The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Pauline Hanson's makes a bid

Pauline Hanson's makes a bid

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 19
  7. 20
  8. 21
  9. All
and the major parties don't like it but the Greens have jumped in early as well.
"Pauline Hanson's brand of poisonous and divisive politics has no place in NSW in 2011," (from a statement on the Green's web site).

But is she really like that or is it only a Green beat up?
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 9 March 2011 5:06:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Considering neither candidates see remotely eye-to-eye, in the Greens eyes (being on the far opposite end of the spectrum in their views), as far as they're concerned, she IS all that.
Although the need to mention this on a site is overkill.

Now for Liberal or Labor to try to claim as such, on the other hand, would be a lot richer.
Posted by King Hazza, Thursday, 10 March 2011 8:38:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pauline Hanson was the first political scalp of the Politically Correct lobby that had infested the parliament. Her maiden speech in the Fed was hardly inflammatory and her views were a reflection of the electorate she represented. They were so FRIGHTENED of her voice reflecting the views of the electorate that she had represented that they locked her up to shut her down.

She simply mirrored the concerns of the electorate regarding the social engineering that had seen Australia population near double in a generation. Pauline Hanson is running in another regional electorate and she will again represent the views of the electorate without the political correct bullscheiser, and that voice of the people against the social engineering that has made Australia unrecognizable to the generations that passed before will again be branded as racist and redneck.
Posted by sonofgloin, Thursday, 10 March 2011 9:17:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Pauline Hanson was the first political scalp of the Politically Correct lobby that had infested the parliament"- sonofgloin

WTF, you mean Tony Abbott? Politically correct?

Oh man, you got it bad.
Posted by Bugsy, Thursday, 10 March 2011 9:22:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pauline Hanson is centre compared with the Greens perverted policies.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 10 March 2011 10:05:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So that attention-starved celebrity racist is having another go at appearing relevant.

She has only been successful in only one election and then lost the next six, pausing only to "Dance with the Stars". Not much of a support base there, despite all the phoney adulation and media cashing in on her exploits.

She rode in on a populist wave of anti-Asian sentiment and is hoping to repeat it by only changing the word from Asian to Muslim.

She may be a magnet for anybody with a complaint but in truth there's absolutely nothing she can do to change anything, except maybe her own bank balance.
Posted by wobbles, Thursday, 10 March 2011 12:40:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wobbles writes

'She may be a magnet for anybody with a complaint but in truth there's absolutely nothing she can do to change anything, except maybe her own bank balance'

at least she is not deluded enough to think she can change the climate by taxing people.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 10 March 2011 12:46:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
She does have one big plus going for her, she's not a Green.

Over on the Ethics Forum there's a bloke having a go at the Greens and he seems to support Hanson as well.
Quote:
Could someone, David Shoebridge perhaps, explain the reasoning behind this :
[from the NSW Greens' policy document]

(Quote):
16.3 Mental or physical fitness - reliable evidence of a mental or
physical condition which would render the applicant
unsuitable for owning, possessing or using a firearm;

If a person was judged to be mentally unfit to posses or use a firearm wouldn't that person be unfit to have access to matches?
Should such a person not be in protective custody?
For the good of society and 'if it only saves one life'.

Physical conditions are a bit of a problem, perhaps David could elucidate.
Not being able to walk perhaps?
Being wheel-chair bound?
Being quadraplegic?
I can think of no good reason why a quadraplegic should be denied owning a gun.

Just another Greens' ill thought out bit of tree hugging feely-goody (unquote)
Just like their having a go at Hanson, not really thought out, I wonder does this apply to their other policies as well?
Posted by Is Mise, Thursday, 10 March 2011 3:47:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well it is a democracy anybody can run for Parliament as we are constantly reminded.

I am not sure why Hanson causes such a fuss, she is an Australian citizen with a view, some will agree, some won't, people vote on what people stand for. If you don't like Hanson or the Greens don't vote for them.

Regardless of what one thinks of Hanson, she should not be hounded by the media, by major parties scared of losing a few votes and be prosecuted for made up crimes. That was a travesty in a fair minded democracy. Like all politicians however she should be able to argue in support of her policies and be prepared to cop some flak in the spirit of freedom of speech.

However, Is Mise your post above about the Greens is pretty straightforward. It is reasonable I would think to argue a person who is unstable should not have access to a gun. It is not about people with physical disabilities in wheelchairs being denied access to guns or matches.

This is just anti-Green propaganda with little merit evidenced by distorting the intention to pander to the faux morally outraged.
Posted by pelican, Thursday, 10 March 2011 4:28:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yup, "physical" incapacity should not impede firearm ownership, but anybody who has a problem with firearms licensing regulations denying mentally-unstable people from ownership really needs to get their own head checked.

Now CARS on the other hand WOULD warrant both mental and physical capacity, as the number of incapacities that might result in the driver killing someone are drastically increased (a gun only harms someone if it discharges (someone pulls the trigger) and pointed at something it shouldn't, a car can kill someone by simply not paying attention while driving).

Simply put, any dangerous device that warrants licensing requirements, should obviously be discriminatory to those who, for any reason, would be judged incapable of operating it safely.
Posted by King Hazza, Thursday, 10 March 2011 6:00:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am not sure why Hanson causes such a fuss, she is an Australian citizen with a view, some will agree, some won't,
Pelican,
The reason is so transparent that every leftie & because the majority of people in all media & public service are lefties her pragmatic approach scares whatever wits lefties have out of them. I bet she can ran a chook raffle but I'm not so sure about most lefties could.
Posted by individual, Thursday, 10 March 2011 6:24:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise, paranoid schizophrenics are not criminals and so do not need to be in protective custody, unless they have done something nasty of course. Many I have known smoke, so yes, they do have access to matches.

Would you seriously think that someone with cerebral palsy or similar should be allowed to own a firearm? They aren't allowed to drive without doctors recommendations, so gun ownership should be more lax than driver licences?

I disagree.

If you can't aim it, you can't own it.
Posted by Bugsy, Thursday, 10 March 2011 6:48:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Who are these mysterious "lefties" that most of you seem so distressed about?

Who exactly are are they "left" of and who represents "the middle"?

Is it anybody who disagrees with you for whatever reason or just a generic term of disdain because the "right" represents a better class of person?

Since the end of the Cold War the environmentalists have been made the new enemy of industry and free market capitalism so maybe it's anybody who dares question their right do do whatever they like whenever they like.

I really would like to know because its manufacturing a split in society - much like Pauline.
Posted by rache, Thursday, 10 March 2011 7:59:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
rache,
It's not Pauline who's splitting society, those who feel so threatened by her are the ones causing the rift. Those who don't agree with having to put in an effort are the ones who represent the left. The right minded are generally better citizens. The middle or rather the fence sitters are the worst. I believe in reward for effort it's as simple as that. The present setup with the more effort one puts in the more one gets fleeced & vise versa. The time is coming for pollies to take notice.
Posted by individual, Thursday, 10 March 2011 8:45:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
individual
It was not the 'lefties' that conspired to jail Pauline Hanson. Hanson threatened the dominant two-party system (or duopoloy) in the same way the Greens and the Democrats, but Hanson was more likely to erode the Coalition support base.
Posted by pelican, Thursday, 10 March 2011 10:10:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I remember watching an interview with Hanson before she was elected all those years ago. I thought she was a bit of a rough diamond: hardly eloquent, but what she said made sense. Had I lived in her electorate, and had I been old enough, I probably would have voted for her. I'm glad that wasn't possible, because almost everything I have heard from her since that interview has been, in my view, bigoted, ignorant and downright silly.

In the intervening years, she has switched between two roles. Sometimes she plays the strong woman; other times she plays the innocent and helpless victim. I don't think there's enough stability in her to justify another term in Parliament; that said, if she gets into the NSW Parliament she'll have no impact on my life whatsoever. I think the real problem, and the cause of her constant media ridicule, is that she simply wasn't ready for office. She didn't know how to behave, she didn't know when to shut her mouth and she didn't know how to play by the rules. That was certainly refreshing - in a fairer world she could have been a useful voice for her electorate rather than the butt of all manner of jokes.

I despise much of what Hanson says, but I wouldn't say that she is responsible for a rift in society. She has simply exposed a rift that was always there. Her politics don't cause division, but they cause us to talk about the division that does exist. Perhaps she does have a purpose after all.
Posted by Otokonoko, Thursday, 10 March 2011 10:14:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Left or Right"?
I'm glad you asked that question Rache because I've been wondering this too, and I think I have an answer for you:
Although previously it implied some kind of spectrum of stratification of rights, social positioning and resources (right being high stratification, left being more egalitarian), and before was nothing more than a label of British Lords over one debate.

In short I think it's just a way for some media lobbies to get a cemented gullible audience, and since the left/right pop culture divide is common knowledge and there is a 'we-are-at-war' mindset in the dumber members of society, many media groups are jumping on the opportunity to have a captive 'wartime' audience (Green Left Weekly and the Murdoch Press always go on about how their fictional enemy is controlling society and they must resist!)

Of course, the people who actually plaster themselves as members of the "left" or "right" don't even really KNOW what they are opposing or endorsing- one side picks a cause, the other opposes on principle.

For example, you get a lot of people assuming Julian Assange is "left wing" simply because they associate anyone who causes problems for a government as a hippy-marxist-Muslim-gay-anarchist-feminist plot, as opposed to say, someone who endorses Western Society's freedom of information and press.
Also, specifically in regards to Pauline Hanson, she and One Nation are regarded as "far right"- and although I have no policy site of Pauline, after reading through ON policies, it is rather hard to consider a pro-rights, pro-nationalization party as 'right'- even if they are full of racists.

I guess to wrap it up, it is for people who lack both independent non-binary thought- so they pick someone Else's views and cheer.
Posted by King Hazza, Friday, 11 March 2011 8:57:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican,
"However, Is Mise your post above about the Greens is pretty straightforward. It is reasonable I would think to argue a person who is unstable should not have access to a gun. It is not about people with physical disabilities in wheelchairs being denied access to guns or matches"

If a person who is unstable should not have access to a gun then why should they be trusted with matches, or kerosene, or petrol, or diesolene, or turpentine?
Just think what damage they could do with but one match and a little flamable liquid.

Who is going to say that a person, who is enjoying their freedom, is not to be trusted with a gun but can be trusted with matches?

