The Prime Minister Is a Liar

We already know that Hon. Julia Gillard, Prime Minister of Australia, is a crooked liar.  Today, St. George’s Day, 2GB’s Ben Fordham publicly confirmed on his radio show that the statement he made in March, when interviewing the PM, that she is being investigated by Victoria Police, for alleged fraud, is true.  Naturally, our mendaciloquent PM denies everything.

Si noscat mendaciloquam, oderit Julia Gillard
et nostram haec ministram illam prima nefaria primam.

(“If she knew our mendacious prime minister
even base Julia Gillard would hate her.”)

Listen to Ben Fordham’s statement on April 23, 2013.

Listen to Ben Fordham’s  interview with Hon. Julia Gillard on 7 March, 2013.

Remember, the PM has already lied in Parliament:

Ms GILLARD (Lalor—Prime Minister) (14:48):  I have in fact dealt with these questions on the public record.  I stand by those truthful statements, and the construction that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is trying to put on them is not a fair construction.  I refer her to my extensive press conference, where I dealt with all of these issues in a great deal of detail.

Neither she nor her Canberra press lackeys referred to the power of attorney in the transcript which her own office released. By saying she “dealt with these questions on the public record”—specifically, the power of attorney which she “witnessed” as well as the mortgage wherewith it was secured—she willfully misled the House.

UPDATE:  see Michael Smith’s “Deny, Deny, Deny.  True to form and entirely unbelievable”.
Of course, ABC News fails—yet again—to mention this important story.

UPDATE II:  see Grace Collier’s “Diary” in The Spectator of 2 March 2013:

Hedley [Thomas] and I have both written about the ‘AWU scandal’.  Some weeks ago I sent the following question to the PM’s office after speaking with the police:  ‘I am asserting that the PM is a subject of a police enquiry.  I believe the investigation was initiated in response to an allegation made against the PM, specifically that she created a false document … I am wanting to know whether the PM is aware the investigation is into whether this allegation is correct and if so whether she intends to comply.  By comply I mean respond to any police requests for interview that may be made.’  And the PM’s response:  ‘The investigation into this matter has been known for some time.  As the Prime Minister has repeatedly made clear, she was not involved in any wrongdoing.  The investigation is a matter for the police.’
The Prime Minister hasn’t denied my assertion that she is a subject of a police enquiry, nor have the Victorian Police corrected it.  It strikes me as ironic that a Prime Minister whose primary impairment is a lack of trust from the electorate may soon be interviewed by the Fraud Squad over her rôle in a major crime.

UPDATE III:  a song:

She’s a Liar

Have we an obligation to listen to our leaders with respect?
Are honour and integrity virtues we may rightfully expect?
Listen to the PM; there is never any honour to detect:
    she’s a liar.

That woman must equivocate, ever fabricating through each day,
she’s misrepresenting and deceitfully inventing all the way;
misleading, misinforming, the truth is something she will never say:
    she’s a liar.

It aint so complicated that she’s prevaricated to us all;
perfidious, mendacious, duplicitous in matters great and small,
simply put she tells untruth, accordingly we have to make this call:
    she’s a liar.

See also “Unfit to Lead” and “The PM Lied”. 

UPDATE IV:  Andrew Bolt joins in the fun with “Claim: Police investigating Gillard on slush fund”.

UPDATE V:  see “PM denies AWU investigation claims”, by Steve Lewis and Carly Lawrence:

Victorian police are escalating their investigation into the union scandal involving Julia Gillard's former boyfriend, engaging forensic accountants to track hundreds of thousands of dollars in allegedly suspect payments.

As detectives continue to interview key witnesses in the Australian Workers Union slush fund scandal, Ms Gillard yesterday denied claims from a Sydney radio host that she was being investigated by police over the affair.  […]

“The police are interested in comments made by Julia Gillard in the interview with me,” Mr Fordham told his listeners.

Mr Fordham told listeners he knew “for a fact that the Prime Minister is being investigated” by the Victorian police.

