Home Archives Profile Subscribe Search
Previous month:
February 2015
Next month:
April 2015

March 2015

Support for this website

Friday, 20 March 2015

The Trade Union Royal Commission is due to commence hearings again soon - you can show your support for this website's coverage here.

Michael Smith

National Australia Bank

BSB: 084855 Acct No: 537650476

and by credit card through our secure PayPal facility here

Posted at 01:39 PM | | Comments (23)

|

Labor - we can do it again in NSW signed Dan Andrews, Premier of Victoria

Friday, 20 March 2015

This note from Victorian Premier Dan Andrews went out to the NSW Labor Faithful today.

Screen Shot 2015-03-20 at 9.27.47 am

Dear XXX

We can do it again. Only 4 months ago, Labor defeated a Liberal Government in Victoria - undoing a Government that cut from schools and cut from hospitals.

NSW faces the same hurdle. After four years of Liberal Government, people are beginning to realise that their agenda will only hurt families.

XXX, I know the challenge of winning an election when all the odds are stacked against you. Over the final week, Labor in NSW will be hit with negative tabloids, unfair attacks and massive ad campaigns. 

We can overcome this - we've done it before. When we come together, we can see off the Liberals. Because people are at the heart of what we do.

Join Labor Leader Luke Foley and I for our Community Action Launch at 10am on Sunday in Burwood.

Together, we can show the people of NSW the power of our progressive community.

I hope to see you there.

 

Thanks,

Daniel Andrews

Premier of Victoria

 

Posted at 12:29 PM | | Comments (63)

|

How the CFMEU treats its mates

Thursday, 19 March 2015

A reader sends us this:

The NSW Construction division of the CFMEU has applied for approval of it's new agreement - available here: https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/documents/agreements_applications/AG2015_511.pdf
 
It is interesting as the union increased the dues members are forced to pay by up to $100 per member a year - supposedly for the purpose of meeting the Royal Commission costs - despite these legal costs being met by the government (here: http://www.ag.gov.au/LegalSystem/Legalaidprogrammes/Commonwealthlegalfinancialassistance/Pages/AssistanceforpeopleappearingbeforetheRoyalCommissionintoTradeUnionGovernanceandCorruption.aspx)
 
The pay increases, and bonuses, are incredible. No doubt paid for by the extra fees paid by hard up members. The union has hidden the agreement both from it's members and easy access.
 
At the end of the agreement, an entry level organiser will earn over $104000 a year + up to a $10000 service announcement, a car, a phone, around $8000 a year in redundancy fund contributions that accumulates each year - a $1500 bonus, and the list goes on.
 
When you search for the CFMEU agreements on the FWC website, it does not appear, as the union has named it [name of agreement] - which you can see if you go here: https://www.fwc.gov.au/awards-and-agreements/agreements/agreements-progress and scroll down the applications made by the CFMEU.
 
I wonder why they don't want the agreement to be seen...

 

Posted at 08:47 PM | | Comments (37)

|

Dan Andrews Labor/CFMEU Government consorts with thugs and standover men

Thursday, 19 March 2015

The Labor/CFMEU government in Victoria knows no shame - here's the HeraldSun today.

Court slams CFMEU and guilty officials

  • MATT JOHNSTON 
  • HERALD SUN
  • MARCH 18, 2015 9:27PM

 

Justice Richard Tracey slammed the union and officials in his judgment, pointing to disturbing incidents such as when Mr Setka threatened to shut up a security supervisor “permanently” during a physical stoush in an alleyway.

The court decision will put further pressure on Daniel Andrews to distance himself from the CFMEU, which was welcomed back into the Premier’s Socialist Left Labor faction in 2013.

The union and the officials are now facing fines of hundreds of thousands of dollars, which would come on top of 2014 Supreme Court contempt charges that cost the union $1.25 million.

The dispute between the union and Grocon began when the building giant refused to endorse CFMEU shop stewards on its work sites.

As a result, CFMEU officials attended three Grocon sites, including the Myer Emporium site in the CBD, to block access.

