Sunday 28th of February 2021

sometimes, our gross exaggerated dreams are so outrageous we could scream...


According to the local historians, those living on “Possession Island” or near by, Cook never planted a flag on the Island and never landed there, though he sailed pass by…

Back in England, possibly asked by the Royals and the financiers of his voyage, he would have been asked: “Have you brought us back new spices or a new “potato” that will nourish those pesky annoying Irish?” 

Cook being an observer of stars and of Venus may have thought he could wriggle out of bringing no gifts by saying: “No, no potatoes, nor spices, but I claimed a whole continent for His Majesty… and here is me planting the flag on Possession Island”… The image of course would have been painted/engraved in England. The trees are wrong, and even the various media show the image flipped, like that above from the ABC “news”. Some other representations of the fake event show the Aborigine dressed in a yellow jacket instead of the blue one… Propagandists are smart people….

See the true history:

From Edward Curtin

"Ah, mon cher, for anyone who is alone, without God and without a master, the weight of days is dreadful.  Hence one must choose a master, God being out of style.”
Albert Camus, The Fall


Propagandists are smart people. They begin their devious machinations with the premise that people need to believe in something rather than remaining suspended in doubt or forced to accept the existential courage of despair that leaves them temporarily lost and without answers or masters, suffering from free-floating anxiety.

Propagandists are like Mr. Death. They know people are afraid of death and aloneness and so use that fear to manipulate them into believing their cover stories for comfort.

Propagandists are like the Candy Man, handing out fictive life savers to the shipwrecked desperadoes willing to grasp on to anything even if it has a big hole in its center.

Propagandists take this need for belief and use it to create different scenarios that they develop into full-scale social theater pieces that will give the public various options to believe, all of which are meant to satisfy the public’s yearning for something rather than nothing but which conceal the truth.

Facts don’t matter with these offerings since they are completely illusory narratives.

These staged plays usually contain their opposites; one can choose what has already been chosen for one, even seemingly contradictory scripts with opposing roles. Seemingly is the relevant word, for the opposites are not opposites but counterparts, flip sides of the same coin. But each choice is a choice of belief that satisfies the need to believe no matter how unbelievable. It’s the coin that’s counterfeit.

For the propagandists, facts are fictions used to entice the audience into double-binds so entrancing that there is no exit.  Or so they hope.

The French sociologist Jacques Ellul put it this way in his classic book Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes:

For no citizen will believe he is unable to have opinions.  Public opinion surveys always reveal that people have opinions even on the most complicated questions, except for a small minority (usually the most informed and those who have reflected most).  

The majority prefers expressing stupidities to not expressing any opinion: this gives them the feeling of participation. For they need simple thoughts, elementary explanations, a ‘key’ that will permit them to take a position, and even ready-made opinions.

As most people have the desire and at the same time the incapacity to participate [except to vote for and support pre-selected candidates], they are ready to accept a propaganda that will permit them to participate, and which hides their incapacity beneath explanations, judgments, and news, enabling them to satisfy their desire without eliminating their incompetence….He realizes that he depends on decisions over which he has no control, and that realization drives him to despair. 

Man cannot stay in this situation too long.  He needs an ideological veil to cover the harsh reality, some consolation, a raison d’être, a sense of values.  And only propaganda offers him a remedy for a basically intolerable situation.


Thus the need to choose a master, a prefabricated demigod. It is why the American presidents are presented and accepted by their followers as minor divinities. Yes, it is a civil religion, and yes, people will vehemently deny that they revere these figureheads. 

But those denials ring false, as recent history and the pageantry associated with the installation of these demigods will attest.

Take the last three presidents, for example.

Barack Obama was considered, by his followers and many others, like a prayer come true, a black messiah come to redeem the country from its racist past and evil war-making deeds of his Muslim-hating, war-mongering predecessor George W. Bush.  

