Gil Hardwick (gil@landmark.DIALix.oz.au)
Tue, 29 Nov 1994 00:06:54 GMT
Who decides what "damaging" is anyway, Marius, while I think of it?
A good example lies in this recent defamation writ against me, where
poor Dr Rindos had after several allegedly sleepless nights managed to
get himself off the the psychiatrist for an examination.
Lo and behold, Victim Certificate now at hand, he manages to "win" for
himself a cool $40,000 in alleged recompense for damages.
In fact, in reality that is, intended to have been added to the prize
pool toward further actions against his colleagues, which fact while
highly publicised in the popular press was ignored by The Beak as not
having been included on the certificate.
In the meantime, up north where I was, whole communities of people
are denied adequate food, shelter or medical attention; where the
women are routinely unable to carry to term because they are so
badly malnourished. And so on . . .
But they get no recompense for their suffering whatsoever!
So what is the difference?
The difference, old bean, is plainly that the latter are a proud and
dignified people adamant in their refusal to be reclassified as
"victims", as a precondition to being allowed the same freedom and
prosperity confered upon all these beautiful, intelligent, well
educated, highly evolved, sexually liberated, victimised white
Australia +61 97 53 3270
Don't worry about all this "sustainable agriculture".
We might well ask, what sustains the cities?