Webdiary - Independent, Ethical, Accountable and Transparent
header_02 home about login header_06
header_07
search_bar_left
date_box_left
date_box_right.jpg
search_bar_right
sidebar-top content-top

Freedom of speech, Aussie style

I awoke this Australia Day to my very first hate call.  The gentleman was very polite to my daughter when she answered the phone,  told me he was taking "a stab in the dark" ringing this number, and asked if I'd written the David Hicks letter in today's Advertiser.   He then told me I should leave my house immediately as it would be unsafe for me there when he arrived, to "get me."

Ah well, he'll be disappointed enough.  I don't live at my phone book address anymore, and the demolition crew have even salvaged the floorboards.  He can trash the place all he likes.. there's nothing he can do that won't be debris in days.   I liked that old house, and felt safe enough there that I hadn't locked the back door in four years, Didn't even carry a house key, and loved the fact.

One phone call has ended all that.  I've just put a chain and padlock on my new front gate.  Even though I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't worrried about my own safety,  I'm more concerned for those around me, but for luck won't be walking dimly lit streets for a while.

The most concerning part of the conversation was that this man was quite well spoken, and polite.  He gave his name, why he was upset with me and the threat.   I told him that I was sorry his son had died in Afghanistan. He then repeated his name, grievance and threat.    No swearwords or invective- had he been a foul-mouthed ranter I would be able to dismiss worries much more easily.

If, as I reckon, he's just trying to put the wind up me and quieten me down, he's only managed half the job.  It makes me wonder, though, how many people respond to such intimidation.  How many such vigilantes are out there trying to silence those who speak their mind?

We are a lucky country to have such a level of free speech.  However, we obviously have people within our community that would prefer us to be silent.  Tough luck for them.

Still, writing what I write has meant that I've had to change my way of life, and is beginning to cost me aspects of my own freedom that I've cherished. 

We've all lost a few of those lately. 

left
right
[ category: ]
spacer

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Free speech and bird brains - I gotta tell ya

I happened upon a lad (around 18/19) last week, actually Tuesday after the long week end (maybe the lad had had a lost weekend, haven't we all).

Anyway the lad was exercising his right (or so he may have thought) of free speech in a particularly unusual manner. He had his head hanging out of the passenger's window of a 4WD.

It was obvious the lad loved his free speech and he engaged in his passion with incredible volume and clarity.  He directed his free speech at one particular lass, minding her own business walking down the track. I won't say what he was calling her, but the poor lass was obviously intimidated and embarrassed (by such propositions) at least appeared such, but maybe she was just acting. She was about my daughter's age - 27 (she is - how cool).

I was standing on that same footpath observing and thinking to myself that this cowardly lad maybe didn't understand what free speech was all about. He was about to learn when the traffic lights turned red. His mate had to pull up the 4WD at the lights of a rather busy intersection in Oxford Street.

The lad then found himself looking directly at me. Eyeball to eyeball.

It was about then I think the learning process kicked in, for the lad. He was looking at one very angry albatross, v.e.r.y. angry indeed. He looked back at me with that look a kid has when his dad is about to kill him. But I was not his dad. As he locked his door and slowly wound up his window the lad decided to get smart.

I won't bother with the rest, only that the coward, er, lad very quickly realised  that dishing out humiliation and embarrassment quite often attracts same in return.

The driver of the 4WD then watched as I recorded his registration number, then gave him a wink and a nod while pointing at him as I strolled casually across the road. 

Maybe I was the closest thing to Jesus Christ they had ever seen, or maybe the closest thing to Charlie Manson. They  know nothing, except a very angry albatross has got their number and is grinning at them.

Free speech, ain't it great, most of the time.

Hicks guilty plea "politically enforced": Guantanamo prosecutor

A former Guantanamo prosecutor has used David Hicks to mock the tribunal process.  Darrel J Vandervelt is now the Senior Deputy Attorney-General of Pennsylvania.  This extract is part of an Erie Times-News account of a local forum held on Tuesday night:

In seven years, then-President George W. Bush's administration prosecuted three Guantanamo detainees. The first, David Hicks, an Australian kangaroo skinner, entered a "politically enforced" guilty plea and served nine months, Vandeveld said.

"One of the 'worst of the worst,'" he said of Hicks, in a mocking reference to then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's characterization of Guantanamo detainees.

