Australian Farms, Crops, Drinking Water Under Threat From Coal Seam Gas Mining

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3375855.htm?site=rural&microsite=coalseam&section=latest&date=(none)

One wonders what exactly the Murray Darling Basin Plan is really all about "environmental" needs ? River health ? as cited by the MDBA. How can this be when toxic waste from Coal Seam Gas mining is being dumped into the very same river system in Southern Qld then flowing along with the toxic waste down to the Riverina and beyond ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/specials/coal-seam-gas-by-the-numbers/


Where are the "Greens" in this rapidly unfolding environmental catastrophe ? Still focused on their three main issues ? Same sex marraige, Carbon tax and Refugees ? The Greens "commitment" to the environment or lack there of on this simmering catastrophy speaks for itself !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZe1AeH0Qz8&noredirect=1

View the above trailer from Gasland, the experience America has had from this Halliburton developed technology of "fracking". Interestingly aside from the enviromental destruction and human health implications, pundits suggest "we must consider the more CSG mining, the less dependant on oil from terrorists we shall be". Terrorists will hardly be a problem once we've poisoned our lands and ourselves with the CSG magic pudding.

What of our Artesian basin, our aquifiers and water contamination generally ?

Our Australian farms will be irrigating crops with a mix of very dangerous and highly toxic chemicals, if crops will grow at all in the salty toxic mix !

Quality drinking water will be reserved for those who can afford to pay multinational beverage companies.

It is difficult to see how CSG mining waste is going to improve the health of the Murray Darling Basin and its fragile ecosystem and at the rate CSG mining is expanding in Australia, the situation has become grave.

Perhaps these questions and more should be asked of the Murray Darling Basin Authority ?

What of the water privatization, foreign "investors" and the "water" futures market ?

So many questions and so few answers... beside the obvious GREED !

No Penalty Due To "Trauma" !!

Daily Advertiser ( 30.9.11 )

Magistrate Peter Dare SC has dismissed charges against a woman who smashed up Wagga's Centerlink office with a cricket bat due to a "mental condition", which in his view stemmed from "one of the most tragic lives".

Constance Lamon Okot, 45, on Wednesday stood in Wagga Local Court accused of destroying 16 computer screens after walking into Centerlink brandishing a cricket bat when the doors opened on the morning of August 29.

But she walked out without penalty after the charges were dismissed under Section 32 of the Mental Health ( Forensic Provisions ) Act.

Mr. Dare said Okot was the victim of an "unspeakable tragedy" in her homeland of Sudan before she relocated to Australia as a "Refugee", was a victim of domestic violence and was "basically a single mother of five or six children".

"I'm satisfied the defendant was suffering from a mental condition that could be treated at a hospital," Mr. Dare said.

Okot was released into the care of a Doctor and ordered to comply with a treatment plan submitted to the court for at least six months.

...............

No doubt Ms Okot was subject to "unspeakable tragedy" in her homeland of Sudan, ( highlighting again the issues surrounding"trauma" ). Validating the Australia First position "more needs to be done in these people's homelands, ( trauma ground zero ).

Let us not forget our Australian brothers and sisters, suffering "unspeakable and traumatic circumstances" in Australian Department of Housing Estates, and many locations around Australia.


Are these "traumatised" Australians availed the same mercy and privilege ? No, they are not, nor is there any desire or political will to improve the very dangerous and traumatic circumstance many Australians live in. Rather the "government" have increased their adversarial attitude towards the disenfanchised people they are elected/employed to assist and consequently disempower these traumatised Australians even further.

The Million Dollar question remains "does anyone ever recover from trauma" ? As one example of this being people sexually and or physically abused in our communities, some who receive years of "treatment" rarely, if ever recover, therefore the 6 month whiz bang treatment plan such as awarded Ms. Okot seems redundant. Australia First would also ask, what happens the next time "traumatised" Ms. Okot "loses it" ?

After all arriving at Centerlink with a cricket bat with intent is a premeditated act, rather than a spur of the moment inability to control oneself emotionally.

Unlike Refugees all Australians receive is much talk and little or no action and their circumstance becomes more dire and "generationally" entrenched... Yet no-body notices and no-body cares !

Same old story: It's amazing what can be achieved when one is the politically favoured "group" of the day !!

'Go Back Where You Came From': SBS Propaganda: Is It Also A Hoax - And An Opportunity ? ( Bill Rezac )

SBS screens this week a three part series 'Go Back Where You Came From', a documentary which shows a group of Australians being confronted ( sic ) with the living conditions of so-called 'refugees' in camps of Asia and Africa and with their difficult journeys ( sic ) to come to Australia.

The program is pure propaganda.

Originally, Australia First members Jim Saleam and Perry Jewel, were also approached to participate. As could reasonably be expected, the tentative invitations to these nationalists were not pursued. At all points, the true purpose of the producers was to choose persons who were likely to be 'remoulded' by a type of hands-on live-drama re-education.

So it was.

At no time does this program really explain that refugees ( sic ) are often people who have declined to take up arms against their alleged oppressors, that the conditions they may find themselves in are in one sense of their own making, what economic refugees may be as opposed to political dissenters, that many consider permanent flight of better value than a fighting return, that many have social practices repugnant to Australian society, that many of these people may also hate and be envious of those who possess wealth and territory-and that overpopulation and New World Order wars and other ethnic based strife are the chief underlying causes of many outpourings from the Third World.

We are witness then to an attempt to brainwash Australians to accept that they are guilty people if they lack compassion.

In fact, for most Australians other than the liberal minded, there is a feeling that this brainwash should be resisted but they don't know how.

The Case Of Raye Colbey:

The star of the show, Raye Colbey, is described as a lady from Inverbrackie in South Australia where the refugee detention centre has been founded. Mrs. Colbey goes on the SBS organised jaunt overseas and learns about her 'hate', learns of compassion and so forth.

Reports passed to Australia First in South Australia, suggest that Mrs. Colbey has family members involved in support campaigns for so-called refugees.

Mrs. Colbey has been a victim, if she really is a victim, of psychological manipulation. We note how quickly the usual media suspects have been to publish a public recant from her of her 'former', t=racist ( sic ) views.

Schools Will Get The SBS Doco But 'The Camp Of The Saints' Will Be There In Reply:

A report was given to Australia First in New South Wales that the program will be shown on DVD to high school students as part of a propaganda offensive to soften students` attitudes to the refugee invasion. This offers an opportunity for the new Eureka Youth League and Australia First Party to fight back.

Both organisations will surely seek to make mass awareness of the antidote: The Camp Of The Saints, the 1972 novel which explained the psycosis the dominant groups of our Western societies faced with a refugee invasion of European lands-a work composed before there were any mass refugee outpourings from the Third World. This revolutionary novel posited that overpopulation and poverty, war and envy, would propel masses towards the vision of a better life. It then pilloried the false-moralities that would justify to certain Westerners the very destruction of their own societies.

For the curious:

http://www.archive.org/details/CampOfTheSaints

This book should be studied by all Australians who need a counter-morality to the SBS type propaganda about to invade our screens.

Intensify The Struggle: 'Expel The Refugees'

Australians need to act against the army of churchmen, Greens, Trotskyites, lawyer-advocates and others who play morality games over the refugee invasion and who mobilise daily to beat down Australians.

The morality is on the side of the Australian people, who under the challenge of mass immigration and now refugee invasion, have opted to resist.

