THE CHICKENS HAVE ROOSTED

It seems an Anglican Bishop's scathing attack on 'liberal' values touched a nerve with Sydney's Radio-2GB personality Alan Jones.
Alan's comments are worth repeating:
"There was an interesting story published at the end of last month in London's Daily Mail newspaper. It was called a lacerating attack on liberal values, by the Right Reverend Michael Nazir Ali, the Anglican Bishop of Rochester.
Dr Nazir Ali was born into a Roman Catholic family in Pakistan. He converted to Anglicanism at the age of 20. He suffered, as a young man, from rough treatment handed out to Christians in a country, Pakistan, where failing to follow the official religion can sometimes end in murder.

The story reported that he was educated at Cambridge University and had served as an assistant to the then Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Robert Runcie. And many thought he was a candidate for the post of Archbishop of Canterbury. He's 58, and he's been in Rochester for nearly 14 years.

Well, the Bishop argued that England was mired in a doctrine of endless self-indulgence that had brought on an explosion in public violence and binge drinking.
And he said that the collapse of Christianity had wrecked British society. And he dated the downfall of Christianity from what he called the social and sexual revolution of the 1960s.
And he said the newfangled and insecurely founded, his words, doctrine of multiculturalism had left immigrant communities "segregated, living parallel lives".
And he said Christian values of human dignity, equality and freedom could be lost as the way is left open for the advance of brands of Islam that do not respect Western values.

As an immigrant from Pakistan the Bishop said that he might be thought to be least qualified to discuss British identity. But he quoted Kipling: "What should they know of England who only England know".

And he talked about something momentous happening in the sixties, and he called it a cultural revolution in which women ceased to uphold or pass on the Christian faith.
And he said that "instead of resisting this phenomenon, liberal theologians and church leaders all but capitulated".
And he said, "It's created the moral and spiritual vacuum in which we now find ourselves". He said in the place of Christianity there was nothing "except perhaps endless self-indulgence".

And then he said the consequences of all this were, his words, "The destruction of the family because of the alleged parity of different forms of life together; the loss of a father figure, especially for boys, because the role of fathers is deemed otiose; the abuse of substances including alcohol; the loss of respect for the person, leading to horrendous and mindless attacks; the increasing communication gap between generations and social classes". He said the list is very long.

But then he said another result of the collapse of Christianity was that immigrants had been welcomed, not on the basis of Britain's Christian heritage to which they would be welcome to contribute, but by "the newfangled and insecurely founded doctrine of multiculturalism".

Obviously the Bishop's outspokenness has not endeared him to the head honchos within his church. But he is not without support.
He may not be the Archbishop of Canterbury, but his comments would echo a ring of truth amongst millions of people in Britain and in Australia. The simple question is, where is the leader who is likely to do something about it?

DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH - THE LEADER IS NOT IN THIS CHURCH !

The following snippet of news about the liberals within this 'Christian' church came from Salt Shakers: Christian Ethics - Research, Education and Action Group: They write:
We have spoken many times against the inter-faith/multi-faith movements being established across Australia and across the world.
The local Council based groups, the Sydney based 'Common Dreams', the 'National Interfaith Festival' held in Qld and the big one, the 'Parliament of the World's Religions' meeting in Melbourne next year.

We have been challenged about our opposition - people say these groups help local evangelism. We always ask 'How' but we get no answers. Now we have the truth - from the President of the Uniting church in Australia, (UCA) the Rev Gregor Henderson.
'Other faiths, [are] not for conversion' - you might upset the interfaith dialogue!

Rev Henderson says, "But deliberate targeting of people of other faiths has a touch of disrespect about it; it will not contribute to inter-faith understanding and harmony; it will not contribute to peaceful relationships in the Australian community.
"Evangelistic targeting of other faith communities - Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc - is very likely to create tensions between these groups and Christians." Go and evangelise the non religious or the "nominal" Christians, he says, but not those of other religions/faiths!!

For a copy of the letter Salt Shakers refers to - the one that went out to all UCA 'leaders', go to http://crosslight.victas.uca.org.au/?p=141#more-141

WHY FEMINISM IS WRONG

by James Reed
I recently came across an interesting online-opinion piece (www.onlineopinion.com.au) by Australian philosopher Stephen Buckle: "Feminist Social Explanations are Wrong." In a nutshell feminism uses sex and gender relations to explain the 'woman problem' and the 'woman problem' in some shape or form is due to men.
There are of course sophisticated variations of this: not all men, but patriarchy, or more recently oppressive dualisms (e.g. men/women, black/white, etc.) under the influence of post modernism. However, whatever the covering rhetoric used, the same old story is rolled out by the feminist tongue or key-board: maleness is the problem.

