Comments

The Government has been investigating claims the state-owned timber company illegally logged and destroyed ancient rainforest canopy species on the Errindura Plateau. The Goongerah Environment Centre alleged the state-owned timber company had logged about one hectare of rainforest on the Errindura Plateau. The group's spokesman, Ed Hill, said according to the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act, any rainforest areas bigger than 0.1 of a hectare must be protected. It appeared to be bigger than .4 of a hectare. Goal-posts can easily be moved with State endorsement, and the FFG Act is mere paper, which no doubt is exempt from logging industries. The investigation found VicForests had not breached logging codes for rainforest protection and waterway harvesting. This is simply how VicForests operates! They are quite "legally" chopping up these massive and iconic trees, 600 years old. That's how VicForests operate - without scrutiny, without environmental limits and quite legally can vandalize our State's natural treasures. These "harvesters" are sanctioned by the fat-cats in Spring Street. ABC: Vicforests cleared over East Gippsland With State government sanction, nothing is "illegal" if it's done under the banner of VicForests - our own environmental vandals!!!

The claim by a supposed 'leader' of the Australian Kurdish community that "ISIS was established by Turkey, Iran, Syria and Iraq, purely to fight the creation of our nation" is an absurd libel against the governments of Syria, Iran and Iraq.

Only those kept ignorant of the facts of the conflicts in Syria could possibly not know that ISIS is a creation of the Arab dictatorships of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to overthrow the secular government of Syria. That terrible war, which commenced in March 2011 has already cost the lives of 220,000 Syrians. In that war the Kurds in northern Syria have so far been allied with the Syrian government (although in the 4 Corners program of 27 April 2014, No Free Steps to Heaven – reviewed on candobetter and available on iview until 25 May – it is a concern that the program reporter was from Israel, itself now overtly supporting the Syrian 'rebels' who are clearly fighting on the same side as ISIS).

Beyond Left and Right, Beyond Red and White:
Framing the Liberation War in Donbass

An interesting article by Nina Kouprianova on the conflict in Ukraine which provides a fresh perspective we don't get exposed to in our media.

Russia seems to represent a "regression" from modern Liberalism and it is here I think the West sees a threat. Russia, and in particular Putin encapsulate many aspects we thought we "moved on" from, perhaps due to Russia's isolation from modern Liberalism post WWII. The conflict is largely ideological, something I believe Putin is keenly aware of. He understands that Western Europe's modern Liberalism is detrimental to Europe's spiritual and demographic future. This challenges the very core of neo-Liberalism, as do many European populist parties such as the Front National.

The year 2014 saw an unprecedented surge of patriotism in contemporary Russia, which resulted in popularizing the notion of the Russian World. One reason for increased patriotic sentiment was Crimea’s return to the home port after the overwhelmingly positive vote by its majority-Russian residents in a referendum one year ago. The onset of the liberation war in Donbass from the West-backed Kiev regime was the other. This war truly delineated the stakes for the existence of the Russian World. The latter is not an ethnic, but a civilizational concept that encompasses shared culture, history, and language in the Eurasian space within a traditionalist framework. To a certain extent and despite the obvious ideological differences, the Russian Empire and the USSR embodied the same geopolitical entity. A particularly noteworthy aspect of the ongoing crisis in Donbass is the symbolism—religious and historic—that surpasses the commonly used, but outdated Left-Right political spectrum. In the Russian context, this also means overcoming the Red-White divide of the Communist Revolution. That this war pushed Russians to examine their country’s raison d’être is somewhat remarkable: for two decades its citizens did not have an official ideology, prohibited by the Constitution that is based on Western models. The emergence of a new way of thinking in Russia will become clearer once we refer to the meaning of religious insignia, wars—Russian Civil and Great Patriotic, as well as the question of ideology in the Postmodern world.

I noted during the "coverage" of the ANZAC day commemorations a lack of history. Channel 9 had many stories, and as is typical for mainstream media, a rundown of emotions felt (as is the case with reality TV too). It seemed largely an introverted affair aimed at broadcasting the specific emotions which this poorly understood campaign is supposed to ellicit. It was basically "How does ANZAC day make you feel?". There was no rundown, at all, of the historical context of the war, or the landings. You could watch this for hours, and be none the wiser as to why they were there, or what the war was fought for, or what the strategic aim was, or the political situation which made the war seem necessary. No understanding of the world at the beginning of the 20th century. There was lots of focus on the emotion of the event, but surprisingly, virtually nothing from the soldiers themselves, no retelling of first hand accounts, no revisiting the news, the analysis and experiences and thoughts of the time. The soldiers themselves are simultaneously lionised and blotted out. I watched expecting maybe a retelling of their personal experiences, a diary entry, anything, these are abundant, but nothing. Sadly, this is how the powers use war. They reinvent wars for their purpose, but stripping out the historical context, and then claiming (falsely) that the war as about reinforcing the PRESENT day morality. All you have to say is that the soldiers 100 years ago fought for our values TODAY, and you get a moral one-up over others. Although never explicitly stated, it is strongly implied that government action today is endorsed by the dead heroes because this is what they fought for. World War 1, World War II, these are reinvented to support the status quo today, a status quo which would have been rejected back then. And because people aren't educated as to what people used to think, they can fall for it.

Note, however, the very crude attempt to 'unite' us all over Gallipoli. It is as if this is the only thing that young people are going to be allowed to identify with as Australians - the 'glory' of war. It seems that young Australians are being prepared for endless wars in the most cynical way and with full cooperation of the corporate press. And people are not falling for this as they are expected to do. This morning a health professional asked me what I was doing tomorrow for the 'Dawn Service'. I had to think for a moment what he meant, and then realised that he meant some Gallipoli 'celebration'. I replied that I would probably be writing articles against war-mongering. He laughed and said it was a bit like that. He added that it was like we are already engaged in the third world war, but made up of little wars everywhere, never stopping. I said, Yes, beginning with Yugoslavia. We agreed.

How many Australians can see through their governments and corporate 'leaders' and press, but do not realise they can speak up against this sickening manufactured consent by writing for candobetter.net and for any other alternative media that isn't trying to sell ads.

Australians must speak out in any way they can.

There is an anti-war event at Federation Square tonight. One fears that there will be little if any criticism of the way we are backing wars in Syria and East Ukraine, and taunting Iran. (Although I must say that I am glad our foreign minister visited there recently. Maybe there was actually a chance for real dialogue behind closed doors, for once.)

Guest worker programs are ALWAYS permanent. ALWAYS. There is, practically speaking, virtually no difference between a guest worker program, and a permanent migration program. Guest worker programs fail. But there is another issue. The lack of debate means that the ONLY people who will vocally, and totally oppose this in an organised manner will be the reactionaries. Sometimes I think our state is doing everything it possibly can to breed a far right movement in Australia. It is almost as if our government is begging for social division.

Kelvin Thomson proposed that

... the property developers who are the beneficiaries of the increased land value that comes from population growth ought to be the ones to pay for the costs of this growth

If the beneficiaries were made to pay the true costs of high immigration it would end very quickly. No articles in support of high immigration that I could find have shown showed any tangible benefit that Australia has gained from high immigration in recent years. Take for example, Immigrants and the economy are inextricably linked in the story of Australia (9/4/15) | the Age.

The article commences:

"George Megalogenis' three-part ABC documentary Making Australia Great ₁  has had a very positive response. ..."

The article continues:

"From the data, Megalogenis looks up to the wider horizons of what it tells us about ourselves and our story and, crucially, he puts economics where it should be, at the heart of a story with many related facets – politics, history, culture, and identity. All interpenetrate. To see any one in isolation is to only partially see how society works and changes."

None of the claimed data is cited in Alex West's article. I have yet to see any data which shows that high immigration is beneficial to the current inhabitants of Australia. The true economic effects of high immigration is given in Kelvin Thomson's speech:

• Government cost of maintaining infrastructure doubles if population grows by 2%;
• The $8 billion cost of the (now abandoned) East-West Link;
• 500,000 15-19 year olds with full-time employment in the 1980's compared to only 150,000 in Jan 2015;
• 20% of 15-19 year olds with full-time employment in the 1980's compared to 75% today;
• Tertiary education, once free, only available to the rich;
• Highest youth unemployment in 17 years;
• Long-term unemployment has more than doubled since 2008;
• More than 2,000,000 casual workers;
• More than 1,000,000 contract or labour hire workers;
• Further increases in housing costs;
• Fewer Melburnians living in detached homes as high-rise apartments being built in Melbourne at 4 times the density allowed in New York, Hong Kong and Tokyo;

As numbers of our cities' inhabitants swell on this arid continent, ever more bushland and farmland in regions adjoining our cities are being destroyed to build more housing. As a consequence, ever more of Australia's unique fauna and flaura are threatened with extinction including the Leadbeater's possum.

Those living on the edges of our ever expanding cities are forced to spend ever larger proportions of their day commuting to and from work.

Even if a minority are able to gain from high immigration, Australians, as a whole, lose terribly. Unless it is stopped, both current Australians and new arrivals are destined to suffer environmental and economic calamity.

If beneficiaries of high immigration were forced to pay all of its true costs, it would end immediately.

Footnote[s]

1. ↑  It was not possible to view the series as ABC only makes a program available on iview for 14 days after its broadcast. (The web page of part 3 only dated 31/3/15 was found here and its no-longer functional ivew page is here.)

Bharat Bachao Andolan
(Movement against Imperialism, Zionism and Religious Fanaticism)

~ Public Meeting ~
"Analysing Yemen and the growing Crisis of Wars across the Middle-East"

~ Speakers ~
Com. Vasudevan (Veteran Trade Unionist), Sarfaraz Arzu (Editor, Hindustan Daily), Feroze Mithiborwala (India Palestine Solidarity Forum, Gen Sec.), Jatin Desai (Veteran Journalist), Kishor Jagtap ₁  (President, Phule-Ambedkar Intellectual Forum) & Mayur Thackeray (Socialist Unity Centre of India)

Venue: Marathi Patrakar Sangh, CST, Mumbai
Date/Time: Saturday, 18th April 2015 from 4-6pm.

~ Organizers ~
Anil Tyagi, Farid Khan, Jyoti Badekar, Salim Alware, M A Khlalid, Sayeed Khan, Swapnil Tare, Farid Batawala, Imran Mubarak, Sohail Ajani, Zaheer Abbas, Aarti Badekar, Farouk Mapkar, Asim Khan, Abdul Qadri, Lilesh Lule, Arif Kapadia, Harshawardhan Vartak, Afaque Azad and Shadab Siddiqui.

Contact: 9029277751 /

Footnote[s]

1. ↑  Kishor Jagtap can be seen on this 8 minute video which was uploaded in Dec 2012 (currently there are two copies). Unfortunately there is no audio or textual English translation.

If only it had been an April Fool’s joke. But it’s true. On 1 April, the 95-metre industrial factory trawler the Dirk-Dirk (now reflagged as the Geelong Star) arrived in Australia, and it’s starting to fish in our waters right now. Unbelievably, the Abbott Government has welcomed this foreign factory trawler, despite huge opposition from recreational fishers, conservation groups, tourism businesses and local communities alike. Join a weekend of action at these events around Australia to Stop the Trawler. Bring your friends, banners and boats along! Melbourne: 11am Saturday 18th rally at the Victorian State Library Fremantle: 11am Saturday 18th banner event outside Cicerello's on Mews Road Hobart: 10am Sunday 19th boat rally on the water or 12noon outside Fish Frenzy at Elizabeth St Pier Sydney: Perth (TASMANIA): 10am Saturday 18th boat towing to rally at Lions Park Adelaide: Sunday 26th banner event at Birkenhead Bridge, Port Adelaide (note, the weekend after) For more details on the events visit Stop the Trawler And if there isn’t a rally being organised near you, you can take a photo with your ‘Stop the Trawler’ message, and post it on social media using the Stop the Trawler Alliance’s hashtag #StopThisBoatTone or email it to us on [email protected] This is the largest factory trawler to be fishing in Australia, and it’s starting to fish in our waters now. But we don't know where or we don’t know what they caught, because the company is protected from providing this information! Massive freezer-factory trawlers represent the most extreme excesses of global over-fishing, wreaking ecological havoc in our oceans. We must not let them get a foot in the door. Please take part on our national weekend of action to protect our marine life, our fisheries and the future of our local fishing communities. In 2012 we stopped the Margiris, and we can do it again. For our marine life and fishing future, Michelle and the team Save our Marine Life & Protect our Coral Sea

54 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
(03) 9662 3744
The New International Bookshop shared their event.

Some local sources in Syria contradict reports in the mainstream media [1], that the PLO is not cooperating with the Syrian Arab Army to oust ISIS from Yarmouk. Local PLO sources say that the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and other Palestinian fighters are doing the fighting inside the Yarmouk camp. The Syrian Army (Syrian Arab Army - SAA) is not entering the camp, but is providing artillery cover for the fighters. The army is hitting hitting Hajjar al-Aswad, next to Yarmouk, where the Daesh (ISIS) fighters are coming from. It has been reported that the UNRWA is trying to get the civilians out, and the SAA is cooperating with them. However, ISIS is preventing civilians from leaving the areas that it controls - using them as human shields to stop the army from defending the area and routing ISIS. At the same time it sounds like ISIS is threatening and taking civilian lives, so in the end the PLO and the Syrian Army may have to go in anyway. There is some optimism that ISIS will eventually be removed. Source:https://thewallwillfall.wordpress.com/2015/04/11/yarmouk-breaking-news/ [1] Mainstream media version here for instance interprets things in a skewed fashion and reports from PLO spokesperson distant from the source: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/apr/10/plo-says-no-to-military-action-in-syrias/

There were reports of missiles thrown by the counter rally-ers, including horse manure, bottles and a placard which hit a young woman and knocked her to the group. An elderly lady was pushed to the ground. Because they have resources (money and people) and they have little to do (you rarely see any charity from these groups), they expend the resources on rallies. The thugs are then let loose on any organisation or collection which is ideologically removed from them. Unfortunately, in my experience, there is no reasoning or discussion with them, as they can't say anything other than pre-prepared "arguments" and talking points. It is important to note that there are very few people who think, who are even ALLOWED to think. The mass of the movement are young people who think they can run the world, have NO knowledge of it, and are armed with hate and a sense of being Fascistic warriors and tropes and set loose. Their membership is very unstable, as most leave once they grow up, but there is no shortage of young, naive people. Their membership turnover is actually very high, as personally witnessed and reported by others I know who took part. I don't think the government specifically deploy them, but there is little doubt the Government tolerates them more than they otherwise would, because these "Socialists" (they are NOT Socialist at all in practice) paradoxically support the system by enforcing the ideals which the system needs and opposing and true anti-capitalist, anti-status quo movement. They do what the state isn't allowed to do, which may be why when they harrass Liberals, they seem to get away with it. However, when you combine close mindedness with a sense of moral supremacy, and combine with fanaticism and a lack of a sense of proportion, you get a very dangerous combination. You get people who will stop at nothing, who will do anything to anyone to advance the cause du jour and attack anyone without trial, without evidence, without a hearing. P.S., Having spent months in Europe, I do understand the concerns of Reclaim Australia, though the response, just being critical of Islam and leaving it at that doesn't address the core problem (in fact, I wager Reclaim Australia don't mention it, which after a look through their facebook page, confirms my suspicion), which is population policy set by an elite. It is also ironic and amusing that they consider Islam as the primary threat to free speech, but when they rallied it wasn't Muslims by the hundred opposing them and using violence. I hope they've learned something about who stops speech. P.P.S. I noted that the image in the article was about the Tunnel protests which turned nasty. It is interesting because the man at those protests, Anthony Main was also organising the "Rally against Racism" and speaking to the Police at Fed square on Saturday. Unfortunately, some people make a LIVING doing this, and as such, have to justify their living by rallying against the world.

Here is what I believe the story behind the Reclaim Australia and No Room For Racism probably is. In a nutshell, the Reclaim Australia protests are a logical consequence of current and recent governments' foreign affairs policy and local promotion of a perceived need for terrorism laws. The Reclaim Australia protests would be a reaction to the grotesque war-propaganda repeatedly conveyed by US/NATO, Australian newsmedia and our government that Middle Easterners are naturally unstable sectarian obsessives and in need of firm external guidance and bombing into oblivion. Recent terrorist attacks - false flag or real - have reinforced this message. On that basis it should be expected that some or even many Australians will start to consider Muslims in Australia as a dangerous group. They have repeatedly been told this by their government. The Government isn't going to change the message that it keeps upsetting such Australians with (and Muslim Australians) because the message serves a purpose of its own, however the Government also does not want Australians to think that they can start giving the government their point of view with impunity. Because if that happened, we would pull out of wars, cut immigration right down and bring down house prices, among other things. Hence, the government deploys the 'Socialists' rent-a-thug crowd to intimidate the worried Australians so that next time they try to organise a rally about their concerns, no-one will turn up.[1] Problem solved: 'apathy' produced through fear. Police state by the handy proxy of so-called socialists. (No offense meant to real ones) and a belief that you can't win. ABC (and all other press except maybe candobetter.net) present what happened as a random clash between diverse groups of Australians (although visibly more young vs old) - rather similar to the way they present 'clashes' in the Middle East, and anyone who was not involved is totally mystified. No-one mentions that Mel Gregson is a prominent member of the Socialist Party of Australia. No-one comments on the resources that were found to organise the 'protest' or the crowds in several states at once at this protest and many others in the past. Somehow the 'socialist' 'anti-racists' come out looking a bit better in the press reports than the anti-sharia law people, even though they will have started the violence. A few will have been arrested, but nothing important will happen to the group. Any experienced activist will recognise this syndrome. It's either intimidation in the streets or take-over of any successful and positive movement. And the same tactics keep 'order' in the Greens and Labor Party. Now, I don't have any direct proof of this in these circumstances, but its a very familiar scenario to most real activists. Anyone with another explanation, please write in. Notes: [1] It's easy to get some actual volunteers to participate if they believe they are combatting racist demonstrators because Australians have all also been schooled in another belief which is that Australians are riven by racism. So we have self-identified anti-racists vs anti-terrorists stopping each other from effective political expression while old civilisations are reduced to dust by bombs in the Middle East. Many of the feared Muslim refugees and immigrants come from these places because we are bombing them. But no-one gets round to asking questions about this, unfortunately.

Very good analysis, Dennis.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mqw4ttLKtX0 Do they think renewable energy will deal with homelessness?

The following was posted to the Melbourne Age three days ago on Wednesday 25 March. I am unable to verify whether or not the letter was published. If any one else is able to, please advise. - Ed

As Malcolm Fraser is laid to rest, it seems that some will work to see his views on the ANZUS alliance buried with him and at a time when our allegiance to the US is drawing us ever deeper into their wars. What irony indeed that SBS, the broadcaster that Fraser launched, should be assisting at this burial with a couple of highly partisan reports on ‘Dateline’ which directly contradict his views on Australia’s preferred ‘alignment’.

While we paid little attention to Malcolm Fraser’s warnings over joining the West’s campaign against Syria, or supporting the US puppet government in Ukraine against Russia, we can still atone for this and pay our respects with ‘the debate we need to have’ on the US alliance.

yours etc,

David Macilwain

"If we had taken polls ... I think people would have voted 80, 90 per cent against us but we explained the reasons for it." It is the job of a democratically elected politician to act and put policies in place as per their stated policies and ideals. Abbott himself said that democracy can't work if a leader says one things before and election, and does something else afterwards (I'm aware he's a hypocrite, but I agree with the sentiment). They are there to represent our will, not push theirs. Otherwise, we may as well have a dictatorship. If Australian's didn't want immigration, as they don't want the levels now, our leaders must deal with it, suck it up and respect the decision Australians have made. That is the whole point of democracy. Malcolm did this with immigration, going against the will at the time. As some may be aware, I am very unforgiving of any politician or leader which doesn't act with utmost honesty and with a sense of servitude to their people, and I also am unforgiving of those who create deleterious conditions in an attempt to "do good". Good intentions are no excuse for poor results. We as a society would do ourselves much good by not longer excusing people's for policies which had poor consequences because "they had good intentions". I view this as a sign of a societies immaturity and incapacity to deal with managing civilisation. For a Prime Minister to use a nations and go against its will and desire, to fulfil a personal moral need is inexcusable. Forcing change on people "for their own good" almost always results in failure, and this is the excuse that tyrants have used in the past. Its always "for your good". The results of enacting population policies using 'population targets' I believe are unethical to the highest degree, and pose a much larger moral hazard than potentially denying some refugees entry. Mr Fraser was planning on creating another 'restore Australia' party, which would have a larger population as one of its platforms. Malcolm Fraser's unrealised manifesto - an Australian republic with green credentials (27/3/15) at http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/malcolm-frasers-un... Lastly "The Population Bomb" was written by Paul Ehrlich, not Ivan Illich.

The following was posted on 21 March 2015 to a mailing list of activists opposed to the United States sponsored-terrorist proxy war against the Syrian people. That war, which commenced in March 2011, has so far cost the lives of 200,000 Syrians.

Whilst Malcolm Fraser's actions against the elected Labor government of Gough Whitlam in 1975 undoubtedly harmed Australian sovereignty, he should still be given due credit for his outspoken public support for Syria and Russia since March 2004. That support for Syria and Russia flies in the face of the lying narrative fed to us by the mainstream 'news' media and nearly all of the political establishment on both 'sides' of the fence. It is no accident that, whilst they mention his opposition to South African apartheid, support for Aboriginal reconciliation and support for Vietnamese refugees, none of the mainstream media eulogies for Malcolm Fraser have mentioned his support for Syria and Russia, as is noted below. - Ed.

While the news of Malcolm Fraser’s unexpected passing yesterday may have penetrated to the rest of the world, it is unlikely that some key facts about his recent political life will do so, given that they are mostly absent from Australia’s own reporting.

Malcolm Fraser was always a Liberal, but the party that he led in power from 1975 to 1982 has now lost all semblance of liberalism, so much so that Fraser formally left the party in 2009 when the current PM Tony Abbott became leader of the then opposition. He had also become on the left of the Labor party as it also moved to the right, and became an associate of the Greens on some issues, particularly on asylum seekers.

But one of the most significant positions that Malcolm Fraser held was on Australia’s close alliance with the US, which he regarded as both undesirable and dangerous. He made this argument extensively in his last book – ‘Dangerous Allies’ – published last year. The ANZUS treaty which is often cited as a reason for Australia’s ‘obligation’ to fight in America’s wars does in fact only oblige us to come to each other’s aid should one be under attack. Not only is the US not under attack in the many wars it has created since WW2, but it is highly doubtful that the US would come to Australia’s aid if WE were to be attacked – and certainly not if we had not been performing our proper role as the US’ ‘Asian Sheriff’.

It is not simply a matter of Australia becoming involved in US wars in the Middle East, even though that support has ‘punched above our weight’ as well as giving crucial support to the US illegitimate stance in 2003 and now in Ukraine. Malcolm Fraser publicly protested when the previous government under Julia Gillard allowed US marines a base in Northern Australia. This is further to the long-time presence of spy base Pine Gap there, which the US uses for Drone attacks in Afghanistan/Pakistan, and no doubt surveillance further east too.

Gillard, like Rudd, and Howard before him, was a rusted on supporter of both the US and Israel; not only did she speak to the US congress with adoring platitudes, but she ‘stood with Israel’ in 2009 when it was flattening Gaza.

More recently the bond between the Australian government and NATO has been surely strengthened by the Ukraine ‘conflict’, as 40 of the civilians killed when MH17 was shot down were Australian. With Tony Abbott’s stance on Kiev’s atrocity being hand in hand with that of Cameron and Obama, and his ‘outspoken’ and aggressive posturing against Russia and Putin being cheered on by our deluded and sycophantic press machine and public, Australia has proved itself a vital member of NATO in spirit. Not even the Greens have spoken out in support of the rights of East Ukraine, leave alone in support of Putin, thanks to the clever psy-ops of ‘Pussy Riot’ and other Western propaganda trickery.

Equally, when Abbott volunteered to send 300 more troops to fight in Iraq – as ‘trainers plus’ there was hardly a squeak of protest – the US needed us to ‘help’. And if the US extends its ‘operations’ in Syria then Australia will be right behind; it is already a key supporter of the ‘SNC’.

All this is why I found the loss of Malcolm Fraser as a high-profile spokesman against US expansionism and militarism personally quite devastating. Following a memorable meeting with him in June 2013, accompanying Mother Agnes and Susan Dirgham, I had written to him periodically about the deterioration of Australian ‘leadership’ over Syria, and still hoped to hear his critical voice on this and other geopolitical issues; his strong support for cooperative relations with China resisting US dominance being the most significant, and of course the role China is currently playing in assisting Russia against NATO is a key one. It is to be hoped that some others may fill his role now, but I doubt it; while some say the ‘American Alliance question’ is ‘debate we have to have’, there is a persistent silence on the issue.

And the signs are not promising; not only did the government apparently choose to release a controversial report into the treatment of asylum seekers on Nauru yesterday afternoon, so that Fraser’s death would distract media reporting on it, but today there have been marches and celebrations around the country of ‘the end of the Afghanistan operation’ – ‘Australia’s longest war commitment, with 41 soldiers killed’. Forty One. It pains one to imagine the sort of rubbish being talked about ‘their sacrifice’ and what they have brought to the country; the warlord who was chief of Oruzgan province where the Australians were stationed was killed by a suicide bomber in Kabul yesterday – heralding a fierce struggle between tribal factions looking to take over Matiullah Khan’s sizeable ‘heritage’ of control over Opium trade and whatever else.

While some, particularly on the left, who were so angry with Fraser for his role in ‘the Dismissal’ of Gough Whitlam in 1975 that they simply can never acknowledge the immense good that he did in years since, there were many who did hear his message on both humanity and racism, as well as on ‘Australian independence’ and our part in Asia.

I have had quite a bit of personal experience with the political activists I'm referring to. Pilger is not creating their ideology, but anyone, anyone who makes a living producing information produces information for a reason. Those who make a profile for themselves by virtue of simple market economics, are producing something that people want to pay for. Few people want to pay for objective truth, but rather what they want to hear. Therefore, there exists a kind of feedback cycle where those who produce information and 'make it' are those who produce that which people want to consume. I myself am by no means an exception, but I don't make a living. Note, I'm not saying people who make a living or a name producing information set out to mislead, only that there exists a selective bias, a natural selection if you will. There exists the same paranoia with the term "Socialist", which is the exact same issue with the word fascist. To free market capitalists, any objection to laissez-faire capitalism, in their minds, must come from a socialist mindset. Their belief is that Capitalism is the 'natural' state, and only the existence of Socialist ideology results in people rejecting this premise. This is obviously not true. For many on the left, in particular neo-Marxists, the same situation exists. There is a belief that it must be due to a political ideology that people identify with cultural and racial groups, have nations, family ties and compete with other groups. This ideology is more or less "right wing" or "fascist", the lines are blurred. There is no debate with what the US is doing and whether it is supportable or not, but in my opinion, and it is just my opinion, that calling it "Fascism" leads to the supposition that a specific ideology is causing this behaviour, and therefore the problem is solved by attacking those who may hold these ideological tenets. This then leads to people attacking absolutely everyone, to the point where even grassroots local political groups can get attacked. If you want to reduce immigration you might be a racist, and racism is a function of fascism. I probably have overreacted, but I consider choice of words, and how an argument or issue is framed critical. Subtle changes in language and in the manner in which events are portrayed can have a huge impact on the response to them. The media's complicity with the state isn't new, nor an invention of fascism. Institutions have always supported the ruling power since time immemorial. Priests supported the state. Academics support the dominant status quo. Even scientific institutions will go with what the powers that be require. Issues which they don't want discussed are met with silence. Twists and biases are given to stories which support the parties which have power. Putting this to 'fascism' or some collusion is I think a grave mistake, because it then leads to the conclusion that if you defeated fascist ideology for a free and open society this wouldn't happen. I believe that even if you did defeat the ideology, institutions and government would naturally gravitate towards a state where they become one monolithic, despotic power by sheer momentum, natural selection and the mechanics of how institutions work. This is what I believe actually has happened since WWII. Therefore, despite the fact it ostensibly looks like the rise or reemergence of a newish singular ideology (and therefore leads people to think a repeat of the fascism of the 30's), it actually is a recurrence of something which has happened all throughout history. I'll view the documentary. I don't mind Pilgers articles, and he does great work as a journalist, I just believe that accurate diagnosis of what has triggered the current political climate is critical to the changes of success in implementing positive change. 16 years ago I would have agreed with everything he said

Reply to comment
Sat, 2015-03-14 12:48 — Dennis K
What is fascism?

Hi Denis,

You say that you think that the term "fascism" is thrown about too readily. But that is a point that John Pilger makes at the outset, that it is used all the time to a degree that strips it of meaning by powers that are in fact, as he says, creating a sort of 'modern fascism'.

"The recent 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz was a reminder of the great crime of fascism, whose Nazi iconography is embedded in our consciousness. Fascism is preserved as history, as flickering footage of goose-stepping blackshirts, their criminality terrible and clear. Yet in the same liberal societies, whose war-making elites urge us never to forget, the accelerating danger of a modern kind of fascism is suppressed; for it is their fascism."

Continuing this theme, he cites (as Western powers often do) how Hitler started the second world war by invading Europe, and then, for his modern fascism comparison, he argues that the United States also illegally invaded Iraq and ultimately gave rise to ISIS.

What is his definition of fascism? Is it simply to illegally invade a country? To start wars of aggression? To tell big lies by manipulating the press?

"Since 1945, more than a third of the membership of the United Nations - 69 countries - have suffered some or all of the following at the hands of America's modern fascism. They have been invaded, their governments overthrown, their popular movements suppressed, their elections subverted, their people bombed and their economies stripped of all protection, their societies subjected to a crippling siege known as "sanctions". The British historian Mark Curtis estimates the death toll in the millions. In every case, a big lie was deployed."

Of course he does not stop there. He gives a succinct run-down of the major post-WW2 debacles we are currently reaping the confusion of including Yugoslavia, Afghanisatan, Libya, Ukrain. Pilger is a real war correspondent, starting with Vietnam. He actually knows what he is talking about.

I don't think Pilger just wants to 'go after fascists'. I think his point is to go after lies - as a journalist.
I also think that "American Exceptionalism" based on the ideology of manifest destiny is like the Fascism of the 1920's; it is much stronger and runs more deeply than most kinds of nationalism. With regard to racism, after watching reports on the Ferguson riots and recent shootings, and knowing of the huge numbers of people in prison in America, the majority black, and of how the US elite aggressively endorse mass immigration whilst knowing that US blacks - who emerged into emancipation without any wealth to establish themselves with (like Australian aborigines) - remain very disadvantaged with regard to employment, housing, schooling etc. The United States is a country built on slavery on its own shores. This is also true of Europe, but most European countries did not have slaves in the mother-countries, did not enter the fossil-fuel revolution with that malignant demographic.

I was extremely impressed by an hour and a half long documentary Pilger has made about the media's role in war which is relevant to the idea of fascism as state violence and lies. It is about how dependent the media has become on state approved messages. Despite a somewhat cliched first minute or so, if you have seen the footage before, the documentary is actually quite extraordinary for the number of journalists he interviews who admit in front of the camera to towing a line that they knew was untrue. It also has remarkable footage of long-range targets and soldiers discussing their victims. And it is very relevant to today's NATO wars and America's role.

Dennis, you write, "So this I think leads to paralysis, because we misidentify the causes of these actions, and think that somehow going after "fascists" will fix everything. They are paralysed by feelings of ressentiment."

I think this is often true, but I don't think it is true of Pilger - although I used to assume it must be because of his association with the Green Left, which is not a publication that I have much respect for.

I agree that, often, "This is why we aren't making any progress. ... Rather than tackle contemporary issues, activist politics is stuck with the tried and true, and very profitable, but rather static menu of political causes," but I don't agree that that is what John Pilger is doing here. In fact I am going to change the teaser on the article to another statement from the article that more accurately reflects the guts of his message.

But, to repeat, you are mistaken to think that Pilger is engaging in "constant references to events over a generation or two ago, as if nothing since then has meant anything,." He is in fact saying how these kinds of references are misused. In fact, he is implying that they are overused and emptied of meaning, and somehow put people off investigating what is actually happening.

So you and John Pilger seem to agree on this. I suggest you reread the article and that you definitely watch the film. Then maybe let us know what you think again. :-)

DennisK,

The above post adds nothing to the discussion. Yet again, you have repeated what you have already posted and, yet again, you have failed to respond to my posts.

Note the contradiction between one sentence and the next:

The application of Marxist ideology led to death and impoverishment pretty much everywhere it was applied (my emphasis).

The very next sentence is:

At BEST ... it resulted in a low grade authoritarian police state, which people still preferred to move away from.

So which of the above do you hold to be true, DennisK? Does communism cause death and impoverishment everywhere it is applied, or does it merely "[result in] in low grade authoritarian police state[s]" presumably like Cuba and Yugoslavia of which you, unlike the Cubans or the Yugoslavs, also disapprove. The Yugoslav government stayed in power until 1999 when it was overthrown by a NATO war of aggression (with the help of Kosovar Islamist terrorists, some of whom are now fighting the Syrian people). The Cuban government has withstood attempts by its far more powerful northern neighbour to overthrow it since the Bay of Pigs invasion of 1961. How do you explain the survival for over 55 years of a government, which by your own logic must be hated by its people?

Until you address my arguments, this debate can't proceed.

Whitehorse Council is holding an information session on living with possums. Picture: Foundation for National Parks and Wildlife.

POSSUMS are seen as pests by countless Melburnians, but Whitehorse Council wants to show you how to live in harmony with them.

The council will host a living with possums workshop on Monday, March 23, in Blackburn North.

Whitehorse Mayor Andrew Munroe said the session was a great chance for residents to learn how to live with possums without losing their trees.

“This information evening aims to educate residents on how to protect their trees by preventing possums from reaching the tree canopy,” Cr Munroe said.

Cr Munroe said the council had found the increasing possum population was damaging residents’ trees due to overgrazing.

“Possums have adapted very well to the urban environment and as a result of that we need to implement measures to protect our trees without harming the possum population,” he said.

The Department of Environment and Primary Industries will present information on safe possum repellents, issues with possum relocation and the laws around trapping possums.

Blackburn resident Peter Baker will also share information on how he and his family saved a large tree in their backyard from near death through trial and error.

The session will be held at the North Blackburn Community Room, North Blackburn Shopping Centre, 66-104 Springfield Rd, Blackburn North on March 23 from 6.30pm — 7.30pm.

For more details, phone 9262 7671.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/east/learn-to-live-with-possums-at-workshop-in-blackburn-north/story-fngnvlxu-1227261223420