from the Heckler at the SMH

All the major sites, from the Empire State Building to Disneyland to Pearl Harbour, had intrusive security of some kind; throughout there was an imperious assumption that, somehow, we should all be grateful to be visiting the US.

The irony of participating in a security process in which civil rights have been entirely subjugated while waiting to see ''Lady Liberty'' is lost on an impertinent nation. Meanwhile one can use the New York subway without scrutiny. Go figure.

It is nearly a decade since that awful day in September 2001 and American security has not matured in any way from the blunt instrument that was imposed in the days following the World Trade Centre attack.

The US maintains a rigid, process-driven security bureaucracy that equates activity with achievement.

The Prime Minister would have to be totally insular or brain dead like F.F. Fielding to ignore the problems facing his government by the obstructionist policies of the Coalition and their Green accomplices.

With the increase in Bob Brown's representation in the Senate, there has been a significant increase in demand - signaling that the Government is in the tragic position of not being allowed to govern in its own right.  Some may see that the position sometimes (too often) when Fielding has the deciding vote as an indication of democracy - when the opposite is the case.

When one person, representing one state and a one only party can defy the voting intentions of an entire nation then - something is radically wrong.  Democracy is built on "majority rules" but the make up of the Senate is in contradiction to that.  A Mandate means nothing to the “Mad Monk” nor does his infamous “iron clad and rock solid” promises.

Does any mature citizen really believe that the major parties and the Greens; F.F.F.; and the independents are actually performing as a "House of Review"?  Which would mean that it doesn’t endorse any matter which disadvantages any State or Territory – the latter being represented in the Senate by only two? 

Whether we like it or not the fact remains that the present system of electing the Senate is "party orientated" because the organized increase in the number of supposedly "independent" aspirants makes it easier to just elect the known parties - and this conflicts with the intentions of Ancient Senates as well as the intentions of those who drafted our Constitution. 

Surely it is counter-productive to allow two governments to be elected in a manner that the truly National House of Representatives can be overruled by the State elected representatives of independent states?

The make-up of the Senate and the principles by which it was to function, was that all State Senators must only vote for those who elected them - not by those who paid for their election as Barnaby Joyce loudly acclaimed (on an occasion when he was lucid).

Not only did I not vote for Barnaby Joyce but - and this is surely the important point - I was not given the opportunity to do so.  That means that the true GOVERNING body in the Australian Parliament is, in fact, the Senate - is it not?  So the buck stops with them?

As I have already written - my Wife and I have resigned from the NSW Labor Party over the victimization of a friend by secret accusers.  I ask the forum this - if we pay for our own registration, could we get elected as Independents by a "donkey" vote and be in a position to decide the fate of legislation which is or is not in the best interest of Queensland? Even though every other State and Territory party hacks have reached a stand-off? 

That means that, neither the "party" votes will succeed and perhaps F.F.F. will again be "top of the Wassa". Struth.

If the State elected Senators were all independents then it would have a stronger appeal of true Senatorial representation.  In the absence of this, all Senators should be separated much better than they are and forced to attend debate in their own particular State position and only allowed to vote, as a group (as the Constitution requires) for their constituents alone. Only then can the people of their state judge whether their best interests are being protected.

Otherwise the current position of manipulation can punish the Australian people for political points by opposing ALL major legislation - it is so crazy as to be ignored by third world nations.

Using the principles of "Greek Theater" - imagine a Nationally elected House of Representatives who happen to be completely Liberal/National and a Senate - whose duty is ONLY to REVIEW legislation on behalf of their respective STATE constituents - is all Labor - would it work?

That is not the way it was intended but, like all criminal minds, dodging rules is standard procedure.

God Bless Australia and keep "Rattus" making support for the “Mad Monk” on T/V.  NE OUBLIE.

Footnote:  In America, which we copy so often, a person not born in the US is not allowed to be President.  Is that the same in Australia? Because the “Mad Monk” was born in England.  A cat among the pigeons eh? Fair dinkum.