Return of the creature from the billabong

The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info

Last updated on March 6th, 2018 at 12:30 am

The Bunyip is back! Current lead post: an ethical dilemma involving Linda Jaivin.

Posted by Tim B. on 05/03/2006 at 12:12 AM
    1. Hmmm, 1st contact SMH to verify LJ story before Step 2

      Posted by rog2 on 2006 05 03 at 12:23 AM • permalink


    1. Tim/Margo, her surname is spelt ‘Jaivin’.

      Posted by IanMc on 2006 05 03 at 12:43 AM • permalink


    1. Hooray, the return of Professor Bunyip! He’s been absent too long.

      Posted by Gravelly on 2006 05 03 at 01:00 AM • permalink


    1. IanMc

      Dammit – I have been trying a range of insults on Tim for months, but none a shade on that one… You don’t mind if I use that one do you?

      Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 05 03 at 01:03 AM • permalink


    1. Question is, why would subs remove “ “?  Is it a Fairfax cost cutting policy?

      John Laws said today that Alan Ramsey has taken his pieces and copied them word for word without any acknowledgement not even one lousy”

      Posted by rog2 on 2006 05 03 at 01:07 AM • permalink


    1. Sure it’s not Jivin’? She sure looks like she could get down! Yeeeeoooowww!

      Seriously, I didn’t realise she was the silly old slapper who used to turn up on Critical Mass on Sunday arvos when the Margoyle was in care or on a bender- she used to sum up the ABC to me, a pretentious old bat trying to look 17, all the while spouting meaningless jargon to try to sound like she knew what the fuck she was talking about, while obviously knowing as much about art as I know about Islamic ablution rituals.

      (She also reminds me of the old trout they’ve let loose to run JJJ into the ratings basement, and the equally loopy old boot that’s just been tossed off the ABC board- what is it with lefty women having heads like robber’s dogs?

      Not a looker among the lot of ‘em- maybe that’s why they’re so keen on burkhas being mainstram- gives them a chance to cover up, while appearing culturally sensitive.

      Posted by Habib on 2006 05 03 at 01:13 AM • permalink


    1. She calls the ‘attack’ unwarranted. It is not. The quotes did not appear in the item which makes the charge of plagiarism valid.  A better approach would have been for her to acknowledge the charge, explain the error and request a retraction. She protetheth too hardeth.

      Posted by ilibcc on 2006 05 03 at 01:15 AM • permalink


    1. BTW- why is it that women who write stickbooks invariably are so grotesquely hideous that their next will be their first?

      At least it shows a fertile imagination, as they’re obviously never written from experience.

      (*Disclaimer- my partner has a cousin who writes Mills and Boons- pensioner porn certainly, but she looks like a (poorly) shaved yeti, and delights in going on cruises and kontiki trips so there’s a captive crowd of really pissed bogans who she can try to interfere with, albeit unsuccessfully; it’s not possible to drink that much booze and keep breathing).

      Posted by Habib on 2006 05 03 at 01:28 AM • permalink


    1. I saw her photo in a mag on the weekend; boy, did I get a fright.
      She was dealt a cruel hand at birth; and she adds to it with “funky” clothes, hairdo, makeup.

      Posted by Honkie Hammer on 2006 05 03 at 01:35 AM • permalink


    1. #6 LOL

      They all must have the same stylist…
      Does anyone take the one with orange orange hair seriously?

      Posted by kae on 2006 05 03 at 01:39 AM • permalink


    1. O/T – Advice given in this week’s CPA Update (it’s for members of CPA Australia only – but you’re not missing anything) —

      A panel of expert businesswomen – including (see below) – recently shared their secrets for climbing the corporate ladder at a lunch presentation in Melbourne.

      The common link between all of the women was that hard work and persistence lead each woman to their success…

      Gratuitous, lightweight advice is never useful and always unappreciated.

      Especially when, in this instance, it is from Natasha ‘Stott’ Despoja.  I mean, what the hell would this well-known political failure know about climbing the corporate ladder? She’s never been near one. She got to the bottom rung of the political ladder and slipped off that. Sheesh.

      Posted by walterplinge on 2006 05 03 at 01:51 AM • permalink


    1. We have all missed the tales from the Billabong and i wondered if the Bunyip had indeed gone out in the midday sun after the Christmas party and become incapacitated.
      One should nethertheless always apologise to a lady even if one is incredibly right and she is incredibly guilty. Unless of course she is NOT your wife.
      “ to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them”
      As in don’t knock bisexuality it doubles your chances of finding a pertner?

      Posted by davo on 2006 05 03 at 01:51 AM • permalink


    1. Hasn’t this happened before to writers less beloved of the left such as sports commentator ‘Phil Gould’ and Janet Albrechtson.

      Correct me if I’m wrong (I frequently am) though from memory, the crimes these two were accused of met with little or any sympathy from their leftist peers. From memory, it was the left leading the pack.

      Posted by Nic on 2006 05 03 at 02:27 AM • permalink


    1. BTW- why is it that women who write stickbooks invariably are so grotesquely hideous that their next will be their first?

      Because the blokes who write them all look like classical gods.  Granted, Bacchus, but still gods…

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 05 03 at 02:35 AM • permalink


    1. I was right. The answer was at the house of Blair all along. In fact Media Watch saw it as being serious enough for a spray. Over to you Ms Jaivin.

      Posted by Nic on 2006 05 03 at 02:42 AM • permalink


    1. Well, I can understand the sub removing the “s because the way the paragraph is structured there is no logical place to put the “s, or acknowledgment that she’s actually quoting Eric Blair. She runs it all together and it makes more sense, but not much sense, as if its her work rather than a quote.

      Posted by jpaulg on 2006 05 03 at 03:16 AM • permalink


    1. My mother always said – ‘If you cant say something nice about a person dont say anything at all’.
      I will therefore not offer a comment on Linda Jeivain.
      Thank you.

      Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 05 03 at 03:24 AM • permalink


    1. i couldn’t work out where the quotes would of been either. maybe the sub did a bit more than just remove the quotes.

      How commandingly, for example, our Prime Minister might be able to lead the citizens of Airstrip One in George Orwell’s 1984, required to know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed.

      Posted by drscroogemcduck on 2006 05 03 at 05:01 AM • permalink


    1. Welcome back, Professor.  Ethics be damned, the only possible reason for ever apologising in print is the threat of litigation, and Ms Jaivin hasn’t a legal leg to stand on—on account of your honest good faith ‘n all—so don’t even think about it!

      Posted by slammer on 2006 05 03 at 05:51 AM • permalink


    1. Ethical dilemma. What ethical dilemma?
      He should apologise over his dead body.

      Posted by geoff on 2006 05 03 at 08:00 AM • permalink


    1. She should get her apology when she prys it from his dead cold fingers, I say.

      We will fight this to the last drop of his blood.

      Posted by geoff on 2006 05 03 at 08:11 AM • permalink


    1. ‘If you cant say something nice about a person…

      blog. That’s the fun part.’

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 05 03 at 08:49 AM • permalink


    1. Speling erorr fickst.

      Posted by Tim B. on 2006 05 03 at 08:51 AM • permalink


    1. #6 Habib, Holy Crap! I didn’t realize that Yahoo Serious wrote under the nom de plume Linda Jaivan? What a knee slapper.

      Posted by Texas Bob on 2006 05 03 at 08:55 AM • permalink


    1. #11 Then she married a LIBERAL politician..

      Posted by crash on 2006 05 03 at 10:12 AM • permalink


    1. linda jaivin may run around looking & acting like a hyperactive ex-commo caught in an accident between a brotherhood clothes van & a clairol truck, but the only time i met her she was very sweet & very funny.  that photo is a particularly unflattering one.  any comparison with the maggot, who exudes anger, fatigue & gloom, & really has a face like a robber’s dog, is odious

      Posted by KK on 2006 05 03 at 10:44 AM • permalink


    1. Philip Adams in Aust. thinks Australian soldiers fought in the Crimean War.

      Posted by Susan Norton on 2006 05 03 at 11:32 AM • permalink


    1. And Florence Nightingale was an opera diva?

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 05 03 at 06:36 PM • permalink


    1. Best wishes to the bunyip, and here’s hoping for a future of billabong-related happiness.

      Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 05 03 at 08:07 PM • permalink


    1. #26- odious, but accurate. Both feed hungrily at the public tit, while despising the lumen proles who provide the succour for their chosen lifestyles as doyens of the progressive yartz.

      Posted by Habib on 2006 05 03 at 08:52 PM • permalink


    1. And I was thinking more along the lines of a well, chewed mintie, diseased paw-paw or dropped pie as a description of her challenging visage; even robber’s dogs have feelings you know.

      Posted by Habib on 2006 05 03 at 08:55 PM • permalink


    1. Susan Norton—They did.  The thieving buggers just hadn’t been transported yet.

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 05 03 at 09:05 PM • permalink


    1. Retroactive Australians?  There’s a concept….

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 05 03 at 09:20 PM • permalink


    1. Silly me- I thought Australians didn’t officially exist until 1901, when the Boer War was well and truly buggered, but once again I’m shown to be an ignorant, ill-informed twat by the Phatster.

      If I ever get to know australian history and culture as well as the olive growing oracle, do you reckon I can get my snout in the Film finance Corporation trough? I desperately want to tell the story about how Indiginous Australians (who’d been torn from the very bosoms of their weeping mothers) were forced at bayonet point to take part in the charge on the Russian artillery at Balaclava, and while being totally wiped out managed to courageously over-run the Tsarist minions and establish a free, ecologically sustainable collective on the banks of the Black Sea (so called because it was Aboriginal territory during the dreamtime, originally called Gunyah Didgeri Goannadoo in the old tongue).

      I reckon it’ll be a winner, at least by Australia Council standards- as long as my cultural collegues, the AFI board (or at least some junior flunky who’s been fingered to do so) and my mum go to see it (and mum’s not even on the free list!) it’ll be touted as another stunning success, and a further strengthening of the bastion against US cultural hegemony.

      Posted by Habib on 2006 05 03 at 10:56 PM • permalink


Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.