Alan Parkington <patriot@iheartaustralia.com.au> wrote:

> As Australia edges closer towards getting a decision on a 21st
> century high speed national broadband network, it's amusing to see
> how speculation about Telstra getting the go-ahead to build it has
> flushed some of the anti-Telstra raving loonies out of the woodwork.

And plenty of fuckwits like you too.

> Of course in any other country it would probably seem logical that the green light for such a project would be given
> to the national
> carrier. After all it has the assets, the knowledge, the workforce
> and the financial clout to make it work - not to mention, in Telstra's case, the country's biggest 'mum and dad'
> shareholder base.

Telstra was always welcome to do it any time they
chose to, just like they did with the adsl1 network.

If they want the govt's $4.7B, they get to do it the way the govt requires it be done.

> But not so in Australia.

Not so with Telstra, actually.

> When Phil Burgess made a remark about his confidence in Telstra being successful, it was seized upon by the usual
> rent-a-quote critics as being a sign that some sort of 'sneaky deal' had been done.

> Really, all Phil was doing was stating the bleeding obvious.

Nope, lying to his teeth, as always.

> The Australian Financial Review (22nd April) threw its hat firmly into the ABT (Anyone But Telstra) camp, backing the
> SingTel G9 argument that a new fibre network was unnecessary.

They're right. When the vast bulk of broadband users choose to
have broadband at 256Kb, what the fuck is the point in pissing
$10B or more against the wall on faster than adsl2+ can ALREADY
do when clearly fuck all are even bothering with adsl2+, just so that
arsehole yank, Murdoch, can flog DVD quality or better movies faster ?

> In its editorial, the paper argued that most Australians already have access to decent broadband

They're right.

> -thanks, it said, to the efforts of Telstra's competitors who've been putting DSLAMS into city phone exchanges and
> piggybacking off Telstra's copper lines.

Because thats what our legislators had enough of a clue to allow.

AND it aint just the citys either, virtually everyone who can get
DSL can have adsl2+ if they want it, and are prepared to pay
the stupid ripoff prices that Telstra is choosing to charge for that.

Clearly fuck all are actually that stupid.

> This just goes to prove that the AFR's editorial team must be among
> the lucky few who live within a stone's throw of a city telephone
> exchange and can get half decent speeds.

Bare faced lie. Hordes can get very decent speeds without being
anywhere near a stone's throw from a city telephone exchange, fuckwit.

> They obviously couldn't care less for those living in the outer suburbs and beyond who are missing out because they're
> too far from an exchange.

There's fuck all of those.

> 'Let them eat cake'.

Let go of your dick, child.

> Nor do they seem to understand that even the current speeds available over copper will seem slow in the not too
> distant future

Who cares ? Telstra is welcome to do FTTN any time it likes.

Its just not welcome to expect the govt to pay $4.7B towards it unless
its prepared to comply with the conditions on that that the govt requires.

> This debate really shows up the difference between Telstra and the ABT brigade.

Nope, if shows what pathological liars you clowns have always been.

> As the only truly national carrier, only Telstra has the national interest at heart

Is that right ? How odd that they refused to build the FTTN using entirely their own money then.

> and realises that planning has to occur now to ensure Australians have access to world-class broadband speeds required
> for the future.

They were welcome to build a FTTN network any time they liked.

They chose not to, and only ever planned to do it in parts of the capital citys ANYWAY.

> Telstra's competitors on the other hand will say or do anything to
> preserve the status quo and keep creaming profits in the major cities

Corse Telstra never ever does anything like that, eh ?

> thanks to the ACCC's basket-case brand of price-setting, effectively
> forcing Telstra shareholders to subsidise everything and everyone else.

Hang on, Telstra claimed that they get an 18% return on capital.

Thats not subsidising anyone, you silly little pathological liar.

> Telstra's Tony Warren recently compared the hysterical G9 campaign to
> that of a blacksmith doing his best to ignore the arrival of the motor car.

And only a fool like you would buy such mindless
silly stuff from just another lying telstra arsehole.

> For students of history, there is in fact a much closer parallel to
> the current debate - that which occurred 'canal mania' period in
> Britain when powerful canal owners did everything they could to
> protect their profits and thwart competition from railways (Liverpool
> and Manchester history - www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk)

Wota fucking wanker...

> The waterways that criss-crossed Britain were, they argued, the best and most cost effective way of moving industrial
> goods. So they lobbied the government to stop the trains competing.

> History of course shows the railways finally prevailed. If the canal owners had their way Britain's industrial
> revolution probably would have stalled.

Irrelevant to broadband now, fuckwit.

> So it is with Singapore Government-controlled Optus, its G9 collective and their media cheer squad.

Nope.

> Acting in their own self interest, they would rather see Australia's economic development halted rather than allow
> Telstra to invest in crucial national infrastructure.

Telstra is welcome to do FTTN without the govt contribution any time it likes, fuckwit.

> It really is a sad spectacle to witness.

Your lying isnt even that. Just pathetic.