Australian National
(anotd)
Sunday 2nd August 1998
This on-line paper is now archived for perpetuity in the
National Library
of Australia
Subscriber's password
check (have your subscription number handy)
Subscribers get free access to the monthly "The
Strategy" on-line from April 1998.
Recent stories exclusive to
(how to)
subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day now at the
bottom of this page.
"ON NOW" weekly abbreviated anotd
fax-back
-
Dial: 1902 211037 and follow the instructions.
(Note: costs 0.75 c per minute will be billed to your phone account
under "ON NOW NEWS LETTER")
Current topical links (available to all readers):
[Links to the MAI]
[One Nation on-line DISCUSSION
forum] [One Nation
Federal Web Site]
Archive of weekly features (available to all
readers):
[The
Canberra Column]
[Economic
Rationalism]
Today's
Headlines
an Aussie's viewpoint on Australia's
first daily Internet newspaper.
Since
October 1995
anotd Search engine updated - One Nation search engine
installed
You are now able to search the gwb site across a number of options, including
a search across the One Nation web site.
The new improved search engine will allow anotd subscribers to access specific
information from 1995.
Take this link
to view the new search engine.
The 60 Minutes debate/debacle
anotd readers might be interested to
see the twist that Channel 9's 60 Minutes have put on
last week's debate.
Click on the thumbnail right for a screen dump of the 60 Minutes web page,
or click
here for our accurate perception of what took place.
The 60 Minutes web site
can be viewed here.
Between the One Nation lines
Well why should Australians be surprised?
The continuing support given by the mainstream media and parties (Laboral)
for blatantly undemocratic protests is an indictment on the "new multicultural"
Australia.
The issue of "racism" is used as the proverbial sledge hammer to legitimise
the most outrageous and unwarranted violence at One Nation meetings. The
failure by the powerbrokers to condemn the action of these hooligans is
encouraging more and more to come out of their cowardly shells.
I was able
to see firsthand last Monday, through face to face discussions with
individual protesters that the majority did not even know what they were
protesting about - they had just come for the excitement and the ultimate
prize - to be seen on television in the news that night. The hardcore
radical protesters are the ones who hide in their number, incite and participate
in violent attacks.
These are the hooligans that slink back into the crowd once they have made
their move - a crowd largely made up of those coming for the thrill.
It is important, therefore, that we look at what the law has to say about
protests.
Quite clearly the law states that if something slanderous or offensive is
said it is a breach of the law. Therefore calling guests at One Nation meetings
"racist" is an offence in the eyes of the law. Now I understand that the
police are in an invidious position because they do not want to inflame the
protesters, but in the cold hard light of day where is the condemnation by
the media and by the major parties about the slanderous and, at worst, unproven
language used by protesters?
If a group of Australians went to Cabramatta and started shouting "slant
eyes, yellow peril" and racist comments like that the media would have front
page stories around the country and the condemnation would be telling on
those involved in the racist slurs.
How come, therefore, the same "ethical" media have overlooked the criminal
activity of the protesters in slandering people who are exercising their
democratic right of freedom of assembly.
There are clearcut rules of law which are supposed to be enforced on protesters
at One Nation meetings - but they are not. That they are not, as I said earlier,
is not the fault of the Police. The silence of the media about the criminal
activity of Labor-inspired protesters at One Nation meetings should feel
like a blow to the stomach for any thinking Australian.
The louts amongst the protesters do not stop at slander,
they resort to
physical violence against guests. This form of physical intimidation
reminds one of the activities of Hitler's brown shirts when they were trying
to stifle debate in Germany in the 1930s.
Tragically we have a bureaucracy made up of big business, multinationals
and their Laboral Party pawns who delight in the undemocratic activities
of these thugs who hide behind "the cause". Let us be quite clear - "the
cause" is not racism, "the cause" is to defeat the most fundamental values
that Australians hold dear - freedom of speech and our fragile democracy.
The Nazis in this new world are the multinationals and big business they
don't want a new political force that will challenge its globalisation agenda.
They use the mainstream media as their sledgehammer to legitimise their
orchestrated perspective of public opinion. The voice of Pauline
Hanson and One Nation is like a biblical David fighting against an enormous
Goliath built on power, money and greed. Their footsoldiers, the brown shirts
are, quite clearly, those who protest at One Nation meetings - protesters
representing the extreme left of the Labor Party.
The Financial Review recently spelled out the true state of play in
this new Australia, "(there is) a conspiracy of silence
on immigration matters. Certainly the government, of whichever party (Laboral)
has not kept the public properly informed about changes in immigration policies,
and the increasing percentage of immigrants from Asia. The media has
censored arguments for a return to a predominantly European immigration policy
and has either ignored or berated people seeking to express support for the
views of Professor Geoffrey Blainey who has said the current level of Asian
immigration is too high. Reports indicate that a majority of immigrants are
now from Asia are given little prominence The failure of multi-racial and
multi-cultural societies overseas is generally downplayed. People who call
for a reduction in Asian immigration are subjected to character assassination
and are willfully described as inciting racial hatred while the racist
immigration policies of Asian countries such as Japan, China, Malaysia and
Indonesia are accepted as normal.
"Asia doesn't want whites. While Australia readily
admits Asians, Asian countries such as China and Japan don't want whites
as permanent settlers or citizens. While Chinese come in greater numbers
into Australia it is all one way traffic. Both China and Japan have immigration
policies designed to retain their racial homogeneity. An Asian immigrant
to Australia (Miss G Lee) was recently reported in The Australian as stating,
'I am Asian and arrived in Australia in 1976. People like Al Grassby cause
problems for us. I am very happy here, but I know I will never be accepted
by real Australians. I do not blame them - after all their families pioneered
and developed this country. They are not welcome in Asia either and cannot
live their permanently. Japan will have no part in multiculturalism. They
want a pure race.'"
Here we have one of the seeds of One Nation's support. Key issues, such as
immigration, which we, the voter, have had no say in formulating or questioning.
One of the greatest crimes of the Laboral Parties, allowing media ownership
to become controlled by Packer and Murdoch, is now destroying the very fabric
of the Australian society. To question policies which are solely in the interests
of the barons is to open one's self to vilification by their hostile press.
Quite clearly News Limited editors, if they had a sliver of integrity, could
vouch for
the statement by John Swinton in 1955,
'There is no such thing, at this date of the world's
history, in America, as an independent press."
The same applies even more to Australia
today.
The concentration and control of the print media in
Australia is greater than in any other Western country. The Murdoch/News
Limited group controls the majority of (about 80) free community papers (mainly
weeklies); it dominates the book publishing market and controls over 65%
of the metropolitan newspaper market.
Major Murdoch newspapers include:
-
The Courier Mail - Brisbane
-
The Telegraph Mirror - Sydney
-
The Herald-Sun - Sydney
-
The Advertiser - Adelaide
-
The Australian - national
-
The Sunday Telegraph - national
Fairfax, now controlled by Packer-related interests completes the domination
of the balance of Australia's major newspaper market.
What I am leading up to is the coverage of a Sydney-based protest yesterday
in which 7,000 were estimated to have participated. The protests, which has
been quite clearly reported as being supported and promoted by Labor's trade
union movement was marked by placards which read: "Pauline Hanson MP is scum.
Send her to the cemetery."
Yet today's Sun-Herald carries only 15 column centimetres of text
dominated by a picture of a man carrying one of these placards.
The text reads, under the heading "7,000 in racism
protest":
More than 7,000 anti-racism demonstrators rallied in
Sydney yesterday and marched to Prime Minister John Howard's city office.
"National Union of Students (NUS) president Van Badham
said the racist climate could be attributed to the fact "the Prime Minister
did nothing when Pauline Hanson started using her political position as a
platform for racism."
The rally was an important way for the community to
oppose the climate of growing intolerance, bigotry, hatred and racism, she
said.
"It's a critical moment in our history, where people
who believe in a multicultural Australia have a responsibility to speak up,"
she told the crowd.
"Otherwise the silent majority will become the silenced
majority."
That is the total, "balanced" coverage given by the Murdoch editors.
No reference to or condemnation of the signs calling for the death of Pauline
Hanson, and why should they? Because with Laboral's active participation
the media barons have already all but killed our democracy.
On Tuesday a meeting will be held in Nicholas Street in Ipswich. A meeting
which has been called by Pauline Hanson to allow her to address her own
constituents. It is being held in the street because the
Ipswich City
Council have refused her access to the Ipswich Civic Hall.
Peter James told me earlier today that protesters are expected to gate crash
the event and mix with the guests. What we have is a bloodbath in the making.
A bloodbath where the victims will not be the One Nation guests, locked out
of a public hall by a politically-hostile council, but our democracy.
The people, the victims of violence that you see on your screens if the event
turns sour, are a clear, visible indictment on how far Australia has gone
under the new order of media manipulation with the blessing of the Laboral
parties.
Quote of the week:
Tim Fischer, "There is no such thing as a level playing field".... so why hell does he stand behind the MAI?
Making the
news" -
an indepth exposé of media and political collusion at the highest
possible levels in Australia.
You say:
Subject: The Big Lie
Well it was no real surprise to read that the
'corporatised' Sydney Water had cut back on the number of rangers whose job
it is to search the tributories and other parts of the water collection system
to remove carcasses. The union had warned that cutting staff would reduce
water quality, and that privatisation had led to indecision about who was
responsible for what. On ABC radio last night a man who had worked on the
old Sydney Water Board for 40 years said he had opposed the corporatisation,
and had predicted that cost-cutting and the demand for profits would lead
to reduced services and water quality.
First Adelaide's Big Stink. Then Auckland's Big Blackout.
Now Sydney's Big Water Contamination. How long are these economic rationalist
clowns going to claim that their policies are good for Australia? Their claim
that all this job destruction and deterioration in Australians' quality of
life is for Australia's future prosperity reminds me of Keating's infamous
J-curve. He said the same thing - the good times were just around the corner.
He lied, and so do the current mob of ideologically-blinkered idiots who
are ruining this once beautiful country.
Antonia
Subject:
Treasury
Tricks
For absolute gall, our federal politicians take the
cake, I am referring to the oh, so secret tax reform package, Why the hell
all this pussy-footing about. Everyone in the whole world will know about
it before the ones it concerns the most, US.
The people want tax reform alright but what we are
going to get is what this mob of arrogant b......s think we should have.
Were you consulted? I know I wasn’t and I’m really pissed off.
THERE SHOULD BE NO LEGISLATION UNLESS THE PEOPLE ASK FOR IT! Alan Gourlay
said that, who was Alan Gourlay? He is a tireless champion for DEMOCRACY
which is something we don’t have in this country.
He has been trying to wake people up to that fact for
over 20 years but until recently has not had a lot of success due mainly
to the fact that it doesn't suit the ones who are really in charge of our
country to have us awake to the fact that this is a DICTATORSHIP and the
dictators are not the politicians, they don’t have the brains, it is
our own TREASURY DEPARTMENT. They run the country, how? The people who control
a nation’s finances, control the nation and the Treasury are the one’s
that control the money in this country.( Anyone who believes that Howard
or Costello has the brains to run a country like Australia has to be a candidate
for the loony bin) The most powerful man in Australia is the SECRETARY of
the TREASURY.
He is not replaced periodically but remains in that
exalted position until he retires or karks it.
The Treasury consists of the following government employees
:- 500 in the Department, 18,000 in the Tax Office, 4,000 in the Bureau of
Statistics, 1,300 in the Reserve Bank, 1,200 in the Superannuation, Consumer
and Competition Industry Commission (and just what is the latter?) Anyway
that makes a total of 25,000 dedicated people who run the country, and you
thought that you had a say in that when you went to vote every three years
didn’t you? Well that is what goes on and will continue to do so until
we get rid of party politics and get some true democratic representation.
Have a nice day!
Alan Esson
Subject: Class action against Coward, Timid Tim
& Kimbo Boozey!
This sorry collection of globalist stooges has seen
fit to recklessly endanger the lives of ordinary Australians by leaving them
to the tender mercies of drug-crazed psychopaths and bands of marauding thugs....
In two incidents to-day(Saturday 1st August) an elderly woman in Perth suffered
a stroke after her home was 'invaded' by a heartless thug and, in Melbourne,
a woman was stabbed and several people beaten with baseball bats after a
large gang of drug-crazed teenage thugs 'gate-crashed' a party.
When are people in this country going to be allowed
to defend themselves in their own homes, or have homicidal, psychopathic
thugs suddenly got more rights than everyone else?
The draconian Gun Laws(reminiscient of some sort of
communist dictatorship) ensure that these 'menaces to society' can operate
with impunity and without fear of swift, just and appropriate retribution
by law-abiding citizens...
I submit that One Nation Party should do everything
within its power to get these ludicrous 'laws' reversed ASAP, so that the
elderly can purchase appropriate weapons which, at least, give them peace
of mind and deter would-be aggressors with the very real threat of serious
bodily harm.
The alternative, a la inner Sydney, seems to be to
turn their 'homes' into mini-fortresses or 'electronic zoos'. Why should
the tax-payer be burdenend with this?
The intellectual elites and the pollies don't have
to worry about these sorts of incidents: they either live in 'leafy' suburbs
with merchant bankers and stockbrokers for neighbours or have access to unlimited
security courtesy of the Commonwealth Police or the State Protective Security
Services....
IF such changes seem unlikely in the short term, the
elderly(and anyone else who feels threatened) should launch a 'class action'
against Coward et al for 'reckless endangerment'[bordering on criminal
negligence] cheers!
(jimbo!)
Subject: GST SUICIDE?
Selling the unsalable: the many GST questions
One of John Hewson's worst moments in the 1993 campaign
came when he couldn't explain the impact of the GST on a birthday cake. John
Howard won't have to worry about the cake. With food apparently in the
Government's proposed GST, the cake becomes a simple matter – it goes
up by an expected 10 per cent.
But a hundred questions of principle, detail and
implementation remain to be answered about the GST. They are likely to make
selling it a nightmare, however attractive the income tax cuts and other
positives.
The GST will be attacked on the grounds of fairness
and equity, administrative complexity and transitional anomaly. The Government
and the tax reformers will argue that a broad-based consumption tax is vital
to get the present ramshackle system into shape. They'll point to the good
of the country. They will observe that a system that taxes flavoured milk
at 12 per cent but unflavoured milk not at all is neither fair nor
rational.
Many critics will accept the overall need for tax reform,
even for a GST, but say that the particular GST should be different. Others
will argue about whether a one-rate GST is really "fair". Yet others will
take up particular difficulties or peculiarities.
The gap between broad support for a consumption tax
and nitty-gritty backing is shown by the experience with the Australian Council
of Social Service (ACOSS). A loose alliance between business and welfare
has held together since 1996 to push tax reform. But a few weeks ago, ACOSS
said that if food were to be included, the consumption tax should not be
higher than 5 per cent. This week ACOSS, while still waiting to see the package,
indicated that a 10 per cent tax with food in did not meet its
specifications.
The arguments for having food in are that a uniform
rate is simple and efficient and that to take food out would forgo more than
$4 billion in revenue. But including food dramatically raises the hurdle
over which the Government must clamber. That's why Hewson was forced in late
1992 to modify Fightback! to exclude food.
The Government's package will have compensation, tax
cuts and rises in family payments to ensure that low-income people will not
be worse off despite paying more for their food.
But whatever is done will not reassure a number of
nervous low-income voters.
One factor that has traditionally concerned the welfare
lobby about the inclusion of food is that it is always possible for the
"compensation" package to erode over time (as in New Zealand), especially
in a climate unsympathetic to anything that's seen as being on the welfare
side of the ledger.
John Howard and Peter Costello will also need to have
convincing arguments to the question of why it is fair to replace one set
of apparent inequities in the tax system with another. Yes, it's unjust that
many household goods that are in fact necessities of life carry a wholesale
sales tax while services like restaurant meals don't. But is it "fair" that
children's clothing under a GST will cost 10 per cent more when the tax on
fur coats will fall from 32 per cent to 10 per cent? Jewellery also goes
from 32 per cent to 10 per cent, but currently untaxed potatoes and eggs
will have a new 10 per cent tax.
The national director of the Australian Taxpayers
Association, Peter McDonald, points out a big difficulty in selling the GST:
the items that rise – like food – are bought every week, while
those with spectacular falls – some bigger-ticket consumer goods like
VCRs, TVs, cameras, cassette recorders – are only purchased every few
years.
Already the battle over baby products is in full swing,
with Labor's Social Security and Family Services spokeswoman, Jenny Macklin,
warning of the tax to come on nappies, baby wipes and other infant necessities.
Family Services Minister Warwick Smith countered by pointing to the "22 per
cent hidden tax" on toys.
Lobby groups can do a lot of harm in a campaign. The
Housing Industry Association (HIA) is one of the few business groups that
has broken ranks and now opposes a GST on the "necessities of life", even
though some rebate for housing is part of the package.
The GST would apply to new houses, but not to the existing
houses when they were sold (although real estate agents' fees would attract
it). The rebate would almost certainly be capped, opening arguments about
the ceiling and amount. Ron Silberberg, managing director of the HIA, says
the rebate will have to be very generous to compensate buyers of new houses
adequately, and predicts it will probably exclude renovations. Rents are
expected to be exempt, but would go up because of rises in the cost of other
services.
There will be some interesting differences created
by the rebate for business inputs. Fancy yourself as a potential champion
at the elite game of polo? Buy yourself a young horse and pay tax. But if
you're a professional player, you can buy a string of horses and get a rebate.
You'll pay the tax on your kid's pony, or a new puppy. But if you're in the
racing business, you can get a rebate when you buy a yearling; so will the
pony and dog breeders.
Having a minimum of exemptions or zero ratings makes
for a simpler tax, but that doesn't mean it's simple. (The difference between
exemption and zero rating is that rebates for tax paid can be claimed where
goods or services are zero-rated, but not where exempt.)
Health, education and child care are expected to be
zero-rated. This means they will not be taxed, but schools, hospitals and
child-care centres will be able to claim rebates where they have to pay tax
on inputs. But what goods and services are "health" and "education"? What
about bandages, for example? Are they integral to providing the health "service"?
And if bandages are zero-rated, isn't a 10 per cent tax on sticking plasters
sold in the supermarket a bit rich? Will drugs be zero-rated? Only prescription
drugs? Fightback! had prescription drugs and some non-prescription drugs
zero-rated, but drugs for animal use prescribed by vets taxable under the
GST.
Nursing-home services are expected to escape the GST.
Apart from anything else, the Government cannot afford another kerfuffle
over nursing homes.
(And the elderly are among those unlikely to be keen
on a GST: self-funded retirees are especially tricky to compensate.) What
about school books – exercise books and text books? If exercise books
were included in zero-rated educational items, how could this work in practice,
given that these books are bought for other uses?
Is alternative medicine "health"? Naturopaths? Stress
counsellors? Diet counsellors? Or are the only health services to be covered
those attracting a benefit under Medicare?
These problems will be dealt with by definitions and
lists. The easiest way is to keep these very limited. Once any distinctions
are made, an element of arbitrariness comes in and there is room for endless
argument. But the narrower they are, the more critics can point to increased
costs in these areas. On Thursday, the National Tax and Accountants Association
said a GST zero rating that applied only to school fees would slug with a
10 per cent increase fares to and from school, uniforms, sports equipment,
books and private coaching, computers, stationery, and certain school camps
and excursions.
Financial services, like banking, are expected to be
exempt from the GST, although the Government has reportedly told the banks
it would look at how they could be included at a later stage. It has been
thought near-impossible to calculate the value-added component of any financial
service charge, but the banks now believe it can be worked out. For them,
the incentive to have their services included is that they can then claim
rebates.
The transitional problems might not get much attention
in the election campaign, but there are traps that require special
arrangements.