But a spokesman for Ms Gillard said the PM has “never been contacted by police and never been asked to provide a statement”.

Well, I imagine that, sometimes, people may be investigated by the police without their being informed, and even without being asked for a statement, until police have completed other investigations and obtained relevant documents.  We need not pay very much attention to any typically equivocatory denial from the PM or anything which her lying lackeys assert.

UPDATE VI (24 April):  shortly after midnight, mirabile dictu, I could find no reference to Fordham’s claim in either the Sydney Morning Herald or The Age.

UPDATE VII:  see “Gillard denies new AWU request”, in The Australian, by Hedley Thomas and Pia Akerman:

A former union employee who has told of depositing $5,000 into Julia Gillard’s bank account at the direction of her allegedly corrupt union boss boyfriend has been asked by Victoria Police to make a formal statement as part of an ongoing fraud investigation.

The request came as the Prime Minister denied allegations made by radio broadcaster 2GB’s Ben Fordham that she was under direct investigation.

Ms Gillard has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in relation to the money.
Fordham said Victoria Police had verified to him that she was being investigated and asked him to make a statement about responses Ms Gillard gave in a March 7 radio interview about her conduct in an alleged fraud involving several hundred thousand dollars in the early 1990s.
The Australian is aware that detectives have questioned more than 12 witnesses since late last year who had direct knowledge of the Australian Workers Union slush fund scandal, the role of Ms Gillard at law firm Slater & Gordon and admissions by former AWU official Ralph Blewitt that he helped perpetrate a major fraud at the union.

UPDATE VIII:  some previous posts:

“Gillard’s End is Nigh” (19 January, 2013);
“Once is Happenstance …” (19 November, 2012);
“One Obvious Wrongdoing is the Misprision” (16 November);

“‘Τετέλεσται’”  (23 August, 2012);
“Yet More on Gillard” (22 August, 2012);
“‘Young and Naïve’ and ‘the Benefit of the Doubt’” (21 August, 2012);
“More on Gillard” (20 August, 2012);

“‘Depart, I Say, and Let Us Have Done with You’” (21 July, 2012);

“The PM’s Distress” (22 June, 2012);

“The PM’s Gag” (10 February, 2012);

“Incredibly Challenging” (10 November, 2011);

“The Loathing of Julia Gillard” (22 September, 2011);
“The National Interest” (20 September, 2011);
“The Elocution of Julia Gillard” (18 September, 2011);
“Principium Exitus” (31 August, 2011);
“Another Story You May Not Read” (includes a Statutory Declaration by Robert Kernohan, 29 August, 2011);
“A Story You May Not Read” (29 August, 2011);

“The PM and the People Agree” (4 July, 2011);
“The Wisdom of Julia Gillard” (at The Friends of CO₂, 26 June, 2011); and
“She’s a Woman” (at Say “Yes’’ to More Taxes, 17 July, 2010).

UPDATE IX (27 April):  see “Who knows PM Julia Gillard is under investigation?”, by Hedley Thomas, in The Australian:

