Australian National


(anotd)
Thursday 16th July 1998


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.

Recent stories exclusive to  (how to) subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day now at the bottom of this page.


"ON NOW" weekly abbreviated anotd fax-back - Updated every Friday afternoon.
Dial: 1902 211037 and follow the instructions.

(Note: costs 0.75 c per minute will be billed to your phone account under "ON NOW NEWS LETTER")


Current topical links (available to all readers):
[Links to the MAI]
[One Nation on-line DISCUSSION forum] [One Nation Federal Web Site]
Archive of weekly features (available to all readers):
[The Canberra Column] [Economic Rationalism]


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

Between the One Nation lines

Pauline Hanson's comments about the 1967 Referendum on Aborigines has, predictably, created a media feeding frenzy with the usual old distortions coming to the fore.

The story was of such importance that The Courier Mail was "forced" to ignore its stance of not reporting on One Nation. Interesting because the television stations are showing us what the papers are not - Pauline Hanson addressing thousands of Australians who hang on her every word, cheer and clap on each point.

The Hanson Phenomenon has certainly continued to rattle the career politicians and their glass cages over the last week. Thus the comment by Mrs Hanson in Adelaide about the 1967 Referendum becoming a major focus for all those who are threatened by her growing support.

Before I comment on these statements here is yesterday's press release by Pauline Hanson on her comments in Adelaide on this issue:

Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum

It is clear Pauline Hanson is often misrepresented by the press and the recent headlines that suggest she questioned Aboriginal Australian’s rights to vote is yet another example of selective reporting. Is this because of the search for what will be the most inflammatory or is it just that some members of the press pick out of context what they believe will do the most damage to Pauline Hanson?

“I have not and would not question the right to vote of any Australian citizen. What I question is whether Australians would have thought twice about their vote in the 1967 referendum if they had known their attempt to bring about equality was going to cause the pendulum to go the other way.

“The main point of the 1967 referendum was the change of section 51 of the constitution that allowed the government to make special laws with respect to Aborigines. It is from this that successive governments have created race based policies such as Abstudy and 1.5% loans for Aboriginals starting businesses.

“Aboriginal Australians like all Australians should and do have the right to vote but no one should be treated differently on the basis of race - all Australians should be treated equally and the same. I am quite certain that if Australians had understood where the 1967 referendum would lead, many would have voted differently.

“These special laws based on race have led to reverse discrimination and the rorting of taxpayers money without helping the Aborigines in most need. We must assist Aborigines, but as Australians in need, not on the basis of race. We must not make laws that set Australians apart and are open to abuse by those who pretend to look after the Aboriginal people.

“It is often reported that I want to take benefits from Aboriginal people, that is not correct and never was correct. It is true many Aboriginal people are seriously disadvantaged but they do not have a monopoly on being disadvantaged and should not be singled out on the basis of race. Everyone should be assisted on the basis of need.”

Statement issued by Pauline Hanson MP, member for Oxley

In her speech to supporters in Adelaide earlier this week Pauline referred, incorrectly, to the 1967 Referendum including the Aboriginal's right to vote. As you can see from the press release above - the thrust of her comments were aimed against the ATSIC Aboriginal industry, the bureaucrats living off the fat of the tax payer provided funding and the manner in which the money is distributed.

Of course making a mistake, which the media would have you believe is Pauline Hanson's exclusive domain, was jumped on by Prime Minister John Howard who said in Parliament yesterday, "...stripped of any kind of rhetoric, any kind of excuse, any kind of explanation, what the Member for Oxley was saying last night is that she's actually contemplating the notion that one section of the Australian community should not have the vote..."

What trash... in fact it was John Howard who preceded Hanson in expressing fears about the divisive nature of the Aboriginal industry back in 1988 before he became a lame duck under the cloud of political correctness.

Here is a quote from the above press release by John Howard:

The whole idea of a treaty makes nonsense of the statement by the Prime Minister on Australia Day that there can be no hierarchy of descent in Australia and that commitment to Australia is everything. The Prime Minister at that time rejected any policy based on racial difference, and we do the same.

Queensland National Party president David Russell agrees with Mrs Hanson about the 1967 Referendum saying, "What Australians were told in 1967 was that two discriminatory provisions were being taken out of the Constitution.

"But that was not what they voted for. What they voted for was to give the Commonwealth the power to make discriminatory laws in relation to Aborigines."

He added that a huge Aboriginal bureaucracy had been established in the years following the referendum.

"We've had a great deal of division that's come from well intentioned attempts to promote indigenous welfare by all sorts of discriminatory treatment."

Two new race based anti-Hanson parties to be established in Australia.

It is an interesting quirk that "race based" parties are given the nod by the mainstream media while the One Nation party which is for equity for all Australians is singled out as the "racist' party.

One does not have to be an Einstein to realise that if there was any truth in media reporting the reverse would be being portrayed in the pages of the daily newspapers. However, the hidden agendas of the media barons are the key to understanding the quirky and dishonest nature of the articles that appear day after day.

The two new parties include a tax payer funded Aboriginal party called the "Indigenous People's Party" - possibly the seed of the new Aboriginal government foreseen in the UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which Australians are not supposed to know about.

And the Unity Party which is aligned with the Internet based "Say No to Hanson" Party" . The Unity Party is clearly a front for the Asian community with the proposer being named as Lin Tang, of 5 Maluka Place, Kingsgrove in New South Wales.  

What is this all about?

Please help me solve the mystery of this anonymous fax sent in 1994 by Paul Elliott MP to Mary Esson MP about Au$1 and Au$2 coins.

The media  distorts even when they are misled!

How the media are easily misled.. or as Joh would call it - feeding the chooks.

Here is an extract:

During these interviews Matthew attempted to explain his point of view - essentially he was ignored. While taping the Hinch interview, Matthew explained an ‘extreme’ idea outlining how kids can go out into the desert and attend camps run by YPAHMTS. The kids were only allowed to wear plain T-shirts, listen to music that YPAHMTS supplied and read material YPAHMTS gave them. They would be totally cut off from the ‘deviant influences’ that heavy metal T-shirts represent. These parts of the interview were cut from the final edit and the interview that went to air focused in on the narrow media-created agenda: banning offensive, heavy metal T-shirts.

The media began portraying Matthew as the leader of a ‘growing group’ wanting to ban all heavy metal T-shirts, when all Matthew advocated was for people to begin thinking about what they wear. The media created something out of nothing. His stance, that heavy metal T-shirts are offensive, was conveniently changed by the media into a stance calling for the banning of all offensive T-shirts. At no stage did Matthew ever mention banning, he just advocated choice, stating “if you want to wear an offensive T-shirt, make it yourself, rather than paying twenty-five dollars to advertise what is basically a multinational recording company.”


Making the news" -
an indepth exposé of media and political collusion at the highest possible levels in Australia.


email the editor

You say:

Subject: Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum

This often misquoting of just about anything Pauline Hanson says is typical of the press and other members of parliament. Personally I don't think they ever take the time to listen to what is actually said, instead they just see if they can get any mileage for their own shortcomings by bending the truth. Don't worry just keep attacking the basis principals which all real Australians understand and come the elections all sensible Australians will give the current dead wood in our parliaments the shakeup they need!!

Yours sincerely
Ron James

A true One Nation Supporter in the ACT.

Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum

Thanks for that. I was a bit concerned when I heard P.M. Howard making his comments in Parliament today and wondered if it was just his political twisting again - hoped it was. Unfortunately that is all that a lot of people want to hear. They are not really interested in the facts.

While I'm here, one other concern I have following some recent reporting on One Nation, is that the elected representatives of One Nation be answerable firstly to the people who elected them and NOT to some unelected person or persons behind the wall. This is what many people are coming down on the established Parties for. I believe I am not alone in believing that the people who put a person into Parliament should have the greatest say in what and how he does what he does. In other words, a politician should be answerable to the people not the party!

Keep up the good work. We will break the bias yet.

Martin.

Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum

I agree whole heartedly with Ms Hanson's statement. No fair minded Australian would say don't help those indigenes who are genuinely disadvantaged. Unfortunately, numbers of people of limited Aboriginality have joined the rush to the largesse provided, in the main, by Labor governments.

This has created anger by those non-indigenous people who see well-heeled people of marginal Aboriginal descent gaining job opportunities, Abstudy, grants and special privileges when they don't have genuine need.

An example is ATSIC's internal Recruitment and Career Development Program that provides special educational opportunities for people on salaries well above the Australian average income, to attend courses full-time at taxpayers expense on full salary and conditions of service. All in the name of equal opportunity.

Numbers of these people are also being placed, at taxpayers expense, in higher level jobs in an attempt to accelerate their promotion.

This is discrimination, but it also misdirects funding from those Aborigines in need, to those who are by any standard advantaged.

Keep up the good work. Common sense will eventually prevail..

RH

Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum

As a white heterosexual male I am at a tremendous disadvantage in our society. I wish I was a black lesbian single mother.

Greg Byrne

Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum

We of the territory can see , that 67 was a poor decision. And that advertising at there expense is our gain. How do you keep going!

All the best We will GET THERE. Reg Dave.

Aboriginal voting and the 1967 Referendum

Scott, thank you for that, I am totally sick of the media persecuting One Nation when I tuned into the Breakfast Show on 6PR this morning I KNEW that what Pauline had said MUST have been taken out of context. I don't know if you listened to Howard Sattler this morning but if you did it shot all the critics "out of the water" and when Pauline came on air from Adelaide and confirmed what she had said - well need I say more!!! I am bloody sick of the media persecuting Pauline but let's face it the more they do it the more votes she is going to get.

Regards Alison

Subject: anti-Hanson party

In today's Australian there is a public notice of an application for the registration of a new political party. The name of the new party is 'Unity - Say No To Hanson'. Its abbreviated name is Unity. Its proposed Registered Officer is a person called Lin Tang. People may object to the registration but quite frankly, who'd be bothered. Surely only brain-dead losers would waste their vote on such a stupid party.

Antonia Feitz

Subject: Good Luck!

We could have used Ms. Hanson here in the USA before all of our immigration, hiring and loan laws were enacted. We, the taxpayers who pay the freight, are really the ones being discriminated against.

I'd like to be kept informed of the progress of your party. The common sense philosophy of One Nation is an inspiration to people everywhere.

Regards,
Claude Cole
Salinas, CA

Subject: e-mail list request

The state which I currently (temporarily) reside in is Western Australia.

I admit to attending a protest rally in Canberra last year against Pauline Hanson, but since I've talked to a couple of different people and overlooked the media hype (journalist rule no. 1 - only use the bits that make it sound juicy) I'm starting to see the real message that is (trying) to be put across and would like to be kept informed of what One Nation really stands for.

Thanks,
Paul Anderson.

MD

Personal trivia, from the global office:

Another perfect day in paradise.

Have a good one.


Search Engine Boosters! 
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]

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

The One Nation mailing list published in the Australia/Israeli Review - 9th July 1998
The Barbara Hazelton betrayal - 2nd July 1998
Pauline Hanson's One Nation Queensland State MPs meet in Parliament - 27th June 1998
QANTAS censor Pauline Hanson - 24th June 1998
"Paul" (Big "K") Costello's lies - 22nd June 1998
Live coverage of Queensland State Elections - 13th June 1998
Beattie's preference lies exposed - 11th June 1998
Launch of One Nation state policies - 8th June 1998
Sixty Minutes break new barriers in unethical reporting - 6th June 1998
Ray Martin revelas his spots when challenging Pauline Hanson on A Current Affair - 4th June 1998 
The backlash to Ray Martin's unethical behaviour during his interview with Pauline Hanson.- 4th June 1998


Return to Australian National News of the Day

#



Web development, design, and storage by Global Web Builders - Email: global@gwb.com.au

See GLOBE International for other world news.


anotd