International:

Yesterday we posted ten of Pauline Hanson's latest speeches in Parliament on the Internet.

They cover a wide range of issues.

The book "Pauline, The Hanson Phenomenon" by Helen Dodd launched just days ago has been very well received with the first run of 10,000 copies now practically sold out.

Extract from an unsolicited post received yesterday from Daniel Pocock - the kid who is co-ordinating the "Stick with Wik" on-line campaign...

"Also, if you have sent several (on-line) faxes already, you may not be able to send any more. The reason for this is that the fax gateway we use only allows five free trial faxes, any others you must pay for. So get yourself a new email address from www.rocketmail.com and use that address when sending your next fax. Each email address is allowed to send five faxes".

What Pocock is suggesting here is that his cohorts get free email and then bump up the number of "Stick with Wik" "faxes" to the Prime Minister under a variety of pseudonyms... he will then claim that xxx thousand have responded - which is pulpable rubbish!

"Some people have asked if their personal information that they used in their fax was submitted to faxsav, the fax gateway company. I would like to assure everyone that this was not the case, but you should be aware that personal information is frequently collected on the Internet without your knoweldge. In this case, the email addresses I have recorded were automatically logged by my mail server (this is standard procedure at most UNIX sites), so you should probably feel better knowing that you know who has information about you than not knowing... chances are, your email address is automatically logged at EVERY web site you visit. To prevent this, you should remove your email address from where it is stored in your browser softwares configuration for sending mail.

What Pocock is saying is if you have visited his site he will have secured your email address... and you will now start getting his unsolicited posts... now you can see why he is a blot in more than one way on the Internet landscape.

Interesting angle on the whole Wik debate came to light yesterday when we discovered that Kerry Packer's Consolidated Pastoral  owns pastoral leases over some 44,329 sq kms of Australia.

News Limited's Courier Mail are making such a beat-up about their king maker, ALP federal hopeful, Wayne Goss, that the articles and comments are becoming blatantly gross. Goss, who is still under a cloud because of the Heiner Inquiry into the shredding of documents sought by the courts, a story which The Courier Mail have swept under the carpet as "un-newsworthy", is portrayed as a loving, caring father and family man one that you could safely leave your twenty year old daughter with.... well we won't go into the reasons why I wouldn't - but those in the know will know what I am talking about.

The story headed "Don't look back" on page 29 of the Courier Mail is a classic in brown-nosing and king making. Here are some extra-ordinary extracts largely repeated from another feel-good story about Wayne Goss by The Courier Mail earlier this week...

"But the big question remains unanswered: will he resume his campaign to enter the federal political stage via Pauline Hanson's seat of Oxley?

....

"When I woke up (after the surgery) and saw my wife and children, I thought, why would you want to go back into politics?" he says.

.....

"Often when I was premier, if I had an evening function to go to, I'd get home for dinner. That was important, I thought I was doing the right thing. But there's two or three hours before dinner which are just as important. Just chatting, just being there provides an opportunity for greater communication."

Before expanding any further on the joys of his home life, Goss balances his argument.

"The reality is you can't sit at home and read books and wait for the kids to come home from school. You've got to have a job - that's my attitude to life."

The half page article with a picture of Goss looking confident is full of comments like this... biased reporting? You be the judge.   

Political:

The Wik debate is becoming a political nightmare for Prime Minister John Howard. Anyone listening in on the Senate debate yesterday has got to be palpably worried because Senator Brian Harradine who holds the balance of power is quite obviously totally out of his depth...

There were times yesterday where his ramblings to his suitors on both sides of Parliament made absolutely no sense in plain English... and this is the man who will decide the passage of the ten point plan on Wik... what a mess!

What makes the whole thing even more ludicrous is that Harradine is being advised by pro-Aboriginal lawyer and Jesuit priest, Frank Brennan. Brennan has been lobbying senators over the Wik debate and, according to Cheryl Kernot, his influence over Harradine could be critical.

