CommieAustralia

Oil Prices are being controlled by more entities than you would think.

2009-12-15T09:41:00.000-08:00

Not only does Russia have some interest but they (being Communist) were the nation that backed the 1973 oil embargo. So the levels and depth of energy manipulation worldwide is rather daunting.

Just doing some research into oil prices. OPEC controls the prices but also the American Government by not allowing development of massive reserves at Prudhoe oilfield in Alaska. Peak Oil is blown out of the water but also the conspiracy of socialization is realized because certain people want to control us, just like the ones working at Copenhagen (a very similar or the same form of socialization). The Greens are the biggest backers of 'protecting' the Alaskan oil fields from being pumped thus keeping the oil price high and thus allowing green technology (vested interests!) to come on the scene. We ARE being controlled and while I would hope to end it I think we might be too far gone. People I know want the Government to regulate oil more. Already the oil industry suffers from massive regulation in the states and Venezuela has already been Nationalized (after enough regulation which causes the companies to go bankrupt they must be nationalized). Regulation is a social dogma which creates masters and servants where tyrannical regimes are created just like in Venezuela.

Read The Energy Non Crisis to get started. There are probably many layers which most of us will not understand as to who and why and how etc the oil in Alaska was plugged and kept classified.

Copenhagen will be the most significant day in history of politics: World Government

2009-11-04T20:32:00.000-08:00

Thats Right! a Communist World Government is about to rise.

From The Australian:

Beware the UN's Copenhagen plot

Janet Albrechtsen | October 28, 2009

Article from: The Australian

SHAME on us all: on us in the media and on our politicians. Despite thousands of news reports, interviews, analyses, critiques and commentaries from journalists, what has the inquiring, intellectually sceptical media told us about the potential details of a Copenhagen treaty? And despite countless speeches, addresses, interviews, doorstops, moralising sermons from government ministers, pleas from Canberra for an outcome at Copenhagen, opposition criticism of government policy, what have our elected representatives told us about the potential details of a Copenhagen treaty?

With just over 40 days until more than 15,000 officials, advisers, diplomats, activists and journalists from more than 190 countries attend the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, we know nothing. Nothing about a climate change treaty that the Rudd government is keen to sign and one that will bind this country for years to come.

Of course, there is no final treaty as yet. That is what they are hoping to finalise in Copenhagen. But there are 181 pages that make up the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change dated September 15, 2009: a rough draft of what could be signed in Copenhagen. And yet, not one member of the media or political class has bothered to inform us about its contents as an important clue to what may happen in Copenhagen. The shame of that state of affairs started to trickle in last week.

PM Kevin Rudd about to dispose of Australian democracy

2009-11-04T20:25:00.000-08:00

It took Mugabe a bit longer with his education revolution, but Kevin Rudd has had assistance with 'Climate Change'. To save Mother Earth, so we are basically trading the democracy our heroic soldiers have fought and died for away to a world Government. This is going to happen. The world's population is going to be massively reduced. Why?
From Catch the Fire Ministries:

‘Prime Minister Kevin Rudd about to betray Australia’ / by Pastor Daniel

Published by Office 2 November 5th, 2009 in A Call To Action, Australia, Bible, Christian Church Issues, Christian Persecution, Courage, Elections, Freedom of Religion, Multiculturalism, Politics, Rise Up Australia, World News

Dear friends and family in Christ,

Is Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and the Labor government, who have betrayed the Christian voters after winning the last federal election, now about to betray the nation of Australia once again? In his recent 2GB Radio interview with Lord Mockton, Alan Jones from Sydney stated in his closing comments, “Is the Prime Minister about to betray us all?”

In December at the Global Warming Summit in Copenhagen, Denmark, PM Kevin Rudd will relinquish Australia’s democratic rights to make decisions as a sovereign nation, by signing a treaty to a ONE WORLD GOVERMENT led by the United Nations.

Janet Albrechtsen’s article on climate change in the 28 October edition of the Australian refers to the United Nation’s ‘Copenhagen Plot’. The article deals with a draft of the climate change treaty, which she says is ‘aimed at creating a world government that would tax rich countries and give to poor ones’. As members know, the United Nations Climate Change Conference will take place at the Bella Centre in Copenhagen, Denmark from 7 to 18 December 2009. The conference includes the fifteenth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

We at Catch the Fire Ministries fought a 5 year battle for freedom of Speech and freedom of Religion in the state of Victoria due to a bad piece of legislation which became law in 2002 under the Labor administration. Thank God we won this battle which helped us regain our freedom of speech. Is our entire nation of Australia about to lose it forever?

As reported in the Australian, ‘the question now is why the Federal Government failed to provide some of the information that is the basis for the treaty to indicate the direction the treaty is going. When 15,000 officials, advisers, diplomats, activists and journalists arrive from 190 countries they will be force-fed the treaty document to sign. We have to know what is in it. If Australia signs it—and I imagine Mr Rudd will enthusiastically commit Australia to it—what effect will it have on Australia? Lord Christopher Monckton, a former adviser to the Thatcher Government, made a statement at Saint Paul Minnesota on 14 October about his interpretation of the document. He has also been interviewed on Alan Jones’ program on 2GB. Lord Monckton claims that the aim of the Copenhagen draft treaty is to set up a trans-national government on a scale the world has never seen. It talks about a new trans-national treaty and refers to a new body to be set up under treaty as a government.’

Lord Monckton in his speech in the US in Oct quoted, “We are at the 11th hour, 59th minute and 59th second to save our nations from a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. Your president is about to sign this treaty so are many other leaders. But you can stop it”.

Visit the following link to watch a 4 minute interview from Lord Monckton of the British House of Lords regarding the upcoming Global Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen in December where nations will cede away sovereignty to a global government body.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMe5dOgbu40

Visit the following link to listen to Lord Monckton’s 15 minute radio interview with Allan Jones in Sydney, Australia regarding the ETS, Copenhagen Treaty, and a One World Government.

http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=4998

The left-wing secularists and most media attack us all the time for standing up for absolute moral values. Will they now cover up and sell their own birthright in order to protect a left-wing secular government. I hope we will wake up to the fact that our children and grandchildren will pay the price if we sign up to this ONE WORLD AGENDA. In particular what worries me is the key players behind it, the Rockerfeller family, Henry Kissinger, Mikhail Gorbachev, Prince Hassan bin Talal of Jordan and others, who are main representatives of the club of Rome. Communists, Muslims, and others are working together for a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. We all know that they despise Democracy.

Australia we need to stop Rudd from signing this treaty. To email the PM with your voice of protest click on the following link and following the instructions for emailing the PM:

http://pm.gov.au/PM_Connect/Email_your_PM

Alternatively, you may send a fax to the PM’s office at (02) 6273 4100.

One report recently stated in the last 30 years the ice melt down has been the least in the last year. The month of October saw a massive prayer operation across Australia and in particular on Mount Ainslie in Canberra. We thank God for exposing the above as we believe it is a direct result of prayer to save our nation and the world.

While a large part of the Christian church is in denial, much of the secular media is increasingly confirming what we proclaimed (and many other Christian prophetic ministries) several years ago regarding a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT! Is this the beginning of the end before the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ to Jerusalem, Israel as the reigning King of kings and LORD of lords?

We at Catch the Fire Ministries and millions of Bible-believing God-fearing Christians around the world believe it is so! (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21, Revelation 19:11-21, Daniel 7:13-14, 18)

Your Brother in Christ,

Pastor Daniel Nalliah

Communism increases costs

2009-08-07T21:31:00.000-07:00

This is the perfect example of how Communism increases costs on society (taxpayer). Even without the Communist leftist hogwash (social inclusion) it still requires 'work' when if the Government was not 'involved' like it is, then the cost would be lower, taxes would be lower, and then business and jobs would benefit because people have more money to invest! Yippeeee but Kevin Rudd writes essays on Ruddernomics, not economics. He is a narcissistic snob who talks through his nose like a girl and he looked like a real man in his early days. These days he looks like a SNAG (sensitive new age 'guy') but I would prefer we leave out the 'guy' part because he is an insult to manliness and masculinity. Maybe a SNAP (sensitive new age 'person') or a SNNAP (sensitive narcissistic new age person) or SNAWP (sensitive narcissistic new age writer person).
Anyway however it is imperative we see this article.

Jumping through hoops to get work
Caroline Overington | August 08, 2009

GAVIN Lester is the owner of a small building company called X-site and he can't wait to get started on the Rudd government's BER projects, building hundreds of Australian school halls.

Wait is what he'll have to do, however, because as X-site, and thousands of other small building companies are discovering, it won't be easy for the "little guys" -- small bands of tradies, chippies and sparkies -- to get a slice of Kevin Rudd's $14.7 billion Building the Education Revolution pie.

The BER was supposed to create local jobs for local people but, in order to work on a BER project, small builders have to commit to a bewildering set of standards and policies.

These include "social inclusion" policies, which mean they have to hire a certain number of women, disabled people, former prisoners, and indigenous apprentices. They also need to commit to an environmental policy, ensuring that whatever work they do won't damage native grasses, or lead to the extinction of rare birds.

Those who want to work on school sites -- and the BER is a school-based program -- need to visit the local police station, to get a Working with Children Check to prove they have never been convicted of viewing child pornography or similar offences.

Read it all here.

Unions now in control of Australia

2009-08-01T00:14:00.000-07:00

From Andrew Bolt. Julia Gillard was a very strong unionist. The Government of Australia is made up of 75% of unionists while Australia in population terms are only 10% of the population! Representative Government? I think not!

Unions given the government’s ear

Andrew Bolt – Saturday, August 01, 09 (06:35 am)

Warning! Here’s the resolution that Julia Gillard has agreed should be put today to the national Labor conference:

Accordingly, Labor in government will aim to include unions, along with business, community and other appropriate interests in constituted boards, committees and consultative bodies that provide advice to the government.

Unions have never been so weak in numbers. But, thanks to Labor, they haven’t been this strong in years.

UPDATE

Why do the union leaders get to barge ahead in the queue for a hearing?

Number of Australians who are Catholic:

5,001,624

Number of Australians who are trade unionists:

1,786,000

Rudd's Innovation or Australia's?

2009-07-26T03:27:00.000-07:00

Rudd speaks of innovation in this self-worshiping article but does he realize that by cutting the ANSTO budget when he first became Prime Minister that it did not cause innovation? I think Kevin Rudd only speaks of Labor innovation since there is none other......

Pain on the road to recovery

Kevin Rudd

July 25, 2009

When Australia last experienced a global recession worse than this one, Jim Scullin and Joe Lyons were prime ministers of Australia, Don Bradman had just begun his Test cricketing career and Charles Kingsford Smith had just made his first flight across the Pacific. Of Australia's current population of nearly 22 million, only 1 million of our number were alive to experience the traumatic impact of the Great Depression.

In its response to the global recession, Australia has sought to learn some lessons of recessions past. To cushion the impact, the Government took strong, early and decisive action through the Nation Building for Recovery plan to support jobs, small business and apprenticeships today by investing in infrastructure for tomorrow.

So where does he mention business? He doesn't say innovation by business. His 'broadband' revolution will 'change' the way business operates he says.....

Innovation

The Government will invest up to $43billion to construct and operate a national broadband network in partnership with the private sector. The network will give all Australian homes, schools and workplaces the capacity to access the superfast broadband services necessary for productivity improvements across our economy. The network will help transform the Australian economy and facilitate the shift to more knowledge-based industries, as well as radically change the way businesses manage inputs, customers and resources. This digital revolution will arguably be the single greatest multiplier of productivity growth.

Bias in the Mainstream Media

2009-07-26T02:27:00.000-07:00

The silence says “Democrat”

Andrew Bolt – Friday, July 24, 09 (07:30 am)

A long, long report on the ABC’s AM program this morning on the extraordinary corruption scandal in New Jersey that’s led to the arrest of three mayors, as well as developers and even rabbis. The reporter was particularly struck by the arrest of the young Hoboken mayor, and suggested New Jersey could be the “most corrupt” place in the US.