It might be worth dropping him a line to ask exactly what "politically enforced" means.

Truth and accountability

Amen to first, but good luck on policing the second, let alone finding a politician who'd vote for it.

Richard isn't that the problem with society, politicians and their desire for power and control, rather than truth, accountability, outcomes and positive results for those who foolishly elect them? Freedom of speech is essential for all who inhabit the planet, no matter their method of communication. Policing the second only requires plain Aussie language stating in law where the line is drawn. You don't need legalese or semantic, politically correct stupid babble.

Afghanistan is about money, arms and more money. Like all conflicts, pit one faction of an ideology against another or an opposing ideology, feed them weapons and human cannon fodder and you have a win win for politicians and big business, otherwise they'd have no excuse for neglecting the realities of the world and the people they supposedly represent.

We only have free speech if it's directed to someone who doesn't have political, social or economic clout, otherwise, the elite bury you.

Pointless presence in Afghanistan

I daresay Richard that your stalker's threats are motivated by grief about the loss of his child.  Worse for him is that no-one can tell exactly why we are in Afghanistan so the loss of his child's life must be a deeply embittering experience.  To lose a child is always terrible.  To lose one to a just war would be a tiny bit more bearable.  To lose one in a pointless military adventure inspired by Howard's toadying to the repellant and plainly moronic Bush would be truly awful. 

Troops out of this place.  Leave it to the mullahs.

A reference on the subject: http://www.globalcollab.org/Nautilus/australia/afghanistan/australian-policy-analysis 

Good luck!

Ernest, I have a feeling that this sort of thing occurs much more than we know about.  I worder how often the methodology succeeds in creating silence? Having only received on such call like this after 40-odd publications, and that on the instance where I've written openly to the state's A-G, I can't exclude the possibility that the call was politically motivated.  Which brings us to..

Alga:"..you should only be able to speak freely when you are not personally threatening violence to someone, or are blatantly lying to gain political, ideological or other advantage."

Amen to first, but good luck on policing the second,let alone finding a politician who'd vote for it.

What can you do?

G'day Richard. Sorry mate, only just picked up this thread.

What a strange situation where a person gives you his name and other particulars to identify himself, and then threatens you.

If it wasn't so damn crazy I'd say that at least he didn't pull on the coward's way on anonymity.

One would have to think at first blush that this was just a stirrer with a dopey sense of humour. Did you contact him to confirm that it was him, Richard?

I understand that in the heat of battle the fear and personal angst the soldiers have against each other - kill or be killed - can cause normal people to commit crimes that they would not normally even consider.

But for a father to feel he is defending his fallen son by threatening the very free speech which the lad believed that he fought and died for is scary indeed.

What would I do?  If the person is so distraught that he cares not for his own freedom then he is a danger to you and any other person who may have a view that he considers worthy of violence.  Almost a suicide act.

The tragedy of the loss of his son does not excuse his behaviour and, just perhaps, you could do him and his lost son a favour by providing the proper care that he so obviously needs.

Cheers Ern G.

Truth at last

"Your fundamental error, my lad, is that you believe that the law "protects". It does nothing of the sort. It is a system of rules which prescribes consequences for breach. No breach; no remedy."

Malcolm, some truth at last. But the law does protect the elite and rich to a great degree, it's not aimed at justice but power and control. For all to get a benefit we have to change the legal system and rewrite all laws, legislation and rules, so those they are imposed upon can understand the system and cope with it better than now. We have to remove control of the justice and legislation system from the legal profession, so it makes sense and we get justice rather than dubious outcomes. There wouldn't be any jobs lost, I recommend those in the legal profession be transferred to work at outback ecological restoration, where they may be of some benefit to society.

As for free speech, you should only be able to speak freely when you are not personally threatening violence to someone, or are blatantly lying to gain political, ideological or other advantage. If we re-wrote laws to reflect that in plain Australian, our society would be much safer and free.

Tasers

Malcolm, I don't dispute your definitions, though you always seem to attribute more to me than I intended. The threat described above is a likely breach and the law of torts might offer a remedy after the fact. Alternately the executive arm might have a part to play in arresting these developments before they lead to something worse. God help him, Richard can bring out the tasers and the law will shield him under the doctrine of self-defence.

Paradise lost

The last comment puzzles me. What aspects of our own freedom have we all lost lately? You are as free as you ever were to hold opinions. If this man interferes with this by threatening violence the law will protect you.

Paradise regained

Ah, the wisdom of Solomon is back. I hope you haven't graduated yet and inflicted yourself on the long-sufferring public.

One of the things I omitted in my last post was that, over the interminable long vacation, SWMBO and I have been watching To Serve Them All My Days and A Horseman Riding By again as well as a few other things. Can't remember exactly what it was but there was one scene in something where a soldier returned from the front looked around and said something to the effect of "Is this what we fought for?"

Your fundamental error, my lad, is that you believe that the law "protects". It does nothing of the sort. It is a system of rules which prescribes consequences for breach. No breach; no remedy. And before you start witterring about injunctions, injunctive relief is (a) discretionary and (b) needs justifiable threat to a legal "right". And it has to be legal or legal by statute not equitable. Trust me: that should get you going.

Nice to see you all back. Here's to weathering the coming depression and the next ice age.

Thoughts so far

Marilyn, I've encountered a few such oddballs in my time. Some amusing, such as the anonymous copy of my pic in the local rag written over with a suggestion that I could lose some weight (polite translation); a blank sheet of paper, with another attached bearing the words "your loud music"(which was sent to all the music pubs during that campaign) and even my very own stalker, a chap I'd had drunk-tanked for a night, who liked to follow me round supermarkets with a fiddle case under his arm, who ceased when confronted loudly and publicly in front of his mates. The one that will always be in the back of my mind is the writer of whom I’ll always wonder was truly Shelley Kovco.

What perturbed me in this instance was the insinuation of physical violence,

I disagree with you though, about the less being said the better, as I suspect that part of the titillation for such people is that they receive no response, so can imagine the one they like. I'm wondering if there's a local archive of such "media stalking" and if not whether there should be one, so that possible patterns could be tracked.

Malcolm, we do not disagree. I am particularly grateful that this particular gentleman didn't subject my daughter to any abuse or threat before she handed the phone to me, but the great concern was that such threats were made at a time when the perp knew she was in the house.

Your noting that anyone who sticks their nose out in public should expect such things seems to be a standard defence of paparazzi snappers. How far do you think such an attitude of laissez faire should extend? Yes, there can be benefits to a level of public profile, but for how far should the yang match the yin before activities are considered to have gone too far?

At any rate, as Paul Walter notes, it's good to see you aroused from online lethargy. Happy New Year!

John Pratt, I'm not too sure about the warfare/democracy-argument. I hope that Australian soldiers are not dying in Afghanistan so that I can write a letter to the paper. Maybe this aspect could be a threadstarter you could write? Participation in warfare in Afghanistan is one of many sub-issues to this piece which I ditched with my first draft, preferring to concentrate on media stalking. It is a deep one, though, and deserves further pondering. Nowadays, as mentioned in the piece, it feels to me that every time we fight under the banners of freedom and democracy we lose a bit of both.

Justin, thanks for your advice, and also you, dear Fiona, for your offline support. I have taken all appropriate actions, plus a couple of extras, to eliminate the possibility of those around me being unsafe. I have, however, returned the taser that was kindly delivered to my front door yesterday arvo, however tempted I might have been.. I know where to find it if considered necessary.

As to this caller having had a son who died in Afghanistan, I am fully prepared to accept that he was genuine. I know one person serving in Afghanistan-his girlfriend works at our pub, and while she's laughed at my activities I suspect her response would be different had she lost her loved one. Reading a letter in support of Hicks and against Guantanamo on Australia Day may have triggered such a response from a bereaved father. If so, I truly hope that such an action on his part has been a catharsis that might help his healing.

Over weight?

Well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, one supposes.

Having met Richard, I would hardly say the bloke is even remotely overweight.

Maybe his enemies have fat heads?

Solomon, the sorts of freedoms under threat are ones of a quality that once gone, are desperate hard to restore. Ask , or look at, the Aborigines, Palestinians and others who were once free.  Secondly, the freedoms of press, thought, expression,  fair and open trial, community input, and cosultation etc are freedoms of the sort that  if one goes, all are threatened, like an ecosystem.  They can be seen as a tapestry where components interwoven, insignificant in isolation, combine to produce the wonderous and awe-inspiring conditional state under which many, including most of us, live. But our society itself is a historical document in an actual as well as metaphorical sense and a genuine heritage to be humbly treasured. In fact the nature of Democracy is that it is conditional on its apprehension by its subjectsand participants; its existance also is an apparent reference point as well as a source of nourishment.

Lest you think my bile is reserved exclusively for the likes of Howard, Ruddock, Vaile, Andrews etc, as well as malign outside influences like
Cheney and Murdoch, I can assure you I trust little more the current lot, with the ilk of Conroy, Brumby, Tripodi and recently Paul Lennon in full cry, than the previous.

It is true that politicians, media bosses, pen pushers and corporate interests have tried to whittle way our freedoms and their bases, that we sadly take for granted, for a long time. However, we had not until this decade suffered a conscious and sustained assault on them, under the false Aegis of "security" .  We are hardly out of the woods either, by a long  shot!

No complacency please; "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance".

Finally:

Malcolm,  in response to your last paragraph; " Thoughts so far", it is a shame that such a fellow's ire is not directed in the right direction. The man, distraught , erroneously "blames the messenger".

Let him seek out the likes of GW Bush. Then  he will find the real source of his sons and many others sons and daughters downfall(s) and his own woes.

Cheeky Chocky

Ah, Paul Walter, Webdiary returns to what it does best - the literary. Nice to hear a bit of John Wyndham - takes me back to my teens. That was when I first met Jennie George. By golly, she was cute in those days.

Richard Tonkin, over what always seems to me to be the interminable long vacation when no money comes in, solicitors all have a great time talking about the holidays they are having with the money they owe me and as a result I am almost terminally incarcerated with SWMBO and Claude who has more senior moments day by day than the all ords has highs at the moment, all Webdiary clatters on about is the fucking middle east. Let them go I say - a view shared both by my Grandfather and SWMBO's father who served there in WWII.

Get our lads out and concentrate on the immediate strategic concerns we have in our own region (and, global cooling or not, we have enough of them), Meanwhile, fuck the banks and let's party. I may have said this before but I think it bears repeqating: the significant difference between this catastrophe and the Great Depression is that architects have for years been designing buildings with windows that won't open. Takes all the fun out of it for the pedestrians in the city.

The Kraken has woken but, so far, only one eye is open. And it is watching all of you.

Tits and cats and bums

"Get our lads out and concentrate on the immediate strategic concerns we have in our own region (and, global cooling or not, we have enough of them), Meanwhile, fuck the banks and let's party."

That's about the bestest and very mostest sensible bita advice I have read on WD since the beginning of this year - of the Ox.

Sounds to me like an ideal platform for an albatross to rest upon; especially when too pissed to fly, and too willing to party, and too weary of reading the tits and tats of Webdiarists possessed (moi included). Tits and bums would be preferable.

As such, I was wondering if that political party run by Claude or his alter ego, would consider allowing an old albatross to sit upon the above platform from time to time.

Of course, Claude would have to understand that such a request is simply an indication of support, rather than an invitation to a meal.

The Ancient Marnier

Well, I suppose the tired albatross just perches on the aft flagstaff jack and tries not to shit on the Captain's bow windows.

Membership fees haven't gone up yet. You can still join for $10. That's Australian - about a penny h'apeney in real terms.

We're a cheap Party but cannot be bought.

Tasers on stun, Mr Spock

Didn't say I was going to use a taser, Solomon.  Said I'd been offered the use of one.  Have contemplated before, too, when one was offered "off the back of a truck".

Let's face it, there are worse weapons you could use on someone if you feared for your life.

My sister's house was the stage for a fairly notorious home invasion case ten or so years ago.  Wheelchair-bound elderly gent blew the would-be burglar away with a shotgun... outpouring for clemency got him off, and I believe paved the way for the "Ivy"  home invasion campaign of later years.  I'll come back with somel links in the morning.  Anyway,our family pretends it all happened next door.

I couldn't see myself being in a vlethal or consciounsess depriving situation with an attacker unless my the lives of people I care about depended on it. 

As I said, the taser was returned.    Apparently there's a very funny email around (haven't read) of an anecdote in which the "author" tries such a zapper out on himself, but is unable to stop the repeated convulsing of the finger on the button, which causes him to zap himself again, which sets the finger twitching

Start carrying tasers,the burglars will carry more guns, I rieckon.

Last night on community radio I dedicated my version of  "And the band played "Waltzing Matida" ,tonight taught the uke club how to play "Give me a home amongst the gum trees"   That's my kinda weaponry.

Paul, are you talking about the same Richard Tonkin (as oppsed to the insurance bloke at the council whose job I was offered)? Maybe I just have a dodgy mirror?

Return of the Rev. Samuel Marsden

It is an ill wind that brings no good.

Am flabbergasted.

Congratulations, Richard. It seems you and you alone are the sole individual in the universe capable of bestirring a certain legislative Leviathan from his depthful slumber, suffering as you do in you in your current pitiable state.

Famines come and go, pestilence, wars; nay, Armageddon itself!

Yet none shall disturb the sleep of the Behemoth of the bail bondsmen.

Beware tho...

The Kraken wakes!!.

Oh I know

This appears to be my first comment for Webdiary for the year and it took Richard Tonkin to do it.

Even though it does peripherally bear on the Middle East (the most boring international topic of comment apart from the new occupants of Launch Base One otherwise known as The White House and global cooling), a subject on which I have such firm beliefs I don't need to bother sharing them or being bored by anyone else's contribution, it is worth comment from a pure desire to share humanity.

As Webdiarists know, I have my own Political Party and am fairly publicly active and very well known not only as a letter-writer but what the Sydney papers sometimes refer to as a "serial candidate".

While I take grave exception to people trying to tar members of my family and supporters with the same brush they choose to apply to me, where Richard and I differ is that, as long as I am the only target, I believe that if I put my head over the parapet, I deserve to expect to be shot at.

While it is not very pleasant to be attacked as "the Rumpole of the Lower Traffic Courts" in parliament by a second-rate intellect like Bob Carr while one is sitting in the gallery without the opportunity of reply, and whille it is not very pleasant having one's car defaced during election campaigns with allegations of paedophilia (the labor [sic] Party around here are sooo unimaginative), it comes with the territory.

As "Tubby" Black said to me the other week after I launched his self-published book, Kings Cross - Double Cross, his memoirs of a life of crime in and around the Cross, "The bullet you hear doesn't kill you." He actually knows.

So Richard and my other friends here, just remember, as long as it doesn't involve the family, sticking your head up makes you fair game. Then again, isn't it nice to think we live in a country where even the nutters get a go?

No worries

I wouldn't be too concerned at all, Richard. People who pre-warn you about their criminal intentions rarely carry it out, if at all. It would only ever be a complete nutter. Any copper will tell you that.

If I was going to kill someone why would I warn them and make my job harder for christsakes? You just do it and tell not a soul, especially your intended victim.

Like many I've been threatened. Once quite publicly some dud threatened to kill me. What a dickhead saying such in front of witnesses. He was just letting off steam.

Another time a guy threatened to kill me because I clobbered his dog. The dog (part German Shepard) was not behaving at all socially, so I thought it best the dog and I reached an understanding. Of course I was well within my rights (under the 1966 Dog Act) to kill the mut, which I would have had no problems doing it had it got serious. I have had heaps of experience dealing with nasty dogs, by the way.

Anyway the dog's owner gave me the shits – and he threatened to kill me while I was standing out side his house. He was only letting of steam but I got the council on to him along with the cops, just for fun. The cops reported back to me that by the end of the day he was the one with the shits, big time.

I could tell many a story like that.

I even had a guy threaten to kill me while poking a rifle in my guts. He was only kidding, otherwise he would have already pulled the trigger (the gun was loaded by the way as I saw him do it). Anyway what do ya do with a loaded gun stuck in your guts. No brainer – you secure the pointy end – he was fucked. My mate stepped in and defused what could have gone pear-shaped – for the dickhead with the gun.

The dickhead who called you was simply being a telephone tough guy and if what he claims is true – that his son died in Afghanistan – than it certainly narrows the list of suspects down. Of course he could just be making that up to justify his stupidity.

Also there is a log file of telephone calls held by your service provider. The IT company could supply same to the cops. You no doubt kept a record of the timing of the call.

Some companies have a police liaison officer so to speak. I know this as I tricked a company (who refused to take my complaint – not wise to do that to an albatross) into thinking I was a copper. I simply called their call centre and told them I was important police business and needed immediate assistance. They put me straight through to their copper relations officer, or whatever she called herself. I explained to her that I hated having to say I was a copper to get stuff done. Note, that at no time did I say I was a copper – that's illegal.

She gave me the service I deserved and also a $100 credit for the inconvenience. Little did she know they had failed to charge me for the first six months of usage. That company was OneTel, no wonder they went belly up. Their billing system was totally stuffed.

I actually warned an acquaintance who held shares in OneTel that his investment was at risk. He thought it best to ignore my concerns because OneTel was a solid company with good backers (hahaha). Eighteen months later (after OneTel went bust) I ran into him asked how his shares were doing. He went very quiet.

Anyway I digress. If I were you I'd report your call to the cops – just for the record. As we all know it is an offence under the Telecommunications Act to make those types of calls. The cops may even find out who made the call and charge him. Don't forget your daughter was a witness.

Having said that it is obvious this telephone tough guy is only that. And if his son got killed in the Ghan (as an Australian soldier) then that is doubly sad. Sad that he lost his son, and sad that he lost his son for nothing.

We will all retire hurt from the Ghan, as all before – it's just a matter of time.

The caller would be better blaming our government (both past and present) for getting us involved in the stupidity of supporting US foreign policy.

PS. I once had a guy call me and threatened to flatten me (I had rightly upset his wife big time). I simply replied to hubby (who was built like a brick dunny) that I had been recording the conversation and would be forwarding same to the coppers. I never heard from him again – nor will I ever again – fortunately he's dead now.

Freedom of speech

Richard, I doubt very much if this chap is genuine. The soldiers fighting in Afghanistan are supposedly fighting for democracy, which includes freedom of speech. People are dying so you can have this hard won freedom. It is a pity that a few still use terrorism to try and take it away from us.

 

The Tonkin Incident

What a foolish fellow!

Reminds of some of some of the nonsense talked during the Vietnam war, where those who were opposed to it were blamed, rather than the idiot politicians really responsible (who are never actually at these locations, leading from the front, such is their belief in their cause).

You would have had it that his son had never been to Afghanistan, killing and being killed fighting someone else's war, run as an alibi to distract attention from the failure in Iraq.

Not dissimilar to to the Gaza antic, on that point.

Never ceases to amazes this writer, the sheer inability of many Australians to think thru an issue, like not being able to count past ten without thongs off.

Walkure!

Yes, this has all the ingredients of a Day of the Jackal plot.

The Great Man, man of letters, statesman; philosopher and humanitarian of our time, awaits the perfidious interventions of the mad Jackal, aka "Mushroom", a fiendish, diabolically clever and infinitely resourceful international Terrorist and Criminal, only known to a tiny elite within the Mafia, CIA, Mossad, MI6 and the local RSL darts team.

This dastardly genius has penetrated security. ... How will he deal with his prey?

Dressed as an old washer-woman, like Toad on his escape from jail in Wind in the Willows, the scurvy knave approaches the Great Man, clutching a biro and autograph book in his hand.

Suddenly the security officer disguised as Tom Cruise, guesses his game (from the study he has completed of Mick Keelty and the Dr. Haneef affair). Our hero lunges forward, like Snoopy after the Red Baron, tackling the desperate professional, so the rice grain in the now hollow Bic biro tube that the Jackal whipped the ink tube out of in a flash and put to his mouth now instead whistles past inches from Lord Tonkin's nose.

The plot is thwarted!

The malcontent is marched off to jail, by arriving coppers, who had worked out this devil's identity by tracing the phone call back to the perp.

Tranquillity reigns supreme, as we head to an ad break extolling the virtues of new, perfumed Botox, especially when found amongst the grub things writhing away in what Fungrys describe as their new Witchetty Burgers.

Richard, I have had hundreds

And hundreds of them. The worst was a letter from some old biddy with two tissues in it. It was from " the president of the deport the Bakhtiyari's club" with the earnest wish that "I would need the tissues soon".

The people who make these threats are simply morons best ignored and the better spoken ones are the worst. This old biddy is in the Bob Francis fan club and is Marie Parham from Pooraka who changes her name to Mary when she rings the ABC with the hope that no-one will recognise the voice. She has ten grandchildren, she told me, but she could speak that sort of filth about six other little children.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
© 2006 - 2008, Webdiary Pty Ltd
Disclaimer: This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of Webdiary Pty Ltd.
Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way,
please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary.

Margo Kingston

Margo Kingston Photo © Elaine Campaner

Advertisements