Bring on the end

Bring on the end of "cricket." What's that you say, am I not a huge cricket fan. Yes, I love the game of cricket but I hate what it has become, or more specifically I hate what the International Cricket Council has become. They are a greedy corrupt organisation, and the recent world cup only highlighted this situation.
A little trivia for you, the ICC recently gave $2 million to China for development of the game there. Yet the only Chinese who play cricket are forced to by their governement and have never heard of the game before. Cricket in China is just another communist plot for world domination, and they will happily steal away childhood dreams to do so. At the same time the ICC only gave $75 000 to Kenya who are on the brink of Test status, which will only be granted at the ICC's whim. Kenya have done everything they can as far as performance is concerned. Apparently their grounds are not up to scratch. So why wasn't the $2 million given to Kenya.
We all know what a farce the world cup was, high ticket prices that locals could not afford, ridiculous internet fees for journalists, fans with t-shirts from non-sponsors being evicted, making Australia and Sri Lanka play in the dark, the list goes on.
But the final proof that the ICC are corrupt is their handling of the issue of Zimbabwe. South Africa were rightly banned from international cricket during the regime of apartheid, but Zimbabwe have been allowed to continue during Mugabe's ever worsening regime. The week started with John Howard suggesting he would pay any fine imposed by the ICC on Cricket Australia, should they boycott Zimbabwe. Alexander Downer rightly states that an Australian cricket tour there would be a propaganda coup for Mugabe. But the ICC have turned around and said to Cricket Australia thay a withdrawl is only valid for safety reasons, and that a fine would be a "minimum $2 million." Worse yet, the fines would go to the Zimbabwe Cricket Board, which in reality is also controlled by Mugabe and so he would get the money too.
If Howard realises that the money would go to Mugabe and does not pay, then Australia could face suspension from International Cricket. I say, bring it on. Bring on the end to this International Cricket farce. If Australia are suspended from world cricket for boycotting Zimbabwe, it will only highlight how corrupt the ICC is. This may be the catalyst for the end of the ICC.
With two billionaires ready to swipe, one in India and one in the Caribbean with new Twenty20 competitions, a revolution in world cricket is about to happen. And I can't wait for it to happen either, so long as test cricket survives,

John Howard could just ban the cricket team from touring and the ICC would have to respect that. That never happens in Australian sport though. If he were to do that he would be protecting the ICC. If he does not then he is helping their demise. I applaud you John Howard for your part in helping to dismantle a corrupt ICC.

My visual DNA

Read my VisualDNA™     Get your own VisualDNA™

Turkey

I thought that a little follow up to our Turkey trip would be in order, but I have decided to write about it on this blog instead. While we were in Turkey there were some home style executions of 3 believers in the eastern city of Millatya. I read the description of their execution in a letter from the protestant church of Smyrna. It is a disturbing an upsetting description of how one German M and two Turrkish believers were disembowled alive and died a slow death. These men are truly heroes of the faith. What is even more astounding is that the wife of one of the Turks had the opportunity to say on Turkish national news at the funeral that she forgives the killers. Such a concept is unheard of in the Is-c world. They expect blood for blood.

There are only around 3 000 Turkish believers out of a population of 72 million. Until recently most new believers came in through correspondence courses over the internet. Recently that has changed, more are now coming to believe through Turkish friends. The Turkish public have overall being shocked at the recent killings. And even though most Turks are afraid and unaware of what Christianity is, there is a shifting tide.

I sensed an openness from a young man that I talked with, while on holidays. I sense that something will happen in Turkey. It is time to take this country up in prayer. Now is the time for change in that land.

New astronomical discoveries

It was in the news last week that a new planet capable of supporting life has been found. The planet orbits a star called Gilese.
Salient facts:
Name: Gilese 581c.
Star: Orbits a star called Gilese 581. Which is believed to be 50 times cooler than earth.
Distance from star: The orbiting distance is around 6 million miles from its star. (Earth is 93 million miles from the Sun).
Orbiting time: 13 days, a rather short year.
Temperature range: Commonly between 0C and 40C.
Mass of planet: 5 times that of earth.
Pole to pole distance: 12 000 miles compared to Earth's 8 000 miles.
Gravity: Twice that of earth.
Composition: Unknown- could be rock, could be ice, could be a combination.
Distance from earth: 20.5 light years. (A little too far with our current technology).

There has been a lot of talk about whether this planet could support life or not. There has also been a lot of talk about the probablity of other such planets in the galaxy. There are many in the astronomical community who seem determined to discover extra-terrestial life and some how to use it as clinching proof against the existence of God. Let me go on the record now as saying that if there is life on any other planet in the universe, that the God we know and worship is the same Creator of this life also. As far as any theological questions are concerned, they seriously would have to wait until such a fact was established and if any contact with sentient life had been made.

There were a lot of people who were rather scared about Galileo's theories and discoveries. He was a branded a heretic for saying that the earth is round. Today we know this is true and it has not undermined our faith or the Bible at all. Neither would the existence of extra terrestial life.

What ever the case may be, this is an exciting discovery. What is even more important is the discovery or faster than light travel. This would make true exploration of our galaxy possible. On that note, there are two scientists- a German and a French who recently claim that some "black holes" could actually be worm holes, but there is no test to prove this yet, other than sending a probe in and seeing if it could return.

More reasons to believe

Just recently I was in a seminar given on post modernism. This was slightly tedious for me. The presenter was German. I am not sure if his particular style was due to his precise cultural make up, or whether is he new to the concepts of post modernism. I suspect it is a little of both. He was extraordinarily modern in the way he presented the concept of post modernism. Then again, many of the people in the room were also quite modernist in their approach.
Many of the people in the room made a number of comments that really pressed my buttons. "How do we relate to 'them'?" "Aren't post modernists just selfish, always thinking of me and what feels good?"

Hello, I'm sitting in the same room as you.

Towards the end of the seminar some one made some very radical comments. There was a deadly silence that filled the room as he spoke. I was the only one that clapped him when he finished, and I am sure some people were ready for some blood letting.

This (now friend) said that we need to go "beyond scripture." This made a lot of people cringe. But there is a serious question to be asked of evangelicals. I prefer to refer to myself as a neo-evangelical. Evangelicals often (not always) hold the bible up as an idol. It is as if truth can only be found with in the pages of the bible. This is a dangerous concept.

How does John refer to Jesus? Jesus IS the Word. The bible is the word of God, but the Bible is not God. It has been said at a different time during this conference that God is Love, but Love is not God. I agree. A pantheist could easily say that Love is God, and an evangelical often portrays the Bible as God.

After the main seminar a few of us had a debate. I started out by saying "When Abraham read the scriptures..... oh no, wait a minute Abraham didn't have the scriptures." Abraham had a relationship with the Living God. For sure God spoke to him in very clear and audible ways, even appearing in person to him. But Abraham learnt about God and grew to know God through relationship with God. God taught Abraham to have faith, then Abraham taught it to Isaac who taught it Joseph and his brothers, who taught it to their descendants, who taught it to the Gentiles, who taught it to us. There was a testimony of faith that carried down through the ages. The scriptures became a record of these testimonies of faith. But the scriptures are records of encounters with the living God. To read the bible alone, does not equate as an encounter with the Living God. There needs to be a witness. That witness needs to come from the Holy Spirit, and it also often comes from others who have had an encounter with the Living God as well.

Secondly, "when the early church read the scriptures about Jesus death and resurrection.... oh no, wait a minute the first gospel (Mark) wasn't written until 55 AD, so the early believers had to believe for another reason." Paul tells us in Corinthians that over 500 saw the risen Christ, and that he also had a vision of the risen Christ. John tells us that they touched the flesh of the risen Christ. They believed because of the testimony of the believers. The new testament becomes a record of these testimonies.

I have had the scales removed from my eyes and I have seen the risen Christ too. So therefore I believe because of the testimony of the Holy Spirit to me and the testimony of others. It is very important to remember that God revealed himself to us through progressive revelation. The witness of creation is a powerful one. Paul argues that no one is without excuse to believe in God, due to the witness of creation. The witness of the Holy Spirit is also vital. Many have come to faith in Jesus with these two alone, before ever putting their hands on a bible. The witness of believers is the next most important thing. It shows that the faith is alive. The testimony of scripture confirms all of these things. Scripture is indeed God's word, but unless it is revealed to us by the Holy Spirit, then it is just words on a page, that liberal scholars love to have fun picking apart.

I too hold the bible in high esteem and believe it to be the full authoritative word of God. But I am leary of the evangelical line that holds it in a place above God at times, even when they do not see it.

Post modernism: a definition

A friend asked me to define post modernism for him. So I wrote him a lengthy email. This is just my definition. Nevertheless I would appreciate anyone who is willing to critique it.

First I would take a quick review of history.

Early church: world view of Europe at the time was very pagan. The early church were in direct opposition to the European world view.

Christendom: The church became the seat of power in European society. Dogmatism arose which opposed all other world views.

Middle Ages: People within Christendom were unaware of the teachings of the Bible and had no way of arguing against dogmatism. Superstition took deep roots in society. Science was seen as belonging to the realm of magic and therefore evil.

Renaissance: (1400s-1600s) A parallel and overlapping movement connected with the protestant reformation. As people were able to challenge dogma and understand doctrine for themselves, science gained some freedom within the European world view. Science was explored within the world view of monotheism.

Enlightenment: Science had experienced two centuries of relative freedom during the renaissance, but still experienced some opposition from the Catholic church. In the period of the enlightenment science threw off the "shackles of the church." This does not mean that there were not many in the Enlightenment who did not hold to the monotheist world view. However, it seems that logic was considered a very high value in the world view of the Enlightenment. Logic was very connected to the birth of modernism. Science saw that the universe was ordered and sought to apply logic to everything. The church was greatly influenced by this modernist world view and began to use logic based arguments to counteract anti Christian logic based arguments. Atheism was born as a world view during the time of the enlightenment. Logic can not provide the answers to all questions, in fact logic can even be used to prove completely false realities and is thus left exposed as inadequate. Much of modern evangelicalism is birthed in the modernist world view. Modern evangelicalism is different to that of early protestantism.

Post modernism: Post modernism has its seeds in the world wars. In many ways as brutal as world war 1 was, it did not challenge modernism. The result of the war was seen as a victory by the western allies; Germany was told to stay in its place and Europe was remapped. But world war 2 shattered the notions of modernism working. The modernist solutions to world war 1 had not worked and Hitler was able to rise up with his ultra modernist world view (order and perfection, the Aryan way). In the aftermath of world war 2, there were many questions in western society over the next two decades. Modernism had given birth to the nuclear bomb, a triumph of science. Ironically it was one of the great scientists of modernism, Albert Einstein that gave rise to a post modern concept: relativism.

World War 2 changed everything in the world. European politics shifted away from an aggressive approach, their previous attempts at international relations had failed greatly. America rose as a super power as a result of world war 2. The baby boom came as a result of world war 2. It was the 1960s that were the beginning of post modernism being voiced. World war 2 and relativism sowed the seeds of dissent. The Cuban missile crisis and the Vietnam war were instrumental in causing many young westerners to seriously question the modernist world view of their politicians. Surely war had proven to not work. Surely the stubborn approach of politicians needed to be corrected. "Make love not war" became the catch cry of the hippy movement. A serious questioning of everything in society began.

The church was seen as part of the problem. Sadly there is a lot of truth in this,. The church saw questioning as bad. Their modernist world view said that they had the answers for everything. They understood everything in the Bible. All doctrine was formed. To question any doctrine or method or form was seen as a sin. Many hippies were completely rejected from the mainstream church. So they started their own churches. As much as secular society remembers the sexual revolution as a pillar of the 60s, the Jesus Revolution of the hippies in the 70s was the hippy response to the church.

Post modernism was only very embryonic in the 60s and 70s. Economics maintained a modernist hardline throughout the 70s and into the 80s. Many countries only began to float their currencies in the 80s. World views in societies do not change over night. They also shift at different rates in different countries. Certainly within the US there are certain geographic regions that are still very modernist in their world view. I know that western Canada is only just starting to be post modernist in the 21st century, at least 15 years behind Melbourne in Australia where I come from.

My own personal definition of post -modernism is this: It is ok to question everything, in fact it is healthy to question. For me, my personal questioning never questioned the existence of God or the reality of Christ's death and resurrection. I liken it to throwing a deck of cards up in the air and letting the cards fall as they may. Then each card is examined and determined as to whether it is valid or valuable. If it is determined invalid then it is discarded if it is determined valid then it is made a part of the new deck of cards. The new deck of cards will have some of the old cards but some new ones as well.

A personal grievance of my own was that so many people placed sanctity in the church in "form." It was important to people how church and Christianity was practiced. How many times a day do you read your Bible? How many church services do you go to? How many hymns are sung? What clothes should you wear to church? When I grew up the traditions and form seemed to be far more important than the actual meaning the form was supposed to represent. Post modernism for me has allowed me the opportunity to discard the "form", dig down, rescue the true "meaning" and give it freedom to breathe without the chains of the old "form." To me many churches in RS are completely chained by form and tradition and meaning itself is on life support.

People who are born from 1965 to 1985 are generally considered to a part of "Generation X." Gen X is also known as the "buster" generation. Those born 1945-65 are the "boomer" generation. Those born before 1945 are known as the "builder" generation. "Builders" are commonly very modernist in their world view. Boomers are commonly proto post-modernists. Gen X-ers have embraced post modernism with a frenzy. The next after Gen X 1985-2005 are known as "Generation Why?" of Gen Y. Gen X and Gen Y are both post modernists but have different approaches. I have Gen X friends who are still busting it all up. I think this needs to happen for a season but can not become a default position for life. The pieces need to be put back together at some stage. Gen Yers have more of a solution based approach and are positive about the world. Gen Xers are often known as the doom and gloom generation, a generation without hope. Of course Chrn-ity tackled from a Gen X perspective does not have to be doom and gloom. I am definitely Gen X in my approach to the world.

As I said though, people in Prairie Canada are only just discovering post modernism now and so are different to young urban Aussies. It remains to be seen what impact post modernism will have on the world. The Renaissance lasted a couple of centuries. The Enlightenment started in the 1700s and morphed into Modernism which has lasted until the end of the 20th century. These are dominant paradigms that can stay around for centuries. Is post-modernism the start of a new world paradigm or is it the epilogue to modernism? I think it has elements of both. Post-modernism is a paradigm between paradigms. The paradigm you have when you don't have a paradigm. It appears that a dominant paradigm that is being born from post-modernism is "pluralism."

Pluralism is the approach "you have my spirtuality, I have mine." This has come into liberal denominations, who say "we should let them be Buddhist of Hindu etc; why should we change their religion." One of the big reasons post modernism has arisen is that modernism failed to answer the questions of spirituality. Science can not tackle the questions of God. As much as many scientists wants to have the answers for all knowledge, they need to admit that science has its limits. This does not mean that science is not useful, it is simply restricted.

The post modernist is not afraid to talk about spirituality. The post modernist does not assume that they have all the answers. The post modernist is willing to explore and will always listen to the Chrn perspective even if they do not choose it. I have two friends who have left their Chrn faith behind. One is into many different spiritualities, yet still asks me to pray for him and still is open to Jesus being the answer. He is very post modern. Another rejected post-modernism and has gone back into a modernist world view and now holds closely to the precepts of atheism.

I would say from what you have told me that you currently do not sit very much within the post modern camp. I guess that maybe your parents were boomers? Boomers had some post-modern tendencies- they questioned some things i.e morality, war, politics; but left others alone. Post modernism is a more full blown questioning. Melody tells me that she doubts whether she is Gen X or possibly the next generation. Some sociologists have narrowed the boundaries to Gen X to only include up to 1980. My wife was born in 1979 and is on the cusp of these two generations. She seems more keen to find solutions than some of my friends who are still questioning ten years later. Myself, I went through a questioning phase of 6 years.

What I can say for certain is that our societies (overlapped) are in great flux. Western society is moving away from modernism. The middle eastern world have never even had a renaissance and they are in a very different place. You will probably find your self going through some kind of post modern experience at some point over the next decade. These ideas seem to hit different geographic regions at different times. Russia is not a place that has begun a post modern search yet. They are still trying to recapture their pre 1917 world view and are a bit confused in the process. I guess Russia is a very different kettle of fish.

The answer to what post modernism is will only be fully known within a couple more decades. It is still very much a movement in flux and full swing. Only when the dust settles will there be full clarity.

International Cricket Council have a culture of elitism

Ireland celebrate their victory over Pakistan on St Patrick's day.

I love the game of cricket. It has to be said though that people in North America have always thought of cricket as a posh English game. As an Aussie I know this is not true, but there is still some truth in this accusation. The English once had a great empire. In this once great empire they spread their notions of class division around the world. England and Australia were the only test playing nations in cricket for a long time.

The first test match was played between England and Australia on March 15, 1877. South Africa played their first test in 1889. West Indies did not play a test until 1928 and New Zealand not until 1930. Even in the early days of international cricket it was an elitist club. Until the 1980s there were only 7 test playing nations and only three more have been added in the last 30 years.

A lot of credit must be given to the ICC for their efforts to develop the game among "associate nations" in the last ten years. There are now two international competitions for Associate nations, both in the one day and four day versions of the game. These two competitions are carefully supervised by the ICC and games are given One Day International status or first class status for the four day games. The top six associate nations Kenya, Scotland, Ireland, Canada, Bermuda and Netherlands competed in the 2006-07 Intercontinental Cup (four day first class games). But only games played within this Intercontinental Cup are given first class status. Then at the end of 2007 these countries will lose their first class status again and have to requalify in 2008. The winner of the 2006-07 Intercontinental Cup will not be given test status. At least there is a system to qualify as a temporary first class country, but the ICC reserves the right to confer test status, when they see fit. They have set no guidelines in place. They have promised Kenya that they will receive test status in the near future, but not even given a date when this will happen.

Many of the old boys of the World Cricket Club have said that the new boys should not be playing in the World Cup. But teams such as Kenya, Bangladesh, Canada and Ireland have all beaten the heavy weights at the top level. Surely it is clear that all these teams need is more exposure to professional level cricket and they will improve in leaps and bounds. Yet the only opportunity they have is once every four years. It will take a long time for them to improve at this rate.

FIFA have been known for their own snobbery at times, making it hard for Australia to qualify for the world cup of soccer; also allocating a lot more places to European nations and far fewer to African and Asian nations. But at least FIFA does not discriminate between the status of teams. If Solomon Islands play Bhutan in an international game it has the same status as when Germany play Brazil.

The ICC need to accept that it is time to remove barriers to the development of cricket. Countries such as Ireland or Canada may have to wait many years before they can achieve test status. In the mean time they could lose many potential players to other more popular sports. If a young player does not have the opportunity to play their sport at the highest level they may quickly choose another sport instead. John Davison, the current captain of Canada had said that Canada needs to be playing "professional" cricket. He has not been specific about this to avoid controversy, but it is clear that what he says is true, they should not be shut out of the elite Test club any longer.

Ireland is the success story of the World Cup so far. They have drawn with Zimbabwe (a test nation) and knocked Pakistan out of the world cup. They claim that they intend to beat West Indies in their final group game. Ireland is a country that, given the opportunity and exposure could be winning test matches against the heavy weights within ten years. But as things stand they have no guarantee that they will even have test status within ten years.

The comments of some cricket leaders, including Australia's captain Ricky Ponting, that the "minnows" should not be at the world cup is unhelpful. It is ironic that some one of the likes of Ricky Ponting- a working class Australian should be making such comments. But this is a result of the ICC's culture of elitism, that he subconsciously fell into. It is because of this culture of elitism that Bob Woolmer felt such shame when his Pakistan side lost to Ireland. It is true that he had been under a lot of stress anyway, and I am sure that the pressure from Pakistan was a big part of this. But it does not help that, due to the fact that Ireland are only an "Associate" nation, that the shame was greater. This was a contributing factor to his death, likely a heart attack, although this has not been confirmed.

The six Associate nations who have qualified for the world cup should all be given test status. This does not mean that the heavy weights have to play them very often at all, but there needs to be a freedom for countries to invite who they choose, to play on their own soil. Otherwise, what incentive do these countries have but to play a handful of world class games, another 4 years from now?

Silverchair are back!

I was at the iTunes Australia website and noticed that one of my favourite Aussie bands have made a comeback. Silverchair. I have always been a Silverchair fan, ever since their "Tomorrow" hit back in 1994. Back then they were accused of being "Nirvana in pyjamas" as they were only 16 and people thought they had an unoriginal sound. I took no notice and said they would be big. Today, they are commonly recognised as the biggest band in Australia. There has however been a long hiatus since their last album "Diorama" back in 2002. Daniel Johns went off ona side project tangent called the "Dissociatives."
His two high school mates and band members may not have seen this as a snub, and probably enjoyed the opportunity to take in some extra Newcastle surf. The question remained however that there was no guarantee that Daniel Johns was coming back. Without Daniel Johns there could be no Silverchair. So I must say that I am glad he has not snubbed his mates and has gotten back together with them.
Mateship being one of my core values, I didn't even give the Dissociatives a look in. But I am excited about the new Silverchair release "Young Modern" due out on April 5th.
For now, give their new single "Straight Lines" a listen. Daniel Johns lyrics have always been unsettled and disturbed, such as in his 1999 song "Ana's song" :

"And you're my obsession
I love you to the bones
And Ana wrecks your life
Like an Anorexia life"

It is well known that Daniel Johns has struggled with Anorexia and the like in his battle with self esteem. Daniel Johns has at times been the subject of prayer in my life. That is why his latest lyrics peak my curiosity:

"Wake me up strong in the morning
Walking in a straight line
Lately I’m a desperate believer
I’m walking in straight line"

Could this be the start of Daniel Jonns' journey toward Jesus? I pray so. Maybe you will too.

The song has received great acclaim and is currently #1 on the radio charts and iTunes. I rather enjoy the music. Tune into Triple J and have a listen.

What people think of Aussies

I just read an article on News.com.au. I had to laugh at the in your face rhetoric of the author who was counter arguing against the criticisms of an English journalist. Persoanally I don't care what the world thinks of Australia. Every country is misunderstood until some one takes the time to live there. The greater the cultural gap, the longer it takes to understand a new culture.

Anyway have a read:

We're not like Neighbours, By Anita Quigley
March 14, 2007 12:00am

THERE is a well-known newspaper term used to describe where unwanted stories go - they are spiked.

A story is spiked when it is deemed not newsworthy, badly written and researched, or if there is simply not one spare column centimetre left in the paper to run it.

This week I discovered another spiked which, according to its mission statement, is "an independent online phenomenon dedicated to raising the horizons of humanity by waging a culture war of words against misanthropy, priggishness, prejudice, luddism, illiberalism and irrationalism in all their ancient and modern forms".

All it needed to say is that it is a website at times dedicated to publishing rubbish written by British social commentator Patrick West.

His latest drivel Life in Oz: Nothing like Neighbours is most certainly worthy of being spiked.

West pontificates: "Answer me this - if things are so great Down Under, why do so many Aussies leave?"

He then attempts to answer his question: "It's because Australia is not the paradise it is portrayed to be on Neighbours. One of my Aussie colleagues is often asked why she chose to live in miserable, rainy Britain ... her answer was simply: Australia is nothing like Neighbours. It's more like Kath and Kim."

West continues: "She went on to explain that the land Down Under is not populated by the hearty, the gregarious and the welcoming, but by white trash ... Australians are some of the most coarse, racist people on earth, as Kath and Kim rightly portrays.

"For example, an American girl who seeks courtship will tentatively ask you for a meal and weeks of getting to know you; an Australian girl will come up to you at the Walkabout bar in London's densely Aussie-populated Shepherds Bush and inquire, 'Would you like a f...?"'

Quite frankly, I'm relieved Australia is nothing like Neighbours, with the likes of busybody Harold popping in and out of your home all day.

Give me Kath and Kim (who are not racists, by the way) any day.

Unsophisticated, perhaps, to Londoners -but racist? How? When?

Strangely, West makes no mention of English soccer fans banned from Europe because of their racism and violence over the years.

Ever heard of an Australian sports supporter being banned overseas?

We all know Kath and Kims. Every city has them - New York's live in Queens, London's reside in Essex and ours in Melbourne's Fountaingate.

Yet however they may dress or speak, most Kath and Kims would be the first to support their neighbours and complete strangers - more so than the sophisticated inner-city slickers (like West) that look down their nose at them.

It is also a gross over-generalisation to say Australia is full of white trash.

But West's argument collapses when he says all the "clever" Australians flee to Britain.

"Because despite all of their protestations against Barry Humphries' character Sir Les Patterson, Oz's own farting, swearing reprobate cultural attache, Australia remains a philistine country," he writes.

"Think about it. Who do the Americans celebrate as national heroes? George Washington, George Gershwin, Ernest Hemingway, Franklin D. Roosevelt and so on.

"We Brits revere Chaucer, Shakespeare, Elgar, Nelson and Churchill. And who do the Australians put on their postal stamps? Ned Kelly, a murderous bandit who famously put a metal dustbin on his head and tried to kill coppers."

And to think all this time I thought modern Britain worshipped Posh and Becks, reality TV stars such as Big Brother's resident racist Jade Goody, and the articulate Gallagher brothers.

But West, who is also the author of Conspicuous Compassion - which was reviewed in Britain's The Times (by one of his own countrymen) as "utterly devoid of insight ... nonsense ... pandering to the fashionable pull your socks up, preachy attitude" - continues with more gibberish.

"This is why all the most cerebral Australians, such as Clive James, Germaine Greer, John Pilger and Peter Singer, have lived for so long either in the UK or the USA. They all wanted to get away from the land of Kath and Kim," he adds.

How does he explain then how England got Pete Andre and Jason Donovan? What West should have said is not necessarily the smartest Aussies flee to Britain, perhaps just the most opportunistic.

And what he doesn't acknowledge is that your Clives and Greers are caught in a time warp. They think Australia is still the Australia they left decades ago, ensuring most of what they say is irrelevant.

As for Singer? The US can keep the academic who in 2001 stated that "mutually satisfying activities" of a sexual nature may sometimes occur between humans and animals.

The immigration department granted 28,821 working holiday visas for Brits in 2005-06. In the same period a further 32,152 UK residents gained permanent residency here.

For "the most coarse, racist people on earth"' we've sure got something going for us that Poms love.

Maybe West could come and investigate in person. I know some welcoming B&Bs in Fountaingate where he could stay.

* Anita Quigley is joint Australian/British passport holder who lived in London for six years.