Evidence accepted by the court included that CFMEU officials told people who had tried to go to work they were f---ing dogs and “gutter rats”.

During violent protests at the Emporium site, police horses were punched and people trying to go to work were told by protesters “you are going to die” and “I am going to kill your family”.

Justice Tracey found eight officials, including Mr Setka and other officials Shaun Reardon, Bill Oliver and Craig Johnston, guilty of coercion.

He said Mr Setka had launched tirades against anyone seeking to enter the work site during the dispute. 

“In branding those workers as ‘dogs’ and ‘rats’ Mr Setka sought to belittle them as traitors to the union and the interests of construction workers generally,” Justice Tracey said.

,b

Posted at 12:50 PM | | Comments (33)

|

The CFMEU responds to the Royal Commission

Thursday, 19 March 2015

The Labor Party is controlled by the CFMEU, AWU, HSU and other unions.   Labor MPs more often than not come from a union background.

So it's important to know whether or not unions are serious about cleaning up their act.

The Royal Commission made dozens of referrals for prosecution, as well as this chilling finding:

Confidential Report

There is a recommendation that one volume of this Interim Report be kept confidential. On 12 December 2014 an order was made directing that any information in the Confidential Report that might enable a person named in that report who has given evidence before the Commission to be identified not be published. That recommendation and that order were made because the confidential volume deals wit threats to witnesses. It is necessary for that volume to be confidential in order to protect the physical well-being of those witnesses and their families. This is unfortunate, because the confidential volume reveals grave threats to the power and authority of the Australian state. 

 

Brian Parker (secretary) and Rita Mallia (President) are the senior office holders in the CFMEU in New South Wales.   Each is mentioned adversely in the Royal Commission's report.   If the CFMEU was interested in reform, they'd be gone.   So have a look at the March edition of the CFMEU magazine, with Rita and Brian proudly on the front cover.

Screen Shot 2015-03-19 at 10.22.33 am

 

 

Brian gets 19 mentions in the mag, Rita gets 8.  But this story really sets out the CFMEU response to the Trade Union Royal Commission:

 

 

Screen Shot 2015-03-18 at 9.33.18 pm

Screen Shot 2015-03-18 at 9.33.41 pm

 

Here is a little taste of what the Royal Commission said about Brian, Rita and their team.

NSW CFMEU President Rita Mallia
 
Did not act on a death threat made by Darren Greenfield against Brian Fitzpatrick [page 1284]:
 
"The lack of investigation, analysis and recording on the day of the incident and in the days which followed indicates that neither Mr Parker nor Mr Mallia regarded it as particularly worrying that one official had allegedly threatened to kill another. This is remarkable."
 
Rita Mallia was aware of serious allegations – but took no steps to investigate the matter until complaints were made by individuals within the CFMEU as to the lack of investigation that had been undertaken. [page 1284]:
 
"Neither Ms Mallia nor Mr Parker, the two most senior figures in the NSW Divisional Branch, took any further step to investigate the matter until complaints were made by individuals within the union as to the lack of investigation that had been undertaken."
 
Engaged a former union secretary, Don MacDonald, to complete a report to shore up her own position rather than investigate the allegations of Brian Fitzpatrick. [page 1287]:
 
"It must have been immediately obvious to Ms Mallia and Mr Parker, and any reader of the McDonald report, that he had not been asked to undertake, and had not undertaken, any real investigation into the events to determine what had happened."
 
Rita Mallia did not conduct an appropriate investigation into the Fitzpatrick allegations – instead she sought to pay him out. [Page 1289]:
 
"Ms Mallia is a trained lawyer.121 She appreciated that it was important, for there to be a proper investigation into the matter, for account to be taken of the objective circumstances.122 Yet she did not do this when dealing with Mr Fitzpatrick’s complaint against Mr Greenfield.
 
…
 
The fact is that Ms Mallia, Mr Parker and others were, on the one hand, working out what it would cost to terminate Mr Fitzpatrick’s employment, and, on the other hand, conducting a somewhat limited investigation into Mr Fitzpatrick’s complaint. It is difficult to see how an investigation could be carried out in good faith in such circumstances. It was all about appearance, not substance. The CFMEU submitted that this was only a coincidence, and that Mr Fitzpatrick was having discussions with various officials and former officials about leaving the union.
 
