Sunday 7th February 1999


This on-line paper is now archived for perpetuity in the National Library of Australia

Subscriber's password check (have your subscription number handy)
Subscribers get free access to the monthly "The Strategy" on-line from April 1998.

Current topical links (available to all readers):
[Links to the MAI]
[One Nation on-line DISCUSSION forum] [One Nation Web Site]
HAVE YOU ORDERED:
[MURDER BY MEDIA, DEATH OF DEMOCRACY IN AUSTRALIA]

from an Aussie's viewpoint on Australia's first daily Internet newspaper.
Since October 1995

Dirty linen

It is not the amount of dirty linen being aired about One Nation by the media today that surprises me, it is the fairly innocuous content that the media, at their worst, can reveal. It is no secret that the media hacks, the lackeys of the media barons, use their vast resources and libraries of damning material to control the major parties - thus One Nation's determined stance against becoming another political group beholden to Packer and Murdoch makes it a prime target. Today's Sun-Herald is a case in point.

Before we look at the Sun-Herald article, take the largely untold story about a Gold Coast madam, Jacqueline Leyden, who supplied then Labor Minister Graham Richardson with prostitutes - courtesy of a leading crime figure in Australia. Ms Leyden was killed in a knifing on Wednesday night while sitting in the dining room of a duplex on the Gold Coast's Main Beach.

The Courier-Mail, in a remarkable admission, stated on Friday, "A Gold Coast madam who allegedly provided prostitutes for former Labor Senator Graham Richardson was one of the victims of a horror double slaying on Wednesday night." In fact Sarah Gee, one of the prostitutes supplied to Richardson at the Hyatt hotel at the Sanctuary Cove on August the 10th 1993, said that she and another girl received Au$4,000 for a two hour sex romp with him.

The manner in which this case was shelved by the media barons back then and following Richardson's sudden departure from politics to become Packer's paid political lackey, speaks for itself. This is the sort of stuff that Packer and Murdoch have volumes of material on which would incriminate many of the "upstanding Federal MPs in the Laboral factions". Of course this material is rarely, if ever, released unless there is a need to target a particular individual who might try to break ranks.

While Minister for Communications in the 1980s Labor MPs laughingly called Richardson the "Minister for Channel 9"... a title which fitted rather well, One Nation has been a thorn in the side. So when young Peter Cook, who was appointed New South Wales secretary with unlimited access to documentation in the Manly office, takes copies of material "to protect himself".... This is what Peter Cook (right below with Pauline Hanson in April 1998 at the One Nation birthday party) wrote to me by email in early January 1999:

Since I knew Ettridge suspected me already (he practically told me he knew I'd try something like that (copy and remove files) a few days earlier) telling him would not make things any better - he'd throw me out on the spot. So I finished all the work I hadn't already finished and walked out.

When I heard from a friend that a timber mill in Baradine was employing people and I might have a chance, I took it and went there.. Unfortunately, it didn't work out and I came home.. Ditto with the Isis Town and Country (a local paper) in Childers..

The reason I went to Fairfax was not to get my name in the headlines - It was to get my side of the story on the record... That has happened, and I will not cast any doubt on that article as it is my only insurance...

Reporter Alex Mitchell refers to Mr Cook as the basis of his article headed "Party's over for Pauline".

Young dissident member Peter Cook is suddenly an expert on all things One Nation saying to Alex Mitchell, "One Nation is on the nose with nowhere to go." Now that's real balanced commentary from a young man who was obviously party to this statement by Alex Mitchell

"The Sun-Herald can reveal what happened at the meeting and in the days and weeks that followed.

"Hanson's demise at the meeting is recorded in a massive file of documents - which has come into the possession of this paper - exposing the internal life of One Nation."

The great resulting expose by Mitchell has about as much spice and intrigue as an anthill in your backyard. But let that not get in the way of this reporter under the heading "How Pauline Hanson lost control of One Nation... Hijacked".

The headline somehow rings hollow as Pauline Hanson never had control of One Nation, it was a party for the people with a firm leadership - required in its early days to hold the party together. Hervey Bay, Petrie and Dubbo are just a few examples of why this was so critical in the party's early days.

Mitchell tries to demonstrate that Hanson's desire to have the One Nation head office based in Ipswich was overruled by the two Davids and that she succumbed to their demands. "It (the new head office in Manly) would need to be at least twice the size of the current location and two extra staff would be hired - one as a designated receptionist and one as a media communications/research assistant under David Oldfield's directions..." as you can see riveting stuff. Much more exciting than the hidden sex and scandal stories about political heavyweights like Graham Richardson.

Desperate for a story Mitchell then reveals private correspondence between David ettridge and various well know third parties like Mel Gibson. Quotes are taken word for word out of a private letter to Gibson from ettridge... with the concluding statement, "The Sun-Herald was unable to confirm whether Gibson bothered to reply."

The party's dislike for the discredited 60 Minutes is well known - as covered in the book Murder by Media, Death of Democracy in Australia... A Memo from David ettridge to state and federal candidates is reproduced... really riveting stuff:

"In spite of us making the position clear to 60 Minutes, last Sunday they ran a Paul Lyneham interview which pauline thought was a part of the Brisbane tally room television coverage.

"60 Minutes have also this week made contact with our new Queensland candidates and covertly attempted to induce them to appear in a story after saying that other candidates had already agreed.

"Please be very clear on our position with 60 Minutes. Until further notice we will not allow them any access to One Nation because they cannot be trusted to do anything but to attempt to damage us and our reputation."  

Again really riveting stuff... the sort of thing that beats Richardson's dalliances with prostitutes for news value any day of the week.

What it does show that if there are any conspiracy theorists around then those leading the pack are the journalists themselves as they try to make much out of nothing in a brazen and deceitful attempt to earn browny points with their media masters.

MD

The Party's Over

Here is an extract from the article by Peter Charlton (reproduced with commentary overseas by an unknown party):

They (Australian voters) did so for a range of reasons: a sense that the major political parties had failed them; a feeling that some groups - particularly those in the big southern cities - received preferential treatment; a feeling that they were being ignored by Brisbane and Canberra; a concern that the changes they had experienced in their lives, from the end of permanent employment to the closure of the local bank and post office, were all for the worse.

Since 1983, politicians from both the major parties had told them how to think and how to vote - and tried to convince them that economic rationalism was good, that globalisation was inevitable and that pain endured would be worthwhile in the end. After 13 years they have had enough. In 1996, they voted out the Keating Labor government. Soon they had conservative governments in Brisbane and in Canberra - and still the pain remained.

See letter below...

There has been a lot of feedback on the crisis facing One Nation following the resignation of three MPs. Some of the letters are carried below. Here is an extract from one of them.

Even if One Nation does go down, there too may issues at stake. Too many wrongs to put right. Too many "taboo" issues to discuss. Too many supporters who can see right through the negativity an hypocrisy of the media and the opponents.

Disloyal MPs

Dear Scott,

At our Lschenault branch AGM held Monday evening there was full support expressed by all the members present, fo Pauline and the two Davids. Ted Vermeer was present with plenty of copies of the draft constitution and they were avidly pounced on.Ted explained that they were only a DRAFt copy and we wee to peruse it carefully and notify him of anything we were not happy about and he would present it to Pauline and Co. Regarding the MP's who are nothing but traitors we can only commisserate.As a suggestion, search your heart and see what you find there should I offer you a couple of million and a good job when the dust has settled and see what you find there. My grandfather always used tosay " every man has his price "

Regards
Barbara

Resignations

The Qld M.P.'s may rightly have issues that they want sorted out but the action they took reeked of immaturity. They have done tremendous damage to the image of One Nation.

Not even the Labourals "air their dirty linen in public".

regards
Wags

In light of the recent dissent of some of One Nation's members.

It seems to me that the members have decented because of what they see One Nation as an "un-democratic" party.

Whether or not that is true, (what's to say Liberal, Labor, Democratic, and the such are democratic? Of course, they have always asked and considered the Australian people their opinion on local and international matters, haven't they? Not to mention the "democratically elected" Untied Nations!) it may not mean these members, who have gone on to become Independents, have not distanced themselves from the principals supported by One Nation. For example, CIR. If existing One Nation members could challenge each of these members publicly about the issues, then they (One Nation members) could say, "well, nothing has really been lost for the country. They wish to continue to support the principals supported by One Nation. We wish them all the best." Those whom have decented may just be taken aback by this. After all, is puts the ball in their court, does'nt it? I'd like to see the biased media trifle with that one!

Just A Thought.

Please reply in the papers.

P.S. Even if One Nation does go down, there too may issues at stake. Too many wrongs to put right. Too many "taboo" issues to discuss. Too many supporters who can see right through the negativity an hypocrisy of the media and the opponents.

I don't see them as staying down!

State MPs

Scott, I reckon I've seen everything now. These Benedict Arnolds honestly believe the people voted for them. I think they are suffering from delusions of grandeur.

DJ

State of the party

Dear Scott I must reply to Steve Milson (Sat 6/2) and thank him for a - mostly - terrific letter, expressing, I am sure, the feelings of many of us, regarding the reasons for our joining PHON in the first instance, and our experiences since joining.

At last, after years of apathy, we have people all over Australia united under the PHON banner, sharing a deep concern over the direction in which we are being driven by all the other mainstream parties, and the forces behind the establishment of the New World Order, a truly frightening prospect. Since joining ON last year, I have been privileged as a member of a small but dedicated branch, and then as a candidate in the Federal election, to meet, talk with and share activities with the most wonderful people, typical of the real heart of this country, and who do not intend to stand by and let it be taken from under our feet by those who would betray us.

Where Steve loses me, however, is in his reaction to the behaviour this week of those Queensland parliamentarians who decided to resign from ON and remain in Parliament as Independents. It is true that the 11 original ON MPs have had to face an unprecedented degree of publicity (perhaps not quite unprecedented - what about Pauline in her lonely seat in Canberra?), and as first timers, and for the most part, untried in political matters, subject to the extreme heat of the blowtorch of publicity every time they sneezed. We are all proud of what they have achieved so far and wish them well in their endeavours, hoping that they will gain support and strength from each other, to help them through their difficulties. But to resign after less than one third of a contract which they undertook with the people who voted for them, is quite breathtaking in its shortsightedness and self centredness. No-one said it was going to be easy, and perhaps no-one realised quite how hard it was going to prove in practice. But to step aside for the reasons given, and at this particular moment, indicates either a failure to understand the most basic principles of political timing, proving that they are still very much 'on probation' as MPs, or else a total lack of concern for the effect their public actions will have, both on the party as it approaches its first National Conference, and NSW its first opportunity to enable the people of that state to elect representatives to their own State Houses. What about the resulting loss to ON of its party status, and the much needed funding and paid positions to assist the members in their very difficult job? If their intention was actually to sabotage both those upcoming events, and to undermine the party structure in Parliament, then they have gone the right way about it, though I feel it is likely that for all the other reasons talked about elsewhere, in Steve's letter, this may well prove an opportunity for the party to develop, rather than to implode, as the other parties, aided and abetted by the media, would like to believe.

Remember Steve, that Pauline's resignation from the Liberal party and her decision to stand as an Independent, was taken before her election, not 7 months after she had been elected under a different banner. We have been quick to condemn people like Mal Colston and others, who crossed the floor or became Independents during the course of a term of office - please don't let us prove that we are really no different deep down from those we criticised so vehemently in the past.

Whether we like it or not, those of us who are now identified with ON by our neighbours and friends, are being watched all the time, and our actions taken to be representative of ON in Australia - not always a comfortable, or even a logical situation to be in, but a fact of life, which we ignore at the peril of the party we support. Since the October election, I still receive phone calls from the local media, who use me as the local voice of ON, and my relationship with them these days is actually quite amicable.

Thanks for your book, Scott, an excellent exposure of what is happening 'out there' to ensure we don't hear what is really happening, but get the pre-digested version that is considered suitable by those who control the presses and programming in this country.

A suggestion for your developing New Look, which sounds great - could you help us to save paper when printing off @notd, by reorganising all the links etc, which at the moment take up most of Page 1 before the actual news begins; also the listing of articles at the end, which is often all there is on the last page. The info contained in those sections is useful, but not really needed at the beginning and end of every day's news.

Avril Baynes

Division

Having read the varying opinions in Saturdays edition, I sense a sameness about them. How often when there is a difference of opinion, the debators seem to be saying the same thing, when they really are trying to achieve the same goals. A quote from Richard L Evens,"History fails to record that any nation has ever shown good prospects of of providing abundance and happiness for all when only a few were doing the thinking or when only a few making the decisions." Come on Pauline, we`ve trusted you, please trust us.

Regards
John Hugo

Letter to Dolly

Dorothy.

You are a good person! Did the NP heavies get to you? Why are you doing a Perrett. You had independence with ON . The democracy thing WE would have solved.

Repent and rejoin, we need your help to win the main battle, and that is not you alone in parliament. We have to have a new party. ON is it for now. The other parties do NOT have democracy in their constitutions, so long as their executives, whoever that is can be bought off.

Think again about the thousands of votes Pauline got. Your supporters. A majority, beaten by labour preferences.

I will not support a non-aligned independent. And neither will the people.

Not so long as I and others are desperate enough to put our life's savings against the major parties who have double-crossed the people too many times already. You are too young and history illiterate to remember their broken promises.

Your reasons were right, but you took the wrong course. Oldfield would get his another way, not your way, which did not seek my will in the matter.

What branch meetings did you attend to get approval for your action? If you believe in democracy.

Philip Madsen, Barambah voter

Scott ,

Flight of the Phoenix (part II)

Scott,

Todays ( Saturdays ) comments in @notd reflect upon the diversity of opinions of ON supporters which disprove the media hype that we are all a bunch of mindless morons blindly following party lines. I hope that these hiccups on the maturing and growth of ON as a true peoples party are quickly and rationally resolved for I believe that the common thread which binds us as a organisation are far stronger than those which divide.

I agree with you Sott on the spectre of censorship which is an issue raised in the document as presented by the ten QLD MP"s ( point 7). I have also read the proposed Draft Constitution and political censorship of ON members is enshrined in: 5.8 (a) No member shall be permitted or authorised to communicate directly or indirectly with the media concerning any Party policy matter or the internal affairs of a branch, a region or, a division, unless first properly authorised by the National Executive or the relevant State Director;

The end does not justify the means.

I also quote from an article from a Canadian newspaper reporting on the Zundel trial currently underway in Canada. OTTAWA CITIZEN, FEB 2 1999.

* "Free speech can be confusing, in part because to defend it requires a willingness to be offended."

* "In Canada's broadcasting industry, we must conclude, you can now be censured for sarcasm. Alarming. "

* "(B)ecause the broadcast industry holds its free speech "privilege" by way of government fiat, it forgets that the public is perfectly capable of censuring . . . without any help: listeners offended by words can reach for their radio's "off" button. In a free-speech society, that is how to correctly handle distasteful views."

* "Now to Ernst Zundel, a tougher illustration. Zundel, purveyor of nonsensical views about the Holocaust, attempted last year to give a press conference on Parliament Hill in a room that is routinely made available for the public to do precisely that. The parties banned him from the precinct. A judge agreed. In January, his lawyer, who wanted to give a press conference on Canada's hate laws, was also banned. (Who's next? Opponents of the government's magazine bill? Anyone who says something MPs don't like?)"

* "Again, free speech has been stifled because the speech in question offends us. Again, those acting for the state have failed to understand that in a free-speech society, individuals can easily censure Zundel without suppressing his right to speak: by not listening to him or, if they choose, by easily refuting him."

* "That a person's speech is emotionally off-putting is not reason enough to limit speech. If emotions are the standard by which we judge what is to be permitted in human communication, then we have no standards."

* "This is a far more offensive idea than anything these controversial figures can conjure up."

Have a good day
Steve Milson

Saturday's edition of anotd was pitiful. Your lead article was long on inuendo and short on facts and your selection of letters to the editor leaves much to be desired.

I would not have bothered commenting on your pettyness if had not denigrated Dorothy Pratt M.P. for the seat of Barambah Queensland . In your diatribe you blame her for the revolt among the ON members in the Queensland parliament and insinuate that her ambition is to gain power through the leadership of the party.

Scott, you have been knocking around with the wrong people to get the right perspective on what has happened to ON and you will not get it by hobnobing with the elite.

Let me put you straight on a few things. Firstly there is no more democracy in ON than any of the major parties and while ever the two Davids are on the National Executive, there wont be.David Ettridge has stated on occasion to use his own words " the day democracy enters One Nation is the day I walk out".

There has been revolt in the party for as long as I have been a member (18 months) and it hasn't been caused by infiltrators, it has been caused by the stupid paranoia of the executive who have steadfastly refused to listen to the message the ordinary members have been trying to get into their thick heads, THEY WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON, and because of the lack of information coming from the top people have left the party in droves absolutely disgusted with the dictatorial manner assumed by the leaders of the party. And this has been the cause of most of the so-called revolts, not as was stated caused by whiteants( I have always been of the opinion that the only whiteants were at the top of the tree, not the bottom).

There were four branches in the electorate of Barambah early last year, today there is maybe one still viable and its pretty shaky. Why do you suppose this has happened? It certainly was NOT from any infiltration .

You go on about Dorothy not being dedicated to the cause, what cause? there isn't one any more except possibly in the minds of a few misguided people who do not know what day it is. Dorothy is the most dedicated person I know, she is totally dedicated to the people who elected her and they come before any party and that is how it should be .

You want to read what you have written. You have been very harsh in your criticism of the national media ( with good reason) but you sound just like them.

You say that the Queensalnd M.P.s are only in parliament because of three people, come on Scott, dont the voters count? Now I'll tell you something, One Nation could have won the Queensland election in there own right if those three had done their job properly and informed the people of Queensland what they were about, instead the people were in the main ignorant because there was NO information being distributed to the branches to pass on.

Finally, your attack on Tony Pitt shows just how much you don't know. Tony did not wreck the CAP, they didn't need his help. Tony has been a staunch fighter for democracy from before you first spat the dummy.

He has spent half his life and all his savings for the cause and I dont think you have earned the right to chuck muck at a person like him.

Alan Esson

One Nation and the @notd

One Nation has come into being because the people are trapped with our two party system of government. Every election sees people confused about how they should vote - after all, don”t we just end up with more of the same, no matter who we vote for?

Perhaps One Nation should seek to do some real damage to the Laboral factions by letting the people know they will give the people the power to over-ride government. Commonly called Citizen Initiated Referenda (CIR), I think the name Peoples” Power of Veto is more descriptive in that it emphasises the peoples” right to control their government. Also, PPV rolls off the tongue more readily than CIR.

I know there are many objections about costs of these referenda and how frequently they should be held, but surely it is time our governments” (plural) misuse of their authority was put to an end. The cost we (the people) all pay because of their (partial) decisions must far outweigh any cost of annual or bi-annual referenda. There would probably need to be a new organisation set up to log and report on government decisions (no more secret treaties or government purks) and also to collate letters of objection and petitions against government decisions. We would also need to determine the percentage of the electorate (33%?) required to force an issue to referendum and also the level(s) at which this should occur (council, state electorate, state, federal electorate or nation).

I believe this is what the people really want. The chance to put our governments” decisions under the microscope, to halt them and even reverse them. Perhaps @NOTD could begin a list of changes the people want eg. Fixed date elections, stopping the GST, tax multinationals, to be able to sack the government, ending the two party preferred system of voting, and so on. Any party speaking against PPV could be painted in the worst possible light by simply mentioning either party”s” list broken promises and their vested interest in not allowing the people to have this power (right).

One Nation can really make a difference and show the voters they are keen to REpresent them. Sadly, ON cannot rely on the media and needs to get its information out by other means. I would like to see an A4 page (folded in three) of ON policy which people (like me) could obtain and do letterbox drops in their areas. These letters should advertise the One Nation Web Site and @NOTD”s Web Site. I”m certain there will be plenty of willing volunteers and we have a little more than two months until the New South Wales election.

Maybe other readers could develop this concept - I”m sure it would be a winner!

Regards,
Chris Fitzgerald

from the global office:

Another perfect day in paradise.

Have a good one.

This Ring Name site is owned by One Nation. Want to join the One Nation ring? [Skip Prev] [Prev] [Next] [Skip Next] [Random] [Next 5] [List Sites]

exclusive to  (how to) subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day:

One Nation "split" - 6th February 1999
Paff and the red light - 3rd February 1999
Launch of "Murder by Media, Death of Democracy in Australia" - 22nd to 24th January 1999
One Nation's Queensland State Conference - 27th to 29th November 1998
Dual Citizenship and politicians- 20th November 1998
Where Prize Turkeys Gather - 17th November 1998
A time with Heather Hill - exclusive interview with One Nation's first Federal Representative - 25th October 1998
A day with Pauline - exclusive interview after the Federal Election - 22nd October 1998
It's YOUR ABC? - 17th October 1998
The Federal Election - 3rd October 1998

Return to Australian National News of the Day

#

See GLOBE International for other world news.