P1405 and Is Mise, I tell you what, I won't dis-agree with MOST of what you've said if at least one of you agrees with what I wrote about the warfies union/labour re; the stalling of the supply ships for our troops during the war.

No one has refuted this fact only to suggest that I am a right wing blah, blah. If you were such staunch unionists, I know you were well aware of these acts of treason.

I know it's an uncomfortable truth, well if you change your mind, I'm not that far away, and always willing to listen.

ALTRAV.

Have you read "Australia's Secret War", an account by Hal Colebatch of home front industrial disruptions by Australian trade unions?

If you haven't then you should.

It's revealing, in more ways than one.

Is Mise, thanks I will. I would suggest it to P1405 but I know he will refute the findings and deflect in some way.

Is Mise, thanks again. I just had a quick overview of the book about the very things I have been trying to convince P1405 and others about.

'Australia's Secret War' by Hal Colebatch. about home front industrial disruptions by Australian trade unions.

It confirms everything I have said, and more. Even to mention my father-in-laws personal suffering. It actually mentioned 'without food, radio equipment and munitions'.

The very things my father-in-law spoke of, as he was posted as forward radio operator in New Guinea.

The book also speaks of how the 'officers had to restrain Australian and American troops from 'killing' striking trade unionists'.

So now I feel vindicated about my comments of killing them at the time because they were fighting against us.

SO P1405. I get the final and decisive knock out punch.

One, Two, Three, YERRRRRRROUT! And the bell sounds as the crowd jump to their feet cheering and screaming out my name. ALTRAV, ALTRAV,.....

AL, contraire my fellow, even though Hal Colebatch's book is worth a read, there are those who claim it contains both historical and factual errors. Colebatch who regularly pushes a right wing agenda, can hardy be described as an impartial source.

Quoting from the following artificial;

"Sadly, Colebatch appears not to have attempted to check any of the stories he was told, but has simply replicated them and on that basis constructed a narrative of Australia in the Second World War in which 'the unions' 'sabotaged' 'the war effort'. He fails to test any of his examples against available primary sources, either public - such as newspapers which are available thanks to the National Library's 'Trove' data base - or government or union archives. This does not prevent him from condemning 'unions' as a whole: a stance that explains the way conservative columnists have embraced his book."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-11/stanley-australias-secret-and-unhistorical-war/5960090

P1405, you shmuck! Your not going to push that angle and think your going to get away with it.

Do you seriously think ANYONE had the stones to write any of these treasonous acts down for posterity. It was done without publicity you twat, they were attacking their own people.

You can deny it all you want, I told you I got my info direct from the people who were there.

My father-in-law, for starters. You do not get to refute or reject my story. You are now looking foolish, just because you don't want to hear the truth about your beloved labor/union/communist scummy mates.

Look it's a matter of record/history, and just because you don't want to hear it, too bad, it actually happened.

When you get the soldiers of BOTH countries (Australia and America) wanting to kill the warfies, you know you've got a problem.

I was not off track when I said we needed to round the scumbags up and shoot them, it seems I was on the money.

Your no longer a credible commentor on this topic now that you and your lot have been exposed. I've told you continually that I don't make this shitt up, so that's the end of it. YOU TRAITOR!