Italy. Lucas Neill, an Australian team member was one such ‘hero’. Lauded he was. Until he threw himself in front of an opposing player in the penalty box. And as is the rule, a penalty was awarded, Italy scored, and Australia went out.
Oh, how the masses objected. Cheats! They cried. Unfair! They shouted.
What was overlooked, though, was the fact that Neill was directly and exclusively responsible for their swift exit from the competition when he facilitated the award of the killing stroke in the form of that penalty. Only he will ever know if there was any intention in it or a benign mistake.
Doesn’t matter – the result was the same. It was, in fact, a clear and valid penalty and bloody Mr Neill, should have, as a professional footballer (allegedly), known better than to throw himself around the legs of the opposing player, in the penalty area. You’ll go a long way in Australia to find someone who’ll agree with that but those who know football, know it is exactly the case.
Radio stations in the constant quest for listeners, therefore money, whipped the dopey public, not for the first time, into a frenzy of patriotic fervour (meantime the sneaky government of the day make use of such patriotism to the full, and screw them a little more).
Y’see, while the public are concentrating on flag-waving, rah-rahing and ooh-ahhing, they’re less likely to notice if a little more of their freedom is quietly snatched. But I’m drifting…

Let me tell you about heroes:

Late in the afternoon of Sunday the third of October, 1993, Mike Durant, an US Army Black Hawk helicopter pilot lay in his crashed bird on the streets of Mogadishu, Somalia.
Part of a hundred and forty strong force whose mission was to remove some Aidid’s top militia who were meeting in a location known to the Americans, his aircraft was struck by an RPG (Rocket Propelled Grenade) and crippled. The helicopter half-buried itself in the ground as it slammed in.
One of just two survivors of five, he lay broken and relatively helpless in the smashed chopper. Somalian militia were closing in from all around and his situation looked truly hopeless.

Enter real heroes (in the truest sensed of the word).

Gary Shutgart and Gary Gordon were two Delta Snipers from the Elite US Army unit. The cream of Americas armed forces, they were lifetime soldiers. They were circling above watching and awaiting orders when Durant’s bird went down.
Knowing one of their buddies was helpless and knowing an angry mob, spurred to an even more frenzied state by the successful downing of the American chopper, was heading towards him, they asked to be inserted to defend their fallen comrade. They obviously knew the chances of survival were slim to non-existent, but regardless of their own safety, they responded as soon as permission was granted.
Through hails of bullets and RPG’s, and hundreds of armed Somalis, electrified on (a local, amphetamine-like drug), these two men defended that downed chopper and it’s hurt pilot to their very last bullet, resorting, when their automatic weapons spent their last, to handguns. Tragically, their efforts were in vain – for them at least – the chopper pilot was taken prisoner by militia, but released some time later.
These two men are actual heroes. Not swimmers, not cricketers, not football players – not even firemen or policemen(who as it happens, get paid handsomely for their efforts).

Much like ‘love’, ‘hero’ has been overused to the point its meaning has lost effect somewhat.

Shutgart and Gordon were posthumously awarded Medals of Honour, America’s highest award, for their bravery – and rightly so. True heroes, they laid down their lives for another, disregarding their own safety.

So enough of the hero tag for players of sport, givers to charity and other such insignificant pastimes, it belittles the true recipients. A real hero doesn’t think of himself. Or bask in self-indulgent adoration from fans cause he scored...whatever.

And before the feminist lobby start whining about my apparent sexism– or herself.

An ordinary woman (one of the aforementioned 'Joes' - or Josephines, I suppose) driven by desperation demonstrated this careless attitude to oneself with as much disregard for her personal safety as the D-boys.
She, with her daughter, was at a picnic with some friends and their children. The children were drifting around the banks in an inflatable dingy. Splashing and having fun whilst their parents looked on. In the blink of an eye (the way these things can happen), the small inflatable was dragged towards the relative rapid part of the river.
Panicked, the youngsters started screaming in fear as the little boat was suddenly bucking around with the force of the rapids.
The woman’s friends looked on, stunned into inaction as the kids were swept away. Breaking her own reverie the woman kicked off her shoes and leapt into the water. Not once did she think of herself, commenting, that at the time, she remembered thinking whether or not she should take her watch off. Off she swam, a female Indiana Jones almost and was thankfully victorious. She reached the small craft and hauled it and its occupants to shore.
Maybe not Medal of Honour stuff, granted, but this woman acted with as much selflessness in principle as the two warriors did. Just an ordinary person. A mother protecting her young. Brave lady.
Another hero. More power to her.

So enough! Winning a football match doesn’t make someone a hero; nor does swimming a fast time. OR regaining the smallest trophy in the history of the world.