Sunday, January 31, 2010

One Nation Leader Signals Sell-Out To The Liberals On Immigration, Population And National Identity?

A prominent executive member of the One Nation party, Mr. Bob Vinnicombe, has signalled in recent public material, that he would sell-out to the Liberal Party.

If Mr. Vinnicombe is accepting as “spot on” Tony Abbott’s recent deceptive mouthings on Australia’s immigration and population requirements and our national identity, then he is encouraging a blurring of the One Nation’s policy integrity with a pure propaganda line from an establishment party.

What do we mean?

In an Australia Day speech, Tony Abbott said a lot about the failure of infrastructure to accommodate immigration, about the need for a population debate, about community concerns with bad immigrants who criticise our ways - and so on. But he also said that he was in favour of a larger population, high immigration and refugee intakes.

His quibbles seem to be precise numbers overall. Big bloody deal! Where’s the real difference with KRudd?

However, we see from the One Nation representative, an attempt to separate the Abbott commentary into little pieces and ‘unite’ with him on some of it. Once any ‘unity’ is arrived at with an establishment party, the sucker party is turned into a satellite.

Mr. Vinnicombe has said on One Nation’s behalf:

“When he said, ‘the inescapable minimum that we insist upon is obedience to the law’ and ‘It would help to bolster public support for immigration and acceptance of social diversity if more minority leaders were as ready to show to mainstream Australian values the respect they demand for their own’ most Australians, and the party that represents them, One Nation, will say ‘spot on’.“

Really? All this means that we continue to accept those who should not be allowed admission into Australia on the ultimate survivalist ground (they differ from Australia’s European population by ethnic and cultural factors!) and on the other grounds that immigration has had its day on an ecological basis, that “diversity” is something to choke on to the point of cultural and social confusion – but we are supposed to insist the new colonisers “respect” our values? What foolishness is this?

Mr. Vinnicombe has said on One Nation’s behalf:

“When he said ‘existing and planned infrastructure can hardly cope with the present population let alone the additional 14 million (almost entirely due to immigration) that the Prime Minister expects by 2050’ and ‘the rise of ethnic gangs and perceptions of ethnic street crime threaten the community understanding that migration should be overwhelmingly a net benefit’, they'll say ‘spot on’ again.”

But Abbott’s Liberals intend to keep high immigration and refugee intakes. They did not say, they never will say, that they will opt for anything else. They simply want to plan it better and select immigrants more carefully to avoid taking in the gangster elements. Big bloody deal! Abbott is addressing how to hoodwink the community with ‘better’ immigrants. He is not addressing whether the entire psychotic desire to boost Australia’s population – should be abandoned. Why should anyone support him?

Mr. Vinnicombe has said on One Nation’s behalf:

“If this signals a possible about turn on policy by the Liberal Party, following their about turn on the ETS, One Nation welcomes it and hopes it is followed by an about turn on other policies like free trade on which the Liberals are at present equally misguided.”

No, there is no “about turn on policy” by the Liberal Party on anything. There never will be.

The Liberal Party is just one face of a two-party-faced regime. The Liberal Party functions to deceive that it is an “opposition” to the “other” party. But both parties agree on all that matters, because they are created and sustained by the same economic-political class. Yet, both play to their electoral and activist clients to convince them they matter and that they listen. It is part of a game which we call mistake as - democracy. For anyone in One Nation not to know this, would mean that he has abandoned reason.

From his press release published on the One Nation website through to a letter in the Griffith Area News (Griffith: where Australia First has recently been in the news over the contract labour scandal now engulfing that city), Mr. Vinnicombe is clearly trying to impose a ‘me too’ style on One Nation, which would make it a cheerleader to Abbott’s deceitful policy (it is a policy that tells the people what they might like to hear in loud tones, while it pushes the establishment agenda). Playing ‘me too’ or ‘we said it first’, seldom gets anyone anywhere. It is desperate politics which leads to being used by someone else.

One Nation exists as a federally registered party, but is it now divided internally, between those who wish to follow in the Liberals’ wake and those who would pursue an independent policy?

It is a cold fact that a faction directed by Mr. Vinnicombe has operated for a long time with very particular politics on things Islamic (ie. to the point of a very narrow focus). It has overstated the Islamic problem in Australia as the main immigration problem. This has led to building alliances with Fred Nile’s Christian Democratic Party, the Australian Christian Nation Association and the actual ‘conservative wing’ of the Liberal Party itself in New South Wales. The focus on Islam by these groups hides their passion for increasing ‘Christian’ immigration from anywhere (particularly Middle Eastern countries). Indeed, Fred Nile supports high immigration drawn from everywhere. These straight-jacket alliances centre on criticising Islam generally, whilst being truly ‘colour-blind’ on immigration overall. They also involve themselves in a lot of false religion about Israel being an ally in a world struggle against Islam (Israel is as much a problem as it seems to incite Moslem discord), which supposedly obligates Christians to support it, even saying that is a fulfillment of Bible prophecy.

It is easy to go down that road. Meetings. Friends. Good press. Talk to others about a great future. This is fantasy politics.

Many people in One Nation reject this. A larger amorphous group inside the party has struggled towards nationalist politics. Many One Nation members have pondered all this Islam / Israel stuff and observe that it’s hatched by people who tie back to the Liberal Party.

So, are the latest comments on Abbott part of a process by which a faction ties One Nation to the Liberal Party?

What is the future? It is not for Australia First Party to lecture One Nation. But we ask: what if Abbott continues with his rhetoric? Just as Howard did at the time of the ‘Tampa Affair’ in 2001 – and even much earlier in 1988 when he invented the ‘One Australia’ idea to run counter to multiculturalism? Remember: Howard flew in the Tampa ‘refugees’ after the tough talk of the 2001 election and his criticism of multiculturalism never, ever, involved a critique of developing Australia as a multi-ethnic society. Will there be those who urge an alliance with the Liberal Party, an entirely delusional thing in fact, but who merge together with the Liberal Party on the ground?

Australia First Party says openly that if these alien elements seize control of One Nation, or acquire a debilitating influence, the nationalist minded within its ranks are always welcome to join us. Our party rejects compromise. The Australia First Party will fight unreservedly for the Australian people in the struggle for possession of its own state!

Sunday, January 24, 2010

General Cosgrove Levels Verbal Guns At Patriotic Australians

General Peter Cosgrove used his Australia Day address (January 19), to make various criticisms of patriotic Australians.

General Cosgrove supported the maintenance of high immigration and said Australia should not be tempted to cut it.

General Cosgrove condemned the nationalist Civil Uprising at Cronulla in 2005 as a matter of “criminality” and equated this event to recent physical attacks upon Indian students (which incidentally are generally carried out by non-European persons).

General Cosgrove criticised “racist elements” (patriotic people angered by immigration and its results) in our society as illegitimate in their views and appeared to equate a category of Australian to an exercise in social “criminality”.

The entire speech seemed dedicated to buttressing the traitor class line on Australia’s demographic future. It was a slippery product, complete with a definition of patriotism as something related to helping neighbour countries and integrating migrants.

General Cosgrove’s speech was sad in that the ordinary Australian might expect either neutrality of opinion, or a patriotic stance from a former soldier. Unfortunately, such an expectation would be na├»ve.

It is necessary to understand that the hierarchy of Australia’s military has no real allegiance to Australia. It is committed to its foreign policy “alliances” and its military “allies”. It has spent so long sending young Australian men (and more recently, women) into harm’s way at the behest of foreign powers, that it has no model of patriotism left. If an Australian movement arose which questioned the virtue of maintaining our alliances and dying for our allies, it is not too hard to figure where the loyalty of the Cosgrove-type would lie.

In attacking the Australian patriotic perspective and Australian youth, General Cosgrove forgot his own morality. This man commanded the Australian army during the criminal invasion of Iraq. He has never forsworn this enterprise carried out to serve Israel and the American and other multinational corporations and oil companies. He has never asked too serious a question about the war crimes of his allies, crimes that went back to the use of nuclear weapons (depleted uranium ammunition). We cannot expect that he would.

The Australian people observe that important figures like General Cosgrove are put up in public by the traitor class to lend endorsement to their treason against the Australian People. Rather than win points for that class, the sad intervention of General Cosgrove in the national population / immigration debate only serves to demonstrate to Australians the venal nature of the class and its policies.

Long Live The Southern Cross! Australia First Replies To Culture-Buster Warwick Thornton

Warwick Thornton, a filmmaker, who has been chosen as the Northern Territory's nomination for Australian of the Year, has launched a vicious attack upon the emblem of the Southern Cross.

He said: “I'm starting to see that star system symbol being used as a very racist nationalistic emblem - and that is seriously worrying me”. “We don’t want to turn the Southern Cross into a swastika – that’s bloody important.”

It is a fact that young Australians carry the National Flag and the Eureka Flag at parties, sports’ events and public occasions; many have tattooed themselves with the star-constellation, or the cross design. The symbol has truly become a tribal expression of Australian identity. No wonder it has been assailed by this traitor class representative – just as Australia Day approaches.

What the globalising, cultureless, masters of the geographic space they call Australia, fear above all else, is the emergence of a movement that openly proclaims a native identity for the European population here. This population has that identity, which stretches back to the first articulation of ‘Australianness’ at the Eureka Stockade and then through to the radical nationalist upsurges at Lambing Flat (1861), the Barcaldine Revolt (1891) and further on into the great achievements of ANZAC and Kokoda. In the lost deserts of multiculturalism, the Australian People are re-finding themselves. Against those trying to bust our culture in the suburbs, all social institutions and in rural Australia, a spirit of resistance is building. The Southern Cross is the symbol of that resistance.

A political movement must be built. No wonder Warwick Thornton prattles on about the swastika. He is trying to build a Great Wall between the mass of awakening ‘tribal’ Australian people (especially the youth) and any movement which builds the nationalist resistance. Smearing the Southern Cross is an act of desecration.

On Australia Day, the Australia First Party will be active. Other patriotic groups will also come out publicly to proclaim their Australianity.
The National Flag and the Eureka Flag will be held high.