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.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
'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 )
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 )
Thursday, February 3, 2011
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 !!
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 !!
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
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 ).
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 ).
Thursday, January 27, 2011
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.
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.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
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
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.
These countries subsidise their farmers, so it about time
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
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
Lynne Wilkinson
Ausbuy.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
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.
"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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
