The Dog Whistler, His Dogs, And The Hellhound On Dissent's Trail
Harold Hark
21 August 2003

How much further can John Howard stretch his credibility until it snaps?

Ross Gittins writes about John Howard's trickiness on immigration:

What a tricky chap is Honest John Howard. If you doubt that, try yourself on this test: would you say he is a supporter or an opponent of high levels of immigration?

If you think he's an opponent - congratulations. Your ability to pick up a message through body language and undertones is first rate. That's exactly what he wants people to think.

If you think he's a supporter of high migration, however, you've hit the truth. The media haven't noticed, but if you look at the figures they shriek it.

The Bureau of Statistics' figures show that, far from falling, net migration has been on an upward trend since the Howard Government's first year in office, 1996-97.

So, where does that leave Honest John - scheming politician or skilful leader?

Howard treats terrorism in a similar way. While calling our attention to its threat on a daily basis, he does everything in his power to bring it upon us. In his black heart he rejoices in each terrorist attack, for he knows it will bolster his chances of re-election. Why?

Because the world's number one dog whistler bays on frequencies beyond the reach of the civilised ear. But the Silent Majority, evolved to the level of dogs, hear him loud and clear. Yet, while dogs may have brains the size of walnuts, they are not stupid. Surely the SM will one day awaken to the fact that their master is a mean little bastard who has bought them off with a handful of generic brand kibbles. In the meantime, how terminally pathetic they are for not seeing through his cunning lies. For they still believe the man who has made them a target for terrorism is the man who will protect them from it. Certifiable lunacy!

If they could just for a moment get their snouts out of the dwindling kibble trough, they might see him for what he is.

Conference of the Scumbags

On Wednesday Parliament witnessed the true face of John Howard's arrogant, dismissive government, a genuine showcase of ethics corrupted and hammered in stone. It was so flagrant that even a lobotomised Chihuahua would have to raise its head.

Wilson Tuckey, the result of generations of inbreeding who used Parliamentary letterheads to demand his middle-aged son be let off a traffic infringement, John Howard, the sleazy weasel who refused to sack him, and Tony Abbott, the punch-drunk pit bull whose job it is to defend the indefensible, took turns degrading themselves, their government, the Australian people, and the entire human race. And they did it without a shred of conscience.

But that's not all Honest John's government was up to. While the Used Car Salesmen in three piece suits were making a laughing stock of ethics, Richard Alston-Goebbels was busy issuing a press release to announce a new bill to shut down dissent on the internet.

The new offence will carry a penalty of two years imprisonment, double the punishment for the existing offence.

People using the Internet to advocate or facilitate violent protests, for example by spreading information on methods of violently disrupting international meetings and attacking police officers protecting such gatherings, including those using the Internet to harass or menace others are amongst those who could be prosecuted under the new offences.

Clever Dick is also including provisions to crack down on child pornography.

The new offence will form part of a package of new telecommunications-related offences which includes offences for the possession and distribution of Internet child pornography, targeting those who use the Internet to trade in child pornography

Who can argue with this (impossible) objective? Surely not Brian Harradine. But in his zeal to outlaw the child pornography, will he also cause dissent to be outlawed? Because the real reason for this bill follows the course of action the government has already taken with the ABC: NO MORE DISSENTING OPINION.

Does this government burn the midnight oil to come up with such Machiavellian "packages"? Or does Stalinist repression come natural to them. I think we know the answer.

Top