Only one detail was - unaccountably - missing. Which corruption-plagued party were these miscreants from?

The silence spoke volumes, but I turned to Bloomberg to confirm it:

The mayors of Hoboken, Ridgefield and Secaucus, New Jersey, and five rabbis were among 44 people charged by the U.S. with public corruption and money laundering.

Hoboken Mayor Peter Cammarano, 32, Secaucus Mayor Dennis Elwell, 64, and Ridgefield Mayor Anthony Suarez, 42, all Democrats; Jersey City Council President Mariano Vega Jr., 59; State Assemblyman Daniel Van Pelt, 44, a Republican from Ocean Township; and Assemblyman L. Harvey Smith, a Jersey City Democrat, were charged today in an FBI complaint. All except Smith appeared in U.S. court in Newark, New Jersey.

The 'Bill of Rights' being pursued by Rudd

2009-07-26T01:41:00.000-07:00

A very interesting article at Quadrant by John Izzard:

Geoffrey Robertson’s latest publication (The Statute of Liberty) might well be the most important book you could read this year. Robertson is a London-based human rights lawyer, writer, and sometimes war-crimes judge for the United Nations. Since 2008 he has been a member of the UN’s Internal Justice Council. He is a strong supporter of “international law”, particularly as defined by the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and now overseen by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

Before proceeding, it is best to look briefly at the UNHRC. The Council is made up of forty-seven members from forty-seven countries. The UN resolution establishing the UNHRC states that “members elected to the Council shall uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights”. Of the forty-seven member countries perhaps only eight could be considered as complying. What countries such as Saudi Arabia, Madagascar, China, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, Bolivia, Angola and Cuba (to name just a few) are doing on this “human rights” council is anybody’s guess.

The Council’s latest agenda items have included such issues as abolishing “country-specific investigations”—that is, investigations into the human rights violations of the governments of Cuba, Belarus, Burma and North Korea. Readers will recall that the UN was struck almost speechless and motionless when it came to the genocide in Rwanda, Burundi, Angola, the Congo, the Balkans and the present-day mess in Sudan. In most cases UN troops were present when these atrocities occurred.

Read the rest

Punlic Health is Good????

2009-07-26T00:22:00.000-07:00

When a former Soviet bloc country's leader says environmentalism is the new communism, listen up!

2009-07-25T22:37:00.000-07:00

The Czech President is no stranger to Communism when in 1989 the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Eastern Bloc fell apart and the 'neoliberalism' which Rudd (Australian narcissist Prime Minister Rudd that called himself a 'fiscal conservative' but went to launch an attack on 'neoliberalism' about 14 months into his term of Government!) criticizes took over!

Climate concern ripped as 'religion'

Environmentalism, says Czech President Vaclav Klaus, is the new communism, a system of elite command-and-control that kills prosperity and should similarly be condemned to the ash heap of history.

The provocative Mr. Klaus, an economist by training and former prime minister, said in an interview that today's global warming activists are the direct descendants of the old Marxists who trampled on individual freedoms and undermined free markets in pursuit of a greater good.

Kevin Rudd's article here.
Kevin Rudd is a fiscal conservative? Something doesn't add up!

Didn't John Howard say that Kevin Rudd was only a fake fiscal conservative?

Prime Minister John Howard has attacked Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd for describing
himself as a "fiscal conservative".

In his Budget reply speech last night, Mr Rudd talked of the need to maintain a conservative
fiscal policy for Australia's economic stability.

He is also appearing in television commercials where he says he is proud to be "conservative"
on the economy.

Mr Howard has told Southern Cross Radio that Mr Rudd's behaviour does not bear out his
claims of conservatism.

"When you've opposed industrial relations reform, when you've opposed the sale of Telstra,
the proceeds of which help pay off the $96 billion debt, in other words when you've opposed
all the fiscally conservative measures this Government's put up over the last few years, it's a
bit rich to turn around and say 'despite all that just forget my behaviour just read my lips, I'm
a fiscal conservative'," he said.

Then this article from Andrew Bolt in June about the character of Rudd. It is udderly Rudderless.....

Rudd's chameleon act actually involves a much deeper ingratiation with his audience. He changes not just his message, but his tone, his colloquialisms and even his accent.

Good God, he's even known to have changed his faith. In short order, he's switched from a professed "Christian socialist" to "not a socialist" to a "fiscal conservative" to a "social democrat", changing colour - pink-blue-bluer-pink - to suit whatever you think you'd like best, given the change in the economic weather.

In fact, I've never known any prime minister or even opposition leader to speak so differently to different audiences.

What does Gerard Henderson have to say about Rudd's anti-neoliberalism? (Could we say Rudd is a communist 'posing' as a fiscal conservative?)

Where did our “economic conservative” go? by Andrew Bolt Saturday, January 31, 2009

Just before the last election, Kevin Rudd boasted that being an ”economic conservative” was “a badge I wear with pride”.

That was just a year after he’d boasted in The Monthly that he was in fact a ”Christian socialist”.

Now, a year after his election ads, and in the very same Monthly, Rudd has pinned yet another badge to his chest. Forget “economic conservative”:

Not for the first time in history, the international challenge for social democrats is to save capitalism from itself:..(T)he time has come, off the back of the current crisis, to proclaim that the great neo-liberal experiment of the past 30 years has failed, that the emperor has no clothes ...(T)he social-democratic state offers the best guarantee of preserving the productive capacity of properly regulated competitive markets, while ensuring that government is the regulator, that government is the funder or provider of public goods and that government offsets the inevitable inequalities of the market...

Which is the real Rudd? The socialist, the conservative or the “social democrat” rejecting the “great neo-liberal experiment of the past 30 years” and demanding a “a new contract for the future”?

Whichever it is, I think voters have been had.

Then from Quadrant magazine, and about how capitalism caused Communism to collapse!

Reflections of a Neo-Liberal

Steven Kates

It is quite astonishing to come across the economic and political philosophy of a prime minister and find that a self-described economic conservative turns out to be anything but. After years of seeing the phenomenal success of market-based economies in comparison with all other varieties of economic organisation, and having watched the fall of the Berlin Wall not all that long ago, there is a frightening recognition that amongst some people, nothing much at all has been learned. The same ideas that have populated and driven the Left for the past two hundred years just seem to come out of the woodwork at the first sign of an economy in trouble.
Read on.....

The Rudd you voted for is not the one you got

* Peter Costello
* February 4, 2009

The PM has been revealed as a Whitlamite in conservative clothing.

EVERY now and then you see a change in the political spin-cycle that is so audacious, so
contradictory that you have to go back and check the facts — just to make sure you haven't
imagined the whole thing.

That's what happened on the weekend.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd briefed the newspapers that "the great neo-liberal experiment of
the past 30 years has failed" and "social democrats (will have) to save capitalism from itself".
That's what he's saying now.

Go to the record. Twelve months ago, on January 21, 2008, Kevin Rudd laid out the path for
his Government as follows: "Prior to the election, we ran as fiscal conservatives. With the
election behind us, we now intend to govern as fiscal conservatives … Today I announce a
fiscal target that will guide our decision making … a budget surplus of at least 1.5 per cent of
GDP … This will require a determined, disciplined approach to spending."

Read the rest here

The Soviet bloc (or otherwise known as the Eastern bloc) has info here.

Reds and Greens, Is there a difference?

2009-07-25T21:58:00.000-07:00

From Andrew Bolt. On Communists and environmentalists. What is the difference? I think the difference is that environmentalists are communists but call themselves environmentalists.

Different flag, same foe

Andrew Bolt – Sunday, July 26, 09 (12:02 am)

Antonia Senior says yesterday’s Reds would be today’s Greens, and just as hostile to your freedoms:

My desire to live a free, mundane life is a fundamental cog in our messy, glorious, capitalist democracy. It is built on millions of such small entrenched postitions. Red-filtered, my desires are despicable and bourgeois and must be beaten out of me with indoctrination or force. Green-filtered, my small desires are despicable acts of ecological vandalism. My house is a carbon factory. My desire to travel, to own stuff, to eat meat, to procreate, to heat my house, to shower for a really, really long time; all are evil.

The word evil is used advisedly. Both the green and red positions are infused with overpowering religiosity. Dissenters from the consensus are shunned apostates. Professor Ian Pilmer, the Australian geologist and climate change sceptic, could not find a publisher for his book Heaven and Earth, which questions the orthodoxy about global warming. He is the subject of hate mail and demonstrations. It is entirely immaterial whether he is right or wrong. An environment that stifles his right to a voice is worse than one that is overheating.

(Thanks to reader Steve.)

Environmentalism and its Communist links are too strong to deny!

2009-07-25T00:51:00.000-07:00

Be very careful of what you think is climate change from CO2 emissions. It just may be climate change from 'communist emissions' like this:

Communist Ties

(15 July 09) If Al Gore Jr. ever runs for President, he'll have to answer some embarrassing questions about the source of his family's wealth....

“.....One of the minor mysteries of American politics has been the source of wealth for the family of Vice President Albert Gore Jr.," observes Joseph Goulden of Accuracy in Media. "When Gore's father was first elected to the House of Representatives in the late 1930s," Goulden continues, "he was an impecunious Tennessee school teacher who eked out extra dollars by playing fiddle at church weddings. But later, as a United States Senator, he lived in the plush Fairfax Hotel on Embassy Row in Washington, and sent his son, Al Jr., to the pricey St. Albans School, the haunt of kids from Social Register families."..... In a recent issue of the Washington Inquirer, Goulden summarizes the contents of a new book called Dossier, written by investigative reporter Edward Jay Epstein, which "shows that the senior Gore had a silent partner who for several decades insured that his pockets remained comfortably filled. He was Armand Hammer, the multi-millionaire businessman and oil promoter who apparently collected art and politicians with equal zeal." Goulden notes that Al Gore Sr. was "Hammer's designated door-opener in official Washington......” Communist Ties , F R Duplantier “..... The handsome compensation that Gore Sr. received for his services culminated in a half-a-million-dollars-a-year position with Armand Hammer's oil company, Occidental Petroleum. Al Gore Jr. picked up where his father left off and "put the family's Senate seat at Hammer's service." .... Hammer's powerful influence on Al Gore Sr. and Jr. would have been bad enough had he been nothing more than an unscrupulous businessman. Like his father Julius, however, he was a lifelong Communist and a friend of the Soviet Union. "Some scattered hints that Hammer's ties with the USSR went beyond business friendship have surfaced over the years," says Goulden. Documents discovered in Soviet archives, however, leave no doubt that Hammer was "a man who bribed and cheated his way to great wealth -- and who started with Soviet gold." Edward Jay Epstein's new book, Dossier, makes a compelling case that both Al Gore Sr. and Al Gore Jr. were the willing partners of a very powerful and very wealthy man, Armand Hammer, who was not loyal to the United States of America. A truly independent press would have exposed these connections decades ago, long before Al Gore Sr. and Jr. rose to their prestigious and influential positions.....”

Australia is left wing and it doesn't even know it!

2009-07-25T00:48:00.000-07:00

From Andrew Bolt in Adelaide. They say to him that Victoria is very left wing, but South Asutralia is just as bad!

Actually, Adelaide may now be worse

9 Comments | 0 Trackbacks | Permalink

Andrew Bolt Blog

Andrew Bolt

Saturday, July 25, 2009 at 02:50pm

“I’d like to welcome Andrew Bolt to Adelaide,’’ says the MC at the charity-do I’m to about to address. He gloats that I’m a refugee from the “most Left-wing” state of Australia.

We’ll, I would have probably said that was true. But have I really found refuge in South Australia?

In my hotel room two hours earlier I watched a long TV news report on the tragic death of two gum trees near some school. In a state with millions of the things, several dozen of which no doubt had to be cleared in the saner days in which the school was actually built, this grieving strikes me as rather excessive.

Next comes a progress report on the state’s mad ban on plastic bags - one the Productivity Commission warned was a costly and inconvenient fix to a problem much more trivial than alarmists claim.

