Wednesday, March 31, 2010

End Free Trade In Beef! Keep Mad Cow Disease Beef Out Of Australia!

The Australia First Party supports the rally, to be held at Parliament House Canberra on May 11, against: free trade in beef – against the import of Mad Cow Disease infected meat products into Australia!

Many groups and people are building this protest. Supporters include: the Australian Beef Association, the Hunter / New England Abattoir, the ‘Support Aussie Farmers: Say No To Imported Beef’ Facebook site (creator: Donna Morrison), Vida Thomson, a Canberra activist, Gabby Hughes a Wagga Wagga activist, various farmers and graziers from country Victoria, NSW and Queensland, the Australia First Party, the Australian Long Distance Owners’ And Drivers’ Association and many independent people.

Messrs Brad Bellinger and John Carter from the Australian Beef Association, will be speaking at the protest, along with Mr. J R McDonald of the Hunter New England Abattoir. There may be other speakers.

May 11 is Budget Day and a substantial media presence is expected.

This is a rally that will not be hijacked by the usual Liberal / National Party game-players who offer a few platitudes to the crowd. It is an independent demonstration of people concerned at the free trade policies that are supported by the major parties.

Assemble: 11th May at 9am Meet at Magna Carta Place in the Parliamentary Triangle.

Free Trade Can You Kill You! Say No To Imported Beef!

Mad Cow Meat :

You could be eating it, if you don’t protest!
We refuse to poison ourselves!

Don’t be fooled by a government promise that it will investigate whether BSE affected meat could ever turn up in Australia. BSE is better known as Mad Cow Disease. And it kills people.

It’s probably already here. And it can beat the quarantine tests that are going to be done now - and in the future.

There’s only one way to be sure: don’t allow beef and beef products to come into Australia from any country that has had an outbreak of Mad Cow Disease!

Class War On The Cattle Stations: What They Said A Few Weeks Ago: Free Trade Cuckoo Politics Grips Very Rich Cattlemen!

The biggest producers of beef in Australia want free trade so they can keep their export market. That means they don’t mind if foreign beef enters our market. If foreigners can do that, then they won’t keep our beef out of their countries. Crazy stuff! The Cattle Council, in supporting the government’s line in allowing free trade, said recently:

“The old BSE policy was not consistent with international rules. Under the previous rule banning sale of beef from countries that have had a case of BSE, if Australia were to be affected by an unlikely single case of BSE the results would be devastating for the sector and the economy. All beef could be removed from all domestic shelves at enormous expense, crippling the industry, and foreign markets could reciprocate by locking us out without scientific justification. Cattle Council found this arrangement totally unacceptable. These export markets were at serious risk if we did not change our BSE policy and we ever got a trade disruptive disease. Our markets could have shut us out and we would have no retaliation.”

Why allow imported beef anyway? The amount allowed in will grow over time. These imports will sooner or later destroy smaller Aussie producers. But that won’t worry the biggest cattlemen because they produce for export. Simple! Free trade can kill you and it will destroy thousands of Aussie graziers and farmers on the way. It will undermine regional cities and towns and destroy thousands of jobs.

If your family dies from contaminated beef, if regional Australia falls apart! That’s a high price for free trade!

Monday, March 1, 2010

Japanese Multinationals Threaten Australian Workers: Who Comes First – Australia Or The Foreign Bosses?

JAPANESE business leaders have issued a threat to Australia and Australian workers, stating in their jaundiced language that “a fresh wave of union militancy threatens the supply of crucial resources and billion-dollar investments.”

Australian nationalists know that some unions have raised workplace issues, compelled as they occasionally must be by the rank and file, which put the immediate interests of the worker at loggerheads with the profit-driven Japanese multinationals.


Australian nationalists know that attacks upon the union movement are seldom calculated to curtail a crook union leadership or to overcome some fault of industrial behaviour. Rather, they are usually designed to make ordinary Australian workers subservient to the foreign bosses – particularly right now when the globalised economy totters on a knife edge.

Nippon Steel's Australian boss, Yoshifumi Nakata, said his company wanted assurances Australia would not return to the “industrial days of the 1970s” when Japan was “forced” to look to Brazil for key supplies.

The steel giant was "afraid and very concerned" that an escalation in industrial action would disrupt export markets, Mr Nakata said.

"We are seriously concerned with the stable supply of raw materials, particularly iron ore and coking coal," he added.

This is all rhetorical muck that was used 30 years ago by the Fraser (and then Hawke) governments to attack, not a few corrupt unions and silly work-rules, but the tried and true structures of Australian workplace culture. We now live with the results of that foul attack: work contracts, visa labour, fewer union rights, intrusive courts and commissions and so on.

It can be rightly said that the Japanese multinationals are more concerned about what they can rip out of Australia vast wealth, with lowering the price of Australian labour and weakening proper conditions, than with any issue of industrial lawlessness.

Nippon Steel, one of Japan's largest steel producers, is among several foreign firms to express “concern” over growing industrial militancy in Western Australia. Indeed, some unions have called snap strikes and disrupted production work there in in past months. And why not? At the moment the unions demand fairness. The day will come when the Australian People will demand an end to the fire-sale of our national wealth!

The fear of the foreigner for any form of union activity comes as workplace relations, emerge as an issue in the next election. The two faces of the regime (Liberal and Labor) will vie with each other to promise the Japanese multinationals that they will curtail the unions and they will spin the Australian suburban voter wild tales about trade union thuggery stopping projects that will make us all rich - as their justification for stripping us of the right to freely associate in unions and fight industrial struggles.

Resources giant Woodside Petroleum last month announced it was suing the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) after the union called an eight-day strike. The action halted development of Woodside's $12 billion liquefied natural gas processing plant on the North West Shelf. This project feeds Chinese imperialism and not just the Japanese. The union should be praised, not criticised!

With annual exports of $50 billion, Japan is Australia’s biggest market. Iron ore and coal account for exports worth about $30 billion while LNG exports are valued at $8 billion. There is nothing wrong with trade with Japan, but there is everything wrong when the Japanese multinationals can demand openly that restrictions be placed on Australian workers and their industrial organizations.

The Japanese concerns were raised during all-day Australian-Japanese talks behind closed doors in Canberra last week. Japanese delegates directly raised the matter of Australia's industrial past. In their view, they want subservient unions like in Japan. They wanted assurances government would act against unions and workers.

Western Australia Treasurer Troy Buswell said: "Investors are growing very nervous." And such a worthy group of parasites these investors are! As if,we must run when investors crack the whip.

The answer of our traitor class is always to rule for the foreign master. The idea of establishing an economy for Australians is not on their agenda. Nonetheless, threats to the Australian workers may spread the idea of Australian Independence, the vision splendid where the ordinary people control their own wealth and their own country.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Sir Edmund Barton’s ideas on Immigrants and being an Australian in 1907


'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an Australian and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an Australian, and nothing but an Australian... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an Australian, but something else also, isn't an Australian at all. We have room for but one flag, the Australian flag.... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the Australian people.' - Edmund Barton 1907

Every Australian citizen needs to think about this!

PUT AUSTRALIA AND AUSTRALIANS FIRST! We Pledge To Implement These Policies.

This is draft election policy for Australia First party in the 2010 Federal poll and for subsequent polls. The final version is yet to be approved. Our general programme is set out in the “Eight Core Policies” of the party; these policies are in accordance with these statements of position. What appears below is an electoral and community programme for action. It may be used as local circumstances permit in tandem with any purely local issue of community significance. Such policies may be added to if they are in accordance with the Eight Core Policies that guarantee the unity of the party around the idea of ‘Australia First’.

Eleven Points For Action

Australia First Party stands in this election with a programme for action and change for our country. Any Australia First representative elected is pledged to advocate these policies. The party is pledged to motivate the community generally to support these key demands to secure Australia’s identity, independence and freedom..


1. We demand that YOU the people should be represented in the parliaments and not be the victims of cynical, corrupt, and foreign-loyal party machines.

2. We demand the Implementation of Citizens’ Initiated Referendum and Voters’ Recall of parliamentarians, so that you the people can propose the laws and get rid of unresponsive parliamentarians.

3. We demand accountability for all politicians: for all those who have failed and corrupted Australia, sold the country to foreign states and agencies, or devoted themselves to globalisation; we pledge to nationalize their personal property and deny them parliamentary pensions and benefits.

4. We demand the promotion and rebuilding of Australian manufacturing and other enterprise and thence guarantee - Australian jobs for Australian workers.

5. We demand the re-instatement of the Commonwealth Bank as originally intended to limit interest rates to a minimum charge and to eliminate the private control of the nation’s credit.

6. We demand the control of currency exchange rates to end speculation in the national currency and resources.

7. We demand the reform of taxation, its simplification to end the exemptions for the speculators, the multinationals and the super-rich.

8. We demand an end to foreign ownership and control of Australian real estate and Australian resources.

9. We demand: the end of all immigration for a long period on environmental, cultural, ethnic and security grounds ; the repudiation of all treaties on refugees ; the end of contract labour ; the end of residency for foreign students; the end of multiculturalism.

10. We demand that the Australian transport industry be freed of bureaucratic control with the end of world-parity-pricing for fuel, the creation of an Australian fuel industry with a domestic fuel price and with public ownership of all roads and abolition of tolls.


11. We demand protection for Australian farmers by the provision of a guaranteed national market and pricing system, such that all food necessary to sustain the Australian People may be grown in Australia and regional Australia and its lifestyle be maintained.

Thursday, February 4, 2010

An idea for Australian business owners

This restaurant owner in North Versailles, Pennsylvania has the right idea. Gives the local community something to think about.










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 naïve.

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.