Who sold Australia and who bought it?
The who, what, when, why and how of our betrayal.
The accused? Not yet in the dock!
Gough Whitlam (Fabius Maximus), Robert Hawke, Malcom Fraser, Paul Keating, John Howard and
Kevin Rudd. Every one of them by their actions can be considered to be an 'international socialist'. The net end result of their policies has been a sociological disaster for Australia and her people.
They have presided over the destruction of the family, the economy, justice, and morality. They have presided over the disarmament of the people, while all the time pretending to protect the family and the nation. AND IF YOU ARE NOT ACTIVELY OPPOSING THEM, YOU ARE COMPLICIT!! You are part of the problem, as long as you continue to "sit on the fence" opt out, or give up. Not just defeated, but actually guilty of aiding and abetting this betrayal. If only by your passive acquiescence to these unwanted, unjust and undemocratically arrived at policies, most of which would not have passed a people's referendum!
We the people of the nation have allowed this to happen. In truth we have become; "DOPED DOWN UNDER", by being compelled to vote for our destruction as a viable, cohesive, independent, sovereign nation. Unbeknown to most Australians, compulsory voting exists in only two other nations. Those being Belarus and Belgium! The leading democracies such as Britain, U.S.A. , France, Greece, Italy, etc. all have an unforced democratic vote. It is hard to imagine those peoples being so passive as to allow their governments to compel a person to vote. In the recent elections in Russia, President Putin asked the Russians to go out and vote; in our last Australian elections, we were ordered to.
In Queensland, our local government boundaries and system were changed, without reference to the people by referendum; once again, it will appear to the foreign observer, that the people agreed. The truth is, yet again, the people had NO CHOICE!! The difference between rape and consent is free choice. One might draw a parallel here between a compelled vote and a democratic free vote.
Statistics tell us that the vast majority of rape victims do not choose to conceive or give birth, when given a choice. When a vote is the result of threats of a person being fined and maybe jailed, and a law that permits a so called dissident to be jailed, for advising people "not to vote", then Australia cannot really pretend to be a democracy. Voting under duress can never be considered democratic.
Since the inception of the compulsory vote, Australian governments may have had some sort of a mandate, but the one mandate they didn't have, was a democratic one. This is not to say that an immediate or sudden change would have occurred, but without doubt over the decades, as Australians came to see what the 'socialists' were intending, many would have re entered the public political arena, as and when they perceived how little public support there is in fact for many of our governments' policies.
Under the current Australian Electoral Commission structure, it is verging on the impossible to create, register and sustain a new party. The reader may well ask: what difference would a democratic vote have made? I will give 2 examples. Assuming that politically active people who join a new party will vote, and that in a free election maybe about 50% WON'T. Then the vote for a new party, with new leaders and policies will be maximised and democratic change or regression can occur according to the will of the people.
A visit to the national archives, or wherever these records are held, would show that based on these assumptions the Confederate Action Party, with .62% of a quota in 1993 on about a 60% voter turnout, would have won a senate seat; so would Mrs. Hanson, on her first attempt, (prompting me to wonder why she reportedly, supports the compulsory vote). Sometimes people don't realise when they are being robbed. I think that Mrs. Hanson has plenty of company in this respect.
There are basically only 3 ways for power or government to change: Invasion; Revolution or orderly political process (ie: Democracy) and that in simple terms wars have been fought on 3 main issues: Race, Resources and Religion. It will be interesting to see what will happen to Australia and Australians if the current "pretend democracy" continues, and an increasingly dumbed-down public come to realise that they have been duped. What if they come to realise that the government has abandoned our religion, sold our resources, and betrayed our people? One reads that in 1971, 19 Australians were working to keep one person on welfare, whereas now we have 5 working, to keep 2 on welfare - and with millions queuing to get into Australia the situation can only worsen. Certainly, stupidity is no crime, but treason most certainly is.
I am supporting the Australia First Party and I hope that it will grow well past the 100,000 membership mark, which would then have it probably outnumber the combined memberships of Labor, Liberal, Nationals etc.
I support Australia First Party because it is both genuinely nationalist and Democratic. Australia First will have Citizens Initiated Referendum and Recall and Australia First has indicated that it will support A.D.D.I.C.T. Associations' strategies on the drug scourge. The drug war currently NOT being fought, as reported in "The Australian 23/10/09: "Afghan Opium kills 100,000 people a year".
Perry Jewell, Australia First (Queensland).