So how’s it working out? From the news report, it seems retailers are now losing twice as much stock to shoplifters who use the new planet-saving green bags to smuggle out their goodies. The planet may not be better off from the ban, but the crooks of South Australia sure are.

Add that to Premier Mike Rann’s ban on nuclear waste facilities, opposition to nuclear power, promotion of global warming faith, friendship with Alarmist of the Year Tim Flannery and ban on GM crops - reimposed last year over the advice of a review committee - and I wonder how much longer I can complain that Victoria is the maddest state of all.

Liberals under Turnbull won't oppose new tax

2009-07-24T23:46:00.001-07:00

I include several posts from Andrew Bolt, The Australian

If the Liberal want to they should either join the Labor Party or just rename themselves to the "Business Party' because it seems they are in with Labor on this one. Is there any difference between the two? I keep getting told by people on the street they are all the same. Maybe its true. But some individuals like Dennis Jensen, Luke Simpkins, Barnaby Joyce, Warren Truss are never going to vote for this ETS. Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull are not prepared to fight. They give up at the earliest opportunity, the white flag is already up, unless these two can be quickly removed and a decent leader like Barnaby Joyce be given the Leadership.

What is happening now is that questions are going to be raised like: Are we really prepared to sacrifice employment and business opportunity on something that will not a make a difference in terms of 'saving the planet' but is the biggest surge of communism (blatant yet hidden through environmental propaganda-the only way communism can penetrate the capitalist west) we have ever seen and the most successful even compared to the dark days of the Berlin airlift.

Telstra is already showing us what is happening when we want to 'save the world'. People are going to pay MORE. What? It is going to cost us? Yes, this is what communism is going to do. It is going to tax you because you are a dirty capitalist!

Andrew Bolt states it plainly:

Turnbull plans to promote a disaster
Andrew Bolt – Tuesday, July 21, 09 (06:25 am)

Malcolm Turnbull prefers not to fight but to quickly agree to a colossally expensive plan that
will actually fail to stop a warming that might have stopped eight years ago already:

CLIMATE change is looming as a major challenge for Malcolm Turnbull’s leadership after
he angered some senior colleagues yesterday by publicly floating a new strategy despite
failing to get shadow cabinet support for it…

Asked about the Coalition’s strategy on ABC radio yesterday, Mr Turnbull said that if he
were prime minister, a vote (on Labor’s emissions trading scheme) would be delayed until
after the UN meeting (in Copenhagen) in December, but Kevin Rudd was “forcing the pace”
and the business community was telling the Coalition that “even though the government is
not proceeding as prudently as they should in terms of timing, we should nonetheless seek to
make this law better so that it is more environmentally effective and less economically
damaging”.

“There’s an overwhelming consensus that the law should be changed and we should seek
to advance and promote those changes,” Mr Turnbull said.

How sad that the Liberals now see it as their duty to promote a non-solution to a possible
non-problem which will actually create a much bigger problem for us all. This apparently is
called “smart politics”.

UPDATE

Talking about fanciful plans, what chance that Kevin Rudd’s plan for 20 per cent renewable
power by 2020 will come within cooee of the target?

Electricity generation from renewable sources increased by 10 per cent last year. but still
represented less than 5 per cent of overall generation.

Hmm. So how to persuade people that still deeper sacrifices must be made, any pain endured,
to fight a warming they can’t actually see at the moment? Let’s ask Nobel Prize-winning
economist Thomas Schelling, who has now appointed himself an expert in global warming,
too:

It’s a tough sell. And probably you have to find ways to exaggerate the threat. And you can
in fact find ways to make the threat serious… I sometimes wish that we could have, over the
next five or ten years, a lot of horrid things happening—you know, like tornadoes in the
Midwest and so forth—that would get people very concerned about climate change.

(Via Watts Up With That.)

UPDATE 2

The Liberals ditch a warming sceptic, and one of the few MPs with a science degree and
some true understanding of the topic:

The first sitting federal Liberal MP lost preselection on the weekend. Dennis Jensen, the
member for the Perth seat of Tangney, was defeated by finance executive Glenn Piggott… Mr
Turnbull wrote Mr Jensen a reference for Saturday’s ballot, but Liberal sources in the west
say the two-paragraph appraisal of Mr Jensen’s contribution to public life didn’t exactly go
beyond the call of duty to support the embattled incumbent.

And it looks like the outspoken 'climate change denier' Dennis Jensen is a target of Turnbull because he doesn't agree with ETS.

Much more reading here:
Emission scheme brings more opposition hot air
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25831899-7583,00.html
Libs need to keep cool head to weather heat
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25825700-17301,00.html
Malcolm Turnbull angers MPs as Coalition torn over climate
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25811890-11949,00.html
Senior Liberals at odds on climate change strategy
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25826885-11949,00.html
Turnbull is right, the Coalition can't win this fight
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25825703-5015664,00.html

Communism almost took over the UK

2009-07-15T06:30:00.000-07:00

Why we have to be very careful of unionists, especially those of the CFMEU in Australia.

From The Spectator and The Australian:

THIRTY years after Britain's notorious winter of discontent, it has become clear that the election of Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government not only ended a long period of Labour rule but also defeated the Left's attempt, led from the trade unions, to transfigure British parliamentary democracy into a form of Soviet state.

The leading figure in this story was the general secretary of Britain's largest union, the Transport and General Workers Union, and chairman of the Trades Union Congress's international committee, Jack Jones. In 1977, more than half the respondents to a Gallup poll named him the most powerful man in Britain. Only half as many named the prime minister, James Callaghan.

Jones died only a few weeks ago at the age of 96 and, after a series of anodyne obituaries not speaking ill of the dead, the brief moratorium on his reputation was suitably ended by one of his KGB case officers, Oleg Gordievsky, the best-known surviving KGB defector to the British.

He confirmed this year that Jones was a Soviet agent.

"I was his last case officer, meeting him for the final time in 1984 at Fulham (six years after Jones's retirement), together with his wife, who had been a Comintern agent since the mid-1930s," Gordievsky wrote in April. "I handed out to him a small amount of cash. From 1981, I had had the pleasure of reading volumes of his files, which were kept in the British department of the KGB until 1986, when they were passed on to the archive."

The idea that Jones had a close collaborative relationship with the Soviet side in the Cold War will surprise and perhaps alarm many who recall how influential he was in British politics during his prime.

The Callaghan government came to depend on him to help keep it in office and arrange the incomes policy it thought would save its political bacon.

Following Jones's death, it is now also possible to examine assertions about him by another Eastern bloc secret intelligence service defector to the West, Josef Frolik, who served Czech intelligence under diplomatic cover in London from 1964 to 1966, defecting to the US in 1969. Living safely under a number of aliases, he is believed to have died in the US in 1989.

In 1975 Leo Cooper published his memoir, The Frolik Defection, in London. In a chapter titled Trade Union Brethren, Frolik named leading British trade unionists he knew to be deeply involved with the Soviet-led spy circle in London.

When Cooper worried about the legal consequences of such exposure, Frolik agreed to withhold the names and replace them with dashes. He confided the names to my good friend, Josef Josten, head of the Free Czech Information Service, on condition that they not be revealed during their lifetimes. Jones was the last of them to die, so Frolik's names now can be published.

Jones was a costly contact. Frolik writes that his expenses in connection with Jones began to mount and, when he reported to Prague, he was given the brisk order, "Drop the Jones project. He's a horse of friends!" Horse was the accepted code for agent and this was the signal that Jones was already being handled by KGB lieutenant-colonel Nikolai Berdenikov, who operated under diplomatic cover as Soviet labour attache.

Jones was not alone among trade union leaders in his pro-Soviet sympathies during the period of overweening trade union power in the 1960s and 70s. Others named by Frolik include Ted Hill of the Boilermakers Union, Ernie Roberts and Hugh Scanlon of the Engineering Union, second in power only to Jones's Transport and General Workers Union, and Richard Briginshaw, leader of the largest printing union.

Without testimony from the British security services and thus far unpublished KGB files, we can't claim that more than a couple of these gentlemen were in receipt of cash from Soviet or other Eastern bloc security services for passing information.

However, there is plenty of evidence that they were strongly pro-Soviet in their sympathies, even more so in private.

Most of them were frequently honoured guests in Eastern bloc countries. They kept close and heavy-drinking company, and spoke freely and confidentially with friends whom they must have known were Soviet bloc intelligence agents whose purpose was to acquire information about Britain's political and industrial classes.

As Frolik advised in his book: "Under no circumstances accept money from any representative of an eastern embassy or official organisation! Everything must be accounted for (by our accountants) and they tolerate no gifts or money, unless they serve the purpose of obtaining information. There are no such things as gifts, retainers and consultancies in the Czech service or in that of any other eastern intelligence department - there are only bribes!"

Long believed to be a staunch supporter of Labour's anti-communist establishment from Clement Attlee to Hugh Gaitskell, Hill was in fact a member of the Communist Party, as was his wife.

However, his membership was kept secret, not an unusual arrangement on the pro-Soviet Left.

It was a common practice after Lenin advised it when asked by suffragette Sylvia Pankhurst how she and her friends could work for the revolution in Britain. "Support the Labour Party as the rope supports the hanged man," he told her.

When Frolik sought permission to recruit Hill, he was told: "Hands off! That particular mare is being run from another stable close by." This was Berdenikov's stable.

Frolik was similarly warned off Briginshaw, Roberts and Scanlon, soon to become general secretary of the Engineering Union. It is worth noting that in 1977 Scanlon was prevented from becoming chairman of British Shipbuilding when MI5 advised that he should not see documents marked confidential or above.

As for Briginshaw, "the Russians had taken him over; he was too important for the Czechs". The ability to shut down Britain's newspapers was a vital facility.

The kindest construction that can be put on the conduct of these trade unionists is that they believed the Soviet countries to be true workers' states and world leaders of the working-class movement; and that it was in the best interest of British workers to shift Britain from alignment with the US and the West to a closer relationship with the Soviet Union. There is no shortage of statements byJones, for example, on the record to thiseffect.

During the 70s, the official Western policy of detente towards the Soviet Union provided an ideal backcloth for the conduct of fraternal relations between Trades Union Congress leaders and the totalitarians of the Soviet "workers' states".

During 1975 and 1976, for example, two members of the Soviet Communist Party Politburo were honoured at TUC headquarters. After leading a TUC delegation to East Germany (the German Democratic Republic) in 1976, Jones said the GDR was a "workers' state and the trade unions were not therefore in opposition, the only help (the GDR) had received from outside being from the Soviet Union in preserving the freedom of the country".

At the 1970 Labour Party annual conference, Jones said: "We have got to start to build genuine democracy in Britain in place of the sham democracy which exists ... maybe we shall eventually get round to the idea of shop stewards in the streets.

"For too long the idea has been about that an MP was just a representative and not a delegate. We must determine to build a people's democracy."

Ernest Bevin, the no-nonsense foreign secretary of the Attlee government, had introduced a ban on communists holding office in the Transport and General Workers Union. Jones removed it.

By 1977, there were 13 Communist Party members on the union's national executive, which had the power to initiate and vote on resolutions at Labour Party conferences. Jones built a powerful network of regional and local officials in his own image that could continue operation after his retirement in 1978. This was to prove disastrous to the Callaghan government in 1979.

These are only a few examples of Jones's activities. There are many similar items concerning Scanlon and other pro-Soviet TUC leaders.

All point to a belief in the ultimate establishment of a Soviet workers' state in Britain, replacing parliamentary democracy.

I can still recall the knock-down argument at a Labour Party conference between Jones and Ian Mikardo, representing the union and parliamentary wings of the pro-Soviet Left respectively, as to whether the coming far-left government of their desire would be run by the TUC or the parliamentary Labour Party. They infuriated each other and left the meeting without shaking hands or resolving the argument.

The revolution was not in question; its proponents were arguing over who should control post-revolutionary power.

