Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Cute » Fairfax falls to demographic prejudice, not technology

Fairfax falls to demographic prejudice, not technology

The post below by  James Adams is copied from Online Opinion under the terms of its creative commons Licence

These journalists avoid telling the truth

They avoid telling the stories they don’t agree with. A father murdering his children is re-hashed in the media for years, but when mothers do the same thing (as is more likely), their stories sink without trace.

These journalists shun and eventually expel those with differing views. They live in Sydney’s expensive inner-suburbs (the ‘white ghetto’, where very few non-Anglos live) and yet support free immigration.

They live in an increasingly small world, where lies circulate and become true. They believe lies like:

  • 10% of men are gay (2%),
  • fathers abuse their children(mothers are much more likely to abuse their kids. Of male abusers, almost none are real fathers. However step-fathers and ‘mummies-new-boyfriends’ are quite probable – that’s why divorce puts kids at risk).
  • Christianity causes most wars (actually demographics or technology does),
  • Men kept women from voting(in most democracies, men and women got it at the same time: (Same time: Australia and NZ and most women in the UK. Only one year after men in Canada. Young adult women had to wait only ten years in the UK).
  • Women have been oppressed by men for centuries(but strangely women were never conscripted into the slaughter of war, killed in dangerous factories etc).

The new religion

They are evangelical zealots who passionately promote their beliefs. No amount of fact will make them question their faith and they all worship the same God. Like any religion, there are many denominations… Nasty Feminism, Failed Socialism, Self-hate Multiculturalism, Irrational Greenie-ism, evangelical Gay-rights.

And like any religion, they hate other religions. They are slowly winning their unremitting campaign against Christianity.

There are few young feminists!

Over the last weeks, the media has been full of journalists telling us how terrible it is that Fairfax is sacking 1,900 staff and their papers shrunk to tabloid size.

Naturally I fell terrible for the innocent workers, especially the printing workers who are losing their jobs and are going to struggle to find new jobsin their skilled areas

But many of the journalists had it coming. They are finally getting what has been overdue for a long time. The “Melbourne Middle-Age” and the “Sydney Moaning Feminist” have been stuck in some kind of 1960′s baby-boomer feminist socialist delusion since, well, since the 1960′s. As society has moved on, they haven’t. Australians became increasingly unwilling to read their rants.

Old, bigoted and out-of-touch

I worked for Fairfax for most of this century. Let me tell you a story to illustrate Fairfax culture.

Walking to bistro for lunch I found it full of old people. I wondered if it was a senior citizen’s club tour or something?

But they weren’t quite old enough; they were dressed in expensive hippy clothing (and there is a hypocrisy); there was the occasional younger person… then I realised! It was a journalists union meeting. Wall-to-wall grey-hairs and chrome-domes!

The journalists at Fairfax are like an episode of Grumpy Old Feminists! What are old people like? They complain, at length, about the immoral youth of today! That today’s youth (anybody under 45!) don’t have their values!

While the internet is one factor in the collapse of Fairfax, the other reason is simply that people don’t want to have this dogma shoved down their throats anymore. Fewer and fewer Australians want to read their rants!

So here’s the good news. Many of these issues are like Feminism are baby-boomer issues. And they are old now. There are few young feminists!

There are few young feminists because war has been well-and-truly won and women now tend to feel sorry for men. People just don’t believe their lies anymore.

Men are Australians largest minority group, downtrodden and humbled. If you look at Australian statistics, there is only one area where men are better-off than women.

Women:

  • live 7 years longer, get the pension younger,
  • get a better education, two thirds of Uni students are women,
  • under the age of 35 they earn more than men (then many choose to stop working or choose to have a pleasant work-life balance as a mum)
  • Get softer sentences for the same crime as a man
  • Almost never have their children stolen by divorce lawyers, and usually keep the house
  • Are supported by vast armies of government-funded professional feminists supporting ‘women’s issues’

Men:

  • Are stuck doing the Dirty, Dangerous, Distant and Disrespected men’s jobs
  • Are far more likely to suffer from preventable illness
  • Smoke more, drink more, use more drugs
  • Suicide maybe nine-times more often than women
  • Are far more likely to be a victim of violence

The exception is that men are less likely to suffer domestic abuse than women. Never-the-less, that statistic is not accurate as there are many incentives that boost the statistics on the size of this problem.