In the days after a heated 2GB radio interview in March, during which Julia Gillard was questioned closely about the AWU slush fund scandal, a detective in Victoria’s Fraud Squad, Ross Mitchell, made a strategic decision.
One answer the Prime Minister gave during a dogged tussle in her interview with Ben Fordham stood out.  Mitchell knew it when he heard it.  The other detectives knew it too.
Although seemingly innocuous to those not involved in the probe, Gillard’s answer was new and pivotal.  It meant police in Melbourne would need a sworn statement from Fordham in Sydney, even though as a journalist he would be expected to subsequently disclose some key facts.
The actions that Mitchell and other police took in seeking further information from Fordham led to him stating in unequivocal terms on his radio show this week something that had been previously cryptically and very carefully inferred—the Prime Minister is under formal Victoria Police investigation as a result of the 18-year-old Australian Workers Union fraud.  Fordham has kept a pledge to police to not publicly reveal more than this.  […]
Neither the Police Commissioner of Victoria, Ken Lay, nor the Prime Minister’s office has sought to dispute any of Fordham’s assertions.  Nor is the PM’s office now suggesting, as it did in March, that the Victoria Police investigation has nothing to do with Gillard.  The reality is that Gillard’s office cannot know the details of the probe.
Lay, who has had the opportunity to correct the record if he decided that Fordham had jumped to a wrong conclusion in naming Gillard, let it stand.  […]
For an alleged fraud being taken seriously since late last year by seasoned detectives, Australians should ask hard questions about why large sections of their media, and particularly the public broadcaster, still baulk at reporting the AWU scandal; downplay the story or, worse, self-censor; ask few or no questions; and even mock journalists who have lost their jobs for pursuing it—Michael Smith and Glenn Milne.
Australia’s best-resourced media outlet, the ABC, has scarcely, if at all, reported the ongoing police investigation this year. Only after Media Watch questioned the ABC’s obvious reticence to look at the AWU story in any meaningful way last year, the 7.30 program belatedly weighed in.  […]
For Mitchell's taskforce, one of the most interesting features of [Ralph] Blewitt’s story is that he has told it in the knowledge that he faces going to prison. Having admitted to police an incriminating role in what he calls a fraud, Blewitt can be prosecuted and convicted. There has been no deal.
One of the planks of Blewitt’s story, which 2GB’s Fordham latched on to in his interview with the Prime Minister in March, concerns a “power of attorney” document bearing Gillar’'s signature as the official witness.  According to Blewitt, it was a false document.
Blewitt has repeatedly said the “power of attorney” was not worth the paper on which it was written.  The document permitted Wilson to buy the Fitzroy terrace house (in Blewitt's name) at auction.  Blewitt, who was living in Perth at the time, claims it is bogus—that Gillard could not have “witnessed” it as they were thousands of kilometres apart at the time.
In previous rejections of Blewitt's claims about this document, the Prime Minister insisted she always witnessed such documents properly as a solicitor.  But Fordham tells Inquirer that all of Gillard’s previous answers seemed to avoid declaring outright that she and Blewitt were in the same room when the power of attorney was witnessed.
“I wanted a straight answer from the PM on that simple question when I interviewed her in March and I wasn’t going to let it go,” he said.
Gillard finally confirmed [i.e., asserted] to Fordham that she and Blewitt were in the room when the document was signed. It is an assertion that could only be [proven] wrong if Victoria Police have evidence placing them on opposite sides of Australia.

UPDATE X (27 April):  the supposed “specific power of attorney” (note the lack of a second witness):

A “specific power of attorney” differs from an “enduring power of attorney” but, nonetheless, see the Western Australian Office of the Public Advocate’s helpful advice on an “Enduring Power of Attorney”; the “Enduring Power of Attorney Information Kit” (p. 15) suggests:

When you sign your enduring power of attorney form, your signature must be witnessed by two people.

Both witnesses must:

   • be present when you sign the form

   • be 18 years of age or older

   • have full legal capacity

At least one of your witnesses must be a person authorised to witness statutory declarations under the Oaths, Affidavits and Statutory Declarations Act 2005 (see Appendix B).  You may choose to have two authorised witnesses, but this is not essential.

The person who is not an authorised witness must not be a party to the enduring power of attorney (i.e. a witness cannot be a sole, joint or substitute attorney or a person involved in a marksman or readover clause in the enduring power of attorney).

It is however also recommended that the authorised witness is not a party to the enduring power of attorney, and can be seen as an independent witness.

I doubt that many reasonable people, knowing of Julia Gillard’s relationship with Bruce Wilson, would contend that she was “an independent witness”.
Victoria also requires two witnesses; see the Victorian Office of the Public Advocate’s helpful advice in “Take Control—A kit for making powers of attorney and guardianship” (p. 41):

The two witnesses must sign the ‘Certificate of witnesses’.  You cannot be a witness and neither can your attorney.  At least one of the witnesses must be someone who is not related to you or the person(s) you appoint as your attorney(s).  One of the witnesses must be authorised by law to witness the signing of statutory declarations.