How, then, could Callaghan come to depend so utterly on Jones and his colleagues to sustain his government? Labour PM Harold Wilson's attempt to reform the unions was defeated by union pressure and by Callaghan's opposition in 1969.

The full story of what happened to the labour movement in the next 10 years, reinforced by Frolik's and Gordievsky's revelations, shows the danger faced by parliamentary democracy after the failure of Wilson's reform effort.

Perhaps Wilson saw it, encouraging his departure in 1976. Despite frequent warnings, Callaghan, who had defeated Wilson's reforms, would not. His blindness may have been induced by his overwhelming loyalty to the trade union movement to which he believed he owed his political career. Or he may have considered the TUC leadership's pro-Sovietism as useful to him in his bipolar detente diplomacy.

Accustomed to the rarefied atmosphere of government and reliant on his concordat with Jones, Callaghan took little or no notice of the replacement of official Labour candidates by hard Left people chosen by the unions. He intervened personally in the ousting of Reg Prentice, the most prominent victim, only to delay Prentice's resignation out of fear of a run on the pound.

By 1979, the candidates' list was dominated by the hard (not Trotskyite) Left in winnable constituencies. Had Labour won that year's general election, the new parliamentary Labour Party would have ditched Callaghan and adopted the extreme policies passed at Labour conferences but kept out of the 1979 manifesto by Callaghan.

In January this year, on the anniversary of the winter of discontent, two of his closest aides admitted to me that the union officials behind the destructive action were politically motivated, which they and Callaghan had not expected. Now they agreed that those of uswho sounded the alarm at the time had been right.

As for the argument between Jones and Mikardo, neither won in the end. The victor in 1979 was Thatcher, the only national political leader who understood all this and was determined to defeat it. That's how close Britain came to losing its parliamentary democracy in 1979.

The Spectator

Douglas Eden is associate fellow of the Institute for the Study of the Americas at the University of London.

Communist Cars are Great Technical Marvels!

2009-07-13T05:38:00.001-07:00

Topgear proves that communism is the only ideaolgy that can make great cars. There is nothing else.......

Ian Plimer Censored by ABC!!!!

2009-07-13T05:14:00.000-07:00

I have discovered by investigation that the ABC Australia has left the transcript from its July 10th program with Ian Plimer on Stateline off its website. Why do I know this? Well the ABC doesn't exactly like to have climate deniers pooping its 'message' of climate change. On the stateline website there is absolutely no mention of Ian Plimer's interview of July 10th 2009.
Communism is already here and it is being ushered in by environmentalism because it is in the interest of the 'public good' that we ensure the pursuit of the global religion of environmentalism will save the world from us, or us from it, or both or whatever you want to think, as long as we become Communist. With Communism it doesn't matter. We will have a dictator, so that is going to save us from huge tidal waves when the sea rises and 'uncontrollable bushfires'. Maybe Al Gore wants to be that dictator.

The reds are here. If you deny climate change you go to the gulag.

Ayers Rock Debate

2009-07-10T20:27:00.000-07:00

Compendium about the debate on Ayers Rock. Australia suffers from Communism.

Garrett’s hearing suddenly improves

Andrew Bolt – Friday, July 10, 09 (11:24 am)

Peter Garrett yesterday couldn’t hear many people opposing the idea of banning climbing on Ayers Rock:

Yesterday Environment Minister Peter Garrett - who would give final approval to the plan - said he was not hearing “many voices” in favour of keeping it open.

Actually, Garrett today hears one voice, which alone should be more than enough:

KEVIN Rudd has called the idea of closing Uluru to climbers “sad”, and said he hopes it doesn’t happen.

Poor Garrett, foiled again. So far he hasn’t banned Gunn’s proposed paper mill, has dropped the promise to prosecute Japan for whaling, has delayed attempts to ban plastic bags, has been stripped of responsibility for global warming policies, has had to defend the delay in the emissions reducation scheme and all in all must be wondering what’s happened to his agenda.

UPDATE

Paul Toohey:

PETER Garrett has been left looking like a shag on a lonely rock after Kevin Rudd undermined him by saying tourists should continue to be allowed to climb Uluru.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_three_bad_reasons_to_close_the_rock/

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25757089-28737,00.html

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,25763552-5006790,00.html

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,25759050-2702,00.html

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,25760613-2702,00.html

Uluru-Ayers Rock and Australia's death of Tourism

2009-07-10T19:55:00.000-07:00

Peter Garrett to ground Uluru climbers

Paul Toohey | July 09, 2009

Article from: The Australian

THE Northern Territory Labor government and the federal opposition are furious with a federal plan to close the climb to the top of Uluru, saying Peter Garrett is slamming the gate on a world famous tourism experience.

A 10-year draft management plan for Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, released yesterday, indicates the days of climbing the rock are coming to an end: "For visitor safety, cultural, and environmental reasons, the director and the board will work towards closure of the climb," it says.

Opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt said the closure was Environment Minister Peter Garrett's idea. "Under the Garrett plan, visitors from around Australia and the world would be stopped from completing the majestic and exhilarating journey," Mr Hunt said.

"I have always suspected that closing the rock to walkers was on Labor's agenda. Today we see the start of their plan to end one of the great tourism experiences in Australia.

"The Prime Minister cannot allow Peter Garrett to go ahead with his plan to close the climb."

Kevin Rudd's office said it was for Mr Garrett to comment. Mr Garrett refused to give his view and his office said he was waiting for public feedback.

About 100,000 people -- a third of the visitors to Uluru-Kata Tjuta -- climb the rock each year, despite signage from traditional owners asking them not to do so. Park managers say they are tired of rescuing people who panic and freeze halfway up the climb.

Read the rest here

Oppose Rudd's ETS (Cap and Trade) Now

2009-07-10T18:31:00.000-07:00

Dr Dennis Jensen, a former research scientist with CSIRO and a member of Australian Parliament kindly informs us the dangers of an Emissions Trading Scheme. So for all these people out there saying the 'scientific consensus' is resolved that climate change is caused by carbon emissions, have a rethink because I seriously doubt and know that it isn't be carbon emissions. 'Global Warming' alarmism has been created solely by the environmental movement, but like many things designed to control us, little is told the population about the motives and the groups behind the 'scare campaigns'.

From Dr Dennis Jensen's website:

OPPOSITION MOUNTS TO EMISSIONS TRADING SCHEME

Thursday, 26 February 2009

Opposition to the Federal Government’s planned emissions trading scheme has mounted with the launch of a petition against the proposal.

Almost 1000 people signed the petition in the hours ahead of the launch in Canberra, which was attended by Federal Member for Tangney Dennis Jensen.

“I think this is going to be a very tangible demonstration of public opposition to the government’s attempt to railroad the country into a costly, ineffective and ultimately pointless scheme,” Dr Jensen said at the Parliament House launch on February 25.

“I am proud to be one of the first to sign the petition and urge all Australians who are concerned at this potentially disastrous plan to join me.”

Dr Jensen, who was joined at the launch by petition organiser Dr Jennifer Marohasy, chair of the Australian Environment Foundation, said he remained sceptical about claims human activity was causing climate change, and that implementation of an emissions trading scheme would be devastating for the Australian economy.

“The science behind this is dubious, to say the least,” he added.

“And any move to put such a system in place unilaterally will drive big industries offshore.

“There must be a halt to this madness which is the Rudd government’s ETS.”

The petition can be signed online at www.listentous.org.au

“I would urge any Australians who are concerned at this move to drag us all into a pointless and possibly devastating program to look at signing the petition,” Dr Jensen.

“And to those who doubt the wisdom of my position, I encourage you to research the issue more thoroughly yourselves. Some of the following links may be helpful.”
http://mclean.ch/climate/IPCC.htm
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/04/cooler_heads_needed_on_warming.html
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/silo/reg/cli_chg/timeseries.cgi?variable=rain®ion=saus&season=0112
http://landshape.org/enm/comparison-of-models-and-observations-in-csiro-decr/
www.co2science.org
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/ross.html

Michelle Malkin has a great deal to say on cap and trade (otherwise known as ETS here in Australia) as do other conservatives in the US.

Ban all forms of Capitalism even if it helps kids enjoy their stay in hospital!

2009-07-09T17:04:00.000-07:00

Another communist measure (those of unions and the left!) want to make sure kids can't get their favourite junk food in hospital! Too bad if they are dying with cancer!!!! More here

So it makes hospital even more unfriendly for children (who are already apprehensive at going to hospital when they shouldn't even be there at their age) and the doctors and nurses don't realize it! C'mon its a kids hospital, isn't there any understanding in the community anymore?

With the banning of our Number 1 tourist attraction it seems the totalitarians are against any form of fun.

Australia junks Capitalism, embraces Communism

2009-07-08T18:47:00.000-07:00

A town in NSW is banning bottled water (so someone will have to start selling EMPTY plastic bottles now!) because they want to save the 'environment'! More here

Then we have Peter Garrett banning us climbing Ayers Rock, named Uluru by Labor and now it seems with this 'forward progression' I think Labor will raise Captain James Cook from the dead and build a large fleet of ships to transport all non Aboriginals back to Britain! This world is getting worse.

Marxist Leader Opposes Free Press

2009-07-07T05:01:00.000-07:00

When the 'Leader' of a country is so controlling as this, you just have to ask yourself, how Marxist is this guy?

AUSTRALIA has two national political leaders. Two weeks ago one of them put all his chips onthe one roulette number and immediately called for the resignation of his opponent. In an odddistortion of timing he then awaited the roll of the ball. And lost spectacularly.

As a result, he was publicly eviscerated. Most commentators immediately wrote off his chances of winning the next election, pilloried him on the basis of his judgment and flawed character and when they were finished with his limp carcass gave him until Christmas before his party cut him down, out of the cold wind of public opinion.

As a result of this commentary the leader lost a record 40 net points in his poll ratings.

The other leader, facing what appeared to be initially serious questions about his integrity, fought his way out of what looked like a tight corner with a disciplined ferocity acknowledged almost universally by commentators as an awesome display of tactical brilliance and temperament. As a result of this commentary his poll ratings soared to unheard-of levels and his chances of winning the next election were declared virtually unassailable.

The rest here

Government Enforced Communism through Welfare

2009-07-04T19:36:00.000-07:00

If Government listened (like John Howard did) then we wouldn't be repeating this welfare hand out again. But you can't tell Communist totalitarians this anyway, because they NEVER listen!

Noel Pearson knows the only way to end the gap of Aboriginal disadvantage with non-Aboriginals is to roll back the welfare system to zero (where Communists lose their power base).

He says "Remedies are the things we suggested"

ON Thursday I read a note about a young Aboriginal woman who has had to take time off work because of heart-related medical problems. I thought about it only fleetingly. There are so many things in life you just wish you could change, but you can't. Thinking too much about such things just increases the sense of despair too much.

Now that I have forced myself to think about it, the story is probably this. This young woman's heart problems are the consequence of her having contracted rheumatic fever sometime in her childhood.

Rheumatic fever is caused by streptococcal throat and skin infections. It is rare in developed countries, except in Australia among Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders. The incidence of rheumatic fever among children in northern regional communities is much higher than in other parts of the world. Rates of rheumatic heart fever have increased in central Australia.

So this woman is a victim of a mundane disease directly related to poverty, overcrowding, poor sanitation and poor hygiene.

The progression from fever to heart disease can be avoided with proper medical attention. But there must be early diagnosis and there is no specific laboratory test to diagnose what can be an elusive killer.

Even where it is diagnosed, the long treatment regimes and changes in the lifestyle and living conditions that can stop the onset of heart disease are hard to achieve. Too many children and young people are diagnosed too late and receive inconsistent and incomplete treatment to avoid heart problems and early death.

So Aboriginal communities are burying these young people in their 20s, or their 30s or their early 40s. It is always confounding when even people who have looked after themselves, don't drink and don't live destructively, are nevertheless condemned by a disease that had decided their fate when they were only children.

They have no choice in their fate. I fear for my young lady's prognosis.

