There are many theories circulating about why Senator Conroy, on behalf of the Rudd Government, has felt compelled to pursue a policy so offensive to the Australia public that many of us now mutter his name in our nightmares.

Some of the theories are straightforward. They assume that Conroy is passionate about stamping out child porn, so passionate he doesn’t care that (a) the ‘filter’ he wants to block it won’t work (b) it may well be counter-productive (c) it will alienate millions (d) it has alarming potential consequences for civil liberties and (e) it is pure electoral poison.

These theories are possible, of course, but they do seem a little far fetched. No-one in Government is really as stupid as that, are they?

Some of the theories are peculiar. Take the ‘factional stitch-up’ theory. It’s inventive, if nothing else. The plot is very complex. But is it remotely plausible?

Along with a few others, I’ve had the temerity to suggest that political censorship – that is, censorship of unpopular views about current affairs and modern history – is the real reason this proposal is being pushed by Conroy and whoever has pushed it onto the Rudd Government. This, of course, is a conspiracy theory. As normal people know, conspiracies never happen, so it can easily been disregarded. In any case, we have the assurance of public intellectual Clive Hamilton that such concerns are merely a ‘red herring’. What more proof do we need?

Anyhow, today the truth came to me from a Labor mole. Here’s the real scoop.

What you read may surprise and shock you…

Last year, at Christmas Party time in Parliament House, someone in the Labor Caucus (whose name I cannot reveal) made Conroy a wager.

The Senator was bragging as usual – he had the best policies, the best staff, the best faction, the best portfolio… on and on and on. So my informant made Conroy a bet. He bet that if Senator Conroy set up a blog, no-one would bother to visit.

The Minister took the bet – and from that moment onwards, got to work on a remarkable and audacious scheme.

He promoted an unworkable and highly offensive policy, enraging millions by pushing for live trials of this dreadful idea, then explained that the trials won’t actually involve any real people!

Now, having got our full attention by carefully baiting the trap, Conroy has set up a blog. (He even shares it with Lidsay Tanner to show off.)

Conroy has won the bet of course. He won it easily.

In its first two days alone, his new blog may have received more visits than the Telstra, Microsoft, Apple and RealFilthyDirtyPorn.com websites combined. It’s an outrageous success! A blogosphere phenomenon!

Hundreds and hundreds of the most intelligent, techologically-aware and progressive Australians have provided him with their email addresses and poured out their souls in detailed, carefully-argued comments.

Quite soon, I predict Conroy will trade his enemies for friends. That’s a brilliant political tactic, as almost the entire nation is currently his enemy while his friends are few indeed.

His announcement will cheer his opponents while it confounds the tiny rump of remaining supporters. He will explain that the reason no real people will participate in the forthcoming Internet ‘filter’ trials is because the trials aren’t real either! What’s more – the entire ‘Clean Feed’ policy isn’t real! As perceptive critics have been saying all along, the entire policy is a joke!

Afrer siezing back the initiative, Conroy will probably move fast to mobilize his newly-acquired email list. (It’s been  estimated his contact list will exceed Barak Obama’s record-breaking list by January 1st.)

Using the latest whizzy comunications techniques, he will utilize this support base to drive the next phase of Australia’s digital revolution.

Brilliant new policies, gleaned from the brightest and the best contributors to his blog, will swiftly be put into operation.

The truth about Stephen Conroy is not that he’s very, very silly. That’s the stage act.

I suspect Conroy is in reality the most brilliant political mind in Australia today – the obvious choice for Prime Minister should Chairman Rudd, heaven forbid, ever get himself run over by a Yarralumla bus.

Historical archaeologist Dr Jonathan Foyle has come up with a remarkable new theory about the mysterious sphinx, which lies close to the Great Pyramid of Giza, looking somewhat the worse for wear.

Eygptologists have generally assumed the sphinx is roughly the same age as the adjacent pyramids.

But several geologists recently disputed that and claim it may be significantly older. One suggests it was built a couple of thouand years before the pyramids.

Foyle argues the sphinx initially bore a quite different head – and says it was later remodelled to sport a pharoah’s visage on a beast’s torso. This helps explain the mismatch between the sphinx’s giant paws and its disproportionately small human head.

The British Daily Mail has the most captivating account of this story.

It provides readers with a digital image, reproduced here. This is, of course, just an artist’s guess…

If accurate, it means the original statue was significantly taller than the sphinx today.

It is rather awesome to imagine a giant stone feline sitting in the Giza landscape – at a time before even the pyramids were a twinkle in an ancient megalomaniac’s eye.

The Great Lion would surely have been the largest sculpture in the world –  a stupendous celebration of an era when these majestic animals roamed a landscape yet to be desertified.

Update: See also A Dog’s Life in the Desert