It’s been a big three days for FOX News in SydVEGAS. We’ve covered everything from North Korean refugee abuses to international terror-funding financial controls, even though FOX’s financial knowledge is limited to remembering his 4-digit PIN number (and FOX can’t remember both of them).
We’ve seen the Security Council eject Human Rights (literally) and become a geopolitical ashram, the Third General Assembly turn into a Battle of the Longest Speech, and the Sydney Uni New Law building become a mosh-pit for pizza. Somalia’s been colonised, the UN’s been cyberattacked, and Ban Ki-Moon has taken up the Charles Taylor-model of leadership. FOX has tweeted loud, grilled hard and drunk far more than is sobre and sensible.
After Fair and Balanced consideration, FOX can confidently say that crypto-communists out to destroy the greatest land on earth, the good old US of A, and the Christian family values it stands for. But, some of you have revealed yourselves to be true Americans (at least in spirit), and for that FOX is glad.
Thus, as the final night is on us, this correspondent recommends two paths. For the patriots tonight, drink hard. And for the leftists, they say some find God at the bottom of the bottle – so drink hard for Jesus.
God bless, and down with the liberal agenda,FOX NEWS
There has been a surprising turn of events within the International Press Gallery. The Sydney Morning Herald can finally confirm that Fairfax Media Limited has bought out The New York Times. Many in the unsuspecting international audience and broader viewership of The New York Times can cry a bloody river, because keep your hats on, the situation is riddled with a twofold story. A mildly entertaining saga, at that, within the world of riches.
Many will remember that merely a year ago, Fox News president and blatant justice obstructer despot, Roger Ailes, notably said in response to buying out The New York Times, in pursuit of some sort of heroic crusade to “purge the socialist rag of its un-American content and transform it into a paper for proper Americans”.
Well touché Fox News. Looks like Fairfax heard half of that message to purge it of its un-American content before Gina Rinehart got on another bandwagon of media investment.
Gina ‘eat your mines out’ Rinehart, the world’s richest woman, mining tycoon and budding media mogul has decided that monopoly over other industries can be both transnational and profitable.
In a precedential move towards media domination and public trust, Gina Rinehart has bought the NYT from Fox News. Speaking about her fellow conservative business partner slash broker, Rinehart has gone on the record to announce that she intends to “purge the un-American content [of the NYT] and transform it into a paper for proper Australians”. With a change of pace to its editorial direction, the SMH hopes that The New York Times will now be completely quote unquote “Australian”.
“We are not living in a dream world in which the mounting wave of violence and terrorism can be contained by strict logic and intellectual niceties alone”. The justices in the Court should take a leaf from Lord Salmon in Abbott. Over the course of the morning, the Court has spent more time organising the list and structure of matters than any relevant discussion. However, when it came to substance, it appeared as though the justices were convinced on using intellectual niceties and logical reasoning – admirable for a profession that is governed by policy. Nevertheless, it is this justification that may lead to the morally destitute outcome.
At this stage, it is very likely that the Court will not make a finding of guilt. This stems from the questions posed to Kiley J and off-handed retorts by Hogan J who describes this event as “a bit of situation” and struggling to translate “all these Latin terms”. After deliberating for hours as to the standard of proof required, the justices proceeded on the grounds that they may be able to satisfy the lower threshold of only producing evidence required at the pre-trial stage. However, concerns arose when inquiries were made as to why the justices needed clarification on the definition of ‘civilian population’. It is in the court’s mandate to construe terms either liberally or conservatively. Pressed as to how the criminal law has classified acts such as domestic violence – committed in the vicinity of one’s privacy – as a crime against the community, why they were not able to extend this logic to sexual violence on a grander scale committed by the clergymen of this scenario? Meaningless words were uttered which yielded no conclusive decision. The issue the NYT has with the proceedings of the court is that they are at a stalemate. Advancements of arguments and reasoning are a rare occurrence. It is evident that the Court has simply conceded to the submissions of the defence as noted by their own Director. Complacency in the court! This may just be the product of the salacious events of yesterday evening taking their toll on justices’ analytical abilities.
The justices appear open-minded and book-filled but then again appearances can be deceiving. They should be warned that an unmalleable court stuck in antiquated thinking and religious reasoning may be – more abruptly – shooting itself in the foot.
One could be mistaken for assuming that society has turned back the hands of time and vanquished itself to the medieval epoch when Church and State were once combined. The almighty power of spiritual leaders is once again subject to the careful eye of the government. The days of a separation have been usurped – for valid reason.
The Church had the opportunity to govern themselves, their laws, systems and hierarchy. However with great power comes great responsibility, and when the hierarchy starts protecting its own criminals, prioritising its reputation above those of victims, then the moral authorities – better known as the State – must intervene. These men of the clergy were spiritual leaders, held up before the children around them as wise and righteous and right. So they had special access to those kids. Special sway.
And when they exploited it by sexually abusing the children, they were protected by their lofty stations and by the caretakers of their faith. The children’s accusations were met with skepticism. The community of the faithful either couldn’t believe what had happened or didn’t want it exposed to public view: why give outsiders a fresh cause to be critical? So the unpleasantness was bound in a dark and sacred corner of the Church, never to the see light of day. They invoke an aloof patriarchy, an insularity verging on superiority and a disinclination to get secular officials involved.
Dicey once alleged that no man is above the law – alas, he failed to have the foresight that the Catholic Church places them on a moral pedestal that surmounts the rest of society. Tensions are escalating as the Church is hiding behind antiquated canonical laws and jurisdictional error of the ICC. However, on the initial day of hearings the prosecution have raised significant material to send Pope Benedict and the Catholic Church into disrepute. There’s undeniably no doubt that this court has a low tolerance for sexual abuse and a moral disgust. However the increasingly irksome claim that has thrown some judges into a rage is that of “but how was the Pope supposed to control every cardinal and official under the Catholicism branch”. The question answered simply by: accountability. It is not a question of whether he did know but whether he should have known. As a spiritual leader of one of the largest growing religions in the world, you must make it a personal priority to ensure that your employees are model practitioners of said religion.
The ICC are currently in a position of tarnishing the name of Catholicism but simultaneously seeking revenge on those children in history that have suffered and borne the psychological damage created by the proponents of the Church. The scales of justice are in their hands.