Then I read the communique from the Council of Australian Governments meeting in Darwin this week, which had indigenous disadvantage as the main agenda item.

You know that famous painting by Edvard Munch titled The Scream? Imagine a more rotund, dark figure instead with his hands clutching his head. That's me after reading the rubbish coming out of Darwin.

The Prime Minister and his colleagues across the country have little clue about what to do to achieve their stated aim of "closing the gap" on Aboriginal wellbeing. The COAG partnership agreement gives me no confidence that we are on the right road to turning around the plight of indigenous Australians. Putting the words "closing the gap" in front of every policy initiative does not magically turn useless policies into effective ones. But this is the new mantra of bureaucrats and politicians across the country.

The country's most senior bureaucrats do not understand what needs to be done. Their political masters know even less. The only politician who made any sense this week was West Australian Premier Colin Barnett who went into the meeting declaring that the shutdown of sit-down money and a fully concerted effort to get indigenous people into real jobs was the main agenda. Barnett said: "There is no doubt that Australia's greatest social challenge is the condition of the Australian indigenous people and I think every government in Australia recognises that. I hope every person in Australia recognises that."

The rest of it was just a Groundhog Day of official consternation about the results of the Productivity Commission's latest biannual report on the state of indigenous Australia. The report tells us not much progress has been made from the turn of the millennium and, indeed, there has been deterioration in some areas. Without a doubt the most worrying statistic concerns rates of substantiated child abuse. The rates are reported as having increased from 4 per cent in 2000 to 6 per cent today.

I expect that these increased rates are the result of more effective reporting and investigation of abuse. Governments all across the country have been forced to overhaul their child protection regimes, driven by TheAustralian's relentless decade-long campaign to uncover the hidden abuse and force governments to take action. It is instructive that none of the momentum for the focus on child abuse came from elected political leaders or from governments. The initiative came from the press.

Policy formulation within the highest levels of government is extremely poor. The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet has developed all sorts of facsimiles of Downing Street-style "strategic policy", "joined-up government" capabilities. The Blairite social policy revolutions that largely failed are being regurgitated by a new generation of policy wonks who have no clue about how social change happens in the real world.

The biggest mistake made by the Rudd government is to premise indigenous policy revolution on delegating responsibility and funding to state and territory governments.

We are supposed to be in the era of "evidence-based policy". Well, the present direction of indigenous affairs policy flies in the face of at least two pieces of evidence.

First, the Howard government undertook a trial under the aegis of COAG five years ago. One site was selected in each of the states and territories for concerted policy and program attention. Cape York was the Queensland site. Shepparton was the Victorian site.

It was a failure. The government's own evaluation of the so-called COAG trials painted a clear picture of failure.

So if the COAG process failed for only seven sites across the country, why do the Prime Minister and his colleagues think it will succeed for all indigenous communities?

Second, following his resignation, former Queensland premier Peter Beattie called for all responsibility for indigenous affairs to be transferred from state and territory governments to the commonwealth. He said: "People in indigenous communities end up not being sure whether they go to the local council, the state or the commonwealth on these matters. This is an international disgrace and we need a national response that's not about victimising, it's not racist, but is actually a co-operative partnership with indigenous communities." If Beattie, having been premier for four terms, believed state governments did not have the ability to make progress on indigenous affairs, why is present policy placing even more responsibilities on state and territory governments?

Beattie closed his indigenous affairs department because he knew it was ineffective. Yet now we are seeing its resurgence as the leader of new efforts aimed at "closing the gap". By the time you get down to state and territory government departments, and by the time you get down to indigenous affairs, the depth of talent is so thin. It has always been the problem. Yet we are banking on this shallow pool to make the revolution.

Beattie was a guy whose heart was heavy with concern for indigenous suffering, but he had more important priorities as a state leader. For his policy attention. For his political attention. For his money. I see it time and time again: politicians and senior bureaucrats who have goodwill but for whom indigenous policy comes into view for fleeting periods and soon disappears out of sight, out of mind. So this week the abuse of indigenous children comes fleetingly to the attention of our Prime Minister and the premiers; next week it will recede into bureaucratic oblivion.

We are just going through another Groundhog Day.

Queensland Premier Anna Bligh released a statement pointing out the progress being made with welfare reform and the Family Responsibilities Commission. She cited a 44per cent decrease in the number of Magistrates Court defendants in Aurukun community since the start of the reforms, as well as increases in school attendance. More than 90 per cent of funds under conditional income management is spent on food and essential items. The children in another welfare reform community, Coen, have a school attendance rate that is higher than the Queensland average.

"The Family Responsibilities Commission is part of the groundbreaking Cape York welfare reform trial, which is globally unique in linking parental responsibility with government assistance," Bligh says. "This is about the determined joint efforts of my government and the commonwealth to improve the prospects for all indigenous children and families living in remote communities."

Well, actually, the Family Responsibilities Commission and the welfare reform trial is about the determination of indigenous leaders and organisations in Cape York Peninsula. These are policies and initiatives we designed and that we requested the commonwealth and Queensland governments to support.

These reforms did not come from Bligh or her government, or from the previous and incumbent federal governments.

As long as governments don't recognise what lies at the heart of the Cape York reforms we will continue to grind gears. At the heart of the Cape York reforms is not what governments say they are going to do or say they are committed to. It is indigenous people taking responsibility for their own future - and asking government to partner them in their own determination to achieve a better life for their children - that lies at the heart of the Cape York reforms that are starting to show promise.

Communism in Australia and 'allegations' that they are raising money for terrorist groups

2009-07-04T17:15:00.000-07:00

Just how Communist are these two, Kevin Reynolds and Joe McDonald?

THE Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union was involved in an alleged fundraising tour by a woman who has since been imprisoned in Colombia for organising financial support to a "narco-terrorist" organisation.

Trade unionist and filmmaker Liliany Patricia Obando was jailed last year in Colombia over her alleged international fundraising campaigns to help the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, a Marxist group known as FARC.

While visiting Melbourne and Perth, Obando posed for photographs with controversial CFMEU heavyweights such as Joe McDonald and Kevin Reynolds. Another organiser, Vinne Molina, who is the president of the Communist Party of Australia, recently travelled to Colombia and visited Obando in prison in Bogota.

Then there is this where the man's wife used state Government money to fund a trip to Cuba (which is Communist, how interesting!). If Cuba is such a great place then why couldn't they pay for the lady's journey instead of 'capitalist' taxpayers?

MP Shelley Archer went on a $5000 taxpayer-funded junket to communist Cuba just weeks before her retirement on Thursday.

Ms Archer cleaned out her imprest bank account several weeks ago to join her husband, union boss Kevin Reynolds, in Cuba for the annual International Workers Day march presided over by President Raul Castro.

Australia and US are now Marxist States

2009-07-04T15:49:00.000-07:00

With Prime Minister Kevin Rudd exercising control over Australia's media, Obama is taking his lead. And even the spin of Rudd is bing used in Iran right now. The Iranians are blaming Britain for the protests of the last few weeks at the rigged election, thus taking the spotlight away from their totalitarian 'tendencies'. Maybe Kevin Rudd is a very well qualified Dictator.

From Frontpagemag:

Obama Dismantles Free Press

2009 July 2

One of the lessons history teaches us is that the further a country moves to the left, the more restrictive its press becomes. In a true Marxist state, the press is an extension of the government and acts as the party’s official mouthpiece. Competition, freedom to report accurately, and dissent are not allowed. Punishments for transgressions are swift and severe. The most egregious example of this was the former Soviet Union.

Today, all true socialist and communist countries lack a free press. North Korea, led by the the demented Kim Jung Il; Cuba, led by the Marxist Castro brothers, Venezuela, led by the the megalomaniac Hugo Chavez; and Communist China are the most familiar examples of the above axiom. Some of the countries mentioned lost their freedom of press almost immediately after a revolution — China and Cuba, for example. Others lost it by degrees. Chavez dismantled Venezuela’s free press a little at a time, all the while consolidating his own power. As he became stronger, the press became weaker, until ultimately, it merely became a transcription service for his speeches.

As our country lurches further to the left, we are starting to see the familiar pattern emerge. The administration of Barack Obama has chosen the Venezuelen model. Slowly and methodically, the government’s fingers are wrapping around the neck of the free press.

The first assault was in the form of the “Fairness Doctrine,” an effort to purge conservatives from the airwaves.

Next came the phony “Town Hall Meetings” with the public, where cherry-picked Obama supporters were allowed to toss pre-screened softball questions designed not to embarass the president.

Now, the same concept of pre-screening both the questions and the questioners has been applied to “White House Press Corps Meetings,” the latest of which was such a fiasco that it prompted an angry exchange [video here] between liberal correspondent Helen Thomas and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs!

Said Thomas: “Nixon didn’t try to do that. They [the Nixon administration] couldn’t control [the media]. They didn’t try…. What the hell do they think we are, puppets?”

The answer, Ms. Thomas, is “Yes.”

And then this about Rudd where it seems his control of the media is almost as strong as the
Religious (fanatical) Mullahs in Iran.

But Rudd is furious. Newspapers questioned his word over the fake email and he wants redress.

If Kevin Rudd is so obsessed with control (like other totalitarian monsters) how can he run the country. Either you control it, or run it.

Green Money=Less Jobs

2009-07-02T14:06:00.000-07:00

So what is really Al Gore's motives for 'An Inconvenient Truth'? I haven't watched that movie yet and will not watch it. I find that facts are not explored in it.

From The Australian:

Gore is chairman of the Alliance for Climate Protection, an outfit that seeks to "persuade people of the importance, urgency and feasibility" of going green. It recently launched a $US300 million ad campaign to coax American people and politicians to embrace the carbon-lite lifestyle.

But Gore is also chairman of a greeninvestment firm called Generation Investment Management, which is a member of the Copenhagen Climate Council, an international collaboration of businesses and science bodies, and which invests in firms that produce renewable energy and low-carbon technology. So Gore uses one of his multimillion-dollar organisations, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to put pressure on government to promote the low-carbon lifestyle that will furnish one of his other multimillion-dollar organisations, General Investment Management, with booming business.

Kevin Rudd's Bill of Rights a Failure

2009-07-02T13:13:00.000-07:00

Bob Carr is against this Socialist/Communist subversive move to undermine the Government of Australia and its traditions and constitution.

Human rights charter is doomed: Carr

BOB Carr has predicted that the Rudd Government's flirtation with a charter of rights for Australia is doomed to failure despite support from Labor luminaries.

The former NSW Labor premier, who has previously warned that a bill of rights would lead to litigation over ``naked strollers'' and ``vegetarian menus'', has urged Kevin Rudd to dump the idea.
The Prime Minister has selected a bill of rights sceptic - priest Frank Brennan - to lead a panel shaping new laws to protect human rights.

Also announced on the panel today are former television news presenter Mary Kostakidis, barrister Tammy Williams and former federal police commissioner Mick Palmer.

One of the architects of the British model yesterday claimed it had become a "villains' charter".

"(But) I just don't think it will take off, politically,'' Mr Carr told The Australian Online today.

"Either a bill of rights or a charter, both proposals represent a shift in power from elected parliaments to unelected judges.

And this:

Rights charter like a dead parrot

Bob Carr
June 5, 2009

Illustration: John Shakespeare.

More judicial review, or judge-made law, is the last thing Australia needs. So nobody should be distressed that the push for an Australian charter of rights is exhausted. "The parrot is dead … It is an ex-parrot," as Monty Python would say.

A charter, according to its supporters, is a list of rights and allows the High Court to make findings of "incompatibility" between these and Commonwealth legislation.

But the constitutional difficulty of designing a charter emerged when two former High Court judges, Sir Gerard Brennan and Michael McHugh, said that requiring the High Court to play an advisory role to Parliament is outside the court's power. The advocates of a charter are self-proclaimed experts on the constitution; this was close to a death blow to something they had worked on for years.

"Moreover, the Australian people are unlikely to endorse any such proposal. Last time it was put to the people in a referendum in 1988 it was soundly defeated.