That Obama then waged war on seven Muslim countries didn’t matter to his congregation. Not in the slightest. They revered him as strongly as they had denounced  Bush, the black-hatted white demon to their white-hatted black god,  for the western movie template underlies these political theater pieces. Obama was a dream come true and the dream factory went into overdrive. As the priestess Madonna prophesied with Like A Prayer in 1989:


Just like a dream
You are not what you seem
Just like a prayer, no choice
Your voice can take me there

Then the orange-halo-headed Trump was paraded in. To his followers he was the savior who would re-redeem the country from the devilish divinity Obama, the false prophet. He would drain the swamp. Desperate middle-Americans revered this NYC real-estate tycoon and reality TV star who for years was nothing but a running joke among those who actually knew who he was.  It didn’t matter to his congregation.  Not in the slightest. 

That he gave to the rich and screwed the middle-class and the poor, increased the military budget, waged secretive wars via drones and private mercenaries didn’t matter a bit. He was a religious figure. 

To Hillary Clinton’s and Obama’s acolytes, he was Satan himself, and for four years the anti-pageant play was presented by the corporate mainstream media to exorbitant box office receipts and ratings. God and Satan fought in the ring for the ultimate fighting championship.

Now Joseph Biden – just as Ronald Reagan, another acting president, had the coffee brewing for “Morning in America” – is greeted by the same media filmmakers as the latest savior, an aging but still virile demi-god who will usher in “a new day” in America.  

The pageantry surrounding his recent virtual inaugural, like all inaugurals, was a religious ceremony choreographed within an ironic circle of 20,000-armed palace guards and barbed wire fencing protecting the erection of the new king, one who, like Oedipus in Sophocles’ tragedy, is presented as the savior who will defeat the viral plague attacking the new Thebes.  

Unlike Oedipus, however, one can be assured that Biden will not seek to discover the murderer of Laius (JFK), the former king, whose assassination resulted in the plague devastating the country. Oedipus’s search for the truth didn’t end well, and Biden’s long insider career bodes well for no truth-seeking.

And like his predecessors’ inaugural ceremonies, this one featured cultural idols such as Hunger Games Lady Gaga, Madonna 2.0, promoting herself as befits idols, and  Bruce Springsteen offering his evenings “small prayer for our country” – Land of Hopes and Dreams:


Grab your ticket and your suitcase
Thunder’s rollin’ down this track
Well, you don’t know where you’re goin’ now
But you know you won’t be back….

I said this train…
Dreams will not be thwarted
This train…
Faith will be rewarded

No, we won’t be back, unless you think Biden’s slogan – “Build Back Better” – which is also the slogan of the world’s rulings elites, means what it says. Perhaps then your faith will be rewarded.

I’ll go with George Carlin when he said that to believe in the American Dream you have to be asleep.

My faith is that the corporate mass media hypnotists who work for the owners of the country will continue to pump out their religious spectacles and that the various congregations will support their masters as always. The will to believe runs very deep and hand-in-glove with the propaganda. Life’s hard and it’s tough to be without a master.

“Men don’t become slaves out of mere calculating self-interest,” writes Ernest Becker in The Denial of Death“the slavishness is in the soul, as Gorky complained.”

Propagandists’ ability to mesmerize the faithful has increase exponentially as the technological life has increased and been promoted as de rigueur.  This on-line life is propagated as a new religion whose embrace is said to be inevitable and whose faith one must accept as the missionaries for its miraculous nature spread the word far and wide.

Propagandists are smart people.

They hate freedom.

Read more:

See also:


As this discussion suggests, and as I argue in my book Empire and the Making of Native Title, if we want to understand why the British government never sought to negotiate a treaty with the Indigenous people in order to acquire sovereignty and purchase land, we need to look elsewhere than Cook and his doings in 1770. Indeed, it is only by shifting our gaze away from 1770 — and by grasping the distinctive nature of the historical truths that mythic stories tell about moments that actually occurred much later — that we are able to explain the plight of so many Aboriginal Australians today. 

Here comes "AUSTRALIA DAY" 26, January, 2021, commemorating the arrival of the first fleet of captain Phillip, on 26 January 1788... A day of conflict for a nation...

move the date...



sanitising history...

clean upclean up

team australia...


"invasion day"...

The Daily Telegraph pooped in its own knickers yesterday... Apparently an ABC reporter had the temerity of calling our glorious Orstraya Day "Invasion Day" (possibly in relation to what many Aborigines call it). But this is sacrilegious, like deliberately burning the sausages on this glorious 36 degrees in shade day... Happy whatever day. Carry on living as well and as happy as you can.


