same old, page-2

unclebarry,
You have made an interesting point about the obvious presence of what seem to be orgainised agitators devoting their entire waking time to promoting the agenda of the union bosses on this and other online forums.
Hard to imagine they are just enthusiastic supporters of a return to union tyranny and not collecting a salary for such round the clock and well organised activity.


It does seem interesting to compare the concurrent US election process with our election process.

Although there are many differences, in both countries there is a real threat that these election may bring the propect of drastic and radical change of the form of government in both the US and in Australia.

These government changes threaten to radically change both the way of life, the social fabric and social policies of both the countries, and the military and diplomatic posture to the terrorists who have declared a war against, and are actively conducting their war, aimed at the destruction of western societies.

In Australia the major threat on the surface, seems to be the handing of the country back to corrupt union bosses who control the labor party. Puppet union boss controlled labor parties in all states, when combined with a puppet federal labor regime, present and unprecedented threat to the Australian democratic system, and an unprecedented opportunity for the return and expansion of the thuggery of the union bosses.

The "me-too" election strategy these union bosses have surprisingly adopted, and the equally surprising collusion of large segments of the left-wing media in support of these union thugs, seems to have caught John Howard's team completely by surprise, as is the aim of any such asymetric warfare strategies.

The surprise comes to some extent from the degree of planning and collusion necessary for such a strategy to have any chance of success. For the union thugs, blackmail, gangsterism, phsyical threats and standover intimidation are more the usual weapons of choice and so this well thought and obviously well planned election strategy is not a standard union boss tactic.

In the US, we have seen the left-wing dominated new/entertainment/media complex line up firmly behind the democrats despite the radical social and political agenda, and their claimed policy of unilateral surrender to the terrorists that have declared war, that they claim to follow.

Although there are too many aspects to bring up in such a short post, some common themes in both countries seem to be along the following lines:

1/ A radical left-wing news/entertainment/media complex driving an "around-the-clock" continuous barrage of sound-bites, a campaign to convince the voter to elect the radical political party chosen by elements of this media complex. In the US, the democrats have been chosen, in Australia the union bosses have been chosen.

2/ In both countries, there is a real prospect that this government change will result in unilateral surrender to the terrorists groups that have declared war on the western world. The potential medium and longer term repurcussions of this unilateral surrender to terrorist groups are massive, incredible and such a unilateral surrender, with the potential rewards to the terrorists for this victory, is unprecedented in history.

3/ Funding for the democrat groups election strategy in the US is somewhat murky. There is obvious evidence of chinese power brokers, probably affiliated with elements of the chinese military, illegally funnelling massive amounts of cash through ethic chinese communities to Hillary's campaign. It is a certainty that Saudi money, Russian mafia money, cash from US-hating Chavez, cash from the Iran government and many others is also flowing into Hillary's warchest and that of others to influence the outcome of the election.

The common demand for receiving much of this money will be for a radical change of government, adoption of a policy favouring surrender to the terrorists, and adoption of radical and unworkable social and political policies to weaken the relative economic and political position of the US in the world. The widely discredited and unworkable kyoto protocol is an example of what could happen.

Is the situation in Australia so different with the union bosses seeingly driving the strategy and having an army of union thugs at their disposal for around the clock promotion of their policies.

Are the union bosses likely to compromise with power brokers and thugs similar to those driving the US election funding in order to gain control of Australia?
It would be foolish to think the answer to this question would be no.

To end this longer than intended post, what country or group stands to benefit the most from the purchase of control of the US election process and the potential destruction of the US economic and strategic position.

My first answer would be China, although Russia, the terrorist groups follow as a close second.

Where could Australia fit into a possible strategy here?

For Russia, the terrorist groups, not that much to gain from purchasing control of Australian government policies via a bought and paid for collection of union thugs in control, at least in the short term.

For China, that needs access to and control of our resources for now and in the future, almost any price they paid would be a bargain of unprecedented proportions.

In light of the very unusual asymetric warfare tactics deployed in this election by union thugs who do not have the intelligence to even consider such a process, it is irresponsible not to ask the hard questions, particularly...

Are we going to elect a chinese-speaking and affiliated union front man as a bought and paid for and controlled Manchurian Candidate for our Government in Australia?

Is it planned to get a Manchurian Candidate elected as the next US president?