Contradiction is balance. [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Axver

[ website | U2-Vertigo-Tour.com: for all your U2 setlist needs! (Got a question, suggestion, or addition? Feel free to leave me a comment! I co-maintain the site.) ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

ANZAC Day [25 April 2008|04:43 pm]
[Tags|, , ]
[Current Music |'Fadeaway' by Porcupine Tree]

They went with songs to the battle, they were young.
Straight of limb, true of eyes, steady and aglow.
They were staunch to the end against odds uncounted,
They fell with their faces to the foe

They shall not grow old, as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning,
We will remember them.

- "For the Fallen", Laurence Binyon

93 years on, lest we forget.
Link1 comment|Leave a comment

A glorious day in Australian history [13 February 2008|09:44 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , , ]
[Current Music |'Beds Are Burning' by Midnight Oil]

Today will surely go down as one of the greatest days in Australian political history. As the first order of business of the 42nd parliament of Australia, Kevin Rudd offered an apology to the Stolen Generations, those thousands of Aboriginal children who were forcibly removed from their homes and made wards of the state, deprived of contact with their family and their culture. Rudd's speech was eloquent and moving; he acknowledged and apologised for the grave injustices of the past, went to great pains to reach out not only across racial lines to the Aborigines but also across ideological lines to all parts of the Australian community on this contentious issue, and laid the foundation of words upon which a structure of actions can be built to ensure a better future. It was only fitting that this apology was delivered by Rudd with Peter Garrett sitting prominently nearby as a fellow elected representative; as the lead singer of Midnight Oil, Garrett tirelessly brought awareness to the plight of the Aborigines and those of you who watched the 2000 Sydney Olympics Closing Ceremony likely remember him performing in black clothing emblazoned with the word "sorry". And today, Australia finally said sorry. I think the following are some of the best words I have ever heard any head of state speak:

"As Prime Minister of Australia, I am sorry. On behalf of the Government of Australia, I am sorry. On behalf of the Parliament of Australia, I am sorry. I offer you this apology without qualification."
- Kevin Rudd

I moved to Australia in 1997, the year Bringing Them Home was published. All I have known is John Howard's stubborn refusal to be a decent human being. In a sure reflection on just how petty, bigoted, and small this man really is, he was the only one of Australia's five living former Prime Ministers who was not in attendance. Four other Liberal MPs were conspicuously absent, while a fifth was so rude and disrespectful as to attend but read a magazine throughout the session and to refuse to stand in the otherwise unanimous show of support for the apology.

Brendan Nelson's pathetic attempt at a reply on behalf of the Opposition was truly a national embarrassment. He started well. He did what even three months ago I never thought I would hear a Liberal Party leader do: he offered support for Rudd's apology and said sorry himself. Then he just dug himself into a hole. His incohesive speech lacked a central theme; he dithered from point to point, inappropriately trying to score political points through mentioning the current Northern Territory intervention, irrelevantly and bafflingly mentioning Australians who died in combat, disgustingly asserting that we should feel no guilt for what has happened, and reprehensibly giving an impression of defending those who did the stealing for what he described as "good intentions". It was as if he was torn between his own bigotry and an irresistible future. It would have been political suicide to do anything other than support the apology, but he sure didn't go down without reminding us that racism and discrimination is alive and well in Australia. Although those in the parliament chamber rightly maintained the manners expected within there, those watching on the big screens outside and in other cities throughout the country quite understandably and justifiably booed Nelson, called "shame", turned their backs, and initiated a slow clap to drown out the disgraceful speech.

What Brendan Nelson and some people in Australian society (including, I am sad to say, a few individuals in journals and communities on my friends list) seem to fail to understand is that we do not exist in a historical vacuum. The consequences of the Stolen Generations live with us - some of those who were stolen are still alive, and their children are very much with us, living with the problems created by past injustices. The rest of us also live with the consequences - dealing with the past, as we exist within the context it created, and completing its unfinished business: that is, righting its wrongs. The first step to righting its wrongs is apologising for those wrongs. Nothing short of saying sorry is adequate.

I am a New Zealander first and foremost. Why, then, do I care? Because I am an Australian citizen. I have the certificate and the passport to prove it. I voted for this government, and I have been subject to the decisions of the Australian parliament for over a decade. Parliament functions within a political continuum - it has a responsibility to the past. Today's parliament exists within the historical context of past parliaments. The policies that created the Stolen Generations were in place during the lives of the majority of Australians. This lasted until the 1970s - it is, as has been emphasised, not ancient history. It is more than about time that this responsibility is acknowledged and an apology given. This apology is not saying that you, as an individual, are sorry for something you did not do - it is saying that we, as a community represented by a democratically elected parliament, are sorry for the wrongs that were done in our country's name to the oldest continuous civilisation on the planet. We exist in a historical context; we should be and are sorry for the wrongs contained within that context and are compelled by all that is good and decent to rectify the consequences of these injustices.

Also, as a New Zealander, I would like to take this opportunity to do something of my own, in the reconciliatory spirit of the day. The Maori people, like the Aborigines, have suffered injustices since Europeans colonised New Zealand. Their land was taken from them, by deception and by force. Their cultural values were ignored. Their language was marginalised. Therefore, I say the following. As the descendent of some of New Zealand's earliest settlers, as a New Zealander who exists within a historical context that contains shameful and inexcusable wrongdoings, and as a person capable of empathy, I am without qualification sorry to the Maori. As an aspiring historian of New Zealand, I can only hope that I may produce work that contributes to the historical record, informs the present and future, and does even the smallest of things to bring together the people of the most beautiful country on the planet in mutual understanding, respect, and equality.
Link4 comments|Leave a comment

A plague of petty sport fans [7 February 2008|10:39 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , ]
[Current Mood | disappointed]
[Current Music |'Mahler' by No-Man]

Well, I guess I'll try writing some kind of normal entry.

I must admit that I'm a little embarrassed to be an Australian citizen at the moment. The offensive and even racist behaviour of certain sections of the Australian community is becoming sickening. I will not be surprised if cricket teams from the subcontinent stop touring here. Why should they bother? Firstly there's the whole Harbhajan Singh fiasco. Whether or not he called Andrew Symonds a "monkey" or any other derogatory slur is really irrelevant at this stage - it hasn't been proven, it is denied by Sachin Tendulkar (the only Indian within earshot), and it very much could be overhyped by Ricky Ponting due to being labelled Harbhajan's bunny. What is relevant is just how petty Australian sportsfans can be. Every time Harbhajan does, well, ANYTHING, he gets thunderous boos from the audience. Come on, people. This isn't sporting, and it sure as hell isn't cricket. Move on. In Brisbane on Tuesday, Harbhajan made a gutsy and valuable stand and the crowd still booed him after he got out. Not to mention that they chanted "Harbhajan's a wanker". Grow up.

What's even worse, however, is this story of an egg being randomly thrown at members of the Sri Lankan squad, including the world's best spin bowler, Muttiah Muralitharan. Now, it was dark, so chances are they didn't know it was Murali, but they obviously targeted the group because they were Sri Lankan. Muralitharan has refused to participate in tours of Australia before due to the abuse he has copped; despite scientific tests showing that his bowling action is legal, even our former Prime Minister, John Howard, labelled Murali a "chucker". I'm deeply bothered by the following quote, and I'm sure that if I were Australian-born rather than just a citizen, I would be rather ashamed too:

Jayawardene said it was important to "block everything" out during tours of Australia. "When you come here it's not just the players who are aggressive, it's also the crowd who are as aggressive as their team," he said.

Way to make the opposition feel welcome, guys. You should respect them, not act aggressively, derisively, and abusively to them. They've come a long way from a completely different part of the world to entertain you. There's just no need for this kind of pathetic, childish, and small-minded behaviour.
Link6 comments|Leave a comment

[21 January 2008|09:42 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , , , ]
[Current Music |'Epidemic' by Blackfield]

I got back from New Zealand this morning.

I've a mass of thoughts swirling in my head on different topics and it really is tremendously difficult to make sense of them or to put them in order. I suppose I shall try. I guess most insistent in the back of my mind is the knowledge that I probably just saw Grandpa alive for the last time. I am trying not to let this come to the front of my mind though, with varying degrees of success. Strangely enough, what bothers me the most is that I didn't say my standard "have a good one" to him when I left ... then I realise that was probably better, as I quite consciously chose to say "see you later". Because damnit, I am going to see him later. He's stubborn; he'll hold on as long as he bloody well can. Apparently he looks good at the moment; to me, he looked much worse than when I saw him in July 2007, but those who've seen him recently think he's improved as a result of his recent radiation treatment. That treatment is for comfort, however.

I got the chance to talk to him about Tangiwai, much more extensively than I expected. I was quite taken aback by the details I did not know, and remarkably enough, almost all of the family stories are true - and omit the most astounding parts! The only part that was significantly wrong was that he ended up in a tree; he in fact ended up on the edge of the river and somehow climbed the bank. He does not know how he did it. Those of you who've looked closely at the photos I have posted will surely agree with me when I say that it looks impossible. I will write up some more at a later stage in some kind of tribute.

I also find that on every trip, I miss New Zealand more - I guess because on every trip, it's even longer since I left, but it has never stopped being thoroughly familiar and entirely my home. I have a similar familiarity with Melbourne today, the Gold Coast unfortunately, and I'm sure if I went back, the University of Queensland's St Lucia campus and immediately surrounding suburbia too. However, it does not feel like home. It doesn't matter how many times I write "Australian" in response to customs forms asking "nationality as shown on passport", and it doesn't matter how much I love Melbourne and think it beats Wellington (or any other city I've visited) hands-down for livability. At the end of the day, it is not my home. I would give up anything, even my sense of independence that Melbourne gives me, to move back to my childhood home in Raumati Beach, have a job at Victoria University in Wellington, and do the looong commute every day. As much as I hate long commutes, I'd love it simply because of the part of the world I would be in. At the very least, I hope one day to have enough wealth to rock up at my childhood home and make the owners an offer they cannot refuse and establish it as a holiday house, somewhere to spend the summers away from Melbourne's heat.

Life moves too fast. It's weird that I'm 21. My father bought three wines in 1987 - well, obviously he bought more, but he specifically bought three, a red (for the life of me, I forget what, a pinot noir?), a late harvest riesling, and a port. We opened them after my birthday dinner and had a good evening drinking them. I seem to have acquired a taste for port. I grew up on wine, but only tried port sparingly and never really liked it, but the last time I had it was many years ago. However, the port actually proved to be my favourite, despite how much I love a good Kiwi late harvest riesling. It also turns out that I really do hold my drink extraordinarily well. I drank enough on both Saturday and Sunday nights to get most people I know fairly sloshed, while I did not even approach tipsy. That was pretty fortunate really, given the travelling on the days that followed both evenings. I incidentally had the longest birthday of my life. With family in New Zealand and Australia, I've had long Christmases and birthdays before, but my 21st managed to stretch from the day itself, the 17th, right through to the 20th when we had a lovely birthday lunch at Grandma and Grandpa's and a good barbecue back at Dad's place. Wow, that was only yesterday. It feels a world away.

I think most bizarrely for me, in the last week, I had a handful of moments - brief moments, but moments all the same - where I actually felt comfortable. I am not comfortable in social situations. My mind is always flying, always analysing. I cannot mentally relax, even if I look at ease to other people. I think I am actually quite good at putting up a kind of appearance of confidence, quite by accident as nothing could be further from the truth. However, being around certain people - both grandfathers and a couple of people in Queensland - actually put me at ease. I thought I would always be too nervous to talk to Grandpa about Tangiwai, but it was actually amazingly good ... I only returned to my standard discomfort when it was over and we went to eat lunch. I remember a time when I didn't find it this hard to relax and when I didn't subject everything to methodical and extensive thought and second-guessing. It was nice, albeit unexpected, to have brief returns to that.

So there's a smattering of thoughts, all very tired as I have been up for 20 hours after only a modicum of sleep. I hope all of you had a good few days. I took shitloads of photos, so I'll make some entries in the coming days that present them and more closely detail where I went and what I did. My photography sucks but it hopefully does the job.
Link34 comments|Leave a comment

An important issue: organ donation [15 January 2008|10:37 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , ]
[Current Music |'Inner Silence' by Anathema]

The news this evening broadcast a story about a call to introduce an "opt out" scheme for organ donation in Australia to replace our current "opt in" system. This follows a similar proposal being put forth in the UK, and the successful implementation of such a system in Spain. The Health Minister has nonetheless ruled out an "opt out" approach for now, and I have noticed one thing - nobody seems to have come forth with a reasonable case against an "opt out" system (it seems the main argument is that Australia's just not ready for it), or for that matter, a reasonable case against organ donation.

I cannot think of a single logical reason why someone would not wish to donate their organs after their death. I occasionally hear someone state that they have legally lodged their intent to not donate, but this is never followed by an explanation as to why. In the couple of Internet forums where I have had the chance to question someone on this matter, they have either not posted again or dodged/ignored the question entirely. Come on. You're dead. You don't need the organs; they're not of any benefit left in your body. If you want to have an open viewing at your funeral, there is no external evidence that you're missing some of your insides. I'll go as far as saying that opting out is a decidedly selfish and stupid move, especially as it seems objectors are incapable of providing a persuasive argument in their favour. I'm willing to reconsider and publicly retract my accusation of stupidity though, so if you object and think you have a good reason, please, speak up. I'd like to hear it.

The argument against donation that I do hear regularly is the basic religious argument, which comes in various forms - the sanctity of the body as God's creation, the state of the body at a resurrection before a final judgement, and others. All of these arguments completely irk me, as I think they are, to put it mildly, theologically flimsy. They essentially imply either or both of two things. Firstly, the weakness of a deity; it does not have the power to restore any organs that may be necessary, or to wholly remake the body in the case of cremation - all the while seemingly ignoring the emphasis put upon the soul as an intangible part of being that exists beyond the temporal plane of existence. Secondly, the malevolence of a deity; for reasons not stated, the deity has some kind of opposition to a generous act that can prolong the life of another person. Surely, if life itself is the creation of the deity, it would not just approve but actually ordain any actions that can be taken to prolong life and improve its quality?

Well, in any case, for those of you in Australia, if you wish to opt in to the current organ donation scheme, you can do so here on Medicare's website. For the record, I have made it very clear to my mother that I wish every useful part of my body to be donated; I have realised that I am not actually on the register and shall rectify that immediately upon my return from New Zealand (the online registration requires the receipt of an item of mail, and I do not wish to have letters piling up while I am away). I have furthermore made it clear that if I cannot donate my organs, if at all possible I want them to be given to science for any research that can be done. I have to die at some point, and while I bloody well hope that's many decades away, when I do die I might as well be usefully dead rather than worm food.
Link11 comments|Leave a comment

Cricket: one billion Indians can't be wrong! [6 January 2008|11:23 pm]
[Tags|, , , , ]
[Current Music |'Carried Away' by Split Enz]

I remember I once made a remark that the quickest way to kill interest in a blog entry is to mention International Relations theory in the opening sentence. I have no doubt that "Australia achieve 122-run victory in a thrilling Test as India lose their last three wickets in five balls" would actually be more effective. Especially if you're like me and the vast sweeping majority of the people reading your journal are Americans without the foggiest notion of how cricket is played. For shame, people. For shame!

But, well, the second five day Test match between India and Australia has to be one of the most memorable I've ever watched - no matter whether you look at the quality of the play over the entire five days, the absolutely unbelieveable ending, or the umpiring controversies. I'm sure that in the public consciousness, the umpiring will stand out as the aspect most widely remembered, but for me, it's got to be the final over, when despite all my gut instincts as a Kiwi who "supports two teams: New Zealand and whoever's playing Australia", I cheered an Australian victory. And at that, a 16th consecutive Australian victory, equalling the record consecutive wins - and by a team captained by Ricky fucking Ponting!

Yes, I really did watch all five days of that game. And what a five days! I almost gave up on it after the absolutely disgusting umpiring on the first day that undoubtedly gifted Australia 100-150 runs. Two blindingly obvious nicks to the wicketkeeper/slips were not judged out by the umpires, who were the only people in the entire world to believe that the ball missed the bat. To be honest, my opinion of Andrew Symonds slipped a little when he failed to walk after being caught. I can understand why he stayed, as he was the last recognised batsman in the line-up, but to use a very appropriate saying, it just wasn't cricket. Ah well, I couldn't help but get sucked back into the game, especially after fantastic centuries to VVS Laxman and Sachin Tendulkar and it became apparent that India had wrestled the initiative away from Australia and were in with a chance of winning.

And then it came down to the final day. Rather than roaring, the Indian bowlers wimpered and took far too long to take the wickets they needed to take. Australia had the initiative back, and while India could have chased the total down, they had Rahul Dravid opening, who seems to have an attitude of scoring as few runs as humanly possible. Even with a minimum of 65 overs left in the day, they had enough wickets in hand to make a reasonable go of it; if they'd batted with the perspective of a one dayer and held onto their wickets, they may just have gotten within striking distance. Batting for a draw didn't work, as they lost wickets, lost initiative, and slowed to such a crawl that the beach cricket tournament on Channel 10 featuring past greats such as Dennis Lillee and Sir Richard Hadlee was far more entertaining. The hopelessly inconsistent umpiring in the Test didn't help, and I ended up getting so frustrated with the snails' pace batting from India that my allegiances wavered.

And then came what proved to be the final over. India were 7/210, with the game scheduled to end after two overs or at 6:45pm, whichever came later. India simply had to hold onto three wickets in the space of twelve balls and the draw would be theirs. So Michael Clarke is given the ball. He'd bowled just a single over in the entire game, but here he was, bowling at the death. First ball? Harbhajan Singh sends the balls to the slips. 8/210. Second ball? RP Singh trapped leg before wicket and the umpire offers a good decision for a change. 9/210. Clarke is on a hat trick and the Indians have a single wicket left as Ishant Sharma comes out - with two right hand gloves! Surely a tactic to slow down the over rate and reduce the amount of balls he and his fellow batsman, Anil Kumble, had to face. So to a chorus of boos, a left hand glove is brought out for him and he takes the strike. Third ball of the over? Clarke is denied the hat trick; dot ball. Fourth ball? Another dot ball. Fifth ball? Sharma chips it up to first slip and that's it, India all out for 210 and Clarke's claimed 3 wickets in five balls! Australia wins by 122 runs. After how frigging dull India's attempt to force a draw had been, you had to cheer the result, even it was the bloody Australians.

And yes, it is a sign of how bored I am that I just spent an entire entry chronicling a cricket match. Tomorrow, Axver reviews the colour of his carpet ...
Link29 comments|Leave a comment

[4 January 2008|08:42 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , ]
[Current Mood | discontent]
[Current Music |'The Genuine Pulse' by Borknagar]

You know what I hate? Drama. Stupid, petty, pointless drama. I have an extremely low tolerance for bullshit. I am extremely frustrated by the complete bollocks that sometimes intrudes on my life. Some people may thrive on being irrational and difficult and take pleasure from the ensuing nonsense, but that's their failing, not mine.

Speaking of people having bullshit thrust upon them, I feel rather sorry for David Hicks. He gets out of Guantanamo Bay, he gets released from Australian detention, and he walks into the invisible cage erected by the media. Now, I'm not willing to take sides on Hicks's guilt - the man was held in the most reprehensible conditions and I think it is more than reasonable to suggest he pled guilty to materially supporting terrorism simply to get out. Certainly without a fair and open trial before a jury of his peers, I am not going to accept Hicks's guilt or presume that he was simply a naive innocent in the wrong place at the wrong time.

However, I am more than willing to take a side on the post-release media circus. The media are acting like a pack of ravenous dogs with no respect for anyone else. This article in The Age struck me as very disappointing. The guy must be extremely psychologically damaged by his time in Guantanamo; no wonder he won't take questions and is apprehensive about being seen in public! The man's gone through a very traumatic experience and the process of re-adjustment to normal life will hardly be a picnic for him either, and the media vultures surely are not helping that at all. It seems like even the most respectable media outlets have questionable moral scruples. There isn't even really a story here! Hicks is free and trying to return to normality, and in no condition to answer any questions; go chase some worthwhile news that matters.

Bah, people. And some folk wonder why I like to say "the biggest problem with humanity is people"?
Link11 comments|Leave a comment

Here I was, thinking the forces of social conservatism in Aussie politics had been banished ... [1 January 2008|10:37 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , , ]
[Current Mood | annoyed]
[Current Music |'Sunset Of The Age' by Anathema]

Politicians, eh? Vile scum. Labour's Telecommunications Minister, Stephen Conroy, has announced mandatory filtering of online content at the Internet Service Providor level in Australia (Source: the ABC and the BBC).

All last year, I took shot after shot at the Liberal government's social policy, and rightly so. It's archaic, out-dated bigotry based upon intolerance and discrimination; a dislike of anybody who deviates from certain "traditional norms". It was hardly a surprise that the Liberals were quite happy to hop into bed with Family Fundies First. It was more than a relief to see them voted out of office on 24/11, and just yesterday, before this filtering was brought to my attention, I proclaimed happily that "Australia's political future really does look brighter".

I take it back. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Now it's time for LiveJournal to show its true colours; recent [info]news posts have devolved into festivals of paranoia, with people fearing the sale of LJ to SUP will result in all kinds of implausible scenarios in which nasty Russian figures censor journals. But when it's something that actually matters, when it's something that's actually on the table and happening, when it's not just your little online blog, will people do anything? Somehow I doubt we'll see much drama about this at all. Well, I'll have my rant in any case.

Firstly, let's see what exactly this entails. From the ABC: "Senator Conroy says it will be mandatory for all internet service providers to provide clean feeds, or ISP filtering, to houses and schools that are free of pornography and inappropriate material" (emphasis mine). The BBC adds that "Australians wanting unfettered access to the web will have to contact their supplier to opt out of the new regime" (emphasis mine). The reasons why this constitutes complete stupidity are multitudinous. Allow me to throw around just a few of them.

1. Who, praytell, decides what constitutes "inappropriate material"? Some government censor maintaining a blacklist who knows better than me? Funny, I thought this was a liberal democracy. And just what constitutes inappropriate? Go back a few decades and the mere discussion of homosexuality was inappropriate. I don't want somebody else's values being forced upon me.
2. Why is it opt-out as opposed to opt-in? If I for whatever reason felt the filter were necessary (e.g. if I maintain a primary school's Internet network), then I could opt-in to a government-provided filter. The rest of us can continue to surf the Internet uninterrupted.
3. How transparent will the opt-out process be? How do I know that if I opt-out, I won't end up on some government list of people whose online activity may be suspicious? All my activity is above board, but I value my privacy and my freedom.
4. Why is this even necessary? Conroy's statements reek of "won't someone PLEASE think of the children!", and I frankly have the voice of Helen Lovejoy from the Simpsons in my head whenever I read any quotes from him. Look, if you're such a poor parent that your children are readily accessing content inappropriate for their age, then that's your problem, and it should not affect anyone else - and especially not legal adults like me who are not parents! No children use my computer, thus the entire argument that this is to protect children is a complete irrelevancy.
5. Will it even protect the children? Last year, the Howard government introduced a software filter that parents could put on their computer, only for the Sydney Morning Herald to report that a 16 year old schoolboy managed to get past it within 30 minutes, all while leaving the appearance that the filter was still on to deceive his parents. This filter will similarly be exploitable; if bloggers in China and Iran can get around much more severe and restrictive state filtering, teens with IT knowledge far superior to that of their parents will be easily able to get around the filter. While Mum and Dad are content in the knowledge the government's Internet filter is there, little Johnny's in the other room, bypassing the filter and downloading some steamy porn film.
6. Which brings me to my next point. There's the "won't someone PLEASE think of the children!" argument in the sense of protecting children from porn (oh no, the human body!), violence (depending upon what we mean, perhaps justifiable), and some vague and ill-defined concept of "inappropriate content". Then there's the "won't someone PLEASE think of the children!" argument in the sense of blocking access to child pornography. That sort of disgusting and exploitative filth should be combatted at every turn, but this filter does not help. Child pornography is already the subject of major international police activity, and it is safe to say that if you are accessing child pornography at the moment, this filter won't make a single jot of difference to you. This filter will not do a thing to stop sick people who get their jollies from the exploitation of children.
7. At the end of the day, you search for content on the Internet. Porn doesn't just spew onto your computer uncontrollably. Parents, if your child is looking at porn, it's because they looked for it and it's your responsibility to do something about it if you think they shouldn't be allowed to see it. Government, if people are looking up illegal content, it is your job to 1. prosecute those making and hosting the illegal content and 2. prosecute those who are actively searching for this content. This should not involve law-abiding Internet users, i.e. the vast majority, having to opt-out of a filter.

This filter will almost certainly not impact my day-to-day Internet activity. However, it strikes me as a gross breach of individual freedom, not to mention a staggering waste of taxpayer money and IT specialist time. Australia's Internet is quite backwards enough, thank you very much. I would urge every Australian citizen reading this to write to Senator Conroy as well as your local member and state senators to protest this moronic decision.

Oh, and surely, surely, this backwards tool of subtle social control violates the human rights charter Victoria introduced today!
LinkLeave a comment

[12 December 2007|09:27 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , ]
[Current Music |'Quiet' by This Will Destroy You]

It's early days yet, but the new Rudd Labour government is doing me proud. A start has been made on dismantling the institutionalised latent racism of the John Howard era. In response to the MV Tampa affair, Howard & Co. established their morally repulsive "Pacific Solution". Thousands of islands which were formerly in Australia's migration zone were removed, and asylum seekers who land there or are otherwise intercepted prior to reaching the Australian mainland have no right to apply for an Australian visa. The government even tried to do this retroactively to some territories after asylum seekers landed there. So what happened to these people? They were transported to processing facilities also located outside Australia's migration zone to have their applications for refugee status assessed, most notably to the effectively bankrupt island country of Nauru in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. In other words, the Australian government deliberately sought to reduce the rights of and their responsibility to some of the planet's most vulnerable and desperate people. After all, to quote (possibly paraphrase) Howard, "we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come here", and it's not hard to guess who Howard and his cronies decided they wanted to let in after one government minister incorrectly asserted that African migrants are more prone to criminal activity. You better believe that if there were white refugees from a civil war in New Zealand or a repressive theocracy in the US or widespread "dirty" terrorism in the UK, they wouldn't be sent to languish for up to three years in Nauru.

As you would expect, this policy was an absolute failure. Acording to an August 2007 article in the Sydney Morning Herald, the Pacific Solution cost Australian taxpayers a cool billion dollars over a five year period, and the cost of processing asylum seekers offshore was seven times that of processing them in Australia. Money that could have been spent on improving healthcare and educational facilities with better equipment and higher wages was burnt on blatant deprivation of rights. Money that could have been spent on urgent infrastructural upgrades to boost capacity on rail and lower pollution by transferring freight to environmentally friendly trains was burnt on a pathetic attempt to demonstrate the government's muscle to the right wing. The Howard government tried to pretend to Australians that it was the best option for economic growth and strongest on security. In reality, it pursued an option that was economically daft, stripped thousands of people of the security of law, and even failed to achieve its desired outcoming in reducing how many people are seeking asylum in Australia. Thank goodness these foolish xenophobes are gone.

Problem is, the ramifications of the Pacific Solution will last years. I am not referring to Australia's tarnished image on human rights or whether Rudd will restore the former boundaries of Australia's migration zone, though those are significant issues. I'm referring to poor Nauru. Once a wealthy Pacific island state, it is a lesson in why you need to manage your money well and why you should not let large multi-national companies gang-rape your land and take all your resources. Nauru was loaded with phosphate; was. The resources are gone. The island has precious little else to offer. My uncle went to Nauru to help build a new hospital ward (and lost an eye there); I understand that funds ran out and the ward remains unfinished. The place has gone down the economic gurgler. Howard & Co. effectively bribed Nauru to participate in the Pacific Solution; they preyed on Nauru's economic desperation and vulnerability by offering considerable financial aid in exchange for establishing a centre to process illegal immigrants in their territory. Nauru received millions of dollars in exchange for doing so, and in the process has become considerably dependent on the Pacific Solution. Now, with Rudd phasing it out, The Age reports that Nauru fears that it is screwed. That's right; not only did Howard pursue a repugnant policy "solution" in response to asylum seekers, but he also made an entire country dependent on it. Now what will the people of Nauru do? No matter how well Rudd phases out the Pacific Solution and no matter how much financial aid Australia continues to supply, that's simply not going to cut it. It keeps Nauru dependent and on the verge of insolvency if the political or economic winds in Australia shift away from it. Let's hope no more politicians exploit this tiny country for their own gain.

I am so genuinely relieved that Howard has gone, and writing this entry really drove that home for me. The Howard government sure enjoyed exploiting the desperate and vulnerable people of this world, both to gather votes ("oh noes illegal immigrants - crime, disease, terrorism!" played well to morons on the right wing) and to accomplish their morally bankrupt schemes ("hey, Nauru, we hear you could use some money ..."). I don't think anybody with a sense of compassion will miss them.
Link4 comments|Leave a comment

[6 November 2007|11:40 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , ]
[Current Music |'Don't Fall' by The Chameleons]

Wow, time really flies. I can remember exactly where I was a year ago at this very moment. Luke and I were standing on a hill looking into ANZ Stadium, Brisbane, as a Queensland tropical storm broke above us and U2 played a dress rehearsal for their first gig in months the next night. Luke was under the shelter of my umbrella. My right arm and notepad for setlist details were also safely under the umbrella. Meanwhile, the rest of me was in the pouring rain, getting abso-fucking-lutely drenched. That's what you call dedication to setlists. A good time was had by all. The setlist is here, down in the soundcheck portion for Monday 06/11. And this is the article I wrote for U2VT after we got back home.

Last November really was such a load of fun. I travelled, I caught up with loads of cool people, and I saw seven really cool gigs, plus the aforementioned dress rehearsal. I saw the real One None Tree Hill, walked down the Onehunga Branch, and got delayed on a Melbourne tram because of a guy with bongos. I got to use German with real Germans who smuggled cameras and tape recorders into concerts; I met Danes who spoke English better than most of the native speakers I've ever met; I watched a bunch of Sydneysiders create a bizarre form of "queue cricket" with a tennis ball and jandals (that's flip-flops for the Yanks) while our entrance to Telstra Stadium was delayed. We got songs like One Tree Hill, The First Time, Party Girl, and Kite. Damn it was awesome fun.
Link6 comments|Leave a comment

On a decade outside my homeland. [8 October 2007|11:24 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , ]
[Current Location |Melbourne, Victoria, Australia]
[Current Music |'Stars Die' by Porcupine Tree]

Well, today is the tenth anniversary of my move to Australia. We visited Australia for the first time in January 1997, to visit my aunt and uncle who'd been living on the Gold Coast since about 1993. When we went back to Raumati Beach, Mum decided it was time for a change, so late on 8 October 1997, we landed at Brisbane airport to start a completely new life. It's funny how time can really fly. On 29 June next year, I will have lived exactly half my life in both countries; I suppose I effectively already have now, and I certainly did a lot of really important intellectual growth on this side of the Tasman as opposed to the side I was born on.

I honestly don't really know how I feel about this. For a while, I've really wondered about my national identity, and the strong British and American influences through the mass media and Internet don't really make that process easier. I will always be a New Zealander, of course; I love the country's beautiful landscapes, its world-leader status as far as progressive politics go, and its enchanting railways. I take pride in the country's achievements and I'm deeply interested in its history, to the point that it will likely be an important part of my future academic pursuits. But what do I really have as far as culture goes? What context do I come from? When I go back to New Zealand, each time I feel like I fit in less than I did last time. The only shred of readily identifiable Kiwi culture I have is the rugby thing. Oh, and I suppose the progressive politics, which were internalised from an early age. As for Australia, I very much appreciate living here, I'm quite comfortable and certainly I think I've been able to achieve more than had I stayed in New Zealand. That said, I still often feel like an outsider on Australian culture, often an interested outsider but an outsider all the same. Even though I'm a citizen, I don't consider myself Australian; that said, I have been known to refer to it as "my country" on occasions, and I think you can fairly do that when you're a resident and thus a participant in the contemporary scene. Apparent contradictions are quickly reconciled when you realise just how much crossover there is between New Zealand and Australia anyway. We have our differences, but they're often exaggerated and the similarities overlooked. Now, I've never been to Belgium, but from what I've heard of its regional divisions, Flanders and Wallonia have much, much less in common than my two countries that are separated by 3,000km of ocean! Hell, we probably have more in common than some parts of the US do with each other.

I don't know where this is leading. I was just thinking about what it means when I say I'm a New Zealander, what it identifies. Rugby? Progressivism? I suppose that's a culture. It just feels diluted, like my identification is weak, that I'm an outsider wherever I am. Maybe that makes me more neutral; maybe it's a good quality. I suppose that if I'm going to do academic work on New Zealand, I don't want to be biased by patriotic fervour anyway - which is why I'll stay far away from any kind of rugby history! It'd all just be "we're the best, here's some apologetics regarding certain losses, oh yeah and we're the best, don't get in the way of the All Blacks or we'll eat you for breakfast". What I think is the biggest shame is that while in New Zealand, I only loosely experienced our surprisingly rich music history; I became fully conscious of it only from about the age of 17 on. And that was primarily the fault of a Minnesotan, [info]screendoor3! Heh. Make sense of that one.

Well, there's some directionless pondering. After yesterday, I was too damn embarrassed and disappointed to wear an All Blacks shirt, so instead I got out my Wellington Hurricanes one instead. Damn, I really miss Raumati Beach sometimes. It'd be nice to walk out and look at that island rather than just the sprawling inner suburbia of bland sixties flats and somewhat older and nicer houses. Well, at least this inner suburbia is redeemed by the trams, unlike Brisbane.

Aotearoa, rugged individual
Glistens like a pearl at the bottom of the world ...

- Six Months In A Leaky Boat by Split Enz

Have a good one, folks.
Link2 comments|Leave a comment

I can't stop laughing [6 September 2007|11:58 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , , ]
[Current Mood | highly amused]
[Current Music |'Hibernation' by Solar Powered People]

OK, The Chaser officially wins at life. I am so amused.

For those of you (i.e. anybody outside Australia) unaware, The Chaser is a group of satirical comedians who are incredibly hilarious and push the limits of just what you can get away with, and their current show is The Chaser's War On Everything ("George Bush declared a war on terror, but only The Chaser is willing to declare a war on everything!"). They have established enough of a reputation that they were even included on an official list of terrorists, anarchists, and protesters deemed to pose a risk when Dick Cheney visited Australia earlier this year.

So, this week, the APEC conference is beginning in Sydney. The heads of 21 countries, including the US and China, are here and untold disruption is being caused in Sydney - to be perfectly frank, I'd be livid if this were happening in Melbourne, especially at Bush, whose excess becomes quickly apparent when compared with the Chinese leader. Central Sydney is effectively in lockdown, with a serious police presence and a rigid security cordon and whatnot. The police even warned The Chaser not to pull any stunts.

Except they did. Disguised as the Canadian motorcade, two members of The Chaser, Chas Licciardello and Julian Morrow, along with nine crew and drivers, got through the heavy security and made it all the way to George Bush's hotel! The police only realised what was going on when Chas stepped out of a car dressed as Osama bin Laden. So all eleven were arrested (and subsequently released on bail, with trial in October) and this has caused a huge furore. Millions upon millions of dollars has been wasted spent on security, only for comedians to breach it. This is easily the biggest success The Chaser has ever had in demonstrating the absurdity of something and humiliating the people behind it. This was headline news on EVERY SINGLE NETWORK. Lead story on some. Even SBS, the bastion of serious-as-opposed-to-sensationalist reporting, mentioned The Chaser in one of their top stories. You can't buy publicity like this.

The funniest part, though, has to go to the official response. Ladies and gentlemen, the ability of Chas and Julian to get within metres of Bush's hotel actually proves the success of the security! Apparently the fact that The Chaser so easily got so close to Bush's hotel that, if they were terrorists, they could have detonated a bomb and killed him, demonstrates SUCCESS. I quote: An angry [NSW Police Minister] David Campbell denied he was embarrassed by the comedians' ability to penetrate APEC's restricted zone - rather, he was pleased the "multi-layered" security had worked. Because, you know, the cops only realised this wasn't the Canadian motorcade when Chas stepped out, and real terrorists aiming to blow up Bush would have definitely stopped, got out, and waved their bombs around before detonating them and destroying the hotel. Yep, the security totally worked. Come on, how stupid do you think we are?

In other words, Sydney is being thrown into chaos by multi-million dollar security that can be breached by a comedy team with relatively little planning in comparison to that of a terrorist organisation. The Chaser has just made this whole fuss look completely stupid. I can't stop laughing, though I have a funny sense of "my tax dollars paid for that failure ..."
Link2 comments|Leave a comment

ANZAC Day [25 April 2007|09:31 am]
[Tags|, , , , , ]
[Current Mood | sad]
[Current Music |'Mothers Of The Disappeared' by U2]

They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.

- "For the Fallen", Laurence Binyon

A brief history of ANZAC Day.

Lest we forget.

What a waste. What a total fucking waste. 10% of New Zealand's population fought in World War I, a war on the other side of the world, and we suffered the highest per capita rate of deaths. A quarter of the dead perished on the hopeless shores of Gallipoli; many others were nothing more than cannon fodder on the Western Front, torn down in no man's land on suicidal missions.

And for what? Somebody care to tell me why so many people, my relatives included, had to die in such a completely pointless war? Every year on this day, I hear about how they fought for peace and freedom. Then every night, I turn on the news. Was what the ANZACs did all in vain? You'd think that ANZAC Day would have taught us the futility of sending young men to die in the name of power politics. We've been observing the day long enough; why don't we finally learn something from it?
Link1 comment|Leave a comment

[11 February 2007|01:18 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , , , , ]
[Current Mood | excited]
[Current Music |'Dislocated Day (live)' by Porcupine Tree]

This guy might just be my new favourite person. Go forth and have a laugh at some of the morons a taxi company's phone operator has to deal with - and the fantastic ways he responds to them. This in particular is gold.

On a different note, you know you live in Melbourne when the AFL Grand Final is already being advertised on TV even though it's not until September. I wonder if they're already advertising the Rugby World Cup in New Zealand? I'm yet to determine whether Victoria is more AFL-mad than New Zealand is rugby-mad or vice versa.

Also, one thing I like about living here is that I have windows that actually open! Everywhere I lived in Queensland along with all the places my friends and family lived had those windows you slide horizontally along a runner, with a screen on the outside so that the bugs that plague every Queensland evening don't come in, so even if the window was open, the screen still stopped you from being able to stick your hand outside or whatever. Here, I actually have windows that swing open. I haven't had anything like this since I left New Zealand almost a decade ago. It's kind of novel.

In startling news, I will actually be supporting Australia in the cricket later today - but solely because I want the series to go to a third final, which I'd like England to win in order to puncture the over-inflated Australian cricket ego. I would be bitter about the English knocking New Zealand out of the tournament, but geez, the Black Caps brought that one upon themselves by becoming lax, going to sleep, and waking up just in time to snatch defeat from the jaws of certain victory not once but TWICE. At least the team isn't as dismal as it was back at the start of the year though, and I think we might not do so bad at the Cricket World Cup next month. I just hope Shane Bond can do the miraculous and actually remain healthy and uninjured for a few consecutive months.

And that's about it for me today. Those of you in the know won't be surprised to learn that I am feeling rather excited. Those of you who aren't quite in the know will find out why I'm excited in due course. Have a good one, folks!
Link10 comments|Leave a comment

A second brief letter to an incompetent excuse for a Prime Minister [4 February 2007|11:23 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , , , , , ]
[Current Mood | infuriated]
[Current Music |'Epidemic' by Blackfield]

John Howard,

Imagine the following scenario. An Australian serving in Afghanistan to aid the Global Spread Of DemocracyTM is captured by the Taliban. They believe he is a threat to their existence and throw him in jail, pending a trial to determine whether he is guilty of criminal conduct. They then hold him in miserable conditions without trial for five whole years, and without charge for the majority of this time. He is treated appallingly during his imprisonment and denied basic legal and human rights, though the Taliban claim otherwise. What do you do, Mr Howard? What do you do? Do you just take the Taliban's word that they're treating him OK and that everything is proceeding as swiftly as possible and he will receive a fair trial? Or do you call bullshit and do everything within your power to secure fair treatment and trial?

Yeah, that's pretty much the David Hicks example flipped. I'm using it to make a point. I'm calling you out on being a complete hypocrite, you disgusting little man. You want to know something funny about human rights? The point is that they apply to everyone, including the people you don't like. The point is that you don't allow Australian citizens to be thrown in a miserable jail for five years without trial, even if the jailor is supposedly our ally. The point is that it's fucking inhumane to lock someone up for five years with the barest of contact with the outside world when they haven't even been put on trial, let alone found guilty of anything! The point is that you don't fucking do that, you don't! Especially not when this US government has been proven time and time again to be completely incompetent, completely full of shit, completely untrustworthy, and completely unconcerned with upholding international law or the Geneva Conventions or basic human rights when it isn't convenient for them to do so!

David Hicks is a citizen of the country you were elected to lead, Mr Howard. He has been mistreated and denied basic human rights by a country deemed to be our ally. What are you going to do about it, huh? Stop sitting on your hands and stop responding with meaningless blather. If you don't get off your hands, just fucking resign and let someone with a sense of compassion and a modicum of intelligence do the job.

Fuck you.

Sincerely,
Intelligent People of Australia

PS If anyone thinks my profanity in this entry is excessive, just imagine if your father was held in miserable conditions without trial by a foreign country for over five years. Bloody hell, the David Hicks issue makes me angry and I think I've remained remarkably composed in this entry.
Link4 comments|Leave a comment

A brief letter to an incompetent excuse for a Prime Minister [3 February 2007|07:44 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , ]
[Current Mood | irritated]
[Current Music |'See No Evil' by Television (heh ...)]

John Howard,

Please, stop being such an anti-intellectual. First you had a problem with historians, and now you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and shout "la la la NUCLEAR POWAH la la la I'm not listening la la la NUCLEAR POWAAAAAHHHH!" while ignoring scientific data on global warming? You're an absolute disgrace to this country and thoroughly impossible to take seriously.

Sincerely,
Intelligent People of Australia

PS I am not inherently opposed to nuclear power, I just think it's laughable that John Howard routinely sticks his head in the sand when the issue of global warming comes up, no matter how many scientists present verifiable data and debunk the claims of the crackpots who say things that Mr Howard likes, or when he does bother to somewhat acknowledge the scientists and their data, he just uses the opportunity as a means to push his nuclear power agenda.
Link29 comments|Leave a comment

[29 January 2007|11:53 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ]
[Current Music |'Nimos And Tambos' by Pure Reason Revolution]

(Axver's Lack Of Feelings About) The State Of The Union. )

A quick comparison of the current US and Australian governments. Guess which I dislike more! )

So there's a brief return to my politically themed writing. On a lighter note, this evening, I watched the TV show Black Books for the first time. I'd previously caught a couple of Dylan Moran's stand-up comedy gigs on TV and he amused me a good deal, so when I saw that Black Books was going to be on, I made a point of checking it out. That was some pretty funny stuff; the Brits and Irish certainly know how to do comedy better than anyone else. Now if only I had the money to buy some Blackadder DVDs ...
Link10 comments|Leave a comment

[26 January 2007|08:11 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , , , , , , ]
[Current Music |'Flesh And The Power It Holds' by Death]

Today is apparently Australia Day. After how much of a whirlwind the last two weeks have been, I still feel stuck in mid-January, but this doesn't make much of a difference to me anyway as I have never really associated anything with Australia Day and it normally passes me by with little more than a faint recognition of "huh, it's Australia Day today" and "hooray for public holidays" at some point in the day. I've never been one to pay attention to national days. In fact, despite all my bluster about New Zealand, especially with regards to the All Blacks, I normally completely forget about Waitangi Day until at least the day after. In fact, it wasn't until very recently that I finally stopped forgetting whether Waitangi Day is on the 6th or 7th of February (it's on the former).

I think I actually present a bit of a false impression on this journal. I am very passionate about rugby union and the All Blacks, I also can't help but take a sense of pride in the achievements of a country so small and out-of-the-way (come on, how can you not be proud of your country being the first to give women the vote?), and New Zealand's remarkable scenic beauty is objective fact, but I would never consider myself especially patriotic. I may be the first to praise the achievements of New Zealanders and their government when things go right, but I would be a liar if I said I felt New Zealand was the best country in the world and I feel a lot has gone wrong in the last couple of decades. To tell the truth, I often feel rather stateless - a passion for sport and scenery does not translate into a fully fledged identity. I don't feel any particularly strong affection towards residing in any particular country, though I'm currently content enough with Australia. It would certainly take a lot to make me move back to New Zealand - namely, a nice house within walking distance of Featherston railway station and a high paying job at Victoria University in Wellington. I choose Featherston because I have no desire to live in a city if I can help it and I adore the tranquil serenity of the Wairarapa region, and Featherston is the closest country town to Wellington via daily rail transport. And anyway, apart from Martinborough, it's my favourite Wairarapa township (re: "tiny village" for the Americans and Europeans in the audience). I really love the Wairarapa. It's my second home; I'm from the Kapiti Coast, but my father grew up in the Wairarapa and during my childhood, we regularly made the trip over the Rimutakas to my grandparents in Masterton and the vineyards in Martinborough. Good memories.

But to get back on topic, I feel that what I appreciate about New Zealand is what any rational, thinking person would also appreciate separate from any sentimental attachment to the place, such as the aforementioned women's suffrage point, and that I appreciate other countries on the same level, though I am not as vocal about it on LiveJournal as they aren't represented by the All Blacks. I was certainly well known for my love of the history and achievements of the republics of the former Soviet Union back in high school, though (to the point that I was nicknamed Vladimir). I feel countries tend to be so diverse that it is really impossible to be patriotic about a country in general; rather, the best thing is to admire specific achievements and facets. I especially admire those countries that, like New Zealand, have contributed a lot to the world despite being rather small and often overlooked. I am happy to be called a New Zealander and I think many of the country's achievements are truly fantastic, but I have in the past said I would revoke my citizenship in certain circumstances and I stand by that. For example, if New Zealand were ever to pass such disgusting homophobic legislation as happened in those American states where homosexual marriage has been expressly constitutionally forbidden, I would revoke my citizenship and never refer to myself as a New Zealander while the law stood. While it is important to have a place in the world and to be aware of your heritage, country affiliation is ultimately a bit trifling, an accident of birth, and if New Zealand ever did anything that I did not wish to be associated with, I would not hesitate to disown the country.

And those are my random thoughts for today. Have a good one, folks!

PS England, your cricket team is a disgrace to the game. Seriously, all out for 110? Losing your last five wickets for a measly seven runs? Go home.
Link37 comments|Leave a comment

Labour Party leadership challenge [4 December 2006|12:17 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , ]
[Current Music |'Walking On The Wind' by Spock's Beard]

For the last couple of years, I have sat on the fence with regards to Australian politics. I despise Liberal Party policies, but Labour has rarely seemed much better - a string of dull, uninspiring leaders and a tendency to appear as a Liberal-lite sometimes. The worst offender of the lot, I feel, is Kim Beazley. I intensely dislike the man and I never would have voted Labour with him as the leader. At least Mark Latham just seemed a bit unsuited to the role and Simon Crean was the amazing man without a personality.

However, I am a fan of Kevin Rudd. All this year, whenever Luke and I have been watching the news and Rudd has appeared on screen, we've commented that he should lead Labour and we'd actually vote Labour if he did. He's the kind of intelligent, articulate person we could get behind, some of his comments against Howard government policy have been fantastic, and he apparently dislikes Friedrich Hayek's economic theories (thank goodness, because the last thing the world needs is more economic neoliberalism). Accordingly, when he announced his intention last week to challenge Beazley for leadership of the Labour Party, I was thrilled. The vote took place earlier this morning.

And HURRAH! Kevin Rudd won 49-39! This is one of those rare good days in Australian politics. As long as there's no backpedalling or other disaster, I'm pretty sure that I will be voting Labour at the next election. Had Beazley led the party, I've no bloody clue who I would've sided with.
Link9 comments|Leave a comment

[8 October 2006|05:51 pm]
[Tags|, , , , , , ]
[Current Music |'Recurring Dream' by Crowded House]

What a great day. The sun's setting after shining all day, the temperature's been comfortable and pleasant, the car make and driver that I support won the Bathurst 1000 (first time the driver I support has ever won in my 10 or so years of watching the event), I had the best and most cheerful conversation I've had with my father in quite a while, I had delicious Arataki manuka honey on my toast for breakfast because it is legal to bring it to Australia even though all other New Zealand honey is banned (as the manuka plant is native to Australia as well as NZ) so my grandmother brought me some of it when she was in NZ last weekend, my essay due tomorrow is coming together nicely and should be finished soon enough, and I'm listening to a song that makes me feel happy. And today also marks the ninth anniversary of my move to Australia. It's hard to believe that I've spent almost half of my life outside of New Zealand, but I'm not letting that get me down today.

I am in a good mood. I hope the rest of you are as well. Have a good one, folks!
Link7 comments|Leave a comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]