John Howard in the meantime has made a short ten minute pre-recorded address which will be screened on the ABC tomorrow. The address will explain Howard's view as to why the Native Title Amendment Bill is a "fair and honourable compromise between competing interests and strongly held views."

But Howard has been beaten to the punch with Aboriginal leader Pat Dodson saying that the Howard plan meant the end of reconciliation.

You Say:

Subject: Who would have thought ?

Dear Sir,

To all those fools who believe that native title is extinguished by freehold title, I address this to remind them that they are fools and probably will never aspire to be anything more than being fools.

Prior to 1972 we had politicians from different political persuasions with varying levels of competence and leadership qualities. Aside from their political differences they mostly all shared one common quality.

They were fierce AUSTRALIAN PATRIOTS. They served Australia first and foremost and history can show that they didn't do a real bad job of it. Since 1972 we have been governed by treacherous excuses for politicians who have systematically dismantled a once great Nation and handed it over to anybody who wanted a piece of the action. They have all taken their "thirty pieces of silver" and haven't batted an eyelid.

Twenty five years ago it was inconceivable to any Australian, regardless of ethnic background, that by 1997 the people would no longer own Qantas, Australian Airlines, the Commonwealth Bank, Telstra, ANL, electricity supplies, water supplies, airports, railways etc. etc.

Twenty five years ago who would have thought that it was possible to be sold out to the tune of over $200 billion by traitors. Don't go looking overseas for the greedy villains who stole our country from under our noses. The answer lies right here in the laps of the ALP, Liberal, National, Democrats, Greens and their respective parasitic groups. These are the diseased cretins who are the guilty ones.

These would-be despots happily gave away our rural sector and pastoral leases and WILL give away your freehold title.

Those who don't own any freehold or never will probably think on the surface that they don't stand to lose anything. The other lot who own freehold and are still out there bleating "stick with Wik" will have the slimy smirks wiped from their faces when the first native tile claim over freehold is successful.

If you truly believe the Aboriginal claim to Australia and you own freehold land in Australia then you are compelled to hand your land over to the Aboriginals, or be guilty of the greatest hypocrisy.

Allan W. Doak.

Subject: Comments on Australian News of the Day

I want to draw your attention to the following,

Please read it, it is important.

In Sydney Morning Herald, Wed., Now., 26, 1997 there was an article by KENDELL HILL, "Jewish Input urged over Native Title", in it Rabbi, Dr. Jonathan Sacks. Formally known as Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregation of the Commonwealth, who is here on a PASTORAL VISIT, organised by the NSW Board of Jewish Deputies and the Australian Institute of Jewish Affairs, gives me the impression that, our Prime Minister and Government are wrong in the way they are dealing with the Native Titles, that we should give 80% of our land to about 1% of our population, (that what the Aborigines seems to claim).

Seeing that he is on a PASTORAL VISIT, I think he is out of order virtually telling us that our Prime Minister and Government are wrong, he should confine himself to his pastoral subjects.

Seeing that he started meddling in our politics, although he is a visitor to our Country, let's look how it looks to me.

The above mentioned article, gives the impression, to me, that Jews are Jews first and Australians after, they have United Hebrew Congregation of the Commonwealth, NSW Board of Jewish Deputies, Australian Institute of Jewish Affairs and others I presume, Why do Jews do not integrate like other people did, why do they separate themselves from other Australians, and then when there is a bad feeling against them, they cry foul, anti-Semitism and such. It appears to me, that Dr. Jonathan Sacks is saying that Aborigines were dispossessed and something should be done about it. It seems to me that there is a suggestion behind all this, that we should unconditionally grant the Aborigine their land claims.

The alleged dispossession happened about 200 years ago,

I think he and the Jewish community have a ghoul, putting their noses in to that, Israelis have taken Palestinian territories just a few years ago, compering it with 200 years. They have to my knowledge two UN resolutions against them, telling them to unconditionally give those lands, including Jerusalem, back to Palestinians, they continuously refuse to do so and try to bargain. We support them by not pressing for them to be forced to do so, by applying sanctions against Israel, and yet we apply sanctions against Iraq to force Iraq to comply with UN resolutions. The rabbi is supposed to be a guest in our Country and should not alienate Australian general population against Jews or Jews against Australian general population. He is virtually saying that our Prime Minister and Government are wrong, who the hell is he, why doesn't he criticise Israel for not obeying UN resolutions.

The Jewish community's response to Wik and general Aboriginal maters, should be that the Jewish community should get the Israel to obey existing UN. resolutions, that Israel gives back unconditionally all the occupied territories, including Jerusalem, to Palestinians, before allowing their rabbi, to tell us to give 80% of Australia to Aboriginal people, who are only approximately 1% of Australian population.

Considering the above, we do not have to give any of our lands to the Aboriginal people. We can not be held responsible for what our ancestors did long ago, under different set of rules existing at the time. The Aborigines have no claim against present day Australians, we have not dispossessed them , will it eventually come to this, that, an Australian will be held responsible for what his or hers grandfather or grandmother, long ago dead, did or did not do under the laws at that time. What right had the Judge to say, they (Aborigines) have the right to claim the land as their own. Aboriginal people are one percent (or so), of the population of Australia, and they claim 80 percent of Australia. We supposed to be clever people, are we stupid ?

This is our country, we have our own democratically elected government, and only that government can tell us what to do or not to do, no Judge or Court should be able to usurp such powers, they have not been elected by the people.

We have not gone far enough, declare Mabo and Wik rulings null and void, and say we are just as important as Israelis, and if they do not have to unconditionally give the land covered by UN resolutions to Palestinians, we should not make gift of our land to Aboriginal people.

Yours respectfully,
Richard Borowski

Subject: Native Title

Dear Sir,

I am confused about this Native Title Debate!!!!!

"?? WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO SANITY & GOOD STRONG GOVERNMENT ??"

The way I see it, there should be "NO" debate and it appears to me that I am not the only person who is confused. Might I suggest that the Government is more confused than anyone for allowing an extremely "SMALL SECTION" of the population to DICTATE and twist the law to the disadvantage of the majority.

The government seem to have forgotten that we live in a DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY and they might need to be reminded that this means, "GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE". "THIS MEANS "ALL" OF THE PEOPLE".

That effetely means that the majority rules and by hell they will at the next election.

I always thought that AUSTRALIA WAS OWNED BY "ALL" OF IT'S "CITIZENS", REGARDLESS OF COLOUR, CLASS, CREED OR NATIONALITY.

I also always thought that, THE GOVERNMENT REPRESENTED "ALL" OF THE PEOPLE, THEREFOR THE GOVERNMENT OWNED "ALL" THE LAND.

If this is the case then what the hell is this debate all about???? If it isn't the case then there is not much hope for any of us and CHAOS WILL REIGN!!!!

Assuming that the GOVERNMENT OWN ALL THE LAND.

In times past the Governments of the day have divided the land into STATES & TERRITORIES, have declared areas as NATIONAL PARKS, have given ARNHEM LAND to the aboriginals for their exclusive use, have ALLOCATED AREAS INTO LEASEHOLD TITLE for which they hold LEGALLY BINDING AGREEMENTS, for which they collect substantial rents, and they even "SOLD" areas into FREEHOLD TITLE.

Having done all of that, are they now telling us that they didn't own the land in the first place and therefor it wasn't theirs to sell ??

Are they also telling us that we, the non aboriginal section of the community, don't have legal title to the land after having busted our guts for 200 years & fought in 2 World Wars, defending the place and giving every AUSTRALIAN the lifestyle they now enjoy, that we didn't have legal title to the land ??

Are they telling us that we were doing it only, to now hand it all over to an extremely small (there are many other adjectives I could use to describe them) minority of our population, and at the same time tell them we are sorry but we didn't know we didn't own to the land.

????????????? IS OUR GOVERNMENT STONE RAVING MAD ???????????????????????

SOMEONE HAD BETTER TELL THEM THAT WE ARE "ALL" AUSTRALIANS, MOST OF US ARE INDIGENOUS("born or originating in a country"), REGARDLESS OF COLOUR OR WHO OUR ANCESTORS WERE, AND THE SOONER WE "ALL" START LOOKING TO THE FUTURE AND WORKING UNITED AS "ONE NATION", RATHER THAN WALLOWING IN THE PAST, THE SOONER WE WILL BECOME THE STRONG UNITED COUNTRY WE SHOULD BE.

GOVERNMENTS MAKE THE LAWS TO BE "FAIR TO ALL".

THE LAWS ARE ADMINISTERED BY THE COURTS.

IF A LAW IS NOT FAIR TO "ALL" THEN GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT AND THE DUTY TO CHANGE IT.

We all know that there are those in all communities who chose to be carried by the rest of the community but we must, at costs, prevent them from become the majority or we all deserve to go down the drain.

~~~ Errol L. ARDRON ~~~

Subject: Re: Reverse Racism?

Dear Sir,

In response to Allan Doak's post about racism, congratulations. Yes, racism is not a one way street. All ethnic groups have their own prejudices, and while it might not be politically correct, there are distinctions between WHITE or BLACK or any other colour RACISM. Lets not dress up the point that racism is wrong whatever the colour. We should be working hard to address the issues and not dress it up in clever sounding names.

The problem however, is that at the moment, WHITE RACISM has been given a voice, and that voice is that of Pauline Hanson. Yes, she may profess that she isn't spouting hate towards Blacks, Asians.......fill in the blank as you see fit. However, the way she voices her opinions (some which I may add are valid) lends support to the racist voices in our community. What she says gives by default a voice to all white racists out there. After all, if someone in the government is spouting off comments which denigrate a subgroup in our community, how wrong could it be to act or reveal one's own petty hatreds and bigotry. By giving racism a political voice, it is by default endorsing it in the community and that is wrong.

As for Allan's comment urging all Australian patriots to stand up and be counted, who do you define as Australian? Is it just because you are white you are Australian? Or is it that you love the country and are willing to defend her that you are Australian? I know many people of Greek, Italian or Asian descent who do not fit the white mould that most see as Australian. However, most of them have either been born here or have grown up in Australia, and do see themselves as Australian. What defines an Australian? White skin? Or love of a country?

Yes, by all means stand up for your convictions. But lets not proceed further and support racism. While I agree with some of Pauline's ideas, supporting them is another thing. Yes, she may have some valid points, but by painting subgroups within the community and making them scape goats just because they are different is not the answer. All it does is stir up the petty hatreds and make problems worse, for white, black and other coloured Australians.

Ethan

Organization: Monash University

You disgust me.

What do you think the words 'bigoted', 'racist', 'dishonest' and 'paranoid' mean. More to the point - what do you think they mean to the 'mainstream Australia' you claim to represent. I'd say those words are adequately represented in the hate-filled garbage you are spouting.

Just as you are entitled to expression on universal information technology, so are the community groups, ethnic groups, individuals and 'mainstream Australians' you mention.

Incidentally, before you jump to conclusions about my lineage and therefore my 'vested interest', I should let you know that I AM a part of what you define as mainstream. My family arrived from Britain on the 1st fleet. My family are home owners in suburban Australia, working class battlers, and my nearest relatives are pastoralists.

Doesn't the amount of hate in your life worry you?

Melanie McGrath

Subject: What I think of gwb

You (and your type) are the scum of the earth. You feel so inadquate you need to hate anyone who is different from you, or has an opinion different to you.

Australia would be a better place without you.

David Gilbert

Business:

Personal trivia, from the global office:

Another beautiful day in paradise.

Have a good one.

#

See GLOBE International for other world news.