30 January 2009 Thought
for the Week:
They withdraw unilaterally; They ceasefire unilaterally; They invade unilaterally; They win unilaterally; They destroy unilaterally; They massacre unilaterally; They bathe in blood unilaterally; They spread white phosphorus unilaterally; They kill women and children unilaterally; They drop bombs unilaterally; They live on stolen land unilaterally; They support their homicidal leaders unilaterally; They love their ‘Jewish Only State’ unilaterally; Their democracy is unilateral; They love themselves unilaterally; They are the unilateral people. It's a wrap, a doddle, an Israeli ceasefire just in time for Barack Obama to have a squeaky-clean inauguration with all the world looking at the streets of Washington rather than the rubble of Gaza. Condi and Ms Livni thought their new arms-monitoring agreement – reached without a single Arab being involved – would work... The great and the good gathered for a Sharm el-Sheikh summit. Only Hamas itself was not consulted… And not one European leader travelling to the region suggested the survivors might be helped if Israel, the EU and the US ended the food and fuel siege of Gaza.
After killing hundreds of women and children, Israel was the good guy again, by declaring a unilateral ceasefire that Hamas was certain to break. But Obama will be smiling on Tuesday. Was not this the reason, after all, why Israel suddenly wanted a truce?
What no one noticed yesterday – not the Arabs nor the Israelis nor the portentous men from Europe – was that the Sharm el-Sheikh meeting last night was opening on the 90th anniversary – to the day – of the opening of the 1919 Paris peace conference which created the modern Middle East. One of its main topics was "the borders of Palestine". There followed the Versailles Treaty. And we know what happened then. The rest really is history. Bring on the ghosts. The front page of the Beirut daily As-Safir said it all yesterday. Across the top was a terrible photograph of the bloated body of a Palestinian man newly discovered in the ruins of his home while two male members of his family shrieked and roared their grief. Below, at half the size, was a photograph from Israel of Western leaders joking with Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister. Olmert was roaring with laughter. Silvio Berlusconi, arms on the back of Olmert's shoulders, was also joshing and roaring – with laughter, not grief – and on Olmert's right was Nicolas Sarkozy of France wearing his stupidest of smiles. Only Chancellor Merkel appeared to understand the moral collapse. No smiles from Germany. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMGuYjt6CP8: - “WE are the authors of the Palestinian tragedy” |
WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE HAVE WOVENby Betty Luks Read the following very carefully: A nation 's sovereign birthright: Money Lenders from Amsterdam: Two hundred years later, the outcome of WW I with Germany depended just as much on the American and International Bankers as it did on Britain 's resources, productive capacity and the fighting capabilities and resolve of its army. [1] 'The Tallies, A Tangled Tale and The Beginning and the Ending by David Astle available from all Book Services. Price: $15.00 plus postage. |
SAVING WESTERN CIVILISATION : THE 1960sby Chris Knight Although the present suicidal disease now gripping the West has its origins in events hundreds of years ago, the 1960s represent a point where the forces of the New World Order 'turned up the heat '. In terms of a cultural assault, the 1960s were a period of intense warfare against the old conservative order. Philosopher Roger Scruton sees the 1960s as an era of rebellion not only against parents, but the concept of parent itself, a radical antinomianism (The Financial Review 23/10/1998, p.7). The 1960s radicals had an upper middle-class background and John Carroll describes this group as 'paranoid and remissive and as 'traitors (J. Carroll, 'Paranoid and Remissive: The Treason of the Upper Middle Class (1982). They had a hatred of the authority of the old conservative culture, primarily because of its weakness in allowing these terrible infants to get away with what they tried. The 1960s radicals came from homes with dominant mothers and weak fathers. Lacking authoritative males to identify with, they turned with 'paranoid hatred against their own society, identifying with the likes of mega-murderers such as Mao Zedong. They pinned their hopes for revolution upon, 'the criminals, the insane, the poor and the racially degraded (as Carroll, p.3 puts it), denizens of a strange nefarious netherland that these young wolves would rule over. All of this explains the ascendency of 'feminist traits in these elites, as well as their fear of fighting. Opposition to the Vietnam War was a cultural 'happening '` primarily motivated by fear of conscription, of becoming a soldier. It was a rebellion against the metaphysical image of man the warrior and certainly against the 'Christian soldier divine warrior tradition of Christianity. Jesus was reborn for the 60s pinko as John Lennon the peacenik, pleading with us to give peace a chance, by thinking happy thoughts and spending the day in bed. Camille Paglia, a 'post-feminist intellectual has recognised that an undermining or white-anting of masculinity has occurred: 'The least happy people in the world are academics. They are miserable, prissy and horrible. The academic feminists fear and despise the masculine. They think 'nerdy bookworm husbands are the ideal model of human manhood. (The Weekend Australian Review, June 1-2, 1991 p.3) It didn 't 'just happen ': In his book 'In the Shadow of the Bomb: Politics, Religion and the Baby-Boom Generation, (Omega Publishing, Canberra 1991) D. Heslin says that traditional Anglo-Saxon Australia was hated so much by the new class that it had to be changed through mass immigration. The Liberal-Left intelligentsia made a natural progression to the doctrine of multiculturalism which they saw as having the power to destroy Anglo-Saxon Australia. Heslin has also said:
A.C. Jacobson in 'Genius: Some Revaluations (Greenburg, New York 1926) anticipated accurately many of our dilemmas. He said 'The Jekyll-Hydes of our common life are ethnic hybrids. Jacobson saw the incompatibility of certain 'racial bloods leading to a 'molecular insult '. Worse, there is also a metaphysical instability: 'very much of the strange behaviour of our young people to-day is simply due to their lack of ethnical anchorage; they are bewildered hybrids, unable to believe sincerely in anything, and disowned by their own ancestral mores It is a foolish case over again of hen hatching ducklings, of wolf fostering foundlings. (cited p.394 of W.A. Price, 'Nutrition and Physical Degeneration (Hoeber, New York 1939) Multiculturalism is a secular religion, created by the new class elites to attempt to fill the spiritual vacuum in the life of affluent and decadent secular humanists. Those who jettisoned Christianity from their world-view, or attempted to dilute and pollute Christ 's message have a guilt-ridden need to destroy, that which they should in a healthy world, embrace. This is a social pathology. But, unfortunately now, the 'long march through the institutions has been accomplished the lunatics now rule the asylum. Combating the decline of a civilisation will not be easy. It will require a resistance movement to begin building again. Let us be the under-labourers in the first steps in this long arduous task.
|
A CHARTER OF M.P.C. RIGHTSby Ian Wilson LL.B. Rather, the three are former SBS newsreader Mary Kostakidis, former Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Palmer and indigenous barrister Tammy Williams. Now I know that you are thinking 'political correctness but others have thought that first (The Australian 11/12/08 p.1). Melbourne QC Peter Faris attacked the consultation process on such grounds. Other intellectuals, such as Professor Blainey said that the charter would take away power from parliament and into the hands of the courts.
This is I think, a most fundamental objection. We must not trust the politically correct legal establishment. After the black magic of the creation of credit by private banks, this must rate as one of the mysteries of modern capitalist society. The legal profession and its doings is badly in need of 'deconstruction and I hope I will have more time this year to examine it. |
THE DISCRIMINATORY ANTI-DISCRIMINATION INDUSTRYby Ian Wilson LL.B.
Before you think that our 1984 system is softening, recall that the agenda of the chattering classes is role reversal; as in the witches scene in Macbeth, fair is foul and foul is fair. Men need to be shoved into the domestic sphere and women into paid employment. Hence the need to redo the Sex Discrimination Act so males have no excuse anymore. |
WHERE ARE THE CRIMS OF YESTERDAY?by James Reed This is an incredible image of our crazy times. Outlaw motorcycle gangs outfoxing corporate lawyers? This has got to be a first. What next? Surely anything is now possible. The ride to destruction is unpleasant, but never boring. |
AT LAST ! A REPUBLICAN MODELfrom David Flint 's Opinion Column This appeared in Craig Brown 's 'End Column of news predictions for 2009 in the London Weekly Telegraph 10 -16 December, 2008. On reading this, I was reminded that the eminent republican author, Dr Greer, once claimed that she never sets foot in Australia before receiving the permission of the "traditional owners of the land" at Sydney Airport.
This prominent republican once called for a Council of Aboriginal Elders to act as some sort of Head of State. Although she did not explain how the Council would be chosen and what powers they would have, she does say state governors would be unnecessary as we already have premiers.
Unlike the republican movement, Dr. Greer at least has some idea of the sort of republic she wants.
|
DRINKING SEWAGE FOR THE SAKE OF IMMIGRATIONby James Reed This is a so-called solution to 'water supply problems. Everyone else in the world is terrified of faeces being in drinking water. But you have to satisfy the demand placed on the system because of migrants. Immigration must continue. |
THE MOON ILLUSIONby Ian Wilson LL.B.
A professor is quoted as saying This has been known since the time of the Greeks and because we see things close to it like trees, we compare the size so it looks larger. 'This is a question-begging response : why is there this difference in perceived size? I researched the answer on Google scholar and found a large literature on the topic. In short, no one knows the answer. For those of us tired of the arrogance of scientists, this is welcomed news. |
ON CREATIONby James Reed However the Royal Society is right. Science should be about obtaining the truth about the world. At least we should investigate and think through the ramifications of this. How else could such a view be shown to be false? Methinketh that the atheistic 'scientists are irrational and religious about their rejection of the religious world view. |