For example, claiming domestic violence is literally a get-out-if-jail-free card for women. If she is unscrupulous enough, her false allegations can get free accommodation, free lawyers, generous pension, possession of the house and kids from divorce and she can hide selfishness behind victimhood). Obviously I am not saying that all women would do this, I’m just pointing out that there are terrible incentives for bad behaviour.

Demographics is destiny

As former treasurer Peter Costello said, demographics is destiny and our society is being run by the large baby-boomer cohort. Because of their shear size, the baby boomers have dominated social change. From railing against issues like the Vietnam War and crooners like Bing Crosby, the baby boomers took over from the old men with their horn-rimmed glasses.

By shear numbers, they have dominated the public mood and left poor Gen x (named ‘x’ because of it’s invisibility) ignored and even Gen ‘Y’ have yet to find a voice, with the green shots of a radical conservative idealism, led by the Tea Party, Christians, the Promise Keepers and the Fatherhood and Families movement. These idealists are competing against a ‘teacher’s pet’ version of left/green attitudes, who have accepted without question the dogma of their baby-boomer schoolteachers and journalists.

They have been helped along in their dominance by their raft of approaches that has decimated marriage rates and birth-rates, effectively shrinking the competition from younger generations. As Economist Harry Deny postulates, if it wasn’t caused, the GFC and Sovereign Debt Crisis are certainly being exacerbated by baby boomer demographics. Too many oldies approaching retirement with their pensions and spiralling healthcare, coupled by a dearth of younger adults to replace them and pay the taxes needed.

Well now it’s the Baby Boomer’s turn to finally lose control and shuffle off into senility and obscurity.

ABC for oldies

So now Fairfax is going down. Bit-by-bit, the journalists will have nobody to pay them. At the next Federal election, the ALP will go down too and so other professional feminists will find it increasingly hard to maintain their billions of dollars in funding. That leaves the ABC, increasingly alone.

Consciousness raising

Once our conservative idealists, the Christian Churches, the Fatherhood and Families Movement get some funding, even a tiny percentage of the funding that the feminists get, they will have to get honest!

But at last, the writing is on the wall! The zealots of the left are baby-boomers. They are increasingly going to loose their stranglehold over public debate. Then we’ll be able to protect children from divorce and abuse, and a whole raft of other issues that will make the world a better place.

Advertisements

31 Comments

  1. alan says:

    and your opinion of the article??, and perhaps much more important……the author of the article?

  2. Iain Hall says:

    Well obviously I liked the piece Alan which is why I posted it 🙄

  3. alan says:

    I doubt you even understand a thing he is saying.
    you saw “fairfax” and that was enough.
    do a little research.

  4. Iain Hall says:

    If you have an opinion of the piece or what it is arguing then give it rather than presuming to judge and lecture me.
    🙄

  5. alan says:

    it is fathers for equality, not equity……i wonder if that was by design or accident.

    so basically you can take it as a given that this guy has lost access to his kids through the courts at some stage along the line.
    another given is that he is very religious.
    another given is that it is always the fault of others for the loss of their kids, rather than the one that greets you in the mirror each morning(although there will obviously be exceptions).

    another is that it is full of bullshit,…..one example…….if i needed a pension…..i will actually be eligible for it at 65 years of age.
    my wife would need to be 65.5 years before she could get it.
    so where it may have been true once upon a time not for much longer will it be true……..but wait there is more……..it’s those evil pricks on the left that changed it…..not the revered right wing religious lot.

    i am sure he also detests stay at home dads that get the invalid pension or whatever it’s called these days.

    and the guy hates them but worked for them……oh yeah sure he did.

