say hi to michelle.
i'm not criticising anyone who didn't leave a comment; i know there are bigger and more important issues to focus on right now*, other than a man who has been left to rot in a jail overseas without a fair trial. or any trial.
michelle tells me today on page 9 of the age that the people who are against the government on this are: major michael mori, hicks' lawyer; david mcleaod, adelaide lawyer for hicks; the greens; australian democrats; fairgofordavid (support group). ok, thus far we have a list of people who could be argued to have vested interests.
what about the following?
nicholas cowdrey, nsw director of public prosecutions; law council of australia; international commission of jurists (australia); lex lasry qc, he of the fight for the underdog fame. and cindy sheehan, mother of killed us soldier, ok she has a vested emotional interest.
then there's lord goldsmith, british attorney-general; reverend john sentamu, archbishop of york; brigadier gerard fogarty, a soldier somewhere i guess, doesn't specify and gerard brennan, former australian high court chief justice.
oh, plus 76 lawyers who signed an open letter to the pm; people who were willing to put their names to this protest.
and then there's me, and maybe you.
against this is listed, as supporters of america's treatment of hicks:
john howard and the federal government
kim beazley and the federal opposition
george bush and the us government
the final word has to go to mori, hick's us lawyer. he's a marine, and he looks like one. he says that "marines love underdogs. i'm a marine" and always signs his emails with "sf" which refers to the expression semper fidelis (always faithful.)
again i ask.
send david hicks home.
and if howard says one more time "i believe, and i think most people would believe" i will fucking scream. i am not most people. most people in this country are idiots because they voted that government back in again. i'm sorry, if you voted liberal at the last election, you are no friend of mine. let's get that out there.
and by the way, are people not commenting because:
a. they don't give a rats about this
b. they're scared of being associated with me, ms sedition? in which case i will have to do the GOB cocococo chicken dance at you most promptly.
c. i have no readers?
i welcome feedback, even in email form so you don't have to have any visible connections to this most incendiary of blogs.
melba_grrrl@yahoo.com
* this is my disclaimer. if you happen to have a post currently on any of these topics, DO NOT TAKE OFFENCE. it's not aimed at anyone in particular, i'm just trying to be funny, so please don't get cross my friend. you know who i'm talking to. yes, you. just move your little green hand away from the delete-melbournegirl-from-blogroll-button, nice and slow.
[insert smiley face here]
i'm mad as hell and i'm not going to take it anymore.
15 comments:
Well I didn't post because I'm not sure I have an opinion to post, thus I didn't post. But if taking up room in the comments box is a way by which you measure the level of readership... then here's a post for ya!
<LAUGHS AT DISCLAIMER>
I was actually about to leave a comment here about the multiple choice options you gave us, before I reached the disclaimer. Now I have to comment on THAT, surely!
"Not aimed at anyone in particular", and then you happen to refer to a little green hand? I wonder whose that would be. Hmm, let's think. Who's written on both Big Brother and Krispy Kreme recently ...
Hehe, I don't mind being singled out at all. I understand that you're just having a laugh in the midst of a very serious issue. No problemo! (Although you've just helped me determine who to evict from the Big Blogger House tomorrow!)
Now back to the multiple choice thing:
(a) How could anyone not care about such a situation? It's a terrible thing to happen and I'd certainly hate it to happen to me or anyone I know. It's absolutely an outrage!
(b) I'd never be scared to be associated with you, oh wise one! You educate and challenge at every step. It is most revealing to be in your presence / read your blog / suffer ridicule at your hands for my extremely empty post topics. (Great Arrested Development reference, by the way!)
(c) I don't know for certain, but I'd say you have heaps of readers. A lot of people seem to have linked to you, anyway. I've noticed.
I think it's more likely to be one of these -- tick all that apply:
(d) I don't have much of a political brain and don't want to embarrass myself.
(e) You sound like you're ready to bite anyone's head off who says anything even remotely inaccurate, and given that I don't have much of a political brain, I may accidentally say something like that which could land me right smack-dab in the middle of the firing line.
