OTG WE 4 May 2025

Australia's Labor part re-elected

My hopes were shattered. The polls were not wrong, but not because the swing against Labor was greater than expected, but because they failed to predict the more significant swing towards Labor. Yes, the bumbling, hapless, mendacious Albanese government has won a second term with an increased majority. How was this possible, given its singular failure to run the country effectively? 

There will be much soul-searching in the coming weeks and months. There is no doubt that the campaign was mismanaged by the Coalition and was well managed by Labor. Peter Dutton as leader of the opposition, has accepted responsibility, as he should. He does not have to resign as leader as he lost his own seat. A most undignified end to a 20-year political career. I will leave my comments short, nd let the dust settle before drawing more conclusions. Alas, my flag is at half mast today.

Johannes Leak cartoon summarises my thoughts exactly.

But, obviously, the majority did not agree with me, or Johannes.

Australian election tomorrow.

After a campaign of some six weeks, Australia's federal election takes place tomorrow. Polls indicate the re-election of Labor under the leadership of Anthony Albanese, most likely in a minority government with The Greens and Teals. All the polls, however are national polls, and seats are decided in individual electorates. It is unusual, but has occure just a few years ago in 2019, where the national polls were all wrong.  So, I for one am hoping, that history will repeat itself. In any objective measure this Labor government does not deserve another term. They have mismanaged the economy, have allowed the rise of anti-semitism and social division, have trashed relationship with Israel, have sucked up to China, and neglected defence. It goes on, but I won't bore you. If you live in Australia you know ,and if you don't , you don't care. 

But here is a recent Liberal party ad that highlights Albanese's bumbling manner.

Can you afford another three years of this? pic.twitter.com/QQG7ST9udB

— Liberal Party (@LiberalAus) May 1, 2025

Is Islam a religion of peace?

Despite the oft-quoted claim that "Islam is a religion of peace", observers of Europe's experiment with Muslim immigration have convinced many that it is not. Certainly, the crime rate in Europe following this experiment has risen in direct proportion to the increase in Muslim immigrants. Yes, I know immigrants are always troubled souls who find it difficult to integrate, so it should not be surprising if crime levels increased. But, it is much worse than that. Europe has experienced many waves of migrants from all parts of the world. In the sixties, it was Indians and Pakistanis. Then, after the fall of the Iron Curtain, there was a great wave of Eastern Europeans, Poles, Romanians and Ukrainians into Western Europe.

In these earlier waves, there was no great rise in crime rates. The most significant rise has occurred following the wave of migrants from the Middle East and North Africa. These migrants were mainly Muslims, coming from a different culture, and consequently, they have not integrated well. Crime rates, including sexual assault, have risen steeply. 

Should we therefore conclude that the rise is due to the religion? Perhaps not. In a recent video, Konstantin Kisin analyses these questions following his recent trip to Uzbekistan. He notes that although Uzbekistan is a mainly Muslim country, it has avoided the crime rates that have plagued the West. He concludes that Western governments have failed to control the Islamists, the religious zealots who advocate global Jihad against non Muslims.  Uzbekistan, in contrast, has succeeded in isolating the Islamists by insisting that non-Islamist Muslims are not allowed to be intimidated or coerced. This is achieved by strict rules against the Islamist dogma. For example, Burkas are not permitted in public. 

So perhaps the religion is not to blame; it is Islamism,  the violent corruption of Islam that is the source of the problems in Europe. The lesson of Uzbekistan must be heeded by all of Europe, and soon. Without significant moves to control the Islamists, Europe is destined to become a battleground with the Islamists gaining ever more population clout.

Here is Konstantin Kisin's video. Well worth the 10 minutes.

 

Trump's first 100 days

I couldn't avoid covering this, too, but I am sure you have already heard multiple analyses of Trump's first 100 days. No doubt, the analyses have varied widely depending on the degree of TDS of the person doing the analysis. Not only the US, but the world is polarised. I cannot remember a time when the performance of the US presidents was so widely covered by the media. Trump is a larger-than-life character, for better and for worse. Let me make just a few observations, as so much has already been said.

The Good

The southern border has been closed, DOGE has uncovered significant savings, and the deportation of the violent illegal immigrants is progressing. 

His executive orders have progressed his agenda on stopping DEI, restarting energy production, removal of Climate Change red tape. He has addressed anti-Semitism on College campuses. 

His support for Israel has released weapons, and he has given Israel free rein to run its defensive war against Hamas. Under Trump, the US has taken direct action against the Houthis to liberate the shipping lanes through the Red Sea. He has negotiated favourable deals for the US for its use of the Panama Canal.

The Bad

Not all has gone well, though. He has started fights where they were not required, for example, Canada and Greenland. In Canada, this has had a disastrous impact on Canada's elections, causing the reelection of Canada's liberal government, reversing a 20-point lead by the conservative party. 

His bombastic approach to foreign affairs has caused unnecessary friction with allies. A more diplomatic approach could have yielded the same outcomes without the bad blood.

The Ugly

There are a couple of areas where Trump's strategy and approach have been terrible. The first is Ukraine-Russia. Commendably, Trump entered the fray to try to bring peace to the region. This was never going to be easy. His approach seemed to be to 'butter up ' Putin to get him to the table. That may have been justified, had he succeeded. But at the same time, he chose to distance himself from Zelensky. This was not necessary and was counterproductive. Putin, seeing Trump's apparent willingness to jettison the close relationship with Ukraine, only served to make Putin demand more. Not very artful deal-making. At this stage, we have had Trump move his position toward Ukraine and threaten Putin with more sanctions. It is a game in progress, so too hard to call. But it has been ugly.