When the events of 2013 are viewed as a whole, the contemporaneity of Mr Fitzpatrick’s slide out of the union, the ineffectual reports into the 27 March 2013 incident, and Mr Fitzpatrick’s growing persecution is not just a coincidence."
 
Rita Mallia was involved in preparing an early 2014 press statement that she knew was untrue and selectively chose facts to mislead the public. Ie, she did not want members of the union or the public generally to be informed of all the facts so that they could make their own assessment. [Page 1303]:
 
"The statements issued by Mr Parker included that the union could not tell whether ‘Mr Fitzpatrick’s allegations were true’. This, coupled with the incomplete account of the relevant events, carried with it the implicit suggestion that Mr Fitzpatrick (not Mr Greenfield) was the one whose word could not be believed.
 
Mr Parker, Ms Mallia and the many other union officials and press advisers who were involved in the preparation of this statement did not want the public or members to be informed of all of the facts so that they could make their own assessment.
 
This betrays a consciousness, on the part of Mr Parker and Ms Mallia, that a revelation of all relevant facts would demonstrate the likelihood that Mr Fitzpatrick’s version of events was correct."
 
Mallia conducted a sham investigation.
 
Mallia has continued to support and intervene on behalf of Parker and others in the union instead of divorce herself from their reprehensible conduct.
 
NSW CFMEU Secretary Brian Parker
 
Gave false evidence to the Commission about his involvement in acquiring and using CBus records of workers at two Lis-Con businesses. [Page 1123]:

"However, Ms Zanatta, Ms Butera and Mr Parker each gave false evidence to this Commission about their involvement. Ms Zanatta went so far as to create an entirely fictitious account of why she came to Sydney on 29 July 2013 and what she did while she was there. When those lies were exposed, she admitted she had committed perjury in order to protect Mr Parker and others. By giving this false evidence, Ms Zanatta, Ms Butera and Mr Parker have put the Commission and third parties to great inconvenience and expense."
 
[Pages 1187-1189]

"Mr Parker also gave false evidence. The evidence he gave as to his lack of involvement of and awareness in the Cbus leak was not true.

Mr Parker was a shrewd, capable and cunning man. He had numerous stock phrases which he used to admit what he thought counsel would know, but not concede anything else. His evidence was in a state of constant movement. It shifted here and there as more evidence adverse to him came to light.

In August 2014, Mr Parker told Ms Mallia that he had telephoned Mr Atkin in July 2013 to get information about Lis-Con compliance, and then had ‘no further contact with anyone from Cbus about Lis-Con’.

He did not mention a single phone conversation with Ms Zanatta or Ms Butera, despite the large number he actually had.

On 3 October 2014, that position had changed. On that date he accepted there had been a brief phone call to Cbus for Lis-Con arrears information and a brief phone call back from Cbus with that information. This conveniently dovetailed with Ms Zanatta’s evidence to that point.

Then, when Ms Zanatta made her admissions on 3 October 2014 after Mr Parker had given evidence earlier that day, other ‘possibilities’ or ‘probabilities’ began to admit themselves to Mr Parker’s mind. On occasion Mr Parker would advance different possibilities in answer to the one question – for example ‘I didn’t’, ‘I can’t recall’ and ‘I’m not privy to’ in answer to the same question within the space of about 15 seconds. In the end, Mr Parker typically sought sanctuary in the harbour of ‘I don’t recall’. Mr Parker presented as a witness who was not prepared to tell the truth, but at the same time wanted to avoid perjury charges."

[Pages 1195-1196]

"Before leaving the topic of the false evidence of Ms Butera, Ms Zanatta and Mr Parker, a few further observations should be made.

First, if these witnesses had told the truth at the outset, the Commission would have been spared great expense, and the case study could have been concluded swiftly and economically. The cost, trouble and difficulty that this Commission has had to go to in dealing with this false evidence may be of considerable significance in any subsequent prosecution. There has also been a cost for third parties. An example concerns the numerous banks, courier, airline and taxi businesses who received notices to produce with a view to collecting evidence about Ms Zanatta’s movements on 26 and 29 July 2013. To comply with a notice to produce requires a search. Searches, successful or not, cost businesses time and money.

Secondly, the fact that Ms Butera, Ms Zanatta and Mr Parker were prepared not only to give untruthful evidence in answer to Mr Fitzpatrick’s evidence, but to sit back and allow what they knew to be wild allegations to be made against Mr Fitzpatrick (which allegations he rightly described as ‘nonsense’ and ‘rubbish’216), makes their conduct all the more unsavoury. It also makes regrettable the CFMEU’s inappropriate public criticism of what it said it perceived to be the Commission’s position in relation to Mr Fitzpatrick.Those comments should now be the subject of public apologies from the CFMEU to both the Commission and Mr Fitzpatrick."

Did not act on the Greenfield death threat complaint made by Fitzpatrick. [Page 1284]:

"The lack of investigation, analysis and recording on the day of the incident and in the days which followed indicates that neither Mr Parker nor Ms Mallia regarded it as particularly worrying that one official had allegedly threatened to kill another. This is remarkable."

Parker did not carry out a rigorous or comprehensive investigation into the death threats made by Greenfield against Fitzpatrick. [Page 1246]:

"Mr Parker shied away from carrying out any rigorous or comprehensive investigation into the incident, avoided arriving at any properly considered conclusion, and generally sought to whitewash the incident rather than discipline Mr Greenfield appropriately; 

Mr Parker set about marginalising and attempting to remove Mr Fitzpatrick from the CFMEU after he complained about the way in which the incident had been handled and about the nature and extent of the union’s dealings with companies associated with Mr George Alex;

the failure of Mr Parker to take any appropriate action in response to Mr Fitzpatrick’s complaints about the death threat incident represented a dereliction of his duty as a union official and, coupled with his attempts to have Mr Fitzpatrick removed, fell short of the professional standards expected of him as an officer of the CFMEU."

Has engaged in gross misbehaviour;
Has grossly neglected his duty. [Page 1308]:

"By ignoring the death threat incident and not ensuring the proper investigation of it, and by instead turning on Mr Fitzpatrick and embarking on a campaign to have him removed from the union (which campaign began before there had even been an investigation into the matter), Mr Parker may have engaged in a ‘gross neglect of duty’ within the meaning of that expression in the Rules. In doing so he may have breached the professional standards expected of them. By so acting, he may have demonstrated an unwillingness or inability to conduct himself to a standard that is expected of them by members of the CFMEU and the community at large."

Parker put the interests of a known bankrupt and alleged  organised crime figure (George Alex) ahead of the interests of his members and the advice of the union delegate and union committee member Mario Barrios, by ignoring Mr Barrios’ complaint on 18 August 2014, and instead communicating that Barrios was creating problems for the company and speaking to journalists.

When Barrios complained to Parker about received a threatening phone call from organised crime figure George Alex and reported the same to police, [page 1321], Parker resisted a CFMEU Committee of Management decision to pull consent to an agreement with the company (Capital) and had a conversation with Assistant Secretary Rob Kera about Mr Barrios in the following terms: [Page 1322]:

"Parker: I’ve just got to stop myself from fucking bashing fucking the other bloke today.

Kera: Who is that?

Parker: Barrios.

Kera: Oh okay. Fair enough.

Parker: I’ve got to stop meself because I will. The tension is pretty fucking high and Rita is a bit worried, you know. I said ‘Well, don’t be worried because it will be all over in fucking – five seconds.’ I said, ‘You’ve never seen me unleash.’ I said, ‘I’ve been building up this up for a fortnight’, you know. I said, ‘The problem is if I fucking end up doing it, you know, it will end up – you know, he’ll end up fucking doing a stint in hospital, I’m fucking telling you, because I won’t stop.’"

Parker compounded the damage by then lying to the Royal Commission about what he had done. [Page 1323]:

"In his examination on 3 October 2014 – that is, only about five weeks after this explosive conversation – Mr Parker was asked whether he had ever told others that he wanted to bash up Mr Barrios, and whether he had ever said that he had to stop himself from bashing Mr Barrios otherwise he would end up doing a stint in hospital. His answer to each of these questions was ‘no’.

It is inconceivable that, when he gave this evidence, only a handful of weeks after having spoken in so violent a way about his feelings towards Mr Barrios, Mr Parker would not have had a recollection of having done so. His sworn denials were not true, and he knew that to be so when he gave the evidence. 

…

… the conduct is not that of a person who is suitable to hold office as Secretary of a Divisional State Branch of a registered organisation."

Parker further compounded his conduct in his conversation with his daughter where he demonstrated a comprehensive disregard and contempt for the alleged values of the labor movement. [Page 1324]:

‘what a dog’

‘he’s a fucking dog’

‘he’s a fuckwit’

‘he makes out like he’s a great fucking trade unionist’

‘that fucking imbecile Mario is so gullible’

‘he is so fucking dumb’
 
It was totally inappropriate to unleash this tirade of abuse about a man who had received a disturbing call from Mr Alex and reported it, who had been compelled to attend the Commission, who had honoured his oath to speak the truth, and who had raised entirely legitimate [concerns]..."

Parker engaged in gross misconduct in general, but in particular in his July 2014 behaviour to federal government employees at the Barangaroo construction site in Sydney. The conduct is too numerous to detail, and is worth reading at chapter 8.9 of the report. Essentially, as Secretary he was directly engaged in or supervised employees of the union in:

• Directing offensive language and abusive comments to federal government employees;

• Allowed the broadcast of the name and mobile telephone number of a federal government employee to approximately 150 to 200 striking workers;

• Allowed an official to stand five centremetres away from a federal government employee, obstructing her in carrying out there duties;

• He misled workers about the function of the federal government employees on site;

• Allowed a barrage of abusive and derogatory comments to federal government employees that made at least one feel intimidated, including spitting at a worker, calling a female worker a ‘fucking slut’ and ‘fucking dogs’, and allowing the statement of an employee: ‘I hope you brought your knee pads, you’re going to be sucking off those dogs all day’;

• Blasting a megaphone wailer centremetres from federal government employee’s ears;

• Telling an intimidated federal government employee that: ‘What are you looking at, you fucking dog, do you think your phone number is all I got’.
 
The silence of self proclaimed 'woman's activist' Rita Mallia is notable in respect of the above behaviour.

Brian Parker was aware of serious allegations by organiser Andrew Quirk – but took no steps to investigate the matter until complaints were made by individuals within the union as to the lack of investigation that had been undertaken. [page 1284]:

"Neither Ms Mallia nor Mr Parker, the two most senior figures in the NSW Divisional Branch, took any further step to investigate the matter until complaints were made by individuals within the union as to the lack of investigation that had been undertaken."

Brian Parker was involved in preparing an early 2014 press statement that he knew was untrue and selectively chose facts to mislead the public. i.e., he did not want members of the union or the public generally to be informed of all the facts so that they could make their own assessment. [Page 1300]:

"In early 2014 Mr Fitzpatrick was interviewed by members of the press and gave an account of the way in which he was treated.

In response, Mr Parker issued a series of contrived and misleading statements to the public and to the members of the CFMEU."

[Page 1303]:

"The statements issued by Mr Parker included that the union could not tell whether ‘Mr Fitzpatrick’s allegations were true’. This, coupled with the incomplete account of the relevant events, carried with it the implicit suggestion that Mr Fitzpatrick (not Mr Greenfield) was the one whose word could not be believed.

Mr Parker, Ms Mallia and the many other union officials and press advisers who were involved in the preparation of this statement did not want the public or members to be informed of all of the facts so that they could make their own assessment.

This betrays a consciousness, on the part of Mr Parker and Ms Mallia, that a revelation of all relevant facts would demonstrate the likelihood that Mr Fitzpatrick’s version of events was correct."

Parker engaged former CFMEU secretary Don MacDonald to complete a report to shore up his own position rather than investigate the allegations of Brian Fitzpatrick. [page 1287]:

"It must have been immediately obvious to Ms Mallia and Mr Parker, and any reader of the McDonald report, that he had not been asked to undertake, and had not undertaken, any real investigation into the events to determine what had happened."

Posted at 10:43 AM | | Comments (52)

|

Get into town this Saturday and say "Thank You" to our magnificent veterans of the war against Islamists in Afghanistan

Wednesday, 18 March 2015

There's been a fairly low key lead up to this welcome home parade - let's hope the promotion fires up a bit before Saturday morning.

This matters to the men and women who served in y0ur name.   Our Vietnam Veterans were shunned and treated as outcasts for a generation after their return from active service.   Tony Abbott is determined to make sure that doesn't happen to the men and women who took the fight up to Islamism in Afghanistan.

There's sure to be  a young  digger marching on Saturday who'll see a small child with a flag screaming out "thank you, welcome home".  The child will never know what a difference he or she made in that returned veteran's life - but rest assured that difference will be life-changing for the vet.   It will power him or her in the dark times.   It's the small and personal moments, like catching the eye of a small child with a flag who just wanted to say thanks - that's what makes it all worthwhile.

That could be your child who'll make that difference - but only if you're there!!

Screen Shot 2015-03-18 at 11.41.35 pm

Here's the blurb for the Sydney parade - you can find the other capital city arrangement as well as Townsville at the Defence website here.

Sydney Commemoration for the end of OP Slipper (NCEOS): 21 March 2015 

Program of Events

The Commemoration events in Sydney on 21 Mar 15, as part of the National Commemoration for the end of Operation SLIPPER, will include a Parade along George St, commencing at 1000, followed by a Commemorative Ceremony held around the Pool of Reflection at the ANZAC Memorial, Southern section of Hyde Park, commencing approximately 1130 and concluding by 1230. There will be a fly-past during the course of the Parade and the salute will be taken by the Reviewing Officer, the Governor of NSW, on the steps of the Town Hall. 

The Parade route and Ceremony assembly in Hyde Park are shown in the respective diagrams. 

The purpose of these events is to provide the Australian public the chance to thank all those who participated in Op SLIPPER, Australia’s whole-of-government commitment to the International Security Assistance Force mission in Afghanistan and the Middle East, which commenced in October 2001. By so doing, the public is able to recognise the commitment and sacrifice of all personnel who deployed as part of the fight against terrorism across Afghanistan and the Middle East.  

Parade Participation

It is expected that there will be approximately 9000 participants in the Parade, comprising those current ADF personnel who served in Op SLIPPER, discharged ADF veterans of Op SLIPPER, Other Government Agency personnel who were part of the UN Assistance Mission, allied nations veterans and locally engaged employees.  

Dress for the Parade:

  • For serving PN and Reserve members is 
    • Navy S2;
    • Army 2A and
    • Air Force 4B / 4C.
  • AFP
    • Uniform members - Ceremonial uniform with tunic and medals
    • Plain clothes members - Business suit or equivalent with medals
  • All other participants are to wear smart civilian attire with medals.

It is important that all intending participants advise their Command of their intention to march or register through the process described below if ex-serving Defence members or members of other government agencies.

Transport

The Parade assembly area will be George St, between the intersections of King and Hunter Sts for serving personnel, and George St end of Martin Place for ex-serving and other government agency members.

All Sydney based personnel will make-own-way into the city by 0900 utilising public transport, which will be free for those personnel in uniform or wearing the relevant medals. Service transport arrangements for ADF personnel in regional areas will be advised in due course.

Serving Members and Reservists travelling from outside of the Sydney area are advised to contact their local Command for transport details.

With extensive road closures, expected heavy traffic and significant delays in the Sydney CBD, participants and spectators are dvised to take public transport to the parade.

Parade participants wearing their official uniform or service medals can travel free on public transport to and from the event. This entitlement also applies to accompanying carers, partners and children. The train is the best way to get there, as buses will be diverting due to the road closures and services may be delayed. 

Motorists are strongly advised to stay away from the Sydney CBD until after 1pm. 

For traffic information, visit www.livetraffic.com or call 132 701. To plan your trip on public transport, visit www.transportnsw.info or call 131 500. 

Ex-Serving Defence Members and other Government Agency participants

Individuals who are Operation SLIPPER veterans and are not now serving with the ADF, as well as members of Other Government Agencies, are strongly encouraged to participate in the parade. Register your interest by going online at [email protected] completing the ‘Request to Participate’ form and emailing it to the parade coordinator. 

Information current as of 23 Jan 2015

 

Posted at 11:45 PM | | Comments (11)

|

Britain's Muslim Manifesto sets out the Muslim agenda for the UK's general election in May

Wednesday, 18 March 2015

The "Muslim Manifesto" is a push towards a Sharia-based United Kingdom.   It must be discussed, dissected, discredited and dust-binned.

Here's what the people behind Britain's Muslim Manifesto say about their plan:

The Muslim Manifesto is a call-to-action and a set of inclusive policy recommendations highlighting the most important issues to the British Muslim community in the forthcoming UK General Election on 7th May 2015. We hope that all British politicians regardless of party or religion will champion the Muslim Manifesto and ensure a brighter Britain for all.

Britain won't be brighter.   Britain will be put on a path to the Dark Ages.   The Manifesto doesn't conceal its true intentions - it's there for all to see.   The Manifesto  is an accurate description of the Islamic way of life - that's what its promoters want for the UK.  

For Muslims, Islam regulates everything.    Islam authoritatively sets out the Muslim social construct, political system, legal system, criminal justice system, relationship arrangements and almost as an afterthought, the idea of  religion.   The point is explicitly made at para 28 of the Manifesto, Muslims want the British Parliament to:

  • Recognise Muslims have a distinct ‘way of life’ (deen) which opposes any understanding of religion or faith as separate from other aspects of life.

Therein lies the incompatibility between Islam and the West.  We separate Church and State, we have a criminal justice system that's separate from our religions, we have a judiciary that's separate from the church - and we have a system 0f government that's separate from religion and the judiciary.

Muslims do not believe in those separations.   Islam is a total way of life.  In Sharia countries like Saudi Arabia there is no criminal law.   Religion describes crime.   This plan will lead us to the same way of life as the dark theocracies of the Middle East.   Does anyone really want that?

The Muslim Manifesto is a frightening document that sets out the steps that will set Western civilisation  centuries back - to a new Islamic Dark Age.

This is it:

Draft Muslim Manifesto

The Institute for Muslim Community Development suggests the following points in no particular order for a Muslim Manifesto. Note where the suffering of the British Muslim community and its demands mirror those of other communities we would fully support them in achieving their rights.

We would ask our parliamentary friends to:

  1. Defend the right to a Muslim way of life, including halal meat; religious clothing; circumcision; and flexible working to accommodate Ramadan and festival observance.
  2. Oppose all forms of hate crime, including Muslim-hate, Anti-Semitism and all other types of racism, whilst also promoting and enhancing community safety.
  3. Promote good relations, understanding and cooperation between all of the UK’s communities.
  4. Support efforts to accurately remember Muslim and non-Muslim histories including oppressive and genocidal actions against Muslim peoples by British and European peoples.
  5. Commit to ethical British foreign policies that uphold the human rights of all peoples.
  6. Affirm the importance of faith schools within the overall provision.
  7. Support the provision of religiously and culturally sensitive youth and social care services.
  8. Promote a more just and sustainable future in the UK and abroad; supporting efforts to tackle poverty, environmental degradation including climate change, human rights abuses and the misuse of arms.
  9. Celebrate and support Muslim heritage and cultural institutions.
  10. Eliminate the root causes of institutional discrimination against Muslims and introduce tougher legislation to prevent it.
  11. Significantly reduce poverty in Muslim communities.
  12. Reduce higher than average unemployment in Muslim communities.
  13. Reverse rising criminalisation of Muslim youth.
  14. Boost secular educational attainment of Muslims in Britain.
  15. Significantly improve health and well-being in Muslim communities.
  16. Provide assurance and evidence that foreign funding is not causing/promoting violent extremism in the UK.
  17. Introduce more robust legislation to curb media hate campaigns against Muslims.
  18. Guarantee the Muslim community the opportunity to evolve independently of government social engineering programmes.
  19. Acknowledge that the holy scripture of Muslims (the Qur’an) does not endorse terrorism and the murder of innocents.
  20. Acknowledge and celebrate Muslim contributions to knowledge and civilization including European civilisation.
  21. Support all reasonable measures not to view Muslims with suspicion and through a security perspective.
  22. Encourage enquiry into the effects of oversexualisation of public spaces upon young people.
  23. Support the introduction of more rigorous and analytical religious education in all British schools that takes a balanced and critical approach to all the major world religions.
  24. Provide more holistic and relevant curriculums in schools with a high proportion of Muslims pupils.
  25. Support a holistic improvement of faith school education and stop the current securitization agenda.
  26. Support greater development of the Muslim arts and cultural sector to nurture more mainstream Muslim cultural leaders and role models.
  27. Allow Muslims greater access to decision-making processes in the security services.
  28. Recognise Muslims have a distinct ‘way of life’ (deen) which opposes any understanding of religion or faith as separate from other aspects of life.
  29. Withdraw all economic, military and other support for oppressive governments in Muslim and non-Muslim countries.
  30. Promote the positive shared Abrahamic history of Moorish, Christian and Jewish culture in Europe.
  31. Highlight and promote the Muslim Diaspora’s contribution to the British economy.
  32. Encourage the development of a 21st century Muslim ideological narrative conducive to living peacefully in the West whilst remaining true to the values of Islam.
  33. Oppose all unfair exploitation of resources owned by Muslim and non-Muslim countries.

 

Posted at 10:44 PM | | Comments (22)

|

Garden Island, Sydney - naval base since 1856. New residents want RAN ships gone 'cause they block the views!

Wednesday, 18 March 2015

HMAS Kuttabul is the naval base that takes in Garden Island, Sydney.   Here's the Wikipedia entry:

Garden Island itself has been host to a naval base since 1856, when the government of New South Wales suggested giving the area over to the Royal Navy as a base for ships serving on the Australia Station. Following the foundation of the Royal Australian Navy in 1911, all naval establishments were given over by the UK to the RAN. However, until 1939, the ownership of Garden Island itself was in dispute, with NSW claiming it as its property. This was solved when the Australian government initially requisitioned the island (together with the naval base) under emergency wartime powers. The government then purchased Garden Island from NSW for £638,000 in 1945.

Ships have been there since 1856.   I think the area is used to it.  Well mostly - today's Wentworth Courier reports on the whinge from people who moved in some time after the ships.

Screen Shot 2015-03-18 at 4.05.37 pm
 
 

Residents fume as HMAS Canberra blocks their view, keeps them awake and now there’s another one on the way

  • NICK HANSEN 
  • WENTWORTH COURIER
  • MARCH 18, 2015 10:16AM
  • Warship blocking harbour views for residents in city’s east
  • Defence dept says 27.5m high HMAS Canberra is not going anywhere
  • 24-hour generators and noise keeping locals awake
  • A second ship set to be docked at the Garden Island base 

THIS is the wall of grey which residents of Wolloomooloo and Potts Point now wake up to — that’s if they’ve managed to get to sleep.

They say the 27,800 tonne HMAS Canberra has obliterated their views of the harbour, spewed oil fumes into their homes and kept them awake with the groan of engines­ and generators since it arrived to fanfare in November.

“It’s just so depressing ... it’s all those things and they’re constant,” said one resident, Catherine Regan.

But the Department of Defence has confirmed, not only will the 27.5m-high helicopter landing dock stay indefinitely at the Garden Island base, she will be joined by sister vessel NUSHIP Adelaide before the end of the year.

 

Posted at 04:12 PM | | Comments (44)

|

Previous MORE ARTICLES CLICK HERE