Month: August 2023

Posted on

Albanese Wants To Silence Your Voice

Albanese Wants To Silence Your Voice

Even while promoting the Voice, Albanese and his bunch of authoritarians have crafted duplicitous legislation to ban you from speaking unless it is authorised while excluding the government and media from any liability from lying.

Gob-smacking level of two-faced.

We need to STOP Labor’s dangerous new ‘disinformation’ laws.

Anthony Albanese does not want you to be able to speak out online in the lead-up to the referendum.

That’s why he’s bringing in laws that give big tech and the government the power to determine what truth is online.

Posted on

Why Hide The Plan For A Treaty?

Shouldn’t Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the ‘yes’ campaign be proud of their promise of a treaty?

They’ve said often enough they’re going to implement the Uluru Statement “in full” after the referendum.

And that means a treaty and a “truth-telling” commission after the divisive Voice is cemented into the Constitution.

So why does Albo refuse to even say the word “treaty” these past few weeks?

What could they be hiding?

Well, just take a look at this document, which solves the mystery.

It’s the Uluru Statement … in full.

Is this what the PM and the ‘yes’ campaign have signed up for after this referendum?

“… a Treaty could include a proper say in decision-making, the establishment of a truth commission, reparations, a financial settlement (such as seeking a percentage of GDP), the resolution of land, water and resources issues, recognition of authority and customary law, and guarantees of respect for the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.”

While redacted parts appeared in the Final Report of the Referendum Council1, which referred to them as “extracts from the Uluru Statement”, the entire document was released under Freedom of Information laws.

And reported by Sky News host Peta Credlin last week2.

This is how news.com.au told the story3:

Taxpayers may be forced to pay “reparations” to Indigenous Australians for “past, present and future criminal acts” under a proposed treaty, with suggestions that “a fixed percentage” of GDP be handed over through “rates, land tax and royalties”…

But what’s that got to do with the divisive Voice, you might ask!

The ‘yes’ campaigners will look you dead in the eye and – like the Prime Minister – swear the Voice has nothing to do with a treaty!

But that’s not what Thomas Mayo and Teela Reid, members of Albo’s referendum advisory group, were saying before the campaign.

Mayo tweeted that without a Voice, Australians are “much less likely to support what we may claim in a treaty (reparations, land back etc)”.

“A constitutionally enshrined Voice to Parliament will provide the political clout needed to enforce & protect treaties,” he wrote!

Teela Reid tweeted that “enshrining a First Nations Voice is paramount to enforcing treaty and holding the system to account”.

The ‘yes’ campaign’s leading spokesman Noel Pearson said the Voice was the “starting point before we can talk about a treaty”4.

So why does the Prime Minister keep saying this referendum has nothing to do with a treaty?

The truth is that the Voice is the first instalment of a package deal.

As Noel Pearson put it, the Voice is “the first door” and the “treaty door is the second door”5.

So don’t tell us that this referendum is not about a treaty!

Because if you say ‘yes’ to a Voice enshrined in the Constitution …

… you’re saying ‘yes’ to handing the activists “political clout” and opening the door to a costly and expensive treaty.

Yours in unity,

Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price
on behalf of FAIR AUSTRALIA

 

1 Referendum Council, Final Report, June 30, 2017.

2 Sky News, ‘Sky News host Peta Credlin exposes Labor’s ‘lie’ on the Uluru Statement from the Heart under Freedom of Information Act’, August 3, 2023.

3 news.com.au, ‘“Land tax”: Secret document reveals demand for “percentage of GDP” under Indigenous Treaty’, August 4, 2023.

4 Judith Neilson Institute for Journalism and Ideas, ‘In Conversation: Noel Pearson and Paul Keating’, April 2, 2022.

5 The Australian, ‘Pearson pushes constitution-first line on indigenous treaty’, August 4, 2018.

 

Posted on

Curious to learn reasons why you should Vote No in the Voice referendum?

Our Constitution Already Allows

DO YOU KNOW THAT WE ALREADY HAVE AN INDIGENOUS BODY THAT FULFILS WHAT SEEM TO BE THE AIMS OF “THE VOICE”?

IT’S CALLED THE COALITION OF PEAKS.

We already have an indigenous body that fulfils what seem to be the aims of the ‘voice’.
The Coalition of Peaks was established in 2020. Its aims and purposes are outlined on it’s web site
The Partnership Agreement – Coalition of Peaks

We are the Coalition of Peaks – a representative body of over 80 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community controlled peak organisations and members. We came together as an act of self-determination to be formal partners with Australian governments on Closing the Gap.

The Coalition of Peaks are accountable to our communities.
We have worked for our communities for a long time and are working to ensure the full involvement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in shared decision-making with Australian governments across the country to improve the life outcomes of our people.

The Coalition of Peaks together with all Australian governments and the Australian Local Government Association have signed the National Agreement on Closing the Gap (National Agreement). The National Agreement has been built around what Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people said is important to improve their lives.

It includes four Priority Reforms to change the way governments work, new government accountability measures and shared monitoring and implementation arrangements.
Could any YES supporter please tell us what the ‘voice’ will do that this body can or could not do?

Curious to learn reasons why you should Vote No in the Voice referendum?

Read more:

https://constitutionalequality.au/

Posted on

Toxin-Free Deodorant

INGREDIENTS

6 Tablespoons Organic Virgin Coconut Oil
¼ cup Baking Soda
¼ cup Arrowroot Powder
8 drops Tea Tree Essential Oil

INSTRUCTIONS
Combine all ingredients in a small bowl and blend thoroughly with a fork.
Spoon into a clean jar and store airtight and covered with a lid between uses.

NOTES
This deodorant recipe is very effective and lasts a long time. One batch typically lasts one person approximately one year with daily use. Other choices of essential oils can be used in place of or in addition to the suggested tea tree oil. However, tea tree is very efficacious at combating odor.

Natural and Effective Homemade Deodorant

Posted on

Petition To US President To NOT Drop The Atomic Bomb

In 1980, when I asked the press office at the U.S. Department of Energy to send me a listing of nuclear bomb test explosions, the agency mailed me an official booklet with the title “Announced United States Nuclear Tests, July 1945 Through December 1979.” As you’d expect, the Trinity test in New Mexico was at the top of the list. Second on the list was Hiroshima. Third was Nagasaki.

So, 35 years after the atomic bombings of those Japanese cities in August 1945, the Energy Department – the agency in charge of nuclear weaponry – was categorizing them as “tests.”

Later on, the classification changed, apparently in an effort to avert a potential P.R. problem. By 1994, a new edition of the same document explained that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki “were not ‘tests’ in the sense that they were conducted to prove that the weapon would work as designed . . . or to advance weapon design, to determine weapons effects, or to verify weapon safety.”

But the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki actually were tests, in more ways than one.

Take it from the Manhattan Project’s director, Gen. Leslie Groves, who recalled: “To enable us to assess accurately the effects of the bomb, the targets should not have been previously damaged by air raids. It was also desirable that the first target be of such size that the damage would be confined within it, so that we could more definitely determine the power of the bomb.”

A physicist with the Manhattan Project, David H. Frisch, remembered that U.S. military strategists were eager “to use the bomb first where its effects would not only be politically effective but also technically measurable.”

For good measure, after the Trinity bomb test in the New Mexico desert used plutonium as its fission source on July 16, 1945, in early August the military was able to test both a uranium-fueled bomb on Hiroshima and a second plutonium bomb on Nagasaki to gauge their effects on big cities.

Public discussion of the nuclear era began when President Harry Truman issued a statement that announced the atomic bombing of Hiroshima – which he described only as “an important Japanese Army base.” It was a flagrant lie. A leading researcher of the atomic bombings of Japan, journalist Greg Mitchell, has pointed out: “Hiroshima was not an ‘army base’ but a city of 350,000. It did contain one important military headquarters, but the bomb had been aimed at the very center of a city – and far from its industrial area.”

https://original.antiwar.com/solomon/2023/08/03/decades-later-the-us-government-called-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-nuclear-tests/

Manhattan Project Scientists to President Harry S. Truman Don't Use Atomic Weapons in World War II

Fayez P Hanna commented:

Oh … god … don’t let me start with this heinous crime against humanity …

Indeed … they were tests … a “Heinous Crime” … a “Crime Against Humanity” … for which we should remember that “H Truman” … is a “Criminal” and a “Terrorist” …

Seven of the United States’ eight five-star Army and Navy officers in 1945 agreed with the Navy’s vitriolic assessment. Generals Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur and Henry ‘Hap’ Arnold and Admirals William Leahy, Chester Nimitz, Ernest King, and William Halsey are on record stating that the atomic bombs were either militarily unnecessary, morally reprehensible, or both.

On 17 July 1945, Manhattan Project scientist Leo Szilard wrote a petition to U.S. President Harry S. Truman—signed by 70 Manhattan Project scientists—asking him to refrain from using atomic weapons in the war.

It has long been considered a rule of warfare that armies fight armies in war. They don’t target non-combatants. The intentional killing of non-combatants is considered a war crime.

A good example of this principle involved the case of Lt. William Calley in the Vietnam War. Calley and his men shot and killed numerous non-combatants in a South Vietnamese village. The victims included women and children.

The U.S military prosecuted Calley as a war criminal — and rightly so. While the deaths of non-combatants oftentimes occur incidentally to wartime operations, it is a … “War Crime” … to … “Specifically Target Them for Death” …

In fact, scientists wrote a letter to Truman begging him to “NOT” use the a-bomb on cities or people … but Truman went ahead with the … “Massacres” …

Posted on

Thermopylae

Monument of Leonidas

A story that has been told a thousand times and will continue.
Xerxes had spent years planning his invasion of Greece. It was to be his ‘divine punishment’ for his father Darius’ crushing defeat at Marathon in 490 BC. Now, a decade later, he had spared no expense in preparing a vast expeditionary force.By the spring of 480 Xerxes’ army had reached Macedonia in the north of Greece. In response a contingent of 300 Spartans and several thousand allies were sent to occupy the narrow mountain pass of Thermopylae, not far from the Greek fleet that was anchored off the nearby coast at Artemisium.
It was a suicide mission, designed to detain the Persians just long enough for the rest of the Greek allies to gather their forces. Led by King Leonidas, the Spartans heroically held the Persians at bay for nearly a week until – outnumbered, betrayed and outflanked – they were finally defeated.
The Spartan sacrifice at Thermopylae was not in vain. In 479 BC Greece was at last free from the threat of eastern domination. After the war, a plaque was erected to commemorate the stand of Leonidas and his men with the inscription –
“ Ὦ ξεῖν’, ἀγγέλλειν Λακεδαιμονίοις ὅτι τῇδε κείμεθα, τοῖς κείνων ῥήμασι πειθόμενοι”, which means: “Stranger, tell Spartans that we lay here, staying faithful to Sparta’s laws.”
Molon Labe-Ancient Greek for “come and take them,” monument of Leonidas💙Thermopylae central Greece
Heroic though it was, the stand at Thermopylae was only a holding action to allow the Peloponnesians to fortify the Isthmus at Corinth and the Athenians to complete the evacuation of the city. Once Thermopylae was overrun the allied Greek fleet withdrew to the bay of Salamis. The Corinthians wanted to withdraw to south of the Isthmus and mocked the now city-less Athenians led by Themistocles. He tricked the Persians into committing their attack on the Greek fleet in the narrows of the Bay of Salamis before the Greeks could disperse. It is suggested that the Corintho-Athenian spat was a put up job to fool the Persians’ spies that the Greeks were disunited and therefore easy pickings.
The result of the Battle of Salamis was that the Persian fleet composed mainly of Phoenicians, Ionian Greeks and Egyptians lost control of the Aegean Sea. (The Greeks of Sicily and Italy were under a coordinated attack from the Phoenician-Carthaginians and won the Battle of Himera, purportedly on the same day as the Battle of Salamis)
Xerxes scuttled back over the Hellespont bridge to Asia Minor leaving a much reduced Persian army under Mardonius. It was defeated the following year by the allied Greek army led by Pausanias, Leonidas’ nephew, at Plataea. After the battle, so the story goes, he took the allied generals to Mardonius’ tent. He pointed to the lavish Persian food and then at the Spartans’ standard ration of porridge saying “They came to rob us of of this!”