Thursday, May 30, 2019

Sweden is prepping for doomsday in Cold War style

Sweden is prepping for doomsday in Cold War style, so should you!!!The majority of Australians have voted for disaster, a disaster that these city people are NOT prepared for. Start prepping now before TEOTWAWKI!!!

BREAKING! Sweden Issues ‘War Prepper Manual’ To Millions of Citizens

Wednesday, May 29, 2019

Why Sweden is encouraging citizens to become preppers.

Climate change, TEOTWAWKI is coming!!! And America want a third world war!!!

Hunters Dog Shot By Illegal Spotlighters - Sporting Shooter

Hunters Dog Shot By Illegal Spotlighters - Sporting Shooter

Criminals DO NOT obey gun control laws or any other laws. We do NOT need more stricter gun laws aimed at law abiding licensed gun owners, we need heavier penalties for offenders!!!

Thursday, May 23, 2019

Urgent alert after dengue fever discovered in unexpected Queensland city.

Police Seizure Abuse - The Loose Cannon.

Although I once defied the odds and got nought out of thirty in an open book multiple choice Chemistry test, leading to me studying law and not an agricultural science, Newton’s third law ‘for every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction’, has always appealed to me, because at least on one level it applies to human and organisational behaviour and not just objects.

Thus when Police are affected by something they react.
Most readers would be familiar with the Edwards tragedy last year.  Mr Edwards was granted a special Commissioner's Permit for a handgun, against the wishes of a gun club he had previously approached, and then he went oput and commited a murder suicide soon after.  Further compounding the tragedy, his distraught former spouse committed suicide earlier this year. 
Police did not blame themselves for granting the permit, and are now targeting anyone who shoots and who is involved in a Family Law break up.
Case in point, I am acting for a small dealer at present who is in the process of going through a break up with his spouse.  The parties are separated under the one roof.
On my instructions his former partner was somewhat jealous because he was having a discussion and was actively engaged in play with his son. His wife’s mother suggested she call Police, which she proceeded to do.
Police attended, and as no threat was made, and there was no apprehension of violence, no AVO was issued.
Nevertheless, my client’s licence was suspended.  The reason on the suspension was ‘child at risk’- yet there was on these facts no evidence of this.  The only thing that happened that night that would have been scary to a child was the arrival of two Police Officers after the child’s bed time - although I stress that in this particular situation the officers behaved commendably well, and only followed instructions.
Not every child in a break up is a child at risk, and if Police wanted to target children at risk their attention would be better spent visiting shopping centres and rounding up truanting children during the day, and getting tired drivers off the road.
As you may be aware, Police policy of seizure, for a ‘cooling off period’ of 28 days, does not appear to have any statutory basis and any seizure of firearms needs to comply with Firearms Act 1996 or the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002.
The Police power to suspend a Firearms licence is set out in paragraph 22 of the Firearms Act 1996, and I have set it out below.
22   Suspension of licence
(cf APMC 6, 1989 Act s 35)
(1)  The Commissioner may, if the Commissioner is satisfied there may be grounds for revoking a licence, suspend the licence by serving personally or by post on the licensee a notice:
(a)  stating that the licence is suspended and the reasons for suspending it, and
(b)  requesting that the person provide the Commissioner with reasons why the licence should not be revoked.
(1A) If a licence is being suspended because the Commissioner is satisfied that there may be grounds for revoking the licence under section 11 (5A), the notice suspending the licence is not required:
(a)  to state the reasons for the suspension, or
(b)  to include any request that the licensee provide the Commissioner with reasons why the licence should not be revoked.
(2)  The Commissioner must suspend a licence in accordance with this section if the Commissioner is aware that the licensee has been charged with a domestic violence offence within the meaning of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 or the Commissioner has reasonable cause to believe that the licensee has committed or has threatened to commit a domestic violence offence within the meaning of that Act.
(3)  A suspended licence does not authorise the possession or use of firearms during the period specified in the notice suspending it.
Whilst not relevant, I shall set out section 11(5) below for your convenience
11(5) A licence must not be issued to a person who:
(a)  is under the age of 18, or
(b)  has, within the period of 10 years before the application for the licence was made, been convicted in New South Wales or elsewhere of an offence prescribed by the regulations, whether or not the offence is an offence under New South Wales law, or
(c)  is subject to an apprehended violence order or interim apprehended violence order or who has, at any time within 10 years before the application for the licence was made, been subject to an apprehended violence order (other than an order that has been revoked), or
(d)  is subject to a good behaviour bond, whether entered into in New South Wales or elsewhere, in relation to an offence prescribed by the regulations, or
(e)  is subject to a firearms prohibition order, or
(f)  is a registrable person or corresponding registrable person under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000.

Turning to the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 which again relevantly provides:
      20   Relevant offences
The following offences are relevant offences for the purposes of this Division:
       (a)  indictable offences,
       (b)  an offence against section 93FB of the Crimes Act 1900,
       (c)  an offence against the Weapons Prohibition Act 1998, the Firearms Act 1996, or a regulation made under either of those Acts,
       (d)  an offence against a provision of Part 2 of the Explosives Act 2003.

      21   Power to search persons and seize and detain things without warrant
      (cf Crimes Act 1900, ss 357, 357E, Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985, s 37)
       (1)  A police officer may, without a warrant, stop, search and detain a person, and anything in the possession of or under the control of the person, if the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that any of the following circumstances exists:
       (a)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control anything stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained,
       (b)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control anything used or intended to be used in or in connection with the commission of a relevant offence,
       (c)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control in a public place a dangerous article that is being or was used in or in connection with the commission of a relevant offence,
       (d)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control, in contravention of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985, a prohibited plant or a prohibited drug.
       (2)  A police officer may seize and detain:
       (a)  all or part of a thing that the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds is stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained, and
       (b)  all or part of a thing that the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds may provide evidence of the commission of a relevant offence, and
       (c)  any dangerous article, and
       (d)  any prohibited plant or prohibited drug in the possession or under the control of a person in contravention of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985,
       found as a result of a search under this section.

      22   Power to seize and detain dangerous articles on premises
      (cf Crimes Act 1900, s 357)
A police officer who is lawfully on any premises may seize and detain any dangerous article that the police officer finds on the premises, if the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that the dangerous article is being or was used in or in connection with the commission of a relevant offence.
 Premises include vessels, vehicles, aircraft and other places.
       The difficulty for Police here is that while a firearm is a dangerous article within the meaning of s21(2)(c) there is no relevant offence, nor is there any suspicion on reasonable grounds that the article is or was used in commission of an offence (s22).
After realising that they were on shakey grounds a Sergeant rang my client, alluded to gaol, and referenced the following alleged offences, none of which are supported by available evidence.
  1.     That my client was in possession of 14 unregistered firearms.  This allegation was denied.  My client had completed all PAB28 and 31 paperwork as required by legislation as required and had forwarded these to the Registry by Registered Post.  My client also completed his quarterly return with respect to these entries and forwarded the quarterly return to the Registry by Registered Post.  Apparently, Police wish to hold my client responsible for processing tardiness at their Registry.
     That my client was in possession of a number of prohibited firearms specifically firearms fitted with a folding stock. Allegation admitted. My client is authorised by virtue of his dealer licence to possess prohibited firearms no 11 of Sch 1 of the Firearms Act 1996, item 11 are any firearms fitted with a folding stock.

  1.     That my client was informed he would be asked why one firearm had a defaced serial number.  Upon entering details of all firearms acquired by my client the physical serial number of the firearm was sighted at all times when making these entries.  My client can answer no explanation why one has a defaced serial number he questions if part of a serial number may be partially obscured by a stock.  I requested further particulars.
  2.     The Sergeant informed my client that his decision to suspend my client in the morning of 9 May 2019 was supported by an allegation involving matrimonial property.  On the 8 May 2019 attending Police referred to this as a civil matter, and it was not raised as a complaint until the afternoon of the 9 May 2019. For this reason, this allegation was not raised on the Suspension Notice and had no bearing upon the decision to suspend.
My criticism is with a Police Policy in practice in respect to domestic situations that exceeds the law, and that involves the seizure of firearms without probable cause merely on suspicion of a domestic break up. 
Just because Firearms ownership is a privilege and not a right, does not mean that privilege is subject to unfettered discretion by Police to seize firearms or suspend licences without appropriate due process.
When I first came to Australia, I was amazed how far this country has progressed since it was a penal colony, a mere couple of hundred years ago.  However the longer I practice law, the more convinced I am that my assumption is wrong, for certainly in terms of Police attitude, this state is still a Penal Colony.

Simon Munslow
National Firearms Lawyer
P: (02) 6299 9690
M: 0427 280 962
Simon Munslow is a lawyer who has a lifelong interest in shooting, having acquired his first firearm at the age of nine, and has had an active interest in firearms law since writing a thesis on the topic over thirty years ago at University.
Simon Munslow practices extensively in Firearms Law matters throughout Australia.
He is a regular contributor to the Australian Sporting Shooter magazine’s website on Firearms law matters, has published articles on firearms reviews and firearms law, and occasionally is asked to comment in the broader media on firearms matters.
This article is written for general information only and does not constitute advice. 
He can assist you with:
Criminal law & Administrative law and in particular that related to Firearms
• All firearms, weapons and game charges
• Avoiding & setting aside Apprehended Violence Orders
• Possession of unregistered firearms
• Unsafe transportation & storage matters
• Applications for prohibited weapons
• License Appeals
• Freedom of Information / Government Public Access matters
• Importation & Customs problems
• Advices & opinions related to Firearms law matters


Tuesday, May 21, 2019

The EU's plan to strengthen civil protection has entered into force

European Commission - Questions and answers

Questions and answers - EU that protects: The EU's plan to strengthen civil protection has entered into force
Brussels, 21 May 2019
In March 2019 new legislation strengthening the Union Civil Protection Mechanism entered into force. Its new element – additional rescEU reserve capacity is now a reality that boosts the EU's ability to respond to and prepare for natural and man-made disasters.
The new legislation to strengthen the existing EU Civil Protection Mechanism boosts EU financial and operational support to disaster response systems of the Member States and participating countries. Concretely, it gradually establishes an additional reserve of capacities, called rescEU. The new system also sees greater investment in preparedness activities and knowledge sharing.
Why did the Commission propose the rescEU initiative in 2017?
Every year, forest fires, severe floods, storms, earthquakes, landslides but also man-made disasters (terrorist attacks; chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear – CBRN - incidents) result in loss of lives and devastate whole regions. Climate change will further exacerbate the impacts of disasters in the future. In 2018 alone, natural disasters killed more than 100 people in Europe. The economic costs are also huge: close to €10 billion in damages on the European continent were recorded in 2016. Last year's forest fire season reminded us once again that the EU must be better equipped to protect its citizens from disasters. In the same time the security environment gets more complex. With rescEU the EU now takes concrete operational steps to better prevent, prepare and respond to all kind of disasters.  
Building on the existing Mechanism, the newly established rescEU creates an additional reserve of capacities to respond to disasters, owned and hosted by Member States, ready to be deployed when needed. The composition of this additional rescEU reserve is based on an analysis of disaster risks in the Union and existing gaps in disaster response and preparedness activities across Member States. Initially, rescEU capacities will include firefighting planes and helicopters. Further means will be added over time, including in those needed to respond to medical emergencies or chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents.
When will rescEU be operational?
Forest fires do not wait. Transitional arrangements are put in place right now to ensure that the EU can draw upon available assets to fight forest fires already in 2019. During a transitional period (until 2025), the EU will integrate national means into rescEU with EU co-financing (75%) of their ‘stand-by' costs.
To date, a total of 7 firefighting planes (6 Canadairs and 1 Dash 8) and 6 helicopters were offered to compose the “rescEU transition” fleet in 2019. The Commission is in contact with other Participating States who have also expressed interest in contributing.
Other rescEU capacities will be developed over time, in particular in the field of medical emergencies (MEDEVAC, Field hospitals (EMT-3 type), etc.) and events related to chemical, biological, radio-nuclear hazards (CBRN). Preliminary technical discussions are taking place with Member States to agree on the type of capacities and numbers needed to be developed under rescEU. The strengthened support to deployment from the European Civil Protection Pool also takes immediate effect upon formal adoption of the revised legislation.
How does rescEU work operationally?
rescEU capacities are to be used whenever Member States cannot cope with a disaster themselves and require extra EU assistance that needs to be delivered fast. It is an additional “safety net”. A great part of operational costs, as well as costs for developing rescEU capacities will be covered by EU financing. rescEU capacities are owned and hosted by Member States. The Commission, in close cooperation with Member States requesting assistance, as well as those owning rescEU capacities decides on the deployment of these capacities.
How does the EU support Member State solidarity through the use of national capacities in the European Civil Protection Pool?
The new policy also includes a number of new provisions that help Member States boost existing capacities and contribute more to the European Civil Protection Pool:
The new legislation aims to incentivise Member States (and Participating States) to help each other in times of need. Concretely, the EU is co-financing assets that Member States put in the European Civil Protection Pool at 75% of operational costs when used inside the EU (or a Participating State) and 75% of transport costs for deployment outside EU.
The new legislation aims to make all existing national assets operational for international deployment. When national capacities need an upgrade or repair for an international response, Member States can request EU co-financing (75% of that upgrade/repair cost provided it does not exceed 50% of development cost of the capacity). These capacities in turn become part of the European Civil Protection Pool and are used to respond to future disasters.
The new legislation establishes a Civil Protection Knowledge Network to support all civil protection actors across Europe, bringing together a full range of expertise on disasters. This allows all disaster response actors to learn from each other and to speak "the same technical language".
The Commission works together with Member States ensuring that investments undertaken via the Structural Funds are "disaster proof". Investments take into account national risk assessments. In addition, the Commission has simplified the reporting approach. In cases where Member States need further support, the Commission makes recommendations on national prevention and preparedness measures.
European Civil Protection Pool: how many assets and from which countries?
The European Civil Protection Pool (former "European Emergency Response Capacity") comprises over 100 response capacities offered to the Pool, committed by 23 different Participating States.[1] These include assets such as firefighting teams and aircraft, flood containment, water purification, and chemical biological, radiological and nuclear detection and sampling. Experience has shown that pre-committed capacities are not always enough, because disasters can occur simultaneously. The Commission therefore strengthens the European Civil Protection Pool by providing increased Union financing to Member States for the adaptation, repair and operating costs of Pool capacities. This provides a significant additional incentive to Member States to commit their capacities to the European Civil Protection Pool.
Does this new structure also work for activations of the Union Civil protection Mechanism outside the EU?
The new policy focuses on strengthening the EU and Member States' collective ability to respond to disasters in Europe. However, as is the case now, any third country or international organisation can activate the Mechanism and make a request for assistance. The European Civil Protection Pool can be mobilised. The Union budget covers the transport costs of these operations (75% of transport costs).
In those cases where disasters affect Member State territories and EU citizens abroad, rescEU can also be mobilised. Operational and transport costs are then entirely covered by Union funding. The Participating States of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (Iceland, Norway, Serbia, North Macedonia, Montenegro and Turkey) equally benefit from the new possibilities offered under rescEU.
How does the new legislation improve preparedness and prevention?
Prevention and preparedness are the cornerstones of an effective response to natural disasters. Investment in disaster prevention has a clear benefit – saving lives and livelihoods as well as minimising economic and physical damage. The new policy strengthens disaster prevention and continues to support Member States in improving their disaster risk management. Through a simplified reporting framework the EU asks Member States to report on key risks through risk assessment and risk management capabilities summaries, as well as to provide additional information on prevention and preparedness measures related to key risks with a cross-border nature or those low probability risks with high impact.
The legislation also provides targeted support to the Member States frequently affected by severe disasters to strengthen their prevention and preparedness through the establishment of consultation mechanisms, and the possibility to deploy expert missions and to make recommendations.
How many times has the Union Civil Protection Mechanism been activated since 2014?
Over the last five years (2014-2019), the Mechanism was activated more than 100 times for disasters both inside and outside the EU.
How much does rescEU cost?
The new legislation foresees a budget increase of around two hundred (200)* million euro for the upcoming two years (2019-2020).
[* this number takes into account expected budgetary decrease from €242 million to allow for increase of share of redeployments given Member States position]

For more information

Wednesday, May 15, 2019

A Woodsrunner's Diary: Food For Trekking & Wilderness Living. Native Bee ...

A Woodsrunner's Diary: Food For Trekking & Wilderness Living. Native Bee ...: Honey is a good food & it has antiseptic properties which make it useful for using on open wounds, & Australian native bees don'...

A Woodsrunner's Diary: Bee Hunting.

A Woodsrunner's Diary: Bee Hunting.: I take with me my dog, as a companion, for he is useless as to this game; my gun, for no man you know ought to enter the woods without one; ...

Tuesday, May 14, 2019

Thoughts for the week By Ron Owen of Owen Guns. 15 May 2019

Thoughts For The Week.
“What you do in your lifetime will echo down through eternity”,
Marcus Aurelius.
Is it About Suppression?
On the 18th of May we have choices to make in our Federal Election. There are two choices, two examples of people that Australians can aim to imitate. One is to be free citizens, armed and sovereign. The other is to be a slave, disarmed and obedient to our socialist elite, master-class. Please chose wisely.
In some ways we have more choices than at any previous federal elections since Federation, but be careful, what you see is not always what you get. Sadly there is a concerted effort by Media and Politicians to suppress the issues and keep a tight lid on all evidence, information and opinions that go towards weakening the major parties control of our freedoms.

British Bill of Rights 1889. still in All Australian State law books.
The suppression is so successful that even people in the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers party don’t believe we have any Rights.
One of the Rights we have left is the one that makes the major parties most vulnerable, that is the Right to vote. The only way we can utilise that Right is by having the Right to Free Speech, the free inter-exchange of information. This is the battleground of the 21st Century.
These Rights and our Rights for Subject to have Arms for our Defence are all acknowledged as pre existing in our Bill of Rights of 1689 which is installed in the Statute law of every State of Australia within the Imperial Acts Application Acts. Heavily suppressed and only dragged out when politicians are taken to task for defamation, as to their own legal protection.
Subjects’ arms—That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.
Freedom of election—That election of members of Parliament ought to be free.
Freedom of speech—That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament.
Right to petition—That it is the right of the subjects to petition the King and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegall.
Note.( The Bill of Rights acknowledges that Catholic’s had the Right to be Armed as well in a previous section).
It is impossible for the Right of Freedom of Speech not to be a general Right as it is necessary to Petition and necessary for the Freedom of Election. Of course the power that guarantees all of these Rights is the Crown, our current head of State – Queen Elizabeth II. That is why our socialist intelligencers are so eager to dispose of our Constitution and impose one of their own manufacture.
That’s him the one on the left, green on the outside and red inside.
The Greens leader Richard Di Natale has promised his supporters he wants to close down Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones and I’m sure that any distributer of information that he did not believe in, would be included in his efforts. Di Natale seems to believe that anyone who does not agree with him is evil, supposedly we all divide Australians with our “hate speech”.
The enemy are in ‘damage control’, they appreciate the losses they have sustained due to Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, the major news channels are screaming at the politicians to control the internet, for as well as losing income they are losing control of people minds. ‘Fake News’ by mainstream media is exposed in seconds by people on the spot with a mobile phone. For example we could see for ourselves that Tommy Robinson activist (seen on more than one mobile phone),was just standing in the street when he was arrested, so when we read the nonsense written in newspapers and hear it on the six o clock news, we all know that its rubbish. This example has been repeated a million times and it exposes what the Major media will do to ignore the truth and manufacture it’s own version to suit their agenda.
The major Politicians’ have woken up, probably provoked by their banker paymasters and have legislated to control the internet, just recently 30 prominent activists including Tommy Robinson, Louis Farrakhan, Alex Jones Lauren Southern, Jeremy Boreing, Infowars, Paul Nehlen, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson and Laura Loomer and even Ron Owen have been banned from Facebook. Even President Trump has complained about the silencing Free Speech and criticised Facebook as they have particularly silenced the Conservative spokes people who appear to have done no wrong. I was banned from Facebook for sharing a photograph of my daughters 8 week old puppy.

I asked for reviews but of course the review is blocked.
Foreign Nations and Big Money Want to Control Our Communications.
To offset our attempts of free speech on the internet the George Soros types, the Big End of the New World Order have responded by pouring millions of dollars into “Get Back” to offset the ongoing damage of small internet media.
Al Jazeera has recently attacked the One Nation main senate hopeful and its mindless adviser James Ashby, with some justification I might add, as they could have checked the credentials of the false Firearm Lobbyist with just one phone call, and to behaved so poorly in the USA is an embarrassment for all Australians. However, if it is wrong for the NRA to buy into Australian Politics, it’s wrong for China to buy Australian Senator’s like Sam Dastyari and Captain Pierre Yang MP ( Western Australia upper house), and it’s wrong for George Soros to fund Gun Control Australia and “Get Up” and Friend of the ABC, then it is also very wrong for a foreign news agency Al Jazeera to plan a scam to lure two One Nation party members on the false pretext of obtaining $10 million in campaign funds. The scam worked Dickson and Ashby should not have had a bar of that proposal especially as One Nation Federal Firearm Policy is no better to the Labor and LNP policy, as it just says it does not want further legislation put on to law abiding shooters, and has refused to change it when they have been implored by Australian shooting associations. (Maybe its because they have not been offered the 10 million).
Al Jazeera is owned by Qatar, they do not have Australia’s best interests at heart they have the Arab/Islamic Qatar interests that control them. Its expensive to buy into a position of media power in any country the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa, provided a loan of QAR 500 million (US$137 million) to sustain Al Jazeera through its first five years. Shares are now held by private investors as well as the Qatar government, but the world power it wields is worth every penny, as they have TV news coverage, USA, Europe, Africa, Middle East, Russia and Australia, only China will keep them out. US137 million oil dollars is small change to influence political decisions in your favour.

Australia’s Pinnnicheo
Please do not think that the ABC is NOT Biased.
Just at the Federal Level. (If you add the State Personalities it is worse.)
A friend sent me this list…
Why Does Labor Protect the ABC.
· Why does the ABC Left media protect the left?
· Because the political commentators of the Left media are either intermingled or married to the left politicians.
· It’s a family thing and they protect their own:
· Greg Combet (Labor) partnered to Juanita Phillips (ABC).
· Gai Brodtmann (Labor) married to Chris Uhlmann (ABC)
· David Feeney (Labor) married to Liberty Sanger (guest commentator on ABC)
· Barry Cassidy (ABC) former speech writer for Bob Hawke (Labor) from 1986-1991
· Heather Ewart (ABC) married to Barry Cassidy (ABC) speech writer for Bob Hawke (Labor) from 1986-1991
· Maxine McKew (ABC) married to Bob Hogg (former ALP national secretary)
· Maxine McKew (ABC) became Labor politician replacing John Howard for one term only.
· Virginia Trioli (ABC) married to Russell Skelton (The Age)
· Mark Kenny (Fairfax) married to Virginia Haussegger (ABC)
· Christine Wallace (ABC & Fairfax) married to Michael Costello (former Chief of Staff to Labor’s Kim Beazley)
· Annabel Crabb (former Fairfax journalist now with the ABC)
· Tony Jones (ABC) married to Sarah Ferguson (ABC) Coincidentally Jones took over the Lateline role from Maxine McKew (from ABC presenter to Labor politician)
· David Penberthy (journalist) married to Kate Ellis (Labor)
· Paul Kelly (former Fairfax journalist) formerly married to Ros Kelly (Labor)
· Kerry O’Brien (ABC) former press secretary to Gough Whitlam.
· Mark Colvin (ABC) married to Michelle McKenzie (Leichhardt deputy-mayor and Greens Councillor)
· Denis Atkins (ABC Insiders regular) married to Melanie Christensen (ABC Canberra)
· Paul Barry (ABC) married to Lisa McGregor (ABC)
· The lamentable Mike Carlton (formerly Fairfax formally ABC) partners Morag Ramsay (ABC)
· Andrew Fraser (Fairfax) and Catriona Jackson (formerly Fairfax and Labor press secretary)
· And so the list goes on. Labor, Fairfax and the ABC are joined at the hip.
Much like the relationship between Labor and the unions, but they’re on YOUR Aussie payroll. Now you know why Bill Shorten wants to increase your Taxes. To fund his propaganda and jaundiced news.
While the Major Political Parties Are Boring Us to Death With Climate Change Australia faces the greatest challenges since World War Two.
High-tech Chinese ships are mapping waters close to Papua New Guinea and at the same time the United States and Australia (after begging China to remove its bases from the International waters of the Spratly Islands) begin to upgrade a naval base on Manus Island which is just north of New Guinea. Besides the territorial waters of the Spratly Islands dominating the South China Sea which a third of the worlds shipping passes through annually ( 3 Trillion dollars worth), the Islands float on an underground sea of oil and gas. So China is not going to give them up, they are also a great stepping stone to the oil fields of Brunei, Sarawak, Borneo, this was the great plum that Japan needed and in 1938 it sent its Pearl Diving fleet to map out these intricate coastlines throughout Australia’s northern approaches.
Cardinal Points.
•Chinese ships deployed to waters near Manus Island as Australia and US announce naval base upgrades
•The vessels are among a large fleet increasing its surveys around the Philippines, Palau, Guam and Japan
•Experts believe the information could be crucial in any future maritime conflict
The Big Issues For This Election is External Threats and Our Defence Forces Paints its Finger nails ‘Pink’.
The deep-water Chinese scientific surveys are part of Beijing’s unprecedented oceanographic research of the Western Pacific, in an area experts believe could be crucial in any future maritime conflict. Military analysis of GPS satellite data reveals two Chinese research vessels entered Papua New Guinea Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) north of Manus Island, just weeks after US Vice President Mike Pence announced a joint redevelopment of the ageing Lombrum naval base. The ships involved, the Ke Xue and Hai Ce 3301, are part of a two-dozen strong Chinese “Distant-Ocean Research fleet” that has conducted expansive maritime surveys around the Philippines, Palau, Guam and Japan over the past two years.
Navel experts say the activities in Papua New Guinea’s EEZ indicates “bathymetric data collection” taking place. High-tech Chinese ships are mapping waters close to Papua New Guinea just as the United States and Australia begin upgrading a naval base on Manus Island.
Australian Defence Force March at Sydney’s Gay Mardi Gras.
Australia’s Defence Department are planning for short-term troop deployments to the former Australian territory. About 30 Australian army officers are already embedded with the PNG Defence Force (PNGDF), but that number is down significantly on past decades.
In between Gay Mardi Gras Marches and sex changes Australian soldiers could soon begin regular military rotations to Papua New Guinea as anxiety over China’s growing influence in the Pacific region continues to rise. In the 20th Century we used to call the Air Force the Brylcreem boys, they could afford it, we considered them posh and slightly effeminate, but they got the girls and succeeded in getting their work done. Now, in Australia the RAAF men are ordered to paint their fingernails pink in support of a queer type of feminism.
War with Indonesia, North Korea, or even the island of Singapore would be terminal, but war with China, well our best bargaining tool would be that they might not want to ruin the properties that they already own here such as the Port of Melbourne and the Port of Darwin, and two airports in Western Australia.  They have spent billions in mining sites, they are the largest foreign owner of Australia’s real estate, they own city water supplies, electrical power distribution and power stations.  They are really miffed that Huawei was prevented from taking over our 5 G telecommunication system. The Garnaut-ASIO report, finished in mid-2017 and never released, uncovered damning new evidence of interference and influence involving Chinese government officials and separately, Communist Party-aligned businessmen seeking political favours and access.
“We’ve had multiple briefings at the top secret level from ASIO and other agencies that foreign interference is being conducted in Australia at an unprecedented level,” Mr Hastie said.
Liberal MP Andrew Hastie, who chaired the parliamentary committee on intelligence and security where they pushed through new counter-interference reforms in 2018, has made the most-strident comments about Beijing to emerge from the Morrison government.
“There are several authoritarian states who are involved in foreign influence across the globe. But in Australia the Chinese Communist Party is probably the most active … China is seeking to influence our elites, particularly our political and business elites, such as Senator Sam Dastyari in order to achieve their strategic objectives.
Even the Australian Army is a target for the Chinese fifth column, Captain Pierre Yang MP ( Western Australia upper house) had to either resign from the parliament of Western Australia, or resign from his association with the Chinese Communist Party fronts. He stated, “I resigned as a member of both the Northeast China Federation and the Association of Great China,” he said in a statement after a story about the memberships was published by News Corp.
Mr Yang spent 49 days on a Chinese navel vessel, citing security experts as saying the vessel may have been conducting spying activities. This Chinese ship was engaged, like the ones mentioned above to chart the northern islands coastline but was taken from these duties to look for the missing Malaysian airliner in the Indian Ocean.
Labor Premier Mark McGowan stated, “it speaks volumes of him,””His proud service for this country, serving as a Captain of the Australian Army Reserve” “I would be certain that the ASIO and the relevant defence agencies have vetted an officer in the army reserve.” Maybe they were the ones that raised the issue of his membership to Associations run by the Chinese Communist Party, we can only hope.
The Nancy looking, Chief of Army David Morrison has not a care for our nations security and makes statements like.
“The Defence Force did not reflect contemporary Australian society, and with women representing just 12 per cent of the army workforce it was making “lousy” use of the talent on offer, Lieutenant General Morrison told ABC TV.
He said undue emphasis on Anzac stories that were “overwhelmingly white, overwhelmingly male, overwhelmingly Anglo-Saxon” risked alienating women and indigenous and ethnic Australians, who were currently under-represented in the army.”
If General Morrison’s logic is right – that is the current members of the Army aren’t good enough because the talent lies with ethnic indigenous women etc, al – then let him point to his Army’s stuff-ups. Let him tell us which operational situations we screwed up because we were too white and Anglo Saxon. Where would we have done better if we were more feminine, more black or more ethnic – Gallipoli? The Western Front? Kokoda? Long Tan?
The Army’s pointy bit is the Royal Australian Corps of Infantry – mostly in the Royal Australian Regiment and the Special Air Service Regiment. The role of the infantry is to seek out and close with the enemy, to kill or capture him, to seize and hold ground, to repel attack, by day or night, regardless of season, weather or terrain. I do not know many ladies interested in plunging bayonets into withering screaming flesh, nor do I want to meet them, but if they are out there, I can hardly see that there would be enough of them to improve the defence force, which is really short of trained men, arms and materials. They do not need any more lipstick and finger nail paint we need the leader of our Army to be a soldier, not a social engineer.
It’s a Mental Disorder!
It take millions of dollars to take a good man from ‘civvy’ street and train him to lead men in combat, but they are resigning from the Force as they are forced to salute men with the 5 o’clock shadow, dressed in skirted women’s uniform wearing lipstick and a wig.
Rear Admiral Hammond said “the navy needed to look at a range of measures — from supporting women’s sporting events to -reviewing procedures for unconscious gender bias.
“We must do this as one navy, regardless of age, rank, race, religion, sexual orientation, ability or gender,” he said. “We cannot afford to leave anyone behind.” Well you would not want them behind you would you?
Dr. Paul McHugh, former head of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins, calls transgender feelings a disorder of assumption similar to that experienced by emaciated anorexics who consider themselves obese and literally starve themselves to death.
“‘Sex change’ is biologically impossible,” said McHugh. “People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women. Claiming that this is civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder.”
Threats to Our Human Rights, Threats to our External Security and one of the Greatest Threats is our Internal Security.
In Australia we already have NO GO areas for Non Muslims. Area’s where White anglo saxons, especially people with fair, or red hair are targets for harassment or violence. Police even stop them from walking down those streets and threaten to arrest the white people for disturbing the peace. Please do not think that the rest of Australia is not a Target for an Islamic take over. We should have a great big Goodbye Australia party for the Islamic’ just tell them that those willing to take the Oath of Allegiance to Queen Elisabeth II as per the words in the Commonwealth Constitution, those who put their allegiance to other objectives well they can sail somewhere else. I will bring the bacon!
Invasion by Gradualism.
This is how they have moved in on Britain.
This is the way the British people have passively succumbed to the Muslim invasion:
Mayor of London … Muslim
Mayor of Birmingham … Muslim
Mayor of Leeds … Muslim
Mayor of Blackburn … Muslim
Mayor of Sheffield … Muslim
Mayor of Oxford … Muslim
Mayor of Luton …. Muslim
Mayor of Oldham … Muslim
Mayor of Rochdale … Muslim
All of the following achieved by just 4 Million Muslims out of the 66 Million population:
Over 3,000 Muslim Mosques
Over 130 Muslim Sharia Courts
Over 50 Muslim Sharia Councils
Muslims Only No-Go Areas across the UK
Muslim Women … 78% don’t work and are on free Benefits / Housing
Muslim Men … 63% Don’t work and are on free Benefits / Housing
Muslim Families … 6-8 children planning to go on free Benefits / Housing.
All UK Schools are serving free Halal food .
Yet here in Australia we can’t decide to vote for someone with the right immigration policy.

Fraser Anning and his good wife Fiona visiting the Owen Guns Trust museum. He is the man to change the direction of this country for the better.
In 1933 the 70 percent of the German people woke up to find that less than 30 percent who had voted placed the National Socialists Workers Party and Hitler as the new Chancellor, like Britain and even here with compulsory voting, lots of people did not bother to vote. Millions more did not even bother to find out the policies of the people they voted for. Some of the Candidates did not even understand or know the policies that they were standing for. That is still the case in Australia is 2019.
In Germany in 1933 the non caring people, those not in the Nazi Party gradually found that their world of comfort, peace and freedom had come to an end and instead they understood that they belonged to the State, and they had lost control of their own and their families destiny. A few years later the fanatical minority plunged the Germany into a devastating and costly world war, and by the end of the war the survivors had woken up to a another reality – they had lost everything for nothing.
They had lost everything for nothing.
I see the same situation playing out today with respect to the attitude of the majority, maybe 51 % towards the expansionist Islamist movement. We are told again and again by politicians and ‘bimbos and bimbettes’ on the TV that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. This unqualified assertion may be true, but the fact is that it is entirely irrelevant! It is meaningless hot air, meant to send us back to sleep again, and meant to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that, same as Germany in 1933, the fanatics rule Islam and have ruled it since 623 AD. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who are waging any one of the 50 shooting wars currently going on worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, or tribal groups in Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, and carry out the so called honour killing. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers. The hard and quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the ‘silent majority,’ has been cowed and made extraneous and irrelevant.” That is the same as Australia, Apathy is used by experts. Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million of their own people. The peaceful majority were silent, irrelevant. China’s huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million of its own citizens. The average Japanese family, prior to and during World War II, was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians, most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. Cambodia, Rwanda, all collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans, and Cambodians were ‘peace loving people?
True history is incredibly simple and blunt, thousands of years of genocide. Yet for all our modern education with infinite resources to libraries of information and powers of reason, we miss the most basic messages, peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy, if they don’t speak up, (and already they are very scared) they will wake up, one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun. Peace loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.
So to here in Australia, if the peace loving, apathetic, hangers on do not awake to the reality of their circumstances they will be rubbed out extinguished, or forced to be a slave of Islam.
Islamic prayers have now been introduced into Toronto and other public schools in Ontario, and, yes, in Ottawa too while the Lord’s Prayer was removed due to being so offensive! But to whom? Not to the vast majority of Canadians but to the few Islamic fanatics!
The Islamic way is only peaceful until the fanatics move in and take control. In Australia, and indeed in many countries around the world, many of the most commonly consumed food items now have the halal emblem on them. (i.e a sign or instruction that says this product can be eaten, consumed or used by Islamics).   Just look at the back of some of the most popular chocolate bars, and at other food products in your local supermarket. Foods on aircraft have the halal emblem, and it is not just to appease the privileged minority who are now rapidly expanding throughout the world but every time we unclean unbelievers buy those items a part of the costs goes to the Islamic foundations for supporting terrorism for training more terrorists. It is funding fanatics.
In Britain, the Muslim communities refuse to integrate and there are now dozens of no-go zones within major cities across the country that the police force dare not intrude upon. Sharia law prevails there, because the Muslim community in those areas refuses to acknowledge British law. As for we who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts, the fanatics who threaten our way of life.
When an Islamic atrocity actually makes the news the educated conservatives who have researched Islam’s sacred texts (Quran & Hadith) immediately point out the driving factor behind the atrocity which is Mohammed’s clear teachings to commit violence against non-believers! When we do we are met with the same old abusive slurs from the politicians These baseless slurs include accusations like , “Nazi, Bigot, Islamophobe, intolerant, far right, white supremacist etc BUT when the New Zealand Christchurch massacre occurred these same low IQ traitors will don a head scarf, play the Islamic call to prayer over a whole nation and of course repeat the same mantra, when a Muslim kills Christian people its because they have been insulted by the Islamaphobes. In other words, if a Muslim kills people in the name of Allah, it’s our fault! If a white, left wing supremacist kills muslims, again it’s our fault!
We have to vote the right way at this election or dig a hole as there is no where to run to. We will be the ones waking up to the realisation that we have lost our Rights, lost our country and eventually lose our families and our lives as one way or another from internal or external threats we are superfluous to requirements, fanatic do not need us. So chose wisely and encourage others to vote for the Defence of your nation, your Rights and your families.
We citizens are the first responders, we are the ones who wake up and find an intruder in our homes.  Firemen, ambulance men are great, but it takes nothing away from their heroism to point out that the title “first responder” is a misnomer, they only take the bodies away. The people on site are the first responders and we all have a duty to respond.
We would not expect someone else to vote for us, nor would we expect someone else to do National service in the armed force for them. Some duties of human obligation should never be outsourced. If you are an able-bodied adult, it’s your duty to know how to stop the bleeding and give CPR until the professionals who do it for a living arrive. And it’s your duty (and right) to defend yourself, your family, your community and your Constitution. With any means at your disposal, guns are one of the best, which sometimes might mean your concealed pistol or your first call “defence firearm”. (which some idiots might call an ‘Assault rifle’)
With the threats that Australia is facing, it is now more than ever that we should be insisting that it is compulsory for all non-criminal (and all the rest should be locked up, or pending extradition) adult, able-bodied citizens should own a firearm and become proficient with them.
The Australia government could easily, and not before time, make them available at a subsidies cost and encourage rifle range and instructors to begin a mass education in home defence, because the law and order that we see is only a thin veneer and it can disappear in a heartbeat. In famine, flood, or internal or external war looting, plunder rape and murder are only resisted with firearms. It’s your duty to be a first responder be prepared to defend our communities. It is your duty as being a citizen of a free country. (if we can keep it that way).  We all should be ready and able to pick up a firearm. Whether it’s a riots and disaster, or whether it’s some terrorist who decides to shoot up your church, or a shopping mall, it’s on you. We all have a job to do when chaos comes, no shirking your responsibility and outsourcing it to the local police or the Army, they will never be there on time.
Being a citizen is not a spectator sport.
The socialist do not see things that way. The mere idea of a good person with a gun makes them vomit. The socialist hates the notion that we citizens might take personal ownership of, and responsibility for, the security of our own families, communities, or our nation. Even if we had an effective defence force, we all have a human and constitutional right, in fact a duty, to have the means to defend ourselves, our families and our communities. The socialists need us all to be compliant dependent on their handouts, their veneer of security that only works one way, to secure the State control over the people, but millions of us must remember are impossible to control, unless we consent to it.
This man is the best for the Big Job. Fraser Anning for PM.
Fraser Anning Firearm Policy is the Best in this election. to download please click on it.
The good men who prepared the Bill of Rights for the King and Queen to sign and seal for all time enshrined the natural right of free men to have arms suitable for their defence, the rights of free speech, free elections and the freedom of religion, knew that without these Rights none of it was worth the paper it was written on. The elite socialist wants slaves, not citizens. They recognise the threat in our possession of firearms. But it’s not the threat of us all causing evil, but of us resisting it. An armed people are a free people, and a free people demand their rights to have their say in their own governance. We want our Freedoms, the Right to Free Speech, the Right to Petition, the Right to Free Elections, the Right to Self Defence, the Rights to own the property we have worked for, but what the Socialists really want is total control over all of us.
Ron Owen
“whenever the Legislators endeavor to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common Refuge, which God hath provided for all Men, against Force and Violence. Whensoever therefore the Legislative shall transgress this fundamental Rule of Society; and either by Ambition, Fear, Folly or Corruption, endeavor to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other an Absolute Power over the Lives, Liberties, and Estates of the People; By this breach of Trust they forfeit the Power, the People had put into their hands, for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the People, who have a Right to resume their original Liberty.” John Locke
Any Inquiries on any products phone 07 54824099 or 07 54825070 or email