For example, it will take a year to 18 months to introduce
the GST, which will bring down the tax on an ordinary family car from 22
to 10 per cent. (The Government could choose to retain a higher rate for
luxury cars. But that would open the way for the argument that other "luxuries"
should receive similar treatment.) Knowing the rate will soon fall would
cause many people to defer new-car purchases. This would produce a downturn
in the car market in the meantime, so some transitional provisions will be
needed.
The Government will also have to make arrangements
for second-hand goods. The bind here is between double taxation on the one
hand and, on the other, letting whole areas – the art market, the used-car
market – escape. Would there be a notional rebate so the full GST did
not apply? There could be a 10 per cent tax on a new artwork, but a lesser
rate when the "new" work was resold.
Big business favours a GST, but small business will
be more equivocal, fearing the extra red tape. Shadow Treasurer Gareth Evans
argued on Thursday that "the OECD estimates the relative compliance burden
[for small business] at up to 30 times greater than that for big business".
The experience in New Zealand, where the introduction of the GST led to better
small-business record-keeping, isn't likely to cut much ice.
A big problem for Howard will be people's fears that
a 10 per cent rate is just the thin end of a much larger wedge. Evans pointed
out that in NZ the GST had gone from 10 to 12.5 per cent, in the UK from
10 to 17.5 per cent, and in Denmark from 10 to 25 per cent.
The Government is aware of this vulnerability. Howard
talks about a "mechanism" to protect the rate. One option is that any rate
rise would require the approval of the States.
But as Evans said, "A law can be made by the Commonwealth
Parliament which says, as the Coalition is, that a particular rate can only
be increased if all the States agree.
But that law can itself be repealed or amended by
the Commonwealth Parliament at any time, without any reference at all to
what the States think." Evans could perhaps also use the Keating Government's
L-A-W tax cuts to make his point that being in "law" is not the be-all and
end-all.
The "trust me" case is always difficult to carry on
tax rates. It's particularly hard for Howard because of his record on GST.
In a doorstop on May 24, 1996 he said: "The Australian people voted against
a GST in 1993, and that is why it was dropped out of our policy. We accepted
the verdict of the Australian people . . . The Howard Government has no plans
to introduce a GST. It is not part of our policy. We were elected on a platform
that did not include a GST, and I don't intend to depart from that." In
Opposition, Howard had made his now infamous "never ever" GST promise.
The PM can argue that his seeking a mandate to go back
to his long-held support of a consumption tax is the operative thing. But
when it comes to people believing politicians, old clips of them saying the
opposite of their current line are extremely damaging.
Kim Beazley describes the GST as "a big black dog".
So far in Australia, it has bitten the politicians who have tried to collar
it. If John Howard can put it on the leash at an election, it will be a
remarkable achievement.
Steve Blizzard
Subject: Only hearing what he wants to
hear.
Dear Sir,
Detractors of One Nation only hear the bits they want
to hear and Gavin Gee-Clough of yesterday's "You Say" was no exception. Gavin
said we were "missing the common enemy entirely - the corporate rich who
live off the wealth generated by the average battler"
Gavin, if you open your eyes and ears to what is being
said in One Nation then you will clearly find out that the "corporate rich"
have not been overlooked and are firmly in the sights.
Gavin, like all the knockers, can't get past the Asian
and Aborigine bit and would rather see the country fall totally into the
hands of Multi-nationals than have to admit that One Nation is the only real
chance we have for rescuing Australia.
Gavin said that "One Nation are racist, sexist and
prejudicial towards people's sexual preference" Bleating nonsense like this
shows that the critic is totally and utterly misinformed. I challenge you
have a look at One Nation policy Gavin and see if you can find any evidence
to back up your ridiculous claim.
I wonder if Gavin worked it all out for himself or
if he was just parroting his master ?
Let me assure Gavin and his lefty mates that they can
protest up and down the roads until their legs wear down to their knees and
they will make absolutely no difference to the outcome.
The only way you can change the system is at the ballot
box and the radical left protest movement does not have the numbers to do
that.
Politics is a simple numbers game - get the numbers
and you get a say.
Even if the protestors were old enough to vote they
still would not have sufficient numbers to get one person into any Parliament
in Australia, let alone enough to make a difference.
Allan W. Doak
Subject: The Stupid Party
The Editor,
The Northern Rivers Echo,
Molesworth Street,
CITY OF LISMORE NSW
Dear Editor,
Readers of the "Letters to the Editor" columns in
the Echo have, over the years been handsomely treated to a large range of
viewpoints on very many, and some intriguing, subjects and your tolerance
in providing such a forum has been greatly appreciated.
Although it has been permissable in the past to criticise
the doings of the so called major, and some minor, political parties and
their parliamentary representatives, it may well be that the July 30,1998
issue was the first one in which, you allowed someone to openly, and it would
seem, quite deliberately, rubbish the voting members of the electorate. Under
the heading "Vote I,stupid" an author, with the quite unbelievable name of
Party Parslow, was able to do it to the locals in this one nation for their
great willingness to vote liars into office.
The future writers of this State and Nation's history
might record that this was the era when the natives became more than usually
restless and some were even revolting.
Surely Australia and its States and various territories
have been magnificently served, with the assistance of a powerful media,
by the Labor and Liberal "administrations" even though those have, of course,
been controlled by "faceless men" or other ruthless non-par-lia-ment-ary
party machine hierarchs.
Sincerely,
J o n M. A x t e n s
Subject: Oh really?
The Australian's national affairs editor Mike Stekete
fessed up on the weekend. Discussing the cynicism in the electorate he quoted
ALP luminary Barry Jones: "We never ever really took the voters into our
confidence". Fancy that! Idiot Stekete thinks that that is news.
As proud as if he had just invented the wheel he continues:
"What he [Jones] meant is that Labor came to power in in 1983 with a quite
different agenda to the one it implemented. It did not ask voters to pass
judgements on cutting tariffs, floating the dollar, letting in foreign banks
or other aspects of financial deregulation. It did not take its plans to
sell the Commonwealth Bank, Qantas and Australian Airlines to the people
for approval - on the contrary it campaigned against Opposition proposals
to do just that".
Precisely Mike. That's the reason for the rise of One
Nation: people are not as stupid as the politicians and elites such as you
think they are. The people, well enough of us, have seen through the lies
and arrogance of the Liberal and Labor parties.
But I really think Mike needs more education into
realpolitik Oz-style. He says: 'The downward spiral in the relationship between
the rulers and the ruled can be broken - but not easily'. Whooaa there, Mike!
You and your mates are in for a really big shock if you think that Australians
are "ruled" by "rulers". You're really on the wrong track here, and until
you understand why you'll be as irrelevant as you were, and look as stupid
as you did in the aftermath of the Queensland election.
Antonia
Another perfect day in paradise.
Have a good one.
Recent stories exclusive to
(how to)
subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day:
Their first
day in Parliament - 28th July 1998
The 60 Minutes debate/debacle - 26th July 1998
Hawthorn - where
the hooligans won - 21st July 1998
The Ipswich City
Council re-institute a ban against Pauline Hanson - 19th July 1998
The One Nation
mailing list published in the Australia/Israeli Review - 9th July
1998
The Barbara Hazelton
betrayal - 2nd July 1998
Pauline Hanson's
One Nation Queensland State MPs meet in Parliament - 27th June 1998
QANTAS censor Pauline
Hanson - 24th June 1998
"Paul" (Big "K")
Costello's lies - 22nd June 1998
Live coverage
of Queensland State Elections - 13th June 1998
Beattie's preference
lies exposed - 11th June 1998
Launch of
One Nation state policies - 8th June 1998
Sixty Minutes break
new barriers in unethical reporting - 6th June 1998
Ray Martin revelas
his spots when challenging Pauline Hanson on A Current Affair - 4th
June 1998
The backlash to
Ray Martin's unethical behaviour during his interview with Pauline
Hanson.- 4th June 1998
Return to Australian National
News of the Day
#
See GLOBE International for
other world news.
anotd
