I am never going to view 60 minutes again after what I saw & heard on last Sundays episode.(normally I have watched every show till then)

Keep up the effort Pauline

Kevin Bates
resident of the ACT
and it's stupid self government

Subject: Pauline Hanson and 60 Minutes

You have to understand that Pauline IS generating fear. That fear is amongst those who for the past ten years (at least) are used to (a) having their views and opinions unquestioned, and b) in the habit of pronouncing their views and opinions as being the views and opinions of most Australians. THEIR credibility is at stake if it can be shown those views are NOT, in fact those of 'most' Australians. Therefore, discrediting Pauline is crucial.

Why do you think these same people keep refering to how divisive a referendum on Wik would be. More people watch 60 Minutes than Lateline. She needs to counter this soon if at all possible, and, in order to do so, she needs to be trained to be politely aggressive, as opposed to defensive, when she finds herself in this kind of interview.

She should be given a few issues to pursue the media on, e.g., Why do they constantly give the impression that only someone of white ancestry can be racist? Where were they when black women honest enough to tell the truth over Hindmarsh were being villified? Why don't they ever refer to Aboriginal representatives' calls for sovereignty as divisive? Why don't they condemn the Asian involvement in the drug trade in Australia as quickly as they try to condemn her?

She must keep referring to John Howard's past statement on Asian immigration. She should be taught to change the subject as easily as this kind of interviewer does. Catch THEM unawares.

On figures, she MUST stick to saying she initially relied on common sense, and still does, but she has since been shown hard data that backs this up. She should be given written references to refer to for this, and should not try to quote the statistics herself. She can be shown how to be vague on the exact figures. Let them look it up.

Carol Coombs

Subject: re: pauline hanson pages

reading through the one nation pages, without even touching on the racism issue, it's not hard to see how a nation is split between one party, attempting to make changes to the current situation which disrepresents a fair portion of the australian community, and on the other side we have people who are content to spitting, swearing and other foul methods of intimidating their opposition.

even looking at the support VS hate mail, you have people who are actively supporting the plan, but on the other side, instead of well constructed criticisms and comments about the one nation page, generally just a pile of abuse and crap, and where does that get anyone??

i think, if people want to dispute pauline hanson, they should do some research, spend some time researching the facts and then base logical arguments on that - not just resort to violence, spitting and verbal abuse.

while i myself have nothing against the aboriginals as a whole, i have had my posessions which i worked for stolen from be by aboriginals who generally didn't give a shit, and then are defended in court with my tax money..

and why is it, when last year in a small town in north queensland, aboriginals went on a riot, the police were helpless but to barracade themselves in their station with firearms while the station was literally destroyed from the outside - and guess what was hit worst? the bottle shop... not a single bottle of alcohol was left, entirely ransacked. i feel sorry for the few percent of aboriginals who are legimately attempting to have a good go at life like everyone else, and not the other majority who are content to live off mine, and your money and be proud of it.

Matt Carter

Subject: For the hate mail section:

Well, call me ignorant, but I am still wondering how the One Nation Party hope to achieve unity by dividing the nation.

It has long been known that a way to get at least some supporters is by polarising any group of people. That way, by far the majority of the group will feel psychologically pressured to go to either extreme, instead of having their own views which are at neither extreme, but somewhere in between.

It is now unlikely for a person with individual and non-extreme views on the immigration debate to be found. Those who may have had a few thoughts as to it having a negative effect on Australia have moved to the Hanson extreme because the only other view in society, since Hanson's arrival, is the other extreme...they are being very racist, and there is nothing wrong with multiculturalism as seen in Australian society today. Now no one seems to lie within these extremes. Polarisation at its best...

A vaguely similar strategy was often used by the Keating Govenment. When things were tough, the polls started to rise in the favour of the opposition, and publicly people were asking tough questions, bring up an issue that really has nothing to do with what is causing the hardship for your party, cause polarisation by splitting the nation, and sit back and watch as your support increases because people who agree on that one matter will suddely swap parties if their 'normal' party they voted for holds a different view. In the mean time they forget about all the other issues that are important, and the only thing they want to know in order to cast their vote is the issue that they have been polarised on.

For the Keating govenment, he very cleverly used the 'flag debate' and 'cutting the ties with England' as a powerful tool to gain votes. It may not have won him the last election, but it did succeed in causing a lot of voters to vote for him that usually would not have, based on the majority of his parties policies. Suddenly everyone is talking about flags and the queen, and no longer asking all those tough questions...

Even more effective because all you then have to do is let the debate die down and dont even have to act on what your views were.

Basically, they are in a way being forced to 'take sides' when in fact they are unlikely to 'normally' do so. Sure, no gun is held to their head, but the human psyche is a wonderful thing, and can be taken advantage of easily. By making the situation seem black and white, people can be led to miss the grey areas, which is in fact where the real world is.

The actual issues involved are not important as the whole issue is turned into a 'for or against' issue, which can easily be seen in the whole Hanson saga.

If we were to ignore all of the actual issues the Hanson party is making a stance on, and to just look at the effects it is having, then it becomes strikingly obvious that this political party is not achieving anything constuctive at all. Regardless of the validity of their points of view, the party is causing a great deal of social upheaval, becoming a focus for violence in the community and also encouraging others to become 'anti-foreigner'. It does not matter if these are or are not what the party wants or is standing for, the simple fact is that the whole Hanson Saga has produced these after-effects. One can not deny the increase in racist behaviour since Hanson started to be publicised, especially amongst schoolkids, which has by now been documented. As I said, it does not matter if the Hanson party does not intend this, these are the factual results of their efforts, and if they continue with the same efforts and the same results, then they can no longer say 'it has nothing to do with us'.

Until this party comes up with a few things that would distinguish them as a 'real party' not just a 'party on paper', such as accurate statistics, real policies (which have also taken into the account all the international ramifications they will cause, for example cutting of trade or banning imports from certain contries which would harm Austrlai more than help it) that will help the nation both now and in the long-run, accountbility for the things said (Pauline Hanson has got off very likely on this one. Never has there been a politician in Austrlian history who has said so many grossly innacurate things and got away with it withough being accountable), communication skills (just watch a Hanson interview, even with a 'soft' interviewer and watch Pauline become extremely defensive, refuse to say anything other than she was intending on saying, refuse to answer a question that she has not previously been given before the interview, and basically acting like a vegetable reading from a teleprompt demostrating no abilitity to think on the spot), and just about everything that separates a real political party from a group of people gossipping, this is not a party to be taken seriously.

It is like a group of kids tasting power for the same time, being completely irresponsible about what it means to have power, and the responsibilities of being a public figure, let alone being in the government.

All I can say to those who dislike the views of this party, especially the protestors who became a bit violent at some Hanson 'speeches' recently is to sit back, relax, and enjoy watching this party make a compete and utter fool of itself (it cant claim 'we are a new party and are just getting on our feet' forever!), and die a well publicised death in front of the whole of Australia, if not the world.

It will be hilarious!

Rich Q