Post-American Presidency: "Palestinian" Jihad Flag to Fly at the UN
Technorati Tags: Palestine,Nazi’s,Hussein Obama,Nazi’s Rule,Religion of Peace,Islam,Islamic Terrorism,Muslim Terrorists
An American, Australian ,Israeli, British "Judeo Christian Friendly " blog.
Anthropogenic Global Warming SCAM
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Friday, July 23, 2010
Australia: Labor’s SECRET Internet Censorship / Snoop LAWS on hold until after August 2010 Federal election “……disclosure of the document uncensored "could be misleading to the public and cause confusion and premature and unnecessary debate".
Australia 2010 :Australia’s “Progressive” Union funded, Australian Labor Party, making sure Australians are protected from information and “unnecessary debate” lest Australians become confused and misled.
No Minister: 90% of web snoop document censored to stop 'premature unnecessary debate'
SMH
BEN GRUBB
July 23, 2010 - 1:32PM
From black list to blacked out. Documents on plans to store web surfing data are heavily censored due to the possibility of 'premature and unnecessary debate'.
The federal government has censored approximately 90 per cent of a secret document outlining its controversial plans to snoop on Australians' web surfing, obtained under freedom of information (FoI) laws, out of fear the document could cause "premature unnecessary debate".
The government has been consulting with the internet industry over the proposal, which would require ISPs to store certain internet activities of all Australians - regardless of whether they have been suspected of wrongdoing - for law-enforcement agencies to access.
All parties to the consultations have been sworn to secrecy.
Industry sources have claimed that the controversial regime could go as far as collecting the individual web browsing history of every Australian internet user, a claim denied by the spokesman for Attorney-General Robert McClelland.
The exact details of the web browsing data the government wants ISPs to collect are contained in the document released to this website under FoI.
The document was handed out to the industry during a secret briefing it held with ISPs in March.
But from the censored document released, it is impossible to know how far the government is planning to take the policy.
The government is hiding the plans from the public and it appears to want to move quickly on industry consultation, asking for participants to respond within only one month after it had held the briefings.
The Attorney-General's Department legal officer, FoI and Privacy Section, Claudia Hernandez, wrote in her decision in releasing the highly censored document that the release of some sections of it "may lead to premature unnecessary debate and could potentially prejudice and impede government decision making".
Hernandez said that the material in question related to information the department was "currently weighing up and evaluating in relation to competing considerations that may have a bearing on a particular course of action or decision".
"More specifically, it is information concerning the development of government policy which has not been finalised, and there is a strong possibility that the policy will be amended prior to public consultation," she wrote.
Further, she said that although she had acknowledged the public's right to "participate in and influence the processes of government decision making and policy formulation ... the premature release of the proposal could, more than likely, create a confusing and misleading impression".
"In addition, as the matters are not settled and proposed recommendations may not necessarily be adopted, release of such documents would not make a valuable contribution to public debate."
Hernandez went further to say that she considered disclosure of the document uncensored "could be misleading to the public and cause confusion and premature and unnecessary debate".
"In my opinion, the public interest factors in favour of release are outweighed by those against," Hernandez said.
The "data retention regime" the government is proposing to implement is similar to that adopted by the European Union after terrorist attacks several years ago.
Greens Communications spokesman Scott Ludlam said the excuse not to release the proposal in full was "extraordinary". Since finding out about the scheme, he has launched a Senate inquiry into it and other issues.
"The idea that its release could cause 'premature' or 'unnecessary' debate is not going to go down well with the thousands of people who have been alarmed by the direction that government is taking," he said in a telephone interview.
"I would really like to know what the government is hiding in this proposal," he said, adding that he hoped that the Attorney-General's Department would be "more forthcoming" about the proposal in the senate inquiry into privacy he pushed for in June.
Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, George Brandis, said the government’s decision to censor the documented showed ‘‘how truly Orwellian this government has become".
"To refuse disclosure of material that had already been circulated among stakeholders, on an issue of intense current political debate on the ground that it might provide unnecessary discussion, shows that the Gillard government has become beyond satire," Brandis said.
Online users' lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia spokesman Colin Jacobs said what was released was "a joke".
"We have to assume the worse," he said. "And that is that the government has been badgering the telcos with very aggressive demands that should worry everybody."
Jacobs said that the onus was now on government to "explain what data they need, what problem it solves and, just as importantly, why it can't be done in an open process".
"The more sensitive the process and the data they want, the more transparent the government needs to be about why it wants that data," he said. "Nobody could argue that public consultation ... would somehow help criminals," he added.
"We have to turn the age-old question back on the government: if you don’t have anything to hide, then you shouldn't be worried about people having insight into the consultation.
"This is a very sensitive and important issue. It raises huge questions about privacy, data security and the burden of increased costs to smaller internet service providers. What really needs to be debated is what particular information they want, because that's where the privacy issue rears its ugly head," he said.
According to one internet industry source, the release of the highly censored document was "illustrative of government's approach to things where they don't want people to know what they're thinking in advance of them getting it ready to package for public consumption".
"And that’s worrying."
The Attorney-General's spokesman declined to comment, referring comment to the department. The department said it had "nothing to add" to the FOI letter it provided.
No Minister: 90% of web snoop document censored to stop 'premature unnecessary debate'
SMH
BEN GRUBB
July 23, 2010 - 1:32PM
From black list to blacked out. Documents on plans to store web surfing data are heavily censored due to the possibility of 'premature and unnecessary debate'.
The federal government has censored approximately 90 per cent of a secret document outlining its controversial plans to snoop on Australians' web surfing, obtained under freedom of information (FoI) laws, out of fear the document could cause "premature unnecessary debate".
The government has been consulting with the internet industry over the proposal, which would require ISPs to store certain internet activities of all Australians - regardless of whether they have been suspected of wrongdoing - for law-enforcement agencies to access.
All parties to the consultations have been sworn to secrecy.
Industry sources have claimed that the controversial regime could go as far as collecting the individual web browsing history of every Australian internet user, a claim denied by the spokesman for Attorney-General Robert McClelland.
The exact details of the web browsing data the government wants ISPs to collect are contained in the document released to this website under FoI.
The document was handed out to the industry during a secret briefing it held with ISPs in March.
But from the censored document released, it is impossible to know how far the government is planning to take the policy.
The government is hiding the plans from the public and it appears to want to move quickly on industry consultation, asking for participants to respond within only one month after it had held the briefings.
The Attorney-General's Department legal officer, FoI and Privacy Section, Claudia Hernandez, wrote in her decision in releasing the highly censored document that the release of some sections of it "may lead to premature unnecessary debate and could potentially prejudice and impede government decision making".
Hernandez said that the material in question related to information the department was "currently weighing up and evaluating in relation to competing considerations that may have a bearing on a particular course of action or decision".
"More specifically, it is information concerning the development of government policy which has not been finalised, and there is a strong possibility that the policy will be amended prior to public consultation," she wrote.
Further, she said that although she had acknowledged the public's right to "participate in and influence the processes of government decision making and policy formulation ... the premature release of the proposal could, more than likely, create a confusing and misleading impression".
"In addition, as the matters are not settled and proposed recommendations may not necessarily be adopted, release of such documents would not make a valuable contribution to public debate."
Hernandez went further to say that she considered disclosure of the document uncensored "could be misleading to the public and cause confusion and premature and unnecessary debate".
"In my opinion, the public interest factors in favour of release are outweighed by those against," Hernandez said.
The "data retention regime" the government is proposing to implement is similar to that adopted by the European Union after terrorist attacks several years ago. Greens Communications spokesman Scott Ludlam said the excuse not to release the proposal in full was "extraordinary". Since finding out about the scheme, he has launched a Senate inquiry into it and other issues.
"The idea that its release could cause 'premature' or 'unnecessary' debate is not going to go down well with the thousands of people who have been alarmed by the direction that government is taking," he said in a telephone interview.
"I would really like to know what the government is hiding in this proposal," he said, adding that he hoped that the Attorney-General's Department would be "more forthcoming" about the proposal in the senate inquiry into privacy he pushed for in June.
Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, George Brandis, said the government’s decision to censor the documented showed ‘‘how truly Orwellian this government has become".
"To refuse disclosure of material that had already been circulated among stakeholders, on an issue of intense current political debate on the ground that it might provide unnecessary discussion, shows that the Gillard government has become beyond satire," Brandis said.
Online users' lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia spokesman Colin Jacobs said what was released was "a joke".
"We have to assume the worse," he said. "And that is that the government has been badgering the telcos with very aggressive demands that should worry everybody."
Jacobs said that the onus was now on government to "explain what data they need, what problem it solves and, just as importantly, why it can't be done in an open process".
"The more sensitive the process and the data they want, the more transparent the government needs to be about why it wants that data," he said. "Nobody could argue that public consultation ... would somehow help criminals," he added.
"We have to turn the age-old question back on the government: if you don’t have anything to hide, then you shouldn't be worried about people having insight into the consultation.
"This is a very sensitive and important issue. It raises huge questions about privacy, data security and the burden of increased costs to smaller internet service providers. What really needs to be debated is what particular information they want, because that's where the privacy issue rears its ugly head," he said.
According to one internet industry source, the release of the highly censored document was "illustrative of government's approach to things where they don't want people to know what they're thinking in advance of them getting it ready to package for public consumption".
"And that’s worrying."
The Attorney-General's spokesman declined to comment, referring comment to the department. The department said it had "nothing to add" to the FOI letter it provided.
Australian Federal Election: Don’t Let Her off the Hook.
Australia: Comrade Lu Kewen’s aka. Kevin Rudd’s Internet censorship almost complete
Lu Kewens’ internet censorship plans “unworkable” says Google
Rudd’s Australia : Australian Labor Party to require ISP’s to keep records of customers web surfing, in the name of “Fresh Thinking” of course
Australian Labor Party Icon and role model orders arrest of TV station owner…
Australian Labor Party’s best friend turns out the lights in Venezuela “Dear President Chávez, We, the undersigned citizens of Australia, would like to extend a warm invitation for you to visit our country…………”Rudds’ Australia: Iran,Australia and North Korea a threat to internet via censorship regulation
Rudd’s Australia: Internet censorship anti Rudd Labor Facebook site shut downAmericans BEWARE Australian internet to be CENSORED by Australian Labor Party
Australia:Former Labor leader Mark Latham says Liberal Party leader Tony Abbott more honest than Labor PM Julia Gillard
Latham attacks Gillard as fraud
Brendan Nicholson
The Australian
July 22, 2010 12:00AM
FORMER Labor leader Mark Latham last night exploded out of retirement to launch a scathing attack on the government.
He declared Julia Gillard's population policy was a "fraud of the worst order" and her education revolution had achieved nothing.
And Mr Latham suggested that Tony Abbott was more honest than the Prime Minister, a one-time friend of his. Mr Latham told Sky News that Ms Gillard was running a phony population campaign while saying she opposed the idea of a big Australia.
"She's been going on about sustainable population growth," Mr Latham said. "That's been her mantra for the past three or four days. It's an issue that's come out of the blue and she's defining her prime ministership around it.
"Today she said it's not an immigration debate. Where does she think all these people have been coming from in western Sydney? We grow them in our back garden? I mean, for every four people who move to Sydney from other parts of Australia, seven move to Sydney from overseas."
Mr Latham, the former MP for the southwestern Sydney seat of Werriwa, said any serious debate about population had to be about immigration.
"If it's not an immigration debate, it's no debate," he said.
"And I'll tell you what it is, it's a fraud. It's an attempt to con people in western Sydney that she's going to do something about congestion. And I think some smartie in the Labor Party worked out that sending out signals on population would be a proxy for the asylum-seeker and climate change debates. It's clever politics. But it's a fraud . . . of the worst order."
Mr Latham also supports putting a stop to Sydney's expansion and he said the way to do that was to stop moving more people into the western suburbs. He said that as a resident of western Sydney for 45 years, he was aware it was "absolutely chock-a-block".
He also attacked the education achievements at the core of Ms Gillard's push for re-election, saying he's seen no evidence of any education revolution.
Mr Latham then attacked the government's health policy, saying he did not see how putting a different set of bureaucrats in charge of hospital funding would produce a revolutionary result.
He said Ms Gillard was a changed person and suggested Mr Abbott was more honest. "She used to be fairly free-wheeling and open about things," he said.
"She has mastered the art of narrowness in public life."
Brendan Nicholson
The Australian
July 22, 2010 12:00AM
FORMER Labor leader Mark Latham last night exploded out of retirement to launch a scathing attack on the government.
He declared Julia Gillard's population policy was a "fraud of the worst order" and her education revolution had achieved nothing.
And Mr Latham suggested that Tony Abbott was more honest than the Prime Minister, a one-time friend of his. Mr Latham told Sky News that Ms Gillard was running a phony population campaign while saying she opposed the idea of a big Australia.
"She's been going on about sustainable population growth," Mr Latham said. "That's been her mantra for the past three or four days. It's an issue that's come out of the blue and she's defining her prime ministership around it.
"Today she said it's not an immigration debate. Where does she think all these people have been coming from in western Sydney? We grow them in our back garden? I mean, for every four people who move to Sydney from other parts of Australia, seven move to Sydney from overseas."
Mr Latham, the former MP for the southwestern Sydney seat of Werriwa, said any serious debate about population had to be about immigration.
"If it's not an immigration debate, it's no debate," he said.
"And I'll tell you what it is, it's a fraud. It's an attempt to con people in western Sydney that she's going to do something about congestion. And I think some smartie in the Labor Party worked out that sending out signals on population would be a proxy for the asylum-seeker and climate change debates. It's clever politics. But it's a fraud . . . of the worst order."
Mr Latham also supports putting a stop to Sydney's expansion and he said the way to do that was to stop moving more people into the western suburbs. He said that as a resident of western Sydney for 45 years, he was aware it was "absolutely chock-a-block".
He also attacked the education achievements at the core of Ms Gillard's push for re-election, saying he's seen no evidence of any education revolution.
Mr Latham then attacked the government's health policy, saying he did not see how putting a different set of bureaucrats in charge of hospital funding would produce a revolutionary result.
He said Ms Gillard was a changed person and suggested Mr Abbott was more honest. "She used to be fairly free-wheeling and open about things," he said.
"She has mastered the art of narrowness in public life."
Australian Federal Election: Don’t Let Her off the Hook.
Part 1.
Pt.2
Pt.3
Don't let her off the hook
The Australian
July 21, 2010 12:00AM
The Prime Minister needs far greater media scrutiny
WEEK one of the campaign and Julia Gillard is getting away scot-free in some sections of the press. The Labor leader is doing everything by the book. She's the perfect 
In March, editor-at-large Paul Kelly wrote about the progressive media's problems in reporting on Tony Abbott, whose "muscular, conservative Christianity" they found offensive. Rather than look at his policies, a Four Corners profile screened at that time focused on the Opposition Leader's religion, reflecting the ABC's dominant ideological mindset that Christianity is a "negative, repressive factor".
One might have thought, given her atheism, that these same journalists would have found it easier to focus on the things that really matter about Ms Gillard. One might have expected that, given she has been in the job for less than four weeks, the Prime Minister would have been under close scrutiny, her policies dissected along with her makeup. Not so. From day one when The Sun-Herald virtually endorsed Ms Gillard on its front page, they have failed to apply the basic rules of reporting to Labor's campaign.
There is no disputing that Mr Abbott has made it easy with his gaffe over industrial relations and his lacklustre start to the campaign. But the problem runs deeper, with the assumption that the conservative side of politics is fair game, while Labor needs not to be challenged too hard.This is not a new phenomenon. Throughout Kevin Rudd's ascendancy and his government, the ABC and Fairfax papers failed to nail his true character or understand what a mess he was in -- inside the party and in the electorate. They ignored the debacles over pink batts and the Building the Education Revolution. They swallowed the idiocy of alcopops, Grocery Choice and Fuel Watch. In short, they had no idea there was trouble at mill.
Now Ms Gillard is positioned as the new broom sweeping away the Rudd detritus. Except that since 2007 she was deputy prime minister and a member of the Kitchen Cabinet, as responsible as Mr Rudd for government decisions. Indeed, it was Ms Gillard who urged the backflip on the emissions trading scheme that helped undo Mr Rudd.
Yet her beliefs, political vision and policies are not being tested by many in the media.
Letting the Prime Minister off the hook does the nation a great disservice. We need to know what she -- and her government -- really stand for. We need to get behind Ms Gillard's carapace of genial certainty and start asking the tough questions about her policies and record. The past few days have shown both leaders are happy to focus on the diminishing horizon of reform. As Alan Mitchell wrote in The Financial Review this week, the Prime Minister is under pressure to mimic the example of former NSW premier Bob Carr and do "as little as possible for as long as possible". It is not good enough, but without more scrutiny, the Prime Minister might just get away with it. Mark Scott at the ABC and Brian McCarthy at Fairfax need to pick up the phone and tell their editors to muscle up and scrutinise both sides of politics.
Australia: The Un Holy Alliance of Gillard and Brown, Brown and Gillard preparing the road to Serfdom for Australians
Who IS Madame / Comrade Julia Gillard ?
Australia: Australian Union (ACTU) Appointed Prime Minister,Madame Gillard and her Union Financiers and Bankers Commit to Internet Filter to protect Australians from Counter Revolutionary thoughts.
Australia: What Madame Gillard did and said she thought BEFORE she was appointed Prime Minister of Australia by the Union Movement & NSW Labor’s Political ASSASSINS on June 24 2010
Australia: Comrade Lu Kewen’s aka. Kevin Rudd’s Internet censorship almost complete
Lu Kewens’ internet censorship plans “unworkable” says Google
Rudd’s Australia : Australian Labor Party to require ISP’s to keep records of customers web surfing, in the name of “Fresh Thinking” of course
Australian Labor Party Icon and role model orders arrest of TV station owner…
Rudds’ Australia: Iran,Australia and North Korea a threat to internet via censorship regulation
Rudd’s Australia: Internet censorship anti Rudd Labor Facebook site shut down
Americans BEWARE Australian internet to be CENSORED by Australian Labor Party
Australia: What Madame Gillard did and said she thought BEFORE she was appointed Prime Minister of Australia by the Union Movement & NSW Labor’s Political ASSASSINS on June 24 2010
Madame Julia’s Progress Australia “looking forward” EVERY Australian school student would be taught positive things about Islam and Muslims
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Two Faces of Australia :The Finest and the Multicultural.
To think that this courageous young man dies fighting in Afghanistan whilst the Union funded Australian Labor Party is allowing the cowards that run away from their own country to colonize Australia is too obscene to contemplate
And this Garbage (Islanders) fly’s / floats into Australia un challenged and takes over our suburbs and streets at will.
Technorati Tags: Multiculturalism,Australia,Afghanistan,Australians at War,Australia's Finest,Pvt.Nathan Bewes
Americans be warned !!! Australia: Nationalised Health Medi DONT Care!!
The Best Third World health care system in the First World, forty years of socialised medicine has given Australians this disgusting mess, they call “FREE Health Care” Look out America
Australia: The Un Holy Alliance of Gillard and Brown, Brown and Gillard preparing the road to Serfdom for Australians
Devils inside hidden Green agenda
By Andrew Bolt
The Daily Telegraph 
July 21, 2010
ONE election result is already clear - and makes this debate about Tony Abbott's "secret" plans even more brainless.
Wake up, people. The Greens will have the balance of power in the Senate.
Labor sealed that deal when it agreed to swap preferences with a party which its wiser heads know would devastate the economy if it could.
That's politics, I guess.
Winning is all, and to hell with the national interest. But how grotesquely irresponsible?
Labor is helping into power a party which demands we scrap our power stations and close industries that earn us at least $60 billion a year.
Oh, and it wants us all to have more holidays, because hard work and making money really sucks.
Some 12 per cent of voters say this is just the party for them, and even Labor now says it's the best of the rest.
Yes, that really is how infantile our society, and our politics especially, has become.
But Labor, whose primary vote has been unusually low, says this only because it badly needs Greens preferences. In exchange, it's agreed to help the Greens save its own five Senate seats - and to probably win a couple more.
It was already inevitable Labor would win back some Senate seats from the Coalition.
But this deal also kisses goodbye to Family First Senator Steve Fielding, who lucked his seat in 2004 when Labor absentmindedly preferenced him but will lose it now Labor is steering votes to the Greens.
That will be all it takes. After this election, no government will be able to pass a law against the opposition's objection without the support of the Greens, and Greens alone.
Never has this party had such a great chance to inflict on us policies that many voters treat as position statements, rather than a deliberate manifesto for the deindustrialisation of our economy and the tribalising of our society.
This now is the real issue: How much of our future did Labor sell off just to get these Greens' preferences?
Never mind this week's scare campaign about what workplace laws Abbott might secretly plan. The hapless schmuck couldn't get them through a Greens-Labor Senate even if he wanted to.
No, what really needs debate is what the Greens might now demand from a Gillard Government in exchange for its vote. And that, in turn, needs journalists especially to take seriously this party's policies.
The Greens' manifesto is not written down for a joke. It is the serious work of ideological warriors hiding behind Bob Brown's amiable front.
Vote Greens in this election and you won't get cuddlier koalas, bigger hugs and cleaner rivers. In fact, you'll be voting to "transition from coal exports", which means ending a trade worth $55 billion a year .
You'll be voting to end "the mining and export of uranium", worth $900 billion a year. You'll be demanding farmers "remove as far as possible" all GM crops, which includes cotton worth about $1.3 billion a year.
You will be voting to close down many other industries, including export of woodchips from old-growth forests, certain kinds of fishing, oil and mineral exploration in wildernesses, and new coal mines.
You'll even be voting to close the Lucas Heights nuclear facility, even though it actually produces treatments for cancer.
In fact, you'll be voting for policies deliberately intended to make us poorer. Less industrialised. Or as the Greens' policy puts it, for a "reduction of Australia's use of natural resources to a level that is sustainable and socially just".
Maybe you think it won't matter if a few industries get shut. Maybe you really are that stupid. But you haven't heard the rest of the Greens' policies yet, have you?
You see, the Greens also plan to shut coal power stations that produce 80 per cent of our electricity. They not only "oppose the establishment of new coal-fired power stations" - claiming they make the planet dangerously hot - but intend to ban new coal supplies for those we already have. And they'll hit power stations with a new tax to make electricity too expensive for you.
Do you have any idea how many businesses would be driven broke by this Green frolic? How many hundreds of thousands of jobs would be lost?
If you think the Greens must have alternative power sources in mind, you're dreaming.
The Greens want to keep Labor's ban on nuclear power. They even want to scrap government-funded research into carbon capture.
So consider. If the Greens get their way we'll have huge industries banned, businesses driven broke and power prices driven through the roof, with not enough electricity for what industries will be left.
So, with our income slashed to ribbons, what do the Greens propose? Not deep cuts in every government program but a spending spree to make Kevin Rudd seem a miser.
It's free money for everyone. If you vote for the Greens, you're voting for an extra week of holidays for all, "mandated shorter standard working hours", more pay for women workers, higher pay for casuals and better weekly benefits to students and artists.
More pay for less work, at the mere stroke of a Green pen. Isn't that a darling way to reorganise the economy? What could possibly go wrong?
They promise to lift foreign aid to "a minimum of 0.7 per cent of GDP by 2010", which means an instant rise in handouts of $4 billion a year.
Another $2 billion a year will go to scrap tertiary fees and forgiving all HECs debts.
The Greens lazily assume that the bill will be covered by hiking corporate taxes, hitting the richer 5 per cent of Australians with wealth taxes, and slugging air travellers. Show us your costings, Bob.
I'd be amazed if after a year of two of this that anyone would want to come to a country which by then would be a smoking hole in the ground.
Yet the Greens plan to do their best to attract more people to their new nation of freeloaders. Any "asylum seeker" making it here by boat would be freed into the community within 14 days, security checks permitting, and rewarded with benefits, medical services and school for children. These goodies will be offered to "environmental refugees", too.
A new, militant industrial agenda is also buried in this New Age madness, signalling the arrival in Brown's party of "watermelon Greens" - green outside and red inside.
These, like NSW candidate Lee Rhiannon, seem Green more of convenience than faith, using this doctors' wives party to smuggle in the kind of hard-Left politics that would scare voters if they saw it coming under a hammer and sickle.
This is what a vote for the Greens really means. And it's this party of vandals, tribalists and closet totalitarians that shameless Labor now helps to such threatening influence.
Who IS Madame / Comrade Julia Gillard ?
Australia: Australian Union (ACTU) Appointed Prime Minister,Madame Gillard and her Union Financiers and Bankers Commit to Internet Filter to protect Australians from Counter Revolutionary thoughts.
Australia: What Madame Gillard did and said she thought BEFORE she was appointed Prime Minister of Australia by the Union Movement & NSW Labor’s Political ASSASSINS on June 24 2010
Australia: Comrade Lu Kewen’s aka. Kevin Rudd’s Internet censorship almost complete
Lu Kewens’ internet censorship plans “unworkable” says Google
Rudd’s Australia : Australian Labor Party to require ISP’s to keep records of customers web surfing, in the name of “Fresh Thinking” of course
Australian Labor Party Icon and role model orders arrest of TV station owner…
Rudds’ Australia: Iran,Australia and North Korea a threat to internet via censorship regulation
Rudd’s Australia: Internet censorship anti Rudd Labor Facebook site shut down
Americans BEWARE Australian internet to be CENSORED by Australian Labor Party
Australia: What Madame Gillard did and said she thought BEFORE she was appointed Prime Minister of Australia by the Union Movement & NSW Labor’s Political ASSASSINS on June 24 2010
Madame Julia’s Progress Australia “looking forward” EVERY Australian school student would be taught positive things about Islam and Muslims
Australia: MSM Rejoices !!!! Tony Abbott Booed
Hey Hey crowd boos Tony Abbott
Tory Shepherd
The Daily Telegraph
July 21, 2010
TONY Abbott did not get the most friendly welcome on the set of Hey Hey It's Saturday tonight begging the question whether Prime Minister Julia Gillard made the right choice by declining to join him.
With a guitar riff and a cheesy intro by Daryl Somers, on walked ... Red Symons, to a chorus of boos, Kylie Minogue to a rousing welcome, Entourage's Rex Lee ... and Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.
Mr Somers said Prime Minister Julia Gillard had "gracefully declined" to join Mr Abbott on the set.
Mr Abbott was greeted with some applause but a majority of desultory jeers, and faced some random shouting from the audience during the show. He certainly did not look threatened by the homosexual Mr Lee sitting next to him.
Somers commended his campaigning stamina and asked whether he had further commitments. Mr Abbott said no, "no karaoke or anything like that".
The first act was some sort of awful inbred yokel performance, a woman who didn't last long before the gong was sounded.
"I quite like the Julia Gillard accent,” Mr Abbott said, giving her a score of 5.
Then there was a dear old guy doing stand-up who lasted a bit longer.
He asked Kylie to say hi to his grandkids and Kylie obliged.
“Well, he’s funnier than I am but I’m not sure he can keep up on the bike, but well done, it’s a great effort,” Mr Abbott said, and gave him a 6. Mr Lee gave him 7 for being “funnier than Tony Abbott”.
Act three was a man and a dog, or rather two – the dogs were cute, the man annoying. Kylie held her ears as the gong went.
“Look, I love animals,” said Mr Abbott, holding up a score of seven. Kylie was, again, more generous.
Next, and finally, some precocious youngsters rocked the house with Wild Thing and fine style and got the whole audience on board. Kylie laughed, Mr Abbot clapped.
Yokel Loretta something-or-other with the Gillard-esque voice won in the end.
Overall, Mr Abbott kept smiling with good cheer throughout, delivered some good one-liners, and at least he’s got the guts to do something a bit more … interesting.
It was hardly a spontaneous show of civil unrest or hatred against Tony Abbott by Hey Hey’s audience, in fact I thought it was representative of the type of results the Telegraph and the Australian, Channels 9 10 7 and Sky news are getting on their online and TV Polls minimum of 65 + % in FAVOUR of Abbott over Gillard in every poll since the Australian Council of Trade Unions appointed Gillard to the office of PM of Australia.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Medan Indonesia’s worst City, Muslims face wrong way to Mecca
Worst. City. Ever.
ADAM GARTRELL SMH July 19, 2010
Dear Medan. I hate you.
I visited you recently and found you the most unpleasant, charmless and thoroughly depressing city I've ever encountered. And I've visited plenty of s---holes in my time.
Now, when it comes to big Indonesian cities I have pretty low expectations.
I live in Jakarta, the biggest of them all, so I know what I'm in for: traffic, pollution, heat, noise, chaos, the stench of human waste.
And you, Medan - Indonesia's third biggest city - you provided all those things. In great abundance.
In fact, even though your population, at three million, is a quarter that of Jakarta's, I reckon you're worse on just about every count.
Quite an achievement.
But Medan, you're awful not just because of your many failings but because you appear to have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
You're slim pickin's for hotels, you don't seem to boast a single, decent restaurant and from what I've heard, you've got no real nightlife.
Your airport is a Boschian nightmare, your roads a mess, your buses an embarrassment and your taxis ... well, if I ever find one I'll let you know.
And ever heard of trees?
Okay, so you have a big mosque but it's also the closest thing you've got to a tourist attraction. And you have a few shopping malls but what city doesn't?
I understand now why you consistently feature on people's "Worst. City. Ever." lists.
You're at the very top of mine.
Okay, I admit, there's a personal element to this. See, I got robbed in one of your hotels.
It wasn't a very nice hotel. It promotes itself as a four star hotel when in actual fact it's closer to a two. But that's fine. I don't need luxury and it cost less than $100 a night.
Except, in the end, it actually cost a couple of grand. Because while I was out one night scouring the streets for a decent meal - in vain, of course - someone broke into my room and stole a giant wad of company cash from my suitcase.
Why did I have a giant wad of cash, you ask? Well, because Indonesia is a mostly cash economy, so I'm forced to travel with plenty of it. But why didn't I put it in the safe? Well, because the hotel didn't provide one.
And when I brought the robbery to the hotel's attention the staff were predictably - and perhaps deliberately - unhelpful.
Security staff at first said they could give me a keycard lock report, so I could see if anyone else entered my room. But then - for reasons not properly explained - they suddenly couldn't.
But that was okay, they said. They could show me the CCTV footage outside my room instead.
Oh no, wait, sorry! We don't actually know the password to review the CCTV!
Can you say "inside job"?
Needless to say I moved to a different hotel for my final night. I woke up the next morning in blood-stained sheets. Mozzies never take any interest in me but your Medan mozzies made quite a frenzied exception.
I didn't get malaria. But I did get spectacularly, violently sick about a week later from an intestinal parasite, which I'm certain I picked up from you, Medan. I just know it.
I've never been so happy to board a plane as I was the one that whisked me away from you, Medan. And I never want to see you again.
Muslims facing wrong way to Mecca
“Indonesian Muslims have been praying in the wrong direction for months, facing Somalia by mistake.”
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Who IS Madame / Comrade Julia Gillard ?
Australia’s Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) appointed Prime Minister, Madame / Comrade Gillard.
“Gillard’s plan for power
Monday, October 29, 2007 at 05:15pmComrade Julia Gillard explains her plan to use Labor as a Trojan horse for the far Left’s agenda:
For the Left to make any real advance all these perspectives on the relationship to Labor in government need to be rejected in favour of a concept of strategic support for Labor governments. We need to recognise the only possibility for major social change is under a long period of Labor administration. Within that administration the Left needs to be willing to participate to shape political outcomes, recognising the need to except (sic) often unpalatable compromises in the short term to bolster the prospect of future advance. The task of pushing back the current political constraints by changing public opinion would need to be tackled by the Left through government, social movements and trade unions.
That comes from a document Gillard wrote for the communist-formed Socialist Forum group which she helped to run, despite now claiming she was just a part-time “typist”. (See the document below.)
It’s clear from Gillard’s writings that she sees the Socialist Forum not as a mere “debating society” (another false claim), but as an activist group that would infiltrate Labor to push its own socialist agenda.
Well, her plan seems to be running to schedule so far. Of course, maybe she’s changed her mind about her far-Left agenda in the past few years, but I’d believe that more if she didn’t tell so many untruths about what she was up to.
As it is, I’m inclined to suspect Labor has a cuckoo in its nest. “
Australia: Australian Union (ACTU) Appointed Prime Minister,Madame Gillard and her Union Financiers and Bankers Commit to Internet Filter to protect Australians from Counter Revolutionary thoughts.
Australia: What Madame Gillard did and said she thought BEFORE she was appointed Prime Minister of Australia by the Union Movement & NSW Labor’s Political ASSASSINS on June 24 2010
Australia: Comrade Lu Kewen’s aka. Kevin Rudd’s Internet censorship almost complete
Lu Kewens’ internet censorship plans “unworkable” says Google
Rudd’s Australia : Australian Labor Party to require ISP’s to keep records of customers web surfing, in the name of “Fresh Thinking” of course
Australian Labor Party Icon and role model orders arrest of TV station owner…
Rudds’ Australia: Iran,Australia and North Korea a threat to internet via censorship regulation
Rudd’s Australia: Internet censorship anti Rudd Labor Facebook site shut down
Americans BEWARE Australian internet to be CENSORED by Australian Labor Party
Australia: What Madame Gillard did and said she thought BEFORE she was appointed Prime Minister of Australia by the Union Movement & NSW Labor’s Political ASSASSINS on June 24 2010
Madame Julia’s Progress Australia “looking forward” EVERY Australian school student would be taught positive things about Islam and Muslims
NATIONAL AFFAIRS: Julia Gillard's long-term agenda
by John Ballantyne
News Weekly,
10 July 2010
Don't say we haven't been warned.
Our new Prime Minister is not the mainstream, centrist leader that the media want us to think she is. Julia Gillard comes with a lot of ideological baggage from her radical-left past.
For several years she has played down her past political affiliations, attempted to mainstream herself and altogether presented an agreeable image to the public.
So appealing is she that she has won plaudits from across the political spectrum, even from conservatives such as Christopher Pearson and Janet Albrechtsen.
The left-dominated media, no doubt with an eye on the forthcoming federal election, have bent over backwards to depict Julia Gillard as, if anything, a conservative. They have reminded us that she was brought to power with the help of Labor's right-wing factions. Thus, so the story goes, she will be beholden to Labor's right and not stray far from moderate policies.
In the past week, Julia Gillard herself has tried to connect with conservative voters, even going so far as to hint that she would be prepared to take a harder line on asylum-seekers.
This is all for public consumption before the election. What she will be like after an election victory, when she has her own mandate to govern and is no longer so beholden to Labor power-brokers, is another question altogether.
Then we will see just how much of her radicalism she has shed and whether she really is the centrist Labor figure she would like us to think she is.
Ms Gillard has long been a prominent figure of Labor's powerful left-wing feminist caucus, Emily's List, which was founded by two former Labor premiers, Joan Kirner (Victoria) and Carmen Lawrence (Western Australia).
The stated aim of Emily's List is to raise money to help "progressive", i.e., pro-abortion, women get elected to parliament.
"Emily" stands for Early Money Is Like Yeast. (News Weekly, September 1, 2007).
Joan Kirner, whom Ms Gillard has described as a mentor and friend, was one of the driving forces behind the passage of Victoria's notorious 2008 abortion laws, which not only decriminalised abortion, but legalised late-term abortions right through nine months of pregnancy.
Ms Gillard has been unswervingly faithful to radical feminist orthodoxy. In 2000, as a member of a House of Representatives standing committee on education, she adopted a very hostile tone towards two members of the public who presented scientific data about the biological and psychological differences between the sexes and the specific educational needs of boys. (News Weekly, February 17, 2007).
Julia Gillard's first foray into politics was in the early 1980s, when, as a university law student, she became active in the now-defunct Australian Union of Students (AUS).
The AUS was then totally dominated by the extreme left. In 1983 — the year she was elected AUS president — an AUS annual council defeated heavily a call to oppose "all acts of terrorism and political violence"
(AUS Annual Council 1983: motion N28).
Furthermore, the AUS annual council declined to recognise the rights of religious clubs and societies at universities to "express their views on campus" or to have access to campus facilities (AUS Annual Council 1983: motion N34).
The AUS declared 1983 to be the International Year of the Lesbian.
It also adopted a policy on prostitution which said, in part: "Prostitution takes many forms and is not only the exchange of money for sex. … Prostitution in marriage is the transaction of sex in return for love, security and house-keeping." (Quoted by Helen Trinca, The Australian, April 6, 1984, p.7).
This bizarre statement made headlines across Australia. Anti-AUS student activists produced posters with the slogan: "AUS says your mother is a prostitute!"
By early 1984, not only Liberals, but moderate Labor and Jewish students, were campaigning vigorously to abolish the AUS. While Julia Gillard and her left-wing colleagues were defending the union, campus after campus was seceding from it, depriving it of funds and bringing about its rapid collapse.
From 1984 until 1993, Ms Gillard became a prominent figure in the militant left Socialist Forum, which had recently been formed by disaffected members of the Communist Party of Australia and Labor's left-wing.
It sought, among other things, to remove Australia from the ANZUS alliance and to twin Melbourne with Leningrad (re-named St Petersburg since the fall of communism).
Julia Gillard has made light of her youthful radicalism, and has been painstakingly careful to present herself as a moderate.
It is worth remembering, however, what she once wrote for the Socialist Forum on how the extreme Left could advance its agenda by giving "strategic support for Labor governments".
She said: "We need to recognise the only possibility for major social change is under a long period of Labor administration. Within that administration the Left needs to be willing to participate to shape political outcomes, recognising the need to except (sic) often unpalatable compromises in the short term to bolster the prospect of future advance." (Quoted by Andrew Bolt, "Gillard's plan for power", Herald Sun, October 29, 2007).
Don't say we haven't been warned.
OPINION: My unhappy memories of Julia
Babette Francis
Newsweekly
The election last year of Julia Gillard as deputy leader of the Labor Party brought back unhappy memories for Babette Francis.
I was giving evidence to a House of Representatives standing committee on employment, education and workplace relations, of which Julia Gillard was a member.
It was 2000. The committee was examining the educational disadvantage experienced by boys and seeking recommendations to ameliorate their plight.
Members of the public could make submissions. Alan Barron, from the Institute of Men's Studies, and I, among others, were invited to make a presentation.
As a member of the Victorian Committee on Equal Opportunity in Schools (1975-77), I had personally researched the problems experienced by boys.
In my presentation, I showed slides illustrating that males suffered disadvantage in all areas of life, with the exception of earnings.
Suicide
Male life expectancy was six years lower than that of females, and male infant mortality was higher. Males are far more likely than females to be in prison and to be victims of homicide, suicide, road accidents and drug or alcohol addiction.
Male success rates at Higher School Certificate exams are substantially lower than the female success rate, and boys outnumber girls four-to-one in requiring remedial or special education.
Alan Barron and I made some eminently reasonable recommendations, for instance, that educators should acknowledge the biological and psychological differences between the sexes and not uncritically adopt a feminist vision of an androgynous society.
Also that schools could consider offering single-sex classes, and that the recruitment of more male teachers should be encouraged.
To our astonishment, Julia Gillard adopted a hostile attitude to our evidence, almost as if we were the accused in the dock. I complained to committee chairman Dr Brendan Nelson, pointing out that members of the public giving information to a parliamentary inquiry, and receiving no remuneration for doing so, were doing the nation a service and deserved to be treated with courtesy.
Gillard turned the discussion into a totally different inquiry about why there weren't more women orthopaedic surgeons or members of parliament. This was no doubt one of her pet peeves.
I tried to explain that much of the discrepancy in male and female career outcomes and earnings were because of women's choices.
Also, women have babies and take time off from jobs to raise children. While numbers of males and females in medical courses were similar, after graduation, many women chose to work part-time. This may not be practical in orthopaedic surgery, which is a demanding specialty.
But Gillard would have none of this, nor my explanation that the differential in male and female incomes was not so significant when it was considered males shared their standard of living with their wives and partners and their children.
But the last straw was Gillard's facetious comment in the transcript of the proceedings. "Sorry about our banter. It started this morning when we had Babette Francis here and our behaviour has gone downhill ever since …"
Personally, as I wrote to Dr Nelson, I would not have thought it possible for Julia Gillard's behaviour to have gone further downhill — not in a public venue anyway — but I guess with a feminist it can be done.
The sad irony is that I highlighted the serious disadvantages of boys in education in my minority report as a member of the Victorian Committee on Equal Opportunity in Schools back in 1977.
It took the Federal Government 23 years to catch up with the seriousness of the problem.
Even now, any recommendations that might improve outcomes for boys will be lost in the stranglehold the feminist lobby has on state school systems — as typified by Julia Gillard.
— Babette Francis is national co-ordinator of Endeavour Forum Inc.
Babette Francis, "Emily's List — who and what are they?", News Weekly, September 1, 2007.
URL: www.newsweekly.com.au/articles/2007sep01_alp.html
Monday, July 19, 2010
Obama Lies Directory
Obama Lies Directory
When the founders of Obama Lies read Obama’s fictional autobiography, Audacity of Hope, it was immediately apparent that this book of Obama Lies is an attempt to define the man as a new messiah and to head off criticism of his obvious inadequacies. When the inaccuracies (read Obama Lies) in his background started to be uncovered and discussed, we went to the web to see if anyone had registered the domain name obamalies.com to use as a vehicle to expose Obama’s lies.
Thanks to Ruth for the above story.
Islams #1 Mad Dog,President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, tells Obowma “"We are for negotiations, but to do so you have to sit down like a good boy,"
US must drop cowboy logic over nuclear program, says Ahmadinejad
Daily Telegraph
19 7 2010
THE United States must drop its "cowboy" attitude if it wants to hold dialogue with Iran over its nuclear program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said.
"We are for negotiations, but to do so you have to sit down like a good boy," Mr Ahmadinejad said, referring to the United States, in a speech broadcast live on state television.
"They adopt a resolution to force a dialogue, but this cowboy logic has no place in Iran."
World powers led by the US voted for new UN sanctions against Iran on June 9 in a bid to force it to stop its nuclear program which they suspect is aimed at making weapons. Iran denies its atomic drive has military aims.
Following up on the UN sanctions, US President Barack Obama on July 1 imposed Washington's toughest-ever unilateral punitive measures against Iran.
Mr Ahmadinejad said Washington's real concern was not that Iran may make an atom bomb but that Tehran is fast rising as a regional power.
"They say we have intelligence that Iranians will most likely build one atomic bomb. Well, this is a lie, but let's say it is true. How many atomic bombs do you have?" he said.
"The Americans themselves say 5000 plus... Is someone who has 5000 fourth and fifth generation atomic bombs, with very advanced launchers, afraid of one bomb? They are not afraid of one, not of a hundred, not of a thousand (bombs). They are afraid of the collective awakening of the Iranian soul."
Displaying his trademark defiance, Mr Ahmadinejad vowed that Iran would not back away from its uranium enrichment program. Washington, he charged, knew full well that Iran is "not after an atomic bomb", despite its claims to the contrary.
"You sanction our banks and some products and think that we will back down and hand over the key to the Iranian nation," he said.
"They should know that they will take their dream of forcing down the Iranian nation to their graves. Our nation is one family... we may have different views, but we are one body against you."
World powers, immediately after the UN sanctions measure was passed, called for dialogue with Iran as part of its dual track strategy of imposing punitive measures and at the same time offering to hold talks. But Mr Ahmadinejad has ordered a freeze in talks at least until end of August as a "penalty" against world powers for imposing sanctions on Tehran.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)