(f) These posts are heavy, man!
(g) I'm too dumb to understand this.
(h) Oops, I got here by mistake. Where's that blog with the doughnuts and reality TV posts, again?
(i) I've been visiting your blog late in the day / early in the morning and it's been too late to get into such deep and serious topics. It doesn't mean I don't respect them or you for talking about them, though. I just planned to get around to commenting when my brain had more spark to it.
(j) This list is probably long enough now, thank you.
Can you guess which of these I'd have ticked?
You know what else is funny/weird/spooky?
I just did the EXACT SAME "insert smiley-face here" gag in my reply to you on my own blog! Before coming here and seeing that you'd already done the same thing! How bizarre is that!
Same blog design, same fascination with a certain brand of doughnuts (even if you don't want to talk about such trivialities this week), and now the same gags.
Is that you, Mum?
BTW, your email address didn't work when I tried it a moment ago. What'd I do wrong?
* Braces self for long list of answers to that question. *
d) I haven't had time to read (newish job and no internerd at home)...
I do care.
What is interesting* to me is that the government is making arrangements to have convicted criminals sent home in 'prisoner swaps' yet Hicks has been rotting in Guantanamo Bay for the past too-many years (for a long time without being charged!) without conviction and as far as the Gov't are concerned he can keep on rotting.
*by this I mean disgusting/outrageous/ another reason to despise the current political climate/ dispicable etc.
Well it's a bit late for me to be worried about sedition now, that's for sure.
I am too busy to comment properly at the moment: I need more thought than just this is fucked and it is wrong.
I DO know that Michelle Grattan is probably Australia's best political journo and as usual she is correct.
Go Melba (and Canberra) Grrrrlss, go.
I read! I agree! I just think you say it far more elegantly than I could.
I have posted about both krispy kreme and big brother! :p oh yeah, shake it, john, shake it
I thought i read that Michael Mori might not even be allowed to represent Hicks now seeing as he was appointed by the US military and being as their court-type thing is now defunct, he may we be out of a gig...
What do you know?
I nearly posted a comment yesterday asking: What can we do? Then I did an internet search and found the FairGoForDavid group, so I thought I would start there.
I also agree with Kungfujen, that you write much better about this issue than I ever could. Which doesn't mean I haven't been thinking about it. Since seeing the interview with his military lawyer on Friday night, I've been thinking about it a lot. And feeling angry and frustrated.
There you go; you are lov'd and admir'd by all.
I'm with you on this one.
thanks everyone. you know how it is. sometimes you feel like you're talking to a wall.
onward and upward.
mars, i haven't heard anything about mori not being allowed to represent him. but haven't read the paper yet today.
big hugs to you all, in solidarity
Jaysus!
I haven't been to your blog for a while and I come back to find you've gone all hell-raisin' on us. Good work!
I hardly ever post anything anywhere, so my lack of comments is probably quite in character.
What really makes me sick is that JWH, who is apparently a lawyer, is making comments in public that Hicks has committed crimes. He hasn't been charged, he certainly hasn't been convicted, and until he has, he is completely innocent.
Grrrrrrr!
I've had limited internet access of late, hence my lack of commenting.
But I'm with you on all you say and I only wish I could be as lucid on the topic as you are.
Howard is a f***wit. I've said it before and have fired off many an email to him bitching about all his f***ed up doings. I just hope that when the sedition police arrest us both we are put in adjoining cells so we can chat and shout "f***!!" a lot, particularly when mentioning Howard.
Evil f***er.
(I'm using the *** just in case Princess is reading).
Bring. Hicks. Home. NOW.
Can't we do some kind of exchange and lock Howard up in Guantanamo instead?
[feels so much less alone]
thanks everyone.
and ps m_m. princess doesn't read randomly, only when she's invited on. which has been precisely once so far.
i will warn everyone when her delicate eyes may peruse these pages.
might also help if i put my correct email address.
this be it:
melba_grrrl@yahoo.com.au
THAT must be why there were no messages flooding in
Post a Comment