But the "offending" reporter was from the ABC... Had he been from Channel 7 or 9, no fuss would have been made... Gunning the ABC down is a pass-time of the Murdoch media...



Read from top.

united like chained road-gang convicts...

Patriotic ins and outs at the Australian unity jamboree


By JACK WATERFORD | On 26 January 2021

It wouldn’t be late January if Australians were not being drawn into pointless “national conversations” about Australia Day, its occurrence on the anniversary of British settlement and the beginning of Aboriginal displacement, and what it means to be Australian.

I used to think the anniversary was all the more embarrassing because it seemed that each year the argument began as a sort of unforced error – some divisive statement by a politician pretending to be seeking national unity while actually seeking to divide.

Increasingly, however, I have come to see the interventions as deliberate, as dog whistles, and as having a distinct relationship with similar messages that were tweeted over the past four years by Donald Trump. And for much the same purpose.

People often talked of the tweets as a quaint stream of consciousness emanating from a sleepless Trump at 4am. All too often they were offensive to particular groups of non-Trump voters, they attacked political enemies in highly personal and somewhat threatening tones, or foreshadowed drastic and possibly unconstitutional action, for example against Muslim or Mexican immigrants.

By mid-morning, the White House would be in full row-back, adding in conditional clauses, redefinitions, disavowals and explanations of the president’s exasperation. The official record would suggest something altogether milder than the earlier provocation.

We now know that many of these statements had been focused-grouped and targeted. Rather than being the occasionally ungrammatical ramblings of an insomniac, they were part of an intense social media message run by a highly professional full-time campaign and communications team at core Trump constituencies.

They served an array of purposes. First, to set the agenda, even, or particularly, among the “fake” mainstream media, many of whose journalists would palpitate about the president’s rudeness, unconstitutional instincts, lies and prevarications. That they were hostile or critical didn’t necessarily matter, as long as everyone was talking about it.

Part of Trump’s talent was that he was so outrageous that most of his advertising was free because it was news. The polarisation of America was such that criticism by the mainstream “liberal” media could be denounced as fake news and propaganda.

Second, the messages were interpreted by many Trump followers as evidence of what he would like to do, were he not constrained by nervous nellies in his team, Congress opposition, governors, foreign presidents, or inconvenient facts that even he could not deny. The electorate understood that Trump could often not do what he wanted, but were encouraged to think he would do it if he could.

Many people gave him credit for saying what he thought or saw his apparently undisciplined statements as a sign of a person who had not gone native in the Washington swamp. The smooth politicians who were forever “on message” had proven unreliable, corrupt, and in it more for the lobbyists than for the people. That Trump was erratic made him seem more authentic as a non-politician, and, at least until January 6, more legitimate among those who had enthusiastically drunk the Trump Kool-Aid.

Scott Morrison is not the first Australian politician to have employed distractions on  Australia Day. John Howard was a dedicated player of the cultural wars. He was not only conscientious about where he would draw the lines, and generally firm in his core beliefs, but was adept at finding distractions that would drive his opponents mad, or preoccupy them with a minor outrage just as Howard was taking the opportunity to perpetuate far greater enormities. As a politician who saw almost every event in terms of its political potential, he was as focused on positioning the opposition at some disadvantage as he was in preparing his own ambushes.

Tony Abbott was a total culture warrior, but without Howard’s ear, eye or nose for popular opinion. Abbott delighted in outraging the opposition and distracting it from his real purpose, but his pyromaniacal tendencies sometimes meant he burnt his own house down.

In theory, he was under the eagle eye of Peta Credlin, a tough disciplinarian, but sometimes his mischievousness was such that he would exclude her from his clever plots, believing that it was sometimes better “to ask for forgiveness than permission”.

A grenade burst in his hand when he decided to reinstate knighthoods and give one to Prince Phillip. He did not do either to please any particular constituency. He did it primarily to enrage Labor, and perhaps to twit republicans in the government’s ranks. He imagined that his decision would set off the “chattering classes” to the point that they could talk of nothing else. That would have been a welcome relief from a Christmas holiday that had begun with talk of a ramshackle ship of state in need of a good barnacle scrape. That might stop the talk about erratic decision-making, his leaking against ministers, and his secretive style of administration.

But critics in his own party saw knights as a perfect example of just what was wrong with Abbott as prime minister. He didn’t consult or think things through. He had a tin ear for public opinion and even for the opinion of his party.

Scott Morrison is more conservative, and more regular, in the messages he starts planting about Australia Day. His eye for a slogan might be good, but his ear and feel for public opinion is as cack as Abbott’s. He has made it clear from the start that Australia Day — far more than Anzac Day — is at the centre of his idea of what it is to be a patriotic Australian, proud of its culture, its history and its progress.

Though the anniversary date was only adopted as a public holiday in all states and territories in the 1990s, it has for him become deeply vested in tradition and culture in a way that should never be disturbed, least of all by people undermining his sense of basic unity of society, white or black, of ancient, old or modern arrival, or creed, outlook or prejudice.

Even more recent is the notion that its celebration should involve an orgy of ceremonies, festivals, flag-waving, anthems. And grand pronouncements by politicians claiming to own not only the day but what its meaning should be to the ordinary Australian. Often with nudges about who is Australian and who un-Australian.

Current authorities on such matters come from the son of a policeman, a former policeman, and folk belonging to a foreign religious cult closely associated with Trumpism. None is disqualified from having an opinion, but none could be said to be representative of the nation.



Read more:



Read from top...

invasion day...

Invasion Day: we didn’t get the day or date right


By JOHN CARMODY | On 27 January 2021

Writing to the Sydney Morning Herald Letters Editor, John Carmody discusses how we haven’t chosen the right day to celebrate the colonisation of Australia. So much for not changing our history.

It seems highly likely – and understandably so – that any “National Day” in Australia will be difficult for Indigenous citizens to accept.  Its association with the arrival of the Europeans, from whatever country, will always evoke traumatic emotions.

The precise date, which should never have been 26 January, is a separate issue.  It could, logically be 26 February, in commemoration of the landing of the crew from the Dutch vessel, the Duyfken, on the west coast of the Cape York Peninsula, the first such white landing here in 1606.

Or it might be 4 January, when William Dampier landed on the west coast of the continent (in 1688) and spent several days there, recording, in the process, the earliest European account of the native “Indians”.

It might justifiably be on 21 August, the date (in 1770) when, with exceedingly dubious morality or legality, James Cook “hoisted the English colours and in the name of His Majesty King George III, took possession”, in Manning Clark’s chilling words, “of the whole eastern coast … and fired three volleys of small arms which were answered by a like number from the ship.”

Yet another date might be Christmas Day, because it was about then that Phillip’s fleet rounded Van Diemen’s Land but it should not be 26 January because his entourage had arrived at Botany Bay from 19 January in 1788.

I grant that, seven days later, Phillip had decided on Port Jackson, hoisted a flag there and drunk the King’s health in porter.  Nevertheless, it was not until 7 February that, with the public reading of the monarch’s Commission to the Governor, the establishment of the rule of English Law, and the typically British humbug of the King’s injunction that (at the risk of severe punishment) the “natives” be treated well, that the colony was officially inaugurated.  Perhaps that day, with its salutary reminder that our sordid subsequent history violated that Royal Decree, should become our national day with its associated mourning?



Read more:



Read from top.

welcome to the gambling country...

Betting irregularities on the Australian of the Year Awards have been referred to the national criminal intelligence agency amid allegations a winner’s name leaked ahead of the announcement.

Federal Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton, who has responsibilities for the agency that will look into the matter, said the allegations were serious and needed to be investigated.

The National Australia Day Council (NADC) confirmed a News Corp report that it made the referral on the day the winners were announced.

“The NADC has been concerned about betting on the Australian of the Year Awards for a number of years and spoken to authorities about having these markets shut down,” a spokesperson said.

“The NADC referred betting on this year’s Australian of the Year Awards to the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission for investigation on Monday, January 25.”

Mr Dutton said he had spoken to Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission chief executive Mike Feelan and was confident he could investigate the issue.

“Australians enjoy a bet but they want to make sure that when they’re placing a bet that it’s on a fair market that it’s not rigged, that it’s not corrupt, and there are allegations here that need to be investigated,” he told Channel Nine.


Read more:



Read from top.