Comments on: Kim Jong Il & Kevin Rudd: separated at birth?

By: Rowan

Rowan — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 03:14:41 +0000

Well then shouldn’t the focus be on protecting our telecommunications assets from foreign ownership, rather than protecting a belligerent homegrown mostly-privately-owned monopoly?

Allowing Telstra to remain a monopoly, for fear that if we don’t, Optus will get bigger, doesn’t seem quite right.

By: Tom McLoughlin

Tom McLoughlin — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 02:57:32 +0000

My views about Telstra relate to geopolitical complexity and so I think Milne and Co are entitled to run their argument because:

1. Optus owned by Singtel owned by Singapore Govt Inc, which in turn are money launderers for Burma and mediators for China Inc.

2. Following on from point 1, and made by such as ex Burgess PR flak for Sol regime - telecommunications ARE a national security issue.

3. Following point 2, an example serves - China has about $70B oil deal with Iran. W Bush was ramping a Straits of Hommuz (Arabian Gulf) ‘Tonkin’ style pretext for militaristic intervention in Iran a year or two back - something to do with mobbing speedboats and a US battle cruiser. Guess what China did to demonstrate its protective investment in Iran? It shot a so called ‘aged Chinese weather satellite’ out of the sky - a real politik message to the USA that if push comes to shove we can turn off your satellite communications for warships, subs etc. The reaction in the USA was stunned diplomatic silence and the USA never did initiate another ‘Vietnam’ in Iran, thank heaven.

4. National and economic security issues run all through Telstra, just like Crikey gets so exercised about the survival of the relatively independent Fairfax institution.

5. Through all of this democracy needs to keep a weather eye on the prediliction for slippery tongued politicians with an eye to the main chance to win deals and revel in duchessing of foreign vested interests, or indeed home grown corporates like Macquarie Bank. Because as the scorpion said to the frog - it’s in their nature.

By: Rowan

Rowan — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 02:31:28 +0000

Funny, but mostly sad.

By: Kirk Broadhurst

Kirk Broadhurst — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 02:23:37 +0000

Funny how so-called ‘market fundamentalists’ don’t understand that a monopoly (or indeed an oligopoly) is not a functioning, competitive and true ‘capitalist’ market. A distortion in its purest sense.

By: Down and Out of Sài Gòn

Down and Out of Sài Gòn — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:34:02 +0000

Rowan is exactly right - Milne’s farcical comparison is a Godwin’s Law violation, it should be seen as such, and the consequences of it follow on from that. The first consequence is that the Milne has automatically lost the argument.

Let’s not invent little “laws” for each dictator out there that finds himself in a hack’s column. There are too many hacks, and too many dictators. This week someone’s compared Rudd with Kim Il Jong, but next week he’s compared with Pinochet or Than Shwe or body-piercing Xerxes from 300. Barring signs of an actual facts-based argument lurking in the piece, Godwin them all from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.

By: Dom Padden

Dom Padden — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:24:03 +0000

My favourite dictatorship comparison is when George W. Bush aligned John Howard with Stalin, calling him a “man of steel”. Howard seemed to take it as a compliment, strangely enough.

I am assuming that Bush was aware of the provenance of Stalin’s assumed name, of course.

By: AR

AR — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 08:40:14 +0000

RayChurch - No, except the other News ravers, such as Rsuty, Porkerman & (Primate) Peernone.

By: Rowan

Rowan — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 05:54:04 +0000

I was going to suggest Hack’s Law, but it appears to already be in use. Joe’s Law it is!

By: RaymondChurch

RaymondChurch — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 05:51:23 +0000

Is there another member of the 4th Estate more qualified to be the No1 jerk, ignoramous, idiot, fool, wanker than Milne. This excuse for a writer regularly exposes his lack of skill and professionalism and over the last 3 days has confirmed his right to hold that title. As the media spokesperson for the Liberal party, it is to be expected he will attempt to find dirt on Govt members and the PM in particular, however this latest stupidity in attempting to rehash an earlier article on Rudd, giving some of his more greedy troops a “burst” in good Australian vernacular, merely shows what a grubby little gnome Milne is and shows a side of the PM the large majority of electors are quite comfortable with. I can’t imagine Hawkee not using words of a similar type when required and Whitlam was known to throw a few expletives around as the occasion warranted. Milne must have some ability, but alas there isn’t a circus currently looking for a clown. Of course News Ltd does a very good imitation.

By: meski

meski — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 05:41:21 +0000

Need a new name for comparison with Stalin. Joe’s Law?

By: Rowan

Rowan — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 05:17:00 +0000

Godwin’s Law should apply here too.