27 June 2008 Thought for the Week:
was also the year when the challenge against bank nationalisation forced on us
a realisation of the restrictions and restraints imposed by the Constitution,
and in particular Section 92. Consequently, this led to a rethinking of our approach.
Because, unless the Platform was just to stagnate into irrelevance, the search
had to be made for alternative means of achieving our objectives
"Nation Tired of Confrontation, says Hawke": But Hawke has some advice for Rudd: remember that Australia 'is the most over-governed country in the world with its many houses of parliament"; and as Rudd proceeds with reform through the Council of Australian Governments, beware the nonsense about states' rights.'
- - Paul Kelly, The Australian, 5 March 2008
AFTER THE REVOLUTION YOU WILL DO AS YOU'RE TOLD !
by Patrick O'Shea
end of the dark days of World War I, the world was to witness the next phase of
the Revolution. This time, the bloody takeover of Christian Russia by the Bolsheviks
It is difficult for present Australians to comprehend the magnitude of the savagery
and brutality inflicted upon the various peoples of Russia during this phase.
Cultural Marxism - the Ideological Phase
Over time, Communists and Labor Party members became indistinguishable. Frequently Party conferences were one and the same thing. You could be a Communist one day and a Labor man the next. They dreamed of the day when Federal Parliament became their 'machine' for implementing the instructions from the Comintern for revolutionary war.
then '. The Fabian Society
The final phase of the Revolution is the complete subjugation of the peoples of
the world - an unchallengeable power imposed through sheer brutality. And unless
Australians arise from their sleep-walking and act to regain their freedoms, they
will experience as much bitter fruit as did the Russian and Chinese peoples and
as the Tibetans now do.
NOTES FROM THE RED HOUSE
by Betty Luks
These were men and women who came to the attention of the KGB authorities as still having a mind of their own, whose spirit had not been broken, who had not wholly conformed to the 'thought processes', the 'politically correct' policies of the brutal Communist authorities.
The booklet lists some of
N.I. Chernyshev testifies that for more than 25 years, N.I. Broslavsky - a sane man - has been languishing in the same "hospital". He is offered freedom if he denies his faith in God.
Guenady Mikhaiovich Shimanov, (writer of the report): After further "treatment", the author expects to be released from the "hospital" and sent back to his beloved wife, a "feeble-minded, slobbering-mouthed, giggling individual". "There has been some progress!"- the psychiatrist will say, "he has already lost his faith in God. Yet it is true that he reasons with some difficulty and can hardly move his tongue around, but his previous logic was merely a superficial one; as a matter of fact, he was raving."
"Special Psychiatric Hospitals" are known to exist in Kazan, Sychevka (Smolensk region), Leningrad, Cherniahovsk, Minsk, Dniepropetrovsk, Orel. It is very likely that they are also to be found in other regions. In many psychiatric hospitals special wards have been set aside for "treatment" against dissidents of all complexions.
The Moscow Patriarchate, recognized by the atheistic Government of the USSR, and kept under its control, maintains a stony silence."
MAYBE IT WOULD BE BEST IF WE LOST THIS BATTLE !
Coyne, in Maclean's magazine writes:
What made the piece work was, in part, how deadpan it was. The correspondent never cracked a smile as he interviewed these people who had spent their lives in such sublimely pointless pursuit. But what really made it soar was the detail. I can tell you about the Institute for the Study of Lenin's Brain. But unless you saw it up close - unless you watched these poor, lunatic pseudo-scientists describe their work, at length and with evident pride - you would not capture the full absurdity of it.
I feel much the same way now, after two days spent in a downtown Vancouver court room watching the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal's hearings into the case of Mohamed Elmasry et al. versus Mark Steyn and Maclean's. I have tried to convey some of the sense of what I have seen in my posts to the magazine's website. But I fear that unless you were actually in that tiny, suffocating room, you could not fully grasp just how utterly deranged the proceedings were.
will perhaps be familiar with the case.
So instead we are in court - or rather, not
court, but some mad parody of a court, whose contours seem to bend and stretch
like some psychedelic vision circa Yellow Submarine.
Free speech denied -
even truth is not a defence:
The "remedies" at the tribunals command are
equally breathtaking. Should, I don't know, a magazine be found to have contravened
the code, the tribunal must, at a minimum, order that unnamed magazine to "cease
the contravention"- i.e. to stop publishing whatever sort of material;; it was
that the tribunal deemed unpublishable.
In consequence, our high-priced legal help, fine lawyers that they are, found themselves boxing with shadows: all but forbidden to mount a defence, raising objections to evidence without the first clue of what rules, if any, the tribunal would apply, plowing methodically through whatever odd bits of flotsam and jetsam the complainants could think to throw at them - not just their own subjective reactions to Steyn's piece, but polls, blog posts, reports on Islamophobia in other countries, the works.
Is it any wonder that I concluded, even before the hearing began, that our best strategy was to lose? Win the case, and all we do is legitimise the process. See, its defenders would argue - the system works, correctly distinguishing between an occasionally over-the-top polemicist like Steyn and a real, honest-to-God hate-monger. And so we would simply be teeing up the next complainant, and the next.
what they seek, is not, as they pretend, the right of reply. Their purpose is
rather to prevent the offending material from being published in the first place.
No, the only answer is to lose, and challenge the law on appeal, on constitutional
grounds - and if that doesn't work, to embarrass the politicians into repealing
NO-TALENT PROSELYTISER OVERTAKEN BY HISTORY ?
by Peter West
Speaking of bad memories, Bob Hawke took time from golf and other arrangements (see The Australian 5/3/08 p.7 for Hawke on the golf course) to tell us: "What are states' rights? There are no such things as states' rights." Why: because "states consist of people, Australian people."
The same reductionist logic would prove that there are no Federal rights either. Talk about centralism on the brain! Maybe Paul and Bob could get together and take the show on the road. They would make a great team with talents to dwarf Lennon and McCartney. I can't wait for their first album.
P.S. It has been announced Mr. Keating is now to be 'recycled' by Rudd Labor. He is to take up a post in London promoting tourism for Australia. What! This is the very man who said "Australia was the *!*#hole of the world." Well, I never.
OH, STOP THE RACIST ASSASSINATION ROT OVER OBAMA !
by Peter Ewer
"racists" kill thesis-plagiarist and adulterer and woman-beater, civil-rights
activist Martin Luther King? Let google do the hard research work. The official
story is that James Earl Ray killed King. He allegedly did it not for reasons
of race, but because of King's communism.
Jesse Jackson, US civil rights activist thinks that the US government did the job. No, we are not talking about Port Arthur, but Memphis Tennessee, 4 April 1968. Funny how all of these conspiracies all have the same structure.
EUROPEAN UNION JUGGERNAUT HALTED BY THE IRISH REFERENDUM
Report and Comment by Nigel
The Irish constitution
required a referendum be held. If the Irish voted NO (as they later did), the
Treaty of Lisbon would fail and the British would be free again.
We were told that 'the treaty's backers'
were resorting to threats if the Irish voted NO. The Australian described the
NO camp as 'a motley alliance of die-hard Catholics, radical socialists and Sinn
Fein politicians' - not a favourable portrait! There was finally a bland report,
without comment, that a NO vote would not be accepted and the Irish in that case
would be asked to think again.
bias shown: The Irish did vote NO by 53.4% to 46.6% in a reasonably high voter
turnout of 53%. The bias and lack of magnanimity of the press in reporting the
NO victory has shown even more strongly their secret alliance with the powers
behind the scenes.
The Age, as it were, wept tears as it told readers ('Ireland rejects key EU treaty', 14 June) that the Irish vote could 'wreck a treaty painstakingly negotiated over years by leaders of all 27 member states.' How sad! There was not a word, however, about the promise-breaking and deceit practised by some of these 'leaders' (they were hardly 'representatives') in ensuring that referendums were not allowed in their nations.
The Sunday Age ('Irish NO vote stymies key reforms of EU', 15 June) used exaggeration in claiming that the Irish vote had 'thrown Europe into political turmoil' rather than caused anguish to certain power elites. The result was blamed on fear, ignoring the fact that fear of tyranny is sensible and ethically acceptable. However, all was not lost for the tyrants (the paper did not put it like that, of course): 'Other European countries said they would try to press ahead for a way to make the Lisbon Treaty work after all' (moving the goalposts during the game!).
On 16 June The Australian published a news report ('Europe powers vow to push on without Irish') which advised that France, Germany and EU officials in Brussels were planning 'to press ahead' with the treaty 'despite Ireland's shock rejection of the blueprint.' It added that Britain and Czechoslovakia felt the treaty was dead. Only near the end of the report came an admission that 'there are signs that across Europe political leaders will face growing public opposition if they disregard the Irish vote.' Below its report The Australian published an opinion article ('Dublin should do right thing and leave the EU') by a former Danish foreign minister and EU supporter, Uffe Ellemann-Jensen, who referred to 'the unfortunate Irish tradition for referendums'!
On 17 June The Australian news report ('EU crisis talks on treaty's defeat') advised that 'most EU leaders have insisted ratification should continue in the eight nations that have not yet endorsed the treaty' and claimed that 'doing so would put huge pressure on Ireland to hold a fresh referendum'. Only in the last of the fourteen paragraphs was there a tiny note that EU leaders risk 'being accused of ignoring their citizens.'
Over: None of these reports for a moment considered the thought that, if the
Irish folk said NO, then maybe many of the other peoples of Europe might also
say NO in referendums, in which case it would only be just to hold those referendums.
Also, on 17 June The Australian published an excellent letter by a British citizen, Dr D. R. Cooper of Maidenhead. Dr Cooper remarked that 'we shall shortly discover the true extent to which the EU respects the rule of law, as claimed on its website.' He pointed out that 'any attempt by the EU to circumvent that 'NO' in order to implement (the treaty) would clearly be illegal under its own law', as would be 'any kind of victimisation of the Irish people for exercising their legal right of veto.'
Here in Australia those of us who cherish our British blood and our ties with our motherland must surely exert ourselves energetically to prevent any further loss of British sovereignty to the EU. The Irish NO is a godsend; but there is still much to do.
THE OIL 'CRISIS'- A LIGHTHEARTED MOMENT
the Gold Coast Citizens Community Forums:
OIL is located in Bass Strait; East Queensland Shale Fields; Canning Basin; Perth
Basin and the North-West Continental Shelf.
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
asks Vol.44 No.22 : "We wonder, will the Christian Church leaders stand up to
be counted, thus defending the rights granted them as long ago as 1215AD under
Magna Carta?" I say no.
matter: Piers Ackerman wrote (Daily Telegraph 4/6/08) of: a "......successful
New Zealand model for guest workers from Pacific nations....." What a twit. I
wonder if he has spent time in Auckland's southern suburbs? A UK policeman working
here told my sister that South Auckland is worse than he experienced in Brixton.
I expect we will see riots before too many more years."
"On Target" is published by the Australian League of Rights, Box 1052. G.P.O. Melbourne 3001.