Category Archives: Law & Government
So now all the islamic apologists are out in droves, trying to explain that the “lone wolf” who orchestrated the Sydney Siege was not an islamic terrorist, but a mentally deranged man. Although you can be both, and arguable most terrorists these days are.
Even “political commentator” Russel Brand weighed in on the topic, claiming that Man Haron Monis could not have been a terrorist because he had no objectives ( other than terrorizing Western people in the name of islam, presumably ?)
I guess, if his Facebook page and website were still available we would be able to find out what his objectives were, as he seemed to have a lot of grievances, especially with the West which granted him asylum when he fled his own country after committing fraud.
Listening to him in a radio interview which he gave only a few months ago, he actually sounded calm and rational to me. Add to this that he was granted bail for what potentially could be severe offenses and the fact that he even had a gun license , the authorities clearly did not think he was dangerous or deranged.
The muslim community claims he was an ostracized outcast, so who were his 14 000Facebook fans? Presumably other “Lone Wolves” ?
Sorry, not buying it. I hate to paraphrase Andrew Bolt, but where are the Buddhist, Hindus, Bahai, Sikh or Rastafarian terrorists? (Just to mention a few peaceful non-western religions)
As for the “I’ll ride with you” campaign, sure I’ll ride with you, as long as you don’t mind that I wear my own religious attire, the red cape with the big black pentagram on it, the one that would get me executed if I wore it in Saudi Arabia .
It sounds like a good idea, lets all be friends on an equal footing all with the same rights. Certainly sounds fair, but we all didn’t get here at about the same time, by the same means , or in the same circumstances. Some of us have root going back thousands of years to the dawn of civilization, some just got off a gunboat 8 generations ago and acted like it too.
Think of it like this:
You are having a family party at your home, rather quiet, just the family.Then all of a sudden hundreds of people burst through the front door and literally start going mad, they tear up the garden and start selling your possessions and even start selling tickets to even more people that start coming. You keep telling them to all leave and that the house is yours and you didn’t invite any of them and they have no permission to be there. every time you complain the gatecrashers say you don’t have a ticket so what you say doesn’t matter. The people selling the tickets realize your complaints are hurting ticket sales so they offer you tickets for free just to shut you up. The ticket is red and has a big white R on it. Do you accept the ticket? Do you realize accepting the ticket will really hurt you chances of a damages law suit against the gate crashers
Yes that’s right by accepting the R ticket you will be agreeing that you are just another gatecrasher and have so land-rights or any special historical connection to the land.
Yes it is a racist rights and real estate robbery, its signing up to be robbed.
Come on, lets be smart, if Tony Abbott really wants this it has to be bad for us, that logic works 9 time out of 10 regardless of what the topic is.
Get a treaty not a second class citizenship.
Men have basically decided the rules (written and unwritten) around women, relationships and society just don’t suit them any more and are simply refusing to play. While it may seem like a fad or a phase, there are serious structural problems causing this and serious consequences including the complete collapse of society. For anyone who disbelieves the significance of this consider what would happen if women simply refused to (or were unable to) get pregnant; extinction in a generation.
Dating sucks for men:
Women with either brand your confident approach as talk rape or you shy approach as creepy.
Women are encouraged to classify a wide range of male behaviors as abusive.
Women making an accusation against men are glorified regardless of whether the claim is legitimate.
Women can accuse you of rape and you will find yourself guilty until proven innocent and punished before evidence is produced.
Work sucks for men:
Men have been competing against women in the workplace for decades now, with such a large labour pool and shrinking jobs, wages and conditions, it is not easy.
Sure its hard for everybody to make a living, but men have the added pressure to make enough to at least partially support a wife and children.
Given the relatively low reward in getting married, men are simply not making the effort to climb the career ladder, some opt out of work completely.
Marriage sucks for men:
Divorce rates are high.
Access to your children post divorce is precarious.
You are likely being forced to pay for someone else’s children that you raised as you own.
Divorce is in most cases initiated by the woman.
Of course much of this is driven by feminism, but feminism’s greatest enemy is just around the corner, the sexbot.
The technology solution to women being taught to to be so antagonistic to men, is to simply recreate the desired parts of the woman sans the politically correct societal destroying baggage.
For those that think this is a fantasy observe the following analytic:
It seems now that any African American dies in the vicinity of a police officer a series of media vultures are circling ready to pick over the body and begin bleating propaganda.
Who made you the spokesperson of our family?
We just want to bury our nephew with dignity and respect.”
-Hertencia Petersen, Akai Gurley’s aunt.
Details about this death are very brief at this stage, too brief to pass judgement in any direction. But none the less, Rev Al Sharpton wanted to grandstand over the death for media and political capital.
So lets state a few things to begin with to attain some perspective. The 2nd amendment of the US constitution promises the right to bear arms, many US citizens choose to exercise this right. The wording of the amendment makes it very clear the purpose of this amendment was to preserve freedom of the people from tyranny.
Of course no right is free or without cost or sacrifice.
As the result of a population who routinely carry hand guns as a matter of course there will be accidents. In the USA there are 2000 accidental gun deaths per year. An example of a pure accident is this: A woman walks into a bar with a revolver in her hand bag, she drops the hand bag on the bar and the revolver goes off, the bullet shoots through the bag and hits the bartender in the forehead killing him instantly. Completely unintentional, completely unpredictable, utterly freak accident.
While gun ownership is very high in the USA, the use of guns in murders is proportionally quite low because most people who use guns know the odds of winning handgun fight are about 50%. Risking your life on a the flip of a coin is insane; even in Russian roulette you have an 85% chance of winning. While the person you are pointing a handgun at may not be armed, many bystanders probably are armed and will be exonerated in a court for defensive homicide.
But this dead leads us to another controversial concept, should the police even have guns at all, maybe we would be better served by an armed population and unarmed police. Police were initially unarmed when police forces were first established.
While a pure accident is a possibility, there are several other factors, an inexperienced cop seeing two figures approach, a poorly light area, a black neighborhood, mistaken identity, at this stage who knows if there was malice or racism as factors. What we do know is a young man is dead, his life ended, and another young man has a huge cloud hanging over the rest of his life. So it is a double tragedy, one that you would probably never hear of because it does not allow itself to be ‘shoehorned’ into fit a specific political agenda.
There is only one thing worse than losing an innocent loved one, and this is politicians feeding on your loss and grief for their own benefit.
We actually do some research here, and we found this which is quite good. Ex causa turpi (non oritur actio).
Basically it means to go to court and have the court rule in your favor you must not have been acting badly at the time. If you were acting badly the court may (and probably will) simply throw out your case.
This is why video evidence of cops (or other scum bags) doing the wrong thing is so important, any case they may wish to bring against you is automatically ruined on proof of ‘Ex causa turpi’. Imagine a police officer trespasses on your land (ignoring the many ‘no trespassing’ notices you have displayed) and you beat him with a stick when he refuses to leave, as he was trespassing, he has no cause of action in court. you probably don’t have a case either, but winning against cops in court is almost impossible anyway, so you were better off dealing out your ‘hillbilly justice’ anyway.
A powerful and simple tool to eliminate vexatious actions.
OK I said it Nigger. Nigger, Nigger, Nigger… That’s what they want to call them selves, but if anyone else says it they are racist or prejudiced, even other blacks.
So lets face it Nigger is not strictly defined by race or ethnicity, its actually defined by a value system that promotes theft, thuggery, violence, drug dealing, drug dependence, ignorance, misogyny, tyranny and squalor, basically Marxism for the very stupid.
Of course you can contribute to society if you chose to and put in some effort and learn a useful skill. In the accounting of life you can chose to be an asset or a liability, too many people are choosing to be a liability.
So lets spell it out really clearly:
1) A large frame man (Man A) steals a box of cigars from a store using threats of violence.
2) (Man A) Punches a man (Man B) in the face while man B is sitting in his car.
3) Man B stops further up the road and gets out of his car.
4) Man B is stunned and partially blinded in one eye from the punch, Man B is afraid Man A will try to steal his gun and then kill him.
5) Man A charges at Man B, Man B yells at Man A to stop, Man A keeps charging.
6) Man B starts shooting at Man A, because that is the only way he can preserve his own life.
7) Man A receives multiple guns shots the last one or two being fatal.
So who is at fault here, Man A or Man B?
If you say Man B is at fault you clearly aren’t looking at the facts, and it is you who is prejudiced.
So the Niggers start rioting and looting, attempting to create a race war and blame all the non-Niggers for it. Marxist are all over it, but as usual are backing the wrong horse.
Police brutality and excessive force are sadly common, I have seen plenty of it first hand, but this was not an example of it. This was an example of a man defending himself against a murderous thug.
Thugs please be fore-warned: I will defend my self using everything at my disposal to defend my life, So don’t be surprised when you get your ass handed to you.
IPAN open letter to the PM and Defence Minister regarding treatment of Swan Island Peace Convergence activists
IPAN open letter to the PM and Defence Minister regarding treatment of Swan Island Peace Convergence activists
Wednesday 29th October 2014
Open letter to the Prime Minister Mr Tony Abbott and the Defence Minister Mr David Johnston
The Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN) bring together over 50 community based peace and justice organisations across Australia.
We wish to express our grave concern regarding the alleged actions of SAS personnel, towards a small group of peaceful protesters at Swan Island military base on the 2nd October.
It is our understanding the Swan Island Peace Convergence group has protested Australian involvement in foreign wars over the past 5 years with protesters treated lawfully and peacefully by the ADF and the Victorian Police Force.
We in the IPAN are concerned that the tactics used this time, which include hooding, stripping of clothing, physical and verbal violence from ADF personnel reflect the Australian government’s current policies which restrict civil liberties on the basis of the threat of terrorism to Australian citizens.
The actions of the ADF personnel are reminiscent of the treatment of prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison in 2004 by US troops, and indeed correlate with a number of inquiries into treatment of civilians by ADF personnel during Australian military engagement in Afghanistan.
We ask, are our young men and women in the ADF being trained to commit war crimes?
When viewed in the context of the government’s decision to send Australian forces into Iraq for the 3rd time we express our concern that the people of our country are being constrained in their democratic rights to protest this engagement as it potentially grows into a major war.
The members of IPAN request that findings of the investigation by the Department of Defence into the actions of members of the ADF at Swan Island be made public.
Annette Brownlie on behalf of the Independent and Peaceful Australia Network
Medical Assn. for the Prevention of War
Lorel Thomas-Victorian Peace and Social Justice Network of Quakers.
Nick Deane- Marrickville Peace Group
Mr Norm Bullen- Just Peace Qld
Dr Chris Haw-Physicians against War
Peter Arndt Executive Officer-Catholic Justice & Peace Commission of Brisbane
Professor Alison Broinowski
Joan Jenkins-Bunbury Peace Group.
Australian Anti-Bases Coalition- Denis Doherty
Peter Murphy – Sydney Peace & Justice Coalition
Jim Green- Friends of the Earth
Beverley Polzin- Quaker
Stephen Darley-Campaign Against Foreign Military Bases (SA)
Peter D Jones, Tasmania Quaker Peace & Justice Committee (Hobart)
Philippine Australia Solidarity Assn
Philippine Caucus for Peace
Kathy Damm- Qld Quakers
Frances Kendall-Just Peace
Ruth Russell WILPF
Willy Bach- Standfast
Rosemary Morrow Blue Mountains Permaculture Institute
Bevan Ramsden- Newcastle Peace Group
John Hughes- Early Works
Rev Simon Moyle
Rev Alan Matheson AM
Michael Henry- Just Peace
Shirley Winton- Spirit of Eureka Vic
Prof Richard Tanter
Daniel Brown Rite of Strings
Annie Didcott WILPF ACT
Bob Briton-General Secretary Communist Party of Australia
David Bradbury- Frontline Films
Roger Keyes- Adelaide Quaker meeting
Ann Rees- Adelaide Quaker meeting
Dr Janet Bodycomb MAPW Vic
Ross Battison Vic
Michael Hamel-Green- MAPW
Julie Marlow- Australian Anti-bases Coalition
Hannah Middleton- Independent Activist
Anne Lane -Catholics in Coalition for Justice and Peace
The Hon Sandra Kanck
Boyette Jurcales- Ban the Bases
Father Claude Mostowik- Pax Christi
Kay Mc Padden
Irene Gale AM
Margaret Jacobs- Member of Women in Black
May Kotsakis – Philippines Australia Solidarity Association.
Berlin Guerrero – Philippine Caucus for Peace
George Kotsakis – Migrante Australia
Independent and Peaceful Australia Network
PO Box 573 Coorparoo Brisbane 4151 Ph: 0431597256
While trying to make the case that Gough Whitlam’s policy success are thanks to the Greens, (which did not exist at the time and Whitlam was never a member of) The greens have produce this rather shameful poster.
This really speaks volumes about the Greens, totally opportunistic, with gutter level morality and absolutely no sense of tact.
In this spirit of this shameful act on the memory of a man dead but not even buried yet, we put the shoe on the other fott and give to the greens another great progressive, Joe Hockey.
Most interestingly during the media frenzy around the passing of Whitlam there has been little mention of the constitutional crisis at the time of his sacking, because that would bring up the fact Australia has a constitution, and people might actually start asking questions about the limits of governmental powers it imposes. Fortunately the Greens will never attempt to claim credit for our work.