If the Greens' policy is not about people with physical disabilities then why do they mention it?
Pauline Hanson isn't as arrogant as the Greens and although she has been accused of a lot of things she has never preached discrimination based upon physical disabilities.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 11 March 2011 9:21:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise
I am not arguing for or against the policy, just that to make it into more than it is, is not being honest.

The interpretation could be removal of rights of gun ownership where there is a condition that might lead to events similar to the Port Arthur massacre or the recent shooting in Texas. How it would be enforced is beyond me, but I don't think the policy sets out to push a discriminatory agenda. Good try though.

There are probably many disabilities that would make using matches difficult and dangerous posing safety hazards such as in the case of dementia patients leaving a pot on a stove. Commonsense has to prevail, you cannot legislate against every possibility and some human commonsense usually prevails. The need for legislation is superfluous.

My mother worked many years ago with a fellow who developed Parkinson's disease and he had great difficulty in undertaking tasks requiring fine or gross motor skills. My family used to provide support for him, undertaking those difficult tasks. However, I am not arguing we legislate every facet of human interaction or for every possible eventuality. We would be up all day and night passing ridiculous pieces of legislation.

It would be almost impossible to legislate and set down fair parameters but that is a different argument. To label it as 'discrimination' is a stretch when clearly that is not the intention nor most likely the outcome.

But it is an interesting approach you have taken to make Pauline Hanson's policies look less discriminatory.
Posted by pelican, Friday, 11 March 2011 9:37:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pauline Hanson's comment, " I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians," resonated with some people however not enough for her to win. She's back for another go. Many believe that the only vacuum she possesses is the one between her ears. However she's also said, "If politicians continue to promote separatism in Australia, they should not continue to hold their seats in parliament. They are not ruly representing all Australians, and I call on the people to throw them out."

The voters just may take her at her word. They usually get it right.
Posted by Lexi, Friday, 11 March 2011 11:04:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bugsy,

"Would you seriously think that someone with cerebral palsy or similar should be allowed to own a firearm? They aren't allowed to drive without doctors recommendations, so gun ownership should be more lax than driver licences?"

In a nutshell, Yes. but you are talking about different things 'use' and 'ownership'; the Greens would forbid ownership.

The Greens would deny such afflicted people gun ownership; is there any thing about a person with cerebal palsy being mentally unstable and therefore not able to tell right from wrong?

Some Notable Cerebral Palsey folk (from Wikipedia)

Josh Blue, winner of the fourth season of NBC's Last Comic Standing, whose act revolves around his CP. Blue was also on the 2004 U.S. Paralympic soccer team.

Abbey Curran, American beauty queen who represented Iowa at Miss USA 2008 and was the first contestant with a disability to compete. She also made an appearance on The Ellen DeGeneres Show
and CBS 'The Early Show'.

Stephen Hopkins, signer of USA Declaration of Independence, reputed to have stated, "My hand trembles, but my heart does not."

Geri Jewell, who was the first person with a disability to have a regular role in prime-time series on The Facts of Life. She has had roles on Sesame Street, 21 Jump Street, The Young and the Restless and Deadwood.

Karen Killilea, the subject of the book Karen (1952) and its sequel, With Love from Karen (1963), by her mother Marie Killilea."
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 11 March 2011 12:20:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican,

See my post above in answer to Bugsy.

The Greens, in their ever continuing hounding of legal gun owners, are being discriminatory.
What possible reason could there be for not allowing physically handicapped people to own a gun?
I defy any one to find one that will stand up to even the most cursory scrutiny.

Pauline on the other hand is all for legal gun ownership and for young people to be trained in the safe handling of firearms.

I really think that the Greens have not the intellegence to read correctly the English that they have used on their website nor to understand the ramifications of their policies.

Pauline doesn't suffer from this handicap.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 11 March 2011 12:34:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
On March 26th 2011 between the hours of 8am and 6pm a survey will be conducted in the state of NSW to determine the number of rednecks and troglodytes residing within the state. If you fall into one of these categories you will be required to place the number one (1) beside the name of Pauline Hanson on the big white paper. For those of you who have great difficulty with writing the number one (1) intensive training will be given on March 25th for a period of 8 hours at the Shooters Party HQ.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 11 March 2011 1:06:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

It's 'Shooters and Fishers Party' if you are going to write humourous pieces it still helps and adds credibility, for other's possible perception of you, if you get the nomenclature correct.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 11 March 2011 4:16:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No it doesn't.

But of course, correcting other peoples jokes does!
Posted by Bugsy, Friday, 11 March 2011 4:22:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
On continued note:
-Matches- may instigate a small fire if exposed to a flammable surface for enough time, which may gradually grow so long as continuous supply of flammable substances are ignited and nobody does anything about it.

To say that a psychopath holds the destructive power with a lit match and some wood to throw it to rivals a car that can kill a person at even 50km in some circumstances, but can achieve much higher speeds, at merely the motion of the foot or turning the wheel, and under low concentration by ACCIDENT: or a gun which can kill someone at any distances by merely aiming and squeezing the trigger?

My stance is simple- any item, substance or device that
1- has capacity to kill or cause a large fire in less than a couple of minutes (or even seconds)
2- exists outside the most basic living necessities that our constitution deems acceptable
-SHOULD be banned from people with a psychological problem.

Beyond eyesight problems, a physical problem should not impede firearm ownership unless it can pose a risk of an accidental or unintended death of an innocent;
For driving, it is an acceptable restriction.
Posted by King Hazza, Friday, 11 March 2011 4:43:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don't be cryptic, Bugsy, us lesser folk have trouble following.

Just tell me why physically handicapped people shouldn't own guns.
I honestly cannot see any reason and I think that the Greens are being discriminatory with their stance on this . They are also against hunting which is clearly a racist stance.

Pauline has been accused of racism but she has never been racist and would never be as racist as the Greens.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 11 March 2011 4:46:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pauline's never been racist? Really? So, we're not "in danger of being swamped by Asians?" And the reason she came back from Britain was not because it was "full of immigrants and refugees." And Europe is not "full of foreigners?" Oh, that's right - these statements aren't racists comments - they're merely "criticisms." Right.
Posted by Lexi, Friday, 11 March 2011 5:24:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi:>> Pauline Hanson's comment, " I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians," Many believe that the only vacuum she possesses is the one between her ears.<<

If you believe Pauline Hanson is vacuous, just say it, as opposed to "many believe".

What this vacuous woman is alluding to is the fact that Australia has near enough doubled its population in a generation, a person born in the eighties with a couple of kids right now have twice as many bodies surrounding them compared to the day they were born. The ABS identifies the growth of the past 35 years in this manner:

"The majority of the growth, 66 per cent, was due to overseas migration, with the remainder due to there being more births than deaths."

In a nutshell for you Lexi 7 out of 10 of the people who doubled the population were not born here. A recent UN report states our population growth is over double the world average.

The Liberal government that was in office during this period did have the power, but not the foresight to direct that a portion of Federal taxes paid to the States should be spent on infrastructure and housing. So we have a situation in Sydney and Melbourne where the populations have more than trebled during this period but the infrastructure is as it was thirty years ago to a major extent.

Why are the Aussies who were here before 1980 unhappy with immigration? Just one example, a standard house in a crappy Sydney suburb that cost $36k in the 1980’s now costs $400k. The working class man who took home $250 a week in 1980 now brings home $600, wages have risen by 200% but house prices have risen by 1300%. What chance of home ownership for the working man, none.

As I said in my post on this subject Hanson mirrored middle Australia and it scared the bejesuss out of the two parties. Hanson is no lawyer but she has substance and most importantly an ear to the electorate and not minority or focus groups.
Posted by sonofgloin, Friday, 11 March 2011 5:37:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just off the subject for a moment, does anyone see shades of Paul Keating in Bob Browns demeanor and media persona? I see Bob as I did Keating, a perfect candidate for a grim reaper for an aids campaign. He looks dead, not just brain dead but mortician dead. Can the dead own guns?
Posted by sonofgloin, Friday, 11 March 2011 5:51:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"They are also against hunting which is clearly a racist stance."
Um, could you care to tell us what exactly you mean by this statement Is Mise?
Posted by King Hazza, Friday, 11 March 2011 5:58:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Certainly, Sire.
Aboriginal Australians are, in some cases, still hunter gatherers and the vast majority of Aboriginals are entitled to hunt the animals that traditionally were their food source; kangaroos are the main example (other lesser macropods as well, of course), we other hunters are restricted to mainly feral pest animals such as foxes, non-native dogs, and feral cats.
The Greens are racist in that they would stop Aboriginals from hunting and are thus being racist as hunting is part of their culture.
It is also part of my, mainly European, culture so I see no reason why I should be stopped from killing ferals, who are destroying so much of the native animals that the Greens purport to wish to protect.

Pauline Hanson is all for protecting our native animals, not so the hypocrite Greens.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 11 March 2011 6:37:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SOG:

I don't have to say that Hanson is vacuous - she does it so well all by herself. As for her having the electorate's ear and scaring the two major parties - she's certainly not a mouse that roared merely a bucket of sludge. But enough said. I disagree with you, but I shall try to do so politely. For that reason I shall end this post with a joke:

One Friday afternoon Little Johnny is in class and the teacher says:
"OK class if you can answer one of these questions you can go home early and have Monday off as well."
Question 1: "Who discovered Australia and in what year?"
Little Jenny Chan puts her hand up, "Captain Cook in 1788 Miss."
The teacher says, "Excellent Jenny. You can go home early and take Monday off as well."
"Oh no Miss I can't do that. I want to be a doctor and I can't afford to take any time off from school."
"That's a very good attitude Jenny. I understand completely," says the teacher. The teacher then asks:
Question 2: "Who discovered America and when?"
Jimmy Wang puts his hand up and replies: "Christopher Columbus, 1648."
"Excellent Jimmy, you can go home early and take Monday off."
"No Miss, when I grow up I want to be a lawyer, and just like Jenny I can't afford to go home early or take any time off from school."
"I fully understand Jimmy and you also have a very commendable attitude I must say," the teacher replies.
Someone at the rear of the classroom yells out:
"F**ing Asian Bastards!"
The horrified teacher asks, "Who said that?"
Little Johnny jumps up with the answer: "Pauline Hanson, 1996. See you on Tuesday Miss."
Posted by Lexi, Friday, 11 March 2011 7:51:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aw! Lexi, that is a lacist joke.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 11 March 2011 8:46:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm surprised you didn't correct her on getting the dates wrong.
Posted by Bugsy, Friday, 11 March 2011 8:59:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There's no 'R' in dates.