When Ben Fordham asked the PM whether she were in the same room as Mr. Blewitt when she supposedly witnessed the “specific power of attorney”, she replied:  

I properly witness documents as a lawyer.  So you can believe Mr Blewitt or you can believe me, Ben.  I’m not overly fussed what you conclude, but I witnessed documents properly as a lawyer.  […]
I’ve witnessed documents properly as a lawyer.  […]
I don’t remember each document, but I witnessed documents properly.  […] 
I witness documents properly.  […] 
I witness documents properly.  […] 
my practice as a lawyer was to witness documents properly.

I should hope that a qualified solicitor, in order to witness a document properly, would ascertain that the said document was drafted with a reasonable level of competence and that the proper number of suitable witnesses were present.
Section 106 of the Victorian Instruments Act (1958), which Julia Gillard, who was practising as a solicitor in Victoria, should have known, is:

Execution of powers of attorney

(1)  An instrument creating a power of attorney may be executed by, or by direction and in the presence of, the donor of the power.
(2)  Where such an instrument is executed by a person by direction and in the presence of the donor of the power, two other persons shall be present as witnesses and shall attest the instrument.

UPDATE X (29 April):  see Michael Smith on “The Power of Attorney, the document that Julia Gillard says she witnessed properly”.

UPDATE XI (2 May):  

A Vision

I dreamed our prime deceiver,
arrested by “the man”;
protested, “I’m your leader!”
as they put her in the van.

She feigned a stout denial,
and claimed she was naïve;
the jury at her trial,
though, ignored her make-believe.

Once in gaol she might spend years
considering her fall;
may her shame—at last!—and tears
be a lesson for us all. 


The Latest Scheme

Accounts aren’t robust;
Gillard says new taxes could
stop things going bust.

In her greedy lust
for pelf, she feigns some care, but
can’t hide her disgust

for crippled kids thrust
near her.  Remember:  all her
pledges are as dust.

People surely must
consider how well Gillard
last set up a trust.

UPDATE XII (10 May):  a reminder of the PM’s supposed position on telling the truth when she was in opposition; on October 5, 2005, Julia Gillard said in the House of Representatives:

The Labor Party is the party of truth-telling. When we go out into the electorate and make promises, do you know what we would do in government?  We would keep them.

When we say them, we mean them.  That is the difference between [the then Coalition Government] and us.  If I were Minister for Health it would be my duty to implement lock, stock and barrel—word for word—exactly what we had promised in the election campaign.

Ha!


UPDATE XIII (16 May):

Sunt lacrimae rerum

Introducing a
new Bill, Julia Gillard
chokes up, weeps and cries

“Disabled people
will be supported quite soon!”
As ever, she lies:

in a few weeks, a
small trial will commence; the
main scheme will take years

to begin.  Gillard
has, for many, caused much pain
without any tears.

UPDATE XIV (17 June):  see “Victoria Police seize files on AWU”, by Hedley Thomas of The Australian:

