I keep harping on the historical "born to rule" which still exists even in what is loosely called a democracy.

I suggest that, with the march of time, and the efforts by various organizations to educate their citizens, the "Monarchists" are still managing to maintain their priviliged position in the scheme of things, wealth, law, politics, crime, corruption and favoured education possibilities. 

Graham, Gus and I will have experienced most of those discriminatory acts and even laws, in this once "Lucky Country".

If I can reasonably remember the ups and downs of the real people of Australia in my time like  - the ones that pay the taxes without recourse - the ones that pay for the State funerals of tax cheats like Kerry Packer - the ones whose sons were part of Menzies' "Ballot of death" for Vietnam, (and when they were not even old enough to vote) and the opposition to the "lower deck" becoming Officers, I suggest to all and sundry that there IS still a class distinction in Australia.

Where does the wealthy foreigners begin their pirating?  No good being honest - even our most gullible and selfish citizens may not cop that.  Could the powers that be single out every federal electorate and give them a financial gift? Too expensive.

G.W. Bush used the phrase (of course he didn't understand it) we must control their hearts and minds. So he introduced "rendition" broke every international law by paying third world countries to torture and murder people that the almighty US have considered as a "real and present danger".  Struth.

Now, the government of which the tortured citizen belonged should have immediately insisted that its accused citizen be given the right to defend themselves in the International Criminal Court.

Does anyone realy remember the David Hicks situation when accused of minding a tank, belonging to the Taliban Government of Afghanistan,  while the US began supplying the Civil war oppostion called the Northerm alliance?   David Hicks had done nothing wrong, especially to Australia - and yet - the Howard government accused him of being a "Terrorist" and of aiding and abetting the enemy!  Whose enemy? Even that disgrace to Australian pride, "Lord Haw Haw" Costello even went as far as to accuse David Hicks of being ready to kill Australians!  Fair dinkum.

The thread of what I have been saying tonight is that our nation is divided right down the middle - in politics - wealth - independence - dignity - and wars from which we can only worship our casualties.

The ultimate result of the 2010 Murdoch "stuffed up" election is yet to be decided.  It was a shambles was it not? Why were our voters confused? Could it be due to the vicious and contradictory misinformation from the the most powerful media in Australia?

With the conundrum that our citizens face now, the future planned by the Rudd/Gillard government or the clearly orchestrated charade by the Liberal's "Master of Cerimonies" Rupert Murdoch.

It may be enlightening to just watch the machinations of Murdoch and his empire while we approach a rare situation were votes may not count.  Let's have bodyguards for the independents?

What an interesting and frightening situation to be in. In my opinion, if we look back at the ins and outs of the election period - I can only say this.  Once again the media has taken control of the "hearts and minds" of the people they intend to deceive.

Only a Labor govenment can deal with and correct that anomoly.  NE OUBLIE.

Hi Ernest,

As I've said before, I agree with a good many of your observations, but I disagree with the way you seem to heap responsibility for everything on the Yank.

I was in the Vietnam ballot whilst demonstrating against that foul & ciminal war ... no different to Iraq & Afghanistan. And I well remember walking into the Kirribilli RSL for a drink with a friend of mine who had just returned from Vietnam the same year & being refused admittance because our hair was too long ... Rupert Murdoch didn't make that rule. Nor did Rupert coerce either the Liberals or Labor into their double-dealing over the media laws over the years, whether with the likes of him or Packer or anyone-else.

And I remember campaigning for David Hicks on these pages & with Howard, Nelson & that cadaverous hypocritical creature, Ruddock, long before he became Australia's favourite son. Rupert Murdoch wasn'r responsible for the lies & hyperbole used by Rattus & the rest. By the way, no-one from Labor could find a good word for Hicks either. I remember meeting Terry Hicks ... what an amazing bloke ... but he couldn't find one Australian politician who would speak-up for his son.

As I've also said to you before, I have no time for Murdoch, but I think he should only be kicked in the goolies for the things he has actually done. And the same should be true for the rest of us, regardless of how we might vote. 

I don't think our nation is divided down the middle Ernest although I suspect humanity might be, but it's more along the lines of the strong over the weak than anything-else.

Cheers.

G'day John,

I think that your article concerns at least three subjects, not necessarily dependent upon one another.

Firstly the overall effect of the Military Corporate of America originally established to defend the nation when in fact it has become the heart and soul of the US economy and without war, they are in trouble. Their price to maintain this enormously profitable enterprise is the lives of their young men and women and in return, as always, they pick an appropriate hero which is supposed to give a goal for the “front and center” oh yes and a medal.

So IMHO - for example - since 1783 the expansion of the American nation into civilized colonies was obtained more by military action and/or invasion than by anything else except perhaps the Louisiana Purchase - then California - Texas - New Mexico etc were gained and Cuba was invaded on the ridiculous charge that the Boiler explosion in the USS Maine was a dirty unprovoked attack by the Cubans (Spanish). And then Concentration camps.

If we consider the events prior to the multitude of American provoked wars, even the small ones like Tripoli (old time) Iraq/Iranian war, Rawanda, Somalia, Kosovo, and other little exercises in oppression for no international objective other than profit, then one can understand why the name US of A is likely to be the most hated name in the Middle East and as distrusted in Europe as was Woodrow Wilson.

IMHO since the American Revolution the American citizens have been brain washed into believing that they are always in danger from people who ”hate us for our values”. 

As a demonstration of that which I believe is becoming commonplace throughout the US style subservient democracy, is that I find the young men and women I talk to couldn’t care less about the US series “Pacific”.  This record of the US in the Pacific war was directed by one of the best in the business, Stephen Spielberg and an actor far better than the accolades he gets – Tom Hanks.

What was it that Abraham Lincoln said…”You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time but, you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”

President of the United States (and former General of the Army) Dwight D. Eisenhower used the term in his Farewell Address to the Nation on January 17, 1961:

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction...

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.

So John, without dates and times and even the most improbable reasons, I believe that after WW II the US Military/Corporate has used the media to keep ramping up the fear of the already paranoiac Americans.

And I add this, very little truth has been released by so-called independent investigators into the 9/11 tragedy but, there are so many unexplained or unbelievably stated thoughts and surmises that the catalyst that began the constant destabilizing of the world since then does not add up to a foreign planned attack.

Fair dinkum John, the US is probably the most over policed nation in the world and yet, these “rag heads” as the US military calls them, managed to cause the most horrifying attack in American history?  Struth.

And I pose the question – did “they” do it to show that it could be done? In which case shouldn't Saudi Arabia have been invaded?

Or, was it done with the evil intention of providing an excuse for further pre-emptive invasions of oil rich countries?

In fact the nation immediately blamed, without proof, was pre-emptively invaded and have suffered far more unjustified murders than the 9/11 victims.

Next subject John would be my take on the second subject – the failure of the Howard “honor” system applied to the foreign media in Australia.

As you and Gus know John, most of my posts are opinions based on my experience during the period we discuss.  While I may not be perfectly correct at least you will know that my memory has not been bought by the Murdochracy and therefore, at worst, are the memories of an old Sailor. NE OUBLIE.