back to homepage
=============================================================================================================
PAULINE HANSON
Your editorial of 31 May 1998 (The Age) on Pauline Hanson was the most unctuous, pompous, sanctimonious piece of garbage masquerading as journalism I have ever read. As for the equally smarmy article by someone called Alex Mitchell (“Tempting hate” [sic]), whose arrogance is matched only by his/her/its sublime ignorance of why people are actually supporting Pauline Hanson, I would just say, eat your heart out. Tempting hate? A case of the pot calling the kettle black if ever there was one. Who is the hate monger? What has Pauline Hanson actually done - Yes, actually done! - to justify the level of hatred directed at her by you bigots for political correctness. Queenslanders are “Village idiots” eh? (Mmmm... funny ... sounds almost racist!) You guys (and gals) just don’t get it do you! Just point the finger, abuse, vilify, and walk away. Just like all the other actual bigots have done down through history. Sock it to ‘em Pauline!
PS. note the occurrence of the word “actual” in this letter - you know as in the word “reality” - as opposed to the fevered ideological fantasies you guys are enmeshed in - “reconciliation, multiculturalism”, and all the other deeply meaningless rhetoric you peddle ...
=============================================================================================================
PAULINE HANSON
An editorial in the Age newspaper following the Queensland election 15/6/98) argued that One Nation was a "threat to Australian democracy". This was a fine example of the way in which Pauline Hanson and her party are routinely put down with the first throwaway line that comes into your head. The editorial then went on to state: "without Liberal and National Party preferences One Nation would not have won a single seat in the Queensland Parliament" - an outcome plainly desired by the Age. What this means is that the editors of this august journal of opinion wanted a full quarter of the Queensland population to be represented by not so much as one single seat in an 89-seat parliament! So much for democracy. The monumental hypocrisy of all this is truly staggering.
=============================================================================================================
HATE
In his article Is hate on the rise? (Time, 19/7/99), John Cloud contemptuously labels as ‘dorks’ people who live with their parents. He also calls those who make a religion out of their race as twisted. I know another group like that. They’re called the Jews. A fine display of tolerance, John. May I suggest you try to reign in your hatred. (25-July-1999)
=============================================================================================================
ONE NATION
In the article "One Nation, 20 police and 10 protesters" (15/7/98) it is reported that "clashes between [Pauline Hanson's] supporters and opponents" took place. When reporting violent incidents at One Nation meetings, the media frequently implies that some kind of pitched battle has taken place between Hanson supporters and protesters. The reality is that the violence is in one direction. It is the violence of heckling and abusive protesters aimed at One Nation supporters as they quietly file in to the meeting. This has been the case at every Hanson meeting I have attended, and I have attended quite a few. This is one more underhanded attempt by the media to misrepresent Pauline Hanson and her party. [17-Aug-1998]
=============================================================================================================
STOLEN GENERATION
I agree with Les Carlyon (Reconciling reality 1/6/99) that the word ‘genocide’ is losing its meaning, especially following on from Sir Ronald Wilson’s report on the ‘stolen generation’. However Mr. Carlyon does not go far enough. Not only has Sir Ronald debased the meaning of a perfectly good English word, he has also debased the memory of millions of dead Jews, Armenians, Cambodians, Rwandans and others who were the victims of real genocide – the attempt to systematically exterminate an entire people. This is something which no Australian government has ever been guilty of. (BULLETIN, 8-June-1999)
=============================================================================================================
GERARD HENDERSON
I am a little sick of hearing Gerard Henderson held up as a good solid representative of conservative thought in this country (Looking for Mr.Right 20/7/99). He is endlessly trotted out as a moderate antidote to right-wing extremism. He is actually a fence-sitter trying to have the best of both worlds in an environment which permits of no middle way. He continually asserts that we have a situation of healthy debate. Gerard Henderson’s freedom of debate is not debate at all, but a vicious, ideological war of personal vilification and character assassination for those not holding trendy views. Pauline Hanson was called an Oxley-moron. What did she actually do to deserve this? Has she personally vilified or character assassinated any person or race of persons? When? Where? The ‘debates’ we keep hearing about consist mainly of endlessly regurgitated political correctness rhetoric. Contrast a debate about concrete matters like taxation rates with a ‘debate’ about ‘aboriginal reconciliation’. Just what in blazes is ‘aboriginal