Thursday, March 13, 2014

Thu Mar 13th Todays News

The UN is not supposed to fund terrorism. But it has and does. The terrorists who hijacked an airplane in 1976 claim they were the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The craft was supposed to go from Athens to Paris. The hijackers diverted the plane to Benghazi, Libya. There, one of the 246 passengers feigned a miscarriage and was released. After refuelling, the aircraft went to Entebbe, Uganda. Idi Amin was leader of Uganda at the time. Four people joined the hijackers, and the passengers were separated into non Israelis and Israelis. For some stupid reason, a justification is given on wikipedia stressing that some non Israeli Jews were released, while non Jewish Israelis remained. Apparently terrorists discriminate. 

Following the Jordanian civil war, some Jordanians called themselves Palestinian and corrupted South Lebanon, reigning rockets on Israeli sites from Lebanese territory. Forty so called Palestinians were incarcerated in Israel. Thirteen others were incarcerated in Kenya, France, Switzerland and West Germany. The hijackers at Entebbe demanded the release of those prisoners for the one hundred and six Israeli hostages. The resulting stand off lasted a week. An air France flight took the non Jewish Israelis away, except for the flight captain and crew who remained behind, and one French nun. 

The Hijacking was the 27th June. The rescue was the 4th July. Israel had negotiated with Idi Amin, who refused to help free the hostages. An elderly woman hostage was taken to a local hospital for care. Israel approved a rescue mission. Yonaton Netanyahu was in charge. Yonaton planned well, and was the only casualty for Israel in the raid. He had destroyed Ugandan fighters on the ground so they would not intercept. In retaliation Idi Amin had the hostage who was being treated in the hospital killed, along with treating staff who tried to prevent it. Yonaton died on that July 4th. But he was born on this day, 1946. Thank you Mr Netanyahu for your service. 

For twenty two years I have been responsibly addressing an issue, and I cannot carry on. I am petitioning the NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell to remedy my distress. I leave it up to him if he chooses to address the issue. Regardless of your opinion of conservative government, the issue is pressing. Please sign my petition at

Happy birthday and many happy returns Toni Shouse Woroniak a compelling artist whose birthday falls on the day a compelling artist William Herschell discovered Uranus in his garden in Bath. True, and cleaner than it sounds.


Tim Blair – Thursday, March 13, 2014 (1:11pm)

Elizabeth Farrelly – whose epic sense of personal entitlement is a matter of record – calls for a reining-in
It’s plain that eco-conscious living involves a reining-in of personal entitlement in the interests of the collective good. This is not socialism. It’s just common sense. 
Presumably that call is meant for people other than Farrelly. Here she lists some of her holiday venues
Mediterranean villages, Balinese mountaintops, luxury yachts. 
And just last August Elizabeth was reining over England: 
London in summer is like a fat girl in a bikini. Wildly different, unexpectedly lovely & gloriously inappropriate. 
(Via handjive)


Tim Blair – Thursday, March 13, 2014 (4:33am)

On the weekend, rag-topped SMH embarrassment Peter FitzSimons looked forward to Tuesday’s radio ratings
I have two key predictions. Kyle and Jackie O will be well down on KiisFM from the heights they knew on 2DayFM. The obvious hope was that they would bring that audience with them, but to judge by my daughter and her friends, though they liked the duo on 2Day a lot, they don’t quite know what or where KiisFM is, and haven’t bothered to switch. 
Other children located the pair without difficulty. FitzSimons continued: 
And the second prediction is that Angela Catterns will surge in the morning slot on 2UE … the former ABC broadcaster has been a revelation this year. I, for one, had forgotten how informative, balanced and entertaining she is. There has long been criticism that commercial talkback lacks strong female voices, but she is all that and more and will break the mould. 2UE will rise this year, with her at the prow. You heard it here, first! 
Catterns surged all the way from 3.0 per cent to 3.8 per cent. Rise!
(Via TPR)


Tim Blair – Thursday, March 13, 2014 (3:53am)

bossy bid to ban an utterly inoffensive word: 
Can banning one school-yard word really change the world? Sheryl Sandberg says yes.
Sandberg – the chief operating officer of Facebook and author of the best-selling book “Lean In” – is spearheading the launch of a campaign today to ban the word “bossy,” arguing the negative put-down stops girls from pursuing leadership roles. 
It also restricts cows:

Don’t call me Bossy!


Tim Blair – Thursday, March 13, 2014 (3:40am)

A terrified parent prepares for battle after his family is taken hostage by a pet cat. Listen here to the fellow’s emergency call.


Tim Blair – Thursday, March 13, 2014 (2:43am)

Fairfax’s favourite stock image scowly lady makes yet another appearance:


Fairfax really should use her to illustrate every Fairfax story. She’s the company’s perfect emblem: scolding, nannyish and humourless. 


Tim Blair – Wednesday, March 12, 2014 (2:09pm)

If anybody wants some sedatives, don’t bother asking Jenna Price. The outraged journalism academic is clearly low on supplies
Of the many utterly loathsome actions of the members of this government, the attempt to besmirch, belittle and demean our ABC is among the worst.
There can be no other analysis of this concerted campaign than to say it is a determined attack on democracy … 
Sure, Jenna. Whatever you say. Then follows a paragraph that might work better if it was screamed in the dark: 
You can imagine, of course, how uncomfortable this must make those who lie for a living. Who cannot bear the forensics of investigation, which good reporters carry out on behalf of the nation. This is where, in the studios of Ultimo, in Parliament House, this is where and when we find out whether our future Prime Ministers have bothered to read the financial statements of the companies about which they proclaim. This is where we can, from the comfort of our couches, cheer drink every time we hear those words “carbon tax” or “penalty rates” without one whit of proof from those who claim to understand our economy. Who claim to have the ears of the ranks of C-suite around the country. Who pretend to know what horrors are being perpetrated in our names on those who seek asylum. 
I don’t know about you, but I need a stiff cheer drink after that. 
For the past six months – at least – Coalition politician after Coalition politician has sought to derail the national broadcaster, to threaten covertly its managing director, Mark Scott, to unsettle and derail its reporters … 
Poor reporters. They’ve been “unsettled”. Imagine how much more unsettled they might be if the government, say, tried to silence or intimidate them. Price (shown here in her cardigan of concern) ends with a swipe at The Australian‘s Chris Kenny: 
It’s our ABC. Not yours. 
That’ll be good news for Chris, who can no doubt expect a tax refund for decades of contributions to something he doesn’t own. Wouldn’t mind a piece of that myself.
UPDATE. Poor, sensitive Jenna
It’s always been my problem that I feel too much. 

The first whiff of a recovery

Andrew Bolt March 13 2014 (12:37pm)

Growth up a little. Retail sales a lot. Now this:
AUSTRALIA’S jobs market roared back to life in February, generating almost 50,000 new jobs, more than enough to offset announced high-profile losses at Qantas, Alcoa, Holden and Toyota. 

An increase in the number of people looking for work helped keep the national unemployment rate unchanged at 6 per cent for the second month in a row - the participation rate rose from a near eight-year low of 64.6 per cent to 64.8 per cent.

While part-time work retreated since January the number of full-time jobs surged by 80,000 to 8.05 million, bringing the total number of Australians in work for more than one hour a week to 11.53 million, a record high thanks also to a continually rising population.
Could Abbott get his reward? Could the country? 

How today’s “anti-racists” are exactly what they say they condemn

Andrew Bolt March 13 2014 (11:07am)

Marcia Langton claims I intimidate Aborigines of fair complexion:

Langton is encouraged by Djarmbi Supreme, who in turn is encouraged by her:

He is paid by taxpayers:
Djarmbi, who works as an Aboriginal Education Officer in Aboriginal Health...
Djarmbi, who was raised mostly by his white mother and solicitor step-father, claims to hate racists and says I am one:

I wanna spear that Andrew Bolt c..t
To prove light skin mob still practise culture
That’s word… Honest...that’s my word
I won’t sleep easy till that rat gets burnt
He means it:
“So yeah, I really do want to spear him in the leg - that’s not a joke.”
He thinks I’ve been too mean, and urges me to be kinder:
An open letter to Andrew Bolt,

I hope you get face cancer.... I want you to suffer and be humiliated. You are a piece of sub-human trash.

But he worries the face cancer might be too slow a death for me, and suggests if “everybody chucked in a dollar we could have this c..t murdered”:

(The red censor’s pen is my own.)
This thought has occurred to other Leftists fighting for a kinder and reconciled Australia - people like film-maker Justin Olstein:

Greens candidate Michael Quall is equally devoted to reconciliation and “caring” as any of those above:
Michael ...  has worked for the federal, ACT & Queensland public sectors, after commencing a distinguished career at the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet in Canberra in 1993…
He has served as the CEO of Aboriginal corporations in Western Australia and Queensland, and has sat on the boards of several NGOs in both Canberra and Brisbane, including Volunteering Queensland and the Youth Coalition of the ACT which he chaired. Michael has also chaired two Ministerial Councils reporting to the ACT Government…
Michael is also a former Young Canberra Citizen of the Year, ACT NAIDOC Young Aboriginal Person of the Year, and a recipient of the Centenary Medal…
At the forefront of Australia’s Reconciliation and anti-racism movements for many years, Michael … passionately believes in the message of the Australian Greens, and strives in his own life, and to encourage others around him, to live the ideals of a compassionate, caring, and sustainable existence.
Naturally, being so committed to reconciliation, he is not in favor of murdering me - just beating me to within an inch of my life. Writing two years ago under his performance name:
(Thanks to reader Peter H.) 

The best way to save Qantas? Fly it, don’t subsidise it

Andrew Bolt March 13 2014 (7:40am)

Niki Savva:

GIVEN his fevered defence of its workers and the need to keep Qantas Australian, coupled with his accusations that if the government abandoned them they would be taken over by - horror - Chinese or Middle Eastern airlines, it seemed reasonable to ask Bill Shorten about his own flight plans.
In January, Shorten and his wife Chloe travelled to Paris and London. Mrs Shorten’s business-class ticket was paid for by Labor law firm Slater & Gordon. His was paid by the taxpayer…
Bottom line: no, he never actually made it on to a Qantas plane on any of the legs - a fact that will give the government a priceless comeback next time the issue arises. There are people who put our money where their mouth is. Then there are others who simply mouth off.
(Thanks to reader Peter.) 

Marcia Langton says sorry for falsely accusing me on ABC TV of racial abuse. Will the ABC?

Andrew Bolt March 13 2014 (7:37am)

The politics of race

Aboriginal academic Professor Marcia Langton apologised to me last night for her false claims on Q&A on Monday that I’d racially abuse a colleague and driven her from public life.
She also apologised for equally false claims - made in The Age three years ago - that I believed in the “master race” and “racial hygiene”.
Langton admitted I was not a racist, despite claiming the opposite on national television on Monday. But she refused to explain why she just made things up about me, and why she’s called so many people racist. Listen to our confrontation here.
Will the ABC’s Q&A next Monday now correct the record and apologise for airing what host Tony Jones called ”those sort of facts”? Langton’s slurs devastated me and were false and defamatory. The damage should be repaired as best the ABC can.
From the transcript…

Langton apologises for falsely claiming on Q&A on Monday that I believed in “race theories” and had subjected one of her colleagues to to “foul abuse ... simply racial abuse”, had “argued that (her colleague) had no right to claim that she was Aboriginal”, and had hurt her that she “withdrew from public life”:

BOLT:  Marcia, I want to summarise them. You said I heaped racial abuse on Misty Jenkins. False. You said that I questioned her right to identify as Aboriginal. False, because you can see the paragraph in front of you. I am sure you are looking - I wrote one paragraph about itand I’m sure you’re looking at it now and you can see it’s not true what you said. You said she was so traumatised she withdrew from public life. False. She’s very involved in public life. Everything you said was false and I’m wondering if I’m going to get an apology from you.
LANGTON: I will apologise to you.
BOLT:  I asked you why you made stuff up about me on Monday. You apologise, but you don’t actually say why you did it.
LANGTON: You won’t let me answer the question.
BOLT: I can’t tell you how hurt I was.
LANGTON: You won’t let me answer the question.
BOLT: All, right. Answer it. Why did you make stuff up about me on Monday?
LANGTON: Well, that’s not the question I’m answering.
Langton apologises for saying three years ago that I believed in the “master race” and Nazi theories of “racial hygiene”:
BOLT: Two years ago i asked you to apologise for making other just as terrible comments about me then.  You privately, in a lunch hosted by the ABC’s Jon Faine, said that you apologised to me – privately. Said you’d consider doing it publicly and I never got it.
LANGTON: I apologised for hurting your feelings. 
BOLT: No. No.
LANGTON: You said at that lunch your feelings were hurt. And I said I apologise if I hurt your feelings.

BOLT:  You said you apologised for calling me someone who believed in the master race.
LANGTON: Well, I did apologise for that. Yes,
BOLT:  Yes. And you never did it publicly. I want to go back to this. Again
LANGTON: Well, I do it now. Andrew, can I do it now? I apologise for saying that you believe in the master race. But let’s go to what you actually said…
BOLT:  And racial hygiene? What about the racial hygiene crack? That I believed in racial hygiene.
LANGTON:  What I was explaining in that article is that there are concepts of race going around in our community. And one can interpret a lot of what you say as, ah, ah
BOLT:  Only if you’ve got a nasty disposition would you interpret what I think as being allied to Nazi thoughts of racial hygiene. It was a disgusting crack.
Langton admits I am not a racist:
PRICE:  Marcia, Marcia, Marcia. Stephen here.  Do you genuinely believe that Andrew Bolt is a racist?

LANGTON: Well, no, I don’t think he’s a racist but I think he goes too close to the line
Warren Mundine, the Abbott Government’s top adviser on Aboriginal issues didn’t like the arguments I put in my banned articles (but is that really reason to ban them?). Still, as Langton now admits, he agrees I am not a racist:

I know Andrew Bolt, I know he’s not a racist, I know he’s an alright bloke.
A partial transcript here (sorry, ran out of puff near 1am.):

Icon Arrow Continue reading 'Marcia Langton says sorry for falsely accusing me on ABC TV of racial abuse. Will the ABC?'

Taxpayers shouldn’t pay for the delicate - or deadly - principles of the artist

Andrew Bolt March 13 2014 (7:27am)

An elegant and principled move by George Brandis to educate artists on the important link between well-meaning actions and their consequences - you know, like “compassion” and a 1000 dead boat people:
FEDERAL Arts Minister George Brandis has signalled a significant shake-up of arts funding to avoid political “blackballing”, in the wake of what he describes as the “shameful” decision by the Biennale of Sydney to reject private sponsorship from Transfield…

The minister has sent a strongly worded letter to Australia Council chairman Rupert Myer, demanding a new policy to deal with any applicant that “refuses funding offered by corporate sponsors, or terminates a current funding agreement”.
The letter - obtained by The Australian - stresses that when government funding for the arts is under budgetary pressure, it is “difficult to justify” funding an arts festival that has rejected the financial support of its principal private partner.
“You will readily understand,” writes the minister, “that taxpayers will say to themselves: ‘If the Sydney Biennale doesn’t need Transfield’s money, why should they be asking for ours?’ “
The Sydney Biennale last week rejected its “founding partner” sponsorship from Transfield Holdings (believed to be worth $600,000 annually) after nine artists boycotted the event on the grounds that the company has a minority shareholding in Transfield Services, which has contracts to operate the Manus Island and Nauru detention centres.
Paul Sheehan:
… the Biennale board delivered an almighty, ungracious, short-sighted and ultimately gutless humiliation and rejection of the Belgiorno-Nettis family, which has nurtured the Biennale from its inception 41 years ago and sustained it with millions of dollars worth of sponsorship grants…
Because of the Belgiorno-Nettis family, Transfield Holdings has also been a long-term sponsor of the Australian Chamber Orchestra, the Museum of Contemporary Art, the Walsh Bay Sculpture Walk and Sculpture by the Sea and has supported the Art Gallery of NSW.
And remember the suffering the artists never protested against - and the solution to which they now oppose:
More than a thousand men, women and children died as a result of Labor, the Greens and open-border activists letting the chaos begin, then refusing to accept the consequences of their actions.
Well, let them at least face the consequence of their boycott.
(Thanks to reader Peter of Bellevue Hill.) 

Called racist just once too often. To fight or to hide?

Andrew Bolt March 13 2014 (12:37am)

Free speech, The politics of race

STRANGE, after all I’ve been through, but Monday on the ABC may have been finally too much for me.
You see, I was denounced on Q&A - on national television - as a racist. I watched in horror as Aboriginal academic Marcia Langton falsely accused me of subjecting one of her colleagues - “very fair-skinned, like my children” - to “foul abuse ... simply racial abuse”.

Langton falsely claimed I was a “fool” who believed in “race theories” and had “argued that (her colleague) had no right to claim that she was Aboriginal”. I had so hurt this woman she “withdrew from public life” and had given up working with students (something seemingly contradicted by the CV on her website).
And when Attorney-General George Brandis hotly insisted I was not racist, the ABC audience laughed in derision.
Not one other panellist protested against this lynching. In fact, host Tony Jones asked Brandis to defend “those sort of facts” and Channel 9 host Lisa Wilkinson accused me of “bullying”. And all panellists agreed Brandis should drop the government’s plan to loosen the Racial Discrimination Act’s restrictions on free speech, which the RDA used to ban two of my articles.
Can the Abbott Government resist the pressure from ethnic and religious groups to back off?
So it feels I’ve lost, and not just this argument. I feel now the pressure to stop resisting the Government’s plan to change the Constitution to recognise Aborigines as the first people here - a dangerous change, which divides us according to the “race” of some of our ancestors.
My wife now wants me to play safe and stop fighting this new racism, and this time I’m listening.
This time I was so bruised by Q&A that I didn’t go into work on Tuesday. I couldn’t stand any sympathy - which you get only when you’re meant to feel hurt.
It was scarifying, even worse than when a Jewish human rights lawyer told a Jewish Federal Court judge that my kind of thinking was “exactly the kind of thing that led to the Nuremberg race laws” and the Holocaust - a ghastly smear published in most leading newspapers. That time, at least, half a dozen Jewish and Israeli community leaders and officials, who knew my strong support for their community, privately assured me such comments were outrageous and the attempt by a group of Aboriginal academics, artists and activists to silence me wrong.
True, none said so publicly for the next two years for fear of discrediting the RDA, which they hope protects them, yet it was some consolation.
But this?
How could I have failed so completely to convince so many people that I am actually fighting exactly what I’m accused of?
The country’s most notorious racist today is someone whose most infamous article, now banned by the Federal Court for the offence it gave “fair-skinned Aborigines”, actually argued against divisions of “race” and the fashionable insistence on racial “identity”.
It ended with a paragraph the court does not let me repeat, but which I will paraphrase as precisely as my lawyer allows:
(Read the full article here.) 

Among the very greatest of all

Andrew Bolt March 12 2014 (6:26pm)

Your favorite books, poems and music - and mine

A terrific essay on Joseph Conrad by Theodore Dalrymple.
And I’ll repeat, having started rereading War and Peace - the greatest of writers, unlike the mediocre, are often conservatives. And, yes, I do include Dickens (as I explain in comments here).
(Thanks to reader James.) 

“It’s our ABC,” Leftist journalism lecturer tells conservatives

Andrew Bolt March 12 2014 (6:10pm)

Culture wars, Media

Jenna Price, a fact-challenged teacher of journalism, hyperventilates over conservatives asking the ABC to merely honor its obligation to be balanced:
Of the many utterly loathsome actions of the members of this government, the attempt to besmirch, belittle and demean our ABC is among the worst.
There can be no other analysis of this concerted campaign than to say it is a determined attack on democracy; the right of reporters to ask the hardest questions; and the right of the citizenry to expect its journalists will speak truth to power.
Price quotes in evident disapproval a polite request I made to the Left to simply share a resource we all pay for, as is fair:
And those attacks have had a chorus of approval from the fankids of the right, from Andrew Bolt to free speech musketeer Chris Kenny (with his own pet hashtag, #theirabc) to Miranda Devine.
Wrote Bolt in February: “Realise how unfair it would be to have the taxpayer-funded ABC completely in the hands of one political caste?”

Showing no sign of having contemplated for a second what I was actually asking, Price sends a message to conservatives - and especially to Chris Kenny, who was called a “dogf’” on ABC TV with a mocked-up picture shown of him sodomising a dog:

It’s our ABC. Not yours.
No, Jenna. The ABC does not belong to just you and your tribe. It belongs to us all. Check its charter.
And this woman teaches journalists. Pity any conservatives in her class. 

Marcia Langton plays the full deck of race cards

Andrew Bolt March 12 2014 (4:09pm)

How many people has Aboriginal academic accused of racism - directly or by clear inference - just for having a different opinion to her own?
Professor Boris Frankel:
Indigenous academic Marcia Langton has again accused a prominent rival of “racism”, using an internal university mailing list to sledge a critic of her controversial ABC Boyer Lectures… Professor Boris Frankel ... in the latest Arena Magazine ... wrote of his disappointment over Langton’s “simplistic narrative of goodies and baddies based on an equally simplistic political geography"…
But Langton’s riposte published last week on the AASnet mailing list says Frankel’s critique could not be taken seriously because he is “racist”:
“History will judge Frankel’s attack on me as dubious, questionable critique with no evidence to support his outrageous claims … like some of you, Frankel believes that it is legitimate to say anything at all, even with no evidence, about me. The racism is obvious and, as I said, I will respond fully in due course.”
Professor Germaine Greer:
Marcia Langton has delivered a stinging rebuke to Germaine Greer, describing her views as outdated and simplistic and condemning the feminist for a “cleverly disguised” racist attack on Aboriginal people. Writing in The Australian today, Professor Langton dismisses Greer’s claims that Aboriginal men suffer a rage they “can’t get over” ...
“Taken as a whole, her arguments are racist,” says Professor Langton, the chair of Australian indigenous studies at Melbourne University.
Professor Tim Flannery:
ABORIGINAL academic Marcia Langton has accused former Australian of the year Tim Flannery of holding a racist belief that indigenous Australians are ‘’enemies of nature’’…
Professor Langton said the ‘’racist assumption in the green movement about Aboriginal people being the enemies of the wilderness’’ had been a recurring theme in deals between conservation groups and state governments ‘’to colonise Aboriginal land under the green flag’’… Accusing conservationists and governments of ‘’racist chicanery’’, Professor Langton said Aboriginal lands held a diversity of fauna and flora because of ancient Aboriginal systems of management, and because indigenous people had fought to protect their territories from white incursion.
Labour lawyer Josh Bornstein:
Mr Bornstein tweeted, “Tim Flannery is racist and all black fellas are budding mining magnates. Did I get that right, Marcia Langton?”
Professor Langton replied: “No stupid, you didn’t.”
After he commented on her “mild and unimaginative abuse”, the Melbourne University professor snapped back, “Doodums. Did the nig nog speak back? ...”
Historian Geoffrey Partington:
“Hitler had Goebbels, John Howard’s got Geoffrey Partington ...  This is the treason of the clerks that Dr Coombs was talking about that we let people like this assume the mantle of historian when the unmitigated garbage that comes from his pen and his mouth.”
Professor Larissa Behrendt, who, ironically, accused me of racial discrimination:
“Behrendt, on the other hand, was raised in suburban Sydney. Her mother is white, and her late father was removed from his family… Behrendt and the other anti-intervention campaign maestros have assumed the role of superior thinkers whose grand education and positions in the metropolis qualify them to heap contempt on the natives of that faraway place where other urban Australians rarely tread foot and about which they sustain a romantic out-of-date mythological view.
“In this view, one sustained by Behrendt and company, the natives are simply not smart or sophisticated enough to know what is right for them. Once upon a time this was the role of the patrol officers, now it’s the turn of the city slicker Aborigines with an axe to grind.”
Prime Minister John Howard:
“...the race-hatred wielded with callous deliberation and deviousness by Howard’s regime ...”
Me (2012):
“These trails of his thinking are not so much spoken out loud but the silent assumptions of a code of racial hygiene that is older than this nation itself. It was ideas about racial purity, racial hygiene, the master race, the inferior races, a perverted idea about the survival of the fittest and other such nonsense that led to the incarceration of Aboriginal people in reserves in the 19th century to prevent ‘’mixing’’ of the ‘’races’’ and later, the segregation laws that specified where and how ‘’half-castes’’ and other ‘’castes’’ could live. [Note: Langton’s claims are false.]”
Me (2014):
“In my opinion, the articles that (Andrew) Bolt wrote about several Aboriginal people were far from the subject of politics and simply abusive. Now, just to take one instance, there was a young woman who was the victim of his abuse ... Dr Misty Jenkins ... the victim of foul abuse from Bolt now, nothing that he said about her was political. It was simply racial abuse. He argued that she had no right to claim that she was Aboriginal and, like most fools who put this argument in public, we are expected to deny our parents and our grandparents because somebody believes in race theories. So, I absolutely refute ... that this has to do with … (the) suppression of political debate. [Langton’s claims are false.]”
Journalism academic Wendy Bacon and former ABC journalist Wendy Carlisle:
And earlier this week she assailed two prominent critics - journalism academic and New Matilda contributing editor Wendy Bacon and former ABC investigative journalist Wendy Carlisle - failing to grasp the “invisibility of racism” because they had not “hounded” other Boyer lecturers over conflicts of interest. The bitter exchange occurred after Crikey drew attention to the fact both Langton and the ABC had failed to disclose tens of thousands of dollars in research cash provided by resources giants, including Rio Tinto and Woodside, that she later singled out as indigenous employment champions.

ABC audit: if stories are biased, it’s to the Left

Andrew Bolt March 12 2014 (3:51pm)

Culture wars, Media

We are to believe the ABC isn’t really biased of the Left, apart from those times that even its handpicked assessors admit that it is:
Two independent audits of ABC news and current affairs stories and political interviews have found the public broadcaster overwhelmingly meets its professional standards and is fair and impartial.
More than 95% of the content examined attracted no criticism or concerns from the two non-ABC reviewers: author and journalist Gerald Stone and former BBC journalist Andrea Wills.
However, out of 97 stories about asylum seekers there were some issues identified by Stone as “raising concerns about the standard of coverage and requiring further investigation”, one on 7:30 and four on Lateline.
So no bias, except for five out of the 97 stories - which, oddly enough, all tilt to the Left’s side of the argument. What a coincidence!
From the Stone report
Segment 1: Tamils speak out about against ASIO security rulings
Summary of content: Three Tamil men initially accepted as refugees in Australia complain that they had subsequently been wrongly branded as security threats by ASIO and thus have been confined indefinitely in Villawood Detention Centre without recourse to legal appeal or knowing what the allegations are against them. Their cause is supported by an eminent barrister, Phillip Boulten, SC, who argues that it is patently unjust for them to be denied access to any means of appeal, effectively left in limbo for the rest of their lives. The three Tamil men agreed to give interviews to Lateline to win support for their cause....
Initial Finding: This report deserves credit for exposing a possibly grave injustice and its show of sympathy for the potential victims is understandable. Still, it failed to apply the required degree of scrutiny to them as well to the expert witness, thus weakening the impact of an otherwise compelling story by tainting it with suspicion of bias.

Segment 5: People-smuggling accused ‘victims of smugglers’

Summary of content: Reporter Brown visits an impoverished fishing village on the Indonesian Island of Sulawesi with a lawyer representing one of some 300 Indonesians held in Australian prisons on people-smuggling charges. The lawyer, Edwina Lloyd, insists that her client, who comes from this particular village, had no knowledge whatsoever that he was being asked to commit an illegal act when he agreed to serve as crewman on a vessel carrying a group of travellers… Lloyd proceeds to go around the village taking photographs as ‘evidence’ of how poor the villagers are. She meets with the fisherman’s wife who tells her she is so sad about her husband’s prolonged absence that ‘I cry every day.’ The wife shows her Australian visitors the grave of an infant son who died of chickenpox while her husband was being held in custody....  Lloyd sums up her case by describing villagers like these as too uneducated to know anything about politics or the law....
Finding: The segment appeared to have only one purpose --to exploit the bias of imagery to evoke sympathy for crew members of people- smuggling vessels.

Segment 6: Sri Lanka still unsafe

Summary of content: According to Tony Jones’s introduction, Lateline had gained access to a new documentary entitled ‘Silenced Voices’ purporting to have evidence of war crimes committed by the Sri Lankan government during the civil war and expressing grave concerns about the fate of countless thousands of Tamils following the defeat of their military wing. Jones advised that the story to follow, featuring interviews with two journalists who appeared in the documentary, suggested that the most recent asylum seekers arriving in Australian waters from Sri Lanka were escaping human rights abuses. That assessment differed markedly from the Federal Opposition’s depiction of them as merely ‘economic’ refugees seeking better living conditions....
Evaluation: The introduction to this segment overstated its relevance to the asylum seeker debate as it plays out in Parliament. The story itself, in my estimation, offered nothing approaching proof of officially sanctioned persecution. Nevertheless, there are certainly grounds for concern that deserve the attention of a serious current affairs program and the High Commissioner’s appearance met the standard of balance.

Segment 7: Australia ‘does not deserve a Security Council seat

Summary of content: The report returns to a subject previously covered in segment 1, namely the plight of three Tamil refugees branded security risks. The focus this time is on Premakumar, brain damaged after being beaten by Sri Lankan soldiers… The program quotes a witness at Villawood who claimed Premakumar had been assaulted by SERCO security guards at Villawood… [T]his segment also features an interview with Ben Saul, professor of international law at Sydney University and a lawyer representing 38 Tamil refugees assessed by ASIO as security risks. He takes the view that Australia did not deserve to win its bid for a seat on the Security Council because its policies towards refugees were in violation of United Nations requirements and so inhumane as to cause them mental distress.
Evaluation: In journalistic terms the interview with Dr Saul was used as a ‘peg’ to revisit and update the programs previous story on Tamil refugees complaining about ASIO assessments. The report, however, failed to raise questions that certainly needed asking Doesn’t Australia at least deserve recognition for taking in more migrants –including refugees—per capita than almost any other nation? If human rights abuse was a bar to Security Council membership why had it been granted in the past to numerous nations controlled by dictatorial regimes?…
Dr Saul is undoubtedly qualified to offer his opinion on the complex issue of eligibility for Security Council membership. If Lateline’s producers, however, still felt that particular subject was important enough to bring to the attention of a national TV audience, then weren’t they obliged by the standard of balance to devote a separate segment to it—a debate in which Saul’s partisan views could be challenged by someone prepared to argue that every nation has the right to assess potential security threats among its newly arrived refugees?

Segment 20: Torture claims emerge from Sri Lanka
Summary of content: Leigh Sales introduces this report by calling attention to the fact that Tamil asylum seekers are now routinely being forced to return to their homeland because the government insists they no longer face the threat of officially-condoned persecution ‘But tonight,’ she adds, ‘one Sri Lankan Tamil living in Australia tells a very different and disturbing story, a story of torture at the hands of the Sri Lankan Army Intelligence just last month.’ ...
Evaluation:  ... I was left with no doubt that his account, as he related it, was credible. In my opinion, however, the program’s treatment of his account contained a fatal flaw.

Here is how reporter Ewart introduced her star witness in her voice over commentary. ‘Kumar….says… he was abducted, raped and tortured by Sri Lankan Army Intelligence officers.’ The problem is, he doesn’t say that at all in terms of what the program actually put to air. The transcript—the exact words viewers would have heard-- contains only one reference to army intelligence. ‘They told my brother that we are from army intelligence.’
In the course of the interview, as broadcast nationally, there was no mention of the two men establishing their identity with official credentials. The place where he was taken, as he described it, may have had bloodstains on the wall but he makes no mention in the program of seeing other guards around it, flags, uniforms or anything to suggest it was a military establishment. Of course, an ordinary viewer might well suppose that’s exactly how military intelligence would operate. The job of a journalist, however, is to exercise extreme caution when hearing the words ‘they told.’ ...
It’s not hard to think of plausible alternatives to who they might have been. They could have been ill-disciplined soldiers or plainclothes policemen acting on their own. In the unsettled aftermath following 30 years of bitter civil war, they could have been Sinhalese ruffians out to cause mischief, taking the law into their own hands. Or they could simply have been extortionists seeing profit to be made in holding a wealthy restaurant owner’s newly arrived nephew for ransom.
Meanwhile, given Sri Lanka’s efforts to deny all accusations of continued persecution of Tamils, one might assume the last thing a government-controlled agency like Army Intelligence would want to do was arrest a Tamil who now made his home in Australia and send him back with gruesome burn scars for all to see—not exactly as subtle a form of torture as water-boarding.

A typical viewer, when confronted with such imagery, is almost certain to conclude: it’s got to be the military intelligence that did that! There’s only the program to warn them of other possibilities and the only permissible word for a journalist to use in introducing a report of such potential impact was a clear-cut alleged as in ‘alleged to be army intelligence agents’. The use of such a qualification is not a sign of weakness for a well- respected current affairs program –it is a mark of its reliability in distinguishing between proven fact and assumption. Instead, Leigh Sales effectively declared the 7:30 Report to have evidence, in the form of a victim’s statement, telling ‘a story of torture at the hands of the Sri Lankan Army Intelligence just last month.’
Five stories, all sympathetic to the Left’s side of the argument. How curious.
Bear in mind, though, that bias is not just evident by the treatment of the topic selected. It is also evident by the selection of the topic itself. Why, for instance, do repeated stories on allegations on Sri Lankan Government oppression rather than repeated stories on people falsely claiming refugee status? Why do repeated stories questioning the tactics used to stop boats rather than questioning the failure to do what’s required?
By the way, can I do the next audit - of, say, the ABC’s coverage of global warming? 

































=== Posts from last year ===

An IDF helicopter crashed during a routine training exercise in the early hours of this morning. Reserve officers, Lt. Col. Noam Ron (49) and Maj. Erez Flekser (31) were killed in the tragic accident. An investigation has been launched to discover the reasons for the accident.

The IDF and its soldiers join the grieving families in mourning their loss.

Sierra Alpine Night Reflections — at Tioga Pass.


SON: "Daddy, may I ask you a question?"
DAD: "Yeah sure, what is it?"
SON: "Daddy, how much do you make an hour?"
DAD: "That's none of your business. Why do you ask such a thing?"
SON: "I just want to know. Please tell me, how much do you make an hour?"
DAD: "If you must know, I make $100 an hour."
SON: "Oh! (With his head down).
SON: "Daddy, may I please borrow $50?"
The father was furious.
DAD: "If the only reason you asked that is so you can borrow some money to buy a silly toy or some other nonsense, then you march yourself straight to your room and go to bed. Think about why you are being so selfish. I work hard everyday for such this childish behavior."
The little boy quietly went to his room and shut the door.
The man sat down and started to get even angrier about the little boy's questions. How dare he ask such questions only to get some money?
After about an hour or so, the man had calmed down, and started to think:
Maybe there was something he really needed to buy with that $ 50 and he really didn't ask for money very often. The man went to the door of the little boy's room and opened the door.
DAD: "Are you asleep, son?"
SON: "No daddy, I'm awake".
DAD: "I've been thinking, maybe I was too hard on you earlier. It's been a long day and I took out my aggravation on you. Here's the $50 you asked for."
The little boy sat straight up, smiling.
SON: "Oh, thank you daddy!"
Then, reaching under his pillow he pulled out some crumpled up bills. The man saw that the boy already had money, started to get angry again. The little boy slowly counted out his money, and then looked up at his father.
DAD: "Why do you want more money if you already have some?"
SON: "Because I didn't have enough, but now I do.
"Daddy, I have $100 now. Can I buy an hour of your time? Please come home early tomorrow. I would like to have dinner with you."
The father was crushed. He put his arms around his little son, and he begged for his forgiveness. It's just a short reminder to all of you working so hard in life. We should not let time slip through our fingers without having spent some time with those who really matter to us, those close to our hearts. Do remember to share that $100 worth of your time with someone you love? If we die tomorrow, the company that we are working for could easily replace us in a matter of days. But the family and friends we leave behind will feel the loss for the rest of their lives. And come to think of it, we pour ourselves more into work than to our family.






This morning I joined colleagues from the Coalition and across the aisle for breakfast to celebrate last Friday's International Women's Day. Julie spoke on the terrific achievements of women throughout our region.

4 her





Fog City - San Francisco

The fog rolls into the bay. It was about the right amount of fog that it does not cover the whole city :) It is one of the reason people call it - fog city . One of my lucky snapshot of the day with the classic fog in the bay area.

 — at Marin Headlands.


“This government will go down in history as the first Australian government outside of wartime to attack freedom of speech by seeking to introduce a regime which effectively institutes government sanctioned journalism." 
News Limited CEO Kim Williams 

If anyone was even thinking of voting Labor at the next election, this should be wakeup call - for at the next election, not only is our economy at stake, so too is our democracy and freedom of speech.

Guy thinks he is jumping in a puddle, but actually..


Celestial Magic in a Jovian Sky

the comet panSTARRS

Global warming causes scrotum shortage

Andrew BoltMARCH132013(8:49am)

The extreme rainfall during the 2012/2013 Australian summer, like all the other extreme weather events, occurred in a warmer and moister climate system compared to 50 years ago. Extreme rainfall is consistent with the type of events scientists expect to see more often in a warming climate.
Large kangaroo scrotums are in short supply for a souvenir-making taxidermist after the continuing rain drove kangaroos beyond the range of shooters.
(Thanks to reader Waxing Gibberish.)

Get their hands off our throats

Andrew BoltMARCH132013(5:36pm)

 Free speech
News Ltd boss Kim Williams sounds the alarm while it’s still legal: 
The Daily Telegraph fights back while it’s still free: 

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy yesterday announced a new proposed statutory position of Public Interest Media Advocate, among a raft of changes the government will attempt to ram through parliament by the end of next week.

The advocate would oversee the Press Council, the main vehicle for complaints about the print media, and could take back exemptions from privacy laws afforded to journalists to report valid news stories if the advocate deemed a breach of standards.
Communications Minister Stephen Conroy does double speak on Lateline last night: 
STEPHEN CONROY: What’s a sad day for democracy is the continued erosion of diversity of opinion. And nobody wants to see a further concentration of opinion and ownership is a vital factor in the diversity of opinion.
Don’t be fooled. What Conroy wants is not more diversity of opinion but less.
Where on earth is the evidence of a lack of diversity of opinion? For opinions of the Left, there is the gigantic ABC, The Age, the Sydney Morning Herald, the Courier Mail, various columnists in News Ltd (Phillip Adams, David Penberthy, Malcolm Farr, Susie O’Brien etc), Crikey, ArenaThe Green Left WeeklyThe Conversation, Sky News, the Global MailThe Project, and so many other radio and Internet outlets, from Mamamia to GetUp.
For conservatives and Right-wingers there are various News Ltd columnists, The Australian, 2GB, Chris Kenny on Sky News, QuadrantThe Bolt Report on Channel 10, Michael Smith News, my blog and some other outlets on radio and the Internet.
Where is this “erosion”?
Here are hints of the real problem, several drawn from Conroy’s unwittingly revealing interview last night on Lateline.
First, Conroy has already called an inquiry into what the Greens insisted was the “hate media” - an inquiry that focused on News Ltd and journalists reporting on climate change from a sceptical position.  (Conroy really does believe there’s a News Ltd plot against the Gillard Government.)
Second, Conroy intervened to block News Ltd’s winning tender of the Australia Network, giving it back to the more friendly ABC.
Third, Conroy in this election year handed the ABC $10 million for news coverage.
Fourth, Conroy on Lateline cited as a benefit of the $37 billion NBN he’s building the ability to help Crikey, a hard-Left website:
I’m a huge supporter in trying to bring the National Broadband Network, which will allow all of those digital voices to come into people’s homes, but we’re not yet at the stage where Crikey, probably the most well-known blog/subscription model, actually only has about 15,000 customers.
Fifth, Conroy in citing the need for tougher rules against journalists just two examples of alleged error and bias that - surprise! - involve reports critical of the Gillard Government:
I think my colleague Anthony Albanese recently had an experience where a news report went to air on the nightly 6 o’clock news, he put in a complaint to the ACMA. He was upheld completely. All of the points made in the program were wrong....

I myself had an experience where someone complained about the Daily Telegraph’s reporting of the National Broadband Network. And they made three complaints. All of them were upheld by the Press Council. And they were ordered to - by the Press Council, the Daily Telegraph, to correct it prior to Christmas a couple of Christmases ago, and not only didn’t they comply with that, they waited until 27th December and they put it on I think about page 42 in tiny print.

Sixth, in saying on Lateline laws were needed for more diversity of opinion, he in the next breath mentioned News Ltd as an opponent: 
So it will be a sad day for democracy if there was a further reduction in the diversity of opinion. So, News Limited have at times been quite hysterical about this.
And, seventh, I know Conroy has threatened a media organisation about giving me a platform, and also know how another media organisation has seen his threats of controls as threats meant to make their coverage more government friendly.
No one, but no one, should doubt that however Conroy dresses up these changes, they are an assault against the freedom of journalists to say what they think, and against the freedom of the public to hear whom they want.
It is astonishing - revolting - that such attacks on free speech should be launched in Australia today. and the plethora of blogs that aggregate content created elsewhere would not be regarded as significant media organisations under proposed new media laws unveiled yesterday by the federal government.
The IPA’s Chris Berg explains Conroy’s changes - giving government and its “independent” bureaucrats more control over what you are allowed to read and hear: 

Mr Turnbull said appointing a government official to check on the press was a way to “bully the media” and a public interest test on ownership would also lead to political influence over the sector.
“I have no doubt that we would seek to repeal any sort of public interest test on media takeovers,” he said.
The statutory press oversight would also be repealed.
“I do not see why there should be a government official, a public official, a bureaucrat no doubt, overseeing the Australian media,” Mr Turnbull said.

“The press, now writ large courtesy of the internet, has always been free subject to the laws of defamation and contempt of court and so forth. And it should remain free. We should be enjoying more freedom, not less.”
ALL politicians are self-interested. But few are as shameless as Communications Minister Stephen Conroy.

His proposed “media reforms” may be a thinly veiled response to a technologically driven changing media landscape, but we all know their real purpose: to punish and rein in the federal government’s critics in the media…

Conroy has been egged on by Labor backbenchers and the Greens for months about the evils of media companies such as News Limited, publisher of The Australian. Former Greens leader Bob Brown famously dubbed News as part of the “hate media” and called for licensing for newspaper proprietors. Current Greens leader Christine Milne called for a “fit and proper test” so the government could control who invested in the media.

In November 2011 Labor senator Doug Cameron said reporting in News Limited paper The Daily Telegraph that Kevin Rudd might challenge for leadership of the ALP amounted to a “threat to democracy”. Of course, when Rudd did challenge less than six months later, Cameron was among his number-crunchers.

Steve Gibbons, another Labor backbencher, even called for individual journalists to receive fines to improve the “fairness of our media”.

Conroy has finally delivered in spades for the most deranged critics of the media.
I like Rinehart and do not understand the legal argument here, but this is not a good look for someone on the board of the company employing the journalist:

Mrs Rinehart, the chairman of Hancock Prospecting, has served a subpoena demanding Adele Ferguson hand over notes of conversations she had with Mrs Rinehart’s son, John Hancock.

Ms Ferguson, author of an unauthorised biography of Mrs Rinehart, has until March 29 to provide “emails, text messages, notebooks and any recordings of interviews that may have been made” in relation to conversations the journalist had with Mr Hancock dating back to September 2011, Fairfax reports.
Rinehart’s lawyers says the report is sensationalist and inaccurate: 
Ms Ferguson is, like many people are every day, the recipient of a subpoena as a third party with information relevant to legal proceedings on foot.  The subpoena process is an integral part of the civil justice system, permitting litigants to seek information from third parties that is relevant to existing proceedings.  The media is not excused from this integral part of the justice system.

In Ms Ferguson’s case she has had extensive conversations with Mr John Hancock in her capacity as an author commissioned, we understand, by Fairfax and more recently as a Fairfax journalist.  No one is seeking to force her to reveal her source.  That source is acknowledged by Ms Ferguson as being Mr Hancock, who has been extensively quoted by her. Ms Ferguson sought and published information from Mr Hancock despite acknowledging in her book (at page 379) Mr Hancock’s “agreement not to speak to the media.”

The contents of Mr Hancock’s communications to Ms Ferguson are relevant to the conduct of an arbitration the details of which are confidential.  Any documents produced by Ms Ferguson under the subpoena to the arbitrator will also remain confidential.
(Thanks to readers Susan and Peter. Image via Catallaxy.) 
March 13Fast of Esther (Judaism, 2014)




Holidays and observances[edit]

“Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.” - 2 Peter 1:4
Morning and Evening by Charles Spurgeon
March 12: Morning
"Thou shalt love thy neighbour." - Matthew 5:43
"Love thy neighbour." Perhaps he rolls in riches, and thou art poor, and living in thy little cot side-by-side with his lordly mansion; thou seest every day his estates, his fine linen, and his sumptuous banquets; God has given him these gifts, covet not his wealth, and think no hard thoughts concerning him. Be content with thine own lot, if thou canst not better it, but do not look upon thy neighbour, and wish that he were as thyself. Love him, and then thou wilt not envy him.

Perhaps, on the other hand, thou art rich, and near thee reside the poor. Do not scorn to call them neighbour. Own that thou art bound to love them. The world calls them thy inferiors. In what are they inferior? They are far more thine equals than thine inferiors, for "God hath made of one blood all people that dwell upon the face of the earth." It is thy coat which is better than theirs, but thou art by no means better than they. They are men, and what art thou more than that? Take heed that thou love thy neighbour even though he be in rags, or sunken in the depths of poverty.

But, perhaps, you say, "I cannot love my neighbours, because for all I do they return ingratitude and contempt." So much the more room for the heroism of love. Wouldst thou be a feather-bed warrior, instead of bearing the rough fight of love? He who dares the most, shall win the most; and if rough be thy path of love, tread it boldly, still loving thy neighbours through thick and thin. Heap coals of fire on their heads, and if they be hard to please, seek not to please them, but to please thy Master; and remember if they spurn thy love, thy Master hath not spurned it, and thy deed is as acceptable to him as if it had been acceptable to them. Love thy neighbour, for in so doing thou art following the footsteps of Christ.
"To whom belongest thou?" - 1 Samuel 30:13
No neutralities can exist in religion. We are either ranked under the banner of Prince Immanuel, to serve and fight his battles, or we are vassals of the black prince, Satan. "To whom belongest thou?"

Reader, let me assist you in your response. Have you been "born again"? If you have, you belong to Christ, but without the new birth you cannot be his. In whom do you trust? For those who believe in Jesus are the sons of God. Whose work are you doing? You are sure to serve your master, for he whom you serve is thereby owned to be your lord. What company do you keep? If you belong to Jesus, you will fraternize with those who wear the livery of the cross. "Birds of a feather flock together." What is your conversation? Is it heavenly or is it earthly? What have you learned of your Master?--for servants learn much from their masters to whom they are apprenticed. If you have served your time with Jesus, it will be said of you, as it was of Peter and John, "They took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus."

We press the question, "To whom belongest thou?" Answer honestly before you give sleep to your eyes. If you are not Christ's you are in a hard service--Run away from your cruel master! Enter into the service of the Lord of Love, and you shall enjoy a life of blessedness. If you are Christ's let me advise you to do four things. You belong to Jesus--obey him; let his word be your law; let his wish be your will. You belong to the Beloved, then love him; let your heart embrace him; let your whole soul be filled with him. You belong to the Son of God, then trust him; rest nowhere but on him. You belong to the King of kings, then be decided for him. Thus, without your being branded upon the brow, all will know to whom you belong.

Today's reading: Deuteronomy 16-18, Mark 13:1-20 (NIV)

View today's reading on Bible Gateway

Today's Old Testament reading: Deuteronomy 16-18

The Passover
1 Observe the month of Aviv and celebrate the Passover of the LORD your God, because in the month of Aviv he brought you out of Egypt by night. 2 Sacrifice as the Passover to the LORD your God an animal from your flock or herd at the place the LORD will choose as a dwelling for his Name. 3 Do not eat it with bread made with yeast, but for seven days eat unleavened bread, the bread of affliction, because you left Egypt in haste--so that all the days of your life you may remember the time of your departure from Egypt. 4 Let no yeast be found in your possession in all your land for seven days. Do not let any of the meat you sacrifice on the evening of the first day remain until morning.

Today's New Testament reading: Mark 13:1-20

The Destruction of the Temple and Signs of the End Times
1 As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!"
2 "Do you see all these great buildings?" replied Jesus. "Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."
3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4"Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?"

Today's Lent reading: Matthew 10-12 (NIV)

View today's Lent reading on Bible Gateway
Jesus Sends Out the Twelve
1 Jesus called his twelve disciples to him and gave them authority to drive out impure spirits and to heal every disease and sickness.
2 These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; 3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; 4 Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.
5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6 Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. 7 As you go, proclaim this message: 'The kingdom of heaven has come near.' Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received; freely give....

Post a Comment