THE YINDJIBARNDI PEOPLE CANNOT LIVE BY MINING ALONE

Yindjibarndi Statement: “Yindjibarndi people can not live by mining alone. In his push to mine our country, FMG’s founder, Chairman, and largest shareholder, Twiggy Forrest, tells us that our future lies in getting a job with his company and giving over our country to his mines, but Twiggy’s teaching about how we should be and how we should live does not compare to the teaching of our elders.

We know that we cannot live by mining alone. We are finished if we cease to honour the heritage and Ngurra (country) passed on by our ancestors, which speaks to our inner needs and our very being as Yindjibarndi people. Mining will not dominate our country forever. The huge ore deposits will be exhausted within a few generations and when the minerals are all shipped overseas, mining will be worth nothing and all the money will amount to less than nothing for our future generations.

When the ground is hard, Yindjibarndi dance:
For a year now, we Yindjibarndi people of the Pilbara have been suffering a split in our community engineered with terrible outcomes by the Fortescue Metals Group (FMG) who intend to mine Yindjibarndi country. Despite having Native Title to our homelands, and despite showing Australian courts and the Native Title Tribunal that the Yindjibarndi people – our culture, Law, language and wellbeing – are dependent upon our connection with our ancestral land and water, the never-ending pressure of Fortescue Metals Group continues to devastate our community and our children’s futures.

One bright light illuminates our struggle. Our wonderful Yindjibarndi Elder, Ned Mayinbungu Cheedy, who has for so long been a beacon of strength and a sharer of knowledge among us. His contribution was recognised nationally by the award of the most prestigious NAIDOC 2011 Lifetime Achievement Award. And for Ned, and all of our children, on Tuesday the 6th September, Yindjibarndi painted up and danced”.

This is the hard ground. See the slide show of the celebration and dance:  

THE CRASS MATERIALISTS OF THE WEST JUST DON’T ‘GET IT’

by Betty Luks
Slowly but surely, writers such as C.S. Lewis ("The Abolition of Man") Owen Barfield (“History in English Words” and “Saving the Appearances” and Prince Charles (“Harmony”) are helping clear away the crass materialist fog from our minds and opening them to the real world in which we live and move and have our being.
Thanks to Barfield’s approach to the subject of human consciousness and “original participation” and “final participation”, I have caught a glimpse of what the Yindjibarndi people mean by “our culture, Law, language and wellbeing – are dependent upon our connection with our ancestral land and water”.
For those who haven’t come across the concepts presented in those books, they could begin with Prince Charles’ book as his introductions to the subjects are easier reading.

What the Yindjibarndi people probably didn’t know was that the ‘planners’ never intended that they should have ultimate control of their ancestral lands. Former communist Geoff MacDonald ‘spilled the beans’ in his book “Red Over Black”* many years ago. The intent was to tie up masses of land under “land rights” claims - and Australians can now see why. These crass materialists do not genuinely care for the Aboriginal people of this land, but have and will make use of them when it suits them.

The Yindjibarndi media release continues: “Our fight against Twiggy Forrest and FMG is not just about our rights as the first people of this Ngurra, it is about doing right by our country and our descendants. We believe that if we keep body and soul together with our country and its unique Yindjibarndi Law and heritage, our Jalurra and language and teaching will be alive long after Mr Forrest and his FMG are gone and forgotten. The Jalurra we danced for Mr Ned Cheedy in his 105th year, were about remembering and celebrating who we are and where we come from; honouring the knowledge and values of our old people; respecting the country that was and is before mining and money, and which runs deeper than mining, and gives us self respect and true identity”.

* “Red Over Black” by Geoff MacDonald $10.00 plus postage from Heritage Book Services.

WALLACE KLINCK’s COMMENTS ON ALEX JONES’ ‘InfoWars’

Cornucopia says, September 13, 2011 at 11:07 pm:
What must be realized is that the financial system is a confiscatory system designed to centralise both economic and political power in a way that weakens nations and drives them in desperation into larger and larger agglomerates, the European Union being a living and undeniable example.
The production system is financed by bank debt so as to create financial costs and prices at an increasingly greater rate than incomes are distributed in the same accounting cycle.
The existing price-system is non-self-liquidating and under the present financial rules money is issued only as debt in order to compensate for this inherent deficiency of effective purchasing power. Increasing billions of dollars are issued as exponentially expanding consumer debt which is an inflationary charge recoverable from future production.
The monopoly held by the banking system over creation of the nation’s money solely as debt must be broken.

