Blog Archives

Will Morrison claw back the $444 million Turnbull handed to the Reef Foundation

by Brent Melville

AUSTRALIA’S new Prime Minister Scott Morrison is an evangelical Christian. The deputy prime minister Josh Frydenberg is Jewish by religion.

It is not difficult to put the case that their values clearly do not synchronize with the environmentalist ideology being pushed on Australians under the so-called 2030 Sustainable Development Goals i.e. Agenda 20-30, which is subscribed to by Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, state governments and councils.

Will Scott Morrison claw back the $444m Turnbull handed to the GBRF of which his wife is patron?

Running parallel to this is the cultural Marxism as recognised in programs such as “Safe Schools” and the “diversity” agenda being pushed by governments, corporations and big sporting codes.
The so-called sustainable development goals in many ways are actually anti-economic development. They supposedly justify the creation of elitist qangos like the Great Barrier Reef Foundation (GBRF) to guide the unwashed masses into the supposed green, diverse global utopia.
The GBRF, with its six employees, was recently given an outrageous handout of $487.6 million by ex-PM Turnbull through then Environment Minister Frydenberg. Of course it’s not all for the employees, but to be dished out to any number of projects that supposedly do something to “save the reef from destruction”.
The sham is that some scientists who have long observed and studied the reef say it is not in danger of dying at all.

The handout would have to rate as one of, if not the biggest environmental rort in Australian history – close to the $460m spooned out to the horrifically crooked Clinton Foundation and associated entities by both Labor and Coalition governments.

The question is, can Morrison and Frydenberg, the Christian-Jewish duo, do something to break the oppressive grip of green-tinged cultural Marxism over Australia?
Both should readily understand the disconnect between their respective beliefs and the philosophy behind Agenda 20-30.
The Old Testament story common to both Judaism and Christianity tells of the earth and mankind being created by a supernatural God of infinite wisdom and love, who put mankind in charge of the planet with instructions (Genesis 1:28) to “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish (or fill) the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth”. The Commonwealth of Australian, through the English law tradition, has been and hopefully still is guided by Christianity and the “Almighty God” referred to in the Preamble to the Constitution.

This tradition recognises The Lord’s Prayer as a spiritual principle for the good government of the nation, hence it being a voluntary part of the parliamentary procedure – even if large numbers of MPs these days reject it.

But environmentalists mostly do not accept the existence of a God who is ultimately in control of the planet. If they are open to any spirituality at all, it’s the idea of a pagan spiritual entity called Gaia, the Mother Earth goddess of Greek mythology.

But there are also many atheistic or agnostic environmentalists who claim to be solely led by “science”, which for them has no place for spiritual entities, faith or a Creator. Their explanation for the existence of all things is the shaky theory of evolution, which is supposedly proven by science.
For those unconvinced either way on this matter, look up a lecture on YouTube by the late Chuck Missler, a former industrial engineer, who explains how Darwin’s “simple cell” theory, taught in high school classes as the basis of evolution, has now been totally disproven by modern science.

Science, rather than pointing to random, chance mutations as being the answer to life as we know it, now points to intelligent design in nature.

Where, we might ask, did this design, this highly ordered and complex information come from?

Those of faith might also ask, did the God of creation miscalculate the ability of the planet to sustain an ever-growing population or the ability of those “made in His likeness” to find technology in order to inhabit the vast, unpopulated regions and oceans of the earth and eventually, other planets.

Environmentalism, by contrast, says the human species as an imposition upon “nature” or “Gaia”.

Humans, they maintain, are causing nature to fail and Gaia to spin out of control in apocalyptic climate change, therefore humans must reduce their numbers and radically cut their economic activity.
Ideally, according to this global green ideology, we should be living in cubicles in high-rises covered in vines with little or no electricity, apart from that which solar panels or windmills can dribble in.
It’s a miserable outlook for humanity, otherwise known as cultural pessimism.

Whether a Christian and Jew in charge of Australia’s governing Coalition party, can throw off this dark cloud over the nation, has yet to be seen.

Advertisements

Jewish citizenship entitlement could disqualify these federal MP’s

Letter to the Editor

In 1950, Israel’s Knesset passed a remarkable law, beginning with a few simple words that defined Israel’s central purpose: “Every Jew has the right to immigrate to this country…”
.
With the inception of the State of Israel, two thousand years of wandering were officially over. Since then, Jews have been entitled to simply show up and request to be Israeli citizens, assuming they posed no imminent danger to public health, state security, or the Jewish people as a whole. Essentially, all Jews everywhere are Israeli citizens by right.
.
In 1955, the law was amended slightly to specify that dangerous criminals could also be denied that right.

The Israeli Knesset(Parliament) allows any Jew an entitlement to citizenship

.

In 1970, Israel took another historic step by granting automatic citizenship not only to Jews, but also to their non-Jewish children, grandchildren, and spouses, and to the non-Jewish spouses of their children and grandchildren. This addition not only ensured that families would not be broken apart, but also promised a safe haven in Israel for non-Jews subject to persecution because of their Jewish roots.
.
Read on
.
http://www.jewishagency.org/first-steps/program/5131
.
.Federal MP’s alleged to be Jewish

Malcolm Turnbull
Josh Frydenburg
Julian Leeser
Michael Freelander
Stirling Griff
Mark Dreyfus
Michael Danby
Jason Falinski
Trent Zimmerman
.
.
…………….“While Israelis may hold dual citizenship, a Basic Law passed in 1958 states that Knesset members cannot pledge allegiance as parliamentarians unless their foreign citizenship has been revoked under the laws of that country,” the article states.
.
Another Israeli politician, who was elected at the same time as Svetlova is Rachel Azaria, who was also forced to renounce her foreign citizenship–in the US! Again from the Times of Israel:
.
Azaria, a 38-year-old Jerusalem deputy mayor, renounced her American citizenship, which she had held by virtue of her mother having been born in the US.
.
It is astounding, is it not? Israel gets billions of dollars per year courtesy of US taxpayers–but anyone holding US citizenship is barred from serving in the Knesset! But we are not allowed to have a similar law here in the US banning Israeli citizens from serving in Congress!
.
And not only do we not have a similar in the US, but apparently Freedom of Information Act requests aimed at finding out which Congress members do in fact hold dual citizenship–are denied. The following is a 2015 article that was published at Counterpunch.
.
Read on –
.
https://uprootedpalestinians.wordpress.com/2017/12/11/do-you-hold-dual-citizenship-you-can-serve-in-congress-but-not-the-israeli-knesset/

Yours

Kevin Moore

Sydney

Editor: This potential bombshell could be why the JSCEM (Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters) wants to abolish s44 and 45 of the Constitution

How Barnaby could save us from this putrid billabong

Larry Pickering

Four-time Walkley Award winning political commentator and Churchill Fellow, has returned to the fray over concern that the integrity of news dissemination is continually being threatened by a partisan media.

 

The next NATs’ Party meeting could set Australia back on track by deciding to reverse what Turnbull tried to do to them. Turnbull made no secret of the fact he was trying to get the NATs to sack Barnaby. Well, that’s heresy and guess what, as I have been saying from day one, Barnaby is going nowhere, it’s Turnbull who should be worried.

A deputation of NATs should now go to Turnbull’s office and demand he step down or the NATs will rip up the coalition agreement and leave the Libs to wallow diseased and deceased.

“WTF?”… Of course, Turnbull will not agree.

So, at the next joint Party meeting, the proposition should be put to the entire Liberal Party where many would be quite excited by the idea.

The NATs, in the meantime, will have had meetings with Bernardi and all other Right of Centre Parties and Independents, who I believe would break their necks to preference the NATs at the next election but not the Libs.

Turnbull support diminished and still shrinking

There would no doubt be Liberal Party defections as it became clear that this NAT coalition would stop Shorten dead in his tracks and the Liberal Party would effectively become defunct, never to rule again.

Those who always voted Liberal will also naturally preference the NATs. The Liberal Party deserves to die for allowing Turnbull to capitulate to his Lefty Labor mates, deserting the Menzies centrist doctrine.

The combination would see the NATs as the senior conservative Party in Government as it already holds 21 seats in the Parliament. The three-corner election deals would be scrapped and the NATs could field and win with candidates in seats, where it formerly could not.

This would give Aussie voters what they crave… a clear choice between socialist and conservative and if you add to that Shorten’s appalling popularity figures it would be impossible for even Graham Richardson to predict a Labor/Green win.

The senior Coalition partner?

The NATs would undoubtedly win between 35 and 40 seats, most at the expense of the Liberals, but it would be the NATs, combined with a diminished Liberal Party, who would be able to convince the GG that they could easily form government as one Party.

The Liberals would then have to agree to a One-Party Conservative Coalition where grubby Lefty wastrels like Bishop, Payne, Frydenberg, Hunt and Pyne etc would no longer run the joint and they would have to toe the line as they did before Turnbull assassinated Abbott.

A One-Party Coalition Government would likely elect Dutton as PM and retain Joyce as his Deputy.

Now Australia could have an honest Conservative Government that will kill off the ABC and Fraser’s SBS, dump the Paris accord, start re-mining coal, get energy costs back to normal, ban RETs, develop the north, start on nuclear power, halve immigration, combine and halve our security agencies, decimate the corrupt and bloated SCSIRO, ban immigration from known terrorist nations, reduce QUANGOs by 75%, reduce all Departmental budgets by 10%, reduce the Public Service by 5,000, cap their salaries, allow the States to collect and spend their own GST, stop ‘nominated’ Aboriginal status, reform the judiciaries, Reform the Senate, force States to reform the Family Court and the CSA, stop Islamic welfare rorts, tell the Islamic dominated UN to go root its boot, ban deficit spending, rip up 20,000 regulations, cull crocodiles and bats and at the next election include a fair dinkum referendum on restoring a trashed Marriage Act. (You can look forward to a much different result than the last Green inspired dodgy one.)

Okay so I might have my hand on it but really, Turnbull must go, and the only people with the testicular fortitude to make that happen are the NATs.

Josh Frydenberg’s re-established Brisbane Line

A letter from a reader about the appalling behaviour of Minister for Northern Development Josh Frydenberg in Federal Parliament on October 21, 2015

http://media.brisbanetimes.com.au/video-news/video-national-news/katter-cracks-up-the-house-6943967.html

Hi Josh, we just saw your comments about flogging off Darwin Port to the bloody Chinese, YET AGAIN.

Why are you and the free-trading, de-regulating Liberals so intent on selling our kids future??

Your disgraceful antics when answering Katters question are deplorable in the least, but not unexpected when Katter, the conscience of the Liberals and former Nationals, asks a question that you cannot truthfully answer.

Northern Development is just another cruel hoax and your comments have just proven it.

Yes there is not a high density of population north of the Tropic of Capricorn but that is no excuse to populate it with unwanted chinamen. I have a copy of Rudd’s Cabinet proposal to sell most of the north to China or Indonesia before they take it forcefully. It was published on www.cairnsnews.org last year I believe.

Go to: https://cairnsnews.org/page/2/?s=northern+Australia

No doubt you are following the same UN dictate.

Is it any wonder people are fed up with neo-con Liberals and Labor recalcitrants in ‘Parliament’ just like you and naturally Malcolm, the Minister for his Jewish mates, Goldman Sachs?

Your machinations foment the white depopulation of Cape York and handing over much needed cattle breeder country to murris that will never again produce anything for the economy.

Did you know there are only 140,000 head of cattle remaining in the Far North?

Why did you allow Warren Entsch to ignore the handing over of the North’s only defence road, the Peninsula Development Road, to the unrepresentative and warring Cape York Land Council?

You have admitted in parliament (prima facie evidence) to the handing over of our country to a foreign power. This is not northern development, this is sedition and you and your ilk should be charged accordingly under the Criminal Code Act 1914.

From a Queensland voter