Dr. Buckle goes on at length to give an alternative explanation of that which enlivens the feminist problematic. I won't try to summarise it and/or criticise it because I am still trying to understand it. But I would question the core assumptions giving rise to the very need for feminism that women are oppressed (we all, who are not rich and members of the ruling elite, are oppressed) and that maleness in the John Wayne sense is a bad thing.

Indeed, if we were all feminists, human civilisation would not exist. The human race would have died out. If the deracinating, emasculating effects of feminism continue, maybe our elites will get a taste of the real Hobbesian world of 'all against all'. Let us hope that 'natural selection' is on our side!

EMMA TOM IS ALMOST RIGHT

by James Reed
Columnist Emma Tom (The Australian 6/3/08 p.13) usually writes such weird columns that I don't see fit to put our readers through the process of reading a critical review. However, one article with an important issue for us she discusses at length is the "Butcher of Bega" an obstetrician and gynaecologist who, by Tom's description mutilated women in a horrific way. I used Google to check this and her descriptions are correct.

But Tom, a young feminist, says that if the attacks were on men, there would have been an uproar with the very first case. She makes the whole thing a feminist issue. The facts are that the medical profession is like the Mafia and stick together. What about the female staff who assisted the Butcher of Bega and all the female doctors who knew about him? Where were all the feminist lawyers who write articles about women's oppression from their air-conditioned offices of our universities? Where is there concern for the plight of such women? A good lawsuit earlier could have stopped this fellow in his tracks.

According to the world's leading medical journal, Journal of the American Medical Association vol.284, July 26 2000, doctors are the third leading cause of death in the US, causing 250,000 deaths every year. Of these, men and women are equal sufferers. So the issue is not a feminist one as trendy "wry side" columnist Emma Tom paints it, but one about the soundness of orthodox medicine.

Much has been written about this, especially the way doctors mindlessly prescribe drugs solely on the basis of drug company recommendations. Doctors, I believe, have a book that is full of the side effects of most drugs. I have yet to have a doctor give me an outline of the risks associated with their witch-doctor prescriptions.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN U.S. WHEN THINGS FALL APART?

by Brian Simpson
This question was discussed in The Social Contract (USA) Fall 2007 "The Future of an Unsustainable Planet: Chaos, Resource Depletion, Ecological Degradation, Ethnic Unrest and National Dissolution."

Here are some quotes from an overview by Dr. Richard Duncan, quoting Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez's view on the fate of 'gringos': Gutierrez bio:
"Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez is on the State of Texas payroll at the University of Texas -Arlington. He founded "La Raza" the group of Mexicans openly dedicated to taking over at least the southwest portion of the United States. He notes that by the differential birth-rate of Mexicans versus white Americans the Mexicans will inevitably take over, and it is only a 'matter of time' before the Mexicans have control. Whether by this he means just the Southwest United States or the whole country is unclear." (Youngquist, 12 July 2007)

We are nice: "If the hot weather hasn't got you steamed, this will do it. Those people will kill us if necessary to take over the U.S. But we have one on the State payroll supported by the taxpayers of Texas. And we meekly put up with these statements. If we said we were going to kill the Mexicans think of what an uproar that would be. But we are nice and civilized and so we submit to this sort of threat without a protest. Given present trends, they will indeed take over." (Youngquist, 12 July 2007)

Gringos must go: "We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him." (Gutierrez, 1969)

Reconquista: "The border remains a military zone. We remain a hunted people. Now you think you have a destiny to fulfil in the land that historically has been ours for forty thousand years. And we're a new Mestizo nation. And they want us to discuss civil rights. Civil rights!! What law made by white men to oppress all of us of colour, female and male. This is our homeland. We cannot-we will not- and we must not be made illegal in our own homeland. We are not immigrants that came from another country to another country. We are migrants, free to travel the length and breadth of the Americas because we belong here. We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. The explosion is in our population." (Gutierrez, 1995)

A leading paper in the journal by Richard Pelto "What Will Probably Happen When Things Fall Apart" sees nations going the Yugoslavia way. Nationalist and ethnic sentiment will arise when "globalisation-caused fragmentation" finishes off the American state.
People will return to their roots when the artificial environment created by globalisation is switched off by inevitable resource and ecological crises. Then what remains of America will need to face Professor Gutierrez's friends

A RECIPE FOR FURTHER CHAOS ?