  6. Iain Hall says:

    Alan

    it is fathers for equality, not equity……i wonder if that was by design or accident.

    so basically you can take it as a given that this guy has lost access to his kids through the courts at some stage along the line.

    Why would you assume that? is every person who fights for a cause likely to benefit form their desired outcome? Take our learned friend who is so hot to trot for Gay marriage as an example, by your logic he would have to be Gay and longing to marry his boyfriend, yet the fact of the matter is that he is straight and married with cats.

    another given is that he is very religious.

    And that is a problem? Why?

    another given is that it is always the fault of others for the loss of their kids, rather than the one that greets you in the mirror each morning(although there will obviously be exceptions).

    Do you have kids Alan? do you have any experience of the Family court? Of the way that the dice are loaded against any man who comes before it?
    I think not

    another is that it is full of bullshit,…..one example…….if i needed a pension…..i will actually be eligible for it at 65 years of age.
    my wife would need to be 65.5 years before she could get it.

    so where it may have been true once upon a time not for much longer will it be true……..but wait there is more……..it’s those evil pricks on the left that changed it…..not the revered right wing religious lot.

    I am sure he also detests stay at home dads that get the invalid pension or whatever it’s called these days.

    and the guy hates them but worked for them……oh yeah sure he did.

    Not sure what you are on about here Alan would mind clarifying your argument please.

  7. alan says:

    “Women:

    live 7 years longer, get the pension younger,”

    they did but they won’t so its bullshit, and that’s just one example.
    the guy is on a mission, and he has no perspective.

    the religion itself is not a problem, but combined with the kiddie problem i would bet there is connection.

    as for kids….yes i have 2 adult kids.
    and a wife for a trillion years if that has any relevance.
    treat them with respect, nurture them, but NEVER try to make them what you want them to be.

    i know a bit about the family court because my son has custody of his kids.
    so tell me a little about loaded dice?
    don’t believe everything you read……especially from those with an agenda.

    as for stay at home dads on the on the invalid pension(or government support), i have perceived(rightly or wrongly) that is you.

    anyway, you have posted this article thinking it is one thing, but really it’s something else.
    of course my perception may be wrong again…..but i doubt it, and who cares anyway?

  8. Iain Hall says:

    Alan

    “Women:

    live 7 years longer, get the pension younger,”

    they did but they won’t so its bullshit, and that’s just one example.
    the guy is on a mission, and he has no perspective.

    Although there are changes in the pipeliine for age pension eligibility the author is actaully right as of now about the difference between men and women’s eligibility according to the centerlink website

    the religion itself is not a problem, but combined with the kiddie problem I would bet there is connection.

    Hmm I think that you need to do better than that alan

    as for kids….yes i have 2 adult kids.
    and a wife for a trillion years if that has any relevance.
    treat them with respect, nurture them, but NEVER try to make them what you want them to be.

    What a pessimistic approach to being a parent! do you think that children won’t benefit form you teaching them to be decent human beings or something?

    I know a bit about the family court because my son has custody of his kids.
    so tell me a little about loaded dice?
    don’t believe everything you read……especially from those with an agenda.

    Well I think taht I know a bit more about it than you do as it happens and that makes me certain that the dice are loaded against men big-time.

    as for stay at home dads on the on the invalid pension(or government support), I have perceived( wrongly) that is you.

    anyway, you have posted this article thinking it is one thing, but really it’s something else.
    of course my perception may be wrong again…..but i doubt it, and who cares anyway?

    Don’t doubt yourself Alan, when you think that you may be wrong it probably means that you are. 😉

  9. deknarf says:

    Some original work would be good. Too easy to fall into the Julie Bishop trap if you’re not careful!

  10. alan says:

    I don’t believe I am am wrong actually, on any points, and that includes invalid pension (or government support), but whatever.

    as for the kiddies and religion i could do better, but why bother?
    i am certain that article was mostly a gripe about the parents that are excluded from their kids,
    i will stick to my belief that the combination of religious & extreme right has much to do with why he(and others like him) is excluded.
    but it is always easy to blame others when you think yours is the only way.
    being married is a partnership, you need to be flexible.

    why is it pessimistic to have wanted my kids to be what they wanted to be, rather than what i would have liked them to be?
    the proof that my wife and i did our job properly is in the way they have turned out.
    do they agree with me on lots of things….no they don’t…..i encouraged them to make up their own minds.
    if they did things wrong they got punished for it, but that has nothing to with their aspirations being the ones i would like them to have.
    so yes they are decent human beings, and they turned out just fine, just not what i would have wanted them to be if i had forced my beliefs on them, which would be the wrong thing to do.

    you say you like a good debate……i say bullshit!!

    “Well I think taht I know a bit more about it than you do as it happens and that makes me certain that the dice are loaded against men big-time.”

    and that’s why it’s bullshit, nothing to back it up with.
    that’s great debating iain!!!
    you state it and say sfa……well done.
    apart from my own son, i may not have experience, but the kids mother wanted sole custody, and all she got was what my son was willing to give her.
    so she gets every 2nd weekend, but the choice was my son’s not the court’s, who ruled in his favour.
    the court deemed that he could provide a more suitable and stable environment for my grandkids.
    maybe it does not always work out for the best, and the process may not be the best, but my son is the evidence that it’s not completely biased in favour of the mother.

    so now we are here, and lo and behold…..see?…..its nothing about fairfax.
    it about exclusion, and the article goes a long way to explain why he was excluded.
    it’s about a nut case having a whinge

  11. GD says:

    Once again, ‘lower case alan’ comments on Iain’s blog. Despite the fact that he has no grasp of punctuation or grammar, he manages to give a swerve to erudite Iain. And what for?

    For posting a blog about something that ‘lower case alan’ doesn’t agree with. Which is fine, but ‘lower case alan’ prefers to assume that Iain doesn’t know a thing about that which he is posting, but ‘lower case alan’ is apparently an expert.

    See, he has a son who was granted custody of his children. According to alan, lower case, no punctuation, this proves that other fathers aren’t disadvantaged by the family court, and it’s all a beat-up.

    Lower case, no punctuation al, I’d suggest you look further than your own family before making such generalisations. My story is vastly different to yours, as are many others.

    Finally, why do you see it as your mission in life to attack Iain Hall for every opinion he posts?

  12. […] Fairfax falls to demographic prejudice, not technology (iainhall.wordpress.com) Share this:DiggEmailLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. This entry was posted in Australian Politics, Ethical questions, Feminst faith, Femnazi Follies, Gender Issues, Journalism, Justice, Leftism, Living with Nature, Media Matters, Men and Women, Misandry and tagged ADF, Australian Defence Force, Australian Defence Force Academy, DLA Piper, Fairfax, Military, Queens, rape by Iain Hall. Bookmark the permalink. […]

  13. Richard Ryan says:

    AND what are you GD? an educated idiot!—-the tactic of a right wing, to pass comment on a persons grammar, the norm on bolt’s blog. Look at yourself! A physically repugnant human resource, with no redeeming features—–Mother nature hates you——— and Carpe, you two, reminds her of her mistakes. Shalom Richard Ryan.

  14. Iain Hall says:

    Alan

    I don’t believe I am am wrong actually, on any points, and that includes invalid pension (or government support), but whatever.

    I don’t take too kindly to being called a liar so perhaps you should practice what you preach and just accept what I say about myself and my personal circumstances.Besides which your seeming obsession with my private life does make you look even more suspicious than you currently do.

    as for the kiddies and religion i could do better, but why bother?

    because the point of debate and argument is to explore issues, that you are unable to do that makes you look rather trollish.

    i am certain that article was mostly a gripe about the parents that are excluded from their kids,

    Really? that argument is not the one I perceive when I read it, care to substantiate that claim with some hard facts?

    i will stick to my belief that the combination of religious & extreme right has much to do with why he(and others like him) is excluded.

    That claim just shows how little you know about the machinations of the family courts, neither politics nor the religiosity of the parties to a dispute has anything to do with the way that it will be adjudicated.

    but it is always easy to blame others when you think yours is the only way.

    Take a look at yourself while you say that!

    being married is a partnership, you need to be flexible.

    Agreed

    why is it pessimistic to have wanted my kids to be what they wanted to be, rather than what i would have liked them to be?
    the proof that my wife and i did our job properly is in the way they have turned out.

    Do you not understand that the things that your children want to do are moulded by the way that they are raised by their parents?

    do they agree with me on lots of things….no they don’t…..i encouraged them to make up their own minds.

    Punctuation Alan! you make my head hurt when you ignore the conventions of good written communication.

    if they did things wrong they got punished for it, but that has nothing to with their aspirations being the ones i would like them to have.

    That is a totally naive claim that suggests to me that you either know nothing about parenting or the way that children become mature individuals

    so yes they are decent human beings, and they turned out just fine, just not what i would have wanted them to be if i had forced my beliefs on them, which would be the wrong thing to do.

    Do you really think that conservatives force our beliefs onto our children?

    you say you like a good debate……i say bullshit!!

    “Well I think that I know a bit more about it than you do as it happens and that makes me certain that the dice are loaded against men big-time.”

    and that’s why it’s bullshit, nothing to back it up with.
    that’s great debating iain!!!
    you state it and say sfa……well done.
    apart from my own son, i may not have experience, but the kids mother wanted sole custody, and all she got was what my son was willing to give her.
    so she gets every 2nd weekend, but the choice was my son’s not the court’s, who ruled in his favour.

    Without going into detail I have had six family members or close friends go through the trauma of dealing with the family court I have been privy to the details of a couple of cases and it is far from pretty and very clearly biased against men.

    the court deemed that he could provide a more suitable and stable environment for my grandkids.
    maybe it does not always work out for the best, and the process may not be the best, but my son is the evidence that it’s not completely biased in favour of the mother.

    Bias does not require a total result in favour of women just a greater than even treatment in their favour.

    so now we are here, and lo and behold…..see?…..its nothing about fairfax.
    it about exclusion, and the article goes a long way to explain why he was excluded.
    it’s about a nut case having a whinge

    Read it again Alan especially the opening paragraphs.

  15. alan says:

    I will start on you if you like gd, and who said i was attacking anybody?
    i was stating opinion.
    as for using lower case then i suppose i could stop being so lazy if it offends your moral compass.
    you poor little diddums….my heart bleeds for you.

  16. alan says:

    oh and before i forget gd.
    one thing i am good at is pissing people off, because i always say what i think and stuff the consequences.
    so when your little rant was over, on a scale of 1 to 10, yours was about -5 in the big deal department.
    if you want to insult me you will have to try much harder.

  17. Richard Ryan says:

    alan—keep up the good work—-you are the voice of reason around here—–but then on the other hand, giving that pair of yobbos advice, is like feeding strawberries to pigs, pigs don’t appreciate strawberries—- and this pair of imbeciles don’t appreciate your words of wisdom.

  18. Iain Hall says:

    Richard with your track record I suggest that you would not understand that wisdom comes in many forms 😉

  19. alan says:

    “I don’t take too kindly to being called a liar so perhaps you should practice what you preach and just accept what I say about myself and my personal circumstances.Besides which your seeming obsession with my private life does make you look even more suspicious than you currently do.”

    you poor little man.
    right or wrong.
    i don’t care if you are or you are not.
    it’s simply my perception, from what you have written, that i have read.
    couldn’t give a stuff about your private life.
    although your writings do make me wonder why you call yourself a conservative.
    how do i look suspicious?
    what a weird comment.

    “Punctuation Alan! you make my head hurt when you ignore the conventions of good written communication.”

    remind me to tell you that you need to use your spell checker much more often then.
    so my punctuation is as bad as you spelling…..that makes us even.

    “Do you really think that conservatives force our beliefs onto our children?”

    another weird comment.
    some people try to indoctrinate, some don’t.
    that would be true across the whole spectrum.
    do the seriously religious try to indoctrinate their kids?
    of course they do, even if they don’t admit to it.

    “That is a totally naive claim that suggests to me that you either know nothing about parenting or the way that children become mature individuals ”

    and that’s an idiotic comment, that i can’t express any other way.
    so i have two adult children, that are doing well.
    but i am naive and know nothing about parenting.
    so if i ever needed anything, to know you have not a clue, when you start punching your keyboard…..there it is.
    so my idea that you are on disability, is as ridiculous as your idea that i stuffed my kids upbringing up?

    “That claim just shows how little you know about the machinations of the family courts, neither politics nor the religiosity of the parties to a dispute has anything to do with the way that it will be adjudicated”

    i didn’t say it did.
    i say that’s what makes some people what they are, and the consequences of that is that it may affect their ability to be a good parent.
    religion itself would be no reason as far as i know.
    it’s WHAT it does to some people…..sorry about uc gd!
    and most of those religious people are extreme right to boot.
    and that article proved that guy was both.
    it’s a lethal combination.

    he needs balance and he has none.

    “Read it again Alan especially the opening paragraphs.”

    i have read it twice.
    after the second time, i thought he was nuttier than i did the first time.

  20. Iain Hall says:

    Alan

    you poor little man.
    right or wrong.
    i don’t care if you are or you are not.
    it’s simply my perception, from what you have written, that i have read.
    couldn’t give a stuff about your private life.

    Logic suggests that if you did not care you would not even mention it once let alone continue to make the assertion when I have told you that you are wrong.

    although your writings do make me wonder why you call yourself a conservative.

    Well on some issues I am socially conservative and on others I am more progressive than the loopy Greens its not my problem if you think that one has to match your stereotypes to be me. I am what I am so just forget all of the labels.

    how do i look suspicious?
    what a weird comment.

    You claim to be Alan Woods who makes his living from gambling, the media story about that person suggests that he lives in Hong Kong, however your IP address shows an Australian location. Lots of reasons for the inconsistency I’m sure but I have may reasons to be suspicious of antagonistic commentators here.

    “Punctuation Alan! you make my head hurt when you ignore the conventions of good written communication.”

    remind me to tell you that you need to use your spell checker much more often then.
    so my punctuation is as bad as you spelling…..that makes us even.

    Its not just me who has trouble deciphering your rambling comments Alan, its everyone. As for may spelling mistakes they don’t last that long here and they are far fewer than your punctuation mistakes. You are writing these comments on your phone aren’t you? which would explain the lack of upper-case letters and the lack of punctuation.

    “Do you really think that conservatives force our beliefs onto our children?”

    another weird comment.
    some people try to indoctrinate, some don’t.
    that would be true across the whole spectrum.
    do the seriously religious try to indoctrinate their kids?
    of course they do, even if they don’t admit to it.

    Alan we all make an effort to bring our children up with the same values as our own, that is both natural and really uncontentious except for the totalitarians of both the left and the far right who presume that they know better how to educate everybody’s children. In this country its mostly the minions of the far left in the teachers union.

    “That is a totally naive claim that suggests to me that you either know nothing about parenting or the way that children become mature individuals ”

    and that’s an idiotic comment, that i can’t express any other way.
    so i have two adult children, that are doing well.
    but i am naive and know nothing about parenting.
    so if i ever needed anything, to know you have not a clue, when you start punching your keyboard…..there it is.
    so my idea that you are on disability, is as ridiculous as your idea that i stuffed my kids upbringing up?

    Alan sometimes children grow up to be well rounded and admirable people despite the worst efforts of their parents to stuff them up and as I don’t know you there is no reason to believe that your children are “good” because of your influence or in spite of it.

    i didn’t say it did.
    i say that’s what makes some people what they are, and the consequences of that is that it may affect their ability to be a good parent.

    Don’t split hairs, your argument is that being devoutly religious does you no favours when facing the family court I call bullshit on your claim.

    religion itself would be no reason as far as i know.
    it’s WHAT it does to some people…..sorry about uc gd!
    and most of those religious people are extreme right to boot.
    and that article proved that guy was both.
    it’s a lethal combination.

    Well that depends very much how you define religion and the political spectrum.I would say that Marxism is a religion as is the cult of climate change, and both of those are of the left, so there goes your argument just on that point alone.

    he needs balance and he has none.

    Why does he need balance? He is writing an opinion piece not reporting a news story 🙄

    “Read it again Alan especially the opening paragraphs.”

    i have read it twice.
    after the second time, i thought he was nuttier than i did the first time.

    Well that is really bad case of confirmation bias you have there.

    Finally you really should concede the point about pension ages after I was kind enough to look it up for you 😉

  21. GD says:

    Richard said:

    alan—keep up the good work—-you are the voice of reason around here

    Oh that is gold! One incoherent commenter supports another commenter who can’t string two words together.

    Richard and (lowercase) alan, perhaps this video illustrates your grasp of reality…

  22. Richard Ryan says:

    GD—–the “nutcase”, as for gold—–you have more front than a rat with a gold tooth.

  23. alan says:

    “Oh that is gold! One incoherent commenter supports another commenter who can’t string two words together.”

    what about people that in all earnest, reference christopher booker as a credible source?

    after i read you saying how good he was, with the help of google, i discovered just how intelligent he was(and therefore gd too).

    and my deepest apologies for being too lazy to press shift when i should have.

  24. alan says:

    “You claim to be Alan Woods who makes his living from gambling, the media story about that person suggests that he lives in Hong Kong, however your IP address shows an Australian location. Lots of reasons for the inconsistency I’m sure but I have may reasons to be suspicious of antagonistic commentators here.”

    i will address that just for you.
    THAT alan woods died in 2008 or 2007.
    he left 600 million dollars if you believe the media, I can tell you it was actually a lot lot more than that.
    THIS one is based in Melbourne, where THAT one was based in Manila(NOT HK, but hated it), but had residences all over the world.
    HIS main operation was run out of Sydney.

    now, for a lesson,…..gamblers that do it for an income can’t do it alone.
    They need experts of varying kinds to mesh it all together, especially on the scale THAT alan did.
    THAT alan, had a team of about 100 people working for him.
    It was just a business like any other, except the business is gambling.
    THIS alan once worked for him.

    do you believe that one alan could have another alan in the same extended family??

    so there you have it, i don’t claim to be that alan woods and never have, that is maybe how YOU interpreted it.
    if i had claimed to be him, any half smart person could have figured in 2 seconds flat that i wasn’t(oh, maybe that explains it!).

    i’ll address the rest later if i can be bothered.

  25. Iain Hall says:

    Alan
    There is no reason at all for me to believe you but I will take all of that convoluted explanation on advisement OK

  26. another alan! says:

    only an idiot would claim to be somebody that died 4 or 5 years ago, and the news of it plastered all over the internet.
    if you believe me or not, interests me not at all.
    you can keep thinking i’m a dead guy for all i care.
    or you can think i’m a stay at home dad on an invalid pension!

  27. alan says:

    well there you go……censorship!!
    and it was not even offensive.

  28. Iain Hall says:

    Alan
    you are not being censored but if you put in different identifiers, (email IP or screen name)then its the same as you being a new commentator and your first comment under that name has to be approved.

  29. Iain Hall says:

    Alan

    only an idiot would claim to be somebody that died 4 or 5 years ago, and the news of it plastered all over the internet.
    if you believe me or not, interests me not at all.

    Hmm If you were uninterested the explanation would not have been so long winded and full of rancour. As I said I will take anything you say about your self under advisement, However if you keep poking me with snark like:or you can think i’m a stay at home dad on an invalid pension! it won’t do anything for your credibility.

  30. alan says:

    Do you honestly think I care if you think I’m credible or not?

    Would you like a long detailed response, as to why I think that way(the last bit in italics).
    You have to ask, and ye shall receive…..rancour and all!

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: