Grr-owl

Here is a second picture from the same article:

Here is the same picture, with the caption as it appeared in the Australian. Apparently, the guy is a 'moderate.'

And here's why. Check out the picture. Who is this guy? Where is he? Why is he holding a rock? Why is the bus burning?

Peace in the Middle East is more complicated than it appears, and it appears very complicated. I live in the Sunni Arab ME and am writing out of personal experience only. People were dismayed by the OBM administration doing the deal with Iran. Here, you don't bring your enemies closer, you obliterate them. Iran is the enemy. "They want their empire back," so it is sometimes said to me. But they're not the only enemy. Where else in the world would you get students writing essays about how great Hitler was because 1. He built great roads, and 2. killed a lot of Jews? However, the announcement of the Abraham Accords was greeted with utter silence. There are two reasons for this: 1. Fear, and 2. They realize there is an advantage in being close to Israel. One is access to the Al Aqsa Mosque; another, the tech (which they already buy and use); and the third is that Israel hates Iran and have the nukes to deter them, though simultaneously recognizing the nukes will not deter Iran, once Iran gets their nukes, which they are eventually sure to do. The key to the deal, however, is the sale of F-45's. This give people here first-strike capability across the region, including against Israel if or when the accords fail. So, it's a matter of priorities. Obliterate, absolutely. But obliterate your major enemy first. The next can wait. According to Henry Kissinger the world seems to be carving itself into four regions set against each other in a kind of cold war. The war is well underway in cyberspace, as Aussies should by now be well aware, and that Americans should understand as Russian interference in elections and Chinese hacking of, well, every good idea they can get their hands on. Iran is well up there now and North Korea a significant but bit-player. See Nina Schick for info on all that. So astonishingly smart, and so simple: divide and conquer using our strengths against us. It's the Art of War, martial arts 101. Anyway, Kissinger says there are four scenarios that are the most likely catalysts for a large-scale conflagration. I gather he meant a conventional conflagration, but a cyber-war may be more likely, hard to say: 1. A deterioration in US-Chinese relations, whereby they tumble into the Thucydides Trap. 2. A breakdown of relations between Russia and the West, based on mutual incomprehension and made possible by: 3. A collapse of European hard power, due to the inability of modern European leaders to accept that diplomacy without the credible threat of force is just hot air; and/or 4. An escalation in the Middle East due to the Obama administration"s readiness in the eyes of the Arab states and Israel to hand hegemony in the region to a still revolutionary Iran. Has the election of Biden made any of these less likely?

Hmmm.... think it was originally in a post by P2J.....

I do need to see them. Then verify them to ensure that what I am seeing really is what it purports to be. The fact that you recommend accepting things on faith is troublesome. Give me evidence and reasonable people will accept it. It is impossible to rig an American election, because as Bob points out, it is in fact more than 50 separate elations all of which would have to be rigged simultaneously, without evidence coming out.

I want to see them. Where can we see them?

Fear does weird things to people. ?

I reckon he’s a one-of-a-kind. I mean, who else could pull off a PR coup like this:

Not sure if this is well known in Aus or not, but Trump got the deal done by agreeing to the sale of F-45’s.....

Yeah, man, I took one look at him and the potential just smacked me in the face. In addition to the body, he's got presence.

Was stoked to hear from Richo that Jordan Lewis is in a coaching role over the pre-season. Gotta keep the quality people involved the project....

Looks to have the head for it. I like him.

Yeah, maybe he was midfield and strategy at Hawthorn....

I've invented a custard-based thick shake called the Chocco Ooze.

As I understand it, many motivated and ambitious people in the football community see MFC as a kind of mystery to be solved.

Doesn't Yze already have that role?

Might just have been case there was no position, then Egan moving on/moved on opened it up, but, yeah, I'd reckon we all hope it's cause smart people are making wise decisions....

Is it as simple as asking how long we can go on borrowing until someone wants their money back, and as we can't find another lender prepared to lend, the whole system collapses?

He contacted Goody and asked if he could come onboard. Can't recall if Chocco actually named the position. Just said that he offered to work at MFC and was knocked back. Pretty sure I heard it on SEN, probably with Lyon and Watson.... you might be able to find it if you search long and deep enough.

When Ferguson talks about most things, I can make sense of it, but as you suggest when it comes to economics he can be incoherent. At least, it seems incoherent to me. As is no doubt obvious, I know barely nothing of economics, so it’s only prudent to be prepared to accept that he may be right, but somehow I just can’t quite get how that could be. The pieces of the puzzle don’t quite fit. In his podcast with Sam Harris — #117 if you are interested, from 1:27:28 — they discuss inequality. Sam brings up Scheidel’s The Great Leveler, which argues that “very bad things” such as mass-mobilization warfare, transformative revolutions, state collapse, and catastrophic plagues are what redistribute wealth. Ferguson agrees, citing two world wars, multiple revolutions, hyperinflations and a great depression in the last hundred or so years, for their impact on wealth distribution which “left the world in 1950 in a remarkably egalitarian state.” He says that over time, with relative peace, we’ve reverted to the kinds of distributions of wealth and income comparable with those in the period before the First World War. Then he says, “It never struck me as plausible that there was a fiscal policy that could replicate the effect of two world wars, a revolution, a great depression etc, which was the argument Thomas Piketty made….” My question to you is, is his position in any way legitimate? Ferguson’s view essentially elides, dismisses, Keynes’s influence entirely...

As I heard from the horses mouth, Chocco came asking for a job in 2019 and was knocked back. Good to have him where he clearly wants to be.

I hear it is a plant to smooth the path for Zac Merrett....

...and Petty.

Jacko , Benny Brown, Weid, May, MB, TMac, Tomlinson, Gawny, Rick.... beginning to think we maybe have a good and versatile crop of big men...