Piers Ackerman Daily Telegraph 4/6/08, dot-points the experiences of European nations, which warns of the chaos resulting from imposing foreign peoples and cultures upon dissimilar peoples and cultures But amazingly, in spite of the evidence of the ever-growing problems, he is in favour of more foreign migration into Australia!
He writes:
"Australia is about to see the greatest increase in its migrant population since the post-World War II immigration scheme began. The Rudd Labor Government has announced a lift in permanent and temporary migration for 2008-09 to nearly 300,000, and Immigration Minister Chris Evans has indicated that some of the rules will be eased to ensure those numbers are met.
Easing need for English Language Skills and Unskilled Workers welcomed: Among the most important changes will be the easing of the need to have a knowledge of the English language, a shift in emphasis from skilled to unskilled workers and the decision to trial a pilot program based on the successful New Zealand model for guest workers from Pacific nations."

Never mind the glaring failure of such policies in other Western nations:
"Germany has huge problems with its Turkish guest worker population for the simple reason that the Islamic Gastarbeiters will not leave when their visas expire.
The French now have vast no-go areas around major cities, including Paris, where even police and military personnel will not go, leaving the largely African immigrants to exist beyond the reach of French law, and the British are not far behind, with areas of cities such as Bradford housing non-English speaking Muslim populations which honour Islamic tradition, not British common law.
The Italians are finding it difficult to police the growing number of Gypsy communities, and even South Africa has problems with Zimbabweans who have come to find a better life.
While there is no doubt that the skilled migrant program and the 457 visa program (which Labor and its trade union allies used to traduce) have increased Australia's economic prosperity, (we exist for the sake of the 'economy' 'ed) it is unlikely that any guest worker program would enjoy the same support should the economy go sour."

So, when the racial and cultural breakdown finishes us off , those who remain of the Australian-Australian population will need to face the racial and cultural equivalents of Professor Gutierrez's friends

PUTTING FOXES IN CHARGE OF THE HENHOUSE

A BBC investigation estimates that around $23bn ( '11.75bn) may have been lost, stolen or just not properly accounted for in Iraq. For the first time, the extent to which some private contractors have profited from the conflict and rebuilding has been researched by the BBC's Panorama using US and Iraqi government sources.
A US gagging order is preventing discussion of the allegations: The order applies to 70 court cases against some of the top US companies. While George Bush remains in the White House, it is unlikely the gagging orders will be lifted. To date, no major US contractor faces trial for fraud or mismanagement in Iraq.

War profiteering - the largest in history?
The president's Democrat opponents are keeping up the pressure over war profiteering in Iraq. Henry Waxman who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform said: "The money that's gone into waste, fraud and abuse under these contracts is just so outrageous, its egregious. It may well turn out to be the largest war profiteering in history."

In the run-up to the invasion one of the most senior officials in charge of procurement in the Pentagon objected to a contract potentially worth seven billion that was given to Halliburton, a Texan company, which used to be run by Dick Cheney before he became vice-president. 'Unusually' only Halliburton got to bid - and won:

Missing billions:
The search for the missing billions also led the program to a house in Acton in West London where Hazem Shalaan lived until he was appointed to the new Iraqi government as minister of defence in 2004. He and his associates siphoned an estimated $1.2 billion out of the ministry. They bought old military equipment from Poland but claimed for top class weapons.

Meanwhile they diverted money into their own accounts.
Judge Radhi al-Radhi of Iraq's Commission for Public Integrity investigated. He said: "I believe these people are criminals. They failed to rebuild the Ministry of Defence, and as a result the violence and the bloodshed went on and on - the murder of Iraqis and foreigners continues and they bear responsibility."
Mr Shalaan was sentenced to two jail terms but he fled the country. He said he was innocent and that it was all a plot against him by pro-Iranian MPs in the government. There is an Interpol arrest out for him but he is on the run - using a private jet to move around the globe.
He stills owns commercial properties in the Marble Arch area of London.
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/7444083.stm

THE FALL OF CHINA

by James Reed
John Lee in "Will China Fall?" (Centre for Independent Studies) has written an interesting book about the political and economic limits of China. China's political system is "dangerously unstable" and its economy unsustainable.
There are major threats to social order such as massive differences in wealth between urban areas and poor rural regions. Then there are pollution problems.

The global financial elites have shifted their attention to China and India as a centre for investment of financial capital. The end result is the same from globalisation everywhere: some people get very rich, others very poor, but in the long term everyone in the nation loses their freedom and the environment is degraded for future generations.

ROMANTIC PRIMITIVISM

by Brian Simpson
Australian writer, Roger Sandall writing in the June 2006 edition of Quadrant (also: "The Savage Garden of Eden" The WE Australian 10-11/6/06 p.19) offered some brilliant reflections upon why various peoples look with nostalgia and longing to the "primitive past".

"Primitive Life" was brutal and often short. Scholars have shown (e.g. L.H. Keeley, "War Before Civilisation" (Oxford 1996) and S. Le Blanc, "Constant Battles: The Myth of the Peaceful, Noble Savage" (2003) that it is indeed a myth to suppose that any "traditional" or "native" society was peaceful.

Bloodshed and killing has been the human lot since the year dot. Sandall says that romantic primitivism arises as part of a guilt-complex "involving moral rules idealising the communal way of life.
This ideal is deeply inscribed in conscience; and guilt arises because of the claims of this communal social conscience on the one hand and the opposing need in civilised societies to assert oneself individualistically against the communal, against the collective, against the claustrophobia of the tribe, against the tyranny of the human herd."

Globalism imposes a prohibition against natural xenophobia (fear of stranger desires). Xenophobia "is obviously an expression of the same unaccommodating instincts we share with countless other animals, including chimpanzees, and goes back to the primate past."
Anti-civilisational xenophile (love of strangers), if I understand this argument, is an "inversion of much that is natural, normal and universal in social life" because the suppression of natural xenophobic forces is far from successful: "those bad old violent and aggressive drives just won't go away."

It therefore makes little sense, I believe, to attempt to compound problems, by building and ever striving, to increase constantly, cultural, ethnic and racial diversity. It is only a matter of time before the wheels fall off of the multicultural cart.

CANADA'S HUMAN RIGHTS 'KANGAROO COURTS'

Source: Ezra Levant 30 May, 2008:
"The Conservative government has introduced a motion to Parliament's Justice Committee proposing an investigation into the abusive, corrupt practises of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).
The motion specifically refers to public "concerns" about the CHRC's "investigative techniques" and their "interpretation and application" of the section 13 thought crimes provision.

The resolution, was put forward by Rick Dykstra the Conservative MP from St. Catherines, Ontario, with the knowledge and approval of the Justice Minister, Rob Nicholson. The following email from Nicholson, was sent to a voter, in which you can read his change of approach.

An excerpt from Nicholson's letter:
'I would like to inform you that my caucus colleague Mr. Rick Dykstra has tabled a motion that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights examine and make recommendations with respect to the CHRC, including its mandate, operations, and interpretation and application of provisions relating to section 13 of the CHRA, which addresses hate messages. I look forward to that review.' Jason Kenney, the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism, was also instrumental in getting this issue on to the government's agenda."

Comment: Are we witnessing the beginning of the fight-back by the Anglo-Celtic peoples?
Our Canadian cousins have flashed round the internet a delightful cartoon we Australians relate well to. It is of a large number of kangaroos hopping up and down, to and fro, a set of steps leading up to a Canadian 'kangaroo' human rights 'court'. Spot on!

TIMELY LETTER TO THE AUSTRALIAN PRESS

'Human Rights': To the Editor of The Australian, 6th June 2008:

Everyone who cares for free speech should read James Allan's exposure of the intellectual repression in Canada ('Canada's deadly tongue trap', The Australian 6/6/08).
Current anti-vilification legislation in Australia does not yet decree, as in Canada, that truth is not a defence against 'hate speech', but already defendants in such cases will be financially punished here even if they win cases conducted, inevitably, in unequitable circumstances. Just ask Dr Frederick Toben.
On one matter, however, Allan is wrong. He apparently believes the Canadian civil libertarian he quotes and accepts that those who set up the Canadian Human Rights Tribunals did not realise that these would 'muzzle the expression of opinion'.
On the contrary, the prime movers were activists in the Jewish community who were determined to stop public publication and discussion of certain viewpoints, on the Holocaust and related topics, at any cost. The disgraceful treatment of Ernst Zundel, currently held prisoner in Germany, is the chief fruit of their efforts.
Australia remains in danger of following Canada's tyrannous example as long as public consideration of the role of Jewish groups in endangering free speech is not freely allowed in our major media and other intellectual forums.

- - Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic