Australian National
(anotd)
Thursday 16th July 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
Between the One Nation lines
Pauline Hanson's comments about the 1967 Referendum on Aborigines has,
predictably, created a media feeding frenzy with the usual old distortions
coming to the fore.
The story was of such importance that The Courier Mail was "forced"
to ignore its stance of not reporting on One Nation. Interesting because
the television stations are showing us what the papers are not - Pauline
Hanson addressing thousands of Australians who hang on her every word, cheer
and clap on each point.
The Hanson Phenomenon has certainly continued to rattle the career politicians
and their glass cages over the last week. Thus the comment by Mrs Hanson
in Adelaide about the 1967 Referendum becoming a major focus for all those
who are threatened by her growing support.
Before I comment on these statements here is yesterday's press release by
Pauline Hanson on her comments in Adelaide on this issue:
Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum
It is clear Pauline Hanson is often misrepresented
by the press and the recent headlines that suggest she questioned Aboriginal
Australian’s rights to vote is yet another example of selective reporting.
Is this because of the search for what will be the most inflammatory or is
it just that some members of the press pick out of context what they believe
will do the most damage to Pauline Hanson?
“I have not and would not question the right to
vote of any Australian citizen. What I question is whether Australians would
have thought twice about their vote in the 1967 referendum if they had known
their attempt to bring about equality was going to cause the pendulum to
go the other way.
“The main point of the 1967 referendum was the
change of section 51 of the constitution that allowed the government to make
special laws with respect to Aborigines. It is from this that successive
governments have created race based policies such as Abstudy and 1.5% loans
for Aboriginals starting businesses.
“Aboriginal Australians like all Australians should
and do have the right to vote but no one should be treated differently on
the basis of race - all Australians should be treated equally and the same.
I am quite certain that if Australians had understood where the 1967 referendum
would lead, many would have voted differently.
“These special laws based on race have led to
reverse discrimination and the rorting of taxpayers money without helping
the Aborigines in most need. We must assist Aborigines, but as Australians
in need, not on the basis of race. We must not make laws that set Australians
apart and are open to abuse by those who pretend to look after the Aboriginal
people.
“It is often reported that I want to take benefits
from Aboriginal people, that is not correct and never was correct. It is
true many Aboriginal people are seriously disadvantaged but they do not have
a monopoly on being disadvantaged and should not be singled out on the basis
of race. Everyone should be assisted on the basis of need.”
Statement issued by Pauline Hanson MP, member for
Oxley
In her speech to supporters in Adelaide earlier this week Pauline referred,
incorrectly, to the 1967 Referendum including the Aboriginal's right to vote.
As you can see from the press release above - the thrust of her comments
were aimed against the ATSIC Aboriginal industry, the bureaucrats living
off the fat of the tax payer provided funding and the manner in which the
money is distributed.
Of course making a mistake, which the media would have you believe is Pauline
Hanson's exclusive domain, was jumped on by Prime Minister John Howard who
said in Parliament yesterday, "...stripped of any kind of rhetoric, any kind
of excuse, any kind of explanation, what the Member for Oxley was saying
last night is that she's actually contemplating the notion that one section
of the Australian community should not have the vote..."
What trash... in fact it was
John Howard
who preceded Hanson in expressing fears about the divisive nature of the
Aboriginal industry back in 1988 before he became a lame duck under
the cloud of political correctness.
Here is a quote from the above press release by John Howard:
The whole idea of a treaty makes nonsense of the statement
by the Prime Minister on Australia Day that there can be no hierarchy of
descent in Australia and that commitment to Australia is everything. The
Prime Minister at that time rejected any policy based on racial difference,
and we do the same.
Queensland National Party president David Russell agrees with Mrs Hanson
about the 1967 Referendum saying, "What Australians were told in 1967 was
that two discriminatory provisions were being taken out of the Constitution.
"But that was not what they voted for. What they voted for was to give the
Commonwealth the power to make discriminatory laws in relation to Aborigines."
He added that a huge Aboriginal bureaucracy had been established in the years
following the referendum.
"We've had a great deal of division that's come from well intentioned attempts
to promote indigenous welfare by all sorts of discriminatory treatment."
Two new race based anti-Hanson parties to be established
in Australia.
It is an interesting quirk that "race based" parties are given the nod by
the mainstream media while the One Nation party which is for equity for all
Australians is singled out as the "racist' party.
One does not have to be an Einstein to realise that if there was any truth
in media reporting the reverse would be being portrayed in the pages of the
daily newspapers. However, the hidden agendas of the media barons are the
key to understanding the quirky and dishonest nature of the articles that
appear day after day.
The two new parties include a tax payer funded Aboriginal party called the
"Indigenous People's Party" - possibly the seed of the new Aboriginal
government foreseen in the UN
Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which Australians
are not supposed to know about.
And the Unity Party which is aligned with the Internet based "Say
No to Hanson" Party" . The Unity Party is clearly a front for the Asian
community with the proposer being named as Lin Tang, of 5 Maluka Place,
Kingsgrove in New South Wales.
What is this all about?
Please help me solve
the mystery
of this anonymous fax sent in 1994 by Paul Elliott MP to Mary Esson
MP about Au$1 and Au$2 coins.
The media distorts even when they are
misled!
How
the media are easily misled.. or as Joh would call it - feeding the
chooks.
Here is an extract:
During these interviews Matthew attempted to explain
his point of view - essentially he was ignored. While taping the Hinch interview,
Matthew explained an ‘extreme’ idea outlining how kids can go out
into the desert and attend camps run by YPAHMTS. The kids were only
allowed to wear plain T-shirts, listen to music that YPAHMTS supplied
and read material YPAHMTS gave them. They would be totally cut off
from the ‘deviant influences’ that heavy metal T-shirts represent.
These parts of the interview were cut from the final edit and the interview
that went to air focused in on the narrow media-created agenda: banning
offensive, heavy metal T-shirts.
The media began portraying Matthew as the leader of
a ‘growing group’ wanting to ban all heavy metal T-shirts, when
all Matthew advocated was for people to begin thinking about what they wear.
The media created something out of nothing. His stance, that heavy metal
T-shirts are offensive, was conveniently changed by the media into a stance
calling for the banning of all offensive T-shirts. At no stage did Matthew
ever mention banning, he just advocated choice, stating “if you want
to wear an offensive T-shirt, make it yourself, rather than paying twenty-five
dollars to advertise what is basically a multinational recording
company.”
Making the
news" -
an indepth exposé of media and political collusion at the highest
possible levels in Australia.
You say:
Subject: Aboriginal voting and the 1967
Referendum
This often misquoting of just about anything Pauline
Hanson says is typical of the press and other members of parliament. Personally
I don't think they ever take the time to listen to what is actually said,
instead they just see if they can get any mileage for their own shortcomings
by bending the truth. Don't worry just keep attacking the basis principals
which all real Australians understand and come the elections all sensible
Australians will give the current dead wood in our parliaments the shakeup
they need!!
Yours sincerely
Ron James
A true One Nation Supporter in the ACT.
Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum
Thanks for that. I was a bit concerned when I heard
P.M. Howard making his comments in Parliament today and wondered if it was
just his political twisting again - hoped it was. Unfortunately that is all
that a lot of people want to hear. They are not really interested in the
facts.
While I'm here, one other concern I have following
some recent reporting on One Nation, is that the elected representatives
of One Nation be answerable firstly to the people who elected them and NOT
to some unelected person or persons behind the wall. This is what many people
are coming down on the established Parties for. I believe I am not alone
in believing that the people who put a person into Parliament should have
the greatest say in what and how he does what he does. In other words, a
politician should be answerable to the people not the party!
Keep up the good work. We will break the bias yet.
Martin.
Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum
I agree whole heartedly with Ms Hanson's statement.
No fair minded Australian would say don't help those indigenes who are genuinely
disadvantaged. Unfortunately, numbers of people of limited Aboriginality
have joined the rush to the largesse provided, in the main, by Labor
governments.
This has created anger by those non-indigenous people
who see well-heeled people of marginal Aboriginal descent gaining job
opportunities, Abstudy, grants and special privileges when they don't have
genuine need.
An example is ATSIC's internal Recruitment and Career
Development Program that provides special educational opportunities for people
on salaries well above the Australian average income, to attend courses full-time
at taxpayers expense on full salary and conditions of service. All in the
name of equal opportunity.
Numbers of these people are also being placed, at taxpayers
expense, in higher level jobs in an attempt to accelerate their
promotion.
This is discrimination, but it also misdirects funding
from those Aborigines in need, to those who are by any standard
advantaged.
Keep up the good work. Common sense will eventually
prevail..
RH
Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum
As a white heterosexual male I am at a tremendous
disadvantage in our society. I wish I was a black lesbian single mother.
Greg Byrne
Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum
We of the territory can see , that 67 was a poor decision.
And that advertising at there expense is our gain. How do you keep
going!
All the best We will GET THERE. Reg Dave.
Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum
Scott, thank you for that, I am totally sick of the
media persecuting One Nation when I tuned into the Breakfast Show on 6PR
this morning I KNEW that what Pauline had said MUST have been taken out of
context. I don't know if you listened to Howard Sattler this morning but
if you did it shot all the critics "out of the water" and when Pauline came
on air from Adelaide and confirmed what she had said - well need I say more!!!
I am bloody sick of the media persecuting Pauline but let's face it the more
they do it the more votes she is going to get.
Regards Alison
Subject: anti-Hanson party
In today's Australian there is a public notice of an
application for the registration of a new political party. The name of the
new party is 'Unity - Say No To Hanson'. Its abbreviated name is Unity. Its
proposed Registered Officer is a person called Lin Tang. People may object
to the registration but quite frankly, who'd be bothered. Surely only brain-dead
losers would waste their vote on such a stupid party.
Antonia Feitz
Subject: Good Luck!
We could have used Ms. Hanson here in the USA before
all of our immigration, hiring and loan laws were enacted. We, the taxpayers
who pay the freight, are really the ones being discriminated against.
I'd like to be kept informed of the progress of your
party. The common sense philosophy of One Nation is an inspiration to people
everywhere.
Regards,
Claude Cole
Salinas, CA
Subject: e-mail list request
The state which I currently (temporarily) reside in
is Western Australia.
I admit to attending a protest rally in Canberra last
year against Pauline Hanson, but since I've talked to a couple of different
people and overlooked the media hype (journalist rule no. 1 - only use the
bits that make it sound juicy) I'm starting to see the real message that
is (trying) to be put across and would like to be kept informed of what One
Nation really stands for.
Thanks,
Paul Anderson.
MD
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:
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
