The Musings of Nemesis

The Communist/Nazi Connection

2014-01-20T16:43:00.000-08:00

Diana West's book, American Betrayal, has opened a can of worms to those who may consider themselves an aficionado of American history and to those who have a personal or political reason/s to attack her highly evidenced book which outlines how Communist influence has shaped American policy, both international and domestic, via a national outlook that became increasingly socialist within the Franklin Roosevelt administration of the 1930's.

And while this author has yet to read American Betrayal, this author has been busy over the past few years putting together snippets of information largely gathered through research that has allowed many dots to be joined that has forced the author to form the same opinion that compelled Diana West to expose in her book.

It has become quite obvious to this author that Communist doctrine has been allowed to infiltrate Western political thinking and that sympathetic individuals have been assisted into positions of influence and power by similar thinking individuals and groups, within the institutions of the West, particularly the educational, labor political and unionist side of Western society over the past 70 years.

What were once termed Democratic or Labor orientated political parties, have now become so compromised by Socialist/Collectivist thinking that the loose term 'Leftist', is generically applied to them by those who do not happen to agree with their Socialist/Communist beliefs/policies.

Ever wonder why the Democratic/Labor political parties have become so anti-business, anti-nationalist and anti-capitalist while heavily promoting Socialism and the dumbing down of our children through inadequate and heavily politicized education? Check out the Communist Manifesto which will give you the reader an insight into the 'modern progressive' Democratic political parties.

This kind of thinking has infected all Western political systems, even into the so called 'Conservative' side of politics in which most honest observers find today that they have a real problem in trying to identify those politicians who are truly Conservative through action - and the true Conservative should not be aligned with the neo-Conservative of which there is no such animal. And just like those who are branded as neo-Nazi's - there is no new Nazi party which is a shortening of the term Nationalosozialistiche Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or The German National Socialist Workers Party, because the Nazi ideology was never defeated, either militarily or countered through re-education, and so as a result, the criminal Nazi ideology lives on.

In fact, thousands of SS and Nazi notables, including hundreds of German scientists, were given escape routes through the 'Vatican Ratlines' to all points of the Globe while others, mainly scientists like Werner von Braun, were taken to America under 'Operation Paperclip'. Included with the escaping Nazi's was the accumulated loot plundered from those nations the Third Reich invaded and occupied and which has been estimated to be in excess of 200 Billion American dollars of 1945 value.

Also, forget about placing the 'neo' tag on anything the Collectivists like to place labels on, because there is no new Conservative movement or party, only those who practise true Conservatism, and there is no new Nazi party, only those who self identify as Nazi and practice Nazi ideology, a criminal ideology that survived World War Two with the escaping SS and Nazi notables, and has been flourishing and influencing many countries around the world ever since.

Another misnomer that the Collectivists like to throw into the mix, just to confuse those who are not interested in looking further, is the tag of 'far right wing' or 'right wing' when labelling political beliefs that run contrary to their own progressive/socialist/communist/collectivist ideals. You see, Nazi or National Socialist ideology is in many ways similar to the Soviet Communist system, both profess to embrace Socialism as an ideal, but National Socialism allows private property and business rights, so long as the owners adhere to Nazi ideals, whereas Communism controls everything and forbids private property/industrial ownership. Both systems imprison or execute those who 'buck' the system, there is no freedom of expression within either system. On the other hand, Conservatism is the practise of doing no harm to society and the retention through investment of those things that have been proven to work in society's favor over many hundreds of years. Too, Conservatives promote the Free Enterprise system, a Capitalist system that has proven to benefit all and gave rise to a very wealthy middle class that is sadly being obliterated through Socialism of both stripes - that is the Communist/Nazi connection. True Conservatives are middle of the road political thinkers and doers, they may stray into the Left and Right of politics occasionally, but knowing the consequences of loitering in either side, never dwell for too long in either camp.

So what is the Communist/Nazi connection?

This author believes that Diana West has exposed the Communist connection, a connection that is obvious to those who know and can realize the impact that the drift into socialism by the West is now causing to every sovereign nation that once valued and maintained as sacrosanct its own sovereignty.

So where is the Nazi connection?

The Nazi's and their progeny, that is those who embrace the ideology of National Socialism are all around us! They inhabit Big Business, Big 'conservative' Government, the Military Industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us about, the alphabet soup of spy agencies, the black operations that sometime get public attention that are supposed to undermine 'communism', the black budget, and many false flag ops.

Did you know that the CIA founded and then funded Al Queda. Did you know that the CIA is still funding Al Queda?

Ever wonder how American Presidents are selected and not elected. Ronald Reagan had several 'ex-Nazi's' in his administration. Remember the controversy when Reagan was visiting Germany and placed a wreath at a SS memorial? Why did he do this and more importantly, who told him to do this?

Ever stop to think why America changed from being an isolationist/neutral nation prior to World War Two into an arrogant and imperial nation of world wide political meddlers and military aggressiveness post World War Two?

Ever wonder why the Democrats and the Republicans have similar policies, how they are now so similar that it is often joked at election time that all the people are doing in voting for change is replacing the rider on the same horse. Democrats do not support business or the free enterprise system while the Republicans do - sound a little like the Communist/Nazi connection?

Ever wonder why the Democrats openly revile and attack personally through the IRS the would be if they could be legitimate third political party of America - The Tea Party? Do you the reader understand why the Republicans now also verbally attack the Tea Party? Does it concern you that two supposed political foes can join forces to attack a true Conservative political party, such as the Tea Party? Maybe they are two sides of the same coin with the same agenda, but slightly different ways of seeing that agenda come about?

Ever stop to think why Afghanistan is now one of the leading producers of opium? How has that come about I wonder? Why wasn't the dependence on poppy production in Afghanistan replaced with a more reliable dependence on better and more modern agricultural practises? Why did so many young men from the West give their lives in Afghanistan for? Who and what entities profit from Afghanistan's increased drug production?

While the Democrats may criticize the Republicans and vice versa, both sides will support each other when the time comes to vote on those 'important issues' that are made 'publicly important' via compliant and abetting media, a media that self-censors every aspect of their public broadcasting to fit in with the politically correct standards that now inhibits the telling of the truth. Both Hitler and Stalin would be proud of what the general media has now become!

What the American people now vote for is no longer a Republic with representative government. It hasn't been that way for a long, long time! The American government is now loosely based on a Communist/Nazi system - a hybrid of the two ideologies joined together for political expediency - to the extent that this hybrid governmental entity now dictates to the American public what they, the American public, should be doing for their government!

With the passing of the Patriot Act, the Communist/Nazi connection has become even stronger. The alphabet soup of spy agencies acting under the illusion of 'national security' routinely spy on and collect 'data' on American citizens they are constitutionally bound to not do so! The CIA now routinely 'executes' American citizens outside of the United States without Habeus Corpus while flagrantly denying those killed the benefit of a fair trial! Drones are now routinely used as surveillance against American citizens within the United States on the pretext those being observed may be involved in some kind of conspiracy or a future act of terrorism. How long do you the reader believe it will be before those drones are employed to 'terminate' suspected 'felons' and 'terrorists' within the United States?

The author would now like the reader of this article to ponder this: Over the past few years over two billion rounds of 9mm hand gun ammunition, much of it hollow point or what it is colloquially known as dumdum ammunition has been purchased by the American government. That kind of ammunition is illegal under the Geneva Convention. So for what purpose has it been purchased?
All major police forces are now being equipped with used armored carriers or in some cases, Tanks as well as a variety of 'war ready' weaponry. To be used for what purpose? Even park rangers and fisheries inspectors are now going armed. Why, what is expected to happen?

We are failing our young.

2013-12-15T19:11:00.001-08:00

Australia used to be a very different country to what it is now. When the author was growing up in the 1950's and 60's, Australia was until the advent of Multiculturalism and Human rights legislation, one of the most successful nations to integrate its immigrants.

Those who came here after world war two were from cultures similar to our own Judeo-Christian background that permitted easy assimilation which was also at the time government policy. Those who came here prior to the mid 1970's were generally labeled as 'New Australians' but under the United Nations false doctrine of Multiculturalism adopted in 1976, any culture was permitted to migrate here, even those cultures that were obviously the complete antithesis to our own Australian culture.

We now have around 5% of our population as Muslim and growing. There are now Islamic enclaves in our major cities and special squads of police set up to combat the crime that invariably Islam brings with it and which is statistically per head of population, out of all proportion to the rest of the population.

Never in the federated history of this nation have the scenes of outrage from young white Australians at Cronulla, a beachside suburb in Sydney, on December 11, 2005, gathered to protest over the authorities lack of intervention in the attacks against young Australian beachgoers, by Muslim Lebanese, that had become an ongoing problem up and down the east coast for some years, ever previously witnessed. The outrage was largely generated by the beating up of two lifeguards a few days earlier, but also the accumulation of years of beach harassments on young females who were given the epithet of 'Aussie sluts' by a never ending parade of male Lebanese Muslims. On Australia Day, 2009, (January 26) crowds of young white Australians, some wrapped in the National Flag and who were intent on impressing their view onto those who watched, shouted their anti-immigrant war cry in unison, 'fuck off, we're full!' as they loosely marched along the Promenade at Manly Beach. The message in the chant was very obvious to those who happened to watch that night's news.

The following Sunday's, The Sunday Telegraph, February 1, 2009, had an article by Nick Leys about TV personality, Scott Cam, who was voicing his outrage at what he described as 'young racist thugs' using the National Flag as a rallying point for their protests. What incensed Cam was his perception that the Australian Flag was being soiled by undesirable elements through acts or protests, with a racist and xenophobic undertone, which according to Cam, was demeaning our national symbol and betraying our national character. What Cam failed to realize though, was that by attacking the 'messenger' he missed what the 'messenger' was trying to tell him, and in the broader picture, the rest of the nation.

What some Australians, like Cam have failed, and to this day are still failing to comprehend, is the fact that never in Australian recorded history have large groups of young white Australians felt compelled to protest about something they perceived was happening to their nation and for which they felt absolutely powerless about. There is no precedent for what occurred at Cronulla in 2005, or up and down the east coast on Australia Day 2009, when more National Flags began to be seen than ever before, and to this day the numbers of flags continue to grow! Those who steer this nation should be asking themselves what has caused such a spike in flag waving on Australia Day and why so many young white Australians felt the need to protest the way that they did. But will the authorities ever bother with some urgently needed soul searching?

The word assimilation these days is a dirty word as far as the Multiculti- Human rights crowd is concerned, and it is now the diversity of cultures that trumps the homogenous society Australia once was. Forgotten too, is the proud record that this nation had of assimilating new migrants with a minimum of fuss, most immigrants, who having learned basic English, eventually found jobs and fended for themselves, some later becoming outstanding Australian citizens. The 'celebration' of cultures that now makes up our nation under the ludicrous notion that all cultures aspire to the same ideals is blatantly false even to a simpleton. Only Western nations have embraced this 'cultural suicide' which is not practised in any developing or third world nation. Do you believe that white Australians would be welcomed as immigrants and catered for, in countries such as Saudi Arabia, China, Indonesia, Africa etc, in ever increasing numbers while demanding special privileges as befitting Australian culture?

Is Multiculturalism really working as the collectivist SSM advertise? Or are the authorities trotting out their usual spin to try and fool the average Aussie? If Multiculturalism is indeed working, then why do we need to be constantly reminded through adverts and pamphlets? If Multiculturalism is truly working shouldn't this be plainly obvious to everyone? If Multiculturalism is working, why have there been the unprecedented protests by our young? If Multiculturalism is working why is there a need for specially introduced laws under Human Rights legislation, such as the Victorian Racial and Religious Vilification Act which is solely designed to keep any criticism at bay, of a specific culture and religion whose followers often warrant criticism? And when public interest or national security concerns matter, how do we now identify our enemies if we are not permitted to speak out about them? Where is the individual Australian's freedom of expression in this very repressive legislation?

Societies which are self critical, historically, are societies which continue to improve and survive as a culture. We are fast becoming a society that refuses to criticize. All cultures within a nation should be open to critical and honest scrutiny so as to find its place within our society, not be given a free license under Multicultural ideology to do as they please.

Those truths are self evident and are not lost on young 'thinking' Australians. No amount of selective legislation by authoritarian governments can blind them to this. They have their eyes firmly open and can see the massive con job that past and present, state and federal governments have imposed on us. It never ceases to amaze the author, that those who peddle the mantra that all cultures are equal, so we should therefore be tolerant of their views, are the first to become intolerant to their own kind by branding them as racist, bigoted or xenophobic, whenever someone raises a genuine concern about the behavior of some cultures that we are forced through the implementation of fascist laws to live with. And make no mistake, as it is the white Australian that is singled out for special attention by these people, who by issuing such degrading terms make a mockery of their own tolerance values by refusing to listen to legitimate complaints!

Is it racist to want to protect your own kind? Are Japan, China, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states racist because they refuse to allow 'others' to become citizens? Why is it only the Westerner who has this false notion that all cultures are equal, so therefore, all aspire to the same ideals? It is self evident to anyone who wishes to notice that not all cultures are equal and do not aspire to our ideals. Why are we on this path of cultural destruction through colonization by peoples from the third world? Why has immigration not become a major issue at election time, when plainly speaking, it affects all of us to some extent? Why should we be allowing more immigration to our already overcrowded cities whose infrastructures are slowly failing due to massive influxes of people? Would you as a white Australian parent, be prepared to send your child to a school that is totally ethnic in make up, including the teachers. There are now several in Sydney you may choose from!

Our youth are watching the slow destruction of our white Australian culture which is occurring before their eyes and feel emasculated about, because no one in authority will listen to their concerns. It is due to the dismissive nature of those same authorities who would rather label the patriotic messengers of those very real concerns, as 'racist', than deal with the root causes of the problems that initiated the protests in the first place, and this is due to become worse the longer it is left to fester. The white Australian is becoming a silent majority which the politicians only listen to at election time. Whenever a valid complaint concerning Islam is raised, the average white Aussie is publicly criticized and branded by those who should know better. Our young have now become subject to this anti-white mentality and are beginning to react to it. They are not blind to the political pandering to those minorities who dwell among us but refuse to assimilate.

Sources: The Sunday Telegraph, Piers Akerman, Telegraph columnist.

Who’ll cry for South Africa?

2013-12-05T17:37:00.001-08:00

Nelson Mandela is dead! Do we say long live the King or do we talk about the kind of man that Mandela really was?

I prefer to talk about what Mandela's legacy as president of South Africa has brought for that country because collectivist history will be much kinder to the person Mandela than I could ever be!

But first some background for my stance against a man that most of the world has been indoctrinated into believing was a 'freedom fighter'.

One of the author's last jobs as a police officer was to take the fingerprints of a middle aged white South African couple who had decided that after holidaying in Australia they would seek to become citizens. The taking of fingerprints in a small country police station that does not have the technology available to it that larger city police stations have, can be quiet a drawn out affair. So it was due to the length of time spent with the South African couple that that the author got a view of South Africa that is kept from the populace by the SSM (Soviet Style Media)

In fact, what this couple told the author has since assisted his subsequent research/investigation that has led him to a greater understanding of where we are being driven to through United Nations policies.

(A disclaimer; It is not the author's intention to present a detailed and thorough history of South Africa, only to briefly outline what the author has learned. There are many varied accounts of South African history that upon reading - the reader needs to keep in mind the many political agendas behind the writing of such history)

Briefly, this is what was learned:

South Africa was at one time almost uninhabited until White Europeans colonized that part of Africa for themselves. Those who are now known as black South Africans are the descendants of two original tribes, imported slaves or migrated into South Africa from northern African regions, to escape tribal wars, famine or other driving influences that caused mass migrations of black Africans into a then prosperous and predominately white controlled South Africa which led to the eventual outnumbering of white South Africans in their own land by ten to one.

This was a gradual process over hundreds of years.

The blacks were generally employed as low paid labor, especially in those jobs that were considered dangerous or demeaning to the white South African. During the mid 20th Century political and business pressures caused the policy of Apartheid to be officially adopted across South Africa.

Apartheid was never about practising racism, but dividing the dominant ethnic groups from each other for their mutual protection and benefit. But the word apartheid, has through distortion and political agendas, now come to mean racism to the ignorant who fail to do their own investigation into what South Africa once was and why Apartheid had to be implemented.

Today, South Africa is no longer the prosperous nation it once was under Apartheid.

Nelson Mandela was a Communist. He was also head of the MK – the terrorist wing of the ANC - and as such, signed off on many terrorist attacks that killed innocent men, women and children in its role to overthrow the South African government. He was jailed for his part in terrorist related incidents for which he has never expressed any remorse.

It doesn't matter how you dress up a rotten carcase, because its smell will eventually permeate even the densest of coverings. And so, that is enough said about Mr Mandela!

Since 1994 when Mandela became president of South Africa white farmers have once again come under attack by roaming bands of blacks who at first terrorize the family in isolated farms before attacking and killing those who resist outright and then by raping and torturing to death those who have survived the initial attack on them. To date over four thousand white farmers have met their fate through these roaming bands who are seldom apprehended by a now almost dysfunctional and corrupted South African police force.

It is now generally assumed that a form of 'white genocide' is now taking place with little interruption to its agenda from the state.

P.S.

One of the driving factors for that South African couple in deciding to leave their homeland was the racist attitudes shown toward them and which according to them, were becoming more threatening on a daily basis by black South Africans who were given an off the record wink and a nod by the state to play out their racist urges against those who were not black. But it's not only whites who are now at the receiving end of this state sanctioned racism, it is every ethnicity other than black African that has had the misfortune to be born 'South African' and who are now under the tyranny that South Africa has become and to which the SSM is now aiding and abetting in by not reporting on its slide into totalitarianism!

The architect for the demise of the Republic of South Africa is dead, but who'll cry for its descendants?

The LEO and the Peace Officer

2013-11-18T16:29:00.001-08:00

What is the difference in policing methods between a peace officer and a law enforcement officer?

Here are some examples of what it means to be a peace officer:

How many readers of this article are old enough to remember, as a kid, the cop who gave them a kick up the backside or a clip around the ears when they did something wrong?

How many can remember the instant respect that the uniform got when out in public and on the beat?

How many ex-criminals owe their 'going straight' to the fear generated of being dragged into the police station and the beating to come if they did not tell the truth or toe the line?

How many of us today can think back to the last time, if ever, they were pulled over for some traffic infringement and sternly lectured to about their stupidity rather than being handed a fine?

How many of us today can remember being out in public and in a group of noisy rowdy people who were obviously breaching the peace in the small hours of the morning and then having their heads knocked together by some cops who told them to get off the street?

How many can remember the last time the next door neighbors often and violent domestics were dealt with for good without either trouble maker being arrested on multiple occasions?

Who can remember that once upon a time one could walk into town and wander around knowing you felt safe from society's predators because there was a cop on the beat in the area somewhere?

A good peace officer was also a good cop!

Here are some examples of what a law enforcement officer (LEO) is now made to do:

First of all, today's modern university trained LEO is not permitted to do any of the above peace officer actions! The law enforcement officer would be subject to disciplinary measures, firing or even criminal charges if taking on the role of the peace officer!

The LEO is now trained to be sensitive to minority and religious expectations, to appreciate cultural diversity even if it means that common sense must be suspended so as to better appreciate that which no thinking person would accept, be psychologically aware of special mental health problems, to look for criminality in every 'job' they attend even to the extent of investigating the obvious victim, to treat illegal drug dependency as a 'social problem' and not a criminal concern, to have 'empathy' for everyone they must deal with, but above all be resistant to offered gifts from those victims of crime they have dealt with who may have thought them good at their job because the acceptance of such rewards for a job well done could lead to 'corruption!'

Why is it only the police who are attacked for being corrupt? What about the politicians and the judiciary they work for, how about their corruption which is just so obvious to many?

Some police now wear uniforms that in nearly all aspects of dress look similar in unkempt style to the very people they often arrest. So how does that earn respect?

Cops now have to stand and accept being verbally abused, threatened, intimidated and even put up with minor assault, such as being spat at. How does this inaction against those who really need to be given a hard lesson from authority earn respect?

There is no requirement for modern officers to be of a particular height or weight which has led to some very small of stature officers who are about as threatening to a big hardened criminal or a fundamentalist Muslim, as a sponge cake is to a clown.

If a couple have an argument at home or out in public, and a busybody do-gooder phones for law enforcement both couples are entered onto a police data base for 'domestic violence' argument only incident. In effect, for simply having a normal argument that may have become a little heated those involved in that 'domestic' are then registered on the police data base for future reference as persons of interest.

If one of the couple is assaulted by the other then the person who did the striking and who may happen to own firearms then becomes subject to having his/her firearms seized as a potential killer!

Don't you think it's drawing a long bow to consider an unwarranted strike in the middle of a heated argument is also a precursor for someone being capable of pre-meditated murder!

Today's law enforcement officer must also at some point in their shift do stationary or Random Breath Testing (RBT) of a mandated number of vehicle stops and alcohol testing of the vehicle drivers. It was once legal to drive with a blood alcohol concentration of .08, but this was downgraded some years ago to .05 due to the declining numbers of persons being arrested for Driving under the Influence (DUI). There is now a move within government for the dropping of a driver's alcohol concentration to zero!

No longer are police walking the beat like they once used to. CCTV dominates the public places now which is about as effective as a cardboard cut-out of a cop you may see from time to time taking up space at a Bank or Post Office. Do you the reader still feel safe today when venturing out at night into the city or large town for a bit of fun?

Highway Patrol officers now issue tickets for the most meaningless and obscure of traffic infringements instead of stern lectures or some friendly advice. Lectures, which once had a more meaningful effect on those drivers who deserve to be lectured about their stupidity, are no longer permissible. And the myriad amount of traffic laws that even a judge has to refer to the Traffic Act in Court for determinations, is impossible for the average citizen to be completely aware of while 'special advice' instead of a fine from a highway cop would go a long way in improving that drivers knowledge of traffic laws and respect toward authority!

Being fined means nothing to some people who will just continue to do what they feel like doing!

Unruly juveniles who come under police notice are now given three chances at criminal activity under various Young Offender Acts – which has variations from state to state - before being summoned to answer at Court for strike number four. Due to the limitations on Law enforcement officers to dish out 'summary justice' on the spot to an offending juvenile, there has been a marked increase of re-offending juveniles who go on to become career criminals. Where once upon a time the peace officer would effectively 'nip in the bud' most unruly juvenile's propensity for getting into trouble, the LEO is powerless and this 'powerlessness' is never more exploited than by the criminal element and the up and coming juvenile/criminal offender.

But there is no common sense applied by our lawmakers who generally have never really had anything to do with enforcing their own laws!

And as any good parent is aware of, if you do not apply some form of discipline on your children as they grow and learn, then the chances of them growing into responsible adults are to a certain extent minimized. How is it then that lawmakers, many who are responsible parents themselves, can usher in and put in place such ill thought out laws that allow our young to have three strikes at criminality before being properly dealt with?

There is more truth in the old adage about sparing the rod and spoiling the child than there is in today's airy fairy progressive (Collectivist) thinking!

What kind of police force would you the reader desire, the good cop that is also a peace officer who knows how to nip in the bud the many social problems before they get out of hand or the LEO who is trained by so called academics in a university to be sympathetic to everyone and hard on no one!

The Day America Died

2013-11-06T20:42:00.001-08:00

On November 22 this year, 2013, it will be 50 years since the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. This author was twelve years old when this tragic event occurred and can remember exactly where he was and what he was doing at the time. The author can also recall the stunned faces of strangers as the news became common knowledge and the reaction of his parents which was one of dismay, when he returned home on that day now so long ago.

After half a century later and after theory upon theory for why Kennedy was killed and by whom, the question still remains officially unanswered to this day.

Some historical background:

On January 17, 1961, President Eisenhower gave his now famous farewell speech in which he implored future leaders to address the growth of the military industrial complex which if left unchecked would undermine the very system that allowed it to operate.

On April 27, 1961, President Kennedy presented a speech to the American Newspaper Publishers Association that has also become famous for his remarks about secret societies and the ramifications for free and open societies, that if they wish to remain free and open, will necessarily need to limit their government's secrecy.

Also in that speech was his imploring to those newspaper owners to self-censor those news stories that might give their undeclared enemy, the Soviets, any information that could be regarded as having a national security concern. Kennedy was not about to give more authority to the alphabet soup spying agencies which he believed would eventually be used to undermine the very fabric of American society.

But was he right in this assessment?

Also in that speech given on April 27, 1961, was a reference to the undeclared war by an undeclared enemy that used infiltration rather than invasion to gain its ground against the United States. This author believes that if anyone has any doubt at all as to what Kennedy was referring to, all they need do is to cast their eyes at what the United States has now become. It is obvious to this author at least that what Kennedy and Eisenhower warned about has been rather successful in its mission!

We may never know what transpired between President Eisenhower and President- elect, Kennedy when meeting at the White House, but when one looks at the contents of both speeches given by such outstanding and astute leaders within months of each other, one is struck by the urgency of the situation that appears to have been known to both men.

There is now a book on the market going by the title, American Betrayal, by Diana West, who is copping an awful lot of flak from those who choose to guard against what has gone down in America over the past 70 years. The thesis of Ms West's book crosses paths with those two speeches given in 1961 for which this author believes, President Kennedy was assassinated. That act of treachery by an alphabet soup spy agency seeking further controls over the government and the citizenry, also guaranteed the outcome, that America would no longer be the open and free society it once was!

THE AGENDA

2013-11-02T14:41:00.001-07:00

What better way for the controlling Elite to have the eyes of the populace that they wish to control through the gradual implementation of their Agenda averted from their tyrannical plan than to introduce Islam –'The Religion of Peace' – into our midst?

Could you the reader think of a more distracting influence for the populace?

Do you the reader also believe that is just pure coincidence that every Western and Westernized nation is now importing Islam, which is the complete antithesis to every value still currently held by those nations that still believe they have a future?

Ask yourself why it is that only the West has sacrificed its wealth through destroying its own manufacturing base to the point that the West is now reliant on those nations that now sell to us what we once made ourselves and that we obediently take in the world's flotsam and jetsam as directed by the United Nations. Only in the West can an outsider become one of its citizens on face value, even though most of those foreigners have no inclination, in fact are encouraged not to, participate in that nation's culture or accept its values.

Do you also honestly believe that it is for the benefit of those nations to be beholden to the United Nations for their political, environmental and social directions?

Do you believe that the United Nations, an unelected and now bloated World bureaucracy reliant on the 'donations' that every nation now latched onto its rotting carcase is directed to give, should be dictating to us what policies we need to be adopting?

This has not occurred without some kind of planning for it to come about. Please do not delude yourself that it is just some kind of coincidence that the West is now on its suicidal path. A retiring British Foreign Secretary once stated words to the effect of: 'No political course comes about by accident'. The name of the person who uttered those words eludes this author, but they were uttered, and it would seem, in a moment of rare honesty.

Can you now see some kind of agenda here in all this, whereby the slow dismantling of the West through immigration, loss of manufacturing and being forced to adopt UN policies via the intimidation of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund to withhold borrowing capacity to governments that refuse to adopt such policies? If you find this reasoning a little hard to swallow then ask yourself why there is such a thing as the United Nations, a World Bank and International Monetary Fund, and what is it exactly that they are in place to achieve?

Do you think they are benevolent or malevolent?

You may also find this interesting: The only nations that are now awake to what the West is doing to itself are those the West once labelled as being behind the Iron Curtain. The West's old enemies, Russia and China and their vassal states, know full well the fate that the West will share in at some point in the future. Vladimir Putin has even given a speech warning his people about the folly of the West and the suicide path it is on! The Chinese and Russians are now shoring up their own currency with similar thinking nations knowing the American Dollar cannot maintain its current world currency status.

They know the American Dollar is about to collapse and what that will entail, do you?

Propaganda, Conspiracy Theory or Truth?

2013-10-24T19:07:00.001-07:00

Most people go about their daily lives based on a predictable course, a kind of certainty through life of what it is that they will do and what they will be expected to do, either as employees, leading hands, managers or bosses. Some of those as just described will also have goals to strive for in life that keeps them as employees, leading hands, managers or bosses, while many in the majority are quite content to have no goals in life at all, and apart from sating their immediate hunger and thirst while being entertained by a never ending array of media and sports distractions have no long term plans for their own wellbeing, and are happy to let others guide their daily lives and futures, so long as their immediate personal needs are not interfered with.

It has been estimated that at any time in a nation's history the majority of the population, and this has been estimated to be up to 80%, will in all probability care little for what their elected representatives may get up to while in office.

It has also been estimated that of the remaining 20% of the nation's population, 10% will aspire to hold power over the remaining 90% through greed and political means, while the remaining 10% will be aware of those to whom wealth, power and eventual control are eagerly desired, and what the eventual misuse of such a combination will bring about when left in the hands of an immoral few, and will as a duty of concern, spend a great deal of their time trying to warn the other 80%!

Ever wonder why ALL Western governments are into gun control, restricting property rights through Sustainable Development (Agenda 21) taxing the air that we breathe (Global Warming) Sustainable Energy programs (Kyoto Protocol) flooding our nations with the third world (Multiculturalism) while telling us daily that it is good for us when even a simpleton would beg to differ?

How much trust do you place in your politicians?

Once upon a time, and a long time ago every citizen of a Western nation could rely on the media at the time to provide them with factual up to date News and general information that was broadcast with the public's welfare and interest in mind. Today that is no longer the case, and the decline in sales for some of the print media along with viewers and listeners of free to air TV and Radio stations, to use as an example – which the author believes is due to the blatant dishonesty now practised - the reasons for which should be so obvious to the well informed. Many in the majority population of Western nations are now realizing that what is generally termed the MSM or as this author now terms it, the SSM, (Soviet Style Media) have become propaganda arms for those who wish to control their access to real information. The elitists, who are gradually exerting their agenda onto us through the restriction of personal property rights and liberties are really Globalists with a desire for control over the entire planet as the main game.

Ever wonder why the SSM call illegal immigrants or aliens, 'asylum seekers' 'boat people' or 'undocumented workers', or why Islamic terrorists are referred to as 'militants' 'freedom fighters' or even, 'rebels'? When was the last time you heard the perpetrator of a crime mentioned by race if it was an actual black on white crime? But most important of all to our own wellbeing and survival – when was the last time you heard someone from the SSM give you an update of the number of Islamic terrorist attacks from around the world?

The internet is proving to be a thorn in the side of those who have been steadily whittling away our personal freedoms and is a system of communication that has given us almost instantaneous correspondence to all points of the Globe, a limited amount of freedom in which to express opinions and to provide evidentiary facts, so long as the internet provider is not also on board with the Globalists and their agenda!

Ever wonder why the NSA has been spying on its own citizens and those of other nations? Did you stop to consider why the former NSA employee Snowden, decided to become a whistle blower?

The United Nations was set up in 1947 largely due to the failure of the League of Nations, or so we are told! Ever since that time the United Nations has become an over bloated bureaucracy filled with the usual failed politicians and totalitarian thinkers. ALL of the policies mentioned, and some that have not been mentioned in this article, have originated from within the United Nations. The UN policies now adopted by ALL Western nations have been introduced without consent from the people who elected those who did the signing. United Nations policies now trump each individual nation's Bill of Rights, Constitution or whatever Bill represents each nation's laws which are constantly being usurped by governments without any input from individual citizens these laws now affect and in future, will limit the individual rights that most of us still have.

And it is only Western nations that have adopted all the UN policies! But where is all this heading?

One world government, or a New Global Order, has been mentioned many, many times though the years and over the airwaves and in the print media. Do you the reader believe that to be propaganda, a conspiracy theory or the truth?

Humility Trumps Evil!

2013-10-22T19:30:00.001-07:00

Our Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, whose party the Liberals –-described as conservative, was elected in a landslide by the people on September 7, 2013, after suffering through six years of a Federal Labor government – described as socialist, is one politician who is prepared to walk the walk while other politicians, more particularly the Socialists, just talk the talk.

While the authors home state of New South Wales, more particularly the Blue Mountains due west of Sydney, has been witnessing the devastating bush fires which have destroyed more than 200 homes as of last count, the PM has assisted the NSW Rural Fire Service by signing on for a 12 hour night shift last weekend and taking part in fighting the fires that are still threatening the residential areas around the state's capital city.

You see, apart from being the PM, Tony Abbott is also a volunteer fire fighter for the NSW Rural Fire Service and a part time Lifeguard on Sydney's Northern Beaches. And as if this was not enough for him and his personal input into the Australian community, he also devotes two weeks of his annual leave to personally assist Aboriginal communities. Next year he is also planning 'Pollie Ride' which will take him over a pre-planned route on a bicycle, and over a number of days, to raise money for one of the many charities he also devotes his time to.

But you won't read or hear about this from the SSM (Soviet Style Media) who avoid any mention of his selflessness, his humility in his service to others and his courage when fighting fires or saving lives at the beach.

Instead, Tony Abbott has been relentlessly pursued by the SSM, the 'intelligentsia' and freelance Left wing writers, not because he has done anything wrong, but because of his piety which the Left simply cannot allow to gain a foothold in the public's imagination.

Tony Abbott is a Catholic who places a lot of faith in his religion and who once studied to be a Priest which has given the Left much ammunition in trying to publicly discredit him. He used to be called the 'Mad Monk' was considered to be 'unelectable' and a millstone around the collective necks of the Liberal Party, but he has confounded all his detractors and critics by becoming the Prime Minister of Australia!

And the Left just hate him while hurling at him all their absurd vitriol and vituperation that those who know what they do is wrong and who fear being exposed for what they do are capable of. The humble actions of a God fearing man causes them to utter even more absurd and inane comments when they realize they are losing the Australian public at large who are switching off to their childish tantrums. Tony Abbott will eventually cause the Left to finally expose itself for what it is and who inhabits it – a bunch of self-serving hypocrites who have absolutely no room in their lives for God or any empathy whatsoever for their fellow human beings. The Left's lust for personal pleasure and their greed for power and wealth have no limitations and because there are no limitations on what the Left will always degenerate to, they will drag us all down with them if we do not start pushing back!

Well done Tony Abbott, a humble man and Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia.

The Criminal and the Politician

2013-10-21T17:21:00.001-07:00

On October 9, 2013, Mark Brandon Reid died from liver cancer. Reid, whose alias Chopper, was a notorious criminal who made a kind of living - that is until he decided to have his criminality put into print form in a number of paperbacks which gave him a not too modest, but honest income, after he declared his 'retirement' from being a career criminal – from preying on other criminals.

Reid's 'death bed confession' also cleared up four murders from the cold case files of Victoria Police that had been on the books for decades. All four persons named by Reid as having been murdered by him were well known criminals in their own right. Reid had even been tried for one of the killings for which he was found not guilty in a court of law.

That really doesn't instil a lot of faith in our justice system does it!

Reid knew how to 'milk' his notoriety for all it was worth through several interviews on TV and other media after his 'retirement'. Even a movie has been made about his 'adventures'. One could say that his infamy gained him much celebrity, particularly among the Soviet Style Media (SSM) – it should now be obvious to anyone who has studied up on their history that the current style of what is generally and loosely termed, Main Stream Media (MSM) is highly inaccurate, as the MSM now operates along the old Soviet lines of Pravda and Izvestia, and so this author will now use the term SSM to describe today's media which self-censors and sanitizes that which is thought to be politically incorrect or goes against the yearned for socialist establishment it supports – that went out of its way at times to laud Reid's criminal exploits. In their eyes, he was working against the capitalist system, wasn't he?

Reid has now become a kind of folk hero to some, especially to the non-thinkers of the world who believe they are victims of the society they share with the rest of us. Like Ned Kelly, Reid will now go into the annals of Australian folklore where his exploits will be debated forever more.

But there were two aspects to Chopper Reid that this author noted for which this author, and grudgingly, has some respect for. One, it was his modus operandi to only pick on the criminal elements of society. He did not prey on innocent members of the society he lived in. And two, in his last days on this Earth Reid was questioned by the SSM why he was not on the donor register to receive a liver transplant, his answer being; "Why should I, a 58 year old, take the place of some ten year old kid".

Reid was also a man of his word. If he told you he was going to do something, no matter how outrageous or criminal, you could take his word to the Bank!

But what has the heading of this short article got to do with politicians?

Then ask yourself this question; what is the difference between Chopper Reid and a politician, and who would you trust?

The Faulty Science of Theories

2013-10-19T18:50:00.001-07:00

It has recently been widely reported that a number of ancient hominid skulls have been unearthed at a place called Dmansi in Georgia – the Georgia that is located on the Russian border - that are reputed to be 1.8 million years old? What has given these skulls relevance is that simple stone tools have also been found in the immediate precinct of the location which strongly suggests the tools were used at some time in the distant past by the owners of those skulls. This find is then given as further evidence for the evolution of Man and for which this find may well re-write the history books on what has so far been given out as factual evidence for the common link between Man and Monkey. But first; how anything can be reported as being so precisely aged as those skulls have been, is beyond this writer, as carbon dating has been proven to be less than accurate when determining precise ages due to the many variables such as;

1. Variations in the difference of the carbon footprint between the atmospheric and the geographically located over time.

2. Isotopic Fractionation.

3. Variations in the carbon footprint ratio in different parts of the location.

4. Contamination.

Even the scientists examining the Shroud of Turin cannot agree for a precise date which is measured in hundreds of years and not hundreds of thousands of years for those skulls, so how can anyone be so precise with their examination to report a finding of 1.8 million years?

And if there is a common link, often referred to as the 'missing link' between Man and Monkey, then where is it and why haven't we found it yet?

Too, the reporting of the evolution of man by the MSM, as if it is a factual event rather than what The Evolution of the species still is, a theory, is disingenuous at best and being deceptive at worst. Like all theories, such as Global Warming, no credibility should be given them until the two theories are proven!

If evolution has been the driver of our current species of Homo Sapien Sapien, a species that seems to have burst onto the planet tens of thousands of years ago without any found direct linkage to those known hominids that preceded us, why has our species not evolved further? If evolution really occurs as most Athiests agree it does, then why aren't we witnessing any examples of the evolutionary process that could prove the theory today?

An English Act of Defiance

2013-10-12T19:29:00.001-07:00

The English Defence League (EDL) was formed by a few like - minded English people who having witnessed the march through Luton by a contingent of returning British soldiers some years ago became concerned when the soldiers came under and subject to verbal abuse, had several items of rubbish thrown at them and a very public display of spitting at their feet by a large number of Muslim residents. What really incensed the English observers though was the cowardly and acquiescent behaviour of the attending police who chose to do nothing.

Those observant Englishmen then realized that any nation that allowed its own returning soldiers to be publicly abused and humiliated and chose to do nothing about it would also allow their own citizenry to be subject to such behaviour. Their England was a country in trouble.

The EDL gradually made a name for itself by holding public demonstrations by peacefully marching through several towns and cities across Britain that had become 'Islamized' to draw public attention to the slow 'colonization' and plight of their nation falling into Islamic fundamentalism. What started out with a few score members soon grew into thousands across the British Isles. The rapid rise of the EDL alerted the British establishment – and one may include most of the media, especially the BBC - who have been unitedly and methodically undermining the future of the Briton and his survival. Ever since the mid-1960's and via the importation of non-Britons, massive social upheaval has occurred which is yet to be fully determined, and then appreciated, across Britain as a whole.

At least most of those who arrived during the latter part of the 20^th Century shared in British ideals, and to some extent, have assimilated into larger British society, but not so with the influx of large numbers of Muslims from India and Pakistan and recently from middle eastern countries, who have all formed into 'ghettoes' or the Islamic Ummah in towns and cities throughout Britain. There are now 'no go areas' for the Briton in most large cities and towns who realize that they are not welcome in those areas in their own land where the Islamic presence has turned what once resembled and was recognized as Britishness into something resembling, and has more in common with, Pakistan and India.

But it is not just the alert Briton who has now been made to feel a stranger in his own land, his children are now being raped by Muslim gangs who specialize in 'grooming' young British females, some as young as ten, by plying them with drugs and alcohol and then pass them around from house to house and even from town to town. The British National Party alerted the Establishment to this degradation of young white females in 2002, but was soon hounded into silence by a willing media who plays the Establishment's tune and it wasn't until the EDL began to expose the sordid Muslim gangs and their grooming methods to a wider public audience, that the Establishment were forced to act against this cultural jihad being waged on their own people by an imported people who practice an ideology called Islam, an ideology that is the complete antithesis to the values of a Western nation!

A greater act of treachery by the British Establishment there has never been!

Many Western writers since the advent of 9/11 have now exposed the criminality of the imported Muslim who is over represented in all jails in all Western lands. The collective criminality of Muslims should have been the death knell for the nation destroying policy of multiculturalism and its fascist enforcer, political correctness, which were both dreamed up in that denizen of moral decay, the United Nations.

Yet it is still being embraced by all Western nations!

Tommy Robinson and Kevin Carroll were co-founders of the EDL and had until October, 2013, led the EDL through many towns and cities, always with police approval and always peacefully. That of course has not stopped the Muslims and their co-conspirators, Unite Against Fascism (UAF) the Socialist Alliance and other Left Wing socialist groups from trying to disrupt the EDL marches through intimidation tactics or outright assault against the members by hurling any handy missiles, such as bricks and bottles onto the marchers, or infiltrating the EDL and attacking police during the marches.

Who pays these mobs to practice their violence?

The media have always taken the side of UAF and their allies, even though there is ample evidence that places any trouble caused at those marches squarely with the Socialists and Fascists (UAF) – and the UAF is a fascist organization which is so very obvious to anyone who knows their history and how the fascists and Nazis used/use violent methods to get their way.

So the cards are well and truly stacked against the EDL especially with the recent controversial resignations of Tommy Robinson (Stephen Lennon) and Kevin Carroll to which the Establishment had hoped the EDL now lacking popular leaders would disintegrate, but which does not appear to be the case at this time of writing. However, that could change after the weekend (October 12) march in Bradford and the handling of the EDL by local police who receive their orders indirectly from the Establishment.

While the EDL have surprised the British Establishment with how quickly the movement spread and how effective it is still in polarizing public opinion in its favor, the EDL, to this author's thinking at least, have been letting those down who know what it is they are up against when taking on the 'colonization' of their own land, and the Establishment, the media and police who are openly protecting those whose job it is to 'colonize'.

The author wishes to point out and criticize five policies the EDL has as its mission statement, and they are;

1. Human Rights - Well doesn't the Magna Carta, and the English Bill of Rights along with the law of the land - common law, guarantee everyone's rights who is a British citizen? Why take a UN inspired policy which was never meant for highly evolved Western nations and run with it when Britain is one of those nations in which basic equality under the law was first enacted? Was this included just to appease the EDL members, or the Establishments sensibility?

2. Democracy, rule of law and oppose Sharia? Wouldn't oppose fundamentalist Islam make more sense? How will the EDL uphold democracy and the rule of law when those opposed to them are not playing by the same rules?

3. Public Education to give a more balanced picture of Islam? The only picture of Islam that the public should see is the REAL Islam which is the complete antithesis to that which the EDL are supposed to uphold. The REAL Islam is on display around the world and in individual nations that have accepted large numbers of Muslims as immigrants 24/7 to those who are willing to see and accept it. The EDL is fighting Islam and that means through necessity, that NO Muslims should be members.

4. Respecting tradition, but openly embracing the best that other cultures can offer? Who gets to consider what is the best from any culture? What part of Islam would be worth accepting as the best? What part of Indian/Pakistani culture would be considered the best? Why is this crap about respecting tradition being put forward when the only culture that Islam respects is Islamic and the only tradition that should be respected is the British tradition?

5. International outlook – working with other nations? How is that achieved when some of those nations have banned the EDL from marching in them?

The author believes the above 'mission statement' is naïve at best and just plain cloud cuckoo land stuff at worst because it is not Islamic extremism that the EDL are marching against, it is Islamic Fundamentalism they are fighting which needs to be recognized. When one is taking the fight up to those who are trying to destroy the place in which you were born and raised and have grown to love, then airy fairy crap like that 'mission statement' is completely out of place and unworkable until the country you are fighting to preserve has been restored to what it once was.

The EDL hierarchy need to drastically re-think their mission statement if they are to survive and they need to discard the multiculti crap that has pervaded and distorted their thinking. They are English first and foremost and England is the land they are fighting to protect. Everything else, including those who wish to join in, come second place to what must be done to reclaim Britain from those who are slowly destroying it. The EDL must also become political, they must register their movement as a political party which the Establishment will then find very difficult to undermine and intimidate individual members as they have done with Tommy Robinson and Kevin Carroll.

It’s Fundamentalism, stupid!

2013-10-02T18:57:00.001-07:00

Islamic Terrorism has been with us for some time now, in fact, ever since Islam came onto the scene around 1400 years ago Islam has been making its presence felt wherever it has been forcefully spread – unlike Christianity which has largely been propagated through peaceful conversion. It may not be widely spoken of today due to the actions of history revisionists and their deceitful ways, but the Crusades of the middle ages were in direct response to the occupation of the Holy Land by Muslim hordes and the Muslim bandits who took to attacking the undefended Christian Pilgrims on their way to the Holy Land while Islam systematically turned Jewish religious symbols, such as the Dome on the Rock, into Muslim shrines or that religious perversion and symbol of conquest, a Mosque.

The Mosque is not a Church or a Temple as Westerners understand a religious building to be. The Mosque is the indoctrination center of the Muslims where, especially in infidel lands, political and social directions are given to the Muslim ummah for them to faithfully follow under Allah's directions to overcome the infidel in his own land.

But back to some basic history;

After Mohammed's death, the plague that is Islam spread its disease throughout the Mediterranean via Islamic Jihad, systematically conquering and destroying, and through the ultimatum of life or death converting the inhabitants of those lands which had once been part of the Roman Empire – it has now been shown that those once Roman cities on the shores of the Mediterranean, such as Timgad in Algeria, once thought to have been destroyed through earthquake were in fact razed by the forces of Islam. Countries we now know as Spain, Portugal, Greece, Italy, Cyprus all came under lslamic control and influence. Islam then spread to the southern aspects of Europe where countries we now know as Turkey, Croatia, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Albania and Romania, all fell under Islam's onslaught.

History shows that many tribes, such as the Visigoths, the Vandals, the Vikings and the Mongols that wreaked havoc and destruction across their path eventually assimilated into the lands they conquered, but the one tribe that will never assimilate into those lands it migrates to or conquers, and will not rest until the whole world becomes subject to it, is Islam, and for evidentiary purposes, there are these historical precedents;

The Islamic practice of Jihad - the only so called religion that makes its propagation obligatory on every believer whether through proselytizing or by force - was first put into a wholesale military onslaught now known as the First Great Jihad which was defeated not far from present day Paris at the battle of Poitiers/Tours in 732.

The Second Great Jihad was stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1638.

It is becoming clear that we are now in the throes of the Third Great Jihad which our Western governments continue to not recognize, but the many thinkers within the West are waking up to. The Third Jihad kicked off when the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem began holding hands with Adolf Hitler who arranged for whole Muslim companies of German outfitted soldiers to wreak havoc in the Balkans, particularly against the Christians and the Communists. It is well established thought, that victims have long memories and the Balkans conflict flared again during the early 1990's after the financial collapse of the Soviet system. Western indifference (deliberate?) also played its part, but mostly it was brought about through political meddling, and has yet to have its end game as there are many scores to be settled by both sides.

This author once asked a work colleague, whose background is Serbian, during the Balkans conflict what the problem was – his simple answer has stayed with the author ever since – 'they are Muslims!'

When Israel came into existence by United Nations Charter in 1948 the Arab/Islamic world rebelled which found favor among the displaced - by their own choosing - the so called 'Palestinians' who chose en-masse to not share Israel with the Jews and migrated to Jordan where they were eventually kicked out from after soiling their own nest through terrorist activities. The 'pallies' whose 'national front' organization, the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) began hijacking commercial airliners during the mid-1960's, and killing 'Jews' at European airports. They then graduated with their most outrageous and heinous act by killing 12 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972. This scum of the earth then eventually drifted off into Lebanon to which their 'cultural contribution' is now a testament for the non-Islamic world to appreciate.

The PLO was led by the Islamic Terrorist, Yasser Arafat, who twice abrogated his responsibility to his own people to sign a peace accord with Israel while refusing to have a Palestinian state, as recognized by the United Nations and Israel, because it meant the Palestinians would have to live side by side with Israeli's to whom the Palestinians and Hamas vow – in fact, this vow is written into their Charter- to kill all Jews and annihilate Israel.

Now you know why the Nazi's and Islam hit it off so well together!

Ever since the Second World War, and with rare exception, Western political/ideological/selfish ambitions have taken first and foremost preference over patriotism to one's own nation which has given every Western nation the Islamic menace now living within our borders and to which our security agencies have to work full time to stop, but usually at best, only mitigate the Islamic terrorist networks and their barbarous acts of terror.

The Barbarians are inside the Western gate but no political authority is willing to acknowledge this plain and simple truth, and it seems to be only a problem to a handful of observers who are willing to identify and accept the clear and present danger that is Islam.

Is this because;

1. Multiculturalism and its fascist enforcer, Political Correctness, are blinding those who are in positions of power to act?

2. Those who have the ability to comprehend the threat and are in positions of authority to act have either been compromised to not act and have therefore become willing dupes in this conspiracy to undermine the West, are moral cowards too afraid and too selfish to 'rattle the cage' due to lack of intestinal fortitude or are being shouted down by their own peers?

Whatever the reason or reasons, the symptoms of how they think are always readily on public display. Nothing to see here folks, just move along and everything will be OK!

Well everything is not OK! And the author will make a point about the Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO) and the lack of comprehension by that organization as to what it is exactly we are fighting on a GLOBAL level when it comes to Islamic Terrorism. This is a war not yet publicly recognized between two civilizations, the West and Islam, and it is a war that is currently being played down (Afghanistan being a prime example) by our elected representatives who are supposed to be working for US!

And on not being publicly recognized as a war between two old enemies, this must now be stated;

The Head spook of ASIO, David Irvine, recently presented a speech on terrorism that was highlighted by the noted columnist and blogger, Andrew Bolt, in his blog yesterday, October 2/2013, and to which the author gained some insight into how a chief spy thinks about Islamic terrorism. In this chief spy's opinion there is, 'No single profile of the Islamic Terrorist'.

What!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He then goes on to emphasize that acts of Islamic Terrorism are being perpetrated by individuals or groups who hold, now get this, 'extremist views of Islam.'

What!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So this is the kind of thinking that permeates throughout the 'establishment'! You can just imagine the 'establishment' running off to the Iman to ask the question; Why do these Muslims carry out acts of barbarism, you are the religion of peace after all, so what gives?

Have those who would beat a path to the Iman's door to ask such an absurd question, and as part of their mandatory responsibility to protect the citizenry from such attacks, even bothered to read just a few lines of the Qu'ran?

Also, one must wonder at the naivety or the criminality of being a willing dupe, when asking those questions of a dangerous enemy if they would have, at another time in history, asked the Nazi's why it is was that they were so murderously violent toward the Jews and had the ambition to conquer the world.

What Irvine has missed, either deliberately or naively when raising questions about Islamic Terrorism, is that there is an obvious thread recognized by those who have studied Islam and a thread that runs through every terrorist attack committed by Muslims worldwide, and that thread is Islam and the Qu'ran. Those Muslims who take up jihad against the infidel by either fighting or committing acts of terror against them are doing what Islam and the Qu'ran dictate. They are not extremists who have taken the teachings of Islam and perverted them as some Muslims, or their Western dhimmis would have us believe, they are FUNDAMENTALISTS who are acting out what is dictated to them through the Qu'ran and from their indoctrination centers, the Mosque, in all Western lands.

Islam teaches that FUNDAMENTALISM is an obligation on all those who follow Islam, and that is why Islam is such a dangerous enemy to an inattentive Western Civilization.

The Comrades

2013-09-30T19:13:00.001-07:00

Marxism is like an out of control cancer – it spreads everywhere it can take hold and eventually destroys the host, the host being in this case, any ordered democratic society that by its own limitations in exerting its right to exist through the people elected to defend it, eventually succumbs, at first to the seemingly reasonable demands to change, which when once gained, soon gather momentum into the outrageous subversion and perversion of all that is good and has been proven over time to work for cohesiveness and stability within that society.

What is now left of all Western nations which still retain some evidence of democracy is now being slowly white-anted away by the inroads made into all our institutions by the Communist/Socialist/Progressive elite who planned for this eventual outcome over 100 years ago. It is a plan that did not include the consensus of those who would be shunted aside by the arranged 'Long March' through our institutions, and because the system of communism would be rejected out of hand by any person given a real education instead of what passes for education today, this plan had to be covertly in favor of those whose political leanings were found to be sympathetic to the Comrade cause!

Hollywood has played, and continues to play a major role in the 'Long March' which is really just now beginning to be fully understood, a prime example being the anti-American, anti-Western themed movies of recent times.

A person who has had her finger firmly on the pulse of what has been allowed to occur within our threadbare democracies and is also a champion of democracy who has known the utter bastardry, vitriol and sheer vindictiveness, ad- hominem attacks and slander that only the Comrades can dish out while they themselves scream offense, play the victim or racist card-whenever some hard questions are directed their way, is Diana West, whose recent contribution to the under the radar cultural war that very few of us 'thinkers' realize is actually happening, is the book titled, American Betrayal.

I won't go into what the book is about only to say that Ms West raises some very interesting points concerning American involvement with Soviet Russia, World War 2 and the Cold War, which in any nation that still has some national self- respect must lead to questions being asked as to how the United States was infiltrated by the Comrades many, many decades ago, and what little has been done to counter the infiltration whenever real concerns are or were raised, and for example, Senator Joe McCarthy's so called 'Communist Witch hunt' during the 1950's that should have had alarm bells ringing everywhere within Congress and the media, but didn't!

Instead, the American Patriot McCarthy was ostracized, and through constant and slanderous attacks by the Comrades, then became demonized!

You have to hand it to the Comrades - they know how to quickly shaft their enemies!

America is now at that stage of national degradation that we have borne witness to the spectacle of an American president being completely humiliated by his Russian counterpart over the fiasco that is Syria, while the talking heads and the media barely raised a question as to what went wrong.

And too, unlike Obama, at least the KGB trained Putin puts his country first!

Now back to Ms West and her book, American Betrayal. It may come as no surprise to some of us that the Comrades have put the attack dogs onto Ms West for daring to raise a valid subject, the subordination of her country to a system that has a proven history of human tragedy that no previous system throughout recorded human history has ever been able to bring about. The fact that the Comrades now disguise their agenda by calling themselves Socialists or Progressives or Greens, instead of what they truly are, Communists, should give pause to the thinker still assessing his/her world view.

And it is for this uncovering to their agenda that Ms West now becomes subject to the Comrades attacks to discredit, not only her recent book, but her reputation as well.

It came as a shock to this author that David Horowitz of Front Page Magazine, a self- styled anti-jihadist who has been very persistent in exposing the danger that is Islam, has taken up the fight against Ms West's book and personally attacked her through some very unsavory innuendo. It now seems that the David Horowitz's and others who have come out of the woodwork to 'have a go' at Ms West now have some explaining to do about their personal political preferences and biases.

Those of us who lauded David Horowitz for his stand against Islam now must re-assess what it is exactly that Horowitz and those who have now joined in Horowitz's chorus against Ms West consider their long term agenda and goals.

And some hard questions must now be asked of those who have allowed the Comrades to gain such a foothold!

Is Barack Hussein Obama a Muslim?

2012-10-29T20:11:00.001-07:00

The reported killing of Osama bin Laden and the recent failure to take aggressive action to safeguard the lives of the American Ambassador to Libya and three of his minders, as well as to secure American assets at Benghazi that came under attack by Islamic terrorists or Mujhadeen, whichever you the reader prefers, may not seem to be related to the uninformed reader, however, given the facts of both incidents an astute person must then consider the questions; Is Barack Hussein Obama a Muslim? And if he is, what does that mean for America and the World in general if he is re-elected?

It has become common knowledge that Obama on at least three occasions when presented with the opportunity to eliminate bin Laden cancelled the operation. It has also been hinted at that the operation that finally took out bin Laden was not authorized by Obama who had to be dragged away from the golf course and be made to watch bin Laden's elimination as the operation was underway at the time.

So if Obama didn't authorize the operation, then who did?

It may surprise or it may not that Hillary Clinton's name as authority for the operation that took out bin Laden has been mentioned.

In any case, whoever the nod was received from, bin Laden's body, for what this author believes are obvious reasons was buried at sea, but not until a full Muslim burial ceremony was carried out. If bin Laden had been a Christian, would the same protocol and sensitivity have been observed?

Why did Obama on at least three occasions that the media are now aware of refuse to give the go ahead to kill bin Laden? Was it because bin Laden was a fellow Muslim?

The facts surrounding the 9/11 attack on the American Embassy in Benghazi are now just being put out by the MSM which has been loath to do so until now. Obviously the MSM, who have largely been in the tank with the current White House administration since the 2008 presidential campaign, have been suffering a little 'buyer's remorse' and until now were very keen to keep anything at all that was adverse about the 'chosen one' under the radar. Well the cat is out of the bag and the facts concerning the appalling response by the White House to an attack on American interests in Libya that also got four Americans murdered, are now out there in the public domain.

Did Obama order a 'stand down' for those operatives in the safe house that came under attack after fleeing there from the embassy compound? The buck stops at Obama's desk and if it wasn't him who gave the order to stand down because he refused to aid his own (countrymen?) then who was it? As with the bin Laden take down, was Obama's authority undermined again?

Was his decision not to assist those Americans he was charged by presidential authority to provide protection for, to limit the 'collateral damage' to fellow Muslims? Or if Ambassador Steven's had survived the attack would his survival have posed a serious problem for the administration? If that is the case, what is it that Stevens knew?

Here is a list of Obama's failure to recognize Islamic terrorism and his seemingly pro-Islamic leaning that should be of concern to every law abiding person if the MSM had been doing its job:

Obama stated in a speech that there were 57 states in the Union and not 50 states that everyone else is aware of. The Organization of Islamic Council has 57 members, maybe Obama was a little confused?

Obama refuses to call blatant acts of Islamic terrorism or Islamic Jihad, for what they really are.

His instructions that NASA include Muslims into the space program, as part of an inclusion program, for which Muslims in general have very little to offer.

Obama's refusal to acknowledge the Fort Hood killer, Major Nidal Hasan, as an Islamic terrorist.

His bowing to the Saudis and all other Islamic leaders while simply shaking the hands of Westerners.

His antipathy toward Israel.

His promotion of the Arab Spring, but his refusal to acknowledge the Students for Democracy demonstration in Iran.

His return to Britain of the Bust of Winston Churchill.

This author believes there are many more examples of why Barack Hussein Obama is really a Muslim. But the most telling aspect of this destructive president is that he was the son of a Muslim Kenyan father which Islam recognizes, in fact insists, that all children born to a Muslim father are to be considered as Muslim. Is that why young Barack spent some of his early years in an Indonesian Islamic school and why his later education records have been sealed?

Anyone having knowledge of Islam knows only too well that any civilization that is not Islamic cannot survive having Muslims as neighbors or having them in any great number within their borders. By his recorded actions as evidence, this author believes that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim whose aim is to bring the greatest nation since the Roman and British Empires to its knees through economic and military destabilization. If this destroyer of democratic nations is given another four years to wreak his vengeance on America, America as we can still visualize it will be no more, and terror and lawlessness will reign supreme in the world with the knowledge that no other nation will be prepared as America has been prepared, to take on those rogue nations which try to upset the balance of world peace. God help us all if Barack Hussein Obama is re-elected!

The New Fascists

2012-10-08T19:22:00.001-07:00

Alan Jones has a conservative radio show which airs Monday to Friday from 5am to 9am at 2GB in Sydney. His program is high rating and is relayed around the country. Those who listen to him have been estimated to range in number from 150,000 to the millions at any one time, and this disparity in numbers would probably be dependent on the political leaning of the estimator, obviously his drawing power has also been the attraction in raising revenue from those businesses and corporations who choose to sponsor his show which has been a nice little money earner for the radio station. Mr Jones also commands respect from politicians and some very big names. He is also famous for his opinions on all topics and having a reputation for not being politically correct, preferring to say how it really is. One could say that in some political circles of Australian society Alan Jones is viewed as the enemy and is very much hated for his conservative messages.

Most Australians would be aware that Mr Jones recently attended a function as a speaker to around a thousand Young Liberals and that one attendee at that function secretly recorded Mr Jones speech in which Mr Jones uttered a slur against the Prime Minister and her recently dearly departed father. It is not the intention of this author to get into the appropriateness of what Mr Jones uttered, however it should be pointed out that what he stated was not meant for the personal ears of the Prime Minister and only for those in attendance at that function.

The person who recorded Mr Jones speech was obviously hoping to catch something that some would consider controversial. And record something controversial he did! And then like a true opportunist - without thought for the consequences of making something said in private available to the wider public and to the target of the comment, who would have been none the wiser if the comment was kept in house – his exposure began what can only be described as the most vicious, political and media driven hate fuelled campaign to unseat Mr Jones for something he said at a private function and when realizing it had been made public, he immediately and publicly apologized for, not once, not twice, but several times.

It may also interest the reader that the person whom the comment was made about, the Prime Minister, has consistently refused to take Alan Jones phone calls and accept his apology. This is a woman who holds the highest office of the land and is expected to lead by example. That is some example she has taken to set, and it has now become quite obvious that the Prime Minister is milking this controversy for all the political mileage she can get out of it in the hope that Alan Jones will lose his position, and the campaign that has been generated by that controversial remark can only lead to one conclusion. Alan Jones must be very effective at what he does!

It's no secret that the MSM is in the tank for the federal Labor government, particularly the ABC and its lesser sibling, SBS. The Canberra press gallery are all on board with this government and pay scant attention to anything other than what the government tells them. Witness the impromptu press interview that the Prime Minister called a few weeks ago to limit the damage being done from the exposure of her time when working for Slater and Gordon as a young, in her early thirties, lawyer.

If the Prime Minister really has nothing to hide from her past why did she not make a statement in parliament on Hansard as is expected of all Prime Ministers and sitting members?

According to the Daily Telegraph (Sydney), over 100,000 emails have now been sent to the various sponsors of Alan Jones radio show asking, pleading, begging and threatening them, to withdraw their sponsorship. That many of those emails have been found to have originated from the one IP address and displaying such colorful names as Skippy the Bush Kangaroo, Daffy Duck, Mickey Mouse and a host of other fun time favorites, speaks volumes to this author at least, as to how most of those 100,000 emails were generated by a fanatical band of partisan political hicks who in all probability are not in a position, nor ever likely to be in a position to actively carry out their threats to boycott those sponsors targeted. Yet, many sponsors have now withdrawn their support which has prompted 2GB management to cancel all sponsorship of Alan Jones who will now go to air ad free.

The Daily Telegraph reports (Tuesday, October 9, 2012) that two people have fronted up to take credit for the 'campaign against Jones' one being a Nic Lochner, university student and studier of political science, and the other, Jenna Price, self- styled feminist and academic. This author has a problem with 22 year old university students and older feminist academics who have probably never listened to an Alan Jones broadcast, but disagree out of hand with what he stands for without any experience of the conservative side of politics with which to base an honest opinion on. Students of political science and feminist academics may be able to obtain a piece of paper from a university that portrays their particular talent in nice pretty writing, but like possessing a driver's license, it does not prove you are a good driver!

But, it appears that the Daily Telegraph article proclaiming Lochner and Price the originators of the Jones campaign may be a misleading article, because other evidence has come to light that the origins of the Jones campaign started with Sally McManus, a branch secretary of the Australian Services Union (ASU) and Emily Mayo an ASU organizer. Their original site named 'destroy the joint' has been co-opted by Lochner and Price, with McManus's and Mayo's blessing, to destroy the reputation, if not the livelihood of one of Australia's most popular conservative broadcasters.

Make no mistake, this 'campaign against Jones' is not about his short unwelcome utterance at a private convention, it is political, and it is being orchestrated from the Prime Minister's office! Any other prime minister prior to Ms Gillard would have graciously accepted Alan Jones so very public apology as an expectation by the public from their leader. Ms Gillard has repeatedly shown that she is first and foremost a political player and conventions, protocols and personal integrity, come in at a very distant last place.

The actions of those who have been so very active in the campaign against Jones would not have been out of place in 1930s Germany with the rise of the Nazi Party. It is therefore an indictment on the state of our educational institutions which have largely become politicized into expressing Left wing thinking whose students go on to promote fascist reactions to organizations and persons who they feel stand in the way of their political goals. The current makeup of the Labor Party and unions in particular, must also take responsibility for taking us back to a time when personal freedom was restricted to the point that hostilities had to be undertaken to regain those freedoms.

Let the Labor Party, the unions and those houses of learning that are churning out students who are taught what to think rather than how to think, take note of where they are pushing us and beware of the consequences, because for every action there is a reaction!

Why it matters what a nation manufactures.

2012-09-11T20:39:00.001-07:00

Not many of us who inhabit the West would sit and ponder just how Australia, until the end of the Nineteenth Century a basically agricultural/cattle/sheep farming nation, became part of Western manufacturing processes that joined with the West to become such a dominant political and industrial culture, that all other cultures are still measured against our achievements.

Not many of us would even consider what it is that allows nations, particularly the United States, to develop such sophisticated technology that other nations, such as Russia and China, through lack of financial incentive and government restrictions on private ownership, must steal Western innovations rather than develop their own.

Not many of us would realize that what we have all come to accept, and to now expect, from our own nation - such as medical care and a standard of living so high that even our so-called poor, when compared to other cultures, such as some African nations, can be considered to be wealthy in comparison - has been due to the efforts of preceding generations of Australians that invested their money and built up a manufacturing base that for the size of our then population was one of the most productive in the developed world.

During World War One it was realized that if this country was to survive the tyranny of distance from those markets we were then dependant on for goods used in this country we did not make ourselves, we would need – and through necessity brought about due to the war- to produce our own products. One of the biggest steps taken during that war was the steel-making enterprise of BHP at Newcastle, New South Wales, which proceeded to produce nearly all the steel products such as railway lines, sheet metal for fabrication of ships, etc. that until then had to be imported from British steel mills.

With the upsurge in manufacturing our own requirements, and becoming less reliant on distant markets for the same products, our standard of living rose (please note it is not the author's intent to dwell on how living standards rose which was due to a number of factors coming into play as this would require quite a lengthy discourse, but only to impress the thought that living standards overall generally rose due to the opportunities made available by having a manufacturing base) over the decades to the 1960's which was a time of full employment and availability of nearly everything that was manufactured within the West, including much being made here. Products such as air-conditioners, refrigerators, stoves, washing machines, motor vehicles, radios, television sets, and a multitude of home appliances, and these items were made to such high standards that many products made in the 1960's still function today. How long does the average imported TV or microwave oven last now?

During the 1970s two things occurred that has had far reaching consequences for our future as a productive nation and that of own standard of living and for the future of our children. One of those things was that minerals began to be discovered and exported, and the other was that government began to dismantle trade protection barriers and adopt 'free trade' agreements with other developing nations.

The gradual reduction of trade barriers which were originally put in place by government to protect our manufacturing base from cheap, and generally at the time inferior imports, such as those products from Japan, began to affect some companies which had been previously protected by the benefits of a closed market. As some companies began to adjust to the challenges that international trade posed with the importing of cheap products, they were also forced to downsize and lay off employees. During the mid - 1970s welfare, as we now know it, was put in place due to the effects of manufacturing companies going bust and coal mines closing due to the low prices being paid for underground coal and the high costs in extracting it, which closed many underground mines in New South Wales. Some families are now into a third generation that has never worked and probably never will. The social implications of this 'sit down money' as implemented by the Whitlam government is far reaching, and which really requires an essay to be written about the problems it has generated, but this is not the author's intent here. While underground mining began to become more expensive during the early to mid-1960's, some mines managed to withstand the economic pressures into the early 1980's and even into the new century, but the biggest impact on unemployment by far, was the lowering of trade protection barriers which has had a domino effect on all of our manufacturing.

It has been estimated that in the period from 1966 – 1995, 120,000 manufacturing jobs were lost due to companies becoming bankrupt, moving overseas or just winding up the business because it was uneconomical to continue. In 1966, 1.23 million people were employed in manufacturing which fell to 1.12 million by 1995. In a period of around three decades 40,000 people lost their jobs every ten years in a nation whose population in 1966 barely topped the ten million mark! By any measure of common sense the government at the time should have recognized the catastrophe of unemployment that their own policies were producing and fixed the problem. Instead the government chose to do nothing! Free trade and trade agreements became the mantra of the day and bugger the unemployed and loss of our own manufacturing base!

And that mentality has managed to trickle down to our current political class without revision or even hope of revision.

Australia managed to weather the fiscal storm of 2008 solely because we had a mining sector that virtually pulled us out of an economic mess even though the then Rudd government tried so very hard to push us into it with its economic madness of stimulus spending. But the mining sector has more boom and bust cycles than the financial sector and cannot be relied upon to keep our economy strong. Only a solid manufacturing base which employs millions, and can operate in a closed and therefore protected market, can guarantee a strong economy!

Total employment in 1966 was 4.8 million jobs, with 1.23 million being employed in manufacturing, which was around 25% of the working population who worked in positions that produced those items we now have to import. In 1995, total employment was 8.1 million jobs with 1.12 million being in manufacturing, which is a little over 12% of the workforce. So in a little under three decades manufacturing had effectively halved in its employment rate. Today those who work in manufacturing jobs are an endangered species that are constantly aware that their occupational position in this country is under constant threat. There is no job security for these people and we have become reliant on Communist countries, such as China, to import most of what we use, including light bulbs. Does anyone realize that this nation does not even make its own light bulbs anymore?

It should be of concern to those individuals who know their history that being reliant upon other nations, particularly in time of war, for our basic consumables places our nation in a very precarious position, especially when our armed forces start to run out of ordinance that we are also reliant on from other nations for. The situation this country now finds itself in is nothing short of Alice in Wonderland thinking that has either been created by those with a Globalist agenda who don't care if our nation collapses economically or by some kind of collective insanity that has caused those who have control over our daily lives to forgo their own common sense when legislating those policies into existence that even a four year old child would reject as unworkable and dangerous for our own existence as a sovereign nation.

Whichever reason you the reader may conclude is that which has caused this crisis of economic malaise to cast its shadow over our nation, it surely must be appreciated that we cannot continue on this path if we are to survive the next 100 years as a sovereign nation that should not be reliant on any other nation for its own survival.

Gun Phobia Or Control For Controls Sake?

2012-08-08T18:50:00.001-07:00

Apart from warfare, people have been murdering people ever since Man was on the Earth. The Old Testament is full of murder stories that highlight, that even under God's Law, and in peaceful times, there will always be those who choose to step outside the boundaries of their existence. Our criminal codes are based on the Ten Commandments which the typical Socialist will choose to disavow and sidestep in order to proclaim the 'clearer thinking' of 21^st Century Man over that of God's ancient laws. What the Socialist will also fail to admit is that so called '21^st Century Man' is now generally less well educated than his recent forbears once were which is a direct result of the long march through our educational institutions by those who decided that Socialism was to be Man's future. These Socialist thinkers also choose to ignore the failure of Socialism during the 20^th Century, a fact that any real unbiased thinker could not ignore!

One of the cardinal rules for indoctrinating the masses into the Socialist way of life is to dumb down the population via education, media and government propaganda, such as the Green's in their diabolical coalition with the Labor party now demonstrate. And in order to maintain their gains in their long march toward Communism, the Socialists realize that control, through whatever means necessary, is paramount in maintaining a controlled society to be maintained for their own purposes. Socialists, although proclaiming empathy for their fellow man, do not trust the masses, and for this reason, control over the masses is the number one goal.

Do you wish to live in a controlled society or an ordered society?

There is a difference, a big difference, and we are rapidly heading into a controlled society in which whatever we have left of our basic freedoms will disappear to be replaced by what you can say, do and think through government edict. Gun control laws will eventually lead to the banning of any private citizen being able to possess firearms and is a major goal that Socialists are aiming for. In other words, a disarmed citizenry is much easier to control to better suit the communist agenda. You the reader may also be aware that the United Nations is seeking to control every nation's small arms through a treaty that is designed to enforce the banning of private ownership of individual firearms.

Is this the kind of future you would like for your children?

One of the issues that Socialists like to push is so called 'Gun Control'. Whenever some nut grabs a gun and murders people we get bombarded by the hysterical gun-phobic crowd, usually catered for by a compliant left wing media, who call for more stringent gun control laws. It may interest you the reader that this nation has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world. In fact they are so tough, that every person who desires to possess a firearm is treated as a potential criminal. Is that fair to an honest and law abiding citizen? Should the actions of a few nuts cause the demonization of millions of law abiding gun owners across Australia?

People are murdered every day in this country for whatever reason and by murderers who use a variety of weapons such as; knives, baseball bats, tyre levers, tomahawks, axes, chisels, screwdrivers, lumps of rock or concrete, fence posts, motor vehicles and last, but of course the most convenient, the firearm. Statistically, all those non-firearm weapons account for more murders and grievous bodily assaults than firearms. Motor vehicle collisions kill more people per year than are murdered, so why is there no call to ban motor vehicles? Why is there no call to ban knives, which are used in more murders than firearms, from every home? Isn't it hypocrisy that those who scream the loudest about Gun Control seem to be the very same people who will pack up their family in the family car and head on down the freeway at speeds that will kill everyone within that vehicle if a wheel happened to fall off it? Do you the reader believe that the people in that speeding vehicle have more chance of being murdered by a nut toting a gun or being killed by a mechanically unsound motor vehicle?

When the hysterics of the gun-phobic crowd can be put to one side, common sense will dictate that it is people who kill people and not guns which are inanimate objects until they are loaded, aimed and fired by a person! Guns do not kill people! People kill people and will use whatever is at hand as a weapon at the time to do so.

Under common law everyone has a right to self-defence and to defend their family, and their property from those who would do them harm or try to steal what they rightfully own. It is interesting to reflect that up until the late 1970's all Bank Tellers in New South Wales were issued with a Smith and Wesson .38 six shot revolver which they kept concealed under the counter for use to thwart a holdup and to protect their own life. When that 'protection' was taken away from individual Tellers under the guise of 'better security arrangements' made by agreement between the major Banks and the Finance Sector Union (FSU) there was an almost immediate upsurge in armed holdups on Banks where several Tellers were injured or resigned due to no longer being able to defend themselves.

The FSU caused the withdrawal of those firearms and had prepared to take industrial action against the Banks if the Banks had not agreed to the demand. But why would a Union, supposedly in place to protect the worker they represented decide that firearms had to go from Banks? Why did the FSU deliberately expose their workers to armed holdups while denying their workers they were paid to represent their right to self-defence? Did the FSU truly believe that by taking away the individual Teller's firearm it would not entice the criminal element to return to the very lucrative crime of holding up Banks that the armed Teller had demonstrably prevented for over sixty years?

It may come as a complete surprise to some, but it is generally recognized that all Trade Unions had become heavily influenced by communist thinking by the 1930's and their goal of looking after the worker began to take second place to that of socialist ideals. As this article has so far pointed out, one of those socialist ideals is for an unarmed, therefore defenceless citizenry. The motives of the FSU raise some serious questions as to why the FSU chose to pursue a policy of disarming Bank Tellers that any reasonable person would have had serious objections to.

No government, or Trade Union, has the right to disarm or to make defenceless those they are empowered to protect. Having police forces that maintain an ordered society is no guarantee of the individual citizen's protection from those who would do them harm. While police forces provide an 'air of security' to the average citizen, the reality of life in the 'burbs and in the cities is the complete opposite, and this is so very self-evident every time the News is watched or a Newspaper is read.

It is also a goal of Socialists to have the citizenry be subject to the law, not be part of the law making process where the masses may have an input, such as in a democracy that most Western nations are now just hanging onto. Most citizens are law abiding and therefore live their lives accordingly without the need for extra laws that socialist governments, under Liberal Democracies, may wish to impose. Socialism is all about control. Therefore, under Liberal Democracies, laws will necessarily be enacted to limit the citizen's rights, and we can now see this form of 'control' manifesting itself through Human Rights Laws which are designed to limit what can be said, whether the truth or not, about some cultures. Multiculturalism is enforced through Politically Correct, or Newspeak, which allows the authorities to persecute, through verbal abuse by epithet, such as racist, xenophobe, homophobe etc; which is legally sanctioned against those who choose to speak out at what they see is just plain wrong. Andrew Bolt is our most recent example of how socialist policies have corrupted our freedom to express ourselves without fear of persecution.

And Gun Control is another manifestation of that socialist process.

WHY CONSERVATIVE VALUES ARE BEING ATTACKED

2012-07-30T20:28:00.001-07:00

A quick look around the Western world at the various forms of government now in power would give the astute political observer cause to realize that ALL governments, regardless of where they are placed by some on the political spectrum, now adhere to and promote socialism under the guise of Social Democracy.

Democracy as a form of government was never meant to be 'socialized' but that is where we have now ended up. And even America, a Constitutional Republic, is now being touted as a Social Democracy.

So what does Social Democracy mean?

To answer that question we first need to understand what Socialism is all about. According to the Macquarie Encyclopedic Dictionary, Socialism is described as thus:

Socialism, noun, 1. A theory or system of social organization which advocates the vesting
of the ownership and control of the means of production, capital, land etc, in the community as a whole. 2. Procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.

National Socialism, or Nazism, was based on this theory. So too was Soviet style Communism. However, the main difference between both ideologies was that Nazism permitted, even encouraged, private enterprise in manufacturing and entitlement to ownership of land provided those who participated were members of the Nazi Party and towed the party line. Soviet style Communism allows no private ownership or manufacturing of any kind, and under Soviet and Peoples Democratic Republics, such as China and North Korea, the state controls everything.

Those who are comfortable with government controlling everything, even down to their daily activities like what they can buy, are usually those who support a socialist system. But not everyone who would give their vote to a socialist party, like Labor/Greens in this country or the Democrats in the United States, are truly cognizant of what it is that they are actually voting for when they cast their vote to a socialist party. This can also be true of someone who votes for a party that is considered conservative. And I would suggest that those voters who have voted for one particular party their entire life, and this would also apply to both sides of politics, continue to do so only because their parents voted the same way. Such are the vagaries of the democratic system.

Conservatism is a relatively modern concept and is based on preserving those systems and traditions that have been proven to work over the more ideologically based (theory) practices that have become the hallmark of the left side of politics. Conservatism has taken quite a hit over the past forty years from those who have an agenda to socialize everything, and the Capitalist Free Market system which has proven its worth over the years with the rise of the Middle Class, has also been demonized as a faulty system that brings more ills than good to the world.

So what is the difference between Socialism and the Capitalist system, a system that is now often portrayed as an evil system by Socialists? Let us consult the Dictionary which states:

Capitalism, noun, 1. A system under which the means of production, distribution and exchange are in large measure privately owned and directed. 2. The concentration of capital in the hands of a few, or the resulting power or influence. 3. A system favoring such a concentration of wealth.

That modern Western Civilization has become one of the most successful civilizations of all time is completely self - evident, and should be to everyone, but what has made our civilization so successful? Capitalism combined with a Free Enterprise system has made our civilization so successful that we have seen off the Soviet System in Russia while China now embraces some forms of private ownership, manufacturing and wealth, but still strictly under state regime controls.

The Capitalist system has allowed some people to become fabulously rich. But is this a bad thing? While this author has a problem with too few people holding the majority of wealth within this kind of system because it needs to be remembered that money in the hands of some is power and that some of these very wealthy people have developed an elitist attitude that generally expresses itself in the exercising of their influence at the political level. Why politics though? Because it is government that controls the less empowered through the rule of law. Laws, that some of the elite class have no compunction in breaking and will always uphold a do as I tell you, and not as I do approach to life that has now led us to a kind of soft totalitarianism that uses Human Rights Laws and failed lawyers to cower those who have become aware and attentive to the elitists real agenda.

But Free Enterprise was also mentioned which combined with Capitalism has given the West an extraordinary advantage over that of other systems and cultures. So what is Free Enterprise? Again we will consult the Dictionary:

Free Enterprise, noun, the doctrine or practice of a minimum amount of government control of private business and industry.

From that description of Free Enterprise we may take it that if government stays away from over-regulating the functions of business and industry, business and industry will thrive and prosper, which in turn powers the economy of the state and its citizenry though job creation and wealth accumulation. The Western middle class is a product of this system which also, to a large degree, came about due to the actions of industrial unions that (which also led to more government regulations) had the workers interest and welfare at heart and through many years of protracted strikes and demands helped to create an affluent middle class. But union activism for the betterment of its workers has been a double edged sword in the sense that the rise of worker's wages and conditions (also coinciding with the Lima Declaration and lowering of trade barriers) came at a cost to the profits and long term re-investment prospects for business and industry which decided to move to third world nations where labor was cheaper and profits higher. Unions by and large, were also pro-communist by the mid-1930's, and thought nothing of bringing a business to its knees, and in some cases, even to the point of closing it down and the workers losing their jobs due to excessive union demands. And when conservative governments should have legislated to uphold the rule of law against the most militant unions, they failed to do so!

We now have the situation where Western nations which were once self-sufficient manufacturers of consumer goods now face the prospect of being reliant on third world nations for those goods. In an ever increasingly dangerous world it is not an enviable position to be in for any nation to have to rely on those nations that supply its necessities it may one day have to go to war with.

The pro-communist stance by unions has over the decades been allowed to permeate our educational and political circles. Where we once had courteous discourse between political rivals, we now have the phenomenon of Conservatives and conservatism being publicly ridiculed on a daily basis by Socialists who would rather slander and cast aspersions on their Conservative rivals than provide a well reasoned argument that may persuade their audience. But what is Conservatism?

Again, let us consult the dictionary for the meaning of Conservatism:

Noun, 1, the disposition to preserve what is established; (opposition to innovation or change). 2. The principles and practices of political conservatives of right-wing parties.

And Conservative:

Adjective, 1, disposed to preserving existing conditions and institutions etc. 2, cautious or moderate: a conservative estimate. 3, traditional in style or manner. 4, having the power or tendency to conserve; preservative. 5, a person of conservative principles.

The reader will note that this author has placed brackets around that part of the definition of Conservatism that implies opposition to innovation or change. The author believes this is a spurious addition to the whole definition and has been added by those who have a vested interest in denigrating traditional Conservative values which is disposed to protecting that which is considered as beneficial to society. Conservatives are also innovative and welcome change, but not for changes sake, and unlike Socialists, only if change and innovation can be PROVEN to be beneficial for all.

Pascal Fervor has provided another example for the definition of Conservatism from a 1961 Webster's Dictionary which the author has included in this article for reference to those readers who will note the deliberate alteration of the meaning of Conservatism between the 1961 definition and the 1990 definition as provided by the Macquarie Dictionary the author has used. The definition is thus:

Conservative. n 1 a : Dispostion in politics to preserve what is established b: a political philosphy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change.

By reading and understanding the difference between those two definitions it is plain to see why those who would choose the socialist path, that conservative ideals stand in the way of socialist ideals. It also explains why the spurious addition, that the author has bracketed in the 1990 definition, would have been added to undermine true conservative values which is nothing short of deliberate obfuscation or an act of sabotaging the true meaning. Such is the mentality of some who now profess to teach our children!

There is an old saying that goes; 'if it ain't broke don't fix it', in other words, why try to rebuild something that has been proven to work over many centuries? And that is what socialism is trying to achieve, it is trying to remake Western Civilization into something that will never work and will eventually, as the European Union is now also proving, fail, because the practice of socialism does not fit the theory for Western Civilization. The Socialists also conveniently forget their history of failed socialism. The 20^th Century was a century of many wars which had their genesis based in socialist ideology. For many reasons that ideology has failed those states that embraced socialism and it was not until those states decided to allow some private enterprise to grow, that those nations have prospered. China and Vietnam are prime examples of how the socialist state failed, but private enterprise has given them a new lease of life.

Conservatives are by nature cautious of those who advocate radical politics and ideas. Those who do not appreciate their cultural history are those who will embrace socialist ideals, because they really have no precedent in their lives with which to gauge socialist values and the outcomes of socialist ideals.

'Those who forget their history are those who are doomed to repeat it'. That quote is very relevant to today's lack of teaching methods in our schools, which due to political correctness and multicultural requirements no longer teach our children the real history of our Western cultures. It is for this reason that Conservatives are now being openly denigrated, humiliated and sometimes physically attacked. Just because they know history and can see the mistakes now being made by so many who remain so ignorant, and are being lied to, by so few!

What has happened to our Police Forces?

2012-07-02T21:29:00.001-07:00

     I once noticed in the Maitland Mercury's editorial, the heading, 'Capsicum Spray case requires careful handling'.

    As an ex cop, I can attest to the effects of a well aimed burst of Oleoresin (often referred to as Capsicum) spray, when confronting those members of the public who, affected by either intoxicating liquor or drugs, or both, loudly declare their intentions of bodily harm to you, the police officer, who has been called to their location in order to quell a disturbance, usually caused by aggressive individuals or groups of rowdy youths, which these days seems to be the norm rather than the exception.

    Before 1998, Oleoresin spray was not in the NSW Police arsenal and the art of subduing a violent person - especially an individual who had also armed themselves and were intent on at least putting you in hospital or making it very plain to you that you were now on the endangered species list - had to be done using your own physical strength, a car mounted baton or the last resort, your revolver.

    Since its introduction, the deployment of Oleoresin Spray to front line police, has been instrumental in saving many violent persons from permanent injury or even death, and has reduced the number of injured police officers involved in these confrontations.

    The Mercury editorial was chiefly concerned with the use of excessive force by the arresting officer who had sprayed a 17 year old youth, who had been handcuffed and detained in the rear cage of a police truck, and as such, was considered by a Court to be defenceless? I have been kicked by a person in a similar situation, and believe me even while handcuffed he was far from being defenceless!

    Details for why the youth was sprayed was not then made available, nevertheless, it is my opinion that this youth probably got what he deserved! The area from where this individual was arrested has been a trouble spot for a very long time with vandalism and anti-social behaviour by local youth completely out of control, and it is this very public process of pilloring a police officer via the court process, who may have been injudicious with his use of force, that further inspires this type of lawlessness amongst our youth.

     Since the Wood Royal commission in 1997 the NSW Police Force has become so heavily politicized that the actual role of the police in law enforcement has taken a back seat to the needs of the bureaucrats who require all their T's crossed and their I's dotted. The state government is in the habit of using spin to appease those of us who cry out for more police resources to combat the ever increasing levels of violent crime, while those officers who are over worked to the point that they are driven to make poor decisions when dealing with some offenders, are then hung out high and dry for all to see. What kind of message does this send out to those in our society who like to disobey the law?

    To further exacerbate an already demoralized police force, it is now taught at the Police Academy (some call it a college) to report on your workmate if you believe he/she has done something wrong. That 'something wrong' may be anything from a personal remark made about someone to a criminal act. While I understand that any officer committing a criminal offence should be treated no differently to any other person, I baulk at the requirement to put someone on report simply because he/she may have voiced an opinion about someone, or other such trivial incidents which in regular human activity occur on a daily basis. This academically inspired expectation of every officer to become their own informant makes for a very distrustful atmosphere in any work force let alone the police force! In short, it has killed any esprit de corps and further lowered any morale that the police force had prior to this communistic doctrine being introduced after the Royal commission. Individual officers can no longer expect to be supported by the police hierarchy if they so much as have a whiff of a complaint against them. They are guilty until proven innocent and I have witnessed this time after time and have been victim myself to this very narrow and destructive thinking by so called police management.

    As a result of that just mentioned, a lack of trust now envelops the force, and with the draconian oversighting measures now in place, the NSW Police Force is in crisis. Following a recent Daily Telegraph poll of 1500 serving police officers the newspaper found that one in four officers plan to leave the force within the next five years. It also found:

    77 per cent of those polled say they will reconsider their positions as police officers if the government caps wage rise increases at 2.5 per cent, which is well below the inflation rate.

    75 per cent of those polled also say they would move interstate to work if offered better pay and conditions.

    98 per cent say that 'red tape' is getting in the way of their efforts to protect the community.

    94 per cent say that policing is now more dangerous than at any previous time.

    92 per cent believe there are not enough operational police to maintain proactive policing patrols, including in the City of Sydney.

And what has the state government done about this very sorry excuse for a police force?

Absolutely nothing! N.S.W. is the highest taxed state in the Commonwealth and yet we get to have a third world police force where the front line police who place their lives at risk on a daily basis are now having to constantly look over their shoulder before making some pretty tough decisions. Due to the extra stress placed on them, because of low police numbers, finding themselves constantly being overworked and often in situations where they may over- react because of that stress, and arising from any incident that has, in the vernacular of the force, 'turned to shit' they are then publicly pilloried by an all too compliant media and then hung out to dry by the very authorities who are in office to provide our protection from the very same people the police officers are being publicly pilloried for if they become too 'forceful' with those they are by circumstance, forced to arrest!

    This needs to change and change quickly. The expectation of government by the people for a secure and safe environment in which we may all feel protected is not being provided and must become a priority.

The Absurdity of Rules of Engagement

2012-06-23T19:41:00.001-07:00

    Although this subject is of a topical nature ie; our Coalition Forces involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, it does not feature very highly on most Westerners radar. Given that Australia is also a signatory to the Rules of Warfare, as laid down by the Geneva Convention, it should be incumbent on all who wish to serve in the military to make themselves aware of the further restrictions, under Rules of Engagement, which have been placed onto all military personnel who undertake combat duties in current and future roles that requires the presence of our soldiers in foreign lands.

    Rules of Engagement are now considered to be an integral part of operations in foreign lands where the Coalition military is required to carry out its function while the normal lives of the occupied civilian population can be maintained with minimum interference. In other words, Rules of Engagement have been designed to keep the civilian casualty list down to foster local good will which also placates the sensibilities of the politicians and the left wing hand wringers back home. While the doctrine of Rules of Engagement has been successful in keeping civilian collateral damage to a minimum thereby limiting political fallout and bad press, it has allowed the enemy to take up some very disturbing practices against coalition forces involved in eradicating them from the landscape.

    The Daily Telegraph Editorial, September 28, 2010, highlighted the often very difficult circumstances that coalition soldiers find themselves in whenever the Taliban decide to use women and children as human shields, while fully cognizant that our highly trained and restrained by rules soldiers will not shoot back, even when shot at by these completely amoral Muslim guerilla fanatics. Those who have heard about the 2010 charging of three Australian soldiers by the Australian Army, who were involved in a firefight sometime during 2009, would also be aware that the incident so described saw the deaths of 5 Afghani children. The children had been holed up in a house with a Taliban fanatic who decided to fire upon advancing Australian troops from within the house with no apparent regard at all for the lives of the children he was hiding behind. And while the complete 'picture' of what actually occurred during that incident was not immediately available to those of us with an interest in our soldiers welfare, it should be noted that soon after being charged, two of the soldiers involved spoke out by issuing statements that defended their actions.

    It must be emphasized here to those who do not comprehend what Coalition forces Rules of Engagement cover, and what actions may occur before our troops are permitted to return fire, even while being shot at, that when soldiers are limited in the actions that they may take when coming under fire, and remember that these are real bullets that are fired at them, it increases the risk of them being killed or very badly wounded, while the enemy who is doing the shooting and hoping to kill them, is not restricted by any rules which may hinder his actions. In short, adding Rules of Engagement onto Rules of War and expecting our soldiers to comply with them is adding to their already high stress levels, and adds further dangers which imperil all coalition personnel while it contributes to an imbalance of military tactics which favors the enemy who Coalition soldiers are employed to eliminate.

    Here are two examples of Rules of Engagement:

If having been fired upon by a shooter who then drops his weapon to his side as soon as he comes under notice from coalition forces, he should no longer be considered an immediate threat and is not to be fired upon, even if he decamps to another location where it is likely he will take up another position to resume firing.

    And:

    If troops come under fire from a dwelling place which could be considered to have women and children present they are to avoid returning fire and deploy to another safer area.

    It's no wonder then that an Army lawyer, a Brigadier Prosecutor, got to rub her hands together at what she perceived was her first real case of substance involving three Australian soldiers who she charged with murder soon after that 2009 incident. Thankfully, and as cooler heads prevailed by applying some common sense, as of this time, those three soldiers have now been cleared of any wrongdoing. This after nearly two years of being forced to live in limbo because some Army lawyer decided to try and make a name for herself!

Rules of engagement have been written by politicians, lawyers and military people who will never visit, let alone take part in a war zone and in all probability, like that Army lawyer, have never been in a combat situation and will never be required to shoot back in self defence. The Rules of Engagement are not only absurd they are immoral, because those rules force the combat soldier to give away part of his own right of self defence to the benefit of his enemy. And those who should know better than to impose such restrictive rules on our fighting forces have forgotten or just plainly ignore, that our soldiers are in those places they are in to protect the basic freedoms of those who enact the very laws that the soldier now finds he is restricted by.

    It's an absurd situation and it needs to be changed!

The United Nations has destroyed good government

2012-06-17T18:16:00.001-07:00

    I have written previously on why the West must divorce itself from the United Nations, a world body that has proved itself incapable of solving any of the Worlds ongoing problems. It is now a dictatorial and tyrannical organization, its policies now largely over riding the laws of our own sovereign states. This article, although mentioning the ANZAC nations only and concentrating on dysfunctional government brought about through U.N. policy, will, I hope, reinforce with the reader from which ever freedom loving nation he/she may dwell in, that the U.N. has now gone well beyond its use by date and must be defunded and dissolved.

    The current Australian and New Zealand systems of government has failed us. Multicultural, Politically Correct policies in line with Human Rights legislation forced upon both nations by successive governments since the 1970's, without due process of referenda, has systematically destroyed much of our basic freedoms. The common law right to freedom of expression has now been hijacked by the Leftist ideologues who consider free speech may only be tolerated when it is confined to their own narrow, but politically correct rules. Due to this intolerance of opposing points of view by government and semi-government agencies, we now find ourselves no longer living in fully democratic societies. We are no longer able to fully express ourselves without fear or favor because we are now forced to dwell under 'soft totalitarian principles' whereby any form of dissention from the Politically Correct is now met with hysterical name tagging, such as racist, homophobic etc. or worse. Pseudo-justice through Human Rights commissions and under the fascist banner of Anti-Discrimination legislation is now meted out to those who would expose the charade of Multiculturalism that we are now forced to live under. Anti-Discrimination laws, laws enforced by agencies which are non-judicial, unelected and unrepresentative of Western cultural values that were once regarded as norms, are permitted to by- pass the Australian Constitution and the New Zealand Bill of Rights which were originally put in place by enlightened people to protect us from this kind of tyranny. What was once taken for granted by the ANZAC nations as a surety for a free and happy society has over the decades been steadily eroded. During the past forty years, and through stealth legislation, this act of treachery by our elected officials has largely gone unnoticed by the citizenry, until now.

    The Australian Constitution and the New Zealand Bill of Rights once safeguarded our systems of democracy, whereby, any variation to those charters as required by elected governments must be decided through referenda by the people. Since the late 1970's all governments have seen fit to sidestep those very laws designed to protect us while dismantling policies and implementing others, which if put to the people at the time would have been politically defeated!

    Governments have been able to do this very effectively by signing onto the United Nations policies for Human Rights. This has permitted our elected and non-elected officials to implement policies which are not endorsed by our standing charters. These policies, under multicultural ideology, are now ruining once successful nations through the adoption of legislation that stealthily discriminates against white society in general by elevating imported cultures to a higher level under minority status. And these policies are being enforced illegally!

    We are no longer true sovereign nations able to determine our place in the world by our own hand because we have become signatories to United Nations policies. These are policies that have been generated by an organisation that is not a democratically elected body, is not run by elected officials, and is completely unaccountable for its actions!

    This slavish adherence, by both sides of politics to an unelected world organization and would be world governing body, has caused the major political parties of both nations to become so ideologically identical, that it is now only through trivial and minor differences that the voter is given a choice. The main political parties are now for big government, unchecked immigration, extended welfare and the destruction of our manufacturing and agricultural base through globalization and environmental issues.

    Our elected and non-elected officials have been actively dismantling the very system of government that following the carnage of World War Two, had seen both countries become world leaders in agriculture and industry. Australia once had its own electrical and white goods manufacturing base. Now Australia no longer produces its own steel, televisions, radio's, washers, refrigerators, freezers etc. Where both nations once had full employment we are now paying out billions of dollars yearly to those who are unable to work due to 'economic downturns' or worse, do not wish to work and are classed as a protected species!

    Small business, farmers and the middle class, the backbone of all Western nations, are now constantly under attack by governments through a system of taxation that one may only describe as oppressive! Due to ever expanding government, which also now employs hundreds of thousands of extra bureaucrats, there has been spawned many departments and agencies which require more of our tax dollars to fund. We now find ourselves having to pay an extra burden for this overblown system of government through a system of taxation where some taxes are raised on a tax. The Australian Goods and Services Tax is a prime example of this tax on a tax system.

    No Government should ever be permitted to become so large that in order for it to survive it imposes tax after tax on its citizens. The best government is small government. If successive governments had abided by the very documents which were written to limit the growth of government and government's interference in ordinary citizen's lives, we would not be in the fiscal and self -identity crisis that we now find ourselves in. In short, governments are no longer serving our best interest and as a matter of course, actively and blatantly engage in self promotion campaigns as the ideal government, while using our tax dollars to do so. Government has become so large that it has to keep inventing more effective means of extracting that extra dollar from the taxpayer. While tax revenue is seen by some as 'legal theft' perpetrated on us by the state, it is generally undisputed that revenue collecting has now become the main earner for government. Some of the methods employed to force citizens to pay up, even those who use their earnings to employ thousands of workers, would be termed a criminal enterprise if not legally sanctioned by the state. That term is called extortion and extortion is a criminal act! Yet we now have the scenario whereby governments extort tax from their citizens through an extortionate act. Pay up or go to jail is blatant extortion, but it is legally sanctioned extortion by the state!

Also, the liberalist stupidity of forcing those with the most to pay for those with the least, only forces those with the most to seek other means, and often 'illegal' means, of preserving what they have rightly earned for themselves. Is it right that because you occupy a position in life that earns you well above a notional average wage everything you earn over a notional sum requires you to pay half of your earnings or more, in tax to benefit those who choose not to work?

     Government is out of control and fast becoming unmanageable and is running out of other people's money. We need to fix it and fix it quickly before the system collapses in upon itself. But how do we repair an out of control broken down system?

    A start would be to divorce ourselves from the U.N. and its radical and nation destroying policies. By doing this simple act we can then begin to dismantle the very system that has enabled a few elitists to hijack our government so as to further their own illogical ideals that is detrimental to, and freedom limiting, for the rest of us.

    And so that this treachery could never be repeated, a stronger worded and less ambiguous Constitution and Bill of Rights, similar to the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, and heavy on individual inalienable rights, not Human Rights, must be initiated with a view to be determined through referendum rather than by our own elected officials, who quite frankly, can no longer be trusted to provide intelligent output in such an important exercise!

Middle Eastern Crime

2012-06-13T18:07:00.001-07:00

    For some time now a handful of ex-police officers, like Tim Priest who was a Detective Sergeant in the NSW Police Force, have been writing and lecturing to any one who wishes to listen on the rise of Middle Eastern Crime (MEC) in this country.

    Most 'aware' officers working in and around Sydney during the mid to late 90's became familiar with the type of crime that Middle Eastern gangs were starting to concentrate on such as vehicle theft, armed robbery and smash and grab raids. Any police force is only as good as the information its intelligence services can gather on organized crime or criminals in general. The downside of course, when collating reliable information for which police act on, is the amount of time taken to gather that information.

    While there was an awareness at senior police level, of the rise of crime related incidents involving middle eastern gangs (Lebanese Muslim) before the Royal Commission of 1996/97 was convened, it was the advent of that Commission that put the investigation of these gangs onto the back burner. Senior police decided that until the fallout from the Commission had been fully assessed nothing further was to be done.

    This action on the part of senior police was a huge mistake, as the squad that would have been tasked with combating MEC was disbanded on the recommendation of Justice Wood, who headed the Commission. This recommendation by Wood has since, had far reaching consequences for the performance of the NSW Police. The loss of this squad very effectively nobbled any investigative knowledge that the police had at this time on criminals of all 'colors'. This ill thought out action of dismantling the state's foremost crime fighting unit gave rise to MEC throughout Sydney and wherever these gangs chose to commit crimes, or just for the fun of it, generally harass the non-Muslim population.

    During the latter part of the 1990's a tactic of the MEC gangs was to taunt and intimidate lone police officers, usually Highway Patrol officers who normally work as 'Alpha' units (Alone). It was not uncommon to be working a shift and have to respond to an 'officer backup' call, where earlier, a Highway Patrol officer may have pulled over a lone driver for a minor traffic offence, only to find within minutes that he/she would be surrounded by several vehicles carrying groups of young middle eastern men, readily identifying themselves as 'Lebs' who would begin to hurl abusive and offensive remarks aimed at that officer in order to intimidate them into retreating.

    While police at that time had no real power to move groups of persons on who were deemed to be causing trouble, and the younger police, some fresh out of the College of Knowledge, would stand around and be intimidated by these would be thugs, this author's favorite trick was to retrieve the Defect Notice book, or the Traffic infringement Notice book from the police vehicle, and begin defecting the trouble makers cars, or issuing them with traffic infringement notices depending on offences at the time. This action usually had the desired effect and the trouble makers would soon disperse leaving the Highway Patrol officer to do his job.

    Another tactic that the MEC gangs used was breaking into police vehicles while the officers were attending to 'jobs' away from the vehicle. Police equipment stolen over several thefts included, body armor, hand held radios, batons, and even a Glock 9mm pistol from a detectives car. Some officers had shirts stolen from their clothes line while some female officers were deliberately targeted and followed home by one or two of these criminals who did not bother to hide the fact from the wary and often intimidated officer. To the author's knowledge, none of the items stolen has ever been recovered, and there have been several incidents of crimes committed by offenders identifying themselves as 'police officers' invariably described by the victims of those crimes as males of middle eastern appearance.

    During mid 1999 a McDonalds Restaurant located in Southern Sydney came under siege by a group of young Arabic speaking men who, just prior to closing time, entered the restaurant and began to intimidate the restaurant's last minute diners by pushing and shoving them or by knocking their food onto the floor. When staff tried to intervene, the self- identified 'Lebs' began to pelt them with the diners discarded food and other loose and handy items which forced the staff, mostly female, to retreat into a back room and call police. Meanwhile the aggressive Muslims set about trashing the restaurant doing hundreds of dollars worth of damage.

    A large contingent of police arrived, including the Dog Squad, who set about arresting those offenders that still remained on the premises. Several scuffles broke out between police and Muslims and several officers suffered minor injuries. Those that were arrested were conveyed back to Sutherland Police station and charged with numerous offences. You may be thinking, that's great they got the bad guys! But wait, there's more!

    Following the Wood Royal Commission the then NSW Labor Government (socialist) put in place a very complex and intrusive complaint system within the NSW Police. In short, any one could call in anonymously and complain about a police officer. All complaints had to be acted on by a Duty Officer and let me add here, that the Duty Officer position was so new at this time, that some of these officers weren't even aware of their responsibilities. Even complaints from an offender recently arrested and still in police custody had to be dealt with. This most ridiculous system led to a very dangerous situation following the siege at McDonalds, and to wit:

    While Sutherland police were busily processing the offending Muslims the station came under a barrage of phone calls from family members of those being charged. As anyone knows who has dealt with these people, they know how to 'utilize' any system to their advantage. Complaints of police mistreatment at the hands of the arresting officers were so numerous that calls had to be diverted to other stations. But to really underscore this silly complaint system some of the Muslim family members began to call the emergency number '000' which then effectively tied up Southern Sydney's Emergency Network for more than two hours. Any REAL emergency calls that were lucky enough to get through, had to be dealt with by either mobile phone or portable radio on back channel. It was just plain luck that no one lost their life waiting for an ambulance.

    But, to really add insult to injury to a police officers job, on their day in Court the counsel for the offending Muslims accused the arresting officers of police brutality against his clients citing one offender who had allegedly been bitten by the police dog. The offenders now became the victims as the sitting Magistrate dismissed the police case against them ordering an investigation into police conduct at the McDonalds incident. This spineless keeper of our laws refused to even read the police FACTS sheet or witness/victims statements. One can only imagine the dismay of those police officers who, having sworn to uphold the law and protect the people and their property in the State of New South Wales, and had done so on the night in question, were now being singled out for investigation which could lead to possible charges. Robin Williams couldn't have written a better comedy!

    The NSW Police Association (Police Union) now became involved in this matter and vowed to fight the Magistrates decision all the way to the Supreme Court. The Secretary of the Police Association promised industrial action if any of the officers involved in the McDonalds incident were to face charges. After an Internal Affairs investigation all police involved in this now farcical stand off between the Police Force, the Judiciary and government were cleared of any wrongdoing.

    Although that silly complaint system soon after was modified to exclude anonymous complaints, which now has to be made in person, in this authors opinion, it was not modified enough!

    In 2000, an unprecedented act of intimidation was committed by a member of a MEC gang who shot nine rounds from a handgun, thought to be a police issue Glock 9mm, into Lakemba police station which narrowly missed the station officer and two other officers near him. The person thought to be responsible for that incident fled the country to Lebanon on his dual citizenship passport when he believed that police were closing in on him. However, he was soon arrested by authorities over there for another unrelated matter, and was until recently, serving time in that country's prison system. He has been extradited back to Australia and is currently serving a seven year jail sentence which some would say is not long enough.

    In 2002, a series of rapes were perpetrated on several young women in the Sydney area. Police soon picked up on the 'modus operandi' and as with most crimes of this nature there is a common thread which links them all together. These rapes were being committed by members of a gang of young Muslim men (Skaf brothers and friends) who would pack rape and taunt their victims and force them into degrading acts whilst uttering racial slurs, such as 'Aussie Pig'. The offenders readily identified themselves to the victims as Lebanese. In fact, they were proud of it! All members of this gang have now been locked up and are serving very lengthy prison sentences. The presiding judge at the trial of these scum was moved to remark when sentencing the leader of the gang, Bilal Skaf, to 55 years jail that was later on appeal reduced to 35 years, that; "Young Muslim men are a blight on our society." Again, some would say that even the original sentence as handed down was not long enough!

    In December, 2005, following many years of intimidation, taunts and some brutal assaults by young Muslim men aimed at young native Australian men and women, including Lifeguards - whose only crime was to enjoy themselves on a warm sunny day as countless generations have done before them at the beach - a crowd of local young people gathered at Cronulla Beach in Sydney's south east, to protest this recurrent problem and voice their concern to the authorities.

    Unfortunately, some people began to consume alcoholic beverages and began to take their frustrations out on anyone who looked to be Lebanese. While the author does not personally condone this type of protest and subsequent behaviour, it has to be understood, that this problem had been ongoing for years and regardless of the protestors concerns, the authorities, including the police, and for years, did absolutely nothing about it.

    Some hotheads in the large crowd assembled on that day hurled empty beer bottles and other handy weapons at police and ambulance officers out of sheer frustration and attacked several – again, self-identified young Lebanese males who had dared to show up on the day. While this was occurring in Cronulla, another group of young men were being primed at their local Mosque in Lakemba for what would turn out to be retaliation raids, almost an act of war, and not protests as most civilized peoples would offer up, against those who happened to live in the suburbs of Cronulla, Maroubra, and surrounding areas, and generally had played no part in the original riot.

    Over the next three nights, people living in those areas were the victims of, or witness to, some of the most violent and destructive actions by any group of individuals that has been witnessed to in this country since the Second World War.

    The police and the authorities to their everlasting shame stood back and let it happen! As an ex-cop and a proud Australian, this author has never felt so ashamed as he did at that time. One young male nearly lost his life and was left with a large knife embedded in his back while trying to defend two females from these gutless monsters. A father of three young children was beaten senseless with a baseball bat and now has brain damage, just because he was putting out his garbage for collection and chose to answer yes to the question; "Are you an Aussie?" before being assaulted. There was thousands of dollars worth of damage done to motor vehicles and other personal and public property. Then these Muslim thugs just melted back into their own community and have never been brought to justice! While the media and the authorities have named and shamed those young Australian men who were caught up in the so called Cronulla Riot, not one Lebanese Muslim has been dealt with who was involved in the payback raids, which for sheer violence and brutality, went far beyond that which had originally occurred on the actual riot day. This is the society that we now live in where individuals have more rights than society in general and minorities like the Lebanese Muslims are protected and can do no wrong according to our governments.

    The MEC gangs of today are involved in every kind of crime imaginable. In truth, they are over represented in crime statistics and in the jails. The crimes they are involved in cost this state and this nation, billions of dollars annually and it is only recently that a dedicated squad has been put in place to combat them. Young Muslim men are notorious for creating incidents against non-Muslim men and women who, on reacting to taunts from the Muslim, suddenly find themselves confronting several armed and very aggressive males. Several young Australian men have been murdered simply because they have reacted to insults aimed at them by young Muslim males. Off duty police have been assaulted and even murdered simply because they felt it their duty to intervene in a crime in progress that they inadvertently stumbled upon and the perpertrators happened to be Lebanese Muslim. Never before in our history have we been witness to the viciousness and wanton violence that the young Muslim is prepared to deal out to unsuspecting Australians, regardless of age or sex.

     We are now witness to the future of this country unless we can halt all Muslim immigration, and we need to do this now. Very rarely does a day go past where some crime has occurred that doesn't involve men of middle eastern appearance. There are now areas in Sydney and Melbourne that are no go areas for the native Australian who are now very thin on the ground in those parts, most having been intimidated into moving away from the areas now occupied by the Muslim.

    Is this what we want for our children?

What has Human Rights got to do with homelessness?

2012-06-10T17:34:00.001-07:00

I originally wrote this article to salve my mind from the morbid stupidity that so called Human Rights people advocate as good policy in line with their utopian ideals on how we should all be, not how life really is, and for good effort or money, can never be changed.

Original article starts here:

I read an article by Graeme Innes, Disability and Race Discrimination Commissioner with the Australian Human Rights Commission, listed in the comments section of The Daily Telegraph, June 18, 2010, titled 'opening a door on the bleak truth of homelessness'. I printed it off as it got me to thinking along the lines of what has human rights got to do with homelessness?

Mr. Innes' article was, to my mind at least, intended to expose the existence of the homeless in our society and the need to do something about this very troubling issue. While his article quoted figures of homeless, (105,000) which I would certainly challenge on the grounds that it would be next to impossible to estimate numbers with any certainty, and to all intents would in truth, be just a guess, there was a notable lack of information which any balanced article should convey to the reader, as to why he believed that in this day and age, there should be so many of our citizens living on the street.

My thoughts were then cast back to my days as a NSW policeman who came into contact with many of our homeless as part of my duties as some homeless people have a tendency to commit petty crimes. Some would say a majority of homeless are mentally ill and on the streets due to the closure by uncaring governments of the very facilities, which until the mid 1970's used to provide for them - there are many issues as to why anyone of sound mind would find themselves living 'rough' and while not all that are unfortunate enough to find themselves in this position turn to crime, many are victims of domestic violence, or for personal reasons, feel they are no longer part of a family and choose to leave a secure home for a life of 'adventure' on the streets. Many of those I spoke with were young teenagers from single parent families, usually an uncaring mother, who felt more at home with other 'street kids'. In short, the reasons for anyone to be on the street are many and varied and cannot be pigeon holed into a nice neat little package that any government agency can correct or alleviate.

Mr. Innes in his article failed to be honest with the reader in that he sidestepped the issues which have led those who are homeless into their present circumstances.

One of the biggest issues concerning homelessness would have to be the 'designed' break down of the family unit that has been relentlessly pursued by those thinkers who are averse to personal binding contracts, such as marriage, an institution which is one of the cornerstones of our culture. Personal responsibility that the marriage vow instills in those of us who choose to raise a family has been so watered down through easily obtained divorce procedures and individual rights, that it is now easier to just walk away from a marriage rather than work at the relationship. My wife and I have been married thirty two years this year, and while it has not been all beer and skittles, we chose out of commitment to each other to work at our relationship. That is why our marriage has stood the test of time. Many choose not to work at the relationship and take the easy option. The fallout from these broken families is what we are witness to on the streets today.

Mr. Innes' silence on the 'broken marriage' syndrome and mental health issues proves to me that his appreciation of the causes of homelessness is naïve at best. Had he been honest with himself and his readers, he would have provided some of the causes of homelessness that have originated from bad decisions within government and the act of governments over reaching into family matters that have caused the greatest explosion of homelessness. Then again, maybe he also realizes that if he admitted to the reader that government is the major contributor of homelessness he would then have to admit that his article really had no basis, and was in fact disingenuous, written only so that he could justify his position as a Human Rights Commissioner!

So please tell us all Mr. Innes: What has Human Rights, or your position as a Human Rights commissioner, got to do with homelessness?

The increasing tyranny of the United Nations

2012-06-06T21:02:00.001-07:00

Following on from the First World War, the Allied powers implemented a non-
government organisation designed to thwart future aggressive nations from instigating actions that could lead to another world war. In this regard, the League of Nations came into being and while it initially had some success in restricting arms build up, by the mid 1930's it was obvious to most military observers and any politicians of note, that the League was an abject failure, in that it could not enforce its own recommendations against nations involved in re-armament. Nations such as Japan, Italy and Germany simply snubbed their noses at the League while continuing to pursue aggressive military policies.

After World War Two the Allies acknowledged that the League of Nations had to be bolstered with more 'teeth' and a wider capability through enforceable laws to 'oversee' the pacification of those nations that persisted in aggressive policies. The Soviet Union had at this time become a recognized world power and it was also hoped that by keeping nations such as Russia 'inside the tent' dialogue could prevail first with military action considered as a last resort.

In October 1945, the United Nations came into being with the League of Nations dissolving itself in early 1946.

While the concept of a world governing body is a sound principle, in reality it is an unworkable arrangement, and one which has proven impossible to operate as it was intended due to a number of factors - while it is not the intention of this author to provide examples of botched U.N. operations, those interested in looking into the many examples available could probably start with the genocide that was allowed to occur in Rwanda – and anyone familiar with human behaviour can appreciate that there are many personality types, cultures and religions that make up the human family. The U.N. concept that all cultures aspire to the same ideals so therefore will obey the same laws is flawed, in that this concept does not recognize the many variables that are so very apparent which even 'Blind Freddy' could identify. This disregard for the obvious to pursue the idealistic should sound a warning to the observer as to the mindset that now inhabits the U.N. To disregard the variables such as religion and the method of government which has a profound effect on a culture, and for a western nation to be equated with that of an Arab nation for instance, is simply ludicrous and a blatantly dishonest concept. This is the crux of the dysfunctional system that is now the United Nations, an organisation that is causing its own increasing irrelevancy and march to tyranny, because it now disregards its founding principles and continues to exercise political and racial distinctions, which in today's politically correct atmosphere, western nations should be considering the U.N. as a racist and bigoted organization, but alas, it is never taken to task by any nation.

Indeed, over the past few years we have been able to witness at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, two very appalling rants from Iran's Ahmadinejad and Libya's Gaddafi, two murderous leaders from Islamic nations recognized as supporting terrorist organizations, but given the status of presenting speeches at the United Nations!

What has happened at the United Nations that would cause an organization which was formed to curtail any form of aggression amongst nations to permit two terrorist leaders to present their twisted logic and derision of the west in general, that if held in a public park would have seen them arrested as promoting 'incitement to hatred and racial violence?'

The United Nations is an organisation run by unelected officials who, unlike our own politicians, are not held accountable for their actions, and in this arrangement may be seen the main contributing problem for why the U.N. is now the dysfunctional organisation that it is today. Ex-politicians are normally given posts at the U.N. and as a result of this higher 'goal of office' as Australia's previous prime minister is now working toward, the organization has become highly politicized. Anyone recognizing the dysfunction that occurs within government and major political parties can also appreciate the same process which has occurred at the U.N. The politicization process has also facilitated the U.N. into being hijacked by those Islamic countries that provide 'black gold' to many European and other oil-reliant nations. This 'oil hegemony' has permitted those Islamic nations who posses it to dominate parts of the U.N. structure allowing them to extract concessions through extortion that has turned the U.N. into a toothless tiger that is now more concerned with keeping the oil flowing into those oil-reliant nations, than in maintaining the rights and privileges of sovereign and democratic nations, such as Israel.

During the 1970's the UN, in a perverted political move, welcomed into its chamber the terrorist leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), Yasser Arafat, and recognized the cause of the 'Palestinian People' in seeking a state in the Holy Land. The PLO had become a leading terrorist organization during the mid 1960's by hijacking passenger aircraft and slaughtering Jews in order to force their issues onto the world stage. In this regard they were highly successful which also showed up the complacency and sheer cowardice of those nations willing to give up their moral obligations for the black gold that the Arabs provided. And to their everlasting shame, France and Germany were the leading players in this regard.

While many westerners still believe the U.N. to be an organization which protects the rights of individual nations around the globe, the reality is the complete opposite. Western nations are all signatories to the U.N. Charter of Human Rights and have through bypassing their individual Bills of Rights, or Constitutions, implemented Human Rights Commissions, which if studied minutely by anyone with a modicum of economic knowledge, would guarantee concerns about such a commissions fiscal viability, let alone the fact that all these commissions are illegal in every sense of the word.

Those who still see the U.N. as a protective body do not realize that the U.N. Human Rights policies have only been adopted and adhered to by mostly western nations. The rest of the world only pays lip service to these policies. One only needs to look at the Human Trafficking currently occurring in Indonesia, and other places, to realize this fact.

The U.N. promotes mass immigration from third world nations into mainly western nations under 'refugee' status and 'suggests' numbers to be taken in. Those who choose to join the queue of immigration as a 'refugee' are encouraged by the pot of gold at the end of their destination (western nations) to pass through several other countries which have similar cultures en-route. They are in effect 'economic refugees' and no longer fit the standard U.N. description of a refugee.

Those who cannot see the ongoing colonization of their nations by people from cultures who despise the western lifestyle and have no intention of assimilating are, in my opinion, also part of this problem, and unwittingly, or more disturbingly, are willingly encouraging the destruction of our western cultures through some misplaced western 'white guilt', that has been encouraged to be thrown around our educational systems for the past fifty odd years.

It is time that this nation and all western nations that value their sovereignty and freedom to withdraw their financial and legal support to the United Nations which has become a farcical and dysfunctional organization more intent in pursuing political favors and a global agenda of governance, than in providing a safe and productive world in which we may all dwell with a concrete guarantee of peace. The U.N. now caters to despots and dictators who strut the world stage espousing their brand of socialism mixed with their perverted logic. Time to call a spade a spade and go back to protecting our own borders and manufacturing industries, which have been devastated by government actions designed to alleviate third world suffering. (Please read the LIMA Declaration) Instead we now find our middle classes becoming the new poor of the world through increased taxation by governments more concerned with supplying money to the U.N. and supporting U.N. policies than in being fiscally and nationally responsible to their own citizens. It's time to say goodbye to the United Nations!

Economic Retribution

2012-05-23T18:55:00.001-07:00

The Western world is currently living beyond its means. The welfare and entitlement mentality that has become the hallmark of recent Western style Socialist Democratic government will soon implode. There is already evidence of this in the economic catastrophe that is Greece. Ireland, Spain and Portugal will soon replicate and then follow the Greek tragedy that is currently being played out in Greece where its people are ill prepared for what lies ahead. Europe will then follow. It's 1929 all over again as those nations which will fail first rush to shore up their dwindling economies by introducing severe economic measures which penalize those who have had no say in what has come about while refusing to enact severe austerity programs and measures to contain those who have helped bring us to this place; the Banking houses and their wastrel CEOs who have governed their lending and invested your money while lining their own pockets with salaries so huge they can only be described as obscene, knowing full well the inevitable economic outcome of their self-serving ways.

The Ten Commandments tell us not to Covet Thy Neighbors House and the Bible informs us that Greed is one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Yet, during the 1980's the catch cry in the financial and business circles was that, Greed was Good! The deliberate inversion of two of our basic civilizational cornerstones by those who could see money to be made from such a moral travesty should have sounded warnings from within our own financial sectors. Those who did rise up were drowned out in a cacophony of Bankers and Entrepreneurs who could sniff out the instant wealth to be made from their fellow man who were completely ignorant of economic matters concerning the giant Ponzi scheme then being hatched. Since abandoning the Gold Standard, finance houses have been lending money as if there was no end to its supply. By abandoning the Gold Standard we also abandoned any pretence in balancing our money supply, that is, we no longer held in reserve the capital via Gold Bullion with which to guarantee the money that was lent for housing, business and any other venture which could generate income for the Big Banks. As a result of no longer abiding by the Gold Standard we now find our government's borrowing huge sums of money from the World Bank with which to finance their welfare and other slave inducing programs which has taken our national debt levels to dangerously high amounts, amounts that may not be able to be repaid! While we must have the Big Banks in order to function as an economy, the accountability of the Big Banks has not been as it should have been and the Big Banks have taken advantage in every area of finance to capitalize on this lack of accountability. Bank profits are now at record highs and although this author has no problem with Banks making money on what they lend out, the Banks have been less than honorable in how they have lent that money and provide incentives to ordinary folk who would wish to save their hard earned money for a rainy day.

We are now witnessing the result of that lack of accountability in lending and business practices with Greek Banks now running out of money because those Banks failed to keep lending money to within their own means. The Greeks who have money in Greek Banks now realize that their money will soon disappear from their accounts if they don't act and remove it first.

It is only a matter of time before we see this happening here and in every other Western style nation that has embraced the lunatic policies associated with Socialist Democracy.

Be warned! Australia which was once a land of opportunity to those who chose to work hard and were prepared to take risks with business ventures, has now become a stagnant place where government now dictates the order of the day and has so much red tape in place that it now deters those risk takers and hard workers from even thinking about creating the wealth that this nation was once so proud to proclaim and which offered work to all those who wanted it.

It is now just a matter of time before the whole House of Cards that has become Western Democracy collapses in on itself. We are now seeing this in Greece with other nations to soon follow which will then engulf the European Union, including Britain. America is teetering on the abyss and only needs another 'stimulus package' or 'Quantitative Easing' part three, to push it over where it will never recover economically from. The next few years promise to be a wild ride, are you prepared?