The real or physical cost (the human and non-human energy and materials) of all goods has been fully met when they are completed and ready for sale to consumers. Moreover the real (i.e., physical) cost of production is decreasing continually. The billions of debt issued to consumers must be replaced by debt-free credit in the form of National (Consumer) Dividends and to effect falling retail prices (i.e., “Compensated Prices).

There is no real need for consumer debt whatsoever and a realistic and honest system of financial cost accountancy would reflect this undeniable fact.
Our enormously Increasing efficiency of production technology should yield falling prices, increasing National Dividends supplementary to earned incomes and growing opportunity for leisure.

Fundamentally, the consumer is now being necessarily and rightly charged with capital depreciation but wrongfully and unnecessarily the consumer is NOT being credited with capital appreciation in order that retail prices properly reflect the reduction in real (i.e., physical) cost, actual total production being evermore greater than total consumption.

The banking monopoly of the issue of credit operates so as to create burgeoning and unsustainable debt in periods of economic expansion and wholesale foreclosure during the inevitable recurring deflationary periods of collapse due to excess debt. We are robbed of the purchasing power of effort alternatively by engineered inflation with oppressive debt accumulation and deflation accompanied by dispossession of our produced real wealth.
We as a society are systematically robbed of prosperity, individual freedom and national independence through appropriation by the banking system of our magnificent Cultural Heritage which should give us increasing Abundance, Freedom and Leisure.

Watch: ‘Financial Credit v Real Credit’ by Jeremy Lee
Listen to: ‘Releasing Reality’ by Eric D. Butler  

PHILOSOPHY, THE UNIVERSITY AND THE LOVE OF TRUTH

by Chris Knight
Philosopher Raimond Gaita (“Loving Truth is Not Enough,” The Australian, August 17, 2011, p.28) asks philosophers “for an account of their role in the university that would observe to convince government officials, business people and ambitious parents that taxpayers should fund their salaries.” For Gaita the concept of a university where philosophy defends democratic values, is defunct. He quotes a story of a philosopher who attempted to justify philosophy’s existence in a university by saying that if philosophy was not taught then democracy would atrophy. No institution lacking a philosophy discipline deserved to be called a “university.” An economic rationalist present replied: “Then we will call it something else.”

Gaita, if I understand him correctly, sees this sort of response as an extrinsic defence of philosophy, where what should have been given is an intrinsic defence of philosophy, dealing with notions such as “love of truth” etc. Now Ray, do you really think any of that would cut ice with an economic rationalist concerned with the “love of money”? What the philosophers could have said is: “even though our discipline is not as politically correct as gay (queer) studies down the hall, feminist studies downstairs and multiculturalism upstairs, we are doing our bit to help destroy Western civilisation. Give us some more money and see what we can churn out!”

The contemporary academic discipline of philosophy is a disgrace and it is only fitting that it be eliminated by the economic rationalist razor gangs. Let the so-called philosophers lose their superannuation and do road work. “Is that ethical? Discuss.”  

WHAT LABOR DOES TODAY NO GOVERNMENT WILL DARE FIX 

Source: Andrew Bolt’s Blog – Friday, September 16, 11 (05:34 am)
Henry Ergas says Labor is trying to make its tax forever, so no government can undo this mistake: It was Mark Dreyfus QC, Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change, who let the cat out of the bag. Once the carbon change legislation is in place, he said, repeal would amount to an acquisition of property by the commonwealth, as holders of emissions permits would be deprived of a valuable asset.
As a result, the commonwealth would be liable, under s.51(xxxi) of the Australian Constitution, to pay compensation, potentially in the billions of dollars. A future government would therefore find repeal prohibitively costly.

That consequence is anything but unintended. The clean energy legislation, released this week, specifically provides that “a carbon unit (its generic term for a right to emit) is personal property”.
This, the government says, is needed to give certainty to long-term trades. But that claim makes little sense, for even without such protections there are flourishing markets for fishing quotas and other tradeable entitlements. And internationally, governments have generally ensured pollution permits are not treated as conventional property rights, precisely so as to be able to revise environmental controls as circumstances change. Rather, this provision serves one purpose only: to guarantee any attempt at repeal triggers constitutional requirements to pay compensation, shackling future governments.  

THE SOCIAL PATHOLOGY OF THE LIBERAL, MULTIRACIAL STATE

by James Reed
It’s been a long time since the Letters-to-the-Editor page of The Australian have permitted letters on the race/immigration issue. But consider these snips from August 11, 2011 on the London riots: “At the risk of being politically incorrect, is it possible that the current rioting in England is a result of embracing a multicultural society at a rate faster than the Anglo-Saxon community can cope with? If this is the case, are there lessons here for Australia?” And: “The vast feral, multicultural, self-centred and stupid underclass that has been carefully cultivated for decades by politicians, the human rights industry and a limp-wristed legal system has finally come home to roost in the UK. No doubt lessons will not be learned, either here or there.” The Australian (August 12, 2011) had “Racial Tension Rising” but not much else.

Theodore Dalrymple, “British Rioters the Spawn of a Bankrupt Ruling Elite”, The Australian, August 11, 2011, p.12, says that “a considerable proportion of the country’s young population (a proportion that is declining) is ugly, aggressive, vicious, badly educated, uncouth and criminally inclined”. Thus even though youth unemployment is very high in Britain, workers had to be brought in from Europe, mainly, Poles, as the young are unemployable, with a quarter of British children virtually illiterate.

Worse: “Criminality is scarcely repressed any more in Britain. The last lord chief justice but two thought that burglary was a minor offense not worthy of imprisonment, and the next chief justice agreed with him. By the age of 12, an ordinary slum-dweller has learned he has nothing to fear from the law and the only people to fear are those who are stronger or more ruthless than he.”
Indeed, the Metropolitan Police were ordered to “stand and observe” during the first part of the race riot because of past accusations of “institutional racism.” In other words much of the damage occurred because of political correctness. (“Cops Told to ‘Stand and Observe’” The Australian, August 11, 2011, p.10)
Why should the Met be scared of the great “racism” accusation if the riots were non-white? No reference was made, of course to Enoch Powell’s “rivers of blood” speech, “Like the Roman” made of April 20, 1968: “As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding like the Roman, I seem to see the River Tiber foaming with much blood.”

But instead we have David Aaronovitch, “Violent Young Men Will Always Walk Among Us” (The Australian, August 12, 2011, p.8) poo-pooing a “certain kind of ring-winger” who “fits the riots into the pattern of moral and social decline that he or she imagines has afflicted British society since the 1950s. Multiculturalism, soft policing, family breakdown (ie. sexual tolerance and feminism), liberal teaching, welfare dependency and immigration are all part of this elaborately imagined world.” Pardon: an “imagined world”?

For Aaronovitch “difficult and violent young men will always be with us.” Yet the same sorts of riots did not occur in racially homogenous Britain during the Great Depression and do not occur in racially homogenous societies, such as Japan, today. This view also ignores the relevance of gang culture in the riot areas. The Met ignored one of its own internal reports which warned that gang culture based on “acquisitive crime” was taking over areas such as Tottenham and Brixton. The report of 2005 said that gangs had taken control of “whole estates and some inner-city areas.” (The Australian, August 15, 2011, p.11)

Frank Furedi, “Why London’s Burning,” The Weekend Australian, August 13-14, 2011, puts the blame squarely on British welfarism which “undermines the everyday social and cultural bonds” in the “ghettos”. There is truth in that; for welfare as a way of life could do that. But an alternative way of looking at this is that these people have been given a basic work-free income and a roof over their heads. They, in many respects, are better off than working people right across the world and across history. They could pursue leisure (which they do) rather than gang-based violence.

The sociological explanation, like all such surface explanations, does not fully explain the phenomena under scrutiny. In fact it begs many questions, assuming that the creation of immigrant ghettos could bring with it “community”, that buzz word of the sociology discipline. Most British people did not join the riots because they believed that it would be wrong to do so, even if they could have gotten away with it. But many still did. Former Greater London Council police advisor Lee Jasper speaking on The 7:30 Report (channel 10 on August 9, 2011) sums up what is wrong with Britain when he takes the personal responsibility off the rioters: “We’ve seen huge levels of austerity cuts in many inner-city areas that are leading to a great deal of anxiety and concern. Unemployment continues to rise and there is a sense of anxiety but also a sense of moral crisis in the country. I think because of the MPs scandal, the corporate tax-dodging issue of huge multinational companies, the News International corruption cases with the metropolitan police and phone hacking, there is a kind of failure really of people in power to uphold the kind of moral standards that we all aspire to. And as such, this has had an effect around the country.”

Yes, it is true that Britain’s elites have failed, but it is doubtful that your friendly neighbourhood ghetto punk with a hoodie who can barely read, would know much about that. In conclusion the last words should go to AlternativeRight.com (August 10, 2011):
“The United Kingdom is marvelling at the enrichment being visited upon the country by the multicultural state. Inexplicably, the politicians who worked so hard for so many years to ensure Britons did not miss out on the joys of diversity, are proving shy to take credit for the creativity and skills they have imported into the country… Instead, they have taken to invest against the displays of rapturous exuberance sweeping the streets of London and now other cities as well. Be that as it may, Britons must admit, however reluctant they may have been in the past, that State-sponsored multiculturalism has finally delivered what it promised.”

Important further reading: “From Class War to Race War” by Geoffrey Dobbs here...

MULTICULTURALISM AND SHARIA LAW

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
The issue of Sharia law being established in the West, including Australia, is not going to go away, given large Islamic populations in the West and unending high immigration. Mary am Namazie, “Australia Must Fight Calls for Sharia Law,” The Australian, August 12, 2011, p.29, points out that recently an Islamic “convert” was flogged in Sydney for drinking alcohol.
According to Namazie, the Far Right “blames, and scapegoats, Muslim immigration for the rise of Sharia law in order to further its racist inhumane agenda.” No, “it is the people living under Islamic laws, or the many, who have fled Sharia and sought refuge in Australia and elsewhere who are the principal victims of Islamisation.” Let us deconstruct this, fearlessly disregarding the first swing of “racist” and “inhumane”. Whatever.

Now to reason; there would be no Sharia law issue if vast enclaves of Muslims did not exist. Further, under multiculturalism, mixed with limp liberalism, migrants are encouraged to retain their culture and it is asking too much for “assimilation” from a world view so different from liberal materialism.
So do Muslim migrants come here to escape Sharia? Some may, but most come to benefit from the society which Anglo-Australians – you know, the racists – have created. The victims of Sharia, unfortunately, have usually faced capital punishment or languish in prison. These are the people that the human rights industry should be concerned for.  

COSMOPOLITANISM AND THE ILLUSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
For some lawyers in the West defending the “rights” of asylum seekers has become something of a holy quest. Incredible as it sounds, pro bono, or “for free” work, is done in the crusade to essentially create an open borders world and undermine national sovereignty. Why do this? Lydia Morris, "Asylum, Welfare and the Cosmopolitan Idea" (Routledge, 2010) is a useful book in explaining the philosophical dimensions of those who do what they can for illegal aliens, while largely ignoring domestic suffering, such as the plight of Aboriginal women and children in outback communities. (Of course, this is my barb, not Morris’.)

According to Morris “cosmopolitanism seeks both to document and advance changes in the nature of society such that it is no longer conceived of as synonymous with the nation-State. Both human rights and international migration are seen as key elements in the empirical manifestation of cosmopolitanism.” (p.15) Cosmopolitanism imagines a one world order governed by a global elite who “protect” human rights.
What is wrong with that? I think that it is communism or collectivism in another form. To suppose that the entire human race could be united by some sort of human rights principles defies belief. Only the power elite and young idealistic lawyers could believe it. As always, the end result is not the protection of human liberty, but further enslavement by a new class elite who seek power and control. Cosmopolitanism is the ultimate form of collectivism and fails for the same reasons collectivism fails: lack of coherence with reality and human nature. It just won’t work.  

THE ONE THEY HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR: US/CHINA WAR

by James Reed
The Black Lords of the New World Order have written the script already: a China/US war, probably with China winning, for the US manufactures nothing and China, when the action starts, won’t be loaning the Yanks a few rounds, or even a smoke. Professor Wang Jisi, Dean of the School of International Studies at Beijing University, China, is the latest high-level visitor to this dreamy land to warn that a “showdown” between the US and China is “certain” unless both nations contain their rivalry. The US is in relative decline compared to super-fantastic China and the US needs to “adjust its mindset.” China is not going to become a Western democracy. And so on.

It is inevitable; the courses are set for collision. Australia meanwhile flogs off its resources to keep its economy afloat as it did with Japan’s build up before World War II. The tradition of Pig Iron Bob lives on. This time though, with a 5th column already running Austrasia there will be no fight, only surrender. Or, more probably, Australia will be fighting for the Chinese empire against the US, having as Professor Huntington once observed, defected from the West in its quest to become part of Asia.

Is it possible to sell off Australia, lock, stock and rusty barrel, and give Anglo and European Australians enough money to go back to Europe to found a new homeland, perhaps in some area in Russia? Sometimes a house becomes so rotten that the best course of action is to walk away, especially when the courage to defend the house is completely lacking.  

SPIDEY, SPLATTEREDY BY THE PC SWATTER!

by Brian Simpson
No doubt you are all aware of the cultural icon in film and comics, Spider Man? White youth Peter Parker who, bitten by a radioactive spider, becomes a superhero. Now, Marvel Comics has killed off Peter Parker and replaced him with a half-Black, half-Latino Spider Man! Marvel has done this to speak “to our rich cultural heritage.” Cultural? No, go ahead and say it; “racial”.

Spider Man’s new writer is Jewish and has two adopted children from Africa. Well Marvel, if Spider Man 4 is ever made, make a “statement about the 21st century” and have your half-Black, half-Latino Spider Man. Let us see you test your product in the marketplace of film.  

THE RAPE OF THE NORDICS

by Brian Simpson
With politically correct world attention on the Nordic countries, it is of relevance to consider rape in Oslo. AlternativeRight.com reports that all rapes in Oslo in the last five years were committed by males of “non-Western background”. (May 30, 2011) from 2005 to 2010, 86 rapes occurred with 83 of the rapists being identified as having non-Western appearance and the other 3 being unidentified, but most probably the same. Norway, a once Nordic country now has 3.1% of its population with a “refugee” background, the largest racial groups being Iraqis and Somalis.

The article quotes a young blonde woman who appeared on Norwegian TV news saying that her non-White attacker “claimed he had the right to do exactly as he wanted to a woman because that is how it was with his religion.” That claim, of course, is theologically suspect, and is most likely a rationalisation of the deed.
The situation once more shows the failure of the liberal, multiracial state. Nevertheless the ruling elites will never admit to this or seek change, even if the sky falls down on them. They are the modern defenders of the intellectual equivalent of a flat earth.  

ISN’T IT TIME FOR THE ATO TO INVESTIGATE NON-ANGLO RICHNESS?

by Peter West
Paul Hogan’s battle with the Australian Taxation Office continues, even though the crime commission has said that Hogan will not face criminal charges. It is still alleged that Hogan owes tax, allegedly hidden via offshore structures. We have said before that these sorts of investigations largely ignore ethnic Australia, which for many years has seen many of its members prosper from operating in the cash economy. Then there is drug money – the ATO doesn’t investigate why many people in our “community” or rather their communities – have riches far in excess of their stated incomes. To start to shake that particular tree would upset the multicult Establishment. The Herald Sun (August 6, 2011) reported that many migrants lie in the Census “because they fear losing their public housing flats or being investigated by tax officials.” I think this is a needless worry - ATO is too busy chasing Anglos like Paul Hogan to look into the dealings of ethnic/immigrant Australia.  

FEMINISTS FALLING FLAT

by James Reed
For a time the feminist fisherwomen/womyn thought that they had caught the big one – IMF boss Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Like so many powerful men DSK had a “zipper problem” a weakness for women. Well, actually, he was probably a sexual obsessive. He fell into trouble and gaol for alleged sexual assault upon black woman Nafissatou Diallo. The feminist writers in the media went wild (e.g., Gloria Steinman etc.) as well as the black and multiracial “community”.
This crime had everything except – a reliable witness. It turns out that Diallo’s asylum seeker application was questionable, that she had falsified an account of gang rape and had transferred large sums of money to her bank account. The case against DSK collapsed. This story becomes yet another tale of political correctness in the naked city.  

WHATEVER IS HE RAVING ABOUT?

by Brian Simpson
Here is Independent MP Rob Oakeshott at the National Press Club on August 25, 2010:
“I’m hearing the optimism, I’m hearing the new paradigm vibe. I’m getting the same vibe from the major parties and it strikes me you guys want to change what is really an ingrained political culture. I’m optimistic…well, it’s empty, but I’m a glass half full kind of guy. Now if we’re left to the dumbed down decision of blue or red we’ll do it, but there is another window of opportunity here to do something else. I believe the media are very important in relation to this issue. If you people are sick of the nonsense you’ve had to put up with, get behind this, don’t support us but promote some of the concepts because the people are absolutely sick of it. You had to listen to the drivel every day. The people are not going to sit in a Woolworths-Coles democracy. They can’t change Woolworths-Coles, but they can damn well change the Woolworths-Coles democracy.

One would need a degree in postmodern hermeneutics (understanding) to get even a shadow of meaning out of that gabble. And that is a sample of those who rule us. At least vote this guy out next time… please!