reconciliation’? How can ordinary people be expected to know what such airy-fairy notions are supposed to mean? Those who do not understand the ideological nature of the argument, are tainted with the evil which the politically correct are supposedly combating. This is the reality of political debate in this country today. The result is that ordinary people who are not ideological combatants are silenced. I can effectively exclude anyone from a discussion by debating something which they don’t see in terms of nebulous intellectual theorising, even if I prefer to think it is. People are, Mr. Henderson, very definitely being excluded and censored. For those like Gerard Henderson and Robert Manne who have caved in and rolled over to self-evident ‘truths’ such as feminism and ‘aboriginal reconciliation’ the going is easy. For those like Hanson who resist, there is abuse, intellectual intimidation, and a real risk of physical violence. (15-July-1999)
=============================================================================================================
PAULINE HANSON
The oft expressed view that the Prime Minister should have criticised Pauline Hanson immediately following her maiden speech represents an unbelievably dumb assessment of the situation. People have to realise that what Pauline Hanson offers to the voting public is her courage, her character, and her willingness to stand up to the big boys of our political system. The fact that she is a woman helps here. A virulent attack by the PM would only have served to reinforce this perception. The likelihood is that, far from neutralising Hanson, it would have doubled her approval rating overnight. (BULLETIN, 16-June-1998)
=============================================================================================================
FEMINISM
Gary Humphries sounded less than convincing when he declared that the appointment of two female magistrates was not based on gender considerations (6/8/98). These days my assumption is that woman in high positions are there through the agency of affirmative action, unless there is some reason to think otherwise. This excludes political figures such as Margaret Thatcher and Pauline Hanson whose success clearly owed nothing to the feminist movement. It is illogical to push women into positions of power in order to prove that they are "equal". (17-Aug-1998)
=============================================================================================================
RICHARD NIXON
Much has been said recently about Clinton's impeachment being a payback for Richard Nixon's removal from office over Watergate. Let's get one thing straight. Whatever wrongdoing Nixon may have been guilty of at Watergate, he was provoked into doing so by the insane hatred directed towards him by the media and the cultural establishment. Bill and Hillary Clinton especially hated Nixon for such deeds as launching bombing attacks against Third World countries. Ultimately this hatred by the Left-wing establishment stems from the fact that Nixon was proved right when he exposed communist sympathisers in the State Department in the 1940's. Watergate was his inept attempt to fight back against those who did not just oppose him polititically, but who wanted to destroy him and his presidency. In short, they hated his guts. This was a level of hatred Bill Clinton has not experienced and is never likely to. (22-Dec-1998)
=============================================================================================================
FEMINISM
I notice your front page of 25 Jan carries a story beginning with the word ‘manhunt’. Now in these days of political correctness, should not the appropriate term be ‘personhunt’? This is of course too much to expect. It goes without saying that whenever there is a negative connotation on men involved in a news story – as in the hunt for a criminal - it’s always OK to use the word ‘man’. And before someone objects that most criminals are men, I would remind them that most ‘chairpersons’ are men as well! (CANBERRA TIMES, 28-Jan-1999)
=============================================================================================================
TIME'S PERSON [ie. MAN] OF THE CENTURY
What your choices tell me is that in a better world a man of science and a (so-called) ‘man of peace’ should be the men of the century, not necessarily that they were. The men who had the greatest impact on the twentieth century were Adolf Hitler and the man who stood up to him, and saved western civilisation in the process, Winston Churchill. These men had a direct influence on the way I live my life, and this is true for most of us. Einstein and Gandhi certainly did not.
=============================================================================================================
PAULINE HANSON
Tom Connors tells us that Pauline Hanson should be "marginalised" (Canberra Times, May 13 1998?). Surely this is nothing more than a rhetorical flourish. How does Tom Connors propose to do this? Does he suggest we heap abuse upon her; get the media to give her a hard time. Perhaps the PM could make a statement about what a narrow-minded, limited person she is. This has all been done and yet Mrs. Hanson, whose support we are constantly being told is declining, still has an approval rating at least equal to that of the Australian Democrats. Could Ms. Hanson be any more marginalised than she already is? Any suggestions Tom?
=============================================================================================================
SANCTO-ROCK
The article “The oils still burning” suggests that after 20 years of social comment the band [Midnight Oil] had “earned the right to slow down”. Why would they want to slow down? After all, it’s so much fun sitting back and self righteously pointing the finger of blame at everyone else but yourself for the worlds woes. [That must be an enormous amount of fun. I wish I could do that, but then I probably couldn't sleep at night!]. This is what I would call extreme unctuousness. (20/8/98)
=============================================================================================================
GEORGE ORWELL
I understand that, in the wake of World War 2, communist leaders in Europe planned a general uprising of the workers for 1948. This year was significant to them because it was the centenary of 'the year of revolutions' in 1848. Orwell, picturing the establishment of this 'new world order' to come, simply reversed this date and placed it in 1984. (1-June-2000)
=============================================================================================================
REPUBLIC
In reference to the republic debate, I am getting a little fed up with claims that Queen Elizabeth II is a "foreign" head of state, an assertion which goes largely unchallenged. Now whilst in a very technical sense this is true, the fact is, she is not a foreign head of state in the same sense as the leader of China or India or Guatemala. Britain and Australia are linked by ties of race, language, history and culture. The majority of people in this country, as everyone knows, are of Anglo-Celtic origin. In these days of political correctness I am deeply apologetic about this, but it is nevertheless true. As such the British monarchy is part of our history, not just the present day denizens of the British Isles. Since the events of 1975 it has been apparent that this country is already a republic acting fully independently of Great Britain. Queen Elizabeth II's status as symbolic head of state is entirely appropriate to this country whether we officially become a republic or not. (28-Jan-1999)
=============================================================================================================
RACISM IN INDONESIA
So ethnic Chinese and Christians are being dragged out of their homes and kicked to death in Indonesia. (This hasn't happened anytime in the last two weeks in Australia!). I would like to hear something from the big noises in our society who spend their lives griping about the supposed “racism” of Australians. I am hearing nothing about the racism of Indonesians - nor Rwandans, nor Serbians for that matter. Is it that no-one expects any better of our brown-skinned neighbours to the north? Is our failure to judge these people by our own standards not racism in itself? But then maybe racism is just a disease peculiar to white Anglo-Saxons as the black armband brigade keep telling us. (19-Nov-1998)
=============================================================================================================
WAR IS HELL
In the review of Saving Private Ryan (24/11/98) the writer implies that the invasion of Europe was a stupid act of futility. We are told that : “war is hell … it wastes lives … it debases humanity”. Maybe so. Nevertheless the Normandy invasion resulted in the end of WWII, the end of the Holocaust, and the liberation of Europe from Nazi tyranny. Pick your poison! From what position of moral authority do the voices of anti-war philosophy divorce themselves from the folly of humanity? (BULLETIN, 8-Dec-1998)
=============================================================================================================
PAULINE HANSON
As a One Nation member I would be honoured to be on Leibler’s list of unacceptable people. He can publish my address and phone number if he wishes. But why don’t we recognise that he represents a bigotry for political correctness which is worse than anything Pauline Hanson stands for. Perhaps One Nation members should start wearing yellow patches emblazoned with a “PH” in order to make them an easier target for discrimination and, philosophically speaking, narrow-minded prejudice. (BULLETIN, 28-July-1998)
=============================================================================================================
REPUBLIC
The decisive defeat of the republican proposal is a major defeat for politicians foisting ‘big ideas’ onto the rest of us, which are basically unconnected with the day to day reality of our lives. This issue, which did not start as a grassroots movement, simply was not important to enough people to pass muster. With an Australian-born, Australian appointed Governor-General exercising the Crown’s reserve powers, Australia is already fully independent of Britain, contrary to what the pollies were saying, and everyone knows it. The battle was purely one of symbolism, and the current symbolism is entirely appropriate, given our historical, racial, and cultural links with Britain. And let there be no doubt, our past explains not only our present but also informs the future. In a hundred years time we will still be speaking English - not Chinese! The republic issue was important to a cultural elite which wanted to show how progressive it was by discarding the trappings of an ‘archaic institution’. Unfortunately for them, ‘archaic’ or not, our current system works perfectly well, and the public was wary of working a fundamental change to how our system works simply to gratify the self-indulgent whims of the fashionable and trendy. I would like to see referenda on various other politically correct issues in the future. (7-Nov-1999)
=============================================================================================================
PAULINE HANSON
Re. Nailing Our Colours to the Mast 1/6/98
In Paul Sheehan’s assessment of the Hanson phenomenon, which made a good deal more sense than most media reportage on the subject, I could not help noticing the following: “Asian immigrants have provided a jolt of energy and talent that Australia needed.” Now this seems logically to me to be suggesting that Asians are “more talented” than we mere white Australians. But isn’t this an evil Hansonite way of looking at things? I mean that we speak in discriminatory tones of one race as opposed to another? Mr. Sheehan was moving in the right direction re. the evil Mrs. Hanson, and then he went and spoiled it all. Perhaps someone can enlighten me further on this. (17-Aug-1998)
=============================================================================================================
HOLOCAUST
Congratulations to the German government for prosecuting Frederick Toben for denying the holocaust. They have gaoled someone for having an interpretation of history. Seems like nothing much has changed over there. The successors of Hitler are simply persecuting a different class of people. If Toben has expressed hatred for the Jews let that be judged for on its merits. An interpretation of history, no matter how wrong it may be, should not be a gaolable offence. Orwell's vision of thought crime is with us. Where does it end? (CT, 6-Jan-2000)
=============================================================================================================
VIETNAM
Clem Colman and Francis Bucknell are horrified by long bloody conflicts like the Vietnam War, but evidently war is heroic and glorious when pursued by revolutionary freedom fighters. This [dispute] was initiated by previous letters concerning the aggressiveness of western countries such as the US and Australia. The shooting war which triggered US and Australian military involvement in Vietnam began with a decision by North Vietnamese leaders to organise an armed revolt in South Vietnam in 1959. As such it was not a ‘spontaneous uprising of the masses against oppression’ as claimed by anti-war activists. This fact is documented in statements made by North Vietnamese leaders in 1983 which were reported on in the Economist article previously cited. I doubt that these admissions were given wide coverage by ‘our ABC’ or the rest of the liberal media as it was too deadly to that false assertion. Without this war of conquest by North Vietnam, South Vietnam would today be a prosperous, technologically advanced country, and everyone knows it. It would be to backward Marxist North Vietnam what South Korea is to North Korea or Taiwan was to Maoist China. As for a free referendum in 1955, how many free elections have been held in Vietnam since 1975. It is a safe bet the Communist leadership would long ago have been voted out as they have been virtually everywhere else over the years. (3-Jan-2001)
=============================================================================================================
THANK YOU DAY
As a non-participant in Sorry Day celebrations I wish to make the following points. I do not feel guilty about being white. I do not feel guilty about European settlement of this great country. I certainly do not feel guilty about actions and policies pursued by governments and churches in the past which I had no involvement in, and which, however misguided, were plainly intended to benefit Aboriginal people. Given the number of people clearly relishing the opportunity to wallow in self-righteous moral indignation, perhaps it should have been called National Wallow Day. My thinking is shared by a great many Australians including our Prime Minister. Sympathy for Aborigines I have, but guilt - No.
P.S. Aborigines might give some thought to a national Thank You Day where they could give a big fat thank you to Europeans for bringing western civilization to this country! (17-Aug-1998)
=============================================================================================================
FEMINISM
Congratulations to the RAAF upon the promotion of Air Commodore Hammer. I am glad that affirmative action is alive and well in Australia’s armed services. I look forward to seeing other women in the services pushed forward into more high profile leadership roles. This will prove once and for all that women are truly equal. (17-Dec-1999)
=============================================================================================================
WOMEN IN COMBAT
I refer to the proposal that women in Australia’s military services should be put into front line combat. It seems to me that this idea is being championed by the 1% of women who are radical feminists. As always, these activists purport to speak on behalf of all women, most of whom would be horrified by this proposal. May I suggest that it is the radical feminists who should be put on the front line. The sooner the better. (BULLETIN, 2 Feb-1999)
=============================================================================================================
THE POPE
The positive side of the Enlightenment was the overturning of the fear ignorance and superstition engendered by the established church with its Inquisition and indulgences. The negative side was the erroneous belief that human reasoning should be the sole criterion of truth. For all our technological progress, the evils and injustices of human existence still lie beyond the reach of intellectual analysis, as Pope John Paul correctly perceives. Problems like war, hatred and greed are going to be solved not through purely intellectual effort but by addressing the spiritual side of human nature. (TIME, 23-Jan-1995)
=============================================================================================================
PAULINE HANSON
The Hanson phenomenon is really quite easy to explain. There are two very different nations in Australia today. One of these is white, middle class and well educated. Following on from the sixties, and in the wake of the moral and spiritual vacuum of the 20th century, it has adopted its own secular belief system known as political correctness. The media has an awful fascination with Pauline Hanson simply because, in a monumental way, she contravenes the value system of most journalists, and the “serious newspaper” reading, ABC watching, tertiary educated, middle class community. To people not in this category, a significant number of Australians, who haven’t been to university, Pauline Hanson is simply uttering words of plain common sense. The result is a collision between two different intellectual and moral universes. One group predominates in the media, another at the ballot box. An irresistible force meets an immovable object. This is bound to produce fireworks. (5-June-1998)