Shrimps on the barbie are so passe, so we got Koala's in a biscuit.
German supermarket shelves have been stocked with koala-shaped biscuits in a bid to lure more big-spending German tourists to Queensland
After reading this, i have to ask "Lara Bingle, where the bloody hell are ya"
Yup, they must of had a pack of monkeys working on this really progressive, memorable and stoopid campaign.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Things Girlfriends Say
Was wrong with your knob?!
Of course she was referring to the window winder in my car, but still not something any guy wants to hear.
Of course she was referring to the window winder in my car, but still not something any guy wants to hear.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
World's Highest Ranking Military Penguin
The World would be a much better place if there were more penguins in military positions of power. Just look at the respect this little Avian Bugger is getting. Ever heard of Norway attacking anyone, well, I rest my case.
When the Norwegian King's Guard visited Edinburgh Military Tattoo of 1961 for a Drill Display,[1] a lieutenant called Nils Egelien became interested in Edinburgh Zoo's penguin colony. When the Guards once again returned to Edinburgh in 1972, he arranged for the unit to adopt a penguin. This penguin was named Nils Olav in honour of Nils Egelien, and King Olav V of Norway.
Nils Olav was given the rank of visekorporal (lance corporal) and has been promoted each time the King's Guard has returned to the Tattoo. In 1982 he was made corporal, and promoted to sergeant in 1987. Nils Olav died shortly after his promotion to sergeant, and his place of honour was taken by Nils Olav II, his two-year-old near-double. He was promoted in 1993 to the rank of regimental sergeant major. On August 18, 2005, he was promoted to Colonel-in-Chief.[2] He is the first penguin to hold this rank in the Norwegian army. At the same time a four foot high bronze statue of Nils Olav was presented to Edinburgh Zoo. The statue's inscription recognises the King's Guard and the Military Tattoo. A statue also stands at the Royal Norwegian Guard compound at Huseby, Oslo.
Man's Best Friend - Proof Positive
A dog is truly a man's best friend. If you don't believe it, just try this experiment.......
Put your dog and your wife in the boot of the car for an hour. When you open the boot, who is really happy to see you!?
Put your dog and your wife in the boot of the car for an hour. When you open the boot, who is really happy to see you!?
Thursday, March 6, 2008
A Hard Week's Work
I work with some serious Geeks, some of them in Denial, but very entertaining nonetheless. Have any of you ever wondered whether the Star Ship Enterprise would win a battle against the Gallactica, probably not. Well fear not, these Serious Geeks i work with have already done so for you. This week, we have been debating Star Trek Vs Gallactica on the online bulletin boards, everything you never wanted to know is covered. Check it out!
From: Rob, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 10:23 AM
Posted To: SciFiConversation:
BSG Vs Star TrekSubject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Who would win a battle out of these ships?
From: Steve, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 10:23 AM
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
This is just so geeky, but I'll join in.
I agree with Ricky, the comparisons can only be done on the amount of ordinance that the ships can use.
The Galactica and the Pegasus have the extra capability of launching multiple small fighters to intercept any incoming ships before they come into weapons range. Therefore a large amount of damage can be inflicted before the main ship joins the battle.
In terms of shielding, the Defiant and the Enterprise have shields, with the Defiant equipped with ablative armour.
The Galactica and the Pegasus will sustain damage for some time, but any damage is directly to the hull.
The attack plan for the BSG ships would be to launch several squadrons of Vipers to attack the incoming ship and wear down it's shielding and armour. Then go in for the kill with nukes, etc.
The Next Gen ships can only attack themselves, so must come into range of any ship they are attacking.
In summary, I'd put money on Galactica coming out of it on top. 'Cause the ace up the sleeve is to warp out to a safe location and leave the attack to the Vipers.
This is just so geeky, but I'll join in.
I agree with Ricky, the comparisons can only be done on the amount of ordinance that the ships can use.
The Galactica and the Pegasus have the extra capability of launching multiple small fighters to intercept any incoming ships before they come into weapons range. Therefore a large amount of damage can be inflicted before the main ship joins the battle.
In terms of shielding, the Defiant and the Enterprise have shields, with the Defiant equipped with ablative armour.
The Galactica and the Pegasus will sustain damage for some time, but any damage is directly to the hull.
The attack plan for the BSG ships would be to launch several squadrons of Vipers to attack the incoming ship and wear down it's shielding and armour. Then go in for the kill with nukes, etc.
The Next Gen ships can only attack themselves, so must come into range of any ship they are attacking.
In summary, I'd put money on Galactica coming out of it on top. 'Cause the ace up the sleeve is to warp out to a safe location and leave the attack to the Vipers.
From: Ric, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 10:31
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
While getting involved in this sort of conversation will doom me to the deepest pits in Hell….
Easy answer. The Defiant. It has shields and it has anti-matter based torpedoes. Admittedly, the amount of hard ordinance the Galactica can chuck out would make for an interesting puzzle on getting close enough for effective damage, it has the capability of warp travel for any distance / any speed and so can jump around all over the place, making it next to impossible to target.
Most people want to live forever....... Most people also get bored on a rainy Sunday arvo....
From: T, MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 09:59
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
The Defiant would be very good as the BattleStars aren't maneuverable, but did you take into account the Vipers???
Mass of numbers would put the BattleStars ahead in my books and therefore the Pegasus gets my vote as it has the better weaponry of the 2.
From: C, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 10:31
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Depending on the tactics and the commanding officer, I'd say the Defiant as well mainly due to shields, armour and weapons. However it would be interesting to see what the Battlestars nukes would do to the Defiant. The NX-01 would get pounded!
Cheers, Chris
From: S, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 10:38
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star TrekSubject:
BSG Vs Star Trek
Toug call but I think the Battlestar ships would come out on top. The Galactica dwarfs the Defiant in size but as the others have said, Its a numbers game for them all they have to do is launch squadrons of vipers and its a whole new ball game which depends on how long the Defiants shields hold.
Now for a real Fight give me
Cylons Vs The Borg
From: M, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 10:55
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
It is a tough call, but the design of the ship isn't as important (while very important) as the ability of its captain. Captains of note include Picard of the Enterprise, who had a battle manoeuvre named after him, and though not mentioned in previous posts, nor of television fame, Captain Jacob Keyes, from the Pillar of Autumn of HALO fame, who also had a battle manoeuvre named after him. I am unfamiliar with most of the others, but my point stands, in determining the victor, supplies, ordnance, and defensive capability are not the only attributes that must be measured.
From: H, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 10:57
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Sure, they can launch Vipers. They chase the Defiant for a while, then the Defiant goes to Warp, warps around to the other side of the Galactica (who are all looking at their real time screens going “What the??”), launches an entire spread of antimatter torpedoes into the engine area and fighter bays and then spends the next five minutes flying up and down the Galactica raking it with phaser fire while the Vipers spend all that time turning around and trying to get back to their ship while there is a ship to get back to.
If the Defiant can take out the Galactica’s FTL drive in the first attack run, the Galactica is dead.
From: K,
Mr Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 11:06
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Yes very Geeky...but who cares!!!!! Defiant would win easily for the reasons outlined by Ricky Holding. Defiant also has pulse phasers and Quantum torpedos, Galactica and Pegasus would not last very long aganist those weapons.
Now the Enterprise (NX01, A, B, C, D or E) or Defiant vs Star Destroyer from Star Wars. Now there is a competition. Wizard magazine had an article on this and they concluded that the Enterprise E would soundly defeat a Star destroyer because generally speaking Star Trek weapons seem to have more of an impact than Star wars weapons.
From: C, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 11:11
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
I'm going with Pegasus. Its a survivor!!!!!!
It does come down to the captain and crew, but next gen tactics were as follows;
Worf: "The alien ship is firing again Captain, our shields are down to 15%, we have plasma leaks on all decks and we are venting atmosphere. Shall I return fire?"
Picard: "Careful Mr. Worf, we don't want to provoke them"
Cheers, Chris
From: M, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 11:30
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
For those that don't know, and are interested.
These are to the best of my failing recollection.
The Picard manoeuvre involves a sudden, ward speed, jump into close proximity and then a point-blank broadside with all available weaponry.
The Keyes roll involved using a remote controlled, burning nuke as a flare to attract guided weapons, then to take cover behind an enemy ship in such a manner that the two ships slightly collided while getting into position (this bit is where 'roll' became part of the name). The collision weakens the enemy shields, they get hit by friendly fire (guided weapons fire not lead away by the nuke), then the nuke is guided around the enemy ships that fired the shots which chase it. They strike the enemy, damaging the shields, the nuke is detonated, destroying or disabling the enemy ships.
From: H, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 11:31
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
I wouldn't try to answer that question until someone cleared this point - how do the Federation shields hold up against projectile weapons rather than energy?
The Feds should make peace with the Colonials. Then they'd have someone who could fight the Borg, at least in close quarters fighting - Colonial assault carbines rather than those damn phasers.
From: A, Miss
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 11:34
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Definitely the Defiant - it has a cloaking device
From: M, MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 11:38
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
I'd have to go with the Pegasus as well, because Cain was bonkers and would have run over the Enterprise/Defiant.
I AM NOT A GEEK... I'm just miss understood ;-)
From: M, Mr
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 11:49
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
You would also have to take into account the flack cannons from the Battlestar's which might make it quite hard for the Defiant to even get a torpedo though. Those flack cannons are like running into a wall of exploding artillery. But the Defiant would probably get the first shot in being able to cloak.
In my opinion there is way to much ordnance on the BSG/BSP for the other ships to even get close. But it dose depend on the firing range of each ship. If Enterprise has a good enough range with it's phasers it would only have to take out the Vipers and then sit back and use phasers to destroy the Battlestar's.
Taking into account Captains of the ships I would have to say the Galactica because of the old Adarma's skill compared to young Adarma on the BSP.
From: Michael MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 12:01
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
I wouldn't try to answer that question until someone cleared this point - how do the Federation shields hold up against projectile weapons rather than energy?
The Feds should make peace with the Colonials. Then they'd have someone who could fight the Borg, at least in close quarters fighting - Colonial assault carbines rather than those damn phasers.
From: U, MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 12:02
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
From: R, MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 12:06
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
One of the ST:NG episodes has an escape pod bump into the shields. It bounced off. From that I would suspect that the shields would be resistant to impact. With the human love of history and the wide range of technological levels they would encounter, I doubt they would have shields that could be defeated by a simple rock.
Flak guns etc would have zero impact on anything from NCC-1701 onwards. Being high speed matter, the Deflectors would take care of them and not the sheilds.
Another point in ST favour? Transporters. The final solution is a container of anti-matter from the engines beamed over into the Galactica/Pegasus and the container beamed back...... big bang and all over.
From: P, MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 12:13
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Why is it that the BSG ships are constrained by physical reality, whereas the Star Trek ships can use weapons that are lazy storytelling devices?
From: H, MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 12:24
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Actually, the Galactica could do something similar, if they only thought about it. The Raptors have FTL drives as well. This means they can be quite small. Can you imagine the effect of having a Raptor jump into a warp core? Or just even the bridge? Targeting might be an issue, but have a dozen or so with jumps pre-programmed. As soon as the target gets more or less in the right spot, do the jump.
From: L, MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 12:24
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
IIRC they never tried beaming back just the container in the episodes. I suspect that would take too much accuracy for the transporter to achieve.
What they could do however, is ensure the antimatter is unstable, or becomes unstable shortly after transportation. This would then leave the enemy with barely enough to realise they had to escape, let alone do so. don't forget though that he shields have to be down to transport (or did they remove this inconvenience in later ships?)
From: O, MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 13:54
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Too much accuracy for a transporters? I would hope they are accurate enough to achieve that task if they can assemble and reassemble human inner workings. I also find it interesting that you can transport anti-matter safely as surely it is uncontained (even if only very quickly) during the transportation process. I am sure I will be corrected with a very long winded explanation of the inner workings of a transporter system ;-)
From: R2, MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 13:58
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Well the transporters option would bring a whole different world of options (not just beaming anti-matter) e.g.; Other forms of explosives, Assault teams (how would a phaser rifle effect the inside of a battlestar?)
From: P, MR
Posted At: Wednesday, 5 March 2008 07:14
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
the container of anti mater and beaming back the container was Scotty's solution to the Kobiayashi Maru at command school.
Transporters were accurate enough to do it when Scotty was at command school so the Defiant would have no problem doing the same trick
From: M, MR
Posted At: Wednesday, 5 March 2008 09:12
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
..yes but you are talking about Scotty "The Miracle Worker", the man who got the Constitution class defiant's phaser banks charged back up in "The Doomsday Machine", the man who killed the Excelsior's Trans-warp drive in "STIII:TSFS", the man who reformed two Kirks into one with the transporter in "The Enemy Within", the man who survived 75 years in a transporter buffer in "Relics", the man who had to "Change the laws o' physics!" in "The Naked Time".
The Defiant has Miles O'Brien as its chief engineer and transporter chief and while he's good, he is no Scotty! The Anti-matter container trick probably wouldn't work for them so they would just have to empty their Quantum Torpedo bays at the BSG ships instead to win .............. and my vote is that they would win!
From: Rod MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 4 March 2008 12:36
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Projectile weapons...
Flak guns etc would have zero impact on anything from NCC-1701 onwards. Being high speed matter, the Deflectors would take care of them and not the sheilds.
Another point in ST favour? Transporters. The final solution is a container of anti-matter from the engines beamed over into the Galactica/Pegasus and the container beamed back...... big bang and all over.
From: B MR
Posted At: Tuesday, 5 March 2008 11:08
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Why is it that the BSG ships are constrained by physical reality, whereas the Star Trek ships can use weapons that are lazy storytelling devices?
From: Shane MR
Posted At: Wednesday, 4 March 2008 12:43
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
I'd say the Defiant might be in with a chance. Especially if able to use the Romulan cloaking device. After all, the BSGs don't have shields. A cloaked Defiant could cruise up to the landing bay of a Battlestar and lob in a photon or quantum (did the Defiant Class get those?) torpedo.
From: Jason MR
Posted At: Wednesday, 5 March 2008 12:00
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Bingo.
BSG should win, but ST would win because they can use what may as well be 'magic'.
BSG should win, but ST would win because they can use what may as well be 'magic'.
From: Gavin Mr
Posted At: Thursday, 6 March 2008 06:45
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Or ST could kill everyone on the BSG with Technobabble !
From: R MR
Posted At: Thursday, 6 March 2008 9:23
Posted To: Rec: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG vs Star Trek
I wonder just how well Phasers would work against the Galactica's armour. Phasers are designed to work against shields and the light armour of the star trek universe.
I have never seen a description of the BSG's armour it would need to be amazing as it protects the during FLT, so it must be able to deflect/absorb a huge amount of energy
From: C MR
Posted At: Thursday, 6 March 2008 9: 05
Posted To: Rec: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
I have never seen a description of the BSG's armour it would need to be amazing as it protects the during FLT, so it must be able to deflect/absorb a huge amount of energy
From: C MR
Posted At: Thursday, 6 March 2008 9: 05
Posted To: Rec: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG vs Star Trek
The Battlestars armour works well enough. Both the Galactica and the Pegasus have received multiple nuclear hits and survived. The Pegasus seemed to come out better off than the G after getting hit by nukes, but that is because the Peggy is bigger and newer and the G had most of her armour removed for her impending retirement. Hence why the Columbia was the same shape as the G, but a lot more streamlined.
