Category Archives: Australia

LET’S TELL THE TRUTH

Stan Grant, well-known media figure, with his slightly olive skin and a thoroughgoing ‘colonial’ education, is an activist of relatively recent origin. He is foremost among those Australians of Aboriginal Ancestry (AOAA) calling for the truth about British settlement, meaning that existing historical accounts are a whitewashing of the violence inflicted on the many indigenous tribes the British found wandering around the countryside. I agree with Stan, with his educated accent, that the truth should be known. Bring it on, I say. Some of the truth is in an outstanding paper by Luke Power, addressing some of those very subjects Stan considers whitewashed.

*****

POWER AND POLITICS – TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT TASMANIAN GENOCIDE

By Luke Powell, The Daily Declaration.

Chris Kenny, in a recent article for the Australian, commented on the sobering truth about Australian history:

“Increasingly, reality does not matter so much in public debate as the narrative.”

This has certainly been the case with Bruce Pascoe’s Dark Emu, which has recently been found out for sourcing incorrect material and fabricating information to present a Eurocentric noble savage account of aboriginal history. 

By rejecting truth and presenting aboriginal history as a narrative of good and evil, historians have gained political power as the saviours of an entire people group. Some such as historian Lyndall Ryan in her recent book, Passionate Histories, have argued in a chapter titled, ‘Hard Evidence’, that academics who focus on primary sources,

Reflect the reluctance of many white Australians even today, to come to terms with incontrovertible evidence about our violent past and to seek reconciliation with Aboriginal survivors.1

The evidence she provides should therefore be discounted by her own standards. In order to gain power in a politicised history, she makes the assumption that academics who search for hard evidence do not want reconciliation with aboriginals. 

This sinister political game has played out in the history of the Black Line. This period of time is arguably the most infamous event in Tasmanian, if not all of Australian history. By most accounts, it expressed the colonial intent to exterminate the Aboriginal population by sending a line of colonial soldiers across Tasmania.

Historian Henry Reynolds writes in An Indelible Stain? The Question of Genocide in Australia’s History, that this action by the British government was tantamount to ‘ethnic cleansing’.2 Others such as anthropologist David Davies in The Last Tasmanians claims the Black Line played a major role in the extermination of the Aborigines.3

But what actually happened? What historical evidence is there? What follows are ten facts from Keith Windschuttle’s book The Fabrication of Aboriginal History, that answer these questions by looking at the available ‘hard evidence’.4 Only by looking at the truth can we begin to achieve true reconciliation.

The Black Line did not Target all Aboriginals

The Black Line only targeted two violent tribes. In order to end the hostilities between these tribes and white settlers, Governor Arthur drew up a plan for the Black Line which focused on two groups: the Oyster Bay and Big River tribes. His goal was to put them into a safe reserve in the northern part of the Island away from settlers, to practise their traditional way of living. As Windschuttle writes:

There was no intention to treat the Aborigines as Bosnians and Kosovars were treated in the 1990s, and to kill them because of their race or religion. Even those to be removed from the settled districts were targeted not because of their race, but because of their violence. Other members of the same racial group deemed to be less hostile were not to be touched.5

Read the rest here…

First nations – NOble savage or just savage?

Bruce Pascoe’s book RED EMU strove to paint a picture of Aboriginal culture before European settlement that was all peace and harmony and in many respects superior to the hated white man’s culture. His bestselling work was swallowed greedily by Australia’s woke/PC class (particularly the ABC) no matter how much it contradicted scholarly findings until Bruce decided to enlighten his fellow Australians.

One aspect that historians before Bruce found common to all Aboriginal tribes was the mind-numbing violence they inflicted on each other, externally with other tribes and internally where the men murdered each other and beat the hell out of their women.

In the age of (European) exploration, the most developed countries of Europe settled mostly in lands where First Nations people lived: Australia, North and South America, Canada, Africa. Again, what was common to the primitive tribes on those lands was the violence. The tribes warred with each other, sparring no extent of brutality, many indulging in cannibalism. Some First Nations people had elaborate religious ceremonies during which all manner of people were sacrifice to the gods. The Spaniards could not believe what they witnessed among the Aztecs, for example.

Just an few hundred miles to the North of the Mayan tribes (today’s Mexico) were the Indian tribes on the Southern Plains (Texas). They included the Apaches and the Comanches. Before white people settled in the area, the dreaded Comanches had driven all the other tribes from the plains, their natural homeland, some hounded to the point of extinction. The Comanches spared no one. Men, women and children were slaughtered in their raids, Women were led away as captives to be gang-raped. The video Comanche War Raids gives a look into the delightful culture of that First Nation tribe.

Bruce Pascoe has turned out to be a fraud and DARK EMU a political work of nonsense.

Who will save us from these ideological crackpots?

The Killing of History

Keith Windschuttle, Quadrant, 13 May 2021

When little else in the world makes sense, history is the defining discipline. It carries extraordinarily important lessons for us and the future that we seek to shape. It can demolish prejudice. It is a reminder that there are hard decisions that have to be made, and the importance of making them and not shying away from them. And it can also inspire and point us to new horizons … We cannot, in facing our future, in the most consequential geopolitical realignment in our lifetimes, abandon what Arthur Schlesinger described as “historic purpose”. We have to be informed by a sense of not only who we are, but from where we have come.  
                     —Brendan Nelson, on launching A Liberal State: 1926–1966 by David Kemp

The audience at the launch in Sydney on April 29 of the fourth volume of David Kemp’s monumental history of Australian Liberalism nodded in agreement at Nelson’s comments on the centrality of history to understanding society. He described the book of his former ministerial colleague in the Howard government as a “towering masterpiece” which he wished he had read at the outset of his political career: “It brings so much understanding and enlightenment to who we are and where we are today.” (The book is reviewed in detail by William Poulos in our Books section in the upcoming June issue.)

On the night, those attending were obviously pleased with the impact both the book and its three companion volumes were likely to have on the future writing of political history in Australia and on the reputation of the single most influential character in Kemp’s latest narrative, Robert Gordon Menzies. The organiser of the book launch, the Menzies Research Centre’s Nick Cater, also announced that he had just signed a deal with the University of Melbourne to host the Robert Menzies Institute, a prime ministerial library and museum with Georgina Downer as executive director. Everyone hearing this felt things were looking up.

The next day, reality returned with a vengeance. The Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority released the new national school curriculum for history from Years Seven to Ten. None of its content bore any resemblance to that of David Kemp’s book. The curriculum has no analysis of the origins and history within Australia of liberalism or democracy. No appreciation of the degree of political, social and economic freedom enjoyed by all Australian citizens. Nothing to give any idea of how Australia became the prosperous, civilised country it has long been. No clue about why the great majority of Australians feel so lucky to live here.

The curriculum contains no mention of Robert Menzies or his political rivals John Curtin and Ben Chifley, or of any other of our prime ministers. No mention of other long-serving leaders such as Bob Hawke or John Howard. Yet there are plenty of names of other political identities that students will be required to study. Here is one list from the syllabus for Year Ten:

William Cooper, Jack Patten, Sir Douglas Nicholls, Lady Gladys Nicholls, Vincent Lingiari, Charles Perkins, Shirley Smith, Gladys Elphick, Essie Coffey, Joyce Clague, Roberta (Bobbi) Sykes, Gary Foley, Michael Anderson, Eddie Koiki Mabo, Lowitja O’Donoghue

There is no prize for guessing what they have in common. They are all Aboriginal political activists. These are the people the curriculum wants young Australians to regard as our most historically significant.

Read the rest here…

Christian Porter’s Bipolar accuser

In contrast with Cardinal Pell’s initial lack of support, there have been some powerful responses to the ABC mob after Attorney-General Christian Porter for alleged rape. But one important similarity between the Pell and Porter accusers is their mental and emotional health.

Despite the ban on the media to keep the identify and state-of-mind of Cardinal Pell’s accuser secret, information continues to dribble out. Merging all the information about ‘J’ or the ‘kid’, as he was variously referred to, one can form a picture of a man plagued by severe mental disorders.

While we rely on bits and pieces about Pell’s accuser, there is no such impediment with Porter’s. She suffered from bipolar disorder before killing herself – a common outcome of bipolar disorder. Bill Dawes in his ‘Accusations from the Realm of Madness’ (Quadrant, 10 March 2021) explains what the condition of bipolarity means.

*****

Accusations from the Realm of Madness

Bill Dawes, Quadrant, 10 March 2021

On Friday a reporter put this question to Attorney-General Christian Porter: “Why do you think this woman would come up with such an elaborate lie?” According to reports, the woman in question, who had accused Christian Porter of raping her in 1988, suffered bipolar disorder. If the reporter spent any time reviewing the experiences of people who suffer from bipolar he would not have asked such an asinine question.

Bipolar disorder, also known as manic depression, is a diagnosis bestowed upon those who experience sweeping mood swings that range from depressive lows to manic highs. Those who suffer from bipolar are often clever, as this poor girl was reported to be, however they must stick to a strict routine of strong medication to prevent slipping into a psychotic state. When they do, it is routine to experience a recurrence of false memories of a violent and sexual nature that become embedded in the brain, only to reappear when another episode occurs.

“Ah, give me madness, you heavenly powers! Madness that I may at last believe in myself! Give deliriums and convulsions, sudden lights and darkness, terrify me with frost and fire such as no mortal has ever felt, with deafening din and prowling figures, make me howl and whine and crawl like a beast: so that I may come to believe in myself!”– Friedrich Nietzsche.

If our ace reporter wanted to find out more about the experiences of bipolar patients and how they come up with such elaborate stories, he could have simply turned to google to read confessions such as this from PenelopeAnn:

Read the rest here…

More articles about the Porter Affair are HERE.

Milligan’s manic campaign continues to disintegrate

In Gerard Henderson’s must-read Media Watch Dog No. 531 of 26 February 2021, one finds correspondence between Henderson and Gavin Silbert QC, ‘one of Australia’s leading lawyers’, and formerly Victorian Chief Crown Prosecutor (2008-218).

There are three points of interest for me. First, this eminent lawyer with vast experience in Victoria destroys the Milligan mob case against Cardinal Pell. He could not be clearer. He had this to say:

‘I have just finished reading The Persecution of George Pell by Keith Windschuttle which is as good an analysis  as one could hope to find. We lawyers are used to defending clients and interpret their acquittals as a failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. I must say, that after reading this I was persuaded that not only was the standard of proof not met, but that Pell was an innocent man.’

Louise Milligan ignores all commentary that does not fit in with her spite and delusion, dismissing her critics as supporters of paedophiles. But even she could not ignore the opinion of someone she quotes approvingly in her book Witness. Silbert in the same correspondence:

‘I am certain that I am the same person interviewed by Louis Milligan for her book Witness  but I have not read the book and am reluctant to comment.

The third point of interest is Silbert’s justified criticism of Victoria police.

All I would say is that Victoria Police have the sole function of charging in Victoria and their recent practice of attempting to obtain the imprimatur of the DPP and/or Crown Prosecutors is without any legal justification; they have sought to do this of late to protect themselves from criticism particularly in matters of political sensitivity or high public interest. My invariable practice was to tell Victoria Police that it was a matter for them and to refuse to offer any advice.’

When will we have a commission investigating Victoria Police’s role in the Cardinal Pell witch hunt?

the Mob case against Porter already failing

Claim against Christian Porter is ‘now falling to bits’: Andrew Bolt

Sky News, 4 March 2021

The claim made against Attorney-General Christian Porter is “now falling to bits” as there are already two “factual errors” in what the alleged victim says occurred, according to Sky News host Andrew Bolt.

“By way of introduction, let me say that one of the silliest and [most] dangerous slogans of our time is ‘believe the victim’,” Mr Bolt said.

“This rape, we’re told, occurred in Sydney in January 1988”.

“The material that Porter’s accuser wrote – and which friends sent to some journalists after she killed herself – recalls that just before she was raped that very night, she went dancing with Christian Porter at the Hard Rock Café”.

“The first Hard Rock Café in Sydney, in Darlinghurst, did not open until 1989, April 1989, a full year or more later. This woman’s account, as told by that journalist, is wrong.”

Mr Bolt said he has now found a “second detail” which is “more important”.

Read the rest here…

Porter already Guilty – Annette Kimmitt of MinterEllison

In an astounding email to her 2,500 staff, Annette Kimmitt, CEO of Australia’s largest law firm, MinterEllison, apologised for the ‘pain’ caused by the firm’s acceptance of Christian Porter as client. One of her senior lawyers, Peter Barlett, well-known defamation expert, accepted the brief.

Christian Porter is presently the target of the media mob for allegedly raping his 16-year-old girlfriend 33 years ago when he was seventeen. Take note: 33 years ago, when Porter was seventeen-years-old.

Kimmitt wrote in her email, “The nature of this matter is clearly causing hurt to some of you, and it has certainly triggered hurt for me.” Poor Annette, to have to endure a bit of hurt. Boo-hoo.

In an oblique reprimand of Bartlett, Kimmitt explained that he had accepted Porter without going through the firm’s process of approval.

As I say, this action by the CEO of Australia’s largest law firm is utterly astounding. Like the media mob, to which she has joined herself, she is declaring Christian Porter guilty before the legal processes have begun.

What’s she doing in the law, leaving aside the question of what she’s doing as a lawyer, and what she’s doing heading up a law firm? Has she not heard of the principle, ‘innocent until found guilty’?

What has happened to the law in Australia? Was not the Pell Affair enough to show Australia’s legal system is on the slide to Salem Witch Hunt and the Dreyfus Affair territory? Apparently not.

Annette Kimitt has joined Louise Milligan’s Sixth Grade Spiteful Girls’ Club. Louise and her pals are the ultimate bone-pointing legal authority. Once they point the bone, that’s it. The guilty may as well lie down and die. There’s nothing they can do or say.

See reports in the Age and Guardian.

Louise Milligan’s 6th grade spiteful Girls’ club is on the rampage – again

I hardly took notice when a young women accused a man connected to the Liberal (read conservative) Party of rape. I took in the bare details that the alleged rape took place after a night of drinking and the couple had gone to someone’s unlit office in Parliament house – to have a cup of tea and a scone, no doubt. I didn’t take much notice because I knew what would follow.

‘We see you, we hear you, we believe you.’

Milligan and her spiteful pals were immediately on the case beating up the usual scenario of a toxic environment in which women are always the helpless victims. Of course, the toxic environment is always one inhabited by knuckle-dragging conservative types – the male-males that Milligan hates.

As expected, more cases emerged, the last being (horror!) of someone stroking a woman’s thigh. What trauma that totally helpless young woman must have suffered.

As expected, the actions of this one man were extended to the whole herd of conservative males in Canberra. They were all guilty of raping the woman.

The cry went up from Milligan and her spiteful pals. Action must be taken! There was no end to the prescriptions to deal with the uncontrollable males roaming Canberra on the lookout for helpless young women.

When the girls’ club rose in fury about the alleged rape by a cabinet minister of a women 33 years ago, my wife asked who they were talking about. I said, ‘I haven’t a clue, but if I have to guess, it’s probably Christian Porter. ‘Why,’ said my wife? I replied, ‘Because Milligan and her 6th Grade Spiteful Girls’ Club are after him and they won’t let him go. He’s done for.’

Christian Porter is a much lesser scalp than Cardinal Pell, but a prize one, nevertheless. Now, who’s next?

The truth about Aboriginal disadvantage

Loudest voices come from the cities, not the bush

Jacinta Nampijinpa, The Australian, 5 January 2021

Despite Closing the Gap, there remains a seven-year difference in life expectancy between the cities and the bush.
Despite Closing the Gap, there remains a seven-year difference in life expectancy between the cities and the bush.

Our political leaders don’t live in the bush, they live in cities. Heads of Aboriginal organisations don’t live in the bush, they live in cities. Policymakers don’t live in the bush, they live in cities. Those with the loudest voices pushing to change the date of Australia Day — or for a voice to parliament — don’t live in the bush, they live in the cities.

The cities are where the activists and their credulous supporters live among some of Australia’s most privileged. The cities are where the “progressive” media lives and the frame through which it views and reports to the rest of Australia. The cities are where the universities indoctrinate with much of their politically correct ideological teachings, delivered by academics who’ve never lived in remote Indigenous communities yet who bombard parliamentary inquiries and grant application channels with recommendations that fail to even grasp Indigenous disadvantage.

This is part of the reason decades of attempts to address Indigenous disadvantage have fallen short of accomplishing the outcomes needed to fix the ongoing raft of problems. Indigenous Australians in regional remote areas still face dire circumstances.

Read the rest here…

Paradigm Progressive pitch

For around four weeks before Christmas – at least, it seemed that long – Facebook people were treated to a pitch for a ‘new progressive party that was transparent, open and easy to join’ – the usual rhetoric of the left. Those that have long observed ‘progressive’ (meaning hard-left) parties know that they are anything but simple, transparent and open. They are usually full of frauds with an abundance of tricks to fool the gullible.

The pitcher did not identify himself, but like the good collectivist he obviously is, he identified his political group: Australian Progressive Media. One wonders whether that is the name of the progressive party he is pitching for, or the name of an media organization – not that it matters to the job at hand.

It is an unfortunate irony that the pitcher presents a paradigm image of the hard-left activist. The hard-left activist is usually male, around thirty, unshaven, short hair, and dishevelled with a sweaty unwashed look. He is a fanatic, totally feminized and homosexualised with testosterone levels at a frightening low.

His basic thesis is that the Australian Labor Party and the hard-left Greens have had their day. Australians, most of whom, he asserts, entertain progressive ideas, are crying out for a new progressive party to take the country out of the do-nothing decaying world of the conservatives and lead it into a glorious future where climate change, sustainability, blah, blah, blah are the central concern of government. All is needed is for the people to organized themselves and to choose able leaders which, he implies, they are yet to do. It is an old story with the usual dodgy message.

But we should take this feminised, homosexualised radical seriously. The left are terrific organizers and manipulators. That’s the reason they have, working outside the official democratic processes, captured the major institutions of the country and can cancel their opponents at will. The public service, secondary and tertiary education, the media, and (unbelievably) many corporations are in the hands of the left. It is only in government that conservatives can exercise power – for now. Who knows how long they can last against a traitor class that continues its effective program of subversion.