Our party will repudiate the United Nations Convention On Refugees ( 1951 ). Ultimately, we will expel the refugees ! But we make this very, very, dark promise: the traitors who have decided to give away our birthright will pay for the assisted return, if necessary of hundreds of thousands of persons to countries of origin-by the public seizure of their assets.

It has come to this.

Warn your friends and children against the latest SBS propaganda.

Pollies Blind To Voltairian Warnings.

Counterpoint:
John Carter ( The Land 2.6.11 ).

Voltaire wrote, "Men will always be mad, and those who think they can cure them are the maddest of all".

Australia's supposed leaders are now demonstrating the accuracy of his observation. Their concept of man controlling the earth's climate in isolation from the sun underlines this case.

We multiply our exports of coal and iron ore to enable China to produce more steel and atmospheric pollution, double world air travel in six years, and promote increased transport emissions through free trade.

At the same time we announce we will show the world how to control climate by taxing one of the many gases emitted into the atmosphere. Perhaps we should implement a tax to cool down the sun.

Urban dwellers are moving on from "saving the Murray-Darling" to saving the planet.

Anybody swallowing the claim that the disadvantaged will be compensated by government doesn't read history. This is all about moving money from the masses to the already rich - as has been demonstrated with the European emissions trading scheme.

Any of the few landholders who are still members of a State farm organisation - and as a consequence of the National Farmers Federation ( NFF ) - must be very confused. NFF has added to its depressing list of farmer sell-outs with the daddy of them all: carbon sequestration by tree planting as a reward for supporting a carbon tax.

The architects of this gem obviously couldn't grow a zucchini in a La Nina year.

The concept of independent assessor chaps coming on to properties to measure the carbon sequestration takes us into a land of fantasy and unlimited corruption.

The record of tree planting initiatives in Australia is woeful, as many saddened superannuants caught in managed investment schemes would attest. Most of our land is subject to severe droughts which play havoc with any crop from wheat to trees.

Country to go under trees would have to be higher rainfall, food and fibre producing country. Food is apparently now seen as something one buys from the supermarket - nobody cares where it originates.

In just a few years we have seen dairying become dominated by an Italian company, our wheat board taken over by our Canadian competitors, our rice board bound for Spain, and our beef processing dominated by two US and Brazillian government-backed multinationals.

Our farmers will have their prices determined by foreigners, who will naturally put their shareholder interest first. Meanwhile the flood of natural gas, coal and wind "farms" will take more of our scarce farming land out of food production.

The urban background of almost all in leadership positions apparently makes them incapable of seeing what is happening. Add the NFF support for importation of beef from countries with BSE to their carbon sequestration and Voltaire's case is sewn up.

Palerang Election Campaign: John McGrath For Australia First Polls A Solid 6.1%

Australia First Party candidate for Palerang Council, John McGrath, has won a solid 6.1% - 430 votes - in the by-election held yesterday ( these figures are not yet final ).

Once again, we have shown that there is a definate community and electoral clientele for our party. In the 2008 NSW local government poll, Australia First won 4% in the Sutherland Shire and some 5.67% in Blacktown City. In Sutherland Shire by-election in October last year we crossed over the 4% line again. In June 2010, in the Hawkesbury City by-election, we won 9.4%

If a full Council election had been held in Palerang yesterday, John McGrath may have picked up the last position; indeed, some of our polling booth workers conversed with the current Mayor, who himself picked up the last seat in Palerang in 2008-with just over 3% of the vote !

Mr. McGrath has signalled his willingness to contest Palerang in 2012, along side of Australia First Party candidates set to contest ( and win ! )-in a swathe of councils across the State.

Farmers, Truckies, Young Workers Targets Of The Campaign:

The Australia First Party campaign followed the political line of the party. It set out to target specific social sectors which we call Real Australia, or those parts of our community who have, in one way or another, stepped outside of the globalising norms of the present anti Australian economic and political system either to vote for something new or wage their economic struggles: some farmers challenged by the Murray Darling Basin Authority water legislation and who have opted to resist outside of the usual sell-out farmers organisations and the National Party; truck owner-drivers who are pushed to the wall by bureaucracy at the service of the big companies, citizens who have rejected the big parties and the Greens on immigration and young workers under the gun of contract labour and who see no party willing to say no. In ways specific to local conditions, these groups were 'targets' of the McGrath campaign.

Importantly too, Australia First publicly campaigned for People's Referendum or Citizens Initiated Referendum where it is the people who may propose directly local rules and 'laws'. This resonated in chaotic Palerang.

There is another aspect of the Real Australia strategy. Because the party targets Real Australia for support, Australia First leaves the 'mainstream' people behind at this stage: sadly, the majority of our fellow Australians accept their lot and relish its rewards and comforts; they may grumble at this or that, but are psychically bound to a 'comfort zone' of political normality and so consequently support the candidates and parties that actually undermine them too. This truth is the truth and is not changed by wishful thinking. These folks are not the agents of change at this point in time. Essentially, our strategy is the logical one: build where we can, with whom we must, at this crucial phase of party and community network construction. That same big-picture logic plays out at local level politics also.

John McGrath's thirty five years of political experience, served him well in doing what needed to be done at a local level and he was witness to how all these sobering strategic facts work themselves out.

Hard Work Yields Results:

John McGrath campaigned very hard in Palerang. John spoke at the three community meetings and was received well and his candidature and the party name were mentioned at length in the Bungendore Mirror, the Braidwood Times and community newsletters. The Queanbeyan Age ( which covers a part of the council area ) referred to him as "arguably the most controversial candidate". Indeed, the latter paper reported on a growing community angst across Palerang at the "plan" to explode the Shire's population by nearly 70% by 2036- and noted what our candidate was saying. Had we tapped a growing consciousness ? We think so.

The party mobilised some Australia First members in Canberra and in Palerang Shire to assist on polling day with how to vote cards. Most booths were covered. Ironically, in the only booth where we have no worker ( the isolated area of Nerriga ), we polled 20%. These same members earlier letterboxed streets and spoke with residents and gave the party 'name-recognition'. John campaigned personally in Captain's Flat, Burra and Bungendore, meeting local residents and soliciting votes.

A Statement Of Position:

Despite the candidates against John McGrath all running as 'independents', there were party allegiances in the poll. One candidate had Labor Party connections and another is active in the National Party, whilst yet another had some Green input to his support-base. What is equally clear is that a layer of voters in Palerang have also made a statement of position in voting for Australia First.

This statement is an ideological statement of Real Australia. It is a rock base of support that will be expanded, but only by the party being involved directly in community politics, if the party markets itself as a protest and defence organisation for issues that affect the lives of people.

Underground name recognition helps Australia First. As the polling booth workers attest, our party has a name that travels by pubs, clubs, workplaces, cafeterias, truck-stops, from brothers to sisters and mothers to fathers. The thousands of people across different States who have voted for Australia First in the last three years carry the name of the party to other Australians and the same process has now commenced in Palerang Shire.

Australia First Party thanks all who assisted in any way on this campaign and we look forward to further electoral successes in New South Wales.

One Nation's Asian Sex Tour: Or The Takeover Of One Nation By Multi-Racialist 'Conservatives'

The One Nation party is to be revived in Queensland with a new leadership. The party wants to register for the next State election.

Since late last year, One Nation has been in the news. It has been reported for its opposition to the illegal refugee influx. Yet, it was noted by ourselves as early as last December that One Nation did not appear to absolutely oppose the just-as-toxic intake of the "legal" arrivals ! Something was amiss. Thereafter came the attempt by former leader Pauline Hanson to enter parliament in New South Wales, vaulting the name 'One Nation' into full public view. The party set out to remodel itself.

But what a sad and compromised thing it is. Whatever One Nation was ten or so years ago, the current group seems to be pushing a product little different from the Liberal National Party ( LNP ). Essentially, One Nation is now all about multiracialism and conservatism.

Australia First makes its allegations very clear. First: One Nation advocates the assimilation of all migrants and any future migrants drawn from anywhere on earth ( note: it excludes only Moslems ), into an English-speaking civic culture. It would multiracialize Australia finally and completely and thereby destroy the Australian identity. Second: One Nation is cuddling up to the LNP offering limp-wristed 'criticism' over some policies, while still promising preferences for patronage.

What is happening ? Are Queenslanders being deceived by the brand-name One Nation ? However, has its guts been ripped out and has it turned into its opposite ?

A REAL STOLEN GENERATION`.

Australia First noted the rot had well set in during the last Federal election campaign. A curious policy statement appeared on the party website. One Nation was advocating foreign adoptions from the Third World, with the placing of these children into Aussie families since this was the best way to arrive at "assimilation".

What ?? This didn't sound too much like our perception of the beliefs of One Nation members.

Last August, a representative of Australia First phoned the One Nation Senate candidate Ian Nelson, who expressed surprise that anyone would question such a policy Mr. Nelson pointed out that the State President, Jim Savage, had experience of the difficulties getting such Third World children into Australia-given his wife had had real problems obtaining visas for her nephew and niece from the Philippines.

Mr. Nelson was asked: "but isn't that going to make a real sort of stolen generation, one where children are stolen and brought into an alien culture ? "No, it is the best way to assimilate them", he said. "But maybe we Australians don't want to assimilate them, maybe they should stay in the Third World" ? Call ended.

In their policy statement, One Nation was advancing the proposition that the assimilation of another race into the Australian nation via the backdoor of some family-based 'cultural assimilation' of stolen children-was a credible policy goal. Why, why, would one want to preach that ? Is there something going on in One Nation ?

THE PLOT THICKENS. THE MOSLEM RED-HERRING AGAIN

Then the penny was dropped on us concerning Mr. Nelson. Penny ? Try cement slab. An article appeared in the Queensland Times. Every patriotic Queenslander should read this article.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/one-nations-surprising-new-face-20110225-1b7y9.html

The article explains that Mr. Nelson who intends to campaign for One Nation in the next year's poll will be joined on the hustings by his Thai wife and their teenage daughter. It said that this was a new development for One Nation which had first made its name by being critical of Asian migration. Did not Pauline Hanson say that "Australia is being swamped by Asians" ? In the article, Mr. Nelson made it very clear that his fury on immigration was only directed at the Moslem bogy man.

The article said-and we quote directly: Despite witnessing his wife's difficult adjustment to a new culture and country, Nelson has no sympathy at all for the most recent targets of multiculturism's critics.

For him, the woman he affectionately calls "little one" is not like the other new Australians, particularly Muslims, at the heart of the current national debate.

"It's the ones that don't [ assimilate ] and live in their little enclaves that's unacceptable in this country," he said.

Now let's get this garbage right. Moslems don't assimilate. Well, tick. And as the rest of the article makes very clear, Mr. Nelson equates Moslem migration with rapes, ghettos and crime. Well, tick. However, if you assimilate other Third Worlders, particularly by marrying them and having kids with them, that is okay ? Yes ? This is an odd policy, a sort of bedroom-driven plan for social engineering. It's a wonder the Human Rights Commission didn't think it up-and offer special baby bonuses to facilitate the outcome.

Do we ignore the other negatives of immigration ? Do we ignore the sustainability question: that is, whether Australia should take any migrants at all ? Do we ignore the reality of Chinese immigration where massive swathes of the big cities are subject to takeover by horde-like agents of a foreign state, a group whose members are far more insidious than an Arab or Moslem rape gang ?

It seems Mr. Nelson has ignored all that. He might also have ignored, if he ever understood it, that the alien does not assimilate: we Australians assimilate to the alien. Moslems are just a small part of the massive demographic change now swamping our country. Why concentrate on just Moslems ?

Australia First has this radical idea that, to a certain small extent, the powers-that-be don't mind too much if a few points are scored against the Moslems. After all, Aussie soldiers are ( sadly ) doing a job for the oil companies and other alien interests by being in Moslem lands and whipping up a little amount of anti-Islamism here has a purpose in keeping support up for these useless wars. And, vaguely out there somewhere, Islamist nutter networks still might pull off a terrorist outrage in Australia. People have to be alert to that too. Of course, this anti-Islamism must never go too far and branch out in a general criticism of immigration, multiculturalism-and more sharply, never, ever, condemn multi racialism. It must stay within strict limits and so the major parties can manipulate the public.

So, very conveniently for establishment needs, along comes some group which wants to raise up the spectre of unassimilated Moslems. One Nation wants to scream at them, rant at them, get votes from people who realise they certainly don't fit; then One Nation can parade itself as an independent party standing up for us ordinary folks who are peeved with immigration.

Yet all the while we have the anti Moslem crusade in operation, One Nation's leading male members use their penises to assimilate nice Asian brides. Is Sigmund Freud having a joke on us ? Are they overcompensating for their personal conduct ? Did any other One Nation members do the Asian sex tour ? Are they the internal base of support for this new leadership ?

Are we missing something here ? Is it the case that there is some game being played aimed right at the heart of those Queenslanders who wish to take the nationalist road ?

CONSERVATISM

Of late, as One Nation makes noises about re-registering as a party, it has been chattering about doing preference deals with the Liberal National Party, even saying publicly that its preferences elected a LibNat in the recent Federal Senate poll and that the LibNats should reciprocate in the future, that they should make an end to the 'preference One Nation last' policy. They are saying that their preferences in the electorate of Ashgrove might even elect the next Queensland Premier. The offer is: throw us a bone and we'll be there for you. Who knows, maybe they will ? But the drift is that One Nation is now calling itself a "conservative party", much to the internal criticism of many sincere One Nation members who think this puts them on the same continuum as the LibNats. In a sort of way-it does. It's the slippery slope to nowhere.

In this delusional politics, the One Nation leadership steers the party rhetoric about traditional family values; a little flag waving is engaged in;, and a civic identity politics is pushed ( ie. it defends the idea of a national identity based only upon symbols, promotes that aliens become English-speaking and everyone gives loyalty to the constitution and our 'allies' ). As a conservative party, One Nation members will be told that they are bringing conservative voters out of the establishment parties towards a new hard patriotism. In truth, it is the establishment LNP which is quite happy to harness disaffected patriotic Queenslanders to One Nation and its forlorn quest to enter the mainstream as the leading conservative voice. That is an old con. Smart. Slick. Effective.

RUDYARD KIPLING'S ROAD TO MANDALAY V RODGERED COUPLINGS WAY TO GO THAIGIRLINTHEHAY

There was a great poem by Rudyard Kipling called the Road To Mandalay, a nineteenth century muse that suggested some sort of true-love unions occur between Europeans and Orientals in the mists of cultural abstraction up the Irrawaddy River-or something like that. Possibly, that has happened occasionally just as much as the true members of those races might have scorned it. However, we have doubts that unions founded upon alcohol in Manila or Bangkok bars, sex-tour romps where rancid old Aussies indulge their fantasies, mail-order shopping for a good housekeeper and compliant bed-partner and so on-make for much along the lines of Kipling's muse. The public displays of these Rodgered Couplings that their little ones are just marvellously assimilated, don't wash with us.