Cheers, Chris
From: H MISS
Posted At: Thursday, 6 March 2008 08:39
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
What about the metaphasic shielding that Janeway from the future brought back for Voyager to use to get past the Borg in ST:VOY Endgame????
From: B, Mr
Posted At: Thursday, 6 March 2008 09:27
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
Whilst measuring the actual capabilities and limitaions of each ship is an insurmountable task... I add this..
ST would have to win, because some Tech Chief or Android or Vulcans would come up with some way of reversing the polarity of some weird ass wave
through the deflector sheild whilst turning the coffee machine off and on in 10 Forward mess to cause a phase loopback error in their flux capacitor (sorry about
the Back to the Future ref), thus causing a catastrophic cascading failure of thier inverse synthetic appature array (mmmmm ISAR)
From: Scott Mr
Posted At: Thursday, 6 March 2008 09:27
Posted To: SciFiConversation: BSG Vs Star Trek
Subject: BSG Vs Star Trek
I think by the time Adama and Col Tigh stopped arguing about what needs to be done to would be all over red rover!!!!.............Although if Adama was to find out that Voyager was commanded by a woman that would certainly get his blood boiling!!!!!!
Monday, November 26, 2007
The king is dead, long live the king!
So Kevin Rudd got in, in a Rudd slide, woo hoo, not a landslide mind you, a Rudd slide. Well I am so excited I think I might rush out and get a job. I actually got a text message, from an anonymous texter that said:
"Yay for Labour! I'm gonna get a f*cken Job!".
Woo hoo, from now on we'll all be able to have gravy with our meat and three veg, cause the jobs gravy train has just left the station. No idea who it was from, except that their number ends in 643. Wonder if it will be a real job, and whether a hair cut will be required. I was so excited for Mr or Mrs anonymous that I sent one back saying"
"Goodonya, who ever you are!"
I expected Mr anonymous to get back to me with "It's me, Kev baby, me of the Ruddslide, there's gonna be some changes, watch this space", but alas I had another sleepless night, tossing and turning, wondering who the soon to be employed person is. K-Rudd obviously figured that whilst I was worthy of a text, he didn't really wanna have a chat. Maybe he was rubbing my nose in his victory.
If a landslide can be re-defined as a Rudd slide, we need to steel ourselves for any further re-definitions of the English language. I'm tipping that Kruddworthy will be added to the lexicon of the English language. Work choices is obviously not Kruddworthy. Kyoto, definitely Kruddworthy, although for a while there it was only Kruddworthy if China and India get involved. I can see the thinking;
"What if we have a party and China and India don't turn up?"
If China and India don't turn up, the thinking goes, we should take our "bat and ball" and go home till they are willing to take it seriously. Well kind of defeats the purpose doesn't it, which apparently was the whole reason why John Winston didn't wanna get down and jiggity with this whole Global Warming thingy. Apparently it was because of jobs, and the whole economy thingy, but I suspect it was more about thinking that having a party without those two was just not worth it. Happens all the time, you would be surprised how many parties are cancelled when people realise that I am not turning up. So anyway, Krudd has decided he will sign Kyoto with or without China and India, good on him, that'll learn em, we can party well enough with, or without them.
Anyway, been wondering what the rest of the world thinks of the Kruddslide:
Malaysia is hopeful that Australia’s newly-elected Labor government will bring about positive changes that would further enhance bilateral ties between the two nations.
Well so do I, but then I am biased, I've been embracing bi-lateral relations with a Malaysian for a few months now. I've been bewitched by a Malaysian succubus, so my thoughts on this matter should quite rightly be ignored.
Apparently Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono was the first person to ring Krudd to congratulate him. Sounds like someone was sitting up hoping and praying for a Kruddworthy labour Victory.
Anyway, gots to go, much work to do, protecting my job from all these giddy labour voters finally looking at getting a job.
Did I Say That?
Last week I predicted that the Liberals would win the Australian Election on the 24th of October. And I stand by that prediction. Although following the apparent Rudd-Slide, my zero regular readers have been bombarding me with the huge number of nil nyah nyah, nyah nyah nyah e-mails.
You see what the Australian public fails to realise is that that was a non-core prediction. If you'd wanted a core prediction, i would have said there will be winners and losers, many drinks will be had at the pub, and the big screen plasma TV normally only brought out on Grand Final Day will get much use at election parties on the weekend.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Rat's Milk Latte' Anyone?
PAUL McCartney's estranged wife overnight accused consumers of meat and dairy products of fuelling global warming, as she launched a vegan campaign at London's famous Speaker's Corner.
Heather Mills, ............. , suggested people could drink the milk of rats or cats, rather than milking cows. Viva, an animal rights campaign group, claims dairy and meat products are major causes of greenhouse gases.
Good Idea, this way i can break into dairy farming, all i need is a couple of Rats an intensive breeding program, and presto, dariy farmer extraordinaire. Little details exactly how i intend to milk the buggers can wait til later. No doubt technology will provide a solution.
"There are 25 alternative milks available in health shops and supermarkets," she said, saying she turned vegan when an African woman at Live 8 asked her: "Why don't people stop drinking cows' milk lattes?"
"Why do we not drink rats' milk, cats' milk or dogs' milk?"
The 39-year-old was speaking to a group of journalists - and a few tourists - standing in front of a poster showing her in a sultry pose and skimpy top with the slogan: "Hey Meaty, you're making me so hot!"
I always knew she liked me, wonder if I will have to sign a pre-nup?
Heather Mills, ............. , suggested people could drink the milk of rats or cats, rather than milking cows. Viva, an animal rights campaign group, claims dairy and meat products are major causes of greenhouse gases.
Good Idea, this way i can break into dairy farming, all i need is a couple of Rats an intensive breeding program, and presto, dariy farmer extraordinaire. Little details exactly how i intend to milk the buggers can wait til later. No doubt technology will provide a solution.
"There are 25 alternative milks available in health shops and supermarkets," she said, saying she turned vegan when an African woman at Live 8 asked her: "Why don't people stop drinking cows' milk lattes?"
"Why do we not drink rats' milk, cats' milk or dogs' milk?"
My guess is that we find the thought of rats and dogs milk disgusting and dry wretch worthy. But that won't stop me providing milk to feed you disgusting habits. No Siree, show me the money.
The 39-year-old was speaking to a group of journalists - and a few tourists - standing in front of a poster showing her in a sultry pose and skimpy top with the slogan: "Hey Meaty, you're making me so hot!"
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Liberals To Win Federal Election 2007
Going out on a limb here, John Winston Howard and Co will win the federal Election 2007. There, I said it, it had to be said, so whatcha gonna do about it? Nothing, since you don't know where i live. Nyah, Nyah, Nyah Nyah.
Politics, it's such a dignified occupation. Take these Keating-isms as an example taken from that golden age of politics where no-one was spared to rage of Keating:
Via the "Paul Keating Insults Page"
On Prime Minister John Howard:
"The little desiccated coconut is under pressure and he is attacking anything he can get his hands on"
"For Mr Howard to get to the high moral ground, he would first need to climb out of the volcanic hole he had dug for himself over the last decade. It is like one of those diamond mine holes in South Africa. They are about a mile underground. He would have to come a mile up to get to even equilibrium let alone have any contest in morality with Kevin Rudd."
"What we have got is a dead carcass, swinging in the breeze, but nobody will cut it down to replace him."
"He's wound up like a thousand day clock..."
"...the brain-damaged Leader of the Opposition..."
(Of his 1986 leadership) "From this day onwards, Howard will wear his leadership like a crown of thorns, and in the parliament I'll do everything to crucify him."
"He is the greatest job and investment destroyer since the bubonic plague."
"But I will never get to the stage of wanting to lead the nation standing in front of the mirror each morning clipping the eyebrows here and clipping the eyebrows there with Janette and the kids: It's like 'Spot the eyebrows'."
"I am not like the Leader of the Opposition. I did not slither out of the Cabinet room like a mangy maggot..."
"He has more hide than a team of elephants."
"I do not want to hear any mealymouthed talk from the Member for Benelong."
"The principle saboteur, the man with the cheap fistful of dollars."
"Come in sucker."
On Federal Treasurer, Peter Costello:
"The thing about poor old Costello is he is all tip and no iceberg. He can throw a punch across the parliament but the bloke he should be throwing a punch to is Howard, but of course he doesn't have the ticker for it."
"He has now been treasurer for 11 years. The old coconut is still there araldited to the seat. The treasurer works on the smart quips but when it comes to staring down the prime minister in his office he always leaves disappointed. He never gets the sword out."
Via Wikiquote
Government cannot get the adjustment, get manufacturing going again, and keep moderate wage outcomes and a sensible economic policy, then Australia is basically done for. We will end up being a third rate economy... a banana republic.
Speaking to John Laws on Radio 2UE, May 14, 1986.
A dog returning to his vomit
Referring to Wilson Tuckey, 1990, after Tuckey repeatedly called out the name "Christine" in Parliament.
The Placido Domingo of Australian politics.
Self description, based on the assessment that Domingo's performances are "sometimes great, and sometimes not great, but always good". Press Gallery Christmas dinner, 1991.
It was we who did the dispossessing. We took the traditional lands and smashed the traditional way of life. We brought the diseases. The alcohol. We committed the murders. We took the children from their mothers. We practised discrimination and exclusion. It was our ignorance and our prejudice. And our failure to imagine these things being done to us.
1992 The Redfern Speech, launching International Year of Indigenous Peoples
I would forbid him going going to the Senate, to account to this unrepresentative swill over there...
1993 Parliamentary speech referring to the Senate, in contrast to the House of Representatives.
This is the sweetest victory of all. This is a victory for the true believers; the people who, in difficult times, have kept the faith.
1993 election victory speech.
A familiar question for Australians is how much we are a product of our circumstances, and how much we are what we have made ourselves to be. In truth, by the act of migration the country was made: by that voluntary act and by the emigrants' ambitions it was built.
Address to the Dáil Éireann, the lower house of parliament of the Republic of Ireland, 20 September, 1993.
Don’t ask me any more questions about Mahathir. I couldn’t care less frankly whether he comes to Seattle or not next year. APEC is bigger than all of us – Australia, the United States, Malaysia, Mahathir – or any other recalcitrants.
Informal comment to the media at Seattle Airport, 22 November 1993.
We will not adopt the fantastic hypocrisy of modern conservatism which preaches the values of families and communities, while conducting a direct assault on them through reduced wages and conditions and job security.
Election campaign launch, February 14, 1996.
By the year 2000 we should be able to say that we have learned to live securely, in peace and mutual prosperity among our Asian and Pacific neighbours. We will not be cut off from our British and European cultures and traditions or from those economies. On the contrary, the more engaged we are economically and politically with the region around us, the more value and relevance we bring to those old relationships. Far from putting our identity at risk, our relationships with the region will energise it.
Election campaign launch, February 14, 1996.
In the end it's the big picture which changes nations and whatever our opponents may say, Australia's changed inexorably for good, for the better.
Concession Speech, March 2, 1996.
No choice we can make as a nation lies between our history and our geography. We can hardly change either of them. They are immutable. The only choice we can make as a nation is the choice about our future.
"A Prospect of Europe", 1997 speech at the University of New South Wales.
You just can't have a position where some pumped up bunyip potentate dismisses an elected government.
In reference to former Governor-General John Kerr. The Great Crash for The World Today book launch, 9 November, 2005.
[Australian Reserve Bank] Governor MacFarlane said recently when Paul Volcker broke the back of American inflation it's regarded as the policy triumph of the Western world. When I broke the back of Australian inflation they say, "Oh, you're the fellow that put the interest rates up." Am I not the same fellow that gave them the 15 years of good growth and high wealth that came from it?
7:30 Report interview, May 8, 2006
Between 1999 and 2004 there was no investment in Australia, it all went into housing and consumption all borrowed on the current account. When Peter Costello runs around saying, 'Oh we've paid off the debt,' it's like the pea and thimble trick. The Government debt or the massive private debt abroad? It's continuing to grow.
7:30 Report interview, May 8, 2006
The little desiccated coconut is under pressure and he is attacking anything he can get his hands on... (he is) still there araldited to the seat.
In reference to Prime Minister John Howard. ABC Radio interview, March 5, 2007.
All tip and no iceberg.
Referring to Treasurer Peter Costello, ABC Radio interview, March 5, 2007.
The fact is Burke is smarter than two thirds of the Western Australian Labor Party rolled together
Referring to disgraced former Western Australia Premier Brian Burke, ABC Radio interview, March 5, 2007.
For John Howard to get to any high moral ground he would have to first climb out of the volcanic hole he's dug for himself over the last decade. You know, it's like one of those deep diamond mined holes in South Africa, you know, they're about a mile underground. He'd have to come a mile up to get to even equilibrium, let alone have any contest in morality with Kevin Rudd.
ABC Radio interview, March 5, 2007.
He's a pre-Copernican obscurantist.
Referring to Prime Minister John Howard's attitude to industrial relations. ABC Radio interview, May 1, 2007.
Silly what's his name, the Shrek, whoever he was on the television this morning?
Referring to Howard Government Minister Joe Hockey, Lateline interview, June 7 2007.
He’s the greatest L plater of all time.
Referring to Treasurer Peter Costello, Lateline interview, June 7 2007.
[edit] Unsourced
The accounts do show that Australia is in a recession. The most important thing about that is, is that this is the recession that Australia had to have.
Announcing Australia was in recession, late 1990
Economic racism.
On tariffs.
I only had one shot in the locker and I fired it.
After a failed leadership challenge against Bob Hawke.
Get a job. Do some work like the rest of us.
To a student protestor, 1995.
We're going to bolt it home.
Assessment of his chances at the 1996 election.
I like the Queen... and I think she liked me.
In response to the controversy caused when Keating placed his hand on Queen Elizabeth II's back during her 1992 Australian tour.
Like an Easter Island statue with an arse full of razor blades.
Description of Malcolm Fraser.
An abacus gone feral.
Description of John Hewson, then leader of the Australian Liberal Party (1993)
Hewson: Why won't you call an early election?Keating: The answer is, mate, because I want to do you slowly.
I was implying that the Honourable Member for Wentworth was like a lizard on a rock – alive, but looking dead.
On John Hewson.
This is the sort of little-boy, stamp your foot stuff which comes from a financial yuppie when you shoe him into parliament.
On John Hewson.
(His performance) is like being flogged with a warm lettuce.
On John Hewson
I'd put him in the same class as the rest of them: mediocrity.
On John Hewson
Can a soufflé rise twice?
On the second (1989) attempt by Andrew Peacock to gain the Liberal leadership.
I suppose that the honourable gentleman's hair, like his intellect, will recede into the darkness.
On Andrew Peacock
The Leader of the Opposition is more to be pitied than despised, the poor old thing. The Liberal Party ought to put him down like a faithful dog because he is of no use to it and of no use to the nation.
On Andrew Peacock
We're not interested in the views of painted, perfumed gigolos.
On Andrew Peacock
It is the first time the Honourable Gentleman has got out from under the sunlamp.
On Andrew Peacock
He, as Foreign Minister, was swanning around the United States of America with Shirley MacLaine or trying to crash one of Ted Kennedy's parties...and he was trying to play statesman...while he swanned around, and then he made a cowardly attack upon the former Prime Minister before slinking back into his cabinet.
On Andrew Peacock
You've been in the dye pot again, Andrew.
On Andrew Peacock
[Most politicians have] brains like sparrows' nests - all shit and sticks.
As quoted by Peter Botsman in a column in The Australian, July 3 2002
What we have got is a dead carcass, swinging in the breeze, but nobody will cut it down to replace him.
On John Howard.
The principle saboteur, the man with the cheap fistful of dollars.
On John Howard.
He's wound up like a thousand day clock.
On John Howard
I am not like the Leader of the Opposition. I did not slither out of the Cabinet room like a mangy maggot.
On John Howard.
You boxhead you wouldn’t know. You are flat out counting past ten.
On Liberal MP Wilson Tuckey
I'm not running a seminar for dullards on the other side.
On the Liberal Party
...votes for coalition members who have always been cheats, cheats, cheats and will always be cheats, cheats, cheats and will always defend cheats, cheats, cheats..
On the Liberal Party
The Leader of the Opposition hurls all sorts of abuse at me, and all through question time those pansies over there want retractions of the things we've said about them. They are a bunch of nobodies going nowhere.
You had an important place in Australian society on the ABC and you gave it up to be a pop star...with a big cheque...and now you're on to this sort of stuff. That shows what a 24 carat pissant you are, Richard, that's for sure.
To journalist Richard Carleton
... you can't write a cheque for taste.
Sydney is the only place to live in Australia – the rest is camping out.
...their existense is putrid. It is absolutely putrid.
On the National Party
Every now and then you have to flick the switch to vaudeville.
On leadership
Politics, it's such a dignified occupation. Take these Keating-isms as an example taken from that golden age of politics where no-one was spared to rage of Keating:
Via the "Paul Keating Insults Page"
On Prime Minister John Howard:
"The little desiccated coconut is under pressure and he is attacking anything he can get his hands on"
"For Mr Howard to get to the high moral ground, he would first need to climb out of the volcanic hole he had dug for himself over the last decade. It is like one of those diamond mine holes in South Africa. They are about a mile underground. He would have to come a mile up to get to even equilibrium let alone have any contest in morality with Kevin Rudd."
"What we have got is a dead carcass, swinging in the breeze, but nobody will cut it down to replace him."
"He's wound up like a thousand day clock..."
"...the brain-damaged Leader of the Opposition..."
(Of his 1986 leadership) "From this day onwards, Howard will wear his leadership like a crown of thorns, and in the parliament I'll do everything to crucify him."
"He is the greatest job and investment destroyer since the bubonic plague."
"But I will never get to the stage of wanting to lead the nation standing in front of the mirror each morning clipping the eyebrows here and clipping the eyebrows there with Janette and the kids: It's like 'Spot the eyebrows'."
"I am not like the Leader of the Opposition. I did not slither out of the Cabinet room like a mangy maggot..."
"He has more hide than a team of elephants."
"I do not want to hear any mealymouthed talk from the Member for Benelong."
"The principle saboteur, the man with the cheap fistful of dollars."
"Come in sucker."
On Federal Treasurer, Peter Costello:
"The thing about poor old Costello is he is all tip and no iceberg. He can throw a punch across the parliament but the bloke he should be throwing a punch to is Howard, but of course he doesn't have the ticker for it."
"He has now been treasurer for 11 years. The old coconut is still there araldited to the seat. The treasurer works on the smart quips but when it comes to staring down the prime minister in his office he always leaves disappointed. He never gets the sword out."
Via Wikiquote
Government cannot get the adjustment, get manufacturing going again, and keep moderate wage outcomes and a sensible economic policy, then Australia is basically done for. We will end up being a third rate economy... a banana republic.
Speaking to John Laws on Radio 2UE, May 14, 1986.
A dog returning to his vomit
Referring to Wilson Tuckey, 1990, after Tuckey repeatedly called out the name "Christine" in Parliament.
The Placido Domingo of Australian politics.
Self description, based on the assessment that Domingo's performances are "sometimes great, and sometimes not great, but always good". Press Gallery Christmas dinner, 1991.
It was we who did the dispossessing. We took the traditional lands and smashed the traditional way of life. We brought the diseases. The alcohol. We committed the murders. We took the children from their mothers. We practised discrimination and exclusion. It was our ignorance and our prejudice. And our failure to imagine these things being done to us.
1992 The Redfern Speech, launching International Year of Indigenous Peoples
I would forbid him going going to the Senate, to account to this unrepresentative swill over there...
1993 Parliamentary speech referring to the Senate, in contrast to the House of Representatives.
This is the sweetest victory of all. This is a victory for the true believers; the people who, in difficult times, have kept the faith.
1993 election victory speech.
A familiar question for Australians is how much we are a product of our circumstances, and how much we are what we have made ourselves to be. In truth, by the act of migration the country was made: by that voluntary act and by the emigrants' ambitions it was built.
Address to the Dáil Éireann, the lower house of parliament of the Republic of Ireland, 20 September, 1993.
Don’t ask me any more questions about Mahathir. I couldn’t care less frankly whether he comes to Seattle or not next year. APEC is bigger than all of us – Australia, the United States, Malaysia, Mahathir – or any other recalcitrants.
Informal comment to the media at Seattle Airport, 22 November 1993.
We will not adopt the fantastic hypocrisy of modern conservatism which preaches the values of families and communities, while conducting a direct assault on them through reduced wages and conditions and job security.
Election campaign launch, February 14, 1996.
By the year 2000 we should be able to say that we have learned to live securely, in peace and mutual prosperity among our Asian and Pacific neighbours. We will not be cut off from our British and European cultures and traditions or from those economies. On the contrary, the more engaged we are economically and politically with the region around us, the more value and relevance we bring to those old relationships. Far from putting our identity at risk, our relationships with the region will energise it.
Election campaign launch, February 14, 1996.
In the end it's the big picture which changes nations and whatever our opponents may say, Australia's changed inexorably for good, for the better.
Concession Speech, March 2, 1996.
No choice we can make as a nation lies between our history and our geography. We can hardly change either of them. They are immutable. The only choice we can make as a nation is the choice about our future.
"A Prospect of Europe", 1997 speech at the University of New South Wales.
You just can't have a position where some pumped up bunyip potentate dismisses an elected government.
In reference to former Governor-General John Kerr. The Great Crash for The World Today book launch, 9 November, 2005.
[Australian Reserve Bank] Governor MacFarlane said recently when Paul Volcker broke the back of American inflation it's regarded as the policy triumph of the Western world. When I broke the back of Australian inflation they say, "Oh, you're the fellow that put the interest rates up." Am I not the same fellow that gave them the 15 years of good growth and high wealth that came from it?
7:30 Report interview, May 8, 2006
Between 1999 and 2004 there was no investment in Australia, it all went into housing and consumption all borrowed on the current account. When Peter Costello runs around saying, 'Oh we've paid off the debt,' it's like the pea and thimble trick. The Government debt or the massive private debt abroad? It's continuing to grow.
7:30 Report interview, May 8, 2006
The little desiccated coconut is under pressure and he is attacking anything he can get his hands on... (he is) still there araldited to the seat.
In reference to Prime Minister John Howard. ABC Radio interview, March 5, 2007.
All tip and no iceberg.
Referring to Treasurer Peter Costello, ABC Radio interview, March 5, 2007.
The fact is Burke is smarter than two thirds of the Western Australian Labor Party rolled together
Referring to disgraced former Western Australia Premier Brian Burke, ABC Radio interview, March 5, 2007.
For John Howard to get to any high moral ground he would have to first climb out of the volcanic hole he's dug for himself over the last decade. You know, it's like one of those deep diamond mined holes in South Africa, you know, they're about a mile underground. He'd have to come a mile up to get to even equilibrium, let alone have any contest in morality with Kevin Rudd.
ABC Radio interview, March 5, 2007.
He's a pre-Copernican obscurantist.
Referring to Prime Minister John Howard's attitude to industrial relations. ABC Radio interview, May 1, 2007.
Silly what's his name, the Shrek, whoever he was on the television this morning?
Referring to Howard Government Minister Joe Hockey, Lateline interview, June 7 2007.
He’s the greatest L plater of all time.
Referring to Treasurer Peter Costello, Lateline interview, June 7 2007.
[edit] Unsourced
The accounts do show that Australia is in a recession. The most important thing about that is, is that this is the recession that Australia had to have.
Announcing Australia was in recession, late 1990
Economic racism.
On tariffs.
I only had one shot in the locker and I fired it.
After a failed leadership challenge against Bob Hawke.
Get a job. Do some work like the rest of us.
To a student protestor, 1995.
We're going to bolt it home.
Assessment of his chances at the 1996 election.
I like the Queen... and I think she liked me.
In response to the controversy caused when Keating placed his hand on Queen Elizabeth II's back during her 1992 Australian tour.
Like an Easter Island statue with an arse full of razor blades.
Description of Malcolm Fraser.
An abacus gone feral.
Description of John Hewson, then leader of the Australian Liberal Party (1993)
Hewson: Why won't you call an early election?Keating: The answer is, mate, because I want to do you slowly.
I was implying that the Honourable Member for Wentworth was like a lizard on a rock – alive, but looking dead.
On John Hewson.
This is the sort of little-boy, stamp your foot stuff which comes from a financial yuppie when you shoe him into parliament.
On John Hewson.
(His performance) is like being flogged with a warm lettuce.
On John Hewson
I'd put him in the same class as the rest of them: mediocrity.
On John Hewson
Can a soufflé rise twice?
On the second (1989) attempt by Andrew Peacock to gain the Liberal leadership.
I suppose that the honourable gentleman's hair, like his intellect, will recede into the darkness.
On Andrew Peacock
The Leader of the Opposition is more to be pitied than despised, the poor old thing. The Liberal Party ought to put him down like a faithful dog because he is of no use to it and of no use to the nation.
On Andrew Peacock
We're not interested in the views of painted, perfumed gigolos.
On Andrew Peacock
It is the first time the Honourable Gentleman has got out from under the sunlamp.
On Andrew Peacock
He, as Foreign Minister, was swanning around the United States of America with Shirley MacLaine or trying to crash one of Ted Kennedy's parties...and he was trying to play statesman...while he swanned around, and then he made a cowardly attack upon the former Prime Minister before slinking back into his cabinet.
On Andrew Peacock
You've been in the dye pot again, Andrew.
On Andrew Peacock
[Most politicians have] brains like sparrows' nests - all shit and sticks.
As quoted by Peter Botsman in a column in The Australian, July 3 2002
What we have got is a dead carcass, swinging in the breeze, but nobody will cut it down to replace him.
On John Howard.
The principle saboteur, the man with the cheap fistful of dollars.
On John Howard.
He's wound up like a thousand day clock.
On John Howard
I am not like the Leader of the Opposition. I did not slither out of the Cabinet room like a mangy maggot.
On John Howard.
You boxhead you wouldn’t know. You are flat out counting past ten.
On Liberal MP Wilson Tuckey
I'm not running a seminar for dullards on the other side.
On the Liberal Party
...votes for coalition members who have always been cheats, cheats, cheats and will always be cheats, cheats, cheats and will always defend cheats, cheats, cheats..
On the Liberal Party
The Leader of the Opposition hurls all sorts of abuse at me, and all through question time those pansies over there want retractions of the things we've said about them. They are a bunch of nobodies going nowhere.
You had an important place in Australian society on the ABC and you gave it up to be a pop star...with a big cheque...and now you're on to this sort of stuff. That shows what a 24 carat pissant you are, Richard, that's for sure.
To journalist Richard Carleton
... you can't write a cheque for taste.
Sydney is the only place to live in Australia – the rest is camping out.
...their existense is putrid. It is absolutely putrid.
On the National Party
Every now and then you have to flick the switch to vaudeville.
On leadership
Not the Tampa!
So, which side of politics is gonna make the most of this little nugget. Just Three days before the Federal Election, someones gotta be able to get some political mileage here, or else they just aren't trying hard enough. And i like to know my pollies are trying their utmost.
16 rescued from sinking boat
AUSTRALIAN navy warships have rescued 16 people from a sinking wooden boat off the West Australian coast.
Defence Minister Brendan Nelson said the the identity of those on the boat plus other details were unknown and would be determined by staff from the Department of Immigration and Citizenship.
16 rescued from sinking boat
AUSTRALIAN navy warships have rescued 16 people from a sinking wooden boat off the West Australian coast.
Defence Minister Brendan Nelson said the the identity of those on the boat plus other details were unknown and would be determined by staff from the Department of Immigration and Citizenship.
It's that time of month, all month - study
Be afraid, be very afraid.
- Study shows PMS a 28-day affliction
- More than 150 physical and emotional symptoms
- Crying, eating chocolate not only option
Crikey, 28 days, will it never end!!! Well luckily i don't need to worry about this, she who must be obeyed somehow manages to be cool calm and collected throughout this 28 day pre, post, and menstrual cycle. Phew. But I nevertheless sympathise with my not so fortunate brothers out there.
....... her research exploded the traditional notion of PMS. "There is a traditional view that it's the week leading up to menstruation that is the time we experience symptoms," Ms Hateley said. "I found that's the case as well, there are significant symptoms during that phase.
"But symptoms also fluctuate across the cycle and the perception of stress in particular was higher from day one." Most women experience some of the more than 150 physical and emotional symptoms linked to PMS
150 physical and emotional symptoms. Sheesh, i didn't realise there were that many emotions. There is only one solution, stop paying experts to do this alarming research. Isn't it obvious.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Federal Erection
In more proof of my blogs growing relevance to one or two people in the Blogosphere, it comes tops in a "Google search" for the term "Federal Erection". Why anyone would be looking for a Federal Erection is beyond me, my member prefers to keep things local, but each to their own.
More Inelligible Candidates
Seems like those Labor candidates with their election winning lead, just can't seem to nominate in time. Apparently there are now up to thirteen Labor candidates ineligible if they win in Saturday's election. Their to do list musta been too full in the lead up to nominations, happens to me all the time, usually when my list runs to two pages. Although can't remember the last time i nominated for parliament.
My prediction: If Labor wins the election there will be some serious court action related to all the affected candidates, and if as a result the Liberals win, we will have our own little George Bush (substitute John Howard) stole the election scandal just like the yanks. Well they do say that imitation is the greatest form of flattery.
Stay tuned for more election predictions.
My prediction: If Labor wins the election there will be some serious court action related to all the affected candidates, and if as a result the Liberals win, we will have our own little George Bush (substitute John Howard) stole the election scandal just like the yanks. Well they do say that imitation is the greatest form of flattery.
Stay tuned for more election predictions.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Singaporeans Blur on Sex
Copied in full from thestar.com.my
MANY Singaporeans have been seeking help from doctors on how to have sexual intercourse, Sin Chew Daily reported yesterday. Singapore Thomson Medical Centre (TMC) founder Dr Cheng Wei Chen said the hospital received several people every month, mostly university graduates, seeking their guidance on how to “do it”.
Its urology senior consultant Dr Lin Fa Cai said he once treated a woman who was married for 10 years and supposedly had sex more than 1,000 times, but was still a virgin. Dr Lin said the husband, who had a doctorate degree, and his wife, who complained of being unable to conceive, sought help at the hospital. “The couple told me they had sex about three times a week but when I examined the wife, her hymen was still intact.
“He had a doctorate degree but zero knowledge on sex,” he said.
Another doctor, who declined to be named, said a couple in their 30s sought help from Mount Elizabeth Hospital and Medical Centre for failing to conceive after seven years of marriage. He said he found no problem with the couple but later discovered that the husband withdrew just before ejaculating.
SEX, SEX, SEX, SEX, SEX, (Don't mind me, it's not often i get to write a legitimate story on SEX, so i am just trying to get my hit counter thingy up, it's the only way to get girls to like you)
Other News & ViewsCompiled by BEH YUEN HUI, GLADYS TAY AND A. RAMAN
MANY Singaporeans have been seeking help from doctors on how to have sexual intercourse, Sin Chew Daily reported yesterday. Singapore Thomson Medical Centre (TMC) founder Dr Cheng Wei Chen said the hospital received several people every month, mostly university graduates, seeking their guidance on how to “do it”.
Its urology senior consultant Dr Lin Fa Cai said he once treated a woman who was married for 10 years and supposedly had sex more than 1,000 times, but was still a virgin. Dr Lin said the husband, who had a doctorate degree, and his wife, who complained of being unable to conceive, sought help at the hospital. “The couple told me they had sex about three times a week but when I examined the wife, her hymen was still intact.
“He had a doctorate degree but zero knowledge on sex,” he said.
Another doctor, who declined to be named, said a couple in their 30s sought help from Mount Elizabeth Hospital and Medical Centre for failing to conceive after seven years of marriage. He said he found no problem with the couple but later discovered that the husband withdrew just before ejaculating.
SEX, SEX, SEX, SEX, SEX, (Don't mind me, it's not often i get to write a legitimate story on SEX, so i am just trying to get my hit counter thingy up, it's the only way to get girls to like you)
Federal Election: Molotov Cocktails Not Required.
Two weeks til this whole Federal Election thing is finalised. I can't wait. Was gonna stock up on Molotov Cocktail making implements before I remembered that I am in Australia, where the worst we do is hurl abuse at each other. We have a more civilised "sticks and stones" approach to political differences, as opposed to other nations where people regularly get attacked, killed and maimed. Somehow I don't think these people are ready to put their hearts into it.. We're so civilised we even complain about the impost created by having to vote. In fact it won't be long til some green loon decides elections should be banned due to their carbon footprint.
With much trepidation some of my friends have invited me to an election party, I say trepidation as they are all rabid greenies and anti everything, who are convinced that nothing is sustainable, in fact I am surprised they are able to sustain the rage. Although since most of them drive cars, wear expensive clothes, and spend their weekends getting drunk and partying, I am guessing the rage is just a front, but a politically correct front (which is the best type) Whereas I on the other hand, think that spending too much time in a room full of people depressed about the state of Life the Universe and Everything, who will quite happily procreate whilst yelling that mankind is the worst thing that could have happened to the universe is definitely unsustainable, and in a more immediate sense of the word.
With much trepidation some of my friends have invited me to an election party, I say trepidation as they are all rabid greenies and anti everything, who are convinced that nothing is sustainable, in fact I am surprised they are able to sustain the rage. Although since most of them drive cars, wear expensive clothes, and spend their weekends getting drunk and partying, I am guessing the rage is just a front, but a politically correct front (which is the best type) Whereas I on the other hand, think that spending too much time in a room full of people depressed about the state of Life the Universe and Everything, who will quite happily procreate whilst yelling that mankind is the worst thing that could have happened to the universe is definitely unsustainable, and in a more immediate sense of the word.
So, why am I going, well duh, there'll be beer, and like I said before girls who are happy to procreate. Can anyone advise on the shelf life of a Molotov Cocktail?
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Watergate film star asks 'where is the press?'
American movie star Robert Redford, who played reporter Bob Woodward in a film about the Watergate scandal, said he regretted that US journalists were not investigating the administration of US President George Bush.
"There are deep similarities going on but where is the press? Where is the press?" Redford pointedly asked at the sidelines of a film festival in the Czech spa town of Karlovy Vary on Saturday.
WTF is old Redman on about, where is the press? Is there a world leader today that gets more air time than Dubya, is there a world leader anywhere in the last thirty years that has gotten more press time than Dubya. From fake plastic turkeys (it was real) to Mission Accomplished, to nucular weapon and all the other Bushisms that so infuriate the world, i cannot believe that anyone would believe the press have been missing in action. Stick to movies Mr "I Played a Reporter in a Watergate Movie therefore i know the press is lacking in modern bush white house politics"
"There are deep similarities going on but where is the press? Where is the press?" Redford pointedly asked at the sidelines of a film festival in the Czech spa town of Karlovy Vary on Saturday.
WTF is old Redman on about, where is the press? Is there a world leader today that gets more air time than Dubya, is there a world leader anywhere in the last thirty years that has gotten more press time than Dubya. From fake plastic turkeys (it was real) to Mission Accomplished, to nucular weapon and all the other Bushisms that so infuriate the world, i cannot believe that anyone would believe the press have been missing in action. Stick to movies Mr "I Played a Reporter in a Watergate Movie therefore i know the press is lacking in modern bush white house politics"
Faster Than Light Travel: Another Aussie First
Fair makes me proud to be Astrayan, apparently the first nation to achieve faster than light travel.
Australian's all let us ring Joyce, for she is young and free!
Perhaps now you can understand why we named our Nations Capital, Canberra, after the Canberra Bomber, apparently the first jet engined bomber aircraft.
Canberra Bomber Frolicking on the Tarmac
Australian's all let us ring Joyce, for she is young and free!
Thursday, November 8, 2007
'Closing The Space Between Us - The Rights of Aboriginal Children'
Got sent this speech to read the other day by my dear friend Michelle, who quite rightly knew it would get my back up. Hence she had enough time to put on the flame retardant suit before i responded. Read the speech here, having done that, the rest of this diatribe should make a lot more sense.
Well
Where do I start.
I CHOOSE TO START THIS RANT ......... NOW!!
Firstly, he identifies a problem, and there is a problem, but makes it sound like it has all come about in the last 11 years. It is all a failure of John Howard's Government, implying that everything was perfect before. He never mentions the other parties, and when he does mention Bob Hawk he does not mention Labor it is as if he is a politician without a party. Didn't Bob Hawk promise in the mid eighties that no child would be living in poverty? Anyway, see i am doing the same thing he did, make provocative statements that highlight the problem but don't contribute to the solution.
The problem has been around for decades, attempts have been made but they have failed. For example for many years Aborigines were given more generous welfare payments, easier access to welfare, and positive discrimination in terms of education, housing etc. These attempts failed, and I believe it is untrue to say that the failure was foreseeable. As a rule if you assist someone financially, you would expect them to prosper more than they would have without the assistance. This does not seem to have happened with many Aborigines. Although I believe that if you look at the data, from now, and compare it to 30 or 50 years ago, there would be a notable increase in the number of aborigines in full time employment, with professional and trade qualifications who are capable of standing on their own two feet without Federal or state assistance. The issue is that not enough of them have reached that point, and many of them live in the conditions described.
Point 10 is one that I partially agree with. I agree that as a nation we need to apologise for what was done in the past, but i know we are not gonna get every individual to do so, so I'm not gonna waste my time trying. I musta done something wrong, I've only been in the country twenty years, but already I'm apologising for the sins of someone Else's fathers. I think there is something in that for everyone.
Anyway, i think we could get most of this to go away if we were truly committed to the policies of equity and diversity, which don't try to treat everyone as equals, but recognise that some people have different needs, Muslims need to pray at certain times of the day facing Mecca, and so should be afforded this right, aborigines need assistance recovering from the institutionalised racism of the recent past, and so should be afforded whatever assistance is required.
There is one waste of time we can't get rid of, and that is politics, the sugar coating of policy to make it equitable. Find me a politician that didn't sugar coat anything, and i will vote for him. he'll lose, but at least he'll do it for being honest.
Anyway back to my three key questions;
Why is it so?
Can we change it?
Should we change it
Well
Where do I start.
I CHOOSE TO START THIS RANT ......... NOW!!
Firstly, he identifies a problem, and there is a problem, but makes it sound like it has all come about in the last 11 years. It is all a failure of John Howard's Government, implying that everything was perfect before. He never mentions the other parties, and when he does mention Bob Hawk he does not mention Labor it is as if he is a politician without a party. Didn't Bob Hawk promise in the mid eighties that no child would be living in poverty? Anyway, see i am doing the same thing he did, make provocative statements that highlight the problem but don't contribute to the solution.
The problem has been around for decades, attempts have been made but they have failed. For example for many years Aborigines were given more generous welfare payments, easier access to welfare, and positive discrimination in terms of education, housing etc. These attempts failed, and I believe it is untrue to say that the failure was foreseeable. As a rule if you assist someone financially, you would expect them to prosper more than they would have without the assistance. This does not seem to have happened with many Aborigines. Although I believe that if you look at the data, from now, and compare it to 30 or 50 years ago, there would be a notable increase in the number of aborigines in full time employment, with professional and trade qualifications who are capable of standing on their own two feet without Federal or state assistance. The issue is that not enough of them have reached that point, and many of them live in the conditions described.
So to me the questions become
1. Why is it so?
2. Can we change it?
3. Should we change it?
But back to those questions later.
The third paragraph really pissed me off, he says the following"
"Children and mothers make up 75% of the world's poor."
Newsflash children and others make up 75% of families!! Well that would appear to be normal to me, if the average family in Australia has 2.4 children, making the average family 4.4 people, and rounding down to four people, i would expect hat 75% of them are women and children. Amazing. I wonder what the statistics are for all male aboriginal families is, I suppose in that case only fifty percent would be living in poverty (since there are no women)!!
On page three, paragraph one of, he says "The medical evidence indicates that we will only....." But then does not state what the evidence is, who did the research, he provides us with no means of confirming that is being said. Admittedly in a speech you would not have full references but in a written transcript of said speech, particularly one put out by a uni, i would think they could provide some references. He makes the same mistake numerous times
"More than thirty major reports on child abuse state....."
is just one example. At least tell us which organisation did some of those reports, no need to mention all of them in the speech, but mention the ones that he gives the most weight to.
Anyway, the major issue in my view is "aboriginal autonomy", and he talks about it, but in the exact opposite context to what i would say. He says aboriginals should be autonomous and blah blah blah, I gathered that that was what is causing part of the problem, not enough autonomy. They have a degree of autonomy to deal with their own issues under their own law, and in many cases can't be compelled to follow western practices. No problem with that. But what happens when those practices are below the minimum level accepted by the rest of us. If under tribal law, the penalty for rape or child abuse is lesser than the western penalties, what should we do about that. He speaks of autonomy as if it is the end of all aboriginal problems, when in fact it causes some problems of it's own.
He also says "It is increasingly clear that this intervention is using the emotive language of child abuse to implement a radical indigenous policy agenda"
Whoa, the government has an agenda! Well Newsflash, i got no problem with that. The standard welfare based system we have used has not worked, all previous attempts have failed, some radical thinking is required. If someone wants to hide behind child abuse, to improve the standard of living of aborigines, whilst incidentally preventing or lowering the instance of child abuse, well that's okay by me.
He says, "The question for you my fellow Australians is, do you believe John Howard has changed? That is the Consequence of your Vote?"
Wrong Question, the question should be "Do you think that John Howard's Actions, however much you like or dislike him, will result in an improvement in Aboriginal living standards" It does not matter whether you like him or not, what matters is whether he is doing the right thing, and saying i would do it differently is a cop out. There is more than one way to skin a cat, but you don't want to stand around arguing about the best way, whilst the cat decomposes. Let the leaders lead, and and the cat is more likely to get skinned.
Personality politics is often full of crap. In the first ever televised political debate between JFK and Nixon, those who watched it on television overwhelmingly said JFK won, those who listened on the radio overwhelmingly said Nixon had won. What the hell is going on there. Evidently JFK had better personality, more presence on camera etc etc etc. Evidently this was more important than his policies. Utter Tosh, I say.
"The first Australians do have a right to autonomy that is once again being denied" like i said before, i suspect this is part of the problem, but is quoted here as part of the solution.
And finally he presents his 10 point plan. People, Friends, Australians, country men, one nation voters ET AL, I say this to you. Do not trust anyone that has a 10 point plan. 10 point plans are full of crap. If it was a 9 point plan, or an 11 point plan, i would have more respect for it. People inflate plans to get to 10 because 10 sounds important, 'Ten Commandments" "Americans Ten Most Wanted" "Top Ten Songs" top ten blah blah blah. If I saw this in a report, opinion for the author would probably go down, after i had confirmed that there were some plan padding in action. So, what have we here in this plan;
All Australians should sign a new statement pledging to support a national effort to achieve equality for all of our children.
Point 10 is one that I partially agree with. I agree that as a nation we need to apologise for what was done in the past, but i know we are not gonna get every individual to do so, so I'm not gonna waste my time trying. I musta done something wrong, I've only been in the country twenty years, but already I'm apologising for the sins of someone Else's fathers. I think there is something in that for everyone.
Anyway, i think we could get most of this to go away if we were truly committed to the policies of equity and diversity, which don't try to treat everyone as equals, but recognise that some people have different needs, Muslims need to pray at certain times of the day facing Mecca, and so should be afforded this right, aborigines need assistance recovering from the institutionalised racism of the recent past, and so should be afforded whatever assistance is required.
There is one waste of time we can't get rid of, and that is politics, the sugar coating of policy to make it equitable. Find me a politician that didn't sugar coat anything, and i will vote for him. he'll lose, but at least he'll do it for being honest.
Anyway back to my three key questions;
Why is it so?
Can we change it?
Should we change it
Well i will leave that up to you. Maybe they should come up with an Automatic-Vote-Amatic for those who don't want to make decisions. By not writing anything down, i can't be questioned so in response to my own three questions, i choose to be enigmatic and maintain a dignified silence. "Go forth and solve this problem i say, but beware, if it should come to my attention that you have been dilly dallying, i shall be most put out!"
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Who's The Man: He's The Man
Secrets of a successful relationship, know your place.
I might not wear the pants, but i still get a certain pleasure out of taking them off!!
I might not wear the pants, but i still get a certain pleasure out of taking them off!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)