ANOTHER CHANGE OF LEADERSHIP - WHAT ABOUT CHANGE OF POLICIES?

"As a result of an Australian Labor Party Caucus meeting in Canberra, Ms. Julia Gillard was elected federal parliamentary leader of the Party. The 26th Prime Minister, the Hon. Kevin Rudd, had decided not to allow his name to go forward. This was a result of political machinations which occasioanlly afflict all political parties.
Following convention, Mr. Rudd then advised the Governor-General to call on Ms. Gillard to form a government. Accordingly the Hon. Julia Gillard was sworn in today, 24 June 2010, as Australia's 27th Prime Minister and the first woman to hold that office.
She was sworn in by Her Excellency, Ms. Quentin Bryce, the first woman Governor- General of Australia, who was exercising the powers of the Australian Crown vested in her under the Constitution."
-- David Flint, Australians for Constitutional Monarchy June 2010.

While the mainline media is making much of the toppling of Kevin Rudd by the Labor ‘heavies’ preferring Julia Gillard for their purposes, I would hope more and more Australians can see that change of faces and gender is not the real issue at stake.Wallace Klinck of Canada gets to the core of the matter:

“The present financial system serves the relentless drive by certain "elites" to broaden and secure their wide base of power on a world scale. What we are witnessing today is another of the periodic foreclosures on the assets of the nation where the strong become more powerful to the disadvantage of the less powerful. The system is intrinsically confiscatory as is demonstrated when debt is allowed to expand to the point where the liquidity of the system is stretched to the breaking point. Thus, Douglas speaks of the "tragedy of human effort."

Nevertheless, the extreme collapse of 1929 could have been averted even along orthodox lines. High policy was served by precipitating that debacle. One may well expect that this present financial crisis, whether inevitable or planned (both, no doubt) will be used to implement increasingly centralising policies on a world-wide scale which will be "justified" because of the alleged critical nature of the events which are unfolding. No doubt it will be used to promote the well-advanced plans for North American integration of Canada, the United States and Mexico (with a common currency, the "Amero") - another significant advance toward the World State.
We will be presented with the "inevitability" that our intensifying "problems" necessarily require solution through bigger economic and political organisation.

More expansion of debt puts off ‘reckoning’ to another day:
The injection of "liquidity" into the system as currently presented is in no way a "fix" and is simply another expansion of debt to put off the day of reckoning while tightening the noose around nations even more tightly by concentrating even more the power of policy-making. We do not solve a problem of excess costs by building more costs into the system. But these are abstract matters which the controllers of high policy have been confident would never be understood by the uninformed masses of the people. Whether this state of affairs can be perpetuated is less certain now that lines of communication have been opened up for the masses by the Internet in a manner which previously could not have been anticipated.

There is a wide sphere of discontent by large numbers of people who, losing their assets en masse are convinced, quite rightly, that they have been "had." Hence, we observe increasing efforts to control the Internet and suppress widespread expression of ideas over it. At this time, retention of this freedom is probably even more important than reform of the financial system itself - because once controlled, effective action re the latter will be effectively suppressed. The money, or credit, system is not something that simply responds passively to events around it. It is an instrument of high policy which is employed to determine events and will not be surrendered easily.”

Goal of Fabianism: Philosophy precedes policy, which precedes administration.
Of course we are moving more and more toward an interventionist State. Keynes was a Fabian Socialist and the interventionist, administerial State is the goal of Fabianism. In that sense, Keynesian policy has not failed at all but has been succeeding relentlessly through the Fabian policy of gradualism to effect increasing centralization of power.
Keynes suggested increased taxes during inflationary periods and stimulative spending during economic recession through the creation of more bank credit created as debt to expand the money supply…”  

ONE OF EMILY’S GIRLS

from Peter Stokes, Salt Shakers E-News: Under the heading, “Gillard becomes Prime Minister” 24 June 2010, Peter Stokes of Salt Shakers gives us some background information on the new lady PM.

He writes: Mr Rudd said "I was elected by the people of Australia to be their Prime Minister". The FACT is that the Party elects the person to lead them - not the Australian People. Today, we have a Female Prime Minister for the first time - we also have an unmarried couple moving into the Lodge for the first ever time in the nation's history. Julia Gillard is a Fabian socialist and member of Emily's list, a very feminist, pro-abortion group in the Labor Party.

As Andrew Bolt noted in a blog three years ago, she has a very left leaning agenda. (Andrew Bolt - Monday, October 29, 2007 at 05:15pm)
Comrade Julia Gillard explains her plan to use Labor as a Trojan horse for the far Left’s agenda. 'For the Left to make any real advance all these perspectives on the relationship to Labor in government need to be rejected in favour of a concept of strategic support for Labor governments. We need to recognise the only possibility for major social change is under a long period of Labor administration. Within that administration the Left needs to be willing to participate to shape political outcomes, recognising the need to except (sic) often unpalatable compromises in the short term to bolster the prospect of future advance. The task of pushing back the current political constraints by changing public opinion would need to be tackled by the Left through government, social movements and trade unions.'

That comes from a document Gillard wrote for the communist-formed Socialist Forum group which she helped to run, despite now claiming she was just a part-time “typist”. Miss Gillard worked for John Brumby before entering Parliament - Mr Brumby being the real face of left Labor in Victoria which was hidden behind the 'nice' face of moderate Labor, Mr Bracks, to get Labor through 2 polls.
Now we have the nice federal face of 'moderate Labor' presented to seduce the Christian vote at the last election, moved aside for the real face of Labor - The Union controlled socialist left. This does not err well for the direction of Australia …
We can expect considerable social engineering towards an even more 'tolerant', socially destructive Australia  

THE CONCERNS OF FEMINISTS

by James Reed
Emma Tom writes a column for The Australian. At the time of writing, her latest is a discussion of the meanings of the c—swear words, a big feminist issue it seems. (The Weekend Australian 19-20/6/2010 p.8) The argument seems to be that men who use that word have a hatred of women, but women can reclaim it: I hope I have got that right. I put her article next to a shocking article (“Teenage Slaves to Region’s Sex Trade”, as above page 3 (Inquirer) about how teenage Asian women are often kidnapped and used as sex slaves.
It is not written about but there is also a nasty side to our present Asian immigration mania which sees Asian women brought to this country on working visas, only to end up being repeatedly raped by ruthless owners of brothels.

Why aren’t the feminist journalists investigating this? Or writing about the sexual abuse of Aboriginal women and children in outback communities? What about the use of rape as a weapon of war in Africa? Not a peep from our feminists.

Now on to the academic feminist:
Did the academic feminists in Australia jump up when a few years back the Mufti of Australia said that women who did not veil themselves were “uncovered meat”? The systematic rape of Anglo girls in Sydney in 2001 did not get a cover either. Academic feminists, being leftists, have a double standard and if someone is non-White, then they fall into the multicultural category and get special treatment.

According to the doctrine of cultural relativism, all cultures are equal, except one – Western culture – which is evil and oppressive. It is after all, the culture that gives them their $100,000 per year academic jobs. Academic feminists have to do something to pay back the favour!  

THE GREAT ASYLUM SEEKER MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR

by James Reed
Step right up all of you Aussie tax-paying suckers for our Kevin Rudd mass immigration inspired asylum flights. It is costing us almost $200,000 a week on charter flights to ferry asylum seekers and government workers to and from Christmas Island. In just 10 months the cost of the aircraft has tripled to $8.2 million, about $134,000 a flight and looks to rise in the future as high as the sky. Another $8.1 million will be spent next year. This however is but a drop in the ocean compared to the infrastructure and other costs of mass immigration and multiculturalism. We pay for the funeral of our own culture and society.  

THE MATHEMATICAL IMPOSSIBILITY OF DEMOCRACY?

by Chris Knight
A recent article in New Scientist magazine (Ian Stewart, “Electoral Dysfunction,” 1/5/2010) raises the issue of the mathematical impossibility of democracy. Ordinary people may not be aware that there are “voting paradoxes” and mathematical problems with the very idea of proportional representation. Kenneth Arrow in 1963, for example, proved a theorem known as “Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem” which showed that an idealised fair voting system could only exist if there was a dictatorship - a reduction to absurdity. What this shows, I believe, is the need for highly decentralised government and a decentralised, localised and pluralistic world.
There can be no democratic “one world” – that is a mathematical impossibility. Our interests and those of the Asians, China and India, can never be reflected in any globalised “representative system.” The way of one world – that of the New World Order – can only be that of dictatorship. 

TRUST US… WE ARE THE MEDICAL PROFESSION!

by James Reed
A recent article published in the British Medical Journal has dealt with some of the side effects of Statin drugs, regularly prescribed to lower cholesterol and allegedly prevent heart attacks and strokes. It seems that the chances of benefiting from these drugs is 3 out of 100 - but the chances of being harmed is 4 out of 100! The harm includes liver damage, kidney failure and cataracts. (Source: reuters.com, Natural News, 11/6/2010).

Next is the case of the study by R. Mukhopadhyay (et.al) “Promotion of Variant Human Mammary Epithelial Cell Outgrowth by Ionizing Radiation…”, Breast Cancer Research, col. 12(1), 2010; R11. As explained by one of the authors: “Our work shows that radiation can change the microenvironment of breast cells and this in turn can allow the growth of abnormal cells with a long-lived phenotype that have a much greater potential to be cancerous. Many in the cancer research community, especially radiobiologists, have been slow to acknowledge and incorporate in their work the idea that cells in human tissues are not independent entities, but are highly communicative with each other and with their microenvironment.

Related to this, the New York Times has reported that the US Environmental Protection Agency has finally come “clean” and listed the chemical ingredients of Corexit, the chemical dispersant used by BP in the Gulf of Mexico oil catastrophe. EPA opted to keep quiet on the “trade secrets” of BP even though it had the authority to disclose them immediately, www.naturalnews.com reports.

All this about a chemical that may be more dangerous than oil, one which the EPA describes as a “chronic and acute health hazard.” Linking the issues: the Big Chemical industry getting away with using products which have dangerous side effects is all in a day’s business. The toxic chemicals in common products, Natural News (11/6/2010) notes, are kept trade secrets and governments collude with industry by permitting them to escape full disclosures. Likewise Big Pharmacy send out drug reps who educate doctors about what drugs they should be prescribing – often without the doctors investigating possible side effects.

This is a world out of control, an insane society, where corporates decide the health of man and nature. None of this, perhaps, should be at all surprising since doctors themselves are “addicted to every drug under the sun.” The UK Telegraph reports on a UK health program, the Practitioner Health Program (PHP), which offered a service to practitioners to avoid them self-medicating. Of the 184 professional patients treated in the first year of the program, 36% suffered from substance abuse and addiction, including heroin and amphetamines and 62% of PHP patients had some type of mental health problem. No doubt about the same sort of statistics would hold in Australia – scary stuff indeed.  

KEV NOW 000: BUT WHY DOESN’T HIS BROTHER TRUST HIM?

by James Reed
Greg Rudd, hot from Beijing has said that although he trusts his brother as a sibling he doesn’t trust him as a politician. Greg, like us, worries about the lack of honesty in politics. About his brother he has said: “Who is Kevin 07? Not relevant… It was a PR campaign that worked well. Keep the T-shirt. Who is Kevin 010?
That’s the issue. The public doesn’t know. He has to explain…and not by the T-shirt. Can you trust a politician? No. Self-interest rules. Can you trust a politician who is your brother? Yes as a brother, no as a politician. We, the public, have made them that way.”
That, I very much doubt. Self-interest has been intrinsic to our way of doing politics for a very long time, corrupted by the centralisation of power. Centralised systems attract the likes of Rudd and Obama. As long as we support the idea of centralised power, we will always have the Rudd, Howard, Fraser, Hawke, Whitlam and the Gillards.  

THE PUBLIC’S QUEENSLAND RAIL - NATIONAL PRECEDENT SET?

The ABC reports: 'Spectacular' QR breach may set national precedent, 23rd June, 2010. The Rail Tram and Bus Union (RTBU) says a court decision ordering Queensland Rail (QR) to pay $660,000 in penalties for breaching industrial agreements has set a national precedent. The Federal Court has ruled QR breached agreements to consult with employees about the sale of certain rail assets.

Justice John Logan decided excluding workers in the face of radical change was a very serious contravention and says the maximum penalty was deserved. "The occasion for consultation [was] so obvious that anything less than maximum penalties would not do justice to the case and the need to ensure public confidence in the adherence to industrial relations bargains," he said.

Electrical Trades Union (ETU) spokesman Jason Young says the ruling is a victory for QR workers who are worried about their jobs. "This decision is a good decision because it takes into effect all of QR and its subsidiary companies in Justice Logan handing down his penalties, because it doesn't matter where you are in QR, not only has your employment been affected directly, but also your prospects of employment have been affected," he said.

RTBU spokesman Owen Doogan says the decision should serve as a warning to other states planning to sell off public assets. "Once employers introduce change, do not consult, and then turnaround and say 'what are you going to do about it' - there is certainly a message now about what's going to happen if people ignore that," he said. "It's a very important precedent." QR says it is appealing against the decision. The hefty fine has to be paid to the five unions that took QR to court. However, the State Government says the public float of QR National will still go ahead as planned.

'Spectacular' breach: An expert in industrial relations at Adelaide University, Professor Andrew Stewart, says the decision could have far-reaching implications. He says even though Justice Logan acknowledged that consultation might not change the end result, Professor Stewart says a lot of companies will be reviewing the wording of their workplace agreements in the wake yesterday's ruling.
"I don't have any doubt the other unions in other workplaces are going to be looking very closely at their industrial instruments and determining whether or not they can mount a similar argument," he said. "What the judge found was that Queensland Rail had certainly put out a huge amount of information to its employees and it kept them informed, but it hadn't brought them into the into the decision-making loop."

Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/23/2934301.htm?section=business  

LAND AND HOME OWNERS AND SHAREHOLDERS TAKE NOTE

The Carbon Sense Coalition today claimed that the ‘war on carbon’ was just another battle in the long war on property rights by populists in Parliament. Speaking at the recent annual meeting of Property Rights Australia in Emerald, (Queensland) the Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that Mark Twain was right – “No man’s life liberty or property is safe while parliament is sitting”.

He added: “The war on property rights is always carried out under the spurious slogan of “the public interest”. It is always secretly serving a private interest. Mainly it is being used by politicians to buy votes from swinging voters or to attract green preferences. (But that is after the people have been propagandised and ‘terrorised’ on the issue…ed)

“Currently ‘global warming’ and ‘carbon pollution’ are their preferred vote winners. As these scams are exposed as grubby schemes to serve private interests in the carbon trading and alternate energy industries, new slogans will be found. But always it will be an attack on the right of property owners to use and enjoy the security of their own property.

“Farmers have been robbed of their rights by bans on controlling woody weeds and regrowth on their properties. Seaside property values are being damaged by sudden changes in zoning laws and development plans using the excuse of possible sea level changes. Shareholders in mining companies have seen the value of their retirement funds slump under the threat of super taxes needed by the federal government to balance the books after the extravagant stimulus packages and roof insulation disasters. Real job opportunities for aboriginal people are destroyed by ‘Wild Rivers’ legislation. Fishermen are being deprived of the right to fish, and foresters are locked out of the forests.

“And at this moment many property rights are being trampled to force-feed the unnatural growth of the wind, solar and natural gas industries, using various spurious climate excuses. Those whose assets are suffering include landowners, miners, tax payers, shareholders and electricity consumers.

Mr Forbes advised members of Property Rights Australia to focus on the real problem, which is in parliament. “It is not other property owners such as miners, gas producers and native title claimants who are your main enemy – they too have bits of paper signed by politicians giving them rights which are often vague and, too often, overlap and degrade your property rights. These overlapping property rights are at the root of all discord between various classes of property owners.

“My advice to all land owners is: “Know your rights, get good legal advice, negotiate hard with other conflicting property owners, but keep out of court battles with them – the only winners in that battle are the lawyers. Focus your legal weapons and court actions on government property invaders, and make sure your politicians feel the heat. And as the global warming scam is exposed, watch for their next excuse for grabbing control of your lives and property. There will be one – bio-diversity, sustainability, soil conservation, ocean acidity, saving something cuddly, energy conservation, or, most likely, all of the above.”