The second and perhaps even uglier issue has been the handling of the Tariffs. With a rather upbeat 'Liberation Day' announcement, Trump effectively started a war against all US trading partners. Naturally, this had serious ramifications in international stock markets. A totally unnecessary own goal. He has now chosen to delay the implementation for all countries except China. Of course, that is a good idea, but he should have anticipated the consequences of his big Liberation Day hit-them-all-at-once strategy and introduced the tariffs for trading partners on a gradual basis. China remains a big issue, and Trump has already modified even the China policy by removing electronics and now some cars. Yes, this is also ugly. This tariff stuff-up is unfortunate and has not yet been sorted. 

So we have seen the good, the bad and the ugly. Given the pace at which Trump has been implementing new policies, some errors are not surprising. Hopefully, he will be able to learn from these errors. But I suspect not. Trump is Trump. We knew he was impulsive and insensitive to consequences. His approach has always been to try to break his way through a problem, and if it doesn't work, reverse and try another approach. That can and has looked messy.

Here is one analysis of Trump's first 100 days from Alan Dershowitz, once a Democrat but now an Independent.

COVID conspiracies transform into Facts

The White House official COVID-19 Site has turned ideas demonised as "conspiracy theories" but a few years ago into today's accepted 'facts'. We have seen this coming. Many of my recent posts have highlighted the results of studies that questioned the 'official facts' relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

There were too many ideas that have now been proven wrong, but let me note a few; - 

• The origin of COVID is believed to be a Wuhan wet market with animal-to-human transfer
• that lockdowns were effective
• that masks are effective in preventing transmission
• that vaccines prevent infection
• that vaccines prevent hospitalisation
• that ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine are not safe
• that side effects are low and justify vaccination even for young children
• etc.

Unfortunately, the reaction of the authorities was herd-like panic. Most Western countries adopted a lockdown approach, used by China, but against their prior pandemic plans. The approach to vaccination was shameful. Authorities coerced the population to inject themselves with a vaccine that had far less testing than any other vaccine in history. The unvaccinated were vilified, and those protesting vaccination were vilified. The accepted human rights of citizens were supplanted by mandates. Mandates restricting their ability to marry, to attend funerals, to visit dying relatives in hospital, and to travel. We have yet to see the elites who imposed these restrictions even acknowledge and apologise for their errors, let alone be held accountable. Perhaps it will happen, but I won't hold my breath.

Here is the recent video from Dr John Campbell about the White House COVID site acknowledging the errors of the past.

Israel has new strategy on Gaza

While I have not seen any announcements of this, I have seen a few articles highlighting Israel's new strategy on Gaza. The news media have concentrated on the ongoing negotiations to try to release the remaining hostages. With Israel's demand for Hamas' total abdication in exchange for the end to hostilities, there is little incentive for Hamas to release more hostages. After all, they want to remain in power. 

But that may be the side show. Israel has taken some dramatic steps in its battle against Hamas. Some time ago, Israel stopped all UN aid from entering the country. The justification for this was that Hamas was commandeering the aid and instead of distributing it to those in need, was taking what it wanted and then selling what was left to the highest bidders. Despite initial protests from the world, to my surprise, the issue has been forgotten. But of course, it means the supply of food must be diminishing, and will no doubt become a serious issue. It has been reported that Israel will now take responsibility for distributing all aid in Gaza. This is a game-changer, as it removes Hamas from the game. It prevents Hamas from trading on this, and also removes the influence Hamas gains by being the sole source of food. 

At the same time Israel has not withdrawn its military. On the contrary, the troops have been active. They are int eh process of isolating Rafah, by creating a 2 km wide, 14 km long corridor. 

Until recently, the border between Egypt and Gaza has been very porous. Egypt has played a duplicitous role, pretending that it prevented armaments from entering via the Philadelphi corridor, while turning a blind eye to it. Israel's invasion of Rafah and the corridor has proved this, exposing the large number of tunnels that were used to arm Hamas.  Israel's new corridor is some kilometres from Rafah, dividing Gaza into two distinct zones. We have yet to see how Israel will exploit this division, but it will certainly enable Israel to prevent weaponry from entering Northern Gaza, and also allow its troops to clear Rafah of its Hamas terrorists. 

Here is a short video highlighting these changes.

 

WEF's Schwab in Hot Water?

Klaus Schwab has stepped won as chairman of the World Economic Forum, following serious claims of governance malpractice. The claims were made by an anonymous letter reported by the WSJ as being from existing employees of the organisation. Naturally, the Schwab family has denied all claims and threatened to sue those making the claim. Many observers of the WEF, yes, me too, will feel some 'Schadenfreude" at this development. After all, it is the WEF that seems to have appointed itself as the de facto rulers of the world, dictating future world developments to us plebs. The WEF has a membership of 5000 of the richest /most powerful members of the world. Most are unelected, and certainly none have been elected to make any decisions as to the future of the world. Yet, they gather each year for a talkfest and make declarations that are reported widely. Their declarations seem to set some sort of agenda for those members who have leadership roles in some countries' governments. So yes, they have a disproportionate influence on our lives. 

I do not care whether their plans have any merit at all. Some may, perhaps, but many are clearly abhorrent. For example, they advocate censorship and the elimination of ownership.  I object to the influence they have managed to gather by bribing the elites. These bribes take the form of bestowing kudos on members.  The organisation should be boycotted, and indeed any members' kudos should be negated, by boycotting those who have been members of the WEF. However, that will all take time.

But for now, we can rejoice that the WEF leadership has been 'hoist on their own petard'. Their staff are now accusing their leadership of the same sort of governance issues that have been used to bring down many organisations, think Black Lives Matter, for example.

Here is a short report on the claims against Schwab.