Human Rights Charter (Bill of Rights) for Australia is a move to Communist State

2009-07-02T12:18:00.000-07:00

Whatever guise it is masked under, this is certainly only going to open the floodgates to the marching leftists (Communists) who are more than ready for a Communist state in Australia. It seems Australia is more ready than the US, as the US has a Bill of Rights that was not designed by Communist leftist ideologues.
If we need to have a Bill of Rights it must mirror that of the US and include a right to bear arms (for citizens who are not dangerous). Farmers in Australia have kept guns for years, and it hasn't killed anybody!

Charter would stifle economic freedom

AUSTRALIA is in the final stages of a debate that might lead to the introduction of a federal charter of rights. A consultative committee will report at the end of August to the Attorney-General as to how human rights might be better protected in Australia, and may in fact recommend the implementation of an Australian charter of rights.

Those who support a charter argue that the time has come, as Australia is one of the only common law countries without any kind of charter (or bill) of rights. However, a charter can also have less favourable effects on individual rights and freedoms.

In this time of financial crisis, it is interesting to reflect on the consequences of the US Bill of Rights during the Depression. Following the worldwide crash in financial markets, US president Franklin D.Roosevelt announced the New Deal in 1933 to remake capitalism. Reforms included plans to regulate large parts of the economy and take state ownership of failing companies.

While popular among the public, Roosevelt's program of reform was frustrated by the Bill of Rights as interpreted by the Supreme Court. At the time, a majority of judges held views that might today be described as "radical neoliberalism". A judicially implied right to "freedom of contract" was used by the court to strike down laws regulating everything from a maximum working week to child labour throughout the 1920s and 30s.

Those Americans who viewed judicial activism under a Bill of Rights as a safeguard to economic liberty soon learned that it had an expiry date. As the composition of the bench changed, so did the prevailing judicial philosophy. The US Constitution has since become the basis for the unprecedented control of the national economy in President Barack Obama's "new new deal". This is a common experience internationally, as human rights laws have become a basis to require, rather than restrain, government activity.

As Australia contemplates the implementation of our own bill or charter of rights, it is instructive to consider the experience of countries that have undertaken similar reforms. If recommended by the federal committee, such a charter is expected to take a similar form to that in force in Victoria, the Australian Capital Territory, and Britain, in that it would require any court when interpreting a law to adopt an interpretation that makes that law "compatible" with a list of specified human rights.

In Britain, human rights are routinely used as a basis for making claims on government expenditure. In his new book, The Assault on Liberty, Dominic Raab observes that applicants under the UK Human Rights Act "are now just as likely to press the government for some new category of social support as to seek the limit of its powers".

Even the best intentioned human rights law invites attempts to test government decisions against the rights of affected individuals. Broadly specified rights can be quite easily equated with obligations upon government. For example, consider a government body that makes decisions as to the subsidy of medications. An affected patient might challenge an adverse decision on the basis that it has affected his or her right to life. Such a case has the unhappy consequence that the merits of government policy must be judged by a court against the circumstances of the individual rather than taking account of the most efficient allocation of those resources across other categories of need. The downside is of course that it's bad luck to everyone else waiting for government assistance.

Many Australians have urged for the implementation of a bill of rights like that in force in South Africa, which has gone even further than Britain and specifically included economic and social rights such as shelter or education in its Constitution. Providing for these needs is, of course, a central obligation of any government, but their inclusion in a bill of rights gives courts the power to indirectly control governmental spending. Courts limited to considering the evidence presented in the individual case are ill-equipped to make such broad policy decisions.

Australia is facing the dual challenges of the growing welfare needs of an ageing population and the biggest global financial crisis since the great depression. Implementing a bill or charter of rights would limit the federal government's flexibility in allocating public resources by placing more expenditure decisions in the hands of the courts.

Ben Jellis is a Melbourne lawyer. This is from an article published by the Centre for Independent Studies.

Child Abuse under Welfare

2009-07-02T11:20:00.001-07:00

They didn't know how bad the problems were, but they are handing out billions of dollars because of 'Aboriginal disadvantage'. How can they be disadvantaged when they get welfare and the ordinary working Australian does not? One irony is that those not on welfare are not 'disadvantaged', even though they have to work for their money. The situation of the working man and woman in Australia is very good compared to those (including Aboriginals) on welfare.
Shouldn't the Government stop welfare and reform to food vouchers? Thus any alcohol or smokes desired can be purchased through getting a job?
Why is it so many Aboriginals are in jail? Can't we treat them equally and let them work? Um......to do this we need to end welfare, because the pollies just don't get it (except some like Mal Brough, Luke Simpkins, Dennis Jensen, John Howard, Colin Barnett etc).
The best idea I have got is to make 50 tax free zones in Northern Australia of about 100sqkm each where enterprise can move in and with the tax incentives train and teach the Aboriginals to work in business. Remove welfare, bring in food vouchers, and stop public housing and hospital. When the income is above $60 per week, the food vouchers will decrease to $30 per week. And when their income rises to$120 per week, cease the food vouchers.

Stop handing all the money out. It will be better spent on tax free zones in the North to open up major centres, reduce housing costs and prices and also reduce the cost of living. Those that export to overseas from a tax free zone should be given more incentives so Australia can become competitive once again.

Less bureaucracy and more business will actually improve people's lives in this country. Less focus on the so called 'human rights act' and more focus on enterprise and vision that will develop the country's industrial base once again.

Sorry state of indigenous abuse, says Productivity Commission report

ABORIGINAL disadvantage is worse than previously thought, with indigenous children almost seven times more likely to be abused or neglected despite a massive government effort to close the gap with the rest of the population.

COAG meeting

PM, state leaders to tackle health, education problems in Indigenous communities. 07/09 Sky News

Kevin Rudd warned yesterday that indigenous disadvantage was more profound than had been believed as he released a Productivity Commission report that found that although improvements were being made in some areas, the gap between the indigenous population on child abuse and neglect was widening.

The Productivity Commission report, released every two years, found substantiated child abuse cases in the indigenous community more than doubled from 16 per 1000 children in 1999-2000 to 35 per 1000 children in 2007-08.

Raping Law? What the heck is Human Rights????

2009-07-02T05:45:00.000-07:00

Can we ask ourselves why is there a push for a human rights 'charter'? Is it that we don't want to give citizens rights but only minority's?

Oh yes it seems 'no one' wants to have a right to bear arms amendment like the 2nd Amendment of the US. No, citizens should never be allowed to defend themselves and criminals should always be able to rape the female. As long as the rapist remains at large, seems like a good law for raping!

More rights for them, not you

33 Comments | 0 Trackbacks | Permalink

Andrew Bolt Blog

Andrew Bolt

Wednesday, July 01, 2009 at 01:11pm

The Australian Human Rights Commission demands the Rudd Government do more for human rights. In particular:

Recommendation 36: The Australian Government should resource a significantly enhanced nation-wide human rights education program.

Recommendation 37: The Australian Government should enhance the powers, functions and funding of the Australian Human Rights Commission, particularly if a Human Rights Act is adopted. Any new functions should be accompanied by appropriate funding.

Recommendation 38: The Commission’s existing functions and powers should be enhanced as follows: ...

Do the words “gravy train” resonate?

Protestors of the West forget Human Rights

2009-07-02T01:11:00.000-07:00

The real intention of protestors here in the West is not to protest against victimization but to force a communist regime on the people, which they are doing with some power.
Here, Greg Sheridan outlines the hypocrisy of these ferals that only seem to protest about things that really never should be drawing raised eyebrows.

THE missing actor in the tragic and gruesome story of Iran since the stolen election of June 12 has been the Western human rights lobby. Where is it?

What has happened in Iran is one of the pivotal events of our time. Tens of millions of Iranians voted against their demented President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the corrupt, clerical misrule he represents. No one seriously doubts the electoral fraud.

With 40 million paper ballots to count, the Iranian authorities announced the result of the election two hours after polls closed.

Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi and the other opposition candidates were not allowed to scrutinise the counting. The margin of Ahmadinejad's alleged victory - 11 million votes - was patently absurd. The final touch: the alleged margin was almost identical across most parts of the country, despite huge regional and ethnic differences.

The point is this was not meant to be a convincing fraud. It was a brazen, supremely arrogant exercise in brute power. The votes, in effect, were not counted at all. The process showed the absolute contempt in which the regime holds elections. It demonstrated the dictator's most important asset: the will to power.

Since then the Iranian dictatorship has behaved with remarkable savagery. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians took to the streets to protest the stolen election and to vent their frustration at the medieval dictatorship they are forced to endure.

For the first few days the regime let them protest.

Then Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned them to get off the streets. What has followed has been one of the most brutal crackdowns on democratic sentiment in recent years.

The regime acknowledges the deaths of 17 protesters. At least 40 Iranian journalists have been imprisoned. CNN, early in the business, reported 150 protesters had died in a single day.

The hated Basij militia, a unit of the Revolutionary Guard, has savagely beaten hundreds of demonstrators. It has also stabbed, shot and clubbed to death many people.

The image of the beautiful young Neda Agha Soltan as she lay dying after being shot at a demonstration, almost certainly by Basij militiamen, for a moment transfixed the world. Mousavi has described the rulers of Iran as "proponents of a petrified, Taliban-style Islam".

Despite the regime's successful if crude reassertion of basic power, this is a vulnerable time for Ahmadinejad and his cohorts. It is not only that there is popular revolt and division within the clerics. There is also now a flowering international Shia debate about whether clerics should play a direct role in politics. Inside Iran, power has flowed away from Khamenei and the other clerics and towards Ahmadinejad and the Revolutionary Guard.

But an ideologically based dictatorship is often at its weakest when it has to resort to crude military rule.

This was the case when Poland declared martial law in 1981. It was then in plain sight for the world to behold: a military dictatorship, pure and simple. The flimsy rags of ideological purpose that global communism had conferred on the Polish government were stripped away. The Polish regime then, like the Iranian regime today, was to be seen in George Orwell's terms as simply a boot treading on a human face, over and over again.

This is the undeniable story of Iran. So where are the Western demonstrators?

Apart from ethnic Iranians, there has hardly been a single demonstration in any Western capital in support of the Iranian democrats.

Yet isn't there a class, in Australia and in the rest of the West, of people deeply concerned about human rights? The class that Robert Manne and Judith Brett call the moral middle class? Weren't there thousands of demonstrators against the World Trade Organisation and G20 meetings in Australia because the global economy allegedly repressed the rights of poor people?

What about the groups explicitly dedicated to human rights? In the twilight struggle against the communist empire, human rights groups played an honourable and at times indispensable role in gaining freedom for the likes of Soviet dissidents Andrei Sakharov, Natan Sharansky and countless others.

It was a tremendous consolation to these dissidents when a US president, or indeed a humble human rights group, campaigned on their behalf.

Recently I interviewed David Menashri, one of the great authorities in the world on Iran. He was born in Iran and studied for his PhD there. Now he is a professor at Tel Aviv University. He is in no sense a military hawk on Iran. He asked this simple question: "Can't the West exercise its moral muscles? What a gesture it would be if all the European nations, and Australia, temporarily withdrew their ambassadors from Iran in protest at what is happening there."

The truth is the language and practice of human rights advocacy in the West has become completely corrupted by the postmodern ideologies of the contemporary Left. In this parallel universe all crimes are a subset of imperialism and the only true villains are the US, Israel and, for us, Australia.

When Frank Brennan commented that the Victorian human rights charter had been ineffective in its own terms and had little to do with human rights, but had become "a device for the delivery of a soft Left sectarian agenda", he was, perhaps somewhat unconsciously, making a broader point about the debasement and collapse of authentic human rights advocacy in the West.

Where are you on Iran, Louise Adler, happy to accuse Israel of war crimes without the slightest evidence, but apparently unstirred by the murder of hundreds of innocent civilians in Iran?

What have you got to say, Antony Loewenstein, stupidly and inaccurately labelling Israel an apartheid state and approvingly quoted in the Iranian official media, but listless on your blog in the face of the Iranian repression?

What about The Age's cartoonist Michael Leunig, who once drew a cartoon so morally obtuse, stupid and offensive that it was happily accepted by an Iranian newspaper in a competition for cartoons that would offend Jews (the cartoon was submitted without Leunig's knowledge), but who is apparently unmoved to draw an image in sympathy with young Iranian democrats?

The conclusion must be that many Western human rights organisations, and many of the most self-congratulatory and morally vain posturers, are not interested in human rights at all. They are interested in advancing a soft Left sectarian agenda. Except, of course, that the word soft may be wholly misplaced.

Update:

Here it seems there seems to be outrage over a Government trying to prevent sexual abuse among children. But the left don't want to prevent anything, especially war. The first groups to ever denounce war when there seems to be a 'game on', they march around and complain about wars. Geez, if they wanted to stop a war why didn't they just stop and ask Hitler or Stalin (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong Il)to stop for world peace and human rights? I'm sure those 2 men, having many fans in socialist/communist movements worldwide (Jew-haters), would have listened.

Communism is a religion unto itself

2009-06-30T18:12:00.000-07:00

From The Australian:

The Left is killing religion

Giles Auty | July 01, 2009

Article from: The Australian

BY an odd coincidence, Hal G.P. Colebatch's excellent article "UK bill an attack on faith" appeared in yesterday's The Australian about five days after I had the pleasure of delivering the annual St Edmund Campion lecture at Sydney's Campion College.

Colebatch's moving piece explained why it may soon become illegal to hang a cross in any Catholic school in Britain and asks advisedly what sort of intolerant world postmodernist totalitarianism is creating.

Anyone familiar with Elizabethan history in Britain may recall that Campion was tortured and executed in 1581 for trying to keep alive the old faith - Catholicism - in Britain after Henry VIII's historic rift with Rome in 1533.

The substance of my talk, which was called "Are we truly evolving? Reflections on the life of an Elizabethan saint", touched on the creeping influence of postmodernist totalitarianism throughout the Western world rather than only in Britain.

Anyone who has read Evelyn Waugh's biography of Campion will understand something of the extraordinary heroism through which he and scores of other martyred priests - plus thousands of devout laypeople - struggled to keep what they regarded as the true, historic Christian faith alive in Britain.

Now, instead of finding itself persecuted by Elizabethan spies, informers and hangmen, Catholicism finds itself under severe assault from the self-righteous, politically correct social engineers of Britain's political Left.

Thankfully the same thing has yet to happen in Australia, but with the increasing politicisation of public education here by an ideologically driven Marxist Left, something very similar may not be far away.

Already Christianity in all its forms is treated with increasing contempt in societies that basically believe they have evolved and so distanced themselves from what they imagine are the old-world superstitions - and attendant moral constraints - of their past.

Postmodernist ideology is an exclusively man-made - and, of course, woman-made - ideology that finds no basis whatsoever in any traditional human system of belief. Until the advent of postmodernism, communism was Christianity's most persistent and relentless recent foe.

Now postmodernism in all its largely Marxist-inspired guises - political correctness, gender theory, feminism, post-colonialism, determinism, deconstruction, relativism, structuralism, historical revisionism - has become a stealthier and thus even more sinister adversary that flourishes, generally unremarked, in our midst.

Why has Western society, with all its proud history, generally allowed such an abject internal collapse?

American Roger Kimball, who is one of a number of international cultural commentators with whom I have corresponded through the years, explains the whole matter as well as anyone: "In a democratic society like ours, where free elections are guaranteed, political revolution is almost unthinkable in practical terms. Consequently, utopian efforts to transform society have been channelled into cultural and moral life.

"In America, scattered if much-publicised episodes of violence have wrought far less damage than the moral and intellectual assaults that do not destroy buildings but corrupt sensibilities and blight souls. The success of America's recent cultural revolution can be measured not in toppled governments but in shattered values.

"If we often forget what great changes this revolution brought in its wake, that, too, is a sign of its success: having changed ourselves, we no longer perceive the extent of our transformation." These wise words are taken from Kimball's The Long March.

Postmodernism corrodes society largely through assaults on its soft underbelly, principally through theeffective hegemony it has created in the arts, education and culture generally.

Perhaps its most damaging corrosion has been through the politicisation of public education at the tertiary, secondary and even primary levels.

In Australia, generations of children have effectively been abducted from the influence of their parents, who often have little or no say in what - or how - their children will be taught.

Now, as Colebatch makes clear, the postmodernist Left is intent on wiping out the remaining pockets of resistance that exist in private and religious schools.

I hope I am not alone in regarding this as an insult to the basic principles of democratic life.

Giles Auty is a former art critic for The Spectator and The Australian.

Communists are not only violent, but against Western Civilization

2009-06-30T18:09:00.000-07:00

From The Australian:

THE Green Left Weekly is probably Australia's best-known radical-left newspaper. While nominally independent, it is affiliated with the Socialist Alliance party and its youth movement Resistance! Like most radical socialist groups, it invariably aligns with the anti-Israel movement.

For some time it has been apparent that an unholy alliance is growing between extreme left-wing groups and Arab and Islamic extremists, despite completely different visions for society. This alliance has been on show in much of the anti-war movement in Britain and other places.

For instance, Britain's "Respect" party is basically an alliance of radical Muslims and old hard-line Marxists such as former Labour MP George Galloway. Galloway was pro-Saddam Hussein before the 2003 Iraq war. Today, he works for the Iranian government mouthpiece television station, Press TV.

But what isn't widely known is that the Green Left Weekly is openly promoting extremism among Arabic speakers in Australia through a monthly Arabic-language insert called the Flame. This support is not limited to Green Left Weekly's own far-left agenda. It supports terrorist groups and promotes violence as the solution to the existence of the "Zionist state."

You would think GLW's declared pursuit of the advancement of "anti-racist, feminist, student, trade union, environment, gay and lesbian, civil liberties" would rule out the promotion of radical Islamist groups such as Hamas, which are deeply hostile to all the above.

Yet alongside content promoting the PFLP, a tiny left-wing and currently marginal Palestinian terror group, Hamas is also promoted by GLW as a positive model of "resistance"; that is to say, terrorism. Those killed as a result of the violence Hamas sparks are "martyrs", terminology Flame shares with Hamas. Further, the terminology of the Flame is openly hostile to the more moderate governments of the region and repeatedly demands all-out war on the "Zionist entity".

The January edition of the Flame was devoted to the conflict in Gaza. The cover page is a compilation of statements from various communist parties in the Arab world. Predictably, the communiques incited its Arabic readers with imagery of "slaughter," and a "waterfall of Palestinian blood washing the streets". More surprisingly, there are implicit calls for other Arab states to expand the Gaza war.

In "Hunt of a people", the paper refers to the 1982 Lebanon war, indignant "Arab capitals stood watching, exactly as is happening now."

The paper targets American-allied Arab governments for their moderation in the war, which it terms "collusion". The front-page article from the Iraqi Communist Party rebukes the Saudi government, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority, which it disparagingly dubs the "Oslo Authority". The Mubarak government is condemned for being "a loyal accomplice to Israel and the Oslo Authority in their attempt to shut Hamas out". It also accuses the Saudi monarchy of having covert dealings with "the Zionists" stretching back decades. Any non-violent interaction with Israel, whether actual or imagined, is scorned.

In the March edition the Flame was aghast at Egypt for co-operating with the US against Hamas. Its expose was titled "Egypt uses American soldiers to prevent weapons smuggling to the resistance!" In the Arabic, "the resistance" is euphemism for terrorist violence and for Hamas itself.

Another article, "A return to principles is necessary after the Israeli aggression", is more virulent. An illustration shows a Palestinian imprisoned behind barbed wire shaped as a partial Jewish star. The article condemns those calling the Gaza war a victory for the "resistance", given the large proportion of "martyrs" from the Palestinian people in comparison to the "slim" number killed among "soldiers of the Israeli occupation army". The rest of the article is critical of the Palestinian factions for their internecine fight.

It criticises Hamas for abandoning its traditional position as the "resistance" against "the enemy" to fight the PA and calls for a "united Palestinian resistance" which will "return the benefit to the Palestinian people". It is clear that this unity will not negotiate peace with Israel, with the paper stating "this unity in battle must not fall into the trap of dialogue that the decrepit Arab regimes of the region are producing." The Flame defines Israel as "the enemy" and demands violent "resistance" while pouring scorn on negotiations or dialogue, It praises the assassination of a "Zionist minister" as "courageous."

The radical anti-Israel stance of Green Left Weekly is no secret. However, the message it pitches to the Arabic-speaking community of Australia is far more inflammatory. Unbeknown to its English readers, it supports terrorist groups such as Hamas whose goal is to create a state where there would be no place for the gays, lesbians, feminists and trade unionists who read the English-language edition of the paper.

Ilan Grapel is a researcher with the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council.

Andrew Bolt is right, Australia is becoming a Communist state with no freedom of press

2009-06-30T09:56:00.000-07:00

Rudd the ruthless

46 Comments | 0 Trackbacks | Permalink

Andrew Bolt Blog

Andrew Bolt

Monday, June 29, 2009 at 10:09am

Glenn Milne says Kevin Rudd’s decision to send the Federal Police to investigate Malcolm Turnbull over the Beaut Ute is sinister:

Rudd wants to be careful about his penchant for persecution, flushed as he is with the fruits of his total war against the Opposition Leader. He too is capable of overreach…

Last week the focus was on special treatment for the Prime Minister’s friends. The other half of that equation is yet to be fully explored; the punishment meted out to those who dare to publicly criticise Rudd.

Stories are beginning to filter through. For example, a commentator who publicly questioned the government’s economic policy was told that a senior member of the government had made a direct representation to the chairperson of a private company asking that the company no longer use the commentator’s services. A senior minister followed up with the chief executive of the same company to see whether the government’s wishes had been complied with.

Ugly stuff.

No doubt we’ll soon have David Marr update his famous denunciation:

(The Prime Minister) has cowed his critics, muffled the press, intimidated the ABC, gagged scientists, silenced non-government organisations, neutered Canberra’s mandarins, curtailed parliamentary scrutiny, censored the arts, banned books, criminalised protest and prosecuted whistleblowers.

Of course, Marr was then damning a Liberal Prime Minister. Will he dare say the same of a Labor one who deserves the criticism far more?

Britain become Totalitarian state

2009-06-30T08:08:00.000-07:00

Want to be shocked? Are you ready for a Government that tells you what to do, instead of you telling IT what to do?

From The Australian

UK bill an attack on faith

Hal G.P. Colebatch | June 30, 2009

I WROTE here in April that Britain appears to be evolving into the first modern soft totalitarian state, but it seems I didn't know the half of it.

A sinister new equality bill is before a parliamentary committee. So far there has been surprisingly little about it in the British media, although the Catholic Church has called attention to the fact it would give the government unprecedented powers to police not only public but private religious and other activities.

The Thomas More Legal Centre's director Neil Addison recently said that under this bill, "nearly every form ofdiscrimination is banned, even for private associations and churches. Christian churches are to be banned from preferring Christians in their employment practices except in the employment of priests or religious teachers. They are not going to be ableto insist that employees live in accordance with the ideals or principles of the church, and any employment ormembership decision they take can be investigated by an unelected quango, the Equality and Human Rights Commission."

This is only the first stage. The Catholic bishops of England and Wales have warned that religious schools and care homes could be forced to remove crucifixes, holy pictures or other religious symbols or icons from their walls in case they offend atheist or non-Catholic cleaners. Under the terms of the bill, Catholic institutions could be guilty of harassment if they display images offensive to non-Catholics.

Ordinary laws already offer protection from harassment in the normal course of events. The draft bill defines harassment in the widest possible terms as "unwanted conduct ... with the purpose or effect of violating a person's dignity, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading or offensive environment".

The bishops, after taking legal advice, say that because the burden of proof for such a highly subjective definition is reversed in legal proceedings under the terms of the bill, it would put them in an impossible position if people complained about any manifestation of religious belief, even on church property.

Andrew Summersgill, the general secretary of the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales, says: "The practical consequences of this are that a Catholic care home, for example, may have crucifixes and holy pictures on the walls (that) reflect and support the beliefs of the residents. A cleaner may be an atheist or of very different religious beliefs. Nonetheless, if a cleaner found the crucifixes offensive, there would be no defence in law against a charge of harassment."

It also would be illegal under the bill to refuse employment to such non-believers. Catholic schools could likewise be forced to remove crucifixes or holy pictures if atheist or non-Catholic dinner ladies found them offensive. Beyond decorations, symbols and icons, this may open the way for state interference in invisible and perhaps more profound matters of doctrine.

There is no test of reasonableness in the draft bill, such as is contained in the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. "It is tailor-made for people to come up with objections because it puts the emphasis on the person being offended rather than on an objective test of what ought to be considered reasonable," Addison says.

A proponent of the bill, Stephen Whittle of Press for Change, effectively agrees. He told the parliamentary committee examining the bill: "We would argue strongly that we experience discrimination because other people think that we look different. It is what those other people do, not what we do, that creates that discrimination. Therefore, the bill needs to refocus on what it is those other people see and react to."

The bill is largely the creation of the Labour Party's deputy leader and Equality Minister Harriet Harman, one of the party's most committed left-wing social engineering activists, who probably has as much clout in the government as anyone. Although the bill was supposed to ensure protection for religious groups, Harman neglected to mention this when she announced the proposals in the House of Commons last month. Recently she also refused to allow a debate on the rising numbers of religious believers complaining that they are discriminated against in the public sector. There has been a string of cases of people suspended or sacked for expressing their religious convictions, wearing religious symbols such as crucifixes or, in the case of one nurse, offering to pray or a patient.

London priest Tim Finigan says: "For the government to promote this agenda in extreme form at a time when the political system is suffering unparalleled contempt and the far-right groups have their best opportunity for years is stupid beyond belief."

While the potential for government interference with private religious activities is serious enough, the bill may go much further: as it stands it will, for example, also allow the government to control the membership criteria of political parties and movements, as well as private clubs and societies.

Hal G.P. Colebatch's book Blair's Britain was chosen as a book of the year by The Spectator in 1999.

The Beast from Within-Power unto an end in itself

2009-06-28T17:21:00.000-07:00

If you want to learn the tragic truth before it happens in Australia or the USA, WATCH THIS VIDEO!

What happens when you can't balance the budget?

2009-06-28T14:21:00.001-07:00

Typical liberal subversion is what causes bankruptcy of the state! Two great examples currently are Japan and California. Next on the list: USA and Australia, Thanks to the leftie liberals of Obama's and Rudd's ilk!
Stop the tyranny of big government now, otherwise we will PAY FOR IT!

California here

Japan here

The Climate Change Climate Change

2009-06-28T14:12:00.000-07:00

Steve Fielding recently asked the Obama administration to reassure him on the science of man-made global warming. When the administration proved unhelpful, Mr. Fielding decided to vote against climate-change legislation.

If you haven't heard of this politician, it's because he's a member of the Australian Senate. As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is preparing to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme. Why? A growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again doubt the science of human-caused global warming.

Associated Press

Steve Fielding

Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers." The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S.

In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.

The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter.)

Read the rest HERE

Communists and the Greens are the Same

2009-06-28T08:33:00.000-07:00

Just because Communism and the Green movement share the same goals, doesn't mean they are the same? Wrong!
The daughter of communists and now a NSW Greens MP, she is staunchly anti capitalist. Lee Rhiannon, are you a comunist or a green? Both, it seems.

SHE was a "red diaper baby" reared by ardent communists in the 1950s. As a teenager she joined the Junior Eureka Youth League, a commie version of the brownies. To this day, she happily espouses the "redistribution of political and economic power". And to usher in middle age, she adopted the name of a Celtic goddess.

Australia, get ready for Lee Rhiannon.

Last weekend, the NSW upper house Greens MP comfortably won the top spot on the party's Senate ticket for the next federal election. Needing about 14 per cent of the primary vote to be assured of victory next year, Rhiannon has a strong chance of becoming the sole Greens senator from the east coast and the most staunchly anti-capitalist MP in the federal parliament.

Read the rest HERE.

Freedom in jeopardy!

2009-06-27T16:05:00.000-07:00

Free Speech is going, going........

2009-06-27T13:55:00.000-07:00

This is the subversion which I am speaking of. The left keep making inroads into Government to make laws that are making Government more tyrannical everyday.

Liberals equate Christianity with Islam

2009-06-27T13:52:00.000-07:00

If you are being lied to or kept in the Dark, is Something Wrong?

2009-06-26T06:32:00.000-07:00

Michelle Malkin's post:

EPA plays hide and seek; suppressed report revealed
By Michelle Malkin • June 26, 2009 12:30 AM

My syndicated column below slams the EPA for suppressing inconvenient truths about Obama’s politicized global warming agenda. As I blogged early Wednesday afternoon, the Competitive Enterprise Institute released e-mails detailing how eco-bureaucrats stifled a senior researcher who challenged the agency’s reliance on outdated data to support its greenhouse gas “public endangerment” finding.

Breaking late tonight, CEI has released the draft version of the censored study that the EPA doesn’t want you to see. You can read the entire 98-page document here.

Here is the preface, which begins, “We have become increasingly concerned that EPA and many other agencies and countries have paid too little attention to the science of global warming. EPA and others have tended to accept the findings reached by outside groups…as being correct without a careful and critical examination of their conclusions and documentation.” No wonder they tried to shut up senior researcher Alan Carlin (click on image for full-size):

***

EPA’s game of global warming hide-and-seek
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009

The Obama administration doesn’t want to hear inconvenient truths about global warming. And they don’t want you to hear them, either. As Democrats rush on Friday to pass a $4 trillion-dollar, thousand-page “cap and trade” bill that no one has read, environmental bureaucrats are stifling voices that threaten their political agenda.

The free market-based Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington (where I served as a journalism fellow in 1995) obtained a set of internal e-mails exposing Team Obama’s willful and reckless disregard for data that undermine the illusion of “consensus.” In March, Alan Carlin, a senior research analyst at the Environmental Protection Agency, asked agency officials to distribute his analysis on the health effects of greenhouse gases. EPA has proposed a public health “endangerment finding” covering CO2 and five other gases that would trigger costly, extensive new regulations of motor vehicles. The open comment period on the ruling ended this week. But Carlin’s study didn’t fit the blame-human-activity narrative, so it didn’t make the cut.

On March 12, Carlin’s director, Al McGartland, forbade him from having “any direct communication” with anyone outside his office about his study. “There should be no meetings, emails, written statements, phone calls, etc.” On March 16, Carlin urged his superiors to forward his work to EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, which runs the agency’s climate change program. A day later, McGartland dismissed Carlin and showed his true, politicized colors:

“The time for such discussion of fundamental issues has passed for this round. The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision… I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office.”

Contrary comments, in other words, would interfere with the “process” of ramming the EPA’s endangerment finding through. Truth-in-science took a backseat to protecting eco-bureaucrats from “a very negative impact.”

In another follow-up e-mail, McGartland warned Carlin to drop the subject altogether: “With the endangerment finding nearly final, you need to move on to other issues and subjects. I don’t want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research etc, at least until we see what EPA is going to do with Climate.”

But, of course, the e-mails show that EPA had already predetermined what it was going to do – “move forward on endangerment.” Which underscores the fact that the open public comment period was all for show. In her message to the public about the radical greenhouse gas rules, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson requested “comment on the data on which the proposed findings are based, the methodology used in obtaining and analyzing the data, and the major legal interpretations and policy considerations underlying the proposed findings.” Ms. Jackson, meet Mr. Carlin.

The EPA now justifies the suppression of the study because economist Carlin (a 35-year veteran of the agency who also holds a B.S. in physics) “is an individual who is not a scientist.” Neither is Al Gore. Nor is environmental czar Carol Browner. Nor is cap-and-trade shepherd Nancy Pelosi. Carlin’s analysis incorporated peer-reviewed studies and, as he informed his colleagues, “significant new research” related to the proposed endangerment finding. According to those who have seen his study, it spotlights EPA’s reliance on out-of-date research, uncritical recycling of United Nations data, and omission of new developments, including a continued decline in global temperatures and a new consensus that future hurricane behavior won’t be different than in the past.

But the message from his superiors was clear: La-la-la, we can’t hear you.

In April, President Obama declared that “the days of science taking a back seat to ideology are over.” Another day, another broken promise. Will Carlin meet the same fate as inspectors general who have been fired or “retired” by the Obama administration for blowing the whistle and defying political orthodoxy? Or will he, too, be yet another casualty of the Hope and Change steamroller? The bodies are piling up.

Malkin is author of the forthcoming “Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies” (Regnery 2009).

The Great Global Warming Swindle

2009-06-26T05:59:00.001-07:00

A Communism for the 21st Century

2009-06-25T12:00:00.000-07:00

A Communism for the 21st Century By: Fjordman
Brussels Journal | Thursday, May 17, 2007

I’ve received some criticism for trying to figure out the ideological and historical roots of Multiculturalism. Critics claim that it’s all about hate, about a desire to break down the Established Order at any cost. Many of the proponents don’t believe in the doctrine of Multiculturalism themselves, so we shouldn’t waste any time analyzing the logic behind it, because there is none. A desire to break down Western society is certainly there, but I do believe there are some ideas about the desired end result articulated as well.

On one hand, we’re supposed to “celebrate” our differences at the same time as it is racist and taboo to recognize that any differences between groups of people exist at all. This is hardly logically coherent, which is why Multiculturalism can only be enforced by totalitarian means. Perhaps it boils down to the fact there are no major differences, just minor quirks, all cute, which should be celebrated at the same time as we gradually eradicate them.

Read the rest here

Steve Fileding newsworthy decision does not make the MSM!

2009-06-25T04:20:00.000-07:00

MSM (Mainstream Media-aka left wing media) and Steve Fielding
The Media (MSM) and global warming (especially by carbon emissions!). For some reason it seems the media doesn't find this newsworthy! Even on TV they are reporting on the ETS they did not even mention that Fielding is now against the so called 'science' that carbon emissions are causing climate change. When it suits them they will go with any alarmist garbage, but when it is not in favour of their 'argument' that we are causing climate change, then they ignore it or simply ridicule it using other alarmist scientists who BELIEVE (their religion is the environment and 'climate change'!) that the sea levels will rise and ice is melting and every other story. It is only to create fear in the masses in order that they take control and have a communist empire.
Read about it here

Australia well on its way to Communism

2009-06-25T02:14:00.000-07:00

Thanks to subversion by the left wing in Australia which started well before the Vietnam war, the goal of a Communist Australia is now taking shape.

Government will now hand out money to the 'obese' to trim down by going to the gym.

OVERWEIGHT people could be paid to lose weight under a radical plan to combat the nation's obesity crisis.

The Rudd Government's National Preventative Health Taskforce is next week expected to call for tax breaks or subsidies for gym memberships and fitness equipment, The Daily Telegraph reports.

Parents could also get tax breaks to help pay for children's sports club membership.

But the welfare state is not just getting its biggest boost in more than a decade, it is now going to 'provide' for mums and dads to pay for sport! Well, our freedom is perilously close to being shattered and the old idea of having choice is now being substituted for the 'public good', which is communism. Under Kevin Rudd we are heavily being converted to Communism not seen since Gough Whitlam. Both had huge success with turning Australia in the direction of becoming a Communist state.

If you aren't shocked you better read the history of communism and capitalism and make sure what type of framework they use. Communism needs a big Government and operates almost everything. Capitalism needs a tiny Government and allows people the freedom to conduct enterprise in a way they seem fit without Government intervention.

Read the rest here