Jew hating journalist quits rather than apologize

Few articles on the Gaza conflict could be as deliberately misleading as the one, by veteran leftist shill and apologist, Mike Carlton who launched into a quixotic diatribe under the cartoon (below, and since removed), which can only be distinguished from Nazi propaganda from the 30s and 40s by virtue of the remote control, which was not available back then.

The Sydney morning Herald has apologized for the cartoon after a week of criticism and complaints, however Carlton has engaged in a vulgar diatribe against readers who have complained.  Some have been told to f**k off, been called pathetic f***wits, likudnicks, and a variety of other abusive terms by him.

The ABC has referred to this as “strident debate with his readers.” 

After numerous complaints about this SMH apologized on his behalf, then decided to demand that he do so and accept a suspension.  Being too arrogant and self-righteous to accept this he has quit his position.  Good bye and good riddance.

Australian media coverage of the Gaza conflict has largely followed the type seen internationally with most of the journalists embedded with Hamas and reporting on the war from the terrorist side of the border.  Reportage therefore is one sided and gives a false impression of aggression by the Israelis against relatively helpless Palestinians.

Most Palestinians are helpless, but are ruled by the terrorist group Hamas which sees advantage in launching rockets into Israel from among the civilian population, who cop the consequences.

Among Carlton’s more hyperbolic rating is:

 … Yes, Hamas is also trying to kill Israeli civilians, with a barrage of rockets and guerilla border attacks. It, too, is guilty of terror and grave war crimes. But Israeli citizens and their homes and towns have been effectively shielded by the nation's Iron Dome defence system, and so far only three of its civilians have died in this latest conflict. The Israeli response has been out of all proportion, a monstrous distortion of the much-vaunted right of self defence. 

It is a breathtaking irony that these atrocities can be committed by a people with a proud liberal tradition of scholarship and culture, who hold the Warsaw Ghetto and the six million dead of the Holocaust at the centre of their race memory. …

Carlton neglects to mention the tunnels through which Hamas launched attacks into Israel, which along with rocket attacks were the primary source of the necessity to invade.

His defense of Hamas appears to be based on the argument that their barrage was largely ineffective, owing to Iron Dome, which intercepted many of their rockets, more than 300 of which were reportedly defective to the point where they fell on their own population.  Incompetence in offensive actions does not make those actions excusable, nor insulate them from consequences.

There will probably still be a position available for him at the public broadcaster, The ABC, which has no worries about offending subscribers as the taxpayer picks up the tab.

FIFO workers camps; Queensland Parliament descends into yet more farce

Image:’ Enslaved’ FIFO worker. Courier Mail 

While not the most emotive issue around, Mining camps and fly in fly out workers tend to be up there in a number of circles.  Towns in mining areas tend to feel that they miss out on substantial trade that might have been had workers resided in the area.

Many workers though like doing it this way as it enables them to hold down well paying jobs out in the sticks in relative comfort without the need to relocate their families, who might be a bit harder to please.

Politicians of all persuasions love to go off about it for whatever reasons they come up with for doing so.  Labor’s Jo-Ann Miller has come up with one of the more extreme examples: 

... Opposition mines spokeswoman Jo-Ann Miller says the "harrowing stories" she has heard from FIFO workers in the mining communities of Moura, Dysart, Middlemount, Blackwater and Moranbah explain why the state's mining towns are suffering. 

"To say that mining companies are engaging in fly-in, fly-out postcode apartheid is no understatement," she told state parliament on Tuesday night. 

"Workers are being kept in what only can be described as mining concentration camps.”Ms Miller said workers were being told not to mix with locals and had to have written permission before being able to leave the camps. …

The premier, Campbell Newman has decided to grandstand the issue with an insistence that this represented some sort of Nazi slur which offended the Jews and the opposition leader’s Polish ancestors. 

It is not understood why concentration camps specifically relate to Germany, who had them but were not the only ones.  The British had them during the Boer War, and they have become a regular feature of history leading to the Soviet Gulags, the Serbian ones during the Balkans conflict, and are still plentiful in North Korea today.

Perhaps he is doing the old Basil Faulty, “Don’t mention the war,” thing.

The initial statement was rather idiotic; conditions and rules vary depending on the company and location involved.  Generally on locations where I have worked, interaction with the locals is encouraged, and there are few restrictions on matters like alcohol consumption, other than having to pass a breathalyzer test with a low level of tolerance prior to going in to work.

The government is grandstanding on the issue, but at least the time taken up with this nonsense is not wasted.  They could be using it to pass more laws based on economic illiteracy, or restrictions on an increasing number of the few freedoms we have left. 

‘The Guardian’ calls for food rationing and more big government

Elitists in the halls of power in government, or in academia, think tanks, media, and elsewhere all share a love of deciding what is good and bad for us and what to do about it whether we agree or not.  Normally this involves the invoking of the good old “My will be done” clause of the authoritarian rulebook.

In Australia we have what former libertarian, John Singleton referred to as ‘the great aorta, which in its own way is the vessel that provides the blood flow to whatever the state uses in lieu of a brain, from the beating desires of those who think they know best.   They orta stop people saying, … they orta make a law to …, they orta provide more ……, they orta encourage the use of …, and so on.

In Britain, Zoe Williams of the Guardian is getting on the bandwagon of national wish lists with a call for the government to halt obesity by bringing back the sort of  rationing from the good old days of WW2: 

It's always presented as a happy accident, one of those cute paradoxes in which the second world war specialised, that rationing, in a bid to stop us starving, also stopped us getting fat. In fact, while obesity may not have featured in the planning, this isn't an accident: in order to be the kind of government that can effect that kind of public health improvement, you have to start by being the kind of government that cares whether or not your people are hungry. You have to be the kind of government that takes what people are putting on their tables every night as its most urgent and pressing business. 

At the end of rationing (which was incredibly unpopular, let's not forget – nobody enjoys being told how much bacon they're allowed) not only was there much less obesity, but other indicators of a nation's health – birth weight, infant mortality – also improved. At a recent Women's Institute history night, I saw for the first time a full list of what the rations actually were. 

I concluded ruefully that they were so meagre (one egg a week, 50g of butter) that I don't think I'd bother eating, I'd just live on protein powder and alcohol. But that's not the point; when one discusses rationing, it's in the context of national circumstances so straitened that everybody simply had to eat less, because there wasn't enough. But the next stage of that logical process is never discussed – which is that it was a fear, really, for the poor not having enough that led to a policy for everyone. 

Circumstances weren't so dire that rich people would have starved, or even people in the middle: the concern was a) that scarcity would falsely inflate prices, so people who could previously afford to eat would be priced out; and b) that people would hoard. The hoarding point is interesting as it gives the lie to a narrative often tacitly peddled, that human nature during the war was better than it is now, more self-sacrificing, less demanding, more generous. 

But more important is that point about prices – all markets favour the rich. In times of scarcity, though, the poor are disadvantaged by an amount so stark that you can't count it. Whatever the price is, the entire point is that it will be too much for that group, so that demand is reduced and supply at the top can remain at normal levels. It's like a bully holding a boy's satchel 5cm higher than he can jump. That much was obvious in the 1940s, and you would hope it would be again today, unless 30 years of neoliberalism has totally hollowed out our sense of reason. …

It seems strange to base an argument for rationing to prevent obesity, (which is caused by plentiful food for the entire population) on scarcity.  The author seems to be making an argument for price controls, which accompanied the rationing of that period, making the accompanying black market profitable.

The entire column though is full of authoritarian dogma.  It rails against hoarding; the prudent stocking up of non perishable foodstuffs and products likely to be in short supply.

There is also the quaint belief that ‘markets favor the rich’.  An unfettered free market creates plentiful food to the point where surpluses are exported, and even the poorest can eat well.  In a rationing and price control regime, many products disappear from the shelves but usually will reappear from under the counter if the customer can come up with a suitable offer, or knows someone who has the product for the right price.

It is not the free market which favors the rich, it is the state manipulated ‘orderly’ market that does so while discriminating against those with limited means as an unintended consequence.

Then again, this is a writer who believes that the only reason people would object to rationing in times of plenty is the fault of 'neoliberalism' 'hollowing out' our dense of reason.  Yep, Zoe, they all need your own special brand of good ol socialism.

Duck Dynasty star's suspension “fascist and Stalinist”; Camille Paglia

For those on another planet or who haven’t seen the show, Duck Dynasty is a sort of ‘reality show’ based on the lives of a real life family from the Louisiana bayous whose success is based on their production of duck hunting accessories.  The stars, the Robertson family, base their lifestyle around hunting and strong Christian conservative attitudes.

It is an immensely popular show with an estimated sixteen million regular viewers.

Patriarch of the show, Phil Robertson has been suspended from it owing to his views on what constitutes sinfulness including homosexuality, as expressed in an interview in GQ.  Some of his comments have been dropped from the article, but according to Katie Pavlich at Townhall included: 

GQ. What, in your mind, is sinful? 

Robertson. “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right. 

“We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?

This has caused consternation in GLAAD and other gay rights groups who believe that equality is not enough and demand universal approval.  They have successfully lobbied for his dismissal.

Lesbian libertarian, Camille Paglia has slammed the decision and the groups who demanded it as fascists, labeling it as Stalinist and a violation of free speech: 

“I speak with authority here, because I was openly gay before the ‘Stonewall Rebellion,’ when it cost you something to be so,” said Paglia. “And I personally feel as a libertarian that people have the right to free thought and free speech.” 

It’s unlikely that you need any background, but Phil Robertson Became the target of GLAAD and other one-track advocates for gay rights after his remarks in a GQ article reflecting personal views on the depravity of homosexuality and other Biblical sins went viral. A&E responded to GLAAD pressure by indefinitely banning him from appearing in future episodes of “Duck Dynasty.” 

That, according to Paglia, was a “fascist,” freedom-squelching move. 

“In a democratic country, people have the right to be homophobic as they have the right to support homosexuality – as I 100 percent do. If people are basing their views against gays on the Bible, again they have a right to religious freedom there … to express yourself in a magazine in an interview. This is the level of punitive PC, utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist, okay? – that my liberal colleagues in the Democratic party and on college campuses have supported and promoted over the last several decades. It’s the whole legacy of the free-speech 1960s that have been lost by my own party.” 

Don’t look under any rocks for more ideological liberals to join Paglia in the Robertsons’ defense. Then again – the Duck Commander clan likely doesn’t need it. A Facebook page protesting A&E’s decision to yank Phil had received 800,000 “likes” by late Thursday – only a few hours after it first went online.

For A&E, this is not a matter of freedom of speech; they have the right to hire and fire as they wish, on any pretext.

The real fascists in this are those who wish to muzzle any form of opinion that disagrees with their own, or disapproves of the cause they are advocating.  Unfortunately, it appears that they are winning. 

Police threaten charity ride

Queensland; beautiful one day, fascist the next!

The Newman/Bleijie anti biker laws are a gross case of legislative over-reach in their own right, with their draconian penalties for being a member of particular groups that the government deem to be undesirable.

When overzealous and petty minded police action is added to the mix though, the authoritarian actions of an unrestrained out of control government are rendered intolerable by its accompanying police state.

Police on the Sunshine Coast have put their insensitivity on full display with their threats towards a charity ride to raise funds for medical treatment of a victim of Lyme disease: 

A CHARITY motorbike ride will go ahead today despite police warnings that any outlaw bikies who participate would risk being arrested and put the event in jeopardy. 

Sunshine Coast resident Marc Revere has organised the event to raise funds for 20-year-old Lucy McGrail, a family friend who is suffering Lyme disease. 

Unfortunately, the innocent event has been caught up in potential pitfalls due to Queensland's strict anti-bikie laws. 

"I just want to see a good day for Lucy. I just want to see people come out and ride their bikes and have a good day with no harassment," Mr Revere said. 

While the event does not need a permit, police have been informed of the ride as required.  "We do know police will be there, undercover, and out on the roads as well, not there to harass, just to keep an eye on things," he said. 

Mr Revere has been warned that, if the event involves three or more outlaw bikie gang members or associates, those riders could risk arrest.  "We will be watched, they will be watching for club members who attend," Mr Revere said. 

"If there's more than three members together - it doesn't matter if it's from one club or different clubs, or an associate - they'll be locked up for six months, no bail, and lose their bikes.”

It has to be questionable at best, just what the problem would be in having members of so called ‘outlaw’ clubs attend a charity event.  Logic suggests that it would be better that they are out there doing good for someone rather than engaging in the sort of activity Bleijie implies, assuming that those present are such people.

It would be nice to think that this sort of situation is an untended consequence of an ill thought out law, but this is not the case.  The way these laws are framed, once the club a person is a member of is declared illegal, that person is a criminal with no scope nor hope of redemption, even by leaving it.  The government has made it clear that even those who have been members in the dim distant past (15 years or more) can still be prosecuted under them.

In civilized countries it is a principle of law that prosecutions are launched on the basis of wrongdoing, not on the basis of associations.  

Queensland biker laws policed to the point of stupidity

Ever since the Queensland government launched it’s fascist anti biker laws there have been reports of police going over the top in enforcing them by harassment of law abiding motorcycle riders.  Some reports indicate that there have been provocations in order to cause an offence to be committed.

At a recent funeral of a seventy-year-old woman in Townsville, a group of motorcyclists were pulled over and searched despite notifying authorities that they were to ride in a guard of honor for the deceased.  Law abiding riders are cutting back on group rides to the point where some businesses catering to this market in some of the popular destinations are concerned about having to close down.

Now a charity motorcycle ride in aid of the Cancer Council has been subjected to arbitrary checks as they set out on a ride: 

Participants of a charity motorcycle ride feel they have been classed as criminal motorcycle gang members following the degree of police presence at the event. 

Former president of the Bundaberg and District Motorcycle Enthusiasts Club, John Burrage, was one of hundreds of riders who took part in the last Bumz on Bikes cancer fundraiser ride on October 27. 

"The police turned up - two guys were walking around in uniform and there were two plain-clothed guys," he said. 

"Later on, we observed them approaching the Cancer Council ladies and demanded all the entry forms and took them away to the police station to photocopy.  "To me, that's a bit off." 

Mr Burrage said the treatment made him, and others, feel like criminals.  "It's putting us in the same category with all the outlaw gangs," he said.  "That doesn't seem fair to me."Now they have everyone who was there on record - don't' we have rights anymore?". … 

… But Bundaberg Criminal Investigation Branch Detective Sergeant David Tucker stressed that officers were not out to "tarnish" the event. 

"We wouldn't even think for one minute that the event was tarnished by any members of a criminal motorcycle gang, or that it was related to a criminal organisation," he said. 

"We had an obligation to ensure that there were no members of criminal motorcycle gangs attending there and committing an offence under the new legislation." 

Det Sgt Tucker said the new legislation, brought in last month, now meant it was an offence if three more members of a criminal bikie gang were together at any one time.  "The reason that police attended was to ensure that among the persons attending, there wasn't three or more criminal motorcycle gang members," he said. …

One member of the Rebels Motorcycle Club was identified at the event.  Had there been two other members or former members of the Rebels or other outlawed clubs present, they would have been guilty of an offence under the act, even if they were unaware of the presence of the others. 

The position of the other riders is not certain under these circumstances, as technically, they would have been associating with outlaw motorcyclists.  In any case, just what the hell is the problem with Rebels, Comancheros, Hells Angels, or any other group the government doesn’t like participating in a charity ride?

This obsession by the government, and the willingness of the police to go around making pricks of themselves among law abiding people in the hope of bagging a couple of ‘bikies’ is only going to lessen respect for the law and especially, the police among the community.

But, can Newman make the trains run on time?

Cartoon: by Zanetti 

Queensland’s extreme anti biker laws have hit the spotlight again to day for all the wrong reasons.  There seems to have been an announcement a day for several weeks now, but after the legislation was rushed through parliament, there seems to be a screw-up per day.

The latest is an error in the draughting of the law, which has changed the context to mean that bikers who have quit ‘outlaw’ clubs are no longer outlaw bikies.  This seems reasonable under normal circumstances, but it appears that this was not the intent of the legislation and has left prosecutors in the embarrassing position of arguing in court that ‘it’ means ‘was’, somewhat reminiscent of Clintons parsing of what the meaning of the word is is: 

Justice Wilson criticised the wording of the laws, suggesting they were not clear on whether the reverse onus of proof for bail should apply to former bikies even if they had left a club long ago. 

"Maybe the problem is if the legislature wanted to capture people (who were past members), they haven't done it very well," she said. 

Mr Bleijie said it would be inappropriate to comment on the case but "if our laws need amending, we'll amend them". 

"The criminal motorcycle gangs will try anything to try to get around our tough new laws and we will adapt the legislation accordingly," he said.  "We put these laws in place to protect the community." 

Justice Wilson criticised the framing of the laws by Parliament, suggesting it was not clear whether the reverse onus of proof for bail should apply to bikies even if they had long ago left a club. … 

… She rejected the argument by prosecutor Todd Fuller QC that the new laws should apply, for example, even to an ex-bikie who had "cut all ties 15 years ago" from an outlaw motorcycle gang. 

Mr Fuller argued an ex-bikie should have to prove he had cut ties with a group that "supported and encouraged participation in serious crime" and was no risk to the community. 

But defence lawyers for the three former Hells Angels argued the laws spelled out an accused must be a present member of a criminal organisation for the new laws to apply.  Barrister Peter Callaghan, for the Da Silvas, said "By no amount of torturing can the word 'is' arrive at 'was'". …

The three people involved are already accused of involvement in an alleged multi-million dollar drug ring and if guilty will be sentenced to years behind bars. There seems to be little benefit, nor justice in adding 15-25 years to such a sentence just for being former members of a motorcycle club.  The law in civilized countries should be about what a criminal has done, not on who he associates with.

Prosecutors seem to be arguing that a guy who was a member of a now declared organization back in the early 60s, got married, sold his bike and settled down to raise a family, retired, got his superannuation, got nostalgic for his old Harley, bought one, went out on a ride, and broke one of the plethora of laws that we are subjected to nowadays, should do fifteen years in the slammer.

Mussolini would have been better than this.

US cop wants Queensland style anti motorcycle laws

Disgraceful slur on war veterans!

Image: Vlad the impaler, who has lent his name to the act.

The Newman government in Queensland has passed draconian new anti association laws to attempt to destroy ‘outlaw’ motorcycle clubs such as Hells Angels, Banditos, and a number of others including one that doesn’t exist.  The odd thing about the new law is that ‘bikies’ are not mentioned in it at all but the minister has proscribed a number of clubs.

The oddly named, Vicious Lawless Association Disestablishment (VLAD) Act has upset civil liberties groups and caused a revolt among the judiciary, who are concerned about undue political interference in their role.  Some of the worst aspects of the legislation are:

• Any member of any organization the Attorney General cares to name is automatically guilty of an offence;
• Any member of a declared organization who commits even a minor offense is to receive a mandatory 15 years extra on the penalty, 25 years if an office holder;
• A ‘bikie’ only prison where inmates will be locked in cells for 23 hours per day and are denied entertainment such as television, and gym equipment is banned;
• For some unexplained reason, the inmates are to be dressed in pink.  This possibly reflects on the AGs sense of inadequacy causing him to want to humiliate tougher men;
• Five years for refusing to answer questions;
• Reversal of onus of proof;

There are plenty more such as a requirement for law-abiding bikers to register their rides to avoid harassment.

This has not dissuaded a US ‘crime-fighter’ from lauding these laws and claiming the need for them in the States.  Worse, he suggests that the risk of war veterans joining outlaw groups as a reason for doing it: 

An American crime fighter has applauded the Queensland Government's hard line on bikies, saying the United States should have brought in similar laws years ago. 

Vice-president of the International Association of Undercover Officers, Steve Cook, says Australian authorities can expect bikie gangs to keep growing and are likely to recruit war veterans from Afghanistan.  "We've had people in the Middle East for the last decade; you're going to have a lot more recruitment of these individuals into these organisations," he said. 

Mr Cook has spent decades fighting gangs like the Hells Angels, Mongols and Bandidos in the US and says American lawmakers should have done more. … 

… Queensland president of the Returned Services League (RSL) Terry Meehan, whose daughter is a member of the Military Brotherhood MMC, says thousands of veterans join motorcycle clubs but it does not make them criminals. 

"They wear their badge on their back and they're quite proud of it, so I'd urge the public don't group classify people," he said.  "Ex-servicemen and ex-servicewomen are not criminals. …

A quick Google check reveals numerous motorcycle clubs for war veterans.  It is an absolute disgrace to make a claim that men and women who have served their countries honorably at the sharp end of conflicts for years, would be drawn to criminality on their return.

The problem Queenslanders have is that the AG graduated law in 2005, then in 2009 with the training wheels still in place on his practice of the profession in a provincial law firm, he was elected to parliament.  He then became Shadow AG and the rest is history.

Anti smokers latest obsession; E cigarettes

Anti smoking zealots seem to have an ever expanding wish list of things they wnt banned.  Not content with advertising bans and plain packaging laws, as well as restrictions on where smoking can be carried out, including private property, they have for some time gone after nicotine replacement methods.

For some time such products as nicotine patches, lozenges, and gum could only be obtained with a doctor’s prescription. Attempts at liberalizing this in order to make this therapy more easily available was resisted with the claim that travelers on public transport could use it to avoid smoking on planes and trains etc. (Go figure)

Now they want to ban E cigarettes, even though they contain no nicotine and a number of friends have successfully used them to give up smoking.  They are currently demanding a purge of Western Australia’s laws after a case was thrown out of court: 

The Cancer Council wants WA's tobacco laws changed to specifically ban electronic cigarettes after a test case that sought to charge a business for selling them was thrown out of court. 

Joondalup Magistrate's Court ruled last week there was not enough evidence that two types of electronic cigarettes looked like cigarettes or cigars, acquitting the operators of Heavenly Vapours of breaching the Tobacco Products Control Act. 

So-called e-cigarettes are battery-powered devices that do not burn tobacco but turn nicotine or fruit flavours into vapour that is inhaled and exhaled.  It is illegal to sell e-cigarettes that contain nicotine under Australian law. 

The WA Health Department prosecuted the Duncraig-based operators who sold e-cigarettes and nicotine-free "e-juice" through a website in late 2011.  WA tobacco laws prohibit the sale of any food, toy or other product that is not a tobacco product but is designed to resemble a tobacco product. 

But the court ruled the electronic cigarettes did not necessarily resemble a cigarette or cigar and could also look like a fountain pen. Unlike normal cigarettes, they also required the user to press a button. … 

… Mr Slevin said the Tobacco Products Control Act was due for a review and could help ban e-cigarettes as well as address issues such as the need to reduce the number of licensed tobacco retailers.  "This incident of a failed attempt to prosecute points to the fact that the current provisions are not adequate," he said.

So, the argument is that because a prosecution based on the device having the appearance of a cigarette failed because the magistrate thought it didn’t, indicates that the law is inadequate for banning a harmless product.

Rules seem to vary from state to state.  In Queensland they can, and are sold through some tobacconists and unlike real tobacco products do not have to be hidden from view and can be spoken of.  According to one shop owner, “It is legal to sell them through tobacconists because they don’t contain nicotine.”

Once again, go figure.

Doctor to be deregistered under sick abortion law

Abortion is essentially a moral matter for those who seek it, and it shouldn’t be the realm of the state, but apparently the state is incapable of allowing it to happen without taking away the liberties of others.  While the ability to procure an abortion is considered a matter of choice, for doctors in Victoria there is only one choice.

It appears that in matters of moral judgment, once the government gets involved the lines become horribly blurred as to what rights we have and what freedoms are to be taken away from others in order to accommodate whatever is now about to be granted the blessing of the state.

In Victoria, a doctor faces the prospect of losing his license to practice for refusing to conduct a sex selection abortion and failing to issue a referral to someone who would: 

Dr Mark Hobart, 55, has been under investigation by the Medical Board of Victoria for five months, accused of having committed an offence under the state's controversial Abortion Law Reform Act of 2008.  His patient and her husband requested a sex-selection abortion after an ultrasound determined their fetus was female. 

They only wanted a boy, the husband told Dr Hobart, who, as a practising Catholic, had a conscientious objection to providing the abortion. 

Under Victorian law, he was obliged to refer the patient to a doctor he knew would terminate the pregnancy.  But Dr Hobart doesn't know any doctor who would agree to abort a healthy baby for sex selection reasons. 

"The general response from my colleagues is disbelief and revulsion," he said.In any case, a referral is not necessary for an abortion. Hobart's patient independently procured the abortion a few days later. Neither she nor her husband made any complaint.  But Dr Hobart now finds himself subject to a star chamber inquiry by the Medical Board of Victoria. 

The complaint about his conduct was generated by members of the board itself, a so-called "own Motion."   Yet Dr Hobart's repeated requests for the identity of his accusers and the substance of the complaint have been rebuffed by the board and its parent body, the Australian Health Practitioners Regulation Agency.

It is disgraceful that under the intended or unintended consequences of the human rights act, or the deliberate enacting of political correctness in legislation, acts which are optional for the public at large, are compulsory for those who may be called on to facilitate those acts.  If abortion is a moral issue for the general public, it should also be a moral issue for doctors.

To suggest that doctors do not have a right to act on conscience, is to make them slaves.

Australia has such an undersupply of medical practitioners that we actively recruit in the third world trying to lure theirs here.  We do not have the luxury of tossing doctors to the wolves for failing to comply with PC.

Queensland pushes for anti biker laws, as if there are not enough laws already

"The civil libertarians will bleat and they will carry on, (but) Friday night was a turning point. – Premier Campbell Newman, demonstrating the condescension of the ‘born to rule’ crowd.

The Qld premier Campbell Newman has chucked a wobbly after some biker gang related violence on the Gold Coast and has joined the fashionable government set by advocating anti biker laws.  Just to demonstrate how ultra – fashionable and (from a governing perspective) really cool he is, he has dubbed it a “War on Bikies.” 

Mandatory penalties, bans on gatherings, locations, and vehicle confiscations form the foundation of the Queensland government's new anti-criminal gang legislation. 

Under the proposed anti-racketeering laws, gang members would be banned from gathering in groups, attending certain locations such as entertainment districts, wearing club colours inside licensed venues and restaurants, owning, operating or working in tattoo parlours or promoting or recruiting members. 

Members of outlaw motorcycle gangs will also face mandatory prison sentences if convicted of serious criminal offences and be banned from gathering in their own club houses under the new legislation. 

A conviction for serious assault of a police officer will carry a minimum one year prison sentence, with mandatory minimum sentencing for the possession and trafficking of firearms already in place.

There are already laws in place to cover pretty much all of the crimes that these people are alleged to have committed, so why not just go out there and arrest those who are guilty of wrong-doing?  It is that simple and without the risk of having the legislation overturned in the High Court as most similar legislation in other states has been.

But hey; to show you have a set of big ones, it is necessary to pick out a group of people, dictate what they can wear, where they can go, where they can work, what entertainment they may participate in, and make different laws which only apply to them, something like Germany in the 30s and 40s.

At least for the present he doesn’t seem concerned about their diets.