We have said that Freudian sex psychology is a factor here. We should say that the whole affair is politically corrupting. Not simply psychic overcompensation is involved when we witness anti Moslem screaming in place of a sober critical sentiment about immigration. Policy could become perverted-and not just about the matter of overseas adoptions. A different model of Australianity is put up there. Intermarraige as assimilation becomes a goal of the 'patriot'. In the latest policy turn of One Nation, we can see that defence of Australia's European identity is just not what the party is about.

EITHER IT'S ONE BIG MELTING POT OR IT'S THE AUSTRALIA FIRST POSITION

The position of Australia First is one that sorts out the muddle of One Nation. One Nation, going back a very long way and right to the start in fact-was always equivocal on what it meant about immigration from the Third World. Did it want to end it ? And reverse it ? Or assimilate what was already here ? Did it seek to preserve Australia's European heritage or not ? Certainly at least, at the very least, Mrs. Hanson said that Australia was running the risk of being "swamped" by Asians. Sadly, she gave no answer.

The mix-up has become one big messy melting-pot muddle. Now One Nation will rant against Moslems ( and refugees too ), but stay criminally silent about the very future of the nation.

We say that nationality does have a biological component. None of that involves, or ever could, any hatreds of other peoples or odd thoughts about how 'superior' or 'better' we white Aussies may be in respect of other peoples. However, it certainly includes our right to exist as a people sovereign over our continent. It is also very clear to us that our very survival is challenged by mass immigration and alien takeover and that we will have to defend ourselves, our heritage, our identity ! As a matter of necessity, one big melting pot is not for us. It is odd to Australia First that not only is the melting pot the official state view, but it is now the position taken by some so-called patriots. We say: no !

It is time for One Nation members to take back their party if they can. Yet, when they do, if they do, they will need to look at how this muddle was arrived at. One Nation members might even think better and consider it is time to join Australia First.

A Liveable Pension For Fairdinkum Australians & The 3000 Club !

Aussie Senior Citizens are now experiencing the effects of the collapsing Globalist economic system, which has been imposed upon Australians over recent decades by Liberal and Labor politicians dutifully implementing the Big Business agenda.

Seniors who have worked productively over a life time; have contributed to society with family and community activity; put some money aside; have paid taxation of 1/3 plus of income; were duped into superannuation schemes, are now seeing their savings evaporate as this Globalist ideology crashes.

The wholesale sell out of our Australian manufacturing and productive capacity to foreign interests, and the deregulation of our financial sector, to create a subservient cog in the Global economic order as a "trinket" type raw materials supplier, and an immigrant dumping ground-is the root cause of the crisis likely to now descend upon Australians. ( Members of the 3000 Club excepted ).

Compulsory supperannuation monies, instead of being allocated for Australian owned productive development, have been used to stoke the Stock Exchanges, and for other usage in speculative exploitation. It was, all inherently prone to collapse as per the contradictions of capitalism.

A rude awakening is now descending on increasing numbers of Seniors as they are forced to undertake the "Centerlink Run"-coming to grips with a pension system programmed to comply with the IMF/Internationalist/Globalist agenda to minimise Social Security payments.

THE CENTERLINK RUN:

STEP 1: You front to the local office, and can experience first hand the Liberal/Labor/Green politicians` immigration/guest workers/refugee rackets, but you fall into the queue for you still believe you count for something as a productive citizen, and your years of paying taxation had a purpose.

You have your turn for the bureaucrat-and the near 100 question application form to see if the paltry $230 a week is to come your way. A number is allotted to you for the "system". ( No members of the 3000 Club sighted ).

STEP 2: You bare your soul in the multitude of questions-any thought of the Aussie tradition that your affairs are your business soon dissipates. Who are you-prove it; How much cash have you under the bed; Have you been o/s and how much money did you take; Did you give any money away; What are your bank accounts; Any rooms rented out; Who has your super fund and how much is it-prove it; What property do you own/got a beach shack/what's it worth; How much for your house and contents; What jewellery have you got; Can you cash in any life assurance.

It starts to dawn on you that this might all be about ensuring you get as little pension entitlement as possible.

But you are enticed that you might qualify for a health card for medical benefits, and reduced rates and government charges. How good is that !

When finished, you look at your arm to see if by chance a tattoo of the allotted system number has appeared, as you are starting to think that as an Aussie you no longer rate for much.

STEP 3 : You front before the bureaucrat, forms ( and cap ) in hand to be scrutinised. You are reminded again about the Pension Bonus of $30k, available to you if you will slave on in full time work for another five years. ( 3000 Club Members get that in 10 weeks ).

Your getting a bit edgy, aware that all your personal information is now going onto Big Brother's database and available virtually to any Government department, and who knows who else.

You are informed that on your details, that after 45 years of work and paying taxes, your in for a part pension-$125 a week, as is your spouse-yes, a pension of $250 a week between you for the good life. And, you must also report in each month on any extra income you may generate so your pension would be reduced. ( Still no 3000 Club Members sighted ).

The penny finally drops that in the Australia of today AUSSIE SENIORS COUNT FOR NOTHING !

WHAT CAN BE DONE.
As a group of citizens, the reality is that Seniors are past"use by date" to the Liberal/Labor politicians who have inflicted the Globalist agenda upon Australia.

Protesting Pensioners can "bare their bras" for the systems` media, or petition these same politicians, but it is pointless. Genuine Seniors may find this difficult to accept, but it is this very same political ilk down the decades who have restricted, and devalued pension entitlements to the current poverty line level, and who continue to parrot that a liveable pension cannot be afforded. ( But not for the 3000 Club Members ).

Petitioning Globalist politicians that have overseen our productive enterprises and natural wealth taken by foreigners; connived for near zero tax for multinational corporations, and other schemes of tax avoidance; squandered untold $billions on alien immigration and anti Australian multiculturalism, AND, stealing the 7% taxation surcharge ( passed by referendum in 1947 ) to fund all Aussies a pension, is a total waste of Seniors time.

The facts are that "Regime Change"-a change of attitude, psycology,economic and cultural direction through the complete and utter rejection of the present traitor political caste and their Big Business masters, is essential to now attain social justice for Aussie Seniors.

The Australia First Core Policy of Citizens Initiated Referendum ( CIR ) and Parliamentary Recall can ensure this change-CIR remakes the political landscape-no ifs-no buts, for the citizen is again in charge of our society and values, not vested interest politicians.

The Australia First Party programme is for ALL AUSSIE SENIORS at retirement age to have a LIVEABLE PENSION, related to the average wage, and secured on supply of appropriate identity to the relevant government administration. Nothing else is needed !

Australia First will take back our productive and natural wealth; we want Aussie control, direction, and ownership of our Australian economy, free of all Globalist dictates, and with equitable payment of taxation to provide pension funding. And, no Globalist political parrots like the 3000 Club Members.

IF YOU DON'T FIGHT, YOU LOSE.

THE 3000 CLUB:
Members on this easy street ride include Malcolm Fraser, Bob Hawke, Meg Lees, Jeff Kennett, John Howard, Gareth Evans, Tim Fisher, Joan Kirner, John Cain, Alexander Downer, Steve Bracks, Paul Keating, Nick Greiner, etc, etc, all feeding off the taxpayer with their $3000 a week pensions. You won't see this lot on the Centerlink run !

Liberal/National Silence Deafening On Labour/Greens` Sell Off.

Daily Advertiser 4.5.11
Jock Munro
Rankin Springs

The proposed purchase by foreigners of AWB commodities by giant publicly unlisted Cargill and Sunrice by Spanish Ebro, is further evidence that the buyup of Australian assets continues apace.

However, Liberal Junee Senator Bill Heffernan who has led a song and dance previously on foreign takeovers is strangely silent.


Bill and his Liberal regional colleagues voted with the Liberal and Labor urban elites to abolish the wheat single desk and the consequences have been profound.

Wheat marketing and logistics are now spiralling out of control and rapidly passing into foreign hands.

Growers, including his neighbours from Junee, a strong wheat growing area, might have expected that Senator Heffernan may have taken the opportunity to stand up and be counted on this latest round of overseas takeovers.

So far his silence has been deafening.

End.....

Australia First Party is the only party that puts Australia and Australians first !

Palerang Shire By Election Campaign

Australia First Party has entered Mr. John McGrath in the Palerang Shire Council by-election to be held on May 14. Palerang is centered on the New South Wales rural towns of Bungendore and Braidwood.

Mr. McGrath has been a Palerang resident for four decades and has mainly been involved in farming. He has also been a committed nationalist activist with a long history in various organisations. He has been a member of Australia First Party since it was re-established as a new corporate entity in September 2007.

The campaign in Palerang Shire has moved well with firm local contacts being made by the party. Articles mentioning the party have appeared in local newspapers and other publications. John McGrath, has been scheduled to speak at community meetings with other candidates, in Bungendore, Braidwood and Wamboin.

This election is the first time that anyone has raised the Murray Darling water conspiracy as an electoral matter. It is John's intention to assist in deepening the community resistance to the schemes of the Murray Darling Basin Authority which will surely destroy Australian agriculture-in favour of foreign and local mining magnates who have mining claims all over the Riverina and other affected areas. Nothing very 'green' there ! Rather, environmental concerns with water usage and being used as a smoke screen by the multinationals and other exploiters.

We publish the Palerang Australia First programme as it appears on John's recently printed how-to-vote card.

(i) For Citizens` initiated referendum at council level; I want to see people be able to propose Council policy and by-laws directly so as to maintain democratic control over their representatives.

(ii) Against the NSW Department of Planning scheme to expand the population of Palerang by 69% by 2036. I am sure this will be immigration -driven. Immigration is no friend to the lifestyle, the environment or our heritage and surely a policy whose time has passed.

(iii) Against the water takeover plans of the Murray Darling Basin Authority. The water plans threaten to destroy Australian farming and regional communities. The UN Treaty RAMSAR upon which this is based is acceded to by the major parties, Greens and others. I stand opposed and will work with all to win against the government.

(iv) To make Palerang more friendly towards road transport. I note that farmers depend on the trucking industry and while I believe in the extention of rail wherever possible, Council must try to protect this vital industry.

(v) For greater autonomy for local Councils over the NSW Department of Planning. I want to see domestic planning decisions made for the benefit of people.

( Electoral comment responsibility: J. Saleam 725 Princes Highway, Tempe 2044 )

Pauline Hanson In The Legislative Council ?: Thanks, But No Thanks!

Australia First Suggests Vote For John Hatton ( Group C ) Or The Shooters` And Fishers Party ( Group P ) For The Legislative Council.

Australia First is supporting two candidates in this election, Tony Pettitt in Riverstone and Tony Robinson in Mulgoa.

In all other electorates, if voters give preferences, we recommend that the sitting member be placed last.

Some media attention has been focused on Pauline Hanson who has formed a group and has nominated for the Legislative Council.

Australia First does not counsel a vote for Mrs. Hanson.

Australia First would recommend a vote for either Group C, formed by one-time Legislative Assembly Member John Hatton, or a Group P, the Shooters` And Fishers` Party.

John Hatton has a proven public record against corruption and mismanagement in New South Wales. His great achievement will forever remain the reform of policing through a Royal Commission. The Shooters` And Fishers` Party will stand up for people's rights to enjoy their sports and their lives free of government over-regulation.

Australia First has grave doubts as to the motives of Mrs. Hanson and some of those on her ticket.

The pro Australian nationalist-minded and patriotic section of the people in this State should not expect anything from Pauline Hanson. Her attempt to speak for them is besmirched by her track record of mismanagement and betrayal of her former parties-One Nation and Pauline's United Australia Party.

After the election and her failure to be elected, we would expect further 'come backs' hosted by dubious forces.

If we are criticized for our position by any group or person, we can only reply that we stand for principle.

Whatever Pauline represented in 1996-7, or even appeared to represent then, cannot be compared to the present person. Thanks ! But no thanks !

Carbon Tax A Pledge Of Suicide.

Terry McCrann.
Weekend Australian ( 26.2.11 ).

Julia Gillard is embarked on introducing two new taxes.

The first is the big lie that last week was turned into a big tax: her Julia carbon tax, the tax you have when you promise not to have that tax. The second is the reworked resources tax.

One is designed to force us to cut our emissions of carbon dioxide. To stress, emissions of the life-enhancing gas, not the so-called carbon pollution of bits of grit subconcious image that Gillard and Co deliberately promote.

The other is based on the assumption that China, in particular, but also India will continue to increase exponentially their emissions of that very same carbon dioxide.

Needless to say, except it does apparently need saying repeatedly, the increase in their emissions will dwarf any reduction we achieve. Rendering any reduction by us utterly pointless.

Indeed, China for all its claimed commitment to aggressive world leadership in alternative energy, plans to get most of its electricity from coal-fired power. Not just today, but tomorow and, indeed, the day after tomorrow. Over the next ten years, it plans to install net new capacity of coal-fired power equal to 10 times our entire power generation sector.

To stress, that's net additional generation. Its existing coal-fired power sector is already 14 times our entire power sector. To the extent it does close down any - really - grit-emitting old dirty coal-fired generation, that means even more replacement plants. All fired increasingly by coal from ... you fill in the blank.

Our real "assistance" to increased Chinese CO2 emissions, though, won't be centered on shipping energy coals from Newcastle. But in pouring hundreds of millions of tonnes of iron ore and coking coal every year into Chinese, and increasingly, Indian mills. And not to forget our old customers in Japan and South Korea.

Gillard's proposed resources tax doesn't just assume huge increases in these exports but is designed to encourage their maximum expansion. Along with - dare I say it, carbon based - natural gas.

Does the Prime Minister have the slightest self-awareness of a certain hypocrisy, but even more an incongruity between her two taxes and the underlying hopes and realities they are based on ? That on the one hand, she has to turn every light switch in the country into a tax collection point, to cut emissions to save the Barrier Reef, if not indeed the planet ? Yet, on the other hand, she says a silent, secular, prayer that China and India go gangbusters emitting, to utterly swamp any such domestic emissions cuts; to save her budget from deficit ? And not just save her - or her successor's - budget; that the foundation of the entire Australian economy will rest increasingly on those increasing emissions ?

There is a further point of damning intersection with reference to China that has utterly eluded the Prime Minister. To say nothing of the massed brainpower of Treasury and our down under 21st century da Vinci, Ross Garnaut.

There she was at it again on Wednesday, saying that we had to move to a post-carbon economy. That "the global economy is shifting". That "Australia is at risk of falling behind the rest of the world". That "the longer we wait, the greater the cost to Australian jobs".

Somehow this message seems to escaped the Chinese. And the Indians. They are making every effort to move to a carbon economy. Indeed, that's precisely the reason for giving them a pass on their exploding emissions.

If indeed the future, and the jobs of the future, lie in a post-carbon economy, why wouldn't the very canny Chinese go straight to "that bountiful future" ? What idiots they are for trying to build the carbon economy that our down under smarties Gillard, Garnaut and ( Treasury secretary Ken ) Henry want to discard like yesterday's worn-out snakeskin.

So what is Gillard "saying" with her two taxes ? That we should feed the Chinese and Indian carbon addiction ? We should profit from the destruction of the planet ? Literally, in the case of the government's tax revenues ?

The truth is that Gillard and Co have taken policy into the realm of the surreal. She and her cabinet have moved beyond incoherence. Guided you have to say by a Treasury that has lost utterly any semblance of rational anaylsis and advice.

She makes KRudd, who had firmly established himself as a prime minister worse than Whitlam, look like the very model of prudent thoughtful judgement in comparison. His rush to lock in an Emissions Trading Scheme before the Copenhagen conference was ridiculous and mad. It would have left Australia right out there like the proverbial shag on the rock when Copenhagen collapsed without even the most basic binding commitments.

To say nothing of the whole bureaucratic imposition of the ETS. More complicated and more onerous than the GST and open to far more rorts than the building insulation fiasco. But at least before Copenhagen, some could argue the hope of some global agreement requiring an Australian commitment.

Not so now after both its failure and even more the gas-emitting farce of Cancun. Gillard doesn't even have that excuse. She embarks on this destructive absurdity knowing that the world-read: China, India and the US -are not going to follow.

If we had a Treasury that retained any of its traditional competence, it would be telling the government that an attack on carbon dioxide emissions is an attack on Australia's core and pervasive national comparative advantage.

Why are we among the biggest emitters per head of CO2 ? The biggest by far, if we include the indirect emissions from the use of our resource exports ? Because we benefit from our bountiful coal and iron ore. Gillard's attack on the so-called carbon economy is not just designed to hurt every Australian. Permanently. It is effectively a national suicide pledge. From the nation's leader. Incredible. Surreal. All-too real.

'Anti-Islamism' A Dangerous Line. Is The US Intelligence Providing Nuclear Information To Al-Qaeda ??

The Liberal Party game that allows patriotic people to blow of some steam in criticizing Moslems in Australia and internationally-is a dangerous line.

Not that Moslems should be allowed to migrate to Australia. They shouldn't. Not that any Islamic radical is any friend of Australia. He isn't. Moslem culture is incompatible with Australia's European culture and identity and Islamic radicalism can threaten Australians in various ways.

However, we can now see dangerous and incredible reports coming out of Pakistan that the CIA is providing information on nuclear and biological weapons to Al-Qaeda. Aren't they the folks who are supposed to have demolished the Twin Towers in New York in 2001 ? Aren't they the ones in Afghanistan who, along with the Taliban fanatics, are being fought by our soldiers ?

Australian nationalists have long said that anti-Islamism is a game designed to rope patriotic Aussies into support for establishment politics. If the CIA is doing what Pakistan intelligence says they are-then anti-Islamism is a lethal game set up with a dark agenda.

What will the Liberal Party say about this ? Read this report from Newstrack India: http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/206839

London, Feb 20 ( ANI ): Double murder-accused US official Raymond Davis has been found in possession of top-secret CIA documents, which point to him or the feared American Task Force 373 ( TF373 ) operating in the region, providing Al-Qaeda terrorists with "nuclear fissle material" and "biological agents," according to a report.

Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service ( SVR ) is warning that the situation on the sub-continent has turned "grave" as it appears that open warfare is about to break out between Pakistan and the United States, The European Union Times reports.

The SVR warned in its report that the apprehension of 36-year-old Davis, who shot dead two Pakistani men in Lahore last month, had fuelled this crisis.

According to the report, the combat skills exhibited by Davis, along with documentation taken from him after his arrest, prove that he is a member of US' TF373 black operations unit currently operating in the Afghan War Theatre and Pakistan's tribal areas, the paper said. While the US insists that Davis is one of their diplomats, and the two men killed were robbers, Pakistan says that the duo were ISI agents sent to follow him after he was discovered that he had been making contact with Al-Qaeda, after his cell phone was tracked to the Waziristan tribal area bordering Afghanistan, the paper said.

The most ominous point in this SVR report is "Pakistan's ISI stating that top-secret CIA documents found in Davis's possession point to his, and/or TF373, providing to al Qaeda terrorists "nuclear fissle material" and "biological agents", which they claim are to be used against the United States itself in order to ignite an all-out war in order to re-establish the West's hegemony over a Global economy that is warned is just months away from collapse," the paper added. ( ANI )

The Great Water Heist...While Australians Slept !

The great water debate continues to rear its head after years of dormancy, complacency, government mismanagement, and of late, proposals by the Murray Darling Catchment Authority.

The problem is not a new one, it emanates from the dismantling of strategic government policies concerning water management, the introduction of water trading, and the granting of exessive water extraction licences along our inland waterways.

Droughts and floods are nature, and we have absolutely no control over the provision of the valued resource ( water ), but we do have control over the way it is managed and harvested.

Many years ago, our forebears had the foresight and will to build one of our natural wonders, Burrinjuck Dam, along with associated irrigation areas and districts. The dam was well-planned and has provided a continued flow in the Murrumbidgee for towns and irrigators since 1912.The engineers of the day forecast the requirements to satisfy the need of irrigators in the Murrumbidgee valley and that of the growing urban population in various towns.

Burrinjuck Dam has been 'dry' several times, but a check of the records will reveal that there were very few times when credentialled irrigators did not receive entitlements to finish off growing crops. I use the word credentialled, because the dam was built for the express purpose of those irrigators farming within the duly constituted irrigation areas, not for the explosion of riverside irrigators that we have seen in the past couple of decades, nor for the benefit of those who would indulge in water trading as a commodity or share market.

So where has the system fallen off the rails ? Bureaucracy ?


Typical of this was the dismantling of provisions of the Crown Lands Act and the severing of water rights attached to land. The recent animated objections to the suggested MDB plan in the MIA are evidence enough of a plan gone haywire. But where were all these objectors when the original changes were pushed through parliament ?

The healthy maintenance of our rivers is paramount, and rightly so, but that should not be at the expense of ongoing infrastructure programs to sustain the irrigation possibilities of inland Australia to feed a growing population. What would be wrong with prioritising water allocation to irrigators who are providing the nation with food ?

I live in hope that a politician, of any standing, will have the gumption to stand up and speak the mind of the people and not some party-line rhetoric that we've all had our fill of.

Mick Foxall
Wagga.
( Daily Advertiser 4.2.11 )
Edited for length.

.............

On this vital and critical issue of water...the people of Australia need to collectively speak their own minds, as no current traitor-class politician ever will, they are guilty of prostituting all things Australian to to their pimp master friends the bankers/investors and globalists. These traitors embrace international treaties, such as the Ramsar Convention, which the Water Act 2007, and the MDBP are based on.

Let us remind ourselves the Water Act 2007, was created by Malcom Turnbull ( Minister in the Howard government and investment banker, Goldman Sachs executive etc ). I encourage people scrutinise Malcom's resume`.

Let us also consider Premier Carr's introduction of the Water Management Act 2000, cleverly crafted, before Mr. Carr took up position at Australia's largest investment bank, Macquarie bank. Interestingly farmers have already expressed concerns regarding Macquarie Agribusiness buying up water rights to secure water for its investments.

And on and on the well oiled propaganda machine goes... the hoodwinking and theft from the Australian people. The desecration of all things Australian. This agenda is much larger and not isolated to the issue of water, although without water we have nothing ! All Australians would do well to realise the seriousness of what is going on here.

Our "new" Captain of the MDBA Mr. Craig Knowles ( ex-Labor MP ) was already in the fray, as he "assisted" the Liberal party at the time of development of the Water Act 2007. Mr Knowles contributed his area of expertise, being international treaties.

On close inspection it is all rather a neat little package, a close knit 'circle of friends'. It matters not if it is the Labor/Greens, or the Lib/Nat's, the agenda is the same.

We must resist, stand up and be counted, or face the very real possibility of finding ourselves peons in a neo-colony....completley dispossessed...and to think we are allowing this to happen to ourselves !!

After all, it would be nothing for 100,000 people to turn up to a football match at the MCG, yet where are the crowds filling the streets because our water supply is under threat and our lives along with it ?

It would be foolhardy for people to think they will not be affected by the water situation, simply because they do not live in the area currently under threat.

As the world's underground aquifiers are drying up and will not replenish due to over pumping etc and other safe un-contaminated fresh water sources are diminishing, why would anyone sign away their water to international treaties and greedy bankers ?

Fellow Australians...we are at WAR...WATER WAR !!

EUREKA !!

Call For A Referendum.

It is disappointing that anyone who tries to express a contrary view on immigration in this country is branded a redneck or a racist and even if those views are shared by the majority of Australians it makes no difference.

The bleeding-heart brigade, the do-gooders and our moral guardians, the media, who have the last say, win every time. So much for free speech.

A lot has been said and written about refugees coming here and our politicians keep telling us the reason for the recent upsurge is the push factor. Most claim that unless they leave their homeland they face persecution or even death.

However, I believe that it is not the push factor but the pull factor that is attracting them to our shores. It's only commonsense that anyone fearing persecution or even death would seek refuge in the first available safe haven that they come to. But not most refugees. They bypass countries where they would be most welcome but because most do not have social security they head for Australia for a better lifestyle.

They know that once they get here they are set for life with generous handouts from the government that include free housing, free dental and medical plus all the perks available through charaties and various church groups. And to top it all off there is the baby bonus. And some people wonder why they make a bee-line for Australia.

Nearly all the men who arrive and settle here are all military age and while they relax at taxpayers` expense, enjoying the life of Riley, our young service personnel are certainly facing persecution and death cleaning up the mess they have left behind.

And it would be interesting to know if Australia was ever threatened with a foreign invasion would the like of Mr. John Moi of Wagga ( "Black Attack", The Daily Advertiser, January 12, 2011 ) and his fellow compatriots be prepared to bear arms against these invaders to defend their adopted country or would they hightail it out of here to another safe haven ?

If they refuse to defend their own country and desert family members and friends then it would be highly unlikely that they would risk life and limb to defend somebody else's country.

I know it makes a lot of people feel warm and fuzzy to have an open immigration policy but I believe every refugee who enters the country is a potential welfare recipient for the rest of their days.

We all know that the big end of town doesn't contribute much in the way of taxes so it's left to the low and middle income earners to foot the bill. And to top it all off, because of overcrowding on Christmas Island, some are now being housed on the mainland enjoying five-star luxury motels with room service. And some people wonder why they are busting their guts to come on leaking boats.

And to think that there are thousands of genuine Aussies, some through no fault of their own, who are really doing it tough by having to sleep in cars, doorways and under bridges yet, despite all of this, our politicians still can't seem to get their priorities right. They apparently don't believe in the adage that charity begins at home.

If we continue to tolerate weak border protection laws, weak politicians, "no questions asked" handouts from Centerlink and the two political party system nothing is ever going to change.

And you can forget about those fruitcakes The Greens as a viable alternative. Their main concerns appear to centre around same-sex marraige and sex-change operations at the taxpayer's expense.

Our politicians won't even consider having a referendum on immigration because if we change our present immigration policies it might just upset our political master-the United Nations.

Geoff Field
Gundagai
( Daily Advertiser 3.2.11 ).

For A Patriotic United Front.

The Following statement was approved by the management committee of the party on January 10 2011. It Is Now Published.

The Australia First Party recognises the dependent nature of the Australian state upon the forces of globalism. Australia is a client state, ruled by a traitor class which is intergrated into a transnational network of globalist elites and their economic and political structures. This class would govern Australia as a resources quarry cowed by thought-policing and a secret political police. Australia is further menaced by a new Chinese imperialism that competes with the American face of the New World Order for domination over Asia and the Pacific, with Australia a pawn in the game. The unfolding population / food crisis coupled with New World Order wars launches refugee hordes at Australia's borders, whilst the traitor class sponsors a mass immigration recolonization of Australia for the purposes of economic enmeshment with the 'global economy'. In the world crisis of the first quarter of the twenty-first century, Australia lacks status as an independent country. Indeed, Australia may disappear by century's end as a country-and suffer partition by other states.

To rescue our country and our people means removing Australia to a position outside of the chaos of globalism. That means the creation of an independent Australia. To win an independent Australia where political power can be exercised directly by the people, where wealth comes to all who labour and where arms and the initiation and the enforcement of the laws are in the hands of the people, a new force outside of the old parties and their worn-out ideologies and prejudices-has become necessary. This new nationalist movement must now fight and win the struggle for Australia's national independence.

It is ultimately necessary to unite all who can be united against the traitor class into a broad patriotic front to achieve Australian national independence. All those parties, groups and trade and community associations which contest the ideology, the politics, the economics and the cultural expressions of globalism, can find common ground against the foreign control and exploitation of Australia. Their uniting thread is the cause of Australian national independence.

The patriotic united front should not be a matter for tomorrow, but a matter of immediacy. United fronts operate in two ways: we predict the ultimate formation of a mass united front in times future, one that will win Australian national independence at a moment when parties and groups, economic and social and cultural associations all bond together in intense struggle. For today, we must build for that future in struggles on a daily basis around all manner of issues; we must wage community campaigns apposite to each Australian group and build unity on the ground. It is mandatory to seek this unity.

The Australia First Party is an incorporation registered as a Federal party. That does not mean that its function is only to contest elections. The party operates to the 'three tier method'. This means that the party contests elections, wages community campaigns of all sorts to build links with fellow Australians and to unite all Australians-and develops its ideas and principles into an Australianist ideology that also carries on a cultural defence of Australianity against globalisation. The three tiers operate as a unity.

In one sense, the party reaches out to groups of a patriotic nature which may operate to one or another of these three tiers as their individual method. The party seeks to build relationships with such parties and groups and to unite whenever necessary to defend common interests and win common victories. New patriotic groups form either as political, trade, or cultural groups. As Australia descends into chaos, that process is organic.

Australia First Party within the broad patriotic movement seeks to be a vanguard movement. This means that the party struggles to affirm the power of the ideals of Australian identity, independence and freedom, to carry those ideals everywhere, to defend them and preach them with zeal as a veritable Australianism and to inspire all others to tread the path towards the overweening fight for Australian national independence.

The party states clearly how it would prefer its dealings with other patriotic political organisations to be conducted and what relationships should be developed.

The Australia First Party recognises that different parties and groups exist for several reasons. These reasons can include: geographic circumstance, particular historical factors, previous organisational histories, the inter-relationships of people and sometimes-internecine struggles that are to be regretted, but which are human nature.

The Australia First Party declares that it will treat the other political organisations within a patriotic united front in this way:

1. Negotiate with any would-be candidate to avoid electerol competition.

2. Assist, when requested, other parties etc. in an electorate or council area where Australia First Party has no candidate.

3. Develop united activist campaigns on public issues or on other fronts, with any party or group-and do this in a consultative and cooperative spirit.

4. Exchange intelligence on disruptive elements, or state or other programs which undermine the integrity of the patriotic movement.

5. Avoid all unnecessary, unreasonable comment on other parties and groups; but point out fairly and reasonably, what any differences may be, whenever appropriate.

The party states clearly how it would prefer its dealings with other patriotic community organisations to be conducted and what relationships should be developed.

The Australia First Party recognises that different community associations arise for different reasons. Some defend the interests of the Australian productive classes-workers, farmers, small-business or other patriotic working people. Some advance the defence of Australian heritage and identity. Some explain new ideas that can inspire a very different Australia.

The Australia First Party declares that it will treat other organisations that represent the Australian community within a patriotic united front in this way:

1. Build links with each group and attempt to link together each group that all understand and appreciate the role of the party and each other.

2. Assist all in their struggles as requested.

3. Develop united activist campaigns on public issues with each group-and do this in a consultative and cooperative spirit.

4. Exchange intelligence on disruptive elements, or state or other programs which undermine the integrity of the patriotic movement.

5. Aviod all unnecessary, unreasonable comment on groups; but point out fairly and reasonably, what any differences may be, whenever appropriate.

The Australia First Party will always maintain its independence and iniciative in any united front arrangement and will act to secure its interests. However, it accepts that the times require a flexible and co-operative attitude.

Certainly, the goals of the Australia First Party are ( i ) to unite all nationalist and activist minded people into a single party and then seek further working arrangements with whatever political forces may thereafter exist for whatever reasons outside of the party's ambit and ( ii ) to deepen the unity of Australia's productive classes and their organisations against the traitor class and to create wider unity amongst all those resistance organisations which critique globalisation in ideas and culture.

Certainly, the party's aim is indeed to impose order where we detect diffuseness and to give focus where we note disarray.

Nonetheless, the party reasons that such general goals can not be reached by a self-proclamation of virtue. Rather, the party will fight such that its ideological position and political line progressively gain hegemony. It shall do so openly and honestly and by all fair means of discourse. No other organisation should feel anything else than a sense of relief that the position is made clear.

In the interim, and given that the fair contest of parties and other forces will continue, the Australia First Party has concluded that the only practical way whereby all may learn of each other and build the necessary bonds and links which allow for final unity, is to work confederally to construct a practical unity in struggle.

The united patriotic front is the requirement to which all should work.

Why Do We Really Need To Levy Australian Business And People For The Floods.

The floods are a national disaster, yet we persist in making short term decisions which have long term impacts on our economy, our food security and our lives. Why levy businesses and our people to pay for the neglect of infrastructure by governments, and poor decisions by planning authorities over many years? Why not levy the importers who will benefit from the decimation of our food growing areas in Queensland, NSW and Victoria?

The floods have exacerbated a problem that we created, not mother-nature. Our farmers have suffered years of drought, the threat of mining taking priority over their water supplies or contaminating them, and foreign companies and countries allowed to buy our land or breeding stock to export and compete with us, or to buy our water licenses then trade them as intangible commodities.

Free Trade Agreements and the high AUD$ mean that cheap, imported foods have been competing against our farmers for years by foreign owned companies manufacturing here, or local retailers importing their private labels in direct competition with Australian suppliers.

Foreign interests have been allowed to buy the channels of distribution for our exports leaving our farmers as price takers not price makers. Seventy five percent of our dairy industry is foreign owned, as are our brewing, beef exports and abattoirs, grain exports, sugar and most of our food manufacturing. Unless we own what we have we lose control.

Decisions have been made wrongly by successive governments on the basis that we export more food than we use here. No other developed country has exposed its food supply and farmers to the same extent. When we consider that we have an enviable clean, green, growing environment and some of the most skilled and productive farmers in the world this is an indictment on how poorly we have managed a strategic resource – our food supply.

We have opportunities to rebuild lost homes and infrastructure, and priority should be given to resourcing our people and our own local companies to supply and build these. But almost half our food growing areas are decimated for the short term. These are our farmers, our skills, our factories, and our jobs under threat.

The beneficiaries of our losses will be all those countries who will gain access to our food markets while our farmers rebuild. These countries will not leave once they gain greater access. China, New Zealand, USA, Peru, Chile, UK, EU, Thailand, India are all ready to capitalise on our losses. If they are to benefit, then they should pay for access to our markets, and their imports should be on an emergency basis only until such times as our farmers can supply us again. The levies should be on them not Australians.

These countries subsidise their farmers, so it about time Australia started to subsidise our farmers especially through this “natural disaster” rebuilding period. Consumers should be better informed and allowed to choose. Our labelling laws should make it mandatory to put country of origin on all foods, and be policed to ensure consumers know exactly where the food they are eating is grown.

Our gate keepers should be better resourced to ensure we have a viable farming sector and retain the skills and quality systems that our farmers meet. AQIS should at the very least triple its resources to assess the quality and condition of produce being imported so that we are not exposed to unwanted diseases or contaminants and chemicals not allowed here.

Bio security Australia should have independent Australian scientists to assess the quality of imported foods, and not have to rely on global companies with vested interests other than Australia’s to provide research.

ACCC should be serious about the unfair competition allowed to occur when foreign interests buy our key food industry sectors for both domestic and export use. Our farmers may own the farms but they do not own the profits.

Our farmers will never recover if we do not look after them now. It is not a level playing field. These are our people, our businesses, our communities and our farmers. The Australian people have shown their true worth in how they responded to the disasters which have befallen them. Now it is time for decision makers to give Priority to Australia.

PRIORITY AUSTRALIA IN 2011

Lynne Wilkinson

Ausbuy.

Will John Moi Go Home ?

That well known Wagga 'refugee advocate' John Moi has blessed us with his views on the independence referendum in Southern Sudan. Many of the African 'refugees' to Australia come from Southern Sudan Moi told the Daily Advertiser ( Wagga ) :


"Close to 9300 southerners living in Australia registered to vote. A number of us from Wagga will travel to Canberra to cast our votes. To many southerners, the plebiscite was the best thing that ever happened because this will now resolve internal contradictions; the country of Sudan was in for the last 50 years, 40 of which was spent in civil wars."


Now that Sudan will break into two states, the African south and the Arabised north, the safety of the South Sudan population can no longer be an issue. We wonder: who will return home? will the Australian government encourage these people to return home?


Mr. Moi continued:


"I would like to call on the government of Australia to support the new born country in its development".


Australia First could not agree more except we would add a rider to that: the Sudanese 'refugees' should return home! Aid should be contingent on South Sudan taking these people and assistance should be provided to get these people home.


Yet, it is our strong suspicion that having tasted the benefits of free housing, cash gifts, welfare of all sorts, few of these people would be interested in a return to South Sudan. And we suspect that Mr. Moi won't be leaving either.


For Australia First Party a return home is non-negotiable. The Future Australia will be generous, but the right of the Australian People to identity in our own land is ahead of everything.