See as you're around how about answering my question?
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 11 March 2011 9:24:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I already did.

If you can't aim it, you can't own it.
Posted by Bugsy, Friday, 11 March 2011 10:37:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi:>> Little Johnny jumps up with the answer: "Pauline Hanson, 1996. See you on Tuesday Miss.<<

Ah little Johnny, the vehicle for social comment from one gen to the next, thanks for that Lexi.
Posted by sonofgloin, Saturday, 12 March 2011 12:14:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"I see no reason why I should be stopped from killing ferals" There is no reason why a mostly drunken mob of yobbos should not be let loose in our National Parks for a shooting frenzy. With a bit of luck they will bag so many two legged ferals that we want have to worry about them again. p/s There's a slab of VB in it for anyone who bags a stray "Pauline" running through the bush, you cant miss it, its bright orange an goes ey aww ey aww.
Posted by Paul1405, Saturday, 12 March 2011 5:03:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thank you Paul for that intellectually minus contribution, still it's good to see a Green responding.

Bugsy,
Your answer is merely an opinion, just give me a reason why physically incapacitated people shouldn't be allowed to own a firearm.
What possible reason could there be for a quadraplegic person being denied ownership of a gun?

I really think that this policy of the Greens is discrimination on the grounds of physical handicap which is clearly contrary to the Anti Discrimination Acts

(quote)Disability Discrimination Act 1992
Grounds of unlawful discrimination
Physical, intellectual, psychiatric, sensory, neurological or learning disabilities; physical disfigurement; disorders, illness or diseases that affect thought processes, perceptions of reality, emotions or judgement, or results in disturbed behaviours; presence in body of organisms causing disease or illness (eg HIV virus).

Areas covered
Employment; education; access to premises; accommodation; buying or selling land; activities of clubs; sport; administration of Commonwealth laws and programs; provision of goods; and services and facilities
(unquote)
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 12 March 2011 10:37:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good Morning SOG,

I'm glad that you enjoyed the joke and saw it in the way it was intended. Now to get a bit more serious. More research needs to be done to document the contribution brought to Australia by migrants. Migrants have joined in the rebuilding of Australia's capital structures that have served the nation for many decades. Their economic contribution was significant at times when Australia needed it most - they helped to solve acute labour shortages, especially in outlying areas. They helped relieve the shortage of domestic staff in hospitals, increased the output of building material, helped build Australian homes, saved fruit and sugar crops, maintained railways, worked in sawmills, brick factories, cement works, on sewerage projects, water conservation, salt and brown coal mining, clearing land, quarrying, et cetera. Many newcomers established building companies, new factories, retail shops, service and repair centres, many became self-employed in small business and in all kinds of professions and trades. They also created secondary jobs, with their high levels of demand for goods and services. Most became Australian citizens and have proven to be loyal members of the Australian society - fighting with Australian forces in Korea and Vietnam. Many have since been honoured with Australian and British decorations and have shown a great love and attachment to their newfound home. Australia has benefited because the migrants solved its acute labour shortages in key areas, and the migrants benefited as well by being assured of jobs and having an opportunity to settle in a new country. Blaming migrants for a complexity of problems is difficult to sustain and an oversimplification. But enough said - it's only when one examines the full scope of the problems that one begins to understand that challenges that lie ahead in solving them.
Posted by Lexi, Saturday, 12 March 2011 10:45:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise, have they said that quadraplegics cannot own a firearm?

Just because you say that there are no physical disabilities you can think of that would render a person unsuitable for firearms ownership (as opposed to firearms use), does not mean that there aren't any. That is why the section is there, legislation should be in neutral language. It does not appear to preclude quadraplegics specifically, but it shouldn't not preclude any disability specifically.

In fact it does not even say 'disability', that's your words. In fact all this conjecture is merely your own interpretation, and therefore 'your opinion'.
Posted by Bugsy, Saturday, 12 March 2011 11:02:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bugsy,

"Just because you say that there are no physical disabilities you can think of that would render a person unsuitable for firearms ownership (as opposed to firearms use), does not mean that there aren't any. That is why the section is there, legislation should be in neutral language. It does not appear to preclude quadraplegics specifically, but it shouldn't not preclude any disability specifically"

There are no physical disabilities that would render a person unfit to own a firearm period, nil, nyet, zilch.

The Greens only put it in there to fill out a paragraph or to emphasize their pathological fear of guns and hatred of their owners.
These crypto communists hypocrites attack the very people who are actively doing something to help protect our native wildlife, every fox shot equals thousands of native animals saved from being killed and eaten.
No wonder the Greens are known as 'Watermellons', Green on the outside and Red in the middle.

Paulene Hanson believes in exterminating foxes and in so doing helping to preserve our unique Australian fauna.
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 12 March 2011 2:43:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise:

Pauline Hanson believes in exterminating foxes and protecting our native animals? That's very commendable. Does she have a policy on how
foxes should be exterminated? Shooting them is helpful, but its likely to only remove a small proportion of foxes (as only foxes that are easily seen, are shot). Spotlighting usually underestimates the fox population. There's also the added problem that fox and rabbit hunting incidents alone have claimed lives. Hunting deaths occur every year and that's a rather high price to pay. Perhaps what Ms Hanson should be supporting is proper training for shooters, like a six month TAFE training course with genuine written examinations. It may be more beneficial to train shooters properly by setting standards to ensure both shooter and public safety.
Posted by Lexi, Saturday, 12 March 2011 3:45:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Again, they do not use the word 'disability'.

They refer to 'reliable evidence of a mental or
physical condition which would render the applicant
unsuitable for owning, possessing or using a firearm'.

Disability is your word. Way to go, strawman.
Posted by Bugsy, Saturday, 12 March 2011 3:55:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi,
what you need to understand is that someone who has worked for a living i.e. like Pauline Hanson in a Fish'n Chips Shop, has a far more realistic view of daily life than say a school teacher who has others do the thinking for them.
Posted by individual, Saturday, 12 March 2011 4:46:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"They refer to 'reliable evidence of a mental or
physical condition which would render the applicant
unsuitable for owning, possessing or using a firearm'."

Quite right, Bugsy, so what physical condition would render a person unsuitable for owning a firearm?

If there is a strawman around then he's decidedly Green.

I will say right out that such a condition does not exist and that there is no way that the NSW Greens can justify such a statement in their policy.
Nor can you or any one else give a legal or a logical reason why a physical condition would render a person unfit to own a firearm.

The Greens are advocating discrimination on physical condition which is just a mite unfair, but in fairness to the Greens I think that their attitude is based on ignorance rather than malice.
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 12 March 2011 4:52:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Evening Lexi, all you say in regard to the contribution migrants have made to this country is valid. You are of course talking about post war migration, a time when we had a job for all who came rather than the migration over the last thirty years, one not driven by our commonwealths need but driven by the illogical self harming protocols that our treasonous pollies signed at the UN.

Many of my sons friends cannot get secure full employment, two kids, both carpentry apprentices had multiple employers last year because nothing is getting built, so they get put off, one still has not found employment this year. So what chance the immigrant from the second or third world? Lexi the current immigration flow serves only big business, it provides them with a growing consumer market, funded by welfare and the shifty cash economy that the Arab and Chinese new chums run amongst themselves when they reach critical mass, and they have.
Posted by sonofgloin, Saturday, 12 March 2011 6:07:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Individual,

I don't know how much work is involved in a fish and chip shop and how much intelligence and lateral thinking it actually involves. However I do know what it involves to become a good teacher - I've got several in the family. Teachers are expected to reach unattainable goals with inadequate tools. The miracle is that at times they accomplish this impossible task. Teachers deserve our support because they are the decisive element in the classroom. It's their personal approach that creates the climate. It is their daily mood that makes the weather. As a teacher they possess tremendous power to make a child's life miserable or joyous. Teachers can be a tool of torture or an instrument of inspiration. They can humiliate or humour, hurt or heal. In all situations it is a teacher's response that decides whether a crisis will be escalated or de-escalated, and a child humanized or de-humanized. Many teaching problems will be solved in the next few decades. There will be new learning environments and new means of instruction. One function, however, will always remain with the teacher: to create the emotional climate for learning. No machine, sophisticated as it may be, can do this job. You claim that teachers don't think - obviously not much thought went into that statement of yours. Schools cannot survive on miracles. They need teachers with effective tools and skills who can increase a child's sense of self-worth, and enhance the quality of life in the classroom.
A competent educator, like an accomplished musician, devotes years and effort to acquiring techniques. Once acquired, they are unseen. The violinist plays his music as though problems of fingering, bowing, and double stopping never existed. A principal, a teacher can respond helpfully, as though congruent communication were his/her native tongue. By giving children an education you give them wings.
And education is essentially the leading forth, the growth, of an individual through structured experience. No job is more important than that of an educator.
Posted by Lexi, Saturday, 12 March 2011 6:27:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And education is essentially the leading forth, the growth, of an individual through structured experience.
lexi,
Of course it is, did I say it wasn't ? I just would like to point out that if everyone is so educated then where on earth is all their usefulness ? I recall the headmaster of a school on Cape York twentyfour years ago telling me that his school will provide students who will make a difference in twenty years. Well, nothing's happened yet. I don't know of any uneducated people in politics & policy making but I know quite a few who became successful business people. So far, I haven't seen an educated person being useful to society. Education is pointless when it's only about education. The teachers I know don't have a clue how to teach & make a student understand. The only thing they know is how to play the get-the-benefits game. I have shared accommodation with teachers on three occasions for a year each time & from my observation of their mentality I wouldn't pay them half of what they are getting.
I accept that there are people who can teach but I have yet to meet one.
Posted by individual, Saturday, 12 March 2011 7:19:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi SOG,

The prospect of "alien" immigration has always provoked some anxiety among the existing population. A good deal of local prejudice and sometimes outright hostility is often directed at the newest arrivals. It is ironic that, if such attitudes had prevailed in the past, the ancestors of many of today's Australians would never have been able to immigrate to Australia in the first place. Competing for scarce resources has always been a problem - and the accusation of migrants taking away jobs from "old" Australians has been levelled from time to time at all migrants. The reality however is often different. I can understand your concerns. Don't forget we had a global financial crisis which affected most countries very badly. Australia managed to survive. With increasing population there is a need for housing, food production, industry, infra-structure - but it's up to the government (no matter of what persuasion) to legislate and keep up (or not) with the "critical mass" that you speak of.
It is a cyclical problem which has existed and will continue to exist with its highs and lows. If Australia wanted to be part of the global economy (which it does) - it had to sign certain International Agreements - to which it is now committed. As for your son's friends, it would be wise for them to broaden their work practices to be able to find work in other areas. Migrants have to adjust. New arrivals take whatever they can get and make the best of it. Whether it involves driving taxis, buses, trams, trains, working in shops, restaurants, hotels, anything to feed the family. My son finished Uni with a Science Degree - worked as a labourer on construction sites, worked as a shop-assistant and finally worked his way up to be a Manager in the retail business. It doesn't always end up with what you had initially planned on doing, however, you make the best of what you can to survive. I've always believed in the old adage, "When life serves you lemons, you make lemonade!" (or words to that effect).
Posted by Lexi, Saturday, 12 March 2011 7:30:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Individual,

I'm sorry that you haven't met a good teacher. I've been fortunate in knowing some excellent ones - who were capable of opening the minds and hearts of the children they taught. One teacher in particular comes to mind - my English teacher - who inspired in me my love of Shakespeare - and to this day that's something for which I'm grateful.
She captivated my imagination and captured my heart. She never criticized, she coaxed. She never pushed, she persuaded. She never insulted, she inspired. With sensitivity she taught us to contrast drama and life, to evaluate performance and character. Through her efforts I came to appreciate the theatre - and its very much a part of my life today.
Posted by Lexi, Saturday, 12 March 2011 8:08:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi:>> The prospect of "alien" immigration has always provoked some anxiety among the existing population.<<

If we are discussing Australia the provocation has not delivered a negative result according to our teary "eagle has landed" PM. She announced to the UN that we were the most harmonious multi culture on the globe; we can guess what she is pitching for, right next to Kev.

>>It is ironic that, if such attitudes had prevailed in the past, the ancestors of many of today's Australians would never have been able to immigrate to Australia in the first place.<<

Lexi I am not against immigration on racial grounds, I base my reasoning on sustainability and infrastructure. I am talking about every major city having to build desalt plants because we were running out of water, our population doubled in 30 years and 70% of that is from migration.
TBC
Posted by sonofgloin, Saturday, 12 March 2011 11:04:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
>> Competing for scarce resources has always been a problem - and the accusation of migrants taking away jobs from "old" Australians has been leveled from time to time at all migrants.<<

Well the accusers would be fools, our jobs and the ability of Australia to sustain the second flow of migrants went with our manufacturing base, and that was dismantled via the Lima Agreement.

>> The reality however is often different. I can understand your concerns. Don't forget we had a global financial crisis which affected most countries very badly. Australia managed to survive.<<

No offence Lexi but this utter rubbish about, we survived the financial crisis. Other than credit getting tight nothing happened to us because our market was not exposed. Whole towns went up for sale in the US, we kept digging and growing and shipping, and the wash on us was NEGLIGABLE compared to the Northern Hemisphere.

>> As for your son's friends, it would be wise for them to broaden their work practices to be able to find work in other areas.<<

Youth unemployment is over 30% in Australia, I will give them your sound advice Lexi.
Posted by sonofgloin, Saturday, 12 March 2011 11:05:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The problem here is that one can't have an opinion, 'an honest one' without being called a 'racist'.

If one suggests that some Muslims don't try to assimilate and adopt our customs, you are 'racist'.

If one suggests that a large percentage of indigenous folk waste most of their welfare money on grog and cigs, or that they waste opportunity after opportunity to better themselves, you are a racist.

Just remember, there is nothing racist about telling it how it is. It's just that to many people simply can't handle the truth.

Also remember that PH tells it as it is, and she also welcomes immigrants who wish to adopt the Australian way.

Now how can that be seen as racist?
Posted by rehctub, Sunday, 13 March 2011 6:21:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here's another bit of Green 'logic' from their Policy Statement in NSW, courtesy of "Samuel' on the Ethics Forum.

(quote) OK, I'll start the ball rolling with a Green proposal that is out and out stupidity.

From their firearms policy.

Quote:
33. Enforcement of regulations requiring guns in homes in rural
communities to be kept in a metal box with a combination lock securely
bolted to wall or floor, with firing mechanisms and ammunition locked in
a similar box in a separate room; unquote.

Now here it is the middle of the night and farmer Jones is sound asleep beside his loving wife.
She wakes him up and tells him that she heard a noise from her sheep.
She has a dozen prize ones that she likes to pen near the house.

Thinking that it might be dogs, because the sheep are kickin' up a row by this time, the farmer goes in the dark to fumble with the combination lock on the gun safe, he gets his rifle out, then still in the dark he manages to get the other combination lock undone and with a feeble torch (must remember to get fresh batteries) he finds the bolt and the the ammunition and moves cautiously outside. He flicks on the floodlights but he's too late, most of the prize sheep are down and those that are still up are walking on their own entrails.

Sadly he shoots those that are still alive because to his expert eye they are beyond help.

Why did he fumble around in the dark?
Because to turn on the lights would have alerted the wild dogs.
(continued below)
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 13 March 2011 8:05:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
(continued from above)
Or consider this :
Mrs Jones is in the kitchen of the farm house when she hears a commotion in the chook house, looks out the window and there's a wild dog.
Does she,
1. Try to get a gun from the locked safe and the bolt and ammunition from the other locked box.
2. Run out and try to frighten the dog, which may save the chooks but then she may be attacked.
3. Ring '000' and watch the chooks get killed.

or does she grab her 12gauge shotgun from behind the door, a shell from her apron pocket, race out the back door and blast the dog.
Pity that Mrs Jones is guilty of a few criminal offences but she still has her chooks.

The Greens are impractical sidewalk cafe theorists.
If a farmer or his wife or his employees need a gun they are often going to need it in a hurry.(unquote).

Pauline Hanson, and a lot of other politicians, would never promote such stupidity but for the Greens it's par for the course
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 13 March 2011 8:07:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear SOG,

You seem to have all the answers therefore I don't see the point in any further discussion. I will suggest that you write to the PM with your concerns as well as your solutions to the problems that you feel Australia is currently facing. That would probably achieve far more then posting on this Forum. Good Luck with that!
Posted by Lexi, Sunday, 13 March 2011 10:57:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear rehctub,

You state there's nothing racist about "telling it like it is." Prejudiced thought always involves the use of a stereotype - a rigid mental image that summarizes whatever is believed to be typical about a group. Clearly prejudiced people are not concerned about genuine group characteristics; they simply accept any negative statement that feeds their existing hostility. Another factor that contributes to prejudice is scapegoating. Placing the blame for one's troubles on some relatively powerless individual or group. Scapegoating typically occurs when the members of one group are threatened but are unable to retaliate against the real source of the threat. Instead, they vent their frustrations on some weak and despised group and thereby gain the sense that they are superior to someone at least. An example can be given from Great Britain, where prolonged recession caused chronic unemployment among working-class white youths. Unable to strike at the real source of their problem - the "system" - some of these youths took to assaulting Pakistani immigrants, whom they believed to be competing for the few available jobs at the same level. These attacks became so common that a new word was created for them - "Paki-bashing."
Posted by Lexi, Sunday, 13 March 2011 11:14:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi,
I hope that for the sake of the children's future whom you teach you are separating your views from the curriculum you're repeating as a proxy.
Posted by individual, Sunday, 13 March 2011 12:53:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Greens are impractical sidewalk cafe theorists.
If a farmer or his wife or his employees need a gun they are often going to need it in a hurry.(unquote).

Far better to be a impractical sidewalk cafe theorists than a rednecked troglodyte who can't see past the end of their gun. Farmer needs a gun, why? Are the Hatfields still feuding with the McCoys.
The reallity is the first thing a person owning a gun is likely to shoot is them self followed by a family member.
Posted by Paul1405, Sunday, 13 March 2011 1:33:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405,
I presume that is 1405 AD?

Still it could be BC, you're far enough out of touch.
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 13 March 2011 1:37:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405,
How about you let us all know when you're ready to face a wild boar without a gun or a pack of dogs gone wild.
I'll bring my video camera.
Posted by individual, Sunday, 13 March 2011 3:56:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Individual,

I need to clarify something for you as you seem to have the impression that I'm a teacher - I'm not.

You state that you hoped that "for the sake of the children that you teach..." I'm not a teacher by profession. But Thank You for the great compliment. However, I am a parent and as such, of course I had an agenda for raising my children - and that was to raise decent human beings. They're adults now and I'm proud to say that we
succeeded. Again, Thank you for the compliment, and for your concern.
Posted by Lexi, Sunday, 13 March 2011 4:28:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise and Individual,

Paul is spot on. Why would you want to own a gun unless you intend to use it for hunting. One doesn't usually meet wild boars on urban streets. (Well, not the four-legged kind at least). And hunting also entails certain risks as well:

Two hunters are roaming through the woods when all of a sudden one of them grabs his throat and dies. The other hunter calls 000 and tells the operator, "My friend just grabbed his throat and died!"
"Okay, okay, calm down," replied the operator.
"Go over to him first and make sure that he's actually dead."
"Okay," replies the hunter.
The phone goes silent, than all of a sudden - BANG from a gun is heard.
"Okay," says the hunter, "Now what?"
Posted by Lexi, Sunday, 13 March 2011 5:01:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
(quote)
JAPAN QUAKE HIGHLIGHTS NUCLEAR DANGERS : Greens
ABC News

Greens leader Bob Brown says nuclear energy is outside "the limits of human safeguards" (Reuters: Kim Kyung-Hoon)

The Greens say the threat from an earthquake-hit nuclear power plant in Japan shows the dangers of nuclear energy.

Friday's 8.9-magnitude earthquake and tsunami damaged the cooling system of a reactor at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
Plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) says radiation levels have surpassed the legal limit and the cooling system at another of the plant's six-nuclear reactors has also failed.
Nineteen people taken to a nearby hospital have been exposed to radioactivity, in addition to three cases of exposure recorded on Saturday.
About 170,000 people have been evacuated from around the plant.

Australia has requested more information about the nuclear threat, which Prime Minister Julia Gillard describes as a very serious issue.

Greens leader Bob Brown says the situation in Japan is a reminder that nuclear energy is outside "the limits of human safeguards".
"It does raise real questions about the nuclear alternative, particularly for a sunny country like this where we don't need it. People don't want it," he said.
"When the Howard government promoted it, they quickly withdrew it, because the Australian people don't want to be unnecessarily faced with that sort of mega risk."

However, Ms Gillard says now is not the time to have a debate about nuclear power.
Meanwhile, conservationists say Australia will be morally culpable if there is a nuclear disaster in Japan.
Dave Sweeney from the Australian Conservation Foundation says Australia has a direct moral responsibility for any nuclear fallout.

"Australian uranium is bought and burnt by this power company in Japan," he said.
"So there are direct links between the industry here and the industry in Japan, which is causing major problems with mass evacuations, with mass dislocation of communities, with a real threat of a grave contamination event.". . . (unquote)

Note the unseemly haste with which the Greens and their (temporary)
Leader hasten to get on the bandwaggon of human misery to push their ajenda
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 13 March 2011 5:08:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise,

I had assumed that this thread was to be a serious discussion about Pauline Hanson's comeback into politics - I can see that you had another agenda all along.
Posted by Lexi, Sunday, 13 March 2011 5:18:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi,
Don't the Greens feature in the first post?
Did they not open the attack on her?
I'm sure that we can all correctly assume that Paulene Hanson would not be so crassly insensitive as to make political capital out of human trajedy, something that has become expected of the Greens.

So much so that Senator Bob Brown MD is becoming known as 'Humanity' Brown, whatever failings Paulene may have she does not lack humanity.

I might add for your benefit Lexi, that farmers and their families and workers, often face real danger in the bush and in Western Australia stockmen have been licenced to carry pistols when mustering as, if their life is threatened by charging wild cattle, they have a chance of protecting themselves. A rifle on horseback is a mite unwieldly sometimes.
Not all of us live in the city, Lexi, and a firearm is just another tool and one that I use a couple of times a week killing foxes and the occassional feral cat, because I do something about protecting our unique fauna.
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 13 March 2011 5:56:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi, you may have a point, however, PH has been known to say that she admires immigrants that "try to assimilate and adopt our customs"

It is the ones who come here and try to 'change our world' that she dislikes. And why shouldn't she?

Have you been to a shopping centre lately and noticed the 'trolley collectors'. It's become a 'spot the aussie' affair.

Now if we were at 20% unemployment I am sure you would see some reaction to that here to. But then again, you get well supported for doing nothing in this country, even if it's just to feed your uncontrollable habits.
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 14 March 2011 6:54:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Now as for a farmer needing a gun, well, those who think any farmer shouldn't have a gun 'at the ready 24/7' is a complete and utter out of touch 'toss'!

Once again, it's a case of 'let's see who's world we can interfere with today' scenario.

Get a life!
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 14 March 2011 6:57:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear rehctub:

If Ms Hanson admires immigrants that try to "assimilate" and adopt "our" customs - perhaps she should make it quite clear as to what she means by "our" and which precise customs she's referring to.
I'm sure that new arrivals would find that most helpful. You may not realise it - but Australia has evolved over the decades - whereas judging from your comments and those of Ms Hanson - neither of you seem to have evolved very far. You both seem to be still living back in the irretrievable past with a fantasy of an all-white Australia.
If contemporary Australians are to live at ease with themselves, they need more education, less fear mongering, and not least, greater honesty about the culture of racism that is so damagins to us all.
As for telling me to "get a life," that's no way to win an argument,
No one likes or supports an abusive, illogical or weak debater.

Dear Ise Mise,

Handguns with magazines holding up to ten bullets are not prohibited on the Australian market. So I don't understand what your complaint is. Most thinking people should be concerned about issues dealing with guns when research shows that the less guns that are available in the community, the less likely someone will be shot by a firearm. There should be mechanisms to stop gun licences being issued to people who aren't fit to hold a licence. There should be restrictions on the sale of ammunition, sold only by licensed gun shops to licensed shooters and limited to ammunition that suits firearms registered in the licensee's name. There should also be Australia-wide uniformity of gun laws. There should be laws requiring all outlets to keep a register of all ammunition bought and sold and so on. Shooting foxes is helpful, but it's likely to only remove a small proportion of foxes. A baiting programme using "FOXOFF" for baits and Econobaits twice a year, with bait replacement until the take is reduced is an effective and environmentally conscious form of fox control in most rural areas.
Posted by Lexi, Monday, 14 March 2011 11:55:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi, I doubt you can change their minds, but I enjoy watching your much more reasoned approach :)

Pauline Hanson and her band of racist, white, shoot-em-up, good-ol-boys, still living in the mid 1900's or worse, will never get majority support in Australian society today because most Australians today have dragged themselves out of that old-fashioned mindset.
Posted by suzeonline, Monday, 14 March 2011 3:34:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi,

Good, someone's reading up on the problems.
(quote)
The persistence of 1080 in....commonly used fox baits, Foxoff® and chicken wingettes, was assessed under different climatic and rainfall conditions in central-western New South Wales. Loss of 1080 from wingettes was....remaining lethal for....on average, 0.9 weeks. Foxoff® baits remained lethal for longer than wingettes under all tested conditions, although their rate of degradation increased generally with increasing rainfall......areas baited with Foxoff® will require longer withholding periods for working dogs than those baited with wingettes, especially during dry periods.....(unquote)
In a nutshell they kill foxes and anything else that eats them, like birds and the endangered natve cats.

http://www.feral.org.au/persistence-of-sodium-monofluoroacetate-1080-in-fox-baits-and-implications-for-fox-management-in-south-eastern-australia/
(quote)
Captive trials were undertaken to determine whether tiger quolls and eastern quolls could detect baits that were either buried or covered with soil following the methods employed in normal buried-poisoned-bait programmes. Both tiger quolls and eastern quolls detected and consumed buried FOXOFF baits.....trials showed that tiger quolls were capable of consuming 2–3 FOXOFF baits in a single meal and more than three baits overnight. Eastern quolls could consume up to 1.5 baits in a single meal.

Field trials....to investigate whether tiger quolls in the wild could also detect and consume buried baits. Trials with both fresh meat and FOXOFF.....The results confirmed that tiger quolls in the wild can detect and consume both fresh meat and FOXOFF baits that have been buried or placed on the surface and covered with soil to a depth of 5–8 cm.

The results indicate that the buried-bait technique is not specific for introduced predators, and free- feeding may not preclude non-target species from taking buried baits. Reliance on the identification of the species visiting bait stations from tracks may also be unreliable as foxes dug up bait stations searching for baits, even after the bait had been removed, potentially obliterating other tracks.(unquote)
LINK:
http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/WR95077.htm

Lexi do you have any idea of the suffering and time taken to die of an animal that has ingested 1080?
I would hope not, but read up on it, it might just change your mind.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 14 March 2011 3:44:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To save all of you interested and humane people from having to search,
(quote)
The list of symptoms include:

"…restlessness; increased hyperexcitability; incontinence or diarrhea; excessive salivation; abrupt bouts of vocalization; and finally sudden bursts of violent activity. All affected animals then fall to the ground in teranic seizure, with hind limbs or all four limbs and sometimes the tail extended rigidly from their arched bodies. At other times the front feet are clasped together, clenched or used to scratch frantically at the cage walls. This tonic phase is then followed by a clonic phase in which the animals lie and kick or 'paddle' with the front legs and sometimes squeal, crawl around and bite at objects. During this phase the tongue and penis may be extruded, their eyes rolled back so that only the whites show and the teeth ground together. Breathing is rapid but laboured, with some animals partly choking on their saliva. Finally such individuals begin to relax, breathing more slowly and shallowly and lying quietly with the hind legs still extended but apparently semiparalysed".(unquote).

Seen this happening and put an end to the suffering with a bullet, also probably broken the law by shooting a kangaroo that was in the final throes.
http://www.wlpa.org/1080_poison.htm
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 14 March 2011 4:04:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
suzeonline,
You can do more civil than your last post. You condemn realistic working people with academic bile dribble, not very intelligent at all.
Posted by individual, Monday, 14 March 2011 5:22:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Individual, so you think those that don't support racist would-be politicians like Pauline Hanson,
("I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians.")
are non -working, unintelligent people?

You can do better than that...
Posted by suzeonline, Monday, 14 March 2011 5:35:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Suze,

Thanks for your kind words and support. As always it's deeply appreciated.

Is Mise,

CSIRO have undertaken numerous projects of land management - including how to deal with foxes, feral cats and others, as well as the problems of endangered animals like the quoll. Of course there's more to controlling foxes than baiting and bullets. Another method is the development of an Immunocontraceptive Vaccine for the control of foxes in Australia. If you're interested you can always google the subject on the web. By the way, for your information, my family's ancestry comes from a long line of farmers - including in-laws who used to own stud-farms near Quirindi, NSW. Pop has since retired - but
his sons have taken over.
Posted by Lexi, Monday, 14 March 2011 5:58:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Immunocontraceptive Vaccine"
Dream on, "Condoms for Foxes" will be just as effective.
How about the horrendous deaths from 1080?

Foxes;
(quote) In Australia, research has shown that the fox normally consumes approximately 30 per cent wildlife in its diet. A single fox can consume around 40kg of small native animals per year. This accounts for a very large number of native animals lost each year, particularly when the current fox population in Australia has been estimated at 7.2 million. That’s a potential of at least 288,000 tonnes of native animals killed and consumed by foxes each year....(unquote)
From SSAA.
I've shot over 1,000 foxes since I started counting and an old friend, who died recently, had shot over 3,000. That's a lot of natives saved.
Paulene Hanson supports these kinds of efforts but the Greens would stop it if they could. Just as they helped boost the number of foxes by the misguided attacks on women who wore fox furs by them and their fellow travellers. The fox fur industry crumpled as it became uneconomical to kill foxes for their pelts.
Who is the more practical?
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 14 March 2011 7:44:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
suzeonline,
you're just simply way too much out of touch with reality. by the way I just saw a TV ad tonight about Alice Springs. It says that accusation of racism is invariably used to divert attention from reality.
Posted by individual, Monday, 14 March 2011 9:42:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi, rehctub here.

Firstly, I did not tell you (personally) to 'get a life' , unless of cause you are one who supports this ridiculous notion that farmers should not have easy access to a gun.

Secondly, what you refer to by way of restricting the issuing of gun licences, the sale of ammunition, relevant to the licenced gun, etc, already exists. I know, as I have a license for two categories of rifles. I also own a rural property and I can assure you, wild dogs and the likes are a serious problem that is out of control.

For the record, do some research into how many drovers dogs have died an agonising death from picking up baits.

Now as for 'racism', simply ask yourself this. If you were to go to a muslim country and openly practice Christianity, would you expect to be allowed the freedom to do this without being harmed?

Or, do you except the fact that it is a forbidden act?

Now be honnest here!
Posted by rehctub, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 5:15:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
" Most thinking people should be concerned about issues dealing with guns when research shows that the less guns that are available in the community, the less likely someone will be shot by a firearm."

This is true up to a point; if there were less cars then less people would be killed by cars, if there were less thunder storms then less people would be killed by lightning, true but utterly simplistic.
Had there been more guns in East Timor then the Indonesians wouldn't have been able to kill so many Timorese, providing the extra guns were in the hands of the potential victims.
Same in Somalia, same in Ethiopia. , same in your home when a criminal breaks in.

"There should be mechanisms to stop gun licences being issued to people who aren't fit to hold a licence"

Good idea, how do you tell?
Perhaps the Greens ought to concentrate on disarming the criminals who have guns rather than the law-abiding citizens who have been judged as trustworthy people by their respective Commissioners of Police. Logic would dictate that the more people who are Licenced Firearm Owners, that is people deemed to be trustworthy, then the better society will be.
That has been Paulene Hanson's stance all along
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 10:44:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Ise Mise,

There are various different ways that you can control foxes apart from baiting and bullets, as I suggested to you earlier - google
the subject in connection with CSIRO (or contact CSIRO) - it's up to you - (if you're interested). Or alternatively - go on doing what you've been doing.

Dear rehctub,

Glad to hear that it wasn't me you were referring to when you stated,
"Get A Life!" As for guns - I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for responsibly designed training courses with genuine written examinations to train shooters properly by setting standards that ensure shooter and public safety and to have uniform gun laws Australia wide. As for racism -in the last five years there has been documented and anecdotal evidence of a mass increase in harassment, vilification, and violence towards Australians of Middle-Eastern appearance both in the media and in popular imagination. Prejudice creates what it fears, because through prejudice young people's prospects are curtailed. Young Australians of Middle-Eastern appearance struggle to get an education and jobs and are increasingly ghettoized in poorer suburbs. Their own families often live defensively and become highly prejudiced about Australians. The increasing hostility of the broader community reinforces this inter-community racism, rather than challenging it. As for my moving to a
Muslim country and practising Christianity - would I be allowed to do it? What an odd question. Islam is one of the world's major religions; it claims the allegiance of a fifth of the entire human population. Although Westerners often think of Islam as an Arab religion, most Muslims are not Arabs. The largest Muslim populations are in Indonesia, India, there are large concentrations of Muslims in
China and Russia. Islam is the second-largest faith in Europe after Christianity, and it competes with Christianity in many black countries. People travel to these places all over the world with no problems. Therefore placing the blame for one's troubles on some relatively powerless individual or group is merely scapegoating and it is irrational and illogical.
Posted by Lexi, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 11:02:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cont'd ...

Dear rehctub,

Most of the problems arise because some people dislike anything that is different from themselves - be it race, religion, colour, education,wealth, dress, appearance and so on. No matter what the circumstances it will continue to exist. People's thoughts and feelings develop in and are shaped by their social context. People tend to think in terms of general categories, if only to enable them to make sense of the world by simplifying its complexity. The key feature of prejduice is that it's always rooted in generalisations and so ignores the differences among individuals. Therefore someone who is prejudiced against Muslims will tend to have a negative attitude toward any individual Muslim, in the belief that all Muslims share the same supposed traits. For example, Pauline Hanson refused to sell her property to "a Muslim," simply because of them being "Muslim." (ie - different). The word "prejudice," literally means "prejudged."

As in the animal kingdom, where the instinct of territorial protection exists - and in the early human history the tribal instinct protected the group from its neighbours so too today those traits seem to carry through to modern society. This attitude is demonstrated in television productions of what's known as - "small town mentality".
Posted by Lexi, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 11:25:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi,

There are indeed many ways to control foxes but giving them 'condoms' or the chemical equivalent seems to be a far fetched answer.
What do they eat whilst fornicating uselessly, how many native animals do they consume during their infertile years?
One well placed bullet takes away all the guesswork.

Greens with Guns is what we need.

But would the Commissioner trust them?
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 11:34:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Another gem by 'Samuel'
(quote)
Storage of Firearms
The Greens NSW support:
29. A prohibition on guns being stored:

29.1 In rural homes without good reason; and (un-Q)

This is airy-fairy; who decides what a good reason is?
The owner, the Government or the police.

(Quote)
29.2 In urban homes, except where a licence is granted for
antique gun collectors (defined as manufactured prior to
1920) and the guns have been disabled; (un-q)

Not even the chance for a good reason here, it's just a blanket 'No'
What if the owner wants to re-furbish his firearm, polish the metal work and re-finish the stock, maybe he's artistic and would like to carve the wood.

Now the poor old collectors. The Greens don't spell out what they mean by disabled but it couldn't mean just the removal of a part that could be easily replaced because that would mean that the firearm could easily be used, so it must mean something permanent that is not easily reversed; perhaps welding? Thus destroying the value of the piece.

(quote)
30. All ammunition must be stored in locked containers separate from any firearms;(us-q).

Have never understood this one, even though it is the law, so there would seem to be no reason to have it as a proposal. The idea is apparently to make whoever breaks into the gun cabinet spend an extra 30 seconds or even a minute breaking into the ammunition box.
[continued]
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 2:45:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
[continued](quote)
31. Guns in urban areas are to be stored at gun clubs under lock and key
with firing mechanisms kept at designated police stations;(un-q)

Do the police then have to be ready at all times to release the mechanisms to the owner?
Will a specific policeman be given this job?
If so can he delegate his responsibilities?
If he is not at work can he be called in to release the firing mechanism and will he be paid overtime?
If a shooter wishes to leave Sydney at 4:00 AM can he withdraw
his mechanism the day before?
What provisions will be made at designated police stations for the storage of mechanisms and will any damage be paid for by the State.
Bearing in mind that some single firing mechanisms are worth more than
other peoples half a dozen guns.
The firing mechanisms from a $50,000 gun would be expensive to replace.
Then there are the guns from which the firing mechanism can't be removed or replaced without the aid of a gunsmith. (who will pay the gunsmith?)
Will the 'designated police station' be one that is close to the owners home? Or can officials make life difficult?

If this is well thought out policy then heaven help Australia if these people ever get to govern. We saw the havock that a few of them in local government could cause when Victoria had those devastating bush fires.(unquote)
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 2:47:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Some years ago a man was able to walk into the ANZAC Riffle range at Malabar, be given a gun and ammunition, walk back to his car and blow his brains out.
An uncle of mine who had a property in the central west of NSW. For a time uncle allowed recreational shooters on to his property in their four wheel drives to 'shoot' rabbits. What did they do, shot his livestock (sheep), drove through fences, muddied dams and creeks, left gates open, shot insulators off poles and left their rubbish behind. Uncle soon stopped shooter from entering his property. I can tell you Uncle was no raving Greenie Country Party through and through.
Having said that there may be, in my mind, a case for a very small number of Australians who should be licenced to hold a firearm as they have a genuine reason to do so. They would need to be trained and supervised in relation to this. Recreational use would not be a genuine reason.
Posted by Paul1405, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 4:23:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Some years ago a man walked off the platform at Central Railway and killed himself under a train.

Some years ago a property owner that I know let some shooters onto his property and in addition to shooting two wild dogs and 18 foxes and more rabbits than you could poke a stick at, they found that one of his cows had fallen into a 'Diggers Hole' so they pulled her out, then they repaired the hole in the fence where she'd gotten out into the dangeraus area.
The next time that they were up there they didn't get to do any hunting as they were helping the locals to fight bushfires.

I know Paul because I was in the party. Still go back there occasionally to see the friends that I made; not one of them votes Green.

You AD or BC, Paul?
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 4:45:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Is Mise,

Paul's moved on. You should try it.
Posted by Lexi, Tuesday, 15 March 2011 6:59:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Registered in NSW we have a number of micro sized one issue political parties such as No Parking Meters Party, Outdoor Recreation Party, The Fishing Party and of course the Shooters and Fishers Party. These political parties with their one issue have an axe to grind and can be dismissed as nothing more than a nuisance that will never attract more than 1% to 2% of the vote. They have no substance, no broad based policies, just their one little issue.
However there is a danger that a micro party like the Shooters and Fishers will through the preference system in the Upper House manage to get elected. To gain the the support of these troglodytes the new O'Farrell Liberal government is likely to throw them a bone in the form of giving in to their extreme demands, such as allowing there rednecked supporters to invade our national parks with AK47's and letting them play Rambo with every thing that moves. Be careful with your vote, don't let these people gain unwarranted power.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 16 March 2011 6:54:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi,

Paul hasn't moved on at all, he is still with us.
The Shooters' and Fishers' Party are far from a one issue party, their name alone shows that they have at least two issues and their current MLCs are both gentlemen and act as such never stooping to the name calling and scaremongering tactics of the Greens.

But can we not discuss Paulene a bit and see if she has ever descended to using the same tactics as the Greens?
Has she ever told deliberate lies to the electorate?
Did she jump on the bandwagon when Queensland was reeling from the recent floods to push her political ajenda?
Did she leap in on the current disaster in Japan to score a political point?
She did not but the Greens, in the form of 'Humanity' Brown did.

Can the Greens defend their Gun Policies in NSW?
Surely the points that I have raised show a serious lack of thought on the outcomes of their policies if they ever became law?

Do the rest of their policies suffer from this same lack of forethought?
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 16 March 2011 7:24:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise,
Listening to David Shoebridge at a private Greens function last Friday night. David spoke on the topic that Shooters and Fishers may gain an extra seat in the Upper House. Not at any time did he use anything but gentlemanly tones towards that party. Not like me with references to rednecks and troglodytes. I think the Greens MLC's in NSW are of the highest order.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 16 March 2011 11:40:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise,

The art of reasoned, intelligent argument is a skill not easily acquired. However, I wish you better success in your future attempts. See you on another thread.
Posted by Lexi, Wednesday, 16 March 2011 6:53:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Out doing a bit of letterboxing last night when I came across a blurb from the No Parking Meters Party. I was shocked, I thought like the other micro parties that they existed in name only but alas they do have followers. I wounder, when these one issue micro parties hold a branch meeting what could they talk about. Could go something like this: "Bob how is the parking metre situation in Sydney?"..."Still there George!"..."Meeting closed." The meeting would last 30 second except in the case of the Shooters and Fishers, where their meeting would last a whole minute as they have to talk about fish as well.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 17 March 2011 6:21:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405, I think you are a bit out of touch with regards to the agendas of these smaller parties like the shooters and fishing parties.

They, unlike the greens, have no ambitions to 'run the country' and rule the lives of many non green voting ordinary Australians.

They, like the former democrats have two agendas, firstly, they wish to protect the given rights of every day Australians like, being able to hunt or fish in a sensible manner.

Now of cause there are fools out there who can't be trusted with a gun, or, who, while fishing, constantly display blatant disregard for the well being of all others, but why do the authorities take the easy way out and ban everyone.

The QLD fishing party demanded nothing other than what they already had.

The second part of their agenda is somewhat of a leaf out of the former democrats, in that they simply wish to 'keep the bastards honest'.

Assuming 1% of the fishing/hunting population are fools. All the authorities have done is punish the remaining 99%, as the 1%, 'the offenders' have no regard for the law in any case and will simply continue to do as they please.

Many of these offenders 'have nothing', so they have nothing to loose. In fact, the prospect of somewhere to sleep with three meals a day is often a viable option.

Family first is a fine example of how a minority party can hold governments accountable. Like him or not, he does not sign an open ended cheque, unlike those in power.
Posted by rehctub, Thursday, 17 March 2011 6:58:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Steve Fielding and Family First were totally rejected at the last election in favour of the Greens. On the surface Family First's agenda seems squeaky clean but their true agenda is some what different.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 17 March 2011 7:44:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405. Sorry, I got the wrong party.

I meat Nic Zeniphone. Or what ever his name is. I don't know who he represents.
Posted by rehctub, Saturday, 19 March 2011 6:19:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One week to go untill the election and i wish Pauline all the very best. She will collect a couple of votes from this household.

Her tenacity in standing illustrates her strong character and strong beliefs. Her honesty and straight forward talking is another bonus.
Posted by Banjo, Saturday, 19 March 2011 10:27:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A post by one ChrisPer on the Ethics Forum which is critical of Lee Rhiannon, Greens Elect Senator for NSW, and a trenchant critic of Paulene Hanson.
(quote)
The reason the NSW greens have a gun policy while others do not, is that Lee Rhiannon graces their fair soil. Ms Rhiannon kindly informed the public of Australia on many occasions after Port Arthur and before 2002 that handguns were very easily available. No-one else did them that great service through that time, though her fans in the media made sure her cackles were widely heard.

It is completely not the fault of this woman that in 2002 a Chinese student decided to take the route so ardently recommended by Ms Rhiannon, and fear of racism meant that no-one would speak against his application in the pistol club he joined.

It is entirely not Ms Rhiannons fault that this person shot five people at Monash University, killing two. Ms Rhiannon's media fan club likewise are completely innocent of those murders, because all the media at the time were energetically cashing in on the sensational murders by the Islamist 'Washington Snipers' and this media frenzy was the likely trigger that suggested his actions.

Even the Chinese student himself was innocent of murdering the people he shot, because he was a lunatic. If this country (and his) dealt with mental illness better, they wouldn't be making laws for decent people based on the actions of lunatics.
(continued)
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 21 March 2011 2:19:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
9continuation)
Raised by parents who prefered the Soviet state (after it murdered eight million people for owning farms!) it may come naturally to hunt out and punish the innocent, the enterprising and the self-reliant in their own society. The root of Rhiannon's apparent hate of gun owners is the need of radical politicians for the approval of their peers and acolytes, which rewards hate of 'out-groups' with hearty approval. You only have to read these peoples blogs to appreciate the depth of contempt for shooters as people - they actually call for our deaths, the worst of them.

Being a relative of another red diaper family, I am aware of the modern CPA-Greens crossover. The hatred of modern homo economicus is a natural fit for those raised hating capitalist America.(unquote)

There are many who think that a vote for the Greens on Saturday will be a vote for totalitarianism and all of its attendant evils.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 21 March 2011 2:21:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If you want to vote for a party with extreme views then vote 1 Shooters and Fishers Party. Just visit their NSW web site and read their policies, extreme in the extreme. They would do Charlton Heston proud!
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 21 March 2011 5:15:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That's a broad statement, Paul.
Just what do you consider to be extreme?
Their Parliamentary record would suggest the exact opposite.
All the changes in the laws that they have achieved have been logical and well reasoned and not aimed at curtailing the freedom and simple pleasures of the ordinary citizens.
Pity that the same cannot be said for the Greens.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 21 March 2011 10:36:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Many within the S&F Party would hold moderate views. However it's not uncommon for this kind of party to be infiltrated by those of the extreme right, as they see the party as a means to an end to push their political agenda. Today the demand might only be the right to do doughnuts on the beach in their dune buggies or shoot donkeys in the desert, tomorrow who knows!
Posted by Paul1405, Tuesday, 22 March 2011 6:38:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
C'mon Paul, you can do better than that.

You could try telling us of all the good legislation that the Greens have got up in the NSW Parliament.
You could tell us that the Greens leaping upon every disanter to further their political ends is not gross unfeeling opportunism with no regard to the feelings of victims.
Just look how Bob Brown leaped onto the bandwagon over the Queensland floods; peoples' homes were still flooding and he was trumpeting away.
Didn't see him up there doing a bit of relief work, or using his medical skills where they might have been of some help.

Then there was his headline grabbing attempts over the disaster in Japan. People were missing, people were trapped in the wreckage and Dr. Brown, who does love his fellow man, was attempting to make political capital out of their suffering.

Have you ever heard a Shooters' and Fishers' Party MP, or Pauline Hanson stoop so low?

However all is not lost and I'm sure you'll enjoy the show after July when Lee Rhiannon takes her place in the Senate and goes after the Leadership and Bob Brown. Bob can expect a few knives in the back and not only from Rhiannon.
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 22 March 2011 9:43:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise,

I've got to Thank You. If it wasn't for your threads and your consistent attacks on the Greens I would never have done any research on them. You see, I've never voted for the Greens - but since you aroused my interest - and since doing the research - I'm discovering
that perhaps they are indeed worthy of support - certainly more so
that Pauline Hanson who can barely answer the simplest question, her ideas barely resonate and she's been relegated to Woman's Day fodder.
She could open up a fish and chip shop in Sydney and I doubt anyone would care. As for the Libs, well - all I need say is two words -
"Tony Abbott" - which says it all! So again - you keep up your anti-Greens ranting - you're actually doing them a favour!
Posted by Lexi, Tuesday, 22 March 2011 10:14:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Reading the SFP Natural Resource plan was enough for me. Any party that uses terms like "continue to expand the agriculture, forestry and mining industries" at the same time as using terms like "sustainable utilisation of all natural resources" should be subject to suspicion. These are motherhood statements but what they really say is environment last, business interests first with no understanding of ecological significance.

Charlton Heston and the Tea Party indeed would be proud.

From the SFP website:
"The Shooters and Fishers Party will continue to work to expand the agriculture, forestry and mining industries in NSW. The Shooters and Fishers Party strongly supports appropriate and sustainable utilisation of all Natural Resources. The intelligent way to do this is not by 'locking them away' and restricting their use but to actively manage natural resources to achieve a balance of economic, social and environmental benefits for all people of NSW."

Then a glimmer of hope:

"Notwithstanding the above, mining exploration and extraction must never be allowed to permanently effect prime agricultural land or water systems - either surface or subterranean."

Good luck with that. While your busy approving every mining application with little attention to safety and environmental impact, not sure how you are going to ensure long term safety of water systems.

That is what is happening now. You are arguing for more of the same.

Why not put these things to a people's vote then it really would be a democratic decision not one influenced by strong lobby groups on either side.
Posted by pelican, Tuesday, 22 March 2011 11:32:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Why not put these things to a people's vote then it really would be a democratic decision not one influenced by strong lobby groups on either side"
Excellent idea,Pelican, I'm all for Participatory Democracy.

Lexi,

Glad to have been of help. Perhaps with your new insight you might care to give an opinion on this further post by Samuel over on the Ethics Forum;

". . . the Greens oppose the burning of wood which is a renewable resource, and one which grows reasonably fast if copicing is practiced. Gum trees contain combustible oils and the green wood can be burned in an efficient fireplace, the 'wood tar' that is a product of incomlete combustion can be collected in coolers and later recycled into the fire where it produces intense heat and by so doing is an aid to cleaner combustion.
The burning of wood is being curtailed in country areas by the various laws against harvesting fallen timber, which therefore lies on the ground and is burned in the next inevitable bush fire. Saving in pollutant gases zero.
Meanwhile the former wood burners switch to electricity, thereby putting up their cost of living, further destroying their independence and causing more polution by a greater demand for electricity.

Which demand is greater than just the heating, for the electric stove is now used to do that cooking which was formerly done on the wood heater, and a not insignificant contribution by the wood heater to keeping costs down was that many of them heated water as a virtually free by-product of combustion.
The slow-combustion wood cooking stove is also being discouraged by high wood prices so most new homes in the country have electric kitchen stoves which again sends up the cost of living particularly in winter. The wood stove used to keep the kitchen warm but now to remain comfortable the housewife must turn on the electric heater.[and up goes the bill and the pollution]

So, I'll say again: Just another example of ideology thiumphant over commonsense.".

I don't think that the Greens think their proposals through.
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 22 March 2011 3:18:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise,

You've got to stop getting your information only from anti-Green websites if you want to be taken seriously. Do some research as to what sort of wood burning the Greens object to, and why, rather than simply accepting any negative statement that feeds your existing hostility towards the Greens.
Posted by Lexi, Tuesday, 22 March 2011 7:04:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi,
It's the dead wood on the ground that they want to save because, believe it or not, it's the home of bush cockroaches, centipedes and other bugs.
Of course in the next bushfire it'll probably be burnt.
The Greens know quite a bit about bushfires, just ask a few people in Victoria.
There is now, thanks to the Greens, a $5,000 fine for taking dead wood from the side of the road.
If you stop at one of the thoughtfully provided fireplaces that councils put at stops along some highways and you wander down the road to pick up a bit of wood to boil the billy then you are liable.

But rather than label Samuel with the anti-Green brush why don't you refute his claims?
Surely this would not be hard to do for one of your ability.
Either he is talking rubbish or sense.
So show him up, if you can.
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 22 March 2011 10:35:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here's another from Samuel,
(quote)
The Greens don't believe in self defence.

Quote:[from the Greens' website]
20. That personal protection should never be regarded as a genuine
reason for owning, possessing or using a firearm . [unquote].

If a firearm is used against a human being for personal protection then it becomes a matter for the Court to decide not the Greens.
The Greens ought to have greater respect for our legal system than to have a policy that would pre-empt the Court.

What about Mrs Jones, the farmer's wife?
Why should she not use a firearm to protect herself or her children from a wild dog? Would the Greens deny her the means of protecting herself?
People in NSW have been savaged to death by dogs.

Let us imagine that Farmer Jones has been throw from his horse when an abandoned wombat burrow caved in and he has broken a leg and his horse has galloped off. His mobile phone doesn't work because he's in a dead spot. Fortunately he was carrying his rifle slung and his ammunition in a belt. So he is armed and when two wild pigs appear he shoots them both.
Would the Greens have him lay there and be eaten or would they excuse
him for saving his own life? (unquote)

Does Samuel have a point?
Should people be allowed to defend themselves with a firearm against wild dogs and scavenging wild pigs?

One would think that saving one's life, or the life of a fellow human, would be a genuine reason for USING a firearm, sometimes the only way, but for some unfathomable reason the Greens seem to think that this is wrong.
Would they value the life of a wild dog or of a pig more than the life of a fellow human?
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 23 March 2011 12:28:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Should people be allowed to defend themselves with a firearm against wild dogs and scavenging wild pigs?"

IM Yes lets make a concession for those Australians that are subject to attack from wild dogs and scavenging wild pigs, please note the pigs must be scavenging. I will go even further than that Australians subject to unprovoked attacks from Polar Bears and/or marauding Wilder Beasts may also strap on a colt 45 and hang out in Dodge City as for the other 99.99% of the population, No!.
The truth is its not about doggies and piggies, these extremists want uncontrolled firearms in our society. Its just not on!
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 23 March 2011 5:59:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

You're not that thick, you can read and write.
The Greens would make it an offence for a farmer or any other person te USE a firearm for self defence.

People on the land may find themselves in such a position, don't make light of it. It shows that the Greens do not think through to the ramifications of their proposals or that they don't give a damn for the lives of their fellow Australians.
It's either one or the other; I prefer to think that they are just stupidly ignorant of the real world.
Wild pigs Paul are scavenging most of the time, they eat a lot of carrion (which is a good thing) but they also kill to eat, and they will kill anything that can't fight back.
There are an estimated 23 million feral pigs in Australia and their impact on the land and on the economy is enormous.
If only the Greens would get out there and kill a pig now and then instead of trying to make life hard for their fellow Australians then they would be doing something constructive.
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 23 March 2011 8:28:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Geez Paul,

I thought that as a Greens supporter that you'd have popped up with a few logical answers to my posts.
Well I suppose that if you wont defend them it means that they are undefendable.

One thing about the election tomorrow, when it's all over we'll be able to know what percentage of NSW voters don't have a clue or are closet communists, the Greens' vote will tell it fairly accurately.

Pity that Ian Cohen is retiring because he is a genuine enviorenmentalist and a gentleman to boot. Never for Ian the denigration of his opponents, who, one and all, have always respected him.

Tomorrow is the big NSW Raffle, you can get your Free tickets at any Polling Place.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 25 March 2011 7:26:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Earth Hour is just over and I've turned off the eight extra lights that I turned on to celebrate the event; and the Greens aren't doing well in the election.
Think I'll have a wee dram to celebrate.
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 26 March 2011 8:37:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
(quote)and the major parties don't like it but the Greens have jumped in early as well.
"Pauline Hanson's brand of poisonous and divisive politics has no place in NSW in 2011," (from a statement on the Green's web site).(/quote)
Well, Pauline didn't make it and neither did the Greens.
Seems that their version of poisonous and divisive politics are out of favour with the voters as well.
The pundits are saying that the Shooters' and Fishers' Party and the Rev Fred will hold the balance of power in the Legislative Council in NSW.

Funny really.
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 27 March 2011 8:23:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
IM,
Yes, a huge result for the Shoot Em' Up Party running at 3.67% of the primary vote in the LC, with preferences you'll get 1 up, keeping you at 2 . Please don't put the Rev Fred's CDP in with your mob, they do not support the gun lobby. You will notice no where on here am I critical of Fred's party, As a Green I don't agree with a lot of their policies but by and large they are not that bad, I wont loose any sleep if they hold the balance of power, preferable to the Libs having 'carte blanche'. The redneck vote for Hanson is running at 1.85%, Pauline back to the Fish n' Chip shop where you belong. As for the Greens I'm not over the Moon with our result 10.97% of the vote in the LC a swing of only +1.87%, but that will give us 3 up a gain of 1 to 5 members, would have liked to have gained 2.
My take on Saturdays result is, conservative Labor voters, and there are lots of em', I meet them every campaign, wanted to punish Labor for their sins, and they did just that by putting their vote into the conservative Liberal camp about 17% of voters.
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 28 March 2011 7:46:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hanson's gone, predictably. She won't be seen again until she crawls out from under her rock for another 5 minutes in the limelight.

The vote for the Greens continues to increase steadily, however. It will be higher again after a few years of O'Farrell's Neocons.
Posted by morganzola, Monday, 28 March 2011 8:08:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
By the end of this term I predict that the Greens wiil be gasping in both State and Federal politics, particularly after Lee Rhiannon gets her claws into Bob Brown.

However that doesn't mean that the thinkers in Australia won't be attacking the Greens at every opportunity and if they keep putting up un-thought out policies then that won't be hard.

Fred Nile has consistently sided with the Shooters when it mattered.
Particularly when the issue was the safety of his fellow citizens, that's usually when he was at odds with the Greens.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 28 March 2011 2:21:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
By the end of this term I predict that the Greens wiil be gasping in both State and Federal politics, particularly after Lee Rhiannon gets her claws into Bob Brown.

IM Your so called prediction is nothing more than wishful thinking on your part. When the time comes for Bob Brown to step aside Lee Rhiannon may be a candidate for the leadership of The Australian Greens and no better person could one find.
What I find interesting is going on to the S and F web site and reading the credentials of their front-men (they must be a macho mob as they have no women). None of them have made any real contribution to public life, unlike the great contributions that Bob and Lee have made.
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 28 March 2011 4:49:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are those that like to attack The Greens over policy and we do have policy, very detailed policy on everything that Australians are concerned with, health, education, transport etc etc and etc . We are very much up front with our policies like em' or hate em' you know where we stand. However when you check the likes of the S and F Party for policy other than waffle about guns and a few vagaries like:
"S&F asserts that Senators elected to the (Federal) Senate must at all times act to protect the interests of the State in which they were elected." Now that's what I call policy! Please tell what is the penalty for those (Senators)that in your view don't comply? Are they to be taken out at dawn and shot!
The above rubbish is of far greater concern to the average person than health, education, transport etc etc and etc.
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 28 March 2011 5:17:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

There is speculation that Hanson may have won a seat.

However have a look at
http://www.ethics.org.au/ethics-forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=674&p=6060#p6060
(unfortunately we can't post pictures on here)

If Greens' policies are so good then why are the Shooters and Fishers and others able to pick holes in them so easily?

They are simply not thought out and their ramifications are not understood by their authors; this leaves Greens' supporters in a nasty position as they cannot rationally support their own policies.
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 29 March 2011 8:30:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What an appalling image Is Mise links to. The nutter who posted it needs help. As for Hanson, if by some electoral travesty she scrapes in over the Greens I tend to agree with Pericles. Better to have the lunatic fringe out in the open than muttering darkly to themselves in obscure corners of the Internets.
Posted by morganzola, Tuesday, 29 March 2011 9:56:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What's appalling about it?
I thought that it was rather good, 'X' for the Greens.

I'd say that the poster has a developed sense of humour considering the way the Greens have done their best to hound those interested in shooting.

Of course one can understand the attitude of some Greens and their distaste for hunters going into National Parks to hunt.
These hunters use SatNav to be sure that they are in the designated hunting areas and when they find an illegal drug plantation they pin-point it for the police, great devices SatNavs.
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 29 March 2011 11:07:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We are seeing one of the real dangers of voting 'above the line' in these upper house elections. There was I, voting above the line, for the No Fruit Cake Party, who's policy of baning the eating of fruit cake on a Wednesday afternoon I totally agree with. I now find, that nice man, Mr Shickelgruber, the head of the No Fruit Cake Party, without my knowledge has directed preferences to Pauline Hanson all 0.1% of their vote has gone to Hanson. Along with her 1.8% of the primary vote plus a bit more from other fruit cakes she will be elected. Can't believe that with less than 2 people in a 100 voting for Hanson she gets in, unbelievable, they call it democracy!
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 7:32:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

It's in the fine print, but she has to get a quota to get in and thats the way the preference system works.
However I do agree that the NSW system of voting above the line and allowing the parties to bargain or just throw away their preferences is wrong, as it negates the intentions of the system that was put there to record the genuine preferences of the voters; however I don't see anyof the parties favouring repeal.
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 9:11:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise
It heartens me to know you and I finally agree on something see your last post. The latest counting for the LC is:
The final seat is currently in doubt and a contest between the third Greens candidate Jeremy Buckingham and Independent Pauline Hanson, with an outside chance for Labor's Andrew Ferguson.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 31 March 2011 7:32:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 19
  7. 20
  8. 21
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy