The pot is boiling over.

Being in Germany for the last month, the news that has permeated the zeitgeist (and the language barrier) most readily was Spain prevailing over England in the World Cup. But there has been a LOT going on globally and I’ve been catching up on the past month’s news over the last 24 hours since I got home. Over the last couple of weeks: the UK booted out their conservative government, France also rejected right wing extremism, there was an assignation attempt on Trump, J.D. Vance was announced as Trump’s running mate, Israel’s occupation over Gaza has been declared illegal, Crowdstrike and Microsoft demonstrated some stunning global IT vulnerabilities, Biden withdrew his candidacy, Harris has emerged as the presumptive Democratic nominee and is steaming ahead with a record breaking campaign (in terms of donors and volunteers). I have no idea what’s been happing in Australia, haven’t got that far yet… other than Gina Whatsherfart and Dutton deciding they like nuclear power a couple of weeks ago (?), but I’ll get into that later.

Any way, one thing I saw stood out a LOT, even among all this noise, was these signs at the fascism-fest that was the Republican National Convention…

Yeessss… subtle they are not! They are fucking huge alarm bells going off.

A couple of weeks ago I was at the Jewish Museum in Berlin and was struck by a room that was lined on both walls with displays of the chronology of legislation that was enacted to slowly restricted the freedoms and rights of the Jewish people under the Third Reich. It started in 1933 and it showed how the lives of the Jewish people in Nazi Germany and eventually Nazi occupied Europe, were slowly and steadily having their rights eroded.

One week, it was Jewish lawyers losing the rights to practice law, the next it’s Jewish student teachers being sacked. The following week Jewish people can’t serve in the civil service, then Jewish doctors can’t treat non-Jewish patients, then Jewish tax accountants had their licences revoked, then civil servants can’t be married to Jewish people. And so on and so forth, until the edicts were codifying that Jewish people can only live in certain parts of various cities, that the property of Jewish people will be forfeited to the state, then Jewish people will be deported and they end up in walled and patrolled ghettos, then they get pushed out of the ghettos to concentration camps, and we all know where this tragic history ended up going.

(If you want to know more about how and when these insidious and pervasive laws were rolled out click HERE.)

The Jewish people in Nazi Europe were frogs in a boiling pot – slowly but inevitably having their rights and humanity stripped away from them, and if they (and the global community) had known where it was going from the outset, history might have turned out completely different.

It is not alarmist to say the Trumpian vision of the US is on the same trajectory – only they’re not planning on boiling that frog slowly. Trump and his advisors are stating unequivocally that they plan to forcibly remove ‘illegal immigrants’ from the United States via forced expulsion and deportation camps. DEPORTATION CAMPS. They are promising to remove 20 million ‘illegal immigrants’; this is a number that far exceeds the estimated number of undocumented residents currently living in the United States, many of whom have been born in the US and have never seen the countries they would be theoretically deported to… And if anyone thinks these deportation camps would be run with any administrative rigour or with any humane consideration whatsoever – just remember the family separation policy that was instituted under the last Trump administration. From April 2018 to June 2018, families arriving at the border saw adults prosecuted and held by in federal jails and subsequently deported, and their children were placed under the supervision and control of the US Department of Health and Human Services. This resulted in over 5,500 children being removed from their parents and the short lived ‘children in cages’ media outrage. No one is talking about it anymore, but as at March 2024, this year – just four months ago! – there are still 2000 children that haven’t been able to be reunited with their families.


“MASS DEPORTATIONS NOW!” is not a slogan for a slow and inexorable removal of rights for people who land on the wrong side of Trump’s bigotry… it is a massive red flag heralding the systematic xenophobic persecution of immigrants based on the ultra conservative values outlined in the Project 2025 manifesto. Trump has stirred and stoked the worst type of fear in these people with his asinine assertions that migrants are ruining their lives. Crime is statistically much lower than during his tenure, but he’s at those rallies and on Fox News bleating about ‘migrant crime’ and, ’Biden migrant crime’ and it’s feeding the worst impulses in his followers.