Police from the Victorian Fraud Squad have seized boxes of legal documents from Julia Gillard’s former employer, Slater & Gordon lawyers, as part of an ongoing probe into the AWU slush fund scandal.
The documents were removed from the firm’s Melbourne offices after the execution of a search warrant and co-operation between the firm and detectives, sources told The Australian yesterday.
Fraud Squad detectives want to examine all legal files related to controversial legal work done by Ms Gillard and the firm for her then boyfriend, Bruce Wilson, the allegedly corrupt Australian Workers Union senior official, and his union sidekick, Ralph Blewitt, in the 1990s.  […]
Mr Wilson and Ms Gillard, whose relationship ended [according to her] over the AWU scandal in 1995, have repeatedly and strenuously denied any wrongdoing, and accused Mr Blewitt of being unreliable and a liar.
It is understood that while Mr Blewitt wants police to examine all AWU-related legal documents held by Slater & Gordon, Mr Wilson will seek to prevent police from examining the files that are relevant to him.  […]
Victoria Police, which has had a taskforce of detectives working on the AWU investigation since late 2012, have repeatedly declined to comment on their most sensitive probe.  Police last month sought documents from the archives of the AWU’s West Australian and Victorian branches, in which Mr Wilson and Mr Blewitt worked in the 1990s during the alleged fraud.
The legal work done at Slater & Gordon for the two men includes the Prime Minister’s role in helping Mr Wilson establish the AWU Workplace Reform Association.
Ms Gillard says she provided legal advice to help set up the AWU Workplace Reform Association, which Mr Wilson later used to carry out the alleged fraud.  She later described the association as a “slush fund” for the re-election of union officials, but said she had no knowledge of its operations.
The slush fund was used by Mr Wilson and Mr Blewitt to bill building company, Thiess, for hundreds of thousands of dollars for work that was not performed.
The union was not aware of the existence of the slush fund.  Slater & Gordon was the law firm for the AWU at the time.
Money was withdrawn from the slush fund to purchase a $230,000 Fitzroy terrace house in Mr Blewitt’s name at a 1993 auction Ms Gillard attended with Mr Wilson, who subsequently lived in the property.  Slater & Gordon handled the conveyancing and helped provide finance.

UPDATE XV (18 June):  see “Police seek approval to use documents”, by Mark Baker of The Age:

Victoria Police will seek to use documents taken from prominent law firm Slater & Gordon in framing potential criminal charges over the Australian Workers Union slush fund scandal.
Fraud squad detectives are expected to appear before a Melbourne magistrate within two weeks to obtain approval to use documents seized under warrant last month from the firm.  […]
The investigation focuses on the 1993 purchase of a Fitzroy house involving some of the hundreds of thousands of dollars allegedly misappropriated from the AWU Workplace Reform Association by former senior AWU official Bruce Wilson, who was then the boyfriend of Prime Minister Julia Gillard.
Ms Gillard, then a partner at Slater & Gordon, gave legal advice in relation to establishing the association—ostensibly for promoting work safety and training—which she later confirmed to be a “slush fund” to bankroll union elections.
She later created a power of attorney to enable Mr Wilson to buy the property in Kerr Street, Fitzroy, in the name of union crony Ralph Blewitt.
Mr Blewitt has confirmed in a statement to police that he was involved in fraud but both Ms Gillard and Mr Wilson have vehemently denied any illegal or improper conduct.
Detectives are believed to have removed two boxes of documents from the La Trobe Street head offices of Slater & Gordon, including one labelled “Wilson”.  […]
Mr Blewitt, who says he did not sign the Wilson power of attorney until after the property was purchased and that he never benefited from the deal, has already publicly waived client privilege over his dealings with Slater & Gordon.  […]
A team involving as many as 12 detectives has worked on the AWU investigation since late last year.
It is believed they have interviewed more than 60 people including former employees of Slater & Gordon who have provided important leads.
Sources said it was unlikely any charges would be laid before the election, but this was due to the complexity of the investigation rather than any desire to avoid embarrassing the government.

UPDATE XVI (13 June, 2014):  at the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption, Bruce Wilson claimed that Ralph Blewitt did indeed sign the supposed Specific Power of Attorney on 4 February, 1993:

Following Advice

The Right Thing to Do

I saw a neighbour’s dog one day floundering in mud;
its eyes were looking rather sad, its ears were dripping blood.
It would have been an easy job to grab that woeful pet
and carry it in tender arms straight to a nearby vet;
but I had read some sage advice, which surely must be true,
that
           the right thing to do is always
           the hard thing to do,
wherefore I kicked that dog back home and rendered it for glue.

As I was driving, late one night, towards a country town
I saw a waving, weeping lass whose car had broken down.
It would have been a simple task to give that girl a lift
and take her safely into town, ensuring aid was swift;
but I had heard some sound advice, endorsed by quite a few,
that
           the right thing to do is always
           the hard thing to do,
wherefore I carved that crying girl then cooked her in a stew.

As I was passing by a school I saw an odd device.
It proved to be a bomb of sorts concealed by melting ice.
It would have taken little sweat to warn the school and bear
that nasty hazard far away, whilst handling it with care;
but I had seen some great advice, the wisest words I knew,
that
           the right thing to do is always
           the hard thing to do,
wherefore I built a wooden box to hide that bomb from view.

At any time, for many folk, the right and proper course
is obvious and simple, needing no official force.
The proper thing to do, at times, is almost effortless:
to speak the truth, do honest work, and when at fault confess;
but I have read some odd advice—some teachers so construe!—
that
           the right thing to do is always
           the hard thing to do.
Those teachers’ jobs and expertise necessitate review.

See the counsel within “Habits of the Mind” from the School Planner which I quoted previously:

The right thing to do is always
the hard thing to do.

ALP Advertisements Attack Abbott Anonymously

I sent an e-mail this morning to Senator the Hon. Lin Thorp:

Today I received by mail an advertising flyer […]
Since you authorised this material, please tell me who paid for this advertisement and whether you spent taxpayers’ money on the production and mailing thereof.  The Australian Labor Party is not mentioned on the flyer and it features no explanation that you are a Labor senator; why?  Furthermore, the advertisement contains no evidence for its startling assertions; do you have any proof that, for instance, a government led by Mr. Abbott will “cut more than $600 million from Tasmania’s economy every year to give to wealthy mining states”?

I shall publish any response I receive.

UPDATE I:  I visited the recommended Facebook page which, astonishingly, reveals that it is an ALP site only on the “About” page:

 

UPDATE II:  Dacka’s Razor reminds us that senior members of the present Government seem to be too timorous to identify themselves as Labor MPs on their own websites; see “So, which party are you from again?”

UPDATE III (25 April):  some supporters are happy to put their names to the sort of Abbott-bashing wherein an allegation, without substance, without a witness, and without credibility, constitutes truth.  For such people, any assertion by Julia Gillard that she did no wrong (when she was a “young and naîve”, say, in her ’thirties) must be believed, despite all the evidence to the contrary, but any assertion against Tony Abbott must be believed, despite all the evidence to the contrary.  The formula for such people, perhaps, could be something like this:

To accuse Tony Abbott, without evidence, proves that he is wicked.

To accuse the PM, with evidence, proves that Tony Abbott is wicked.

UPDATE IV (25 April):  many Abbott-haters also hate to lose an opportunity to sledge their bogey-man; in “Amphlett, a hero always”, a sort of eulogy of the late Chrissy Amphlett, Christine Croydon, a “local playwright”, finds imagined, gratuitous fault with Tony Abbott and slightly praises our prime minister: 

[Amphlett’s] fierce, upfront sexuality was also hugely appealing to young women, although it did some men’s heads in (no doubt her performances would have disturbed Tony Abbott and his ilk).  As a result she was often labelled damaged goods and dismissed.

To be the first when there is no script, whether art or politics, is a hard call.  Julia Gillard has faced many challenges as our first female PM and although sexy and dangerous is not going to work for her, she, too, has needed to create a persona as a bulletproof vest to achieve what she believes in.  [sic]

As far as I can determine, the PM “believes in” the lucripetous gaining of maximal pelf as well as the clutching and prolongation of corruptly obtained power, for as long as possible, at any cost.

UPDATE V (5 May):  Abbott-haters can’t perceive inconsistent cant in their demonising and fearfully hating a man whom they accuse of demonising and fearfully hating:

Standards at Taroona High School

Some pages from Taroona High School’s Student Planner for 2013 supply some evidence of the standards of writing and thinking demonstrated by the school’s staff.

For example, the planner’s guide to bullying—which reveals, inter alia, that “Ignoring”, “Body language” and, more astonishingly, “Texts, Emails” constitute non-verbal bullying—asserts that “to ignore [bullying] is to condone it” but that, “if you are being bullied”, you may “choose to ignore it”; however, a student who prefers not to take such recommended actions as ignoring or approaching a bully, or talking to a trusted person, may instead choose “to take action”.

