Comments

Missing US journalist James Wright Foley goes unflinching to his death as ISIS behead him in horrific video, as a warning to Obama. Foley, has been missing since November, 2012, after being taken hostage while reporting from Taftanaz, in northern Syria, for the agency, GlobalPost. ISIS posted the extremely graphic video to social media as proof of their barbaric actions late on Tuesday afternoon. The video features text saying “Obama authorizes military operations against the Islamic State effectively placing America upon a slippery slope towards a new war front against Muslims.” Before Foley was killed, he was forced to give an anti-American speech. His killer, a knife-wielding black masked jihadist speaks with a British accent while threatening the U.S., including threatening death to a man who is identified as American journalist Steven Sotloff. American airstrikes began earlier this month in an attempt to help thousands of people—members of the Yazidi, an ethnic minority in the region—who were trapped on a mountain range by fighters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS). He last tweeted on August 3, 2013. Soltoff went missing on August 4, 2013 outside of Aleppo, Syria. There was a time not so long ago when the Vietnam War was widely viewed as the biggest misstep in American military history. 60 percent in the latest polls in America now show that they never should have been a country in the first place, so trying to make democracy work there is likely to be a thankless task. The war's faulty premise that Iraq was stockpiling deadly weapons of mass destruction continues to make the decision to invade difficult to justify. The price tag for the war, according to nonpartisan congressional researchers, was at least $806 billion, and 4480 deaths of soldiers, more than 100,000 Iraq civilians. Before the 2003 invasion, Iraq's domestic oil industry was fully nationalized and closed to Western oil companies. A decade of war later, it is largely privatized and utterly dominated by foreign firms. Armed intervention by external actors into ongoing conflicts in the Middle East will likely add fuel to the fire. The solution must be financial, not through conflict.

The former CSIRO scientist and author of the books, Poisoned Planet and The Coming Famine, shared his thoughts at the 29th International Horticultural Congress (IHC) in Brisbane this week. He painted a grim picture of the human reliance on resource-heavy agriculture and the consumer dependence on a grain-based diet. “Mega cities” would become the future trend, according to Mr Cribb, which cannot feed themselves but rely on a “river of trucks” bringing food in on a daily basis. With global population almost roughly doubled since 1970, with more people on top of the food chain, the whole food security issue is exacerbated. Today almost a quarter of the world's farm land is affected by serious degradation (FAO 2008), up from 15% two decades ago. By 2050, 7-8 billion people will inhabit the world's cities. They will use about 2800 cubic kilometres of fresh water - more than the whole of irrigation agriculture uses worldwide today. Cribb says that the central issue for humans in the next 50 years is not climate change or another global financial crisis but whether the world can feed itself. We face, “a looming scarcity of just about everything necessary to produce high yields of food – water, land, nutrients, oil, technology, skills and stable climates”. Population growth, urbanization and changing consumption patterns will lead to rising demand for food between now and 2050. It is estimated that food production will have to increase by 70 per cent on current levels to meet future food needs. Just how is this 70 per cent increase in food production going to be achieve with less resources? global agriculture will have to produce at least another one billion tonnes of cereal each year and meat production will have to rise by 200 million tonnes. Against a background of growing resource scarcity, this food will have to be produced more "sustainably" and with fewer resources than current practices require. No doubt this means crushing any efforts to secure ethical farming practices with regards to animal welfare! The "ag-gag" are planned to silence activist and hide animal cruelty. Few people accept the challenge of population overshoot, and a global family planning program. Numbers Ch 11: Where could I get meat to give to all this people? For they weep to me, saying, 'Give us meat, that we may eat.'

Almost 10 million migrants over the next 50 years will swell Australia's population to more than 40 million by 2060 and more than 50 million by 2100. This is to stimulate our economy, and keep our population "young" instead of ageing. However, is the 40 million a point in time for continuing growth, or a target reach and then stabilize! Two such scenarios are completely different, and their graphs would reveal this. With no plan for our population, it's likely that the 40 million by 2050 is just part of a continuum, of ongoing growth!

With such full throttle rates of growth, the "tap" can't just be turned off! It's like slowing down a full-speed train, and it takes time. However, this momentum isn't being considered, and nobody is questioning what happens after 2050. There simply isn't a plan!

Between now and 2050 the number of:

• older people (65 to 84 years) is expected to more than double;
• very old people (85 and over) is expected to more than quadruple, from 0.4 million people today to 1.8 million in 2050.

In 2010, there will be an estimated 5 people of traditional working age for every person aged 65 and over. By 2050 only 2.7 people of traditional working age are projected for every person aged 65 and over.

Australia's population is projected to double to 46 million by 2075, according to the latest population projections released today by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) - "but under our high and low scenarios it could be as early as 2058, or after 2101."

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/lookup/3222.0Media%20Release12012%20%28base%29%20to%202101

The number of people 65 and over is projected to double, from 3.2 million people, (14 percent of the population) in 2012 to 6.8 million (20 percent) by 2040. So the quadrupling of our population, the percentage of older people will decrease by only by a mere 6%!

It's seems to assume that income tax is the main resource for funding older people! And, for all the population growth, there'll be only 2.7 people of traditional working age for every person over 65 (instead of 5 now)! The cost of population growth is massive, yet will achieve little to dilute the ageing! Government revenue should be more than from income taxes, and be from productivity, industry, knowledge-based learning, and innovation - what we're losing in Australia do to globalisation!

It's not hard to recognise a Ponzi scheme - and this one is. Economists and governments only see and consider raw statistics, and are in a frenzy to keep our economy growing, against natural demographic trends, a planet of finite resources, and use whatever means to keep our populations at an traditional working age! It's absurd and unrealistic. There are many multiple factors and variables to consider with regards to demographics, and the social, environmental, quality of life issues, and economies of growth are being ignored. The traditional owners of this land are being swallowed and overlooked, and we're being inundated by foreigners to create a country of strangers - "diversity" of integrity and nation-hood!

Twenty-five per cent of Japanese are over 65. But not only do they live longer, they work longer, stay healthier, care for their elderly better – and have found ways to pay for it. By around 2017, the number – though not the proportion – of over-65s will actually stabilise, meaning the costs associated with ageing will tend to level off.

At no point in the conflict has Russia made any claim on Ukrainian territory. If you are aware of where this has occurred, Dennis, please advise.

Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

With China having more and more interest in assets here, I wonder if a future scenario could play out, where disenfranchised Australians, pushed out of homes decide to reverse the foolish decisions to allow foreign ownership of land, residential property etc. Would that be a threat to China's interests? Would China, or another nation investing then have to decide whether to use force to protect their interests here? I think it a feasible prospect. What if the only people who would take back our lands were a bit 'extreme', but because no one else tackled the issue, they got some power because they were the only ones proposing a solution. What if this put foreign nationals, and those aligned with those nationals here on alert, due to the rhetoric of this party? I'm worried, as we sell our nation more and more to others, that this conflict of interest could lead to an ugly standoff.

National Press Club: Dick Smith and Graham Turner High profile businessman and philanthropist Dick Smith and Flight Centre founder Graham Turner spoke at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday, warning Australia’s annual population growth of 400,000 people was unsustainable. Dick Smith and Graham Turner, of Flight Deck, are both keen environmentalists, and patriotic millionaires. He was a "free-range" kid from the north shore of Sydney, living in a home with a sizeable back yard. His father was a salesman, and his mother was a stay at home mum! Now, with Sydney's population set to soar to 8 million, and Melbourne's too, kids are expected to live in 80 storey apartments and quality of life is falling. Dick Smith made a film, and a book, but he was surprised that he got little interest from journalists. He's a great supporter of politician, Kelvin Thomson, who "gets away with speaking" on population because the press ignore him, and most people agree with him! The economic system we've had since the second world war is one that that requires compound population growth and endless resources of energy. It's clearly not sustainable as it's a finite world. We've come to the end of easy growth, to now what he calls extreme capitalism. Managers at Coles and Woolworths now say they don't enjoy their jobs any more because you have to be so ruthless because shareholders insist on never ending profit increases. He read Prince Charles' book "Harmony" saying you have to live in balance but he gets virtually no coverage in the media. He produced a book of "Forbidden Ideas" that journalist won't cover - free range kids, limits to growth, and extreme capitalism - is it good? He got thousands and thousands of emails and letters of support, for his common sense. Strangely the biggest growth-pushers was the ABC, and it's not from profit pressures! When he launched is Wilberforce Award, he had $1 million in cash and 5 "blond bomb-shells", like Richard Branston always does, but it made no difference. ABC journalists asked 3 questions of racism- and he said this is a world problem with nothing to do with race,creed or skin. The issue wasn't linked to racism, so nothing appeared in the press. Q&A ran nothing on population, but they had the head of the international monetary fund on the show. There were twitter feeds on growth, but the discussion didn't touch the subject. The lady spruiked growth as if it could be endless, and no more twitters! Smith says that we need a capitalistic plan, but with a different form of growth. Growth in quality and efficiency, but not in population and endless resources of energy. Similar to Japan, their lifestyles are improving and they don't have to spend in high rise buildings and infrastructure. Our grandchildren can have a great future if we live in balance, and harmony, with resources. Our system must become sustainable. Graham Turner grew up on an apple orchard, and often went into the bush. He used to shoot rabbits, and understood early the potential for the environment. Ralph Nader wrote on Zero Population Growth in the 1970s, and predicted world food shortages. Most of what he said will be applicable in the near future. Sir David Attenborough is in his 80s and his views are very well known. In Australia 90% of native temperate vegetation has gone, and 50% of Australia's rainforests have gone. Turner worked as a vet in Yorkshire. There was a traffic jam in the middle of the Yorkshire dales, and took about 20 minutes to get out of it. His family settled in the 1800s in WA. For our ancestors, who've done lot of damage, they had an excuse. We have no excuses and must take action in our lifetime. 21% of all known mammals are at risk of extinctions. Australia's mammals have 40% gone- and it's not a record to be proud of. Japan's population is shrinking, but their economy is growing reasonable well. GDP and population growth are not linked, and shouldn't be linked. The loss of quality if life is not just for us, but our grandchildren. We should be looking at a 100 year, or thousand year plan, for Australia. By 3000, Queensland alone will have 1.2 billion people! Immigration is not the answer to an ageing population and the retirement of workers. It's just delaying the issue. Australia has had 25% population growth in just 14 years. This means that in 25 years we will need 25% more roads, hospitals, and it's just not possible. Galaxy poll showed that 70% of people do not want "big Australia". 50% don't want population growth at all, the other 50% don't want the consequences of population growth. A lot of the immigrants now are from India and China, and we're taking the smartest and brightest - exactly what they need. Flight Centre have a bilateral program with skills sharing between Australia, Canada and the UK. One has to replace the other. Even an immigration rate of 75,000 per year would be high by world standards, but it would allow us to stabilize our population. “If you've got a 5000-acre farm there is a very clear limit to how much you can grow. “If you've got 500 head of breeders (cattle) on there now you can't just grow that limitlessly; you've got to work in with what you've got for it. We need a plan, and doubling our population by 2050 can't be maintained. Standards of living will decline, and quality of life. We need to talk on population, and also do something about it. As Attenborough said, only flat-earthers deny population growth as a problem! Ag resources are finite warns Smith Humans are meant to be intelligent, and of "higher" order than animals. The Earth's limits are obvious, and there's over-confidence in technology and science to overcome the constraints of Nature. Farmers know there's a carrying-capacity of their land, and overshoot means hunger and land degradation! Humans must control their assumed rights to reproduce, and governments must rein in their quest for never-ending perpetual economic growth -and stop meddling with our demographics! Politicians are cocooned in their privileges and wealth, and their addiction for endless growth is fatalistic. Dick Smith wants a discussion, and while he's only a "car radio installer", there are better qualified people to implement it. Turner is a former vet, and it's clear we need to cut immigration to about 70,000 per year. We won't solve the problem of an ageing population with a Ponzi scheme. Something that requires perpetual growth is not sustainable. You are just pushing the problem out further. We have a huge bank of potential workers in Australia. Economists are letting us down, and continual growth can't be supported mathematically. Productivity gains make more "stuff", and not necessary. A plan for the future would be to make less stuff, and work less hours. Less working and and less stuff we don't need. Only economists and cancer cells promote endless growth, and cancer cells actually kill their hosts! Australia's growth is largely political policy, through immigration, while most of the world's growth is natural - and living standards are falling. We do control our immigration, our borders. It's government policy changing our population. 40% of the world lives on less than $2 a day.

CBA's team of media, investor and government relations advisers have spent recent weeks and days polishing messages and preparing Mr Narev and chief financial officer David Craig for the inevitably tricky questions on how they plan to defuse the fallout from their investment financial planning "advice" scandal. Another record result of $8.63 billion posted today will not be enough to deflect the glare. Analysts expected the bank to report a cash profit of around $8.7 billion, an increase of around 11% over last year’s results. CBA, the nation’s largest home loan provider, has dismissed suggestions of a housing bubble, claiming recent investor interest in housing was “a rational response to the low interest rate environment created by the central banks”. Of course, they are a powerful lobby groups inflating the housing bubble, with swelling coffers from the housing market. Borrowers have taken advantage of the low interest rates to pay down their debts which has resulted in record low bad debt charges. Australian dwelling prices have jumped more than 10 per cent over the year to March 2014. In Sydney and Melbourne, which make up 55 per cent of the metropolitan population, home values leapt by 15 per cent and 11 per cent, respectively. Yet disposable incomes per capita only rose by 1.7 per cent over 2013. A growing population means demand is still kept high. First home buyers are virtually out of the market, so foreign investors are needed to keep the housing bubble inflated. It means draining the salaries from workers and filling the banks with easy profits. At the heart of the problem are Australia’s unique mix of tax concessions, such as negative gearing, a constipated supply system, and major banks that use internal risk models that make mortgage lending their most profitable business, but at a cost of chocked up productivity. Productivity growth is the key to national prosperity, never more so than in Australia right now as we struggle with failing competitiveness after the mining boom. Housing is not an export industry, and merely props up the lending institutions without contributing to our growing infrastructure debt, welfare and productivity.

The notice below is from a campaigner petitioning the NSW Govt to publish a register of Crown Lands in and around Sydney before any more of them are sold off to developers. Clearly the Federal Govt is actively using public funds to promote the fire-sale. You can join a petition HERE. ₁

suzie gold, Sydney

10 Aug 2014 — Is the public aware of the Chinese Brochure produced by the Dept of Trade and Investment which takes the form of a glossy brochure written in CHINESE show casing "potential investments opportunities"

"We are proud to showcase just a few of the potential tourism investment opportunities that are all in premium locations and will shortly be available including

2 adjacent sandstone buildings, which are unique to Sydney’s history and heritage

A commercial property that has high commercial potential for redevelopment and is immediately opposite the famous Sydney Town Hall

Unique Sydney Harbour tourism opportunities

North head sanctuary

Fuel tanks at George’s Heights Headland Park, Mosman

Greenfield opportunities on Middle Head Rd Headland Park, Mosman

The Jenolan Caves, lease all or some of 30 buildings"

I believe this is scandalous.

The brochure figures large at para 5.1 of the submission from

Crown Land is Our Land to Premier Baird.

Footnote[s]

1. ↑ The full URL for the petition is: https://www.change.org/petitions/the-hon-mike-michael-bruce-baird-mp-postpone-the-government-s-proposals-to-allow-the-largest-sell-off-privatisation-of-crown-public-land-in-our-history-until-you-supply-the-public-with-a-complete-list-of-all-crown-land-in-nsw/sponsors/new. .

In a complete counter-logical defence of high immigration at a time of heavy unemployment, there's an article that in a crisis we need MORE migrants! It's a "just add people" logic, totally contrary to empirical evidence and any precedent.

He says that the matching up of the jobless numbers with the immigration numbers paints a false picture. It paints migrants as a "burden" to the economy, and is a product of populist unrest! The biggest "burden" to the economy is not migrants, but the "ageing population" - and young migrants are meant to be the solution!

Angela Chan, national president of the Migration Institute of Australia, says that’s just not true. Employers in regional and remote Australia find it extremely difficult to fill positions with workers who have families, homes and lives in our capital cities -- cities that house the unusually high figure of 85 per cent of our population. However, most skilled migrants don't go to regional or remote areas, but settle in the cities of Sydney and Melbourne!

We need more migrants in a crisis, not less (8 Aug) by Rob Burgess in Business Spectator

Would the Migration Institute ever promote leveling off immigration? It's like expecting an egg farmer to recommend eating less eggs.

Heavy immigration is a vain attempt to increase the GDP! It's like force-feeding a sick child, to gain strength when what's needed is optimising of corporate functions and stability. Australia's wealth is being diluted by more and more people to share it with. Per capita gdp has flat-lined in the last decade and many people are facing harsh times. We have increasing costs of housing, food, utilities and more poverty and homelessness. The economy can't be evaluated purely by "jobs" and GDP at the cost of human welfare, crime, intergenerational inequity and the environment.

Japan has an ageing population, yet their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in Japan expanded 1.60 per cent in the first quarter of 2014 over the previous quarter. Their lifestyles will improve with time, and their economy is based on productivity, manufacturing exports, high skills and knowledge. These economist see the meta level of figures, and economic data, rather than human welfare, gross employment rates, opportunities for young people, and living standards. The more of us there are, the more our common wealth must be shared.

Extract from "The lies driving Big Australia" by Leith van Onselen in Macro Business com au "A big negative of Australia’s high rate of population growth is that it is placing increasing pressure on the pre-existing (already strained) stock of infrastructure and housing, which reduces productivity and living standards unless costly new investments are made. Further, controversial and expensive investments like desalination plants and road tunnels (e.g. the East-West Link) would arguably not have been required absent such strong population growth. Further, when infrastructure and housing investment fails to keep up, it places upward pressure on inflation, requiring higher interest rates, which can then damage productive sectors of the economy. As explained in a 2011 speech by the Reserve Bank of Australia’s Phil Lowe (summarised here), these factors were certainly in play in the late-2000s, when rapid population growth placed upward pressure on rents, as well as caused a big surge in utilities prices as the capacity of the system struggled to keep pace with the growing demand, requiring costly new investments. Ongoing high population growth also places additional strain on the natural environment, causing greater environmental degradation, increasing water scarcity and pollution, and making it more difficult for Australia to reduce its carbon footprint and meet international pollution reduction targets. A bigger concern is that Australia earns its way in the world mainly by selling its fixed mineral resources (e.g. iron ore, coal, natural gas, and gold). More people means less resources per capita. A growing population also means that we must deplete our mineral resources faster, just to maintain a constant standard of living. Finally, modelling by the Productivity Commission has also found that immigration is neither beneficial for the economy or living standards, nor can it alleviate the impacts of an ageing population. All of which raises the question: what is the end-game of Australia’s migration-based economic model?" Unfortunately, the rest is behind a firewall here: "The lies driving Big Australia" by Leith van Onselen and costs over $100 to subscribe to this new emag. As they point out that is a lot less than the cost of subscribing to the Fin Review - however I can't afford it at the moment. Hope this business mag keeps up this kind of perspective. Local businesses need an alternative to the corporate world rags.

The development will start with a Buddhist temple.
Wyong Mayor, Doug Eaton says the park, to be known at Chappypie China Time, will cater for the growing Chinese tourism market and provide a massive boost to the coast's economy. If Chinese tourists want to come here, why would they want to be in China-land? Surely they could see Chinese icons in their own country? It would be like Australian tourists going to China to see a theme-park based on Australiana! All the mock Colonial houses, transplanted gum trees, wildlife that are considered "pests" in their own homeland, and other tacky reminders of our past!
The development would provide thousands of jobs! As if this justifies it? Jobs and jobs, and tourists who don't want to be immersed in Australian natural bushland, but will see it cleared, denuded and sterilized into a comic, clique of their own country!

Subject was: Imperialism.

Australia First Party

Mr Ya Zhang Zhong 13th July 2014
Executive Official
Shanghai Municipal People’s Government OPEN LETTER
200 People Avenue Post
SHANGHAI CHINA Zip: 200003

Dear Sir,
RE: CHINESE THEME PARK PROPOSAL - WARNERVALE, AUSTRALIA

I write on behalf of members and concerned citizens, in relation to reports of your intentions of economic exploitation and political propaganda in Warnervale via a Chinese Cultural theme Park.

The concern is that the any such undertaking by foreign sources is imperialistic, undermines our integrity and independence, and is not in the interests of our Australian People.

In addition, the cultural decline from such an alien concept dumped into our Australian society, together with likely resulting deterioration to the critical eco-systems of this near pristine region, is not acceptable, We consider this a very serious matter.

It has also been reported that Messrs Doug Eaton and Robert Stokes MP, members of the political caste in Australia has been acting to facilitate this exploitation, but be under no illusion that this has any sanction of the Australian People.

Your Shanghai Government enterprise may have been further misled by other elements of our political caste that foreigners’ exploitation in our economy is welcome, however this stance emanates from Quislings, the likes of whom our Australian Peoples Movement will ensure accountability for such actions.

Your attention is drawn to understanding that imperialism in the economy of Australia in dispossessing Australians of the ownership and benefit of our own resources, is an intolerable compromise of the Commonwealth of our People.

It may also be that the Shanghai Government has been influenced by the current large scale transfer of your fellow country men into Australia, a virtual re-colonisation process that has never been sanctioned by the Australian People as it undermines and degrades our European derived civilisation. This is a matter that can now only be addressed by either their voluntary departure, or directed repatriation back to your own country.

I therefore caution against ignoring this situation in continuing with this imperialistic intent, and bring to your notice that our Australian Peoples Movement, under the full authority of our People, will enforce without redress or compensation, the eradication of such projects, as a necessity for our national self respect and independence

I therefore urge your enterprise to add to the process of mutual respect between the Australian and Chinese People by refraining from such imperialistic activity as has been reported.

To this end, I request a public announcement from you rescinding from this exploitation, which will effectively close this very important matter.

Your immediate attention will be appreciated.

Yours faithfully,

Bob Beavers
State Convenor

NSW Branch P. O. Box 593 Rockdale 2216
www.australiafirstparty.net ausfirst [ AT ] hotmail.com National Contact Line - 02 8587 0014
Australia First Party - Reclaiming Australia for Australians

Intelligence analysts in the United States had already concluded that Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down by an air-to-air missile, and that the Ukrainian government had had something to do with it. Associated Press reporter Robert Parry said "some US intelligence sources had concluded that the rebels and Russia were likely not at fault and that it appears Ukrainian government forces were to blame". Malaysian Airlines confirmed that the pilot was instructed to fly at a lower altitude by the Kiev air traffic control tower upon its entry into Ukraine airspace. Spanish air traffic controller claimed it was not an accident, that the Ukrainian authorities shot down MH17 and were trying to "make it look like an attack by pro-Russians" . His Twitter account was closed down shortly after the tragedy.

The Malaysian Airline MH17 Crash: Sixteen Central Issues Which Cannot be Ignoredon GeoEngineering Watch

Although his account has yet to be fully corroborated, some of his claims have been confirmed by Malaysian Airlines and the Russian authorities.

Despite claims to the contrary, there has not been a shred of tangible evidence to support the conclusion that Russia supplied the rebels with the BUK-M1 anti-aircraft missile system that would be needed to hit a civilian jetliner flying at 33,000 feet. How could such a conclusion be formed so early, before full investigations? Pro-Russian activists fighting the Ukrainian government said the jetliner had been shot down by a Ukrainian jet.

Looking at photo-reconstruction, one can easily tell that the SU-25 or other fighter-jet that was firing into the cockpit from the pilot's left side didn't just riddle the area surrounding the pilot with bullets, but that it then targeted-in specifically onto the pilot himself, producing at his location a huge gaping hole in the side of the plane precisely at the place where the pilot was seated.

Evidence Is Now Conclusive: Two Ukrainian Government Fighter-Jets Shot Down Malaysian Airlines MH17. It was Not a ‘Buk’ Surface to Air Missile (8/8/14) by Eric Zuesse on Global Research

July 17, 1996 at 8:19, TWA Flight 800, a Boeing 747, was cleared for takeoff at New York's JFK Airport on a flight to Paris. Twelve minutes later, TWA 800 exploded, the parts raining down in the Atlantic ten miles south of Long Island.

There were 270 eyewitnesses of the explosion of the TWA 800 who said they saw what looked like a missile strike the aircraft. The testimony of these witnesses was corroborated by radar data and the investigators ignored all these witnesses. There were three investigations into TWA800 that did not agree with the "official" story. One was by the Union for aircraft workers, one by the organization for retired air crash investigators, and one by the NTSB (National Transportation and Safety Board).

Operation Northwoods (see Wikipedia page - Ed) was a series of proposals written by Department of Defense back in the 60s, which directly advocated committing acts of terrorism within the United States, and even proposed shooting down a civilian airliner in order to blame it on Cuba, and this would be used to justify a war. These documents were declassified in 1997, and there are thousands of copies available for download on the internet (for example this one from George Washington University). On July 3, 1988 the U.S.S. Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655 killing 290 people. The TWA flight 800 tragedy occurred exactly 18 years before the MH17 tragedy, on the very same day. On July 17, 1996 TWA flight 800 was downed over Long Island.

Kiev confiscated the voice recordings of the Ukrainian air traffic controllers and is not making them available and if the US Military do not release their radar and satellite raw data, chances are slim that we get the undoctored versions.

It would be great if somebody were to write petitions (to the relevant authorities) regarding population. One would have to be to the minister who is responsible for immigration and the other would have to be to the minister who is responsible for family allowances and/or the baby bonus. No country should be offering financial incentives for people to have children (especially if they already have 2). Although a "signature" on a petition is not as effective as an individually-written letter or e-mail, if my experience is anything to go by, many activists are trying to follow so many e-mails, online articles and sources of media in general that they rarely focus on a single issue to write their own letter or e-mail. A petition enables many people to do at least something. It would be good if the petition had a "country" field so that people from outside Australia could "sign" (and that way nobody could accuse the "signers" as only being interested in protecting their own standard of living). A letter-to-the editor of a newspaper is a good idea but I cannot write to an Australian newspaper because I live outside Australia, and the letter would probably not get printed because I am "obviously" not a regular reader, and even if the letter did get printed, I would have no way of knowing because letters-to-the-editor that appear in the printed newspaper are not visible online. In 2013, I wrote to the ministers for immigration of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States of America because these countries have a high per-capita ecological impact and I am opposed to the white colonization of these countries. I would be interested to know what Australian Aborigines and Native Americans think about immigration. I am not sure who the relevant ministers for family allowances in the mentioned countries are. Immigration cannot be totally separated from breeding because people generally immigrate whilst they are of reproductive age. Humans and human activities (especially animal farming and commercial fishing) already take up more than their fair share of the land (and ocean) and they should stop spreading into and destroying the habitats of other species. I immigrated into Australia with my parents in 1970 but returned to my country of origin, Croatia, in 1992 and encourage others to do the same. I am disappointed that more people have not done the same and I condemn my family and friends for continuing to live in Australia. I regularly complain if the Croatian media speak or write positively about emigration to and life in Australia or North America. I never say "congratulations" or send a card or gift or go to the Christening when somebody has a child and I bring up population in front of relatives with more than 3 children. In addition to being a burden on ecosystems in the country that them moved to, immigrants also harm their country of origin because it is often left without scientists, engineers and medical practitioners. I also do not like the idea that "successful" people are expected to emigrate to some country with a "high" standard of living or one that is a "leader" in science and technology. People should stay in their original country and work to improve it.

"Environment" Minister Greg Hunt should be concerned about the environmental impact of big population growth, and any further "developments" in the north of Australia! What aspect of the environment has he referred to in this nonsensical response? It's too "complex" to comprehend, that human population growth and encroachments on natural resources and land is an environmental threat? With the Abbott government's anti-science stance, cut backs to scientific and climate change research, loosening of environmental laws, more prohibitions to higher education, and the trashing of climate change mitigation strategies and the World Heritage status of the Great Barrier Reef for the coal mining industry, Mr Hunt is the perfect "environment" minister for a government that is willing to sacrifice any concerns for the environment to promote businesses and profits! They assume "business as usual" and there are no limits to human growth. The revelation that the Department of Immigration is corrupt, full of incompetencies and rorts, and the numbers being allowed to cross our borders into Australia is completely congruent to social, economic and environmental concerns is quite timely. It's only MP Kelvin Thomson whose got the integrity and audaciousness to question these issues - and expose the incompetence of his colleagues. It would be actually incongruent to have an Environment Minister with integrity, environmental credentials and knowledge! It's an Orwellian title, meaning just the opposite! While we've had some very lacklustre environment Ministers in the past, exploiting loopholes to affirm corporate interests above environmental impacts, Mr Hunt must take the prize as the biggest and most blatant mis-fit!

Most of the sheep died on an afternoon of extreme heat 15 days after leaving Fremantle on board the Livestock Shipping Services Pty Ltd–operated Bader III. They were travelling to the Middle East. The "incident" was covered up and not reported within the time line, of 12 hours. This death rate was well over the accepted mortality rates, but the Department of Agriculture was not notified until after 13 days! The on board veterinarian did not supply daily health reports as required by the law. This is about as relevant as having a doctor in a death camp, or a chaplain for the slave trade! The DoA, which made no adverse findings against LSS after investigating the incidents, rejected claims from Animals Australia that it covered up the reporting delay and the lack of daily updates. No "bad news" is allowed to seep through the thick veneer of how lucrative and "safe" the live export trade really is. Nobody wants scandal! The sheep arrived dead at the Doha in Qatar. The live export trade is Australia's trade of shame, exporting animal cruelty and lies.

No wonder Japan is not taking our win at the International Court of Justice seriously! Tony Abbott didn't even mention the issue of their illegal whaling during the recent talks about free trade agreements with Japan! So much hypocrisy comes from Australia, and kangaroos are meant to be "protected" native species - just like the whales in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary. A small group of activists gathered outside the Legislative Assembly on Friday afternoon, leaving flowers and a gravestone for the animals, killed as part of controversial efforts to protect native grasslands and woodland sites which the government says are threatened by overgrazing from eastern grey kangaroos. Canberra Times: More than 1500 kangaroos shot during ACT government cull It assumes that native grasslands and woodlands are threatened by native kangaroos! It's totally ignorant and based on unfounded fears of over population of these native grazers that actually benefit the environment. It's like killing whales or other top ocean predators to protect the prey - when they actually co-exist naturally and part of the food chain! There will be an attempt to "move" bushland out of the Bush Capital to create opportunities for property developers! In an attempt to balance urban expansion with the ongoing loss of threatened species in the Bush Capital, the ACT government proposes that impacts from development on threatened species in the ACT must be offset by restoring equivalent biodiversity elsewhere, including in NSW. SMH: The Bush Capital threatens biodiversity The translocation of kangaroos was considered too risky, so they were shot! Now, it's assumed that biodiversity will automatically be moved along with these "off sets". How can threatened species be protected and also simply moved? Biodiversity offsets have attracted criticism from scientists and public interest groups around the world as a “licence to trash” biodiversity. It's simply land-clearing and declaring another existing piece of land it's replacement! It's tokenism and pure deadly economics that puts housing growth ahead of the environment. How do you "off set" a 300 year old native tree, or grasslands that have been endemic to Australia for thousands of years? Native animals and plants have taken millions of years to co-exist and be co-dependant, and it's expected magically that they will just shove-off for urban expansion. Australia's rapid human population growth should be stemmed, not that of low-impact native kangaroos!

Just watched a podcast of tonight's SBS news (http://www.sbs.com.au/news/video/313807427755/SBS-World-News-31-July-630-part-1) and made the following comment, which is pending: SBS fails to report on the huge extent of bombing houses and creation of refugees in East Ukraine by the Ukrainian (Kiev) government. Homeless refugees streaming across the border for weeks now. It should make clear that the Kiev army spokesperson alleging actions by separatists is at war with them and probably engaging in propaganda. It needs to tell Australians that the Kiev government is in disarray, with the PM having resigned, soldiers unpaid. It should tell us of the terrible atrocities committed against civilians protesting the Kiev government, beginning with the Odessa Massacre on 2nd May 2014, rivaling the worst in the world, which has hardly been reported in Australia or the US. It should tell how neo-Nazis are now in charge of most of the security in the country, with three neo-Nazis now in Parliament, outlawing political parties they disagree with. It should report how the Russians have reported the presence of Ukrainian fighter jet near the MH17, and how the cockpit shows clear signs of having been machine gunned. SBS and other Western media's reporting is so biased and simplistic that it is manufacturing tensions in this important geopolitical region. Don't you guys realise the danger of war and your responsibilities as reporters?

Again this year the ACT Government has show just how dictatorial they are. The case put before the ACTCAT was once more defeated even though the case against the slaughter was sound and backed up by eminent scientists. But how can anyone win when cases such as this are judged by people on the Government pay roll? Shane Rattenbury should get out of the Greens Party and join the Coalition. His empathy seems to be with his position and pay packet, not animals and the environment. Those who give their time to opposing this slaughter should be given the highest congratulations, unless you've been there you have no idea what it like for them and yet they do it year after year, they are truly remarkable. http://www.theage.com.au/act-news/kangaroo-cull-draws-to-an-end-on-thursday-activists-plan-memorial-on-friday-20140729-zxnjv.html

Subject was: "The link to Minister Ryan Smith will not click."

I am in the process of writing my own e-mail and it is taking longer than expected because I always get "bogged" in something that I notice along the way. I notice that the link to Minister Ryan Smith will not click; I searched his name using Google and found his e-mail. I did not "sign" the petition because the address format is for residents of Australia and I live in Croatia and would rather send an e-mail where I can use my correct details. I am not sure if there is time to send a paper letter. (I was not sure whether to write this in a comment or send a message; but when I click "contact" it refers to James).

Dear Sime,

Our apologies for the incorrectly typed mail links. That's been fixed now. I have also included the e-mail addresses in the page so that they can now be copied and pasted, as well as clicked on. (I prefer the former method.) Thank you for your post and for your concern about animal rights in Australia. Sadly, they are no not going well right now, but we are confident we can change that (although, possibly not before a few more endangered mammals become extinct).

How are animal rights in Europe these days? I trust that animals are faring better in Croatia than they are in England where there is almost no wildlife to be found. Please stay in touch. - best regards, James (aka 'Ed')

Public opinion is pathetically easy to manipulate when the print and TV news, and the Hollywood films, are made by a handful of companies with similar [even if not quite identical] agenda. The situation in Australia is much the same: Rupert Murdoch and Murdoch, R. companies compete. The public is now salivating, I'm told, at the prospect of 100 or more Australian troops going to eastern Ukraine. What is the purpose of that, please, if not to set the kindling for a conflagration with Russian separatists and possibly even Russia itself?

Before joining or supporting any environment or planning group, it's best to check their population policy, or their attitude to population growth. Ignoring the "elephant in the room" is hypocrisy and time wasting. We have enough green Pharisees as it is! At the dawn of agriculture, about 8000 B.C., the population of the world was approximately 5 million. Over the 8,000-year period up to 1 A.D. it grew to 200 million. In 1989 there were 5.2 billion people globally, today there are 7.2 billion, and we are heading towards 10.9 billion by 2100. Rapid population growth has already complicated efforts to reduce poverty and eliminate hunger in Africa, whose population of 1.1 billion is expected to more than double by 2050. The Global Footprint Network estimates that by 2030 we will need two Earths to meet our demand for renewable resources, and if everyone in the world lived like the average American, we would need at least five planets to support us. Do these organisations think that the impacts of swelling numbers of people have no impacts on the environment, ecosystem destruction, natural resources depletions and the stretching of natural systems. By 2045, the report states, the effects of climate change, coupled with global population growth -- particularly in urban areas -- will increase the severity of humanitarian crises, especially since the majority of urban areas will be vulnerable to flooding due to being on or near the coast. Organisations trying to address wildlife declines, environmental cause, humanitarian issues, and planning schemes should all have relevant population policies to be honest and effective.

25 July 2014, 15:55 Ukrainian air defence exercise might be behind MH17 crash The Malaysian Airlines MH17 that crashed in southeast Ukraine could have been brought down by an accidental launch of a missile by Ukrainian forces during an anti-aircraft exercise, Russia's RIA Novosti agency reported, citing an unnamed source in the Ukrainian defence ministry.*** “On July 17 the commanding officer of 156th Anti-Aircraft Regiment was instructed to conduct a training exercise of ground troops stationed near Donetsk, which involved deploying the troops, and carrying out a routine tracking and destroying of targets with the Buk-M1 missile,” the source said. The source added that the actual launch of the missiles was not intended. Two Sukhoi Su-25 combat aircraft participated in the exercise. It is likely that at some point, the routes of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 and a Su-25 jet overlapped. Despite flying at different levels, they became a single dot on the radar of the missile system. Of the two, the system automatically chose a larger target. The reasons for the actual missile launch - if indeed it did occur - are under investigation. Practical exercises with the Buk missiles have been banned since 2001, when a Russian Tu-154 passenger airplane en route from Novosibirsk to Tel Aviv was shot down by the Ukrainian military. Impartial investigation At the moment, an international team of 24 experts is investigating the plane crash. The B777-200 aircraft had a clean maintenance record and was last checked on July 11 at Malaysia Airlines’ hangar at Kuala Lumpur International Airport. Russia insists on an impartial, independent and open international investigation under the auspices of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) into the crash of MH17. “It is necessary to ensure an absolutely impartial, independent and open international investigation under the auspices of the ICAO,” said Andrei Kelin, Russia's Ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), quoted on Russia's Foreign Ministry website on Friday. “Total transparency should eliminate any possibility of fraud and falsification,” he said.“Unfortunately we have reasons to be concerned.” Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 heading from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur crashed on July 17 near the city of Donetsk in Ukraine, killing all 298 people on board. Kiev placed the blame on pro-independence fighters in eastern Ukraine for bringing the plane down, but the rebels insisted they did not have the means to hit an aircraft flying at 32,000 feet. (RIA Novosti, ITAR TASS, VoR)

Date: July 24, 2014 Source: University of California - Berkeley [snip] Global decline of wildlife populations is driving increases in violent conflicts, organized crime and child labor around the world, according to a policy paper led by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley. The authors call for biologists to join forces with experts such as economists, political scientists, criminologists, public health officials and international development specialists to collectively tackle a complex challenge. The paper, to be published Thursday, July 24, in the journal Science, highlights how losses of food and employment from wildlife decline cause increases in human trafficking and other crime, as well as foster political instability. "This paper is about recognizing wildlife decline as a source of social conflict rather than a symptom," said lead author Justin Brashares, associate professor of ecology and conservation at UC Berkeley's Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management. [[[Aren't both "wildlife decline" and "social conflict" symptoms of population overshoot?]]] "Billions of people rely directly and indirectly on wild sources of meat for income and sustenance, and this resource is declining. It's not surprising that the loss of this critical piece of human livelihoods has huge social consequences. Yet, both conservation and political science have generally overlooked these fundamental connections."

This article destroys its own credibility by using the word "Nazi" ad infinitum. That term is 70 years old. Can people not think of anything new to label political opponents? I mean, the original hippies that used it are in nursing homes now. "Nazi" is used so often to describe people against global ethnic homogenisation, its no wonder that young people end up adopting Nazi imagery as means of saying "F$%# You" to the system. Is the tail wagging the dog here? Is the mainstream media and popular repetition of the "Nazi" theme causing young people to take it up in opposition to the globalist ideals of that media? I would hazard a guess it does, just how people became "satanists" to rebel against Christian moral tightness. Oh, and of course the russian media would say this!

Editorial comment: MikeP clearly has either not read the article or, if he has, has chosen not to respond to the arguments and evidence presented in this article. Whatever may be the case, nothing has been added to the discussion. Those who wish to know the truth and find out who is trying to conduct a proper investigation into the MH17 tragedy and who is trying to prevent a proper investigation and protect the guilty will find it on Global Research, VoltaireNet, Paul Craig Roberts, Land Destroyer and RT and here, on Candobetter. - Ed

What an incredible article that is breath taking in how nonsensical you can be when you are blinded by partisanship.

Who do you think the pro Russian movement in Ukraine is funded by which countries weapons do they use? They are well organised and trained. They may well have a perfectly good cause as most of East Ukraine is ethnically Russian and they have been part of Russia for most of the. last six centuries but Russia pulls the strings and runs the strategies. They fired at what they believed was a Ukrainian army Transport with a very sophisticated major army weapon that could knock a plane out of the sky at 30,000 feet That is blindingly obvious. That is was a stupid mistake is blindingly obvious and brought down worldwide opprobrium on Putin is axiomatic they stuffed up pure and simple. It's a public relations disaster for Putin to be sure so like all such disasters you spin to cover up your miss deeds. Blaming anyone but the obvious idiots who did it is madness. But then I suspect you might recognise that little problem.

Seeing as the Malaysian Air 777 was transiting from west to east, high over the border between the two rivals, may have classified the aircraft as a Ukrainian military aircraft? A friendly fire incident was quite possible if airliners continued to use routes over the troubled region.

If rebel forces were either given these surface to air missile systems from Russia, or one similar such as the more modern SA-11/17 "Buk" — it is fairly clear Russia has backed these forces — or at least initially, with material and training, then it would also implicate Russia in this tragic event.

it is quite possible that Russia's air defense apparatus along the border with Ukraine was on high-alert as it may have already shot down two Ukrainian aircraft. Ukrainian officials believe Russian separatists fired a ground-to-air BUK missile that downed the plane, but in an interview with TIME, separatists leaders claimed they had nothing to do with the incident.

What was a passenger plane doing anywhere near the area? As it turns out, aviation authorities had addressed the Ukraine situation and taken precautions. They just didn’t think non-combatant planes flying at 33,000 feet were at risk. Flight restrictions often apply only under certain altitudes. Planes are most exposed to ground-level threats when they’re taking off and landing—that’s when they’re within range of small arms and shoulder-mounted anti-aircraft missiles.

Malaysia Airlines had flown this route repeatedly over the past several weeks without incident, as had other carriers.
The SA-11 "Buk" is designed to engage military aircraft and missiles at altitudes of up to 72,000ft. It is in service with the Russian and Ukrainian armed forces, as well as other forces around the world.

Reports from Ukraine suggested a BUK had been smuggled in the dead of night into Russia soon after the plane was blasted out of the sky on Thursday last week.

It came after images were released of a launcher rumbling through Torez, held by pro-Russian separatists, just two hours before the Malaysia Airlines flight was shot down.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2699170/Is-BUK-missile-launcher-shot-MH17-smuggled-Russia-Motorist-captures-military-truck-carrying-BUK-M1-border-town.html#ixzz383f42eoF

Malaysia is reeling from the second tragedy to hit its national airline in less than five months. Russia Today cites a report from the Interfax News Agency quoting unnamed sources who claim the doomed flight had a similar path as a plane carrying Russian President Vladimir Putin.0 Some relatives of those on board the MH370 accused the airline of engaging in a cover-up, and there have been persistent conspiracy theories over the fate of the plane, including that it might have been shot down. In an incident still shrouded in controversy and conspiracy theories, a Korean Airlines flight 007, flying from Alaska to Seoul in South Korea, was shot down by a Russian fighter on September 1 1983. The aircraft came down at sea, killing all 269 people on board. Eighteen years ago today, TWA Flight 800 exploded over the Atlantic Ocean near on July 17, 1996. There were no survivors. Government investigators concluded the plane was brought down not by a missile but by a spark in one of the plane’s fuel tanks. Aircraft wreckage that was inconsistent with a centre fuel tank explosion. In addition, they allege a conspiracy by the NTSB and FBI to destroy and cover-up evidence. While the Crimea was regarded as too dangerous to fly over because of military aircraft movements, eastern Ukraine was not deemed off-limits even though two Ukrainian military aircraft were shot down this week. Flight MH17, a Boeing 777, first flew on 7-17-97 and crashed 17 years later, on 7-17-14. There is also the mystery of Malaysia Airline Flight 653, which crashed on Dec. 4, 1977, after a reported hijacking, the details of which are still unknown. The tragedy of modern airline travel is that they are easy targets for mass killings, political cover-ups, and conspiracy theories. Could this mean the end of safe international air travel?

Flitting, darting, flashing blue green tail Brushing, hopping , stares with beady eye Bright eye like pin head sees me stopped on asphalt path Bird on little patch of bush is on display She makes the best of this mean reserve, Surrounded by the constant roar of, eager homeward bound traffic Little wren, it could be worse, At least this meagre noisy space is officially yours

When people talk about "Free Markets", they are talking about a dogma. They say nothing should impinge upon the markets, not even the market itself! Consider a democratic society (or any society which has some form of governance for the benefit of the people) which regulates the market to ensure that excesses don't hurt the society. According to the dogmatists, you shouldn't intervene or regulate, at all. Not even if those who comprise the market want to use their systems of government to restrain excess or prevent abuse. But surely, if the people who partake choose particular restrictions (such as trade barriers) for their benefit, that is the market's wishes? This is where the dogmatism comes in. The dogma says that any intervention is bad, and government intervention is bad, so this is taken as an absolute. As a result, if the people who participate in the economic market want a particular regulation (such as lowering skilled migration), it is, due to their dogma, redefined as not being part of the market at work, and therefore ignored and vilified. As a result, peoples ownership over their own systems is denied. If the people have no choice as to certain market actions which affect them, how can the market be claimed to be free and representing the aggregate will of the people? I do believe a market system is the best one (I consider this question settled), though don't assume this means individualism. The "economic unit" may be the family or tribe (ie, communalism and shared property with the tribe, but trade with other tribes). I'm not sure whether Abbott, Hockey and all the other dregs of humanity which calls itself the Liberal Party operate according to an ideology, or naked self interest for their plutocratic mates. I suspect a bit of both, but probably more the latter. I think what is happening is our standard of living, and social progression is being liquidated on the market for cash for a few to pocket. Hockey's comments about the end of the age of entitlement is just to ensure people accept this, as people don't realise their way of life is being sold, or are too blindsided with they money they've made selling our way of life (through high property prices) to bother weighing things up.

I have observed unions opposing things like the 457 Visa worker program, but I have also noted that the same unions are still beholden to appropriating misinformation from the radical left. The CFMEU in Brisbane attacked Australia First actvists in Brisbane, due to the incorrect belief that AF supported Campbell Newmans laws on associations, attacked demonstrators at the behest of the far left who gave them this information(I believe Andy Slackbastard?). Many CFMEU members did not support this action and I'm reasonably confident that this action was not representative of the union, but it still happened, which is odd. Why does an organisation which represents working people have such ties? But I've heard far left radicals in the past tell me about how they can get, or have gotten, the unions to do "dirty work" against their political enemies. While the comment was about the MUA, there do appear to be ties between the upper echelons of the union movement and internationalists, and one has to look closely at whats actually going on. Union members need to take a closer look at their leadership.

Australia First Party NATIONAL WATTLE DAY 1st September 1st September, was the date chosen by our earlier generations to be an occasion "primarily to inspire and stimulate an Australian national sentiment". It was felt this could be accomplished by embracing such sentiment in a native flower, and uniting as a people on the day to do it honour. The Wattle had been selected as the most suitable of our native flora because of its accessibility, and occurring throughout the length and breadth of our continent. In addition, it was desired that the Wattle Blossom, as the Australian National Flower, should be worn, and its cultivation and display encouraged. The call was made to "all citizens to foster, protect and cherish the Wattle; for a sacred charge to every Australian to plant it in all parks, reserves, and pleasure grounds and also private gardens, that it might become a source of pilgrimage in blossom time. Also to rouse the young people's sense of chivalry, and make the Wattle synonymous with Australia's honour." Wattle Day was first celebrated in Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney in 1910, promoted by the citizens who had formed the Wattle Day League. The Sydney Morning Herald editorial about the Day stated "To the Native Australian the wattle stands for home, country, kindred, sunshine and love - every instinct that the heart deeply enshrines". The Wattle Day League was truly a patriotic society, in the vein of the Australian Natives Association, and promoted "Australia First" not only in our national values, but in a sense directly linked to the preservation and appreciation of the uniqueness of the flora of our land. This attitude for patriotic sentiment included an "Order of the Wattle Blossom" award for contribution to our Australian society, and for the day to give recognition to Australian manufacturers and Australian productions. The theme suggested from the Golden Wattle was a representation:- "the golden fleece - the wool; the golden green - the wheat; the golden sunshine - the golden hearts of the Australian people". In addition, there was a call for the three cheers of hip hip hooray, of Danish/Polish origin, to be replaced by an Australian cry of three COO-EE'S, our then well known bush call. Sadly, this developing folkloric celebration was later submerged by "Imperial and Empire" type politicians, who lacked interest in Australian sentiment in practical terms, and the day has largely passed into memory. Australia since WWII has seen further decline of our Aussie cultural values due to “Americana” and crass consumerism influences accompanying the extensive buy out of our natural and productive wealth by American/multinational corporations monopolising for their Globalist market. In this present era, Australia hating multiculturalists’ programmes, designed to inflict a culturally deficient, low grade multiracial society, of no common heritage or real values, are being used to assail our Aussie culture and to break down the community bond that makes an Australian - that being European derived and of our Native Soil. The Asian Graveyard Century is their goal! History shows that no nation can endure the destruction of its identity and culture, as is occurring via the plagues of Third World peoples and cultures now being dumped into Australia by Globalisers, and their paid politicians. Regime change is now necessary for our Australia to survive! In Wattle Day, Aussies have the great legacy of an inheritance which is uniquely Australian. It flies in the face of multicultists and must be reclaimed as an essence of our Australian culture. Australia First Party calls on all fairdinkum Australians to join with our Australian Peoples Movement in ensuring a High Culture for our people, and where the spirit of Wattle Day is enshrined. Celebrate National Wattle Day as an expression of our Aussie heritage; of environmental awareness/ecological sustainability; genuine patriotism and sentiment in support of a modern independent nation, with its own strategic and self-sufficient industry base where wealth is created, owned and shared by Australians. TO PARTICIPATE:- Wear a sprig of Wattle; plant a Wattle shrub in your garden; rub hands on the bark of a Wattle tree, and reflect on the unique eco-diversity of our Southern Land; read some verse of The Banjo or Henry Lawson; play a few Larrikins songs; dwell on our cultural heritage with thanks to our earlier generations. And support our Australian Peoples Movement. The Australia First Party is committed to the advancement of Australia's traditional culture and identity, founded on economic, political and cultural independence. If you don’t fight - you lose! But now that we have made the land And we must sing a rebel song A garden full of promise, And join in rebel chorus. Old Greed must crook 'is dirty hand We'll make the tyrants feel the sting And come to take it from us. O' those that they would throttle; So we must fly a rebel flag, They needn't say the fault is ours, As others did before us If blood should stain the wattle! Henry Lawson Australia First Party www.australiafirstparty.net. email: ausfirst [ AT ] hotmail.com National Contact Line 02 85870014 AUSTRALIA FIRST PARTY - RECLAIMING AUSTRALIA FOR AUSTRALIANS