The pot is already boiling. The whole world can see where this is going… I find myself hoping that the average American is more decent than deplorable, but whenever I think about it too long I worry that most of them are largely apathetic.

WashPo Article re: Civil War

‘They are preparing for war’: An expert on civil wars discusses where political extremists are taking this country

Barbara F. Walter, 57, is a political science professor at the University of California at San Diego and the author of “How Civil Wars Start: And How to Stop Them,” which was released in January. She lives in San Diego with her husband.


Having studied civil wars all over the world, and the conditions that give rise to them, you argue in your book, somewhat chillingly, that the United States is coming dangerously close to those conditions. Can you explain that?
So we actually know a lot about civil wars — how they start, how long they last, why they’re so hard to resolve, how you end them. And we know a lot because since 1946, there have been over 200 major armed conflicts. And for the last 30 years, people have been collecting a lot of data, analyzing the data, looking at patterns. I’ve been one of those people.
We went from thinking, even as late as the 1980s, that every one of these was unique. And the way people studied it is they would be a Somalia expert, a Yugoslavia expert, a Tajikistan expert. And everybody thought their case was unique and that you could draw no parallels. Then methods and computers got better, and people like me came and could collect data and analyze it. And what we saw is that there are lots of patterns at the macro level.
In 1994, the U.S. government put together this Political Instability Task Force. They were interested in trying to predict what countries around the world were going to become unstable, potentially fall apart, experience political violence and civil war.

Was that out of the State Department?
That was done through the CIA. And the task force was a mix of academics, experts on conflict, and data analysts. And basically what they wanted was: In all of your research, tell us what you think seems to be important. What should we be considering when we’re thinking about the lead-up to civil wars?
Originally the model included over 30 different factors, like poverty, income inequality, how diverse religiously or ethnically a country was. But only two factors came out again and again as highly predictive. And it wasn’t what people were expecting, even on the task force. We were surprised. The first was this variable called anocracy. There’s this nonprofit based in Virginia called the Center for Systemic Peace. And every year it measures all sorts of things related to the quality of the governments around the world. How autocratic or how democratic a country is. And it has this scale that goes from negative 10 to positive 10. Negative 10 is the most authoritarian, so think about North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain. Positive 10 are the most democratic. This, of course, is where you want to be. This would be Denmark, Switzerland, Canada. The U.S. was a positive 10 for many, many years. It’s no longer a positive 10. And then it has this middle zone between positive 5 and negative 5, which was you had features of both. If you’re a positive 5, you have more democratic features, but definitely have a few authoritarian elements. And, of course, if you’re negative 5, you have more authoritarian features and a few democratic elements. The U.S. was briefly downgraded to a 5 and is now an 8.
And what scholars found was that this anocracy variable was really predictive of a risk for civil war. That full democracies almost never have civil wars. Full autocracies rarely have civil wars. All of the instability and violence is happening in this middle zone. And there’s all sorts of theories why this middle zone is unstable, but one of the big ones is that these governments tend to be weaker. They’re transitioning to either actually becoming more democratic, and so some of the authoritarian features are loosening up. The military is giving up control. And so it’s easier to organize a challenge. Or, these are democracies that are backsliding, and there’s a sense that these governments are not that legitimate, people are unhappy with these governments. There’s infighting. There’s jockeying for power. And so they’re weak in their own ways. Anyway, that turned out to be highly predictive.

And then the second factor was whether populations in these partial democracies began to organize politically, not around ideology — so, not based on whether you’re a communist or not a communist, or you’re a liberal or a conservative — but where the parties themselves were based almost exclusively around identity: ethnic, religious or racial identity. The quintessential example of this is what happened in the former Yugoslavia.


So for you, personally, what was the moment the ideas began to connect, and you thought: Wait a minute, I see these patterns in my country right now?


My dad is from Germany. He was born in 1932 and lived through the war there, and he emigrated here in 1958. He had been a Republican his whole life, you know; we had the Reagan calendar in the kitchen every year.
And starting in early 2016, I would go home to visit, and my dad — he doesn’t agitate easily, but he was so agitated. All he wanted to do was talk about Trump and what he was seeing happening. He was really nervous. It was almost visceral — like, he was reliving the past. Every time I’d go home, he was just, like, “Please tell me Trump’s not going to win.” And I would tell him, “Dad, Trump is not going to win.” And he’s just, like, “I don’t believe you; I saw this once before. And I’m seeing it again, and the Republicans, they’re just falling in lockstep behind him.” He was so nervous.
I remember saying: “Dad, what’s really different about America today from Germany in the 1930s is that our democracy is really strong. Our institutions are strong. So, even if you had a Trump come into power, the institutions would hold strong.” Of course, then Trump won. We would have these conversations where my dad would draw all these parallels. The brownshirts and the attacks on the media and the attacks on education and on books. And he’s just, like, I’m seeing it. I’m seeing it all again here. And that’s really what shook me out of my complacency, that here was this man who is very well educated and astute, and he was shaking with fear. And I was like, Am I being naive to think that we’re different?

That’s when I started to follow the data. And then, watching what happened to the Republican Party really was the bigger surprise — that, wow, they’re doubling down on this almost white supremacist strategy. That’s a losing strategy in a democracy. So why would they do that? Okay, it’s worked for them since the ’60s and ’70s, but you can’t turn back demographics. And then I was like, Oh my gosh. The only way this is a winning strategy is if you begin to weaken the institutions; this is the pattern we see in other countries. And, as an American citizen I’m like, These two factors are emerging here, and people don’t know.
So I gave a talk at UCSD about this — and it was a complete bomb. Not only did it fall flat, but people were hostile. You know, How dare you say this? This is not going to happen. This is fearmongering. I remember leaving just really despondent, thinking: Wow, I was so naive to think that, if it’s true, and if it’s based on hard evidence, people will be receptive to it. You know, how do you get the message across if people don’t want to hear it? If they’re not ready for it.


I didn’t do a great job framing it initially, that when people think about civil war, they think about the first civil war. And in their mind, that’s what a second one would look like. And, of course, that’s not the case at all. So part of it was just helping people conceptualize what a 21st-century civil war against a really powerful government might look like.
After January 6th of last year, people were asking me, “Aren’t you horrified?” “Isn’t this terrible?” “What do you think?” And, first of all, I wasn’t surprised, right? People who study this, we’ve been seeing these groups have been around now for over 10 years. They’ve been growing. I know that they’re training. They’ve been in the shadows, but we know about them. I wasn’t surprised.

The biggest emotion was just relief, actually. It was just, Oh my gosh, this is a gift. Because it’s bringing it out into the public eye in the most obvious way. And the result has to be that we can’t deny or ignore that we have a problem. Because it’s right there before us. And what has been surprising, actually, is how hard the Republican Party has worked to continue to deny it and to create this smokescreen — and in many respects, how effective that’s been, at least among their supporters. Wow: Even the most public act of insurrection, probably a treasonous act that 10, 20 years ago would have just cut to the heart of every American, there are still real attempts to deny it. But it was a gift because it brought this cancer that those of us who have been studying it, have been watching it growing, it brought it out into the open.


Does it make you at all nervous when you think about the percentage of people who were at, say, January 6th who have some military or law enforcement connection?
Yes. The CIA also has a manual on insurgency. You can Google it and find it online. Most of it is not redacted. And it’s absolutely fascinating to read. It’s not a big manual. And it was written, I’m sure, to help the U.S. government identify very, very early stages of insurgency. So if something’s happening in the Philippines, or something’s happening in Indonesia. You know, what are signs that we should be looking out for?


And the manual talks about three stages. And the first stage is pre-insurgency. And that’s when you start to have groups beginning to mobilize around a particular grievance. And it’s oftentimes just a handful of individuals who are just deeply unhappy about something. And they begin to articulate those grievances. And they begin to try to grow their membership.

The second stage is called the incipient conflict stage. And that’s when these groups begin to build a military arm. Usually a militia. And they’d start to obtain weapons, and they’d start to get training. And they’ll start to recruit from the ex-military or military and from law enforcement. Or they’ll actually — if there’s a volunteer army, they’ll have members of theirs join the military in order to get not just the training, but also to gather intelligence.
And, again, when the CIA put together this manual, it’s about what they have observed in their experience in the field in other countries. And as you’re reading this, it’s just shocking the parallels. And the second stage, you start to have a few isolated attacks. And in the manual, it says, really the danger in this stage is that governments and citizens aren’t aware that this is happening. And so when an attack occurs, it’s usually just dismissed as an isolated incident, and people are not connecting the dots yet. And because they’re not connecting the dots, the movement is allowed to grow until you have open insurgency, when you start to have a series of consistent attacks, and it becomes impossible to ignore.


And so, again, this is part of the process you see across the board, where the organizers of insurgencies understand that they need to gain experienced soldiers relatively quickly. And one way to do that is to recruit. Here in the United States, because we had a series of long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria, and now that we’ve withdrawn from them, we’ve had more than 20 years of returning soldiers with experience. And so this creates a ready-made subset of the population that you can recruit from.
What do you say to people who charge that this is all overblown, that civil war could never happen here in the United States — or that you’re being inflammatory and making things worse by putting corrosive ideas out there?

Oh, there’s so many things to say. One thing is that groups — we’ll call them violence entrepreneurs, the violent extremists who want to tear everything down and want to institute their own radical vision of society — they benefit from the element of surprise, right? They want people to be confused when violence starts happening. They want people to not understand what’s going on, to think that nobody’s in charge. Because then they can send their goons into the streets and convince people that they’re the ones in charge. Which is why when I would talk to people who lived through the start of the violence in Sarajevo or Baghdad or Kyiv, they all say that they were surprised. And they were surprised in part because they didn’t know what the warning signs were.


But also because people had a vested interest in distracting them or denying it so that when an attack happened, or when you had paramilitary troops sleeping in the hills outside of Sarajevo, they would make up stories. You know, “We’re just doing training missions.” Or “We’re just here to protect you. There’s nothing going on here. Don’t worry about this.”


I wish it were the case that by not talking about it we could prevent anything from happening. But the reality is, if we don’t talk about it, [violent extremists] are going to continue to organize, and they’re going to continue to train. There are definitely lots of groups on the far right who want war. They are preparing for war. And not talking about it does not make us safer.


What we’re heading toward is an insurgency, which is a form of a civil war. That is the 21st-century version of a civil war, especially in countries with powerful governments and powerful militaries, which is what the United States is. And it makes sense. An insurgency tends to be much more decentralized, often fought by multiple groups. Sometimes they’re actually competing with each other. Sometimes they coordinate their behavior. They use unconventional tactics. They target infrastructure. They target civilians. They use domestic terror and guerrilla warfare. Hit-and-run raids and bombs. We’ve already seen this in other countries with powerful militaries, right? The IRA took on the British government. Hamas has taken on the Israeli government. These are two of the most powerful militaries in the world. And they fought for decades. And in the case of Hamas I think we could see a third intifada. And they pursue a similar strategy.

Here it’s called leaderless resistance. And that method of how to defeat a powerful government like the United States is outlined in what people are calling the bible of the far right: “The Turner Diaries,” which is this fictitious account of a civil war against the U.S. government. It lays out how you do this. And one of the things it says is, Do not engage the U.S. military. You know, avoid it at all costs. Go directly to targets around the country that are difficult to defend and disperse yourselves so it’s hard for the government to identify you and infiltrate you and eliminate you entirely.
So, like with the [Charles Dickens’s] ghost of Christmas future, are these the things that will be or just that may be?


I can’t say when it’s going to happen. I think it’s really important for people to understand that countries that have these two factors, who get put on this watch list, have a little bit less than a 4 percent annual risk of civil war. That seems really small, but it’s not. It means that, every year that those two factors continue, the risk increases.
The analogy is smoking. If I started smoking today, my risk of dying of lung cancer or some smoking-related disease is very small. If I continue to smoke for the next 10, 20, 30, 40 years, my risk eventually of dying of something related to smoking is going to be very high if I don’t change my behavior. And so I think that’s one of the actually optimistic things: We know the warning signs. And we know that if we strengthen our democracy, and if the Republican Party decides it’s no longer going to be an ethnic faction that’s trying to exclude everybody else, then our risk of civil war will disappear. We know that. And we have time to do it. But you have to know those warning signs in order to feel an impetus to change them.
This interview has been edited and condensed.

KK Ottesen is a regular contributor to the magazine.

Democracy Dies in Darkness

Goodies vs Baddies After All.

Incase you don’t know what’s happening in the middle east. ?

President Assad ( who is bad ) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels ( who are good ) started winning ( Hurrah!).
But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State ( who are definitely bad!) and some continued to support democracy ( who are still good.)

So the Americans ( who are good ) started bombing Islamic State ( who are bad ) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) so they could fight Assad ( who is still bad ) which was good.
By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS ( which is a good thing ) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they’re good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.

Getting back to Syria.
So President Putin ( who is bad, cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi ) has decided to back Assad ( who is still bad ) by attacking IS ( who are also bad ) which is sort of a good thing?

But Putin ( still bad ) thinks the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans ( who are good ) who are busy backing and arming the rebels ( who are also good).

Now Iran ( who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good ) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad ( still bad ) as are the Russians ( bad ) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.

So a Coalition of Assad ( still bad ) Putin ( extra bad ) and the Iranians ( good, but in a bad sort of way ) are going to attack IS ( who are bad ) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) which is bad.

Now the British ( obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad ) and the Americans ( also good ) cannot attack Assad ( still bad ) for fear of upsetting Putin ( bad ) and Iran ( good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS ( who are super bad).

So Assad ( bad ) is now probably good, being better than IS ( but let’s face it, drinking your own wee is better than IS so no real choice there ) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them Good. America ( still Good ) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin ( now good ) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran ( also Good ) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now Bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS ( still the only constantly bad group).

To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims ( Assad and Iran ) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihadis fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as Good ( Doh!.)

Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal ( mmm.might have a point.) and hence we will be seen as Bad.

So now we have America ( now bad ) and Britain ( also bad ) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels ( bad ) many of whom are looking to IS ( Good / bad ) for support against Assad ( now good ) who, along with Iran ( also Good) and Putin ( also, now, unbelievably, Good ) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?

So, now you fully understand everything, all your questions are answered!!!!

(via Hassan Ali on Facebook)… all of which lines up pretty damn with this:

Open Letter to Fuckwit Abbott

AN OPEN LETTER TO TONY ABBOTT FROM THE EDITOR:

Look, I know open letters are a bit April of last year, but I’ve been worried about you, Tony. Since the Leigh Sales interview when you were unable to articulate exactly who you are, I’ve been worried.

It’s a question most Australians are asked every now and again – in job interviews, by partners, by caring friends rolling around on the back lawn after one too many G&Ts, sometimes by our therapists. And as the Prime Minister and a man with more than a fleeting interest in spirituality, I’m sure at some point you’ve asked yourself the question, “Who the hell am I? What do I really stand for?”

But at 7.48 or 7.52 that evening, Leigh’s question seemed to rattle you. You became evasive. So in case you find yourself fumbling for an answer in the future, here’s who I think you are. (Feel free to quote me).

You’re a Christian guy. You’re the Christian guy who, when faced with appalling facts about the ongoing abuse and psychological torment of innocent children in our detention centres, chose to viciously attack the messenger rather than reflect maturely upon the incredibly sad and sensitive contents of the message. You’re that guy.

You’re the guy who condones shoving terrified women and children fleeing rape, persecution and death, (much of which we helped fuel), into little orange boats in the dead of night, sending them back into the darkness and uncertainty they’ve somehow managed to flee, hopeful of our shelter. That’s you with your whole “Australia isn’t for everyone” Jesus thing.

You’re the guy who’s been trash talking the economy for so long, most Australians are afraid to buy a pine-lime Splice let alone a car or a house. And it was you who in opposition said the so called ‘Carbon Tax’ would wipe towns off the map – something about a python squeeze not a cobra strike – when you knew that simply wasn’t ever going to happen. Is it all coming back to you, Tony? You’re that Henny Penny guy.

You’re the guy with the gay sister who stubbornly refuses to change his views on same sex marriage, despite her personal pleadings and the firm belief of most Australians that equality is long overdue. Represent, Tony! Step up! They mean you no harm. And if it’s about saying one thing before an election and doing another after… honestly, let’s not imagine anyone’s going to be too upset or surprised.

While we’re on that, you’re the guy who hounded the previous government TO DEATH over one supposed lie, promising an all adult, no surprises government of your own. I swear it was you boldly proclaiming you can’t say one thing in opposition then do another in office, before making brutal cuts in literally every single area you said you wouldn’t. Ringing bells, Tony?

You’re the guy who says he’s intimidated by the burqa then gets around in a bright red banana sling.

And forgive me for delving into personal irritations, but you’re the Rhode scholar guy who has to repeat everything twice, sometimes thrice, buying yourself time to formulate your next sentence. It’s an old orator’s trick Tony, but every frickin’ sentence?

While I could go on, I’m sure the electronic graffiti artists will be happy to continue this letter for me. And hopefully, next time Leigh asks for a little personal reflection, you’ll have a better idea of who you are. You’re that guy.

Abbott looking stupid
(from:  https://www.facebook.com/ABCNews23/posts/784248744998717 – author’s name conspicuously absent… probably an LNP backbencher)

He is the very model of an LNP Prime Minister

I am the very model of an LNP Prime Minister
I’ve never had a budget measure passed however sinister;
I’ve backing of the business groups who back me most assuredly;
Especially the ones of them who lately were bankrolling me!
(Especially the ones who lately were bankrolling, rolling he,
Especially the ones who lately were bankrolling, rolling he,
Especially the ones who lately were bank rolling, bank-a-rolling he!)

I’ve scuttled manufacturing ’cause the demographics favoured me;
Encouraged our veterans to clothe and eat responsibly…
I’ve re-arranged my rhet’ric to avoid the taint of honesty;
(inhale.…)
And bought our submarines from overseas because it pleases me!
(He buys the submarines from overseas because it pleases, pleases he!)

We simply cannot compromise on issues of security
Despite the UN signatories glaring at us angrily
We need another fifty-seven jets to fight the war you see,
The war…
(The war?)
What war?…
The war against the people who are brown, and do not look like me!

I tend to ignore history, lest it be cause the black armbands be worn,
For facts of slavery, genocide and abduction can make folks forlorn,
I ignore difficult questions or I just prevaricate endlessly,
Quite sure if there’s an expert then that expert surely must be me.

Common law or common sense, be sure I will disregard these,
Which is kind compared to what I do with international rights treaties,
I know Australia’s world-renowned for being prosperous and free, 
Best I do not wonder why people are looking down at me.

Best I do not wonder why Obama’s looking down at me!
Best I do not wonder why Putin’s looking down at me!
Best I do not wonder why Jinping is looking looking down at me!

Then I can scowl at journalists and say that they have not been informed,
While crapping from great height on my constituents in uniform,
In short when dealing national and international harassment,
I am the very model of a national embarrassment.

I am the very model of a national embarrassment!
I am the very model of a national embarrassment!
I am the very model of a national embarrassment!

In fact, when I know what is meant by “human rights” and “prejudice”,
When I can tell at sight a queue jumper from an exodus,
When such affairs as interviews and debating I’m more wary at
And when I know precisely what is meant by “Bloody thick arse-hat”

When I have learnt what is meant by intellectual commentary,
When I know more of women than a novice in a seminary,
In short, when people do not laugh at the very mention of my name.
You’ll say no better modern man has ever made a knight or dame.

You’ll say no better modern man has ever made a knight or dame!
You’ll say no better modern man has ever made a knight or dame!
You’ll say no better modern man has ever made a knight or night or dame!

For my political knowledge, though I look great in swimming trunks,
Is the kind of nonsense usually heard from retired, racist bogan drunks,
But still in matters of national and international harassment,

I am the very model of a national embarrassment!

He IS the very model of a national embarrassment!
He IS the very model of a national embarrassment!
He IS the very model of a national embarrassment!!!

iHauLS0
(Lyrics by Ammonia Cogg and James Graewolfe)