The section on “Habits of the Mind”, for me, is most revealing: the arrangement, punctuation, expression, and vocabulary—such as the use of “verbal” for “oral”, and its odd contention that “the right thing to do is always the hard thing to do”—furnish little evidence that Taroona High School’s teachers and administrators provide a particularly high standard of thinking or writing or much “striving for accuracy” which students ought to emulate.

Habits of the Mind

When smart people have a problem to solve, they think in certain ways.
– they change their thinking to fit the situation.
There have been 16 different ways to think found.
They are called Habits of the Mind and will help you greatly
– know when and how to use each habit
– know why each habit will help you
– be willing to use them.
It’s time to think about your thinking.
Remember, habits are things you do often and easily.
Score yourself out of 10 for each of them and set a target to reach by the end of the year.  […]

Striving for accuracy 
Being able to take time to check the accuracy of your work; check it again.
Taking pride in lifting the quality of your work to the highest level you are capable of.
Not being threatened to settle for second best to get work out of the way.  […]
 
Questioning and Posing problems
Being able to ask the right questions to fill in the gaps of what you don’t know
Asking questions that begin with “what if” “why do” “How.”
Being able to recognise the reasons behind why and how questions are asked.  […]  

Applying past knowledge to new situations
Being able to use experiences and knowledge learned for new problems.
Being able to adapt what you have learned from a previous experience to a new situation and make connections.
Being willing to apply yourself to use experience in your thinking; use what you learn.  […] 

Thinking of communicating with clarity and precision
Being able to communicate your thoughts in accurate and clear language, both written and verbal.
Being able to explain, compare and give evidence using correct names and labels; think clearly.
Avoiding vague and generalising language such as “you know” “it’s weird”, “everyone says”, “stuff-like”.  […]
 
Gathering Data through all senses
Being able to gain a feeling for a situation through taking in messages from all of your senses.
Being able to form mental images through what your senses experience.
Being able to feel and communicate by considering aspects such as colours, sounds, patterns, tastes, textures, rhythms, etc.; living is not just describing it; use you natural pathways.  […]

  THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS ALWAYS

THE HARD THING TO DO

Being able to accept and believe that you “just don’t do something”, but you must plan, reflect and think.
Accepting that in all top performers in any activities you find a higher level of thinking.
Having the courage and willingness to do the “hard things” and leave behind the everyday easy way of thinking; actually uses habits of the mind.

UPDATE I (17 April):  see also my logical extension in verse of the odd notion that “the right thing to do is always the hard thing to do” in “The Right Thing to Do”.

UPDATE II (10 May):  according to my son, his English teacher insists that, if you’re the important person, then the sentence “My mother told Peter and I to stand by the car” is grammatically correct!

UPDATE III (1 October):  here is the full text of a recent assignment from my son’s “Wellness” class:

Surviving Adolescence

You must complete all of the activities below, A, B and C.

Activity A – Dear Abby
'I think I am starting to go through puberty, I don't know what is happening, I don't know what to do. Some advice please!'
 
Write an answer for Abby, by outlining some advice/tips boys and girls need to help them survive adolescence.

Some things you may want to think about….
⇒ What is the message you want to get across to the reader?
⇒ What pictures/diagrams could you use to get the message across
⇒ How do you want to present your advice? (letter, poster, brochure, picture)

Activity B – Other cultures
Investigate adolescence/puberty in other cultures. How is it similar to the experience someone in our culture goes through? How is it different? What does this mean?

Activity C – A Taste of Activities
⇔ The Alphabet - complete a list of words from A to Z associated with puberty
⇔ The Question - chose a word from your alphabet list and write 5 possible questions that could only have that word as an answer
⇔ The Brainstorm - brainstorm solutions to some of the problems faced by someone during puberty
⇔ The Word Find - Google puzzle maker, use the site to make a word find using as many words as you can from your alphabet, you may add other words associated with puberty if you wish.
⇔ Wordle - Create a wordle related to 'Surviving Adolescence'

We may well wonder (quoting from the “Habits of the Mind” which students are exhorted to follow) whether the Wellness teacher took much “time to check the accuracy of [her] work” or took much “pride in lifting the quality of [her] work to the highest level”.

UPDATE IV (13 November):  a teacher at Taroona High School recently explained to a Grade 7 History class (orally and by way of a printed hand-out) that “China is the largest country in Asia.”

My son, rightly, protested that Asian Russia is far larger than China, but his teacher merely reiterated that “China is the largest country in Asia.”  Siberia, a part of Russia (over three quarters thereof) since the seventeenth century, covers an area of over 13,000,000 square kilometres; China’s total area is less than 9,597,000 square kilometres.  I submit that 13,000,000 is larger than 9,597,000 and that, therefore, Russia is the largest country in Asia.

Some Sycophantic True Believers Will Believe Anything

UPDATE I:

UPDATE II:  I sent a complaint to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission:

The Australian Labor Party is publishing an advertisement online, and on Julia Gillard’s Facebook page, which is authorised by Sen. Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, which is deceptive and misleading in that it claims that “connecting to high-speed fibre broadband is free” under the “Gillard Labor Government”.  Even if the claim were designed to suggest only that the actual connection into a customer’s dwelling be free of additional cost, the advertisement is surely misleading; however, I submit that the advertisement seems to have been designed deliberately to give a false impression that the entire process of connecting to the broadband network might be free of any charge under the present government.

I shall, of course, publish any response. 

UPDATE III:  see Michael Smith’s “Stephen Conroy and the free connections, free handsets, free broadband – I’ve asked the ACCC for an opinion”. 

UPDATE IV (11 April):  see also Tim Blair’s “No Money Down”. (I posted details of Labor’s deceptive advertisement to Blair’s ’blog yesterday.)

UPDATE V (12 April):  see Andrew Bolt’s “Gillard pays for your NBN out of her own huge pocket”.  (I posted details of Labor’s deceptive advertisement to Bolt’s ’blog on Wednesday morning, but Bolt, like Blair, credits Michael Smith for spotting the ad.  Smith did reveal his source; he wrote, “I first saw this little promotional piece on a blog site – and frankly I thought it was a stitch-up”.)

UPDATE VI (9 May):  I received an e-mail today from Tim, the “Correspondence Officer” of the ACCC:

Thank you for your email of 10 April 2013 to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) about an advertisement published by the Australian Labor Party.  Your reference number for this matter is 446797.

We will not be investigating your complaint because it is unlikely that the Australian Labour [sic] Party’s actions would be considered to be in ‘trade or commerce’.

Most Australian consumer protection laws apply only to people or businesses when they are engaged in ‘trade or commerce’.  This means that a person must be carrying on commercial activities for the law to apply.  If a person or business is contributing to a debate about government policy or issues of interest to the community, they are unlikely to be engaged in ‘trade or commerce’.

Please see our website for more information about the ACCC.

I hope the above information is helpful.

I replied:

I thank you for your helpful response.

I now realise that I can make a deliberately deceptive claim for any commercial enterprise or service—such as, say, a national broadband network—as long as I ensure that the advertisement is published by a political party.

If I understand your advice correctly, I may not claim that my expensive bottles of tap-water lead to wealth and sexual success and cure cancer but, if I publish a political advertisement saying that my party’s preferred brands of bottled water will indubitably lead to wealth and sexual success and cure cancer, that’s perfectly fine.

Excellent.

I shall make a point of telling shonky pharmaceutical companies how to get around the “trade or commerce” provisions.  All they need to do is register political parties and then make advertisements which merely contribute “to a debate about government policy or issues of interest to the community”.

UPDATE VII (4 August):  on alleged reform for the funding of schools, it seems that true believers like simple arithmetic:

UPDATE VIII (9 August):  hmmm, still running with the NBN as a reason to re-elect a criminally incompetent government: