Who says that Islamic freedom fighters don't have big hearts? One of the Bali "terrorists" has already apologized for killing Australians, only a week or two after the event. Yet the Master of Evil could never bring himself to apologize even after several years of pressure to do so.

It's obvious that this fellow Amrozi is much more compassionate than our "elected leader". He should not just be forgiven. I think Howard should apologize to him for enraging him by all that arse-licking of the Great McSatan.

But it's no use, is it, fellow travellers? He'll never apologize. Because -- unlike us -- John Howard has no heart.

Yet more speciesism in the media, fellow travellers. This story is about a "vicious" squirrel who habitually attacked children, and was shot by one of the "victim's" relatives. It's reported in a very condescending, rodent-phobic manner, expressing no pity for the furry creature whatsoever.

Certainly, the squirrel had issues. But does anyone ask why? No, they don't, do they? They just shoot first, ask questions later -- just like with that other cuddly, misunderstood hoarder. It's very sad. Very sad indeed.

See, fellow travellers. We were right all along. The Bali tragedy was America's fault. The validation comes right from the mouth of one of the freedom fighters who was forced to to carry out the bombing.

Advice to fellow travellers: if you are distributing antiwar or green literature and someone uses terms like "lizard", "snake", or "reptile" to insult you, then remind them of the side blotched lizard, a creature whose entire lifestyle is blissfully, peacefully matriarchal.

Smile sweetly and say, "I know you were trying to hurt me, but really you were paying me a compliment. Thank you so much!" Then give them a big hug and kiss. They'll run away screaming, I can assure you! (I know, I've tried it.)

Not only is John Howard trying to kill every Indonesian in Australia with his ASIO raids, he's also got Australian scientists blaming them for global warming!

I've just had a fascinating insight! While dancing with my animal companion Jocelyn, she decided that since I have been such a dutiful fellow traveller and soul-mate to her it was time to disabuse me of my misconceptions about the distant past:

Now, as we all know, the patriarchy is very new. Before peenie-waving testosteroids took over, global peace was the norm under the wise and watchful eye of kind, compassionate and very capable sisters -- much like these women of today. It was kind of like Emily's List in the Serengetti fellow travellers; a truly joyous and life affirming time in herstory.

But did you know that before this, the feline was queen? (Er, and I don't mean that in a monarchist way.) Yes, fellow travellers. Before the patriarchy, and before the matriarchy, there was the catriarchy.

Now, I would like to say to all the women reading this, hey it's okay -- like Jocelyn, they were all feminist cats. So the tom cats most definitely knew their place. And they all lived in harmony with their environment, as Jocelyn does today. And seeing that perhaps humans could benefit from their wisdom, they bestowed catriarchy upon us. This is why the witch always had her familiar, and the ancient Egyptians worshipped felines. No wonder Mediaeval peenie-wavers burned witches at the stake, and their descendants continue their appalling crusades against benign, women-friendly Middle Eastern societies to this day!

This is also why they made the cat's mortal enemy a symbol of duty, and nobility. See, it's a man's best friend isn't it? And "the enemy of my friend is my enemy". No, wait. The "friend of my friend is my enemy". Or, er, "the enemy of my enemy is my, er, friend"... or something.

Whatever, fellow travellers, I'm sure you get my drift. They were afraid. Afraid of feline energy. Which is why cats were put down collectively by the patriarchs then, and are "put down" individually by vets now.

So fellow travellers, I exhort you to do your bit to remember and celebrate the catriarchy. Stroke a nice warm pussy today.

I doubt very much that this article about fellow traveller Saddam's alleged "brutality" has any truth in it at all. But if it does, and Saddam did torture his pets when he was very young, this is clear evidence that he was an abused child. And we know who to blame for that, don't we? The institutions of marriage and fatherhood -- in short the white male patriarchy.

No wonder Dubya and his fellow British and Australian Anglo peenie-wavers want to get rid of him. He's a reminder of the evil that (white) men do! The want to cover evidence of their own past barbarities and retain their global phallocentric hegemony!

Appalling. Just appalling.