WHY DO PEOPLE REALLY HATE LAWYERS?

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Against Lawyers Series: From the Bible to Shakespeare, to today, the question of why people hate lawyers has been intensely debated. Tell a joke about Jews, blacks, women etc. and somebody is sure to be offended. But tell a joke about lawyers – however crude – and laughter is guaranteed. The joke may have been the punch line “kill more lawyers” and still the same results are reached. Why? Jay Michaelson has a book advertised on the net (www.metatronics.net/words/aa.htm) Why We Hate Lawyers: Legalism, Judaism, and the Secret History of the Soul. He draws a link between Judaic legalism and lawyering where the “letter of the law” is seen, following Saint Paul, to undermine an essential part of the human spirit.

That may be so but perhaps there is a less philosophical explanation. Could it be that lawyers are usually involved in antagonisms that often result in harm and they take home the big bacon? Consider: the five year law suit and hundreds of thousands of dollars spent in a legal battle between an insurance broker and a financial services regular – and – it was all over a draft, yes a draft document (The Australian 14/1/2010, p.15). The mistake was discovered on day two of the hearing and was missed by both government officials and the lawyers.

This “sorry affair” is perhaps a metaphor for why people hate lawyers. You see, the lawyers and government officials are not going to face disciplinary action and the public “will pay for bungled lawsuit” (The Australian 15/1/2010, p.3).

WINNIE THE POOH ON IMMIGRATION AND RACE

from article by Israel Shamir:
“A couple of Ukrainians are examining some graffiti: Kick a kike and save Russia! One Ukrainian says to the other “Great idea! But who wants to save Russia?” This joke popped into my mind while reading the white nationalist calls: Stop immigration and save the White Race. The means are laudable, but the stated end is irrelevant, at best.

You do not have to belong to the White Race to understand the problems caused by movements of populations. You do not even have to believe in the existence of racial classifications to appreciate that mass migrations cause real problems. The racialist reasoning behind opposition to this phenomenon is superfluous and unproductive at best. Mass immigration is a modern phenomenon, while 140-year old racialism is so dated that it hurts. Opposition to immigration does not require feelings of racial superiority or even racial identity.
Readers of Milne probably remember that Winnie the Pooh, Piglet and Rabbit’s reaction to the newest animal – Kanga – in their forest was anything but welcoming: they kidnapped the immigrant baby. The story of course ended with everyone becoming fast friends, but even Milne could not pull off a happy ending if Kangas were to flood the forest by their thousands.

Humans and other animals have defensive mechanisms used to protect their territory and their access to resources. These mechanisms are now deliberately misrepresented as ‘racism’, or as the unleashing of brutal natural tendencies, but the protection of one’s territory is morally defensible.
In the Soviet Russia of my youth, a young man courting a girl from a different neighbourhood had a better than even chance of being beaten up by the local boys. There was no ethnic, racial, religious or even social difference between the two neighbourhoods; the boys from block A did not think they are inherently better than boys from block B; they were simply defending their access to “their own” girls.
It is reasonable that today’s youngsters act protectively towards ‘their own’ females, or ‘their own’ jobs. They also have to make a living, and the idealistic groups who hand control over to transients die out quickly. Mass immigration is neatly sandwiched between invasion and slave trade. If the immigrants prosper, it is invasion; if they are kept down, it is slavery. Either way a small slice of the local population will profit: they will be called “compradors” or “slave traders” as the situation develops.

The ‘shepherds’ simply fleece the sheep – the ‘predators’ slaughter them:
In general, wealthy people enjoy the fruits of immigration while poor ones bear the brunt of it. However, not all wealthy people take advantage of the situation to the same degree. Wealthy people, like the rest of us, have different attitudes toward the society that nurtured them: they might be divided into shepherds and predators. The shepherds fleece their sheep while predators will slaughter every last one if the price is right.

The shepherds might be represented by the great Swedish industrialist family of Wallenberg, unobtrusive owners of 30 major Swedish firms, including nine of the country's 15 largest. Altogether, the Wallenberg family owns or controls well over half the Swedish economy. The great and unique achievements of Swedish society were obtained with this powerful bloc working in harmony with the trade unions and the government.
The list of predators would start with Carl Icahn, the feared Jewish corporate raider and financier who ruined more companies and people than Wallenberg ever owned. The presence of unfettered predators makes it impossible for shepherds to do what they do best. Furthermore, predators do not shrink from driving their victims toward the slaughterhouse.

Predators use mass migration like a powerful tool. The immigrants have to live somewhere, so real estate and rents rise – benefiting the wealthy. In Israel, landlords divide their old flats into small units and sublet them to immigrants. In such a way, they double and triple their income, while ordinary local people can’t find a decent-sized flat for a reasonable price. The immigrants need credit, so moneylenders have a feast day on them, charging 20% per month. Immigration undermines workers’ security, creates surplus of labour.
Mobile labour is less expensive: the workers are here when you need them; and when you do not need them, they just go away. This was one of the reasons why Israel locked up its Palestinian workers and imported Thais and Chinese in their stead. Mass migration is a powerful weapon in the class war. By importing potential workers, the predators-owners undermine the working classes. It is import of labour, and as every import it reduces value of local product, i.e. of native labour.

Predators speak of “creative destruction”:
The companies that fail under the new regime have no value to them. The companies that survive might be shifted to India with the click of a button. Immigration breaks unions. Even better for the owners, mass immigration opens the second front in the class war, that between the working classes and immigrants.
Immigration inevitably turns into a war for resources: for employment, for women, food and accommodation. The middle classes reap some benefits: they get cheaper housemaids, cheaper drivers, nannies, gardeners, cheaper sex. The middle-class Gay International (a term of Joseph Massad) is on the forefront of support for immigration: one can explain it by their compassion, but one can also explain it by their own interests of having a pool of cheap and available sexual partners.
Immigrants do not compete with the middle classes; they do not live in the same areas; they are not likely to take their jobs. The workers are bearing the brunt of this war, and they have no time or strength left for the class war against the owning classes…”
Full article at: https://www.israelshamir.net/English/immigration.htm  

CHRISTOPHER MONCKTON OF BRENCHLEY OPENS HIS DIARY

We thought our readers would like to read what Monckton recorded in his diary about his whirlwind trip to Australia.

London: Professor Ian Plimer, an eminent geologist who reads God’s log-book in the rocks, called me and said: ‘Would you like to do a speaking tour of Australia to explain why “global warming” is not a global crisis?’ Yes, I said. Case Smit and John Smeed, two retired engineers from Noosa, had watched Prime Minister Rudd ranting for 45 minutes at my expense and wanted to give me the right of reply. They dug deep into their superannuations to fly me to Australia before Rudd’s emissions trading scheme, like a drowning man, came up for the third and last time.

Sydney: Two feet of snow at home in Scotland, 40 degrees of sunshine over Botany Bay. I had to hit the ground running: interviews with the inimitable Alan Jones and just about everybody who was anybody in national journalism, followed by three hour-long lectures in an afternoon, and the phenomenal Australia Day fireworks at Darling Harbour. For the main lecture, we crammed 1,000 people in and had to turn away another 300. They had come from up to four hours away. Some had stood in line from 10 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. The queue snaked down three floors and out into the street. Alan Jones took the chair. Ian Plimer did his rock-jock thing and told the audience the world had begun 4,567 million years ago, on a Thursday, and that the climate had been changing ever since. Sea level had once suddenly risen 1,500 metres. ‘Now, that’s a sea-level rise!’ The audience loved it.

Newcastle: The room was too small for the crowd. Here and elsewhere, the majority of the audience were working-class. Miners terrified for the future of their industry came in such large numbers that we grabbed the vast town hall itself. When that filled up, we flung open the gallery. Then we had to turn people away. So what’s wrong with an ETS? If you set a low price for the right to emit a ton of carbon dioxide, you don’t deter anyone from emitting it and you have no effect on the climate. If you set a high price, you send your jobs and industries to China and India, which are not going to have ETS schemes, and global carbon emissions increase, because third-world countries emit more CO2 per thing produced than we do. Lunatic.

Redcar: In the North of England, I explained, Tata Industries had just announced the closure of a steelworks employing 1,700 British workers, because the unelected EU Kommissars who make 90 per cent of Britain’s laws had decreed that we must have an ETS. British MPs were delighted: all but three had voted for our silly Climate Change Bill as the first October snow for 74 years fell in Parliament Square. The government got Carbon Brownie points for shutting a heavily-emitting industry. Precisely the same steelworks will now be re-erected in India, which will also get Brownie points because the steelworks will be more efficient than anything they have now. Net effect: an increase in CO2emissions in the dismantling and re-erecting of the steelworks. Newcastle’s miners were rightly horrified.

Brisbane: A debate at last! Professor Barry Brook had agreed to face me across the dispatch box in front of 450 businesspeople. I said the warming effect of CO2 was one-seventh of what the UN’s climate panel imagined. He said the world had warmed, but did not claim that CO2 had had anything to do with it. I threw in the odd joke. How many climate sceptics does it take to change a light bulb? None — it’s too early to say whether it needs changing. Verdict? Honours even: Prof. Brook’s side said we’d won by a country mile, but our side thought the Prof. had gotten the better of us by recommending nuclear power. Ian Plimer and I crossed the road to the Irish Club, where 700 beery, cheery citizens gave us a riotous reception. It’s a toss-up whether the Irish or the Australians are the nicest people on Earth. Irish-Australians are as good as it gets.

Noosa: The village hall held only 400. Elf-n-Sifety were determined not to let any more in. Even the deputy leader of the opposition was turned away. So I held an impromptu meeting in the car park outside, telling 250 punters that at least they wouldn’t have to pay (huge cheers), but they were going to get to hear me anyway (groans). David Bellamy, Britain’s jovial bearded naturalist, had told me to watch out for fruit bats. That night I saw one lazily flapping its tea-tray wings as it came in to roost at nightfall.

Melbourne: Before the main event (packed ballroom), I addressed a lunch for 120 philosophers in a warehouse-turned-living-room. In among the equations, I dropped the occasional reference to the Greek philosopher Anaximander, who, unlike the IPCC, had insisted on maintaining clear blue water between ‘to on’ (that which is so) and ‘to me on’ (that which is not). The indefatigable blogger Andrew Bolt was in the audience. Wish I had his million hits a week.

Canberra: Would any serious politician meet me? The media thought not. However, I had quietly been meeting some of your most eminent pollies. ABC radio was particularly annoyed that I wouldn’t say who I was meeting. Just before Question Time that day, I had 20 minutes with Tony Abbott. Don’t underestimate this charming Rhodes Scholar who spends his holidays doing menial work for underprivileged Australians. His dispatch-box battles with Kevin Rudd, also no mean performer, will be an entertainment.

South Australia: From Adelaide (packed ballroom, packed overflow hall) to the Beverley uranium mine. Not one man underground: they pump the ore from an aquifer west of Lake Frome and sell it for $35,000 a barrel to everyone except Australia, where the Greenies have not yet learned that atomic power is clean, safe and emissions-free. From Beverley, a geological expedition to Arkaroola, Doug Sprigg’s 144,000 acres of paradise in the Flinders Ranges. The dolomitic rocks containing 40 per cent CO2, said Ian Plimer, were formed 750,000 years ago, when atmospheric CO2 concentration was 30 per cent (it’s just 0.04 per cent today) and Australia was equatorial. Yet there was a mile of ice at sea level. Go figure. I flew us out in Doug’s 207.

Perth: Packed ballroom, packed overflow hall, extra public meeting the following day, also packed. Back to Sydney (extra public meeting) and home to our beloved Highland hills for just five days. Two months in the US next. Suddenly, climate scepticism is popular worldwide. Feels good, that.
Source: The Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP.

Note: Have you written, faxed or emailed your federal politician and Senator insisting you do not want to see either mainline party’s ‘climate change’ legislation passed? Tell them both bills need to be shoved down the memory hole of history!  

CLIMATE CHANGE SNIPPETT

Wind farms are dying in the United States as the taxpayer handouts dry out: Some say that Ka Le is haunted—and it is. But it’s haunted not by Hawaii’s legendary night marchers. The mysterious sounds are “Na leo o Kamaoa"-- the disembodied voices of 37 skeletal wind turbines abandoned to rust on the hundred-acre site of the former Kamaoa Wind Farm…

The ghosts of Kamaoa are not alone in warning us. Five other abandoned wind sites dot the Hawaiian Isles—but it is in California where the impact of past mandates and subsidies is felt most strongly. Thousands of abandoned wind turbines littered the landscape of wind energy’s California “big three” locations—Altamont Pass, Tehachapin (above), and San Gorgonio—considered among the world’s best wind sites…

California’s wind farms—then comprising about 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity—ceased to generate much more quickly than Kamaoa. In the best wind spots on earth, over 14,000 turbines were simply abandoned. Spinning, post-industrial junk which generates nothing but bird kills... Source: Andrew Bolt’s blogspot – 16/2/2010.  

CHAIRMAN RUDDY’S LITTLE RED SCHOOL BOOK

A long time ago, in a place far-far away, when I was a teacher, there was a controversial book published for students called “The Little Red School Book”. I think the book was controversial because it mixed sex and communism in an explosive mixture. Today it would probably be laughed at by high school students.
Now we have from Kevin Rudd PM, and TV presenter Rhys Muldoon a children’s book about a small cat and a loveable dog, Jasper and Abby and the Great Australia Day Kerfuffle.

These animals are the Rudd family pets. Jasper the cat is shown in one illustration to be advising PM Rudd and this new world order cat supervises the transportation of food from each State to be brought to The Lodge for a great national dog party.
Of course, one may philosophise and deconstruct centralist political rhetoric as many have done. But it is preferable to state the obvious: Big Kev 10 has too much time on his hands and needs to get a real job. Let's do it at the next election.  

WHY MUST I HEAR MORE AND MORE ABOUT HAITI ?

by Chris Knight
Disasters happen - some would say “get over it”. One day it is them, the next it is us. The Haiti situation could have been prevented. A local scientist was denied funds by the government to set up a seismic monitoring station, despite his claims that a big earthquake was coming. Government officials were, of course, too corrupt to fund him.

Buildings in Port-Au-Prince were knocked up with scant regard to earthquake precautions so that when the “big one” came, the whole stack of cards fell to the ground (“Officials Ignored Quake Warnings,” The Australian, 25/1/2010, p.8). Along with this the UN showed itself of being incapable of organising the Haiti rescue operation, demonstrating that the UN has no positive good at all – it can’t even successfully lie about climate change!

Israel was quick off the mark to send a team of 220 aid workers. Why is this? Why the interest in Haiti? Is this an historical recognition of Haiti’s past as a nation with the only successful slave revolt against shall we say…”colonist” oppressors”?
And given that Haiti has experienced a massive population explosion due to Western countries supplying them with food and medical resources – so that half of the population now lives on international relief and welfare – will Israel step right up and take over this welfare bill? If so, great work Israel!  

WHERE HAS COURAGE GONE?

by John Steele
Kurt Westergaard portrayed the prophet Mohammed as a suicide bomber four years ago and since that time has been under “protection” from the Danish police. Some protection – an axe-wielding Somali extremist broke into the home of the 75 year old cartoonist while he had his five year old granddaughter, who had a plaster cast on her leg. Westergaard escaped by fleeing into a “safe” room or “panic” room. It seems that he didn’t take the granddaughter with him as 1) he didn’t have the time to get her and 2) as he said “he wouldn’t do anything to her”.

It is an incredible story. We are used to axe-wielding mentally challenged folk but the lack of courage here is alarming. Surely at 75 years of age one’s duty is to protect the five year old. If he had been armed with a firearm there would have been no problem. But even the average 75 year old could put up a reasonable self-defence with a light-weight sword or even a fighting knife duct-taped to a stick.

Westergaard assumed that his granddaughter would not be attacked – an assumption which next time may prove tragic. Where oh where has manly courage gone? It has gone with liberalism, the philosophy of death that has gripped Western man.  

EUROPE : VEILS AND BURKAS; BEHEADINGS, STRANGLINGS

by Peter Ewer
Slight murmurs of opposition: the Danish Prime Minister Lars Leokke Rasmussen has said that the face-covering burka and nikab veils worn by many Muslim women have no place in Danish society: “They symbolise a view of women and humanity that we totally oppose and that we want to combat in Danish society.” It conflicts with liberal and feminist values.

Likewise the French President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to ban the veils saying that the veils “are not welcome” in France. But French Muslim leaders have warned the president that any such banning would stigmatise them - and they have the largest Muslim community in Europe. Sarkozy also portrays himself as the protector of Muslims so he will probably back down. But it, for a moment, sounded promising.

All of this is not just an “American issue”. Back in Australia recently an Afghan man strangled his wife with her veil in front of her baby and toddler after complaining that she was “becoming Australian” (Herald Sun, 21/1/2010). Perhaps France is really onto something. It is about time for a genuine debate on Australian national identity as well.  

THE GEOMETRY OF ABSURDITY

by James Reed
Dolphins, they say, are the world’s second most intelligent creatures, after humans (The Australian, 4/1/2010, p.3). But consider: some feminist biologists said a few years back that men were heading to extinction because the “pathetic” Y chromosome was “disappearing” (whatever that meant). Now it seems that is all wrong and the Y chromosome is merely “evolving” (whatever that means) (The Australian, 15/1/2010, p.8).
In the 1970’s men were also told that women had a…..a…a “G Spot”. I will not elaborate but entire books were written on the topic. And now the G Spot has been shown not to exist but to be “all in the mind”. I ask: are feminist biologists really smarter than dolphins or is it “all in the mind”!  

FEMINISTS: AN ANSWER TO CHINA’S PROBLEMS

by James Reed
One of the little intellectual debates that the new class had in one of their holiday modes was over the question of how female politicians and hyper-career women can be mothers and careerists at the same time. The general consensus emerged that they cannot – but that careers are more important and that children will have to wait until some time just prior to the biological alarm-clock ringing. After all, these (largely) feminist champions of commo-capitalism (my new name for “globalism”) have a civilisation to bring to its knees.

And yet, maybe the feminist elites can have their cake and eat it too – if the cake is Chinese. News came that China will be short of brides by the figure of 30 million in 12 years (The Australian, 15/1/07, p.11). About one in every ten Chinese men aged between 20 and 45 will be lacking a wife. Interracial couplings are one of the “cool” things advocated by the new politically correct morality: so in the aid of championing political correctness, could not the West’s feminists see it as their moral duty to serve the cause of an anti-West nation by becoming Chinese brides? Go girls, go – preferably far away!

Disclaimer: by “feminists” Reed refers to primarily the left wing oriented globalist career woman and not the decent hard-working women of this nation. Some of Reed’s best friends are women, but most bitter enemies, “feminists”.  

HAVE A GUESS WHY THERE IS A WAR IN AFGHANISTAN

by Peter Ewer
Although Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world, the West is interested in fighting on its soil. Why? An answer may be found in Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s recent statement that Afghanistan has mineral and petroleum reserves worth $1.13 trillion.

This is based upon a US Geological Survey. No wonder the US is over there! And coming on top of this is the news (to us at least) that a large ethnic group in southern Afghanistan, the Pashtuns, commonly practice homosexuality but reject the claim of being homosexuals. Apparently Western forces were “frequently confused” 

THE “RIGHT TO EUROPEAN SURVIVAL” ON TRIAL?

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Geerl Wilders, leader of the Netherlands populist Party for Freedom has spoken of Europe’s looming demise from Islamisation – and for his pains is on trial for intentionally offending Muslims. Incredible to think that these sort of politically correct laws exist – on trial for offending people!
Wilders has declared that he will make the truth of his statements about Islam (i.e., The claim for a right to discuss European survival) the basis of his defence. \
The liberal media are deeply depressed by this because even if Wilders is convicted, it will make him more popular, seeing him as something of a saint of the “right to European survival”. If he wins, the results could be even more disturbing for the Establishment. It will be interesting to see what way this case is decided.  

WE ARE WATCHING YOU

by Betty Luks
A while back Australian academics, accused of having an “anti-Israel bias”, were warned that their work was being monitored to see if it breaches Australia’s race-hate laws (The Australian, 22/11/06, p.27). The warning came from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, motivated by an alleged risk in “anti-Semitic” activities in Australian universities in the aftermath of the Lebanon-Israel (or Israel-Lebanon) war. Thus, racial vilification is allegedly occurring on campus. Various leading academics, many from the Left, were accused of having “anti-Israel bias in blogs and newspaper columns.”

Note the smooth jump in logic from “anti-Semitic” activities to “anti-Israel bias”. Further, if the academics were writing “anti-Semitic” articles in newspapers, this means that the establishment media is also liable under Australia’s race hate laws as the publishers. A summary article by Rebecca Weisser, “Mideast Studies Accused” appeared in The Advertiser, 22/11/06, p.30 pointing out that there is a bias against Israel in Australian universities, particularly in Middle Eastern studies. So put them on your agenda as well.

It seems that the search for who to monitor had to be extended to also include journalists in the Murdoch press. Deborah Hope, “Israel Lobby’s Gag No Joke”, The Weekend Australian 4-5/11/06, p.40 (Review), gave a number of examples of the Israel Lobby’s power to get their way and of “flexing its muscle to muzzle new targets”. Even Professor Tony Judt, himself a Jewish critic of Zionism, accused the Jewish Anti-Defamation League of using pressure to cancel a lecture which he was to give at the Polish consulate.

A play, My Name is Rachel Corrie, about a US student, sympathetic to Palestinians, who was killed by an Israeli bulldozer driver busy demolishing a Palestinian home, was shelved “indefinitely” due to “pressure from unnamed Jewish leaders.” Is this anti-Israel bias? And what about the reporting of this material (“Israel in West Bank ‘Land Grab’” The Australian, 23/11/06, p.9):
At the time, the “Peace Now” group alleged that it had obtained documents from Israel’s military showing that the Jewish settlements were not built on State-owned land as Israel claimed, but land seized by Israel from Palestinian landowners. Over 130 of the 162 Jewish West Bank settlements were built on seized Palestinian land.

Dror Etkes of “Peace Now” said: “We are talking about a systematic and institutionalised land grab. This has been happening for decades and in almost every settlement in the West Bank. The data presented here has been hidden by the Israeli state for many years, for fear the revelation of these facts could damage Israel’s international relations”. Can we expect that these facts and others will be aired in the courts when race vilification trials against Australian critics of the Israel lobby start to see the light of day?