Treachery from Within

The quote below is attributed to Marcus Tullius Cicero.  From Google, Cicero was 'a Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer, political theorist, and Roman constitutionalist. Cicero is widely considered one of Rome's greatest orators and prose stylists.'

'A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor, he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.'

I have seen this quoted several times recently, and that is because Western countries are now faced with 'the enemy within.'   Those admitted, often accepted as refugees, have taken their place in our home countries.  Many became useful citizens, but many others have never accepted that the values of their old homes should be forgotten,  even when those values were what made their old homes an unsafe place to be.  So now we see crimes we seldom saw before, and we see other people's agenda being pushed even from within our own government.


We MUST NOT have anyone whose values conflict with those of Australia representing us in parliament, Federal or State, or even in for local councils.

So who should be permitted to represent us in government?  

1. They must be an Australian citizen.  There can be no dual citizens permitted.  They must be Australian and Australian only.  Australian citizenship should not be easily granted. 

2. We cannot have in parliament any individual who believes in an ideology whose 'holy' books advocate what to us are crimes - from the beating of wives to the killing of 'infidels.' That would mean that no believing Muslim could represent Australia.

3. Every single person who represents us in local, state or federal government should be, not only an Australian citizen, but Australian born. This will not eradicate the possibility of treachery from within, but it will reduce it.  Some will act against Australian interests because of ideology, and some, sadly, will take bribes. 


Australian Citizenship.

1. Instead of four years permanent residency, there should be a requirement of fifteen years of residence and productivity.  That means not on welfare. 

2. There should have been no trouble from the applicant more than one or two parking tickets. There is theoretically a 'good character' requirement in place at the moment, but it is absurdly lenient.

3. Citizenship should not be granted to anyone merely because they are born in Australia. 

4.Citizenship should not be granted merely because one marries an Australian citizen. It is a privilege, not a right.



Who should be permitted to vote?

1. They must be an Australian citizen.

2. They must not be in prison.

3. If a person has committed an offence with a penalty of more than one year's imprisonment, they should permanently lose their right to vote. 

4. They should be aged eighteen or over.

5. Anyone who has been out of the country for more than five years should not be permitted to vote. They would be insufficiently familiar with the issues, and some expatriates would be feeling a geater loyalty to the country they live in rather than the country they have left behind.  


A lot of people will be thinking that all of this is absurd, maybe xenophobic, maybe 'racist,' certainly 'Islamophobic.'  It is not.  It is defence of our own country and our own way of life.

Treachery is happening.  It is treachery from within.



Local Councils:

At the moment, there are different and more lenient rules to run for election to local councils. They were devised when local councils understood their responsibility was to do with local development, garbage collection, the upkeep of roads, and so on.  But in recent years, they have become more political, and sometimes, treacherous.  

1. Australia Day/ Anzac Day.  Several local councils, mostly Sydney ones,  are attacking Australia Day as 'divisive.'  Some have stopped having naturalisation ceremonies on that day.  (Naturalisation means granting Australian citizenship.)  To attack Australia Day is to attack Australian values.  Anzac Day, likewise. 

2. Political Activism:  Councils collect rates to pay for their responsibilities. It is wrong to use these rates to pay for political campaigns.  An example is Sydney Council  spending $110,000 on the yes side of the campaign for same-sex marriage. That was late 2017.   
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-01/city-of-sydney-flies-vote-yes-flags/8862472

That was an abuse of their power, but it was not really treacherous. This one could certainly be regarded as treacherous, that a council has sent ratepayers' money to Gaza.  Gaza is ruled by Hamas, which is a terrorist organisation.   Some councils advocate a boycott of Israel. 
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/canterbury-bankstown-council-sends-ratepayer-money-to-international-conflict/news-story/649e0e69c5d78dce9cab78f2c171855f

3. Development not in the interests of the rate-payers.  
There are many countries who are happy to invest in Australia, and there are some members of councils eager to reap rewards by accommodating them. Some, no doubt, are influenced by bribes, (maybe called 'donations,')  but a Chinese-Australian, for instance, might be happy to swing a vote toward China's interests rather than Australia's interests.  Others might be influenced by idealism, maybe that he feels that the idea of a country that acts only in its own interests is no longer in line with his 'progressive' values. 


State Government:

The same arguments apply to State Governments, especially in regard to problematic development by overseas firms.  It is a shame to see so much of our Australian farmland handed over to overseas interests, whether it is China or India.



Federal Government: 

It is federal government where the capacity for treachery is greatest.  In the past, treachery from within was more rare, simply because people were so much less mobile. Times have changed, and we must protect ourselves.  Otherwise, we could see our own country stolen away from us by traitors from within.

Threat 1 - Commercial Interests

A Chinese-Australian billionaire has been named as someone who bribed a UN official, and is also active in 'donating' to political parties and to universities with the motive of swaying decisions in favour of China. 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/22/chinese-australian-billionaire-involved-in-un-bribery-case-mp-claims

Penny Wong

There are ministers who are adamant that to try and protect ourselves against foreign ownership of Australian land is somehow 'xenophobic.' 

For example, Labor minister Penny Wong wants to make it easier for foreign investors to buy our farms.  We have fought to protect our country from foreign invaders, and now we are going to simply sell it?  How utterly short-sighted!  

Penny Wong is Malaysian-born.  She is the Senate Shadow Minister for Trade and Investment.  

 https://www.pennywong.com.au/transcripts/abc-radio-national-breakfast-3/

Threat 2 - Political Leverage

 China has been accused of trying to influence Australian politics, and has definitely been doing its best to influence what is taught in universities. Their preferred map, for instance, does not show Taiwan as a separate country.  An Australian senator, Sam Dastyari, (no longer a senator)  was accused of allowing China to influence him. Bribes are alleged. Dastyari was not Australian-born, but whether that was an influence in his flawed loyalties is impossible to say. 

Saudi Arabia donates a great deal of money to Australian universities, though how much influence they manage is debatable.  It is safe to say that little would be taught that criticised the country, and not a thing that criticised its religion. 

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/dastyari-and-chinese-government-influence-australia
http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/tensions-rise-as-chinese-governments-influence-infiltrates-aussie-universities/news-story/e7768b0bb1f5953a7608884527387372

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/archived/religionreport/saudi-money-australian-universities-and-islam--/3255562

Threat 3 - The 'New World Order.'

 The 'New World Order'  is basically the eradication of borders, the promotion of mass immigration, and the moving toward a single world government. European countries that have relinquished control of some of their powers to the EU is an example. The EU started as a mere 'Common Market.' It has gone a long way further than that now. 

The United Nation has also garnered powers that nation-states have given up. Each time Australia signs a UN agreement, we have less power to decide Australian matters in Australia's interests and no-one else's.  

 Some say there is no such push, others say it is a worldwide conspiracy by the most powerful men in the world.  

http://constitution.org/col/cuddy_nwo.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs-882eP0ag              
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R2XbDbzwPg


Whichever is true, there is no denying that some very influential people appear to want us to drop borders and accept an unlimited number of immigrants - 'globalism.'  Look, for instance, at the amazing hostility to Donald Trump's desire to stop people and contraband flowing in from Mexico.    
Not many ordinary workers like the idea of globalism. Donald Trump's rejection of it was probably one of the main reasons that he was elected US President.  

  

Image taken from the Brexit campaign

Some European countries are fighting back against the imposition by the EU of the acceptance of enormous numbers of immigrants - Poland, for instance.  Other countries are increasingly veering toward what those in power and the media refer to contemptuously as 'far-right' or 'populist' parties.  Italy is one. Maybe in Europe, the pendulum has begun to swing against the suicidal open borders policy.  A recently published books speaks about it -  'The Strange Death of Europe' by Douglas Murray.   

Europe has been betrayed by those in power, and by those working against it from within. 

Threat 4 - Islamisation

In more and more countries, blasphemy laws are being enacted. In practice, what is meant is that criticism of Islam is termed 'hate speech,' and those who commit this 'crime' can be punished.

Sweden: 

There have been so many new immigrants surging into Sweden, immigrants from the sort of third world country that view women as chattels to be used as desired, that it is now known as 'the rape capital of Europe.'  Women are advised not to go out at night.

Police must not 'racially profile' suspects, and statistics are deliberately noncommittal about country of origin of criminals.

It recently came to light that school children were being taught Islam.

People who speak out about the high level of immigration and the dangers of Islam are liable for arrest for 'hate speech.'  Islam has strong laws against 'blasphemy.' It amazes me that a civilised nation pays attention to blasphemy laws, but it seems they do - only against Islam, of course. One can say what you like about Christians.

The Swedes are losing Sweden.There are forecasts that ethnic Swedes will become a minority in their own country within a couple of decades.

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/03/sweden-police-to-focus-on-combating-hate-speech
http://www.cvikas.com/2018/05/22/civil-war-erupts-in-sweden-as-86868/


France

In France, they have been in a state of emergency for years. Terrorist attacks are frequent, the latest (at the time of writing) in Marseilles. (May 21st, 2018)

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/two-women-killed-in-suspected-terrorist-attack-in-marseilles-1.3240030



Germany

Germany now has to defend itself against Islamic terrorist attacks including 'rape jihad' such as the infamous attacks in Cologne, New Year's Eve, 2016. There are  'No Go Zones' and the culture has changed. It is very sad.  See the interview below.

https://www.facebook.com/AutumnbreezeMovies/videos/10156121425611223/UzpfSTE1MDgwMjEyODk0NjcwODY6MjA4Mzc1ODc1NTIyNjY2Nw/

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/cologne-attacks-trigger-raw-debate-on-immigration-in-germany-a-1071175.html

https://www.facebook.com/BritainBitesBack/videos/355775868271331/UzpfSTEwMDAwMjg4NjgyODk3MjoxNDcxNjE0MjgyOTQ0Nzg1/


Britain:

London bus with 'Allah is great' on the side.

London police are trying to cope with surging knife crime, a lot of it by recent immigrants. They have a Muslim Lord Mayor and a Muslim Home Secretary.  They have a sign 'Allah is great' on London buses. There are the scandalous 'grooming gangs' or 'rape gangs,' especially targeting underage girls.  The culprits were Muslim, the girls not Muslim.  As the girls were 'infidels,' the abuse is not even wrong according to Islamic law. 

And yet the police appear to be more active in persecuting those who criticise Islam than they are in  the perpetrators or even in those Muslim imams who preach terrorism.

May 25th, 2018, Tommy Robinson was arrested and imprisoned for reporting on a trial of those involved in 'grooming gangs.'

Since the arrest was shown live, and since he did not appear to have been doing anything at all that was 'disturbing the peace,' there is outrage, with many talking of a police state, and others saying he was a racist and got what he deserved.

Left a bacon sandwich,
ended up dead. 

If this man is imprisoned with Muslims, he may very likely not survive.  He was brutally bashed on a previous occasion while in prison. 

There was another who criticised Islam by leaving a bacon sandwich outside a mosque.  He was arrested and sentenced to a year in prison.  For a couple of bacon sandwiches and a sign or two saying 'No Mosques.' He was killed by other inmates. That was also in Britain.  2016.






http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4075328/Man-jailed-leaving-bacon-sandwiched-outside-mosque-dead-prison-half-way-12-month-sentence.html
https://www.facebook.com/OzraeliAvi/videos/931030387021435/UzpfSTMxODcxMTI1ODUyMTA1Mzo2NTY2ODk2MDgwNTY1NDg/
https://www.facebook.com/BritainBitesBack/photos/a.292147614634157.1073741829.292022501313335/404836693365248/?type=3&theater
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-22617339
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11057647/Rotherham-sex-abuse-scandal-1400-children-exploited-by-Asian-gangs-while-authorities-turned-a-blind-eye.html


The Tommy Robinson arrest prompted this article by Bruce Bawer,  written May 26, 2018 

In the 'European Appeasement Olympics,' Britain wins. 

"All right, the competition is over. Britain wins.  For years I thought that Britain's long tradition of open debate and individual liberty would enable it to stand up more firmly to the encroachments of Islam than other Western European countries.

"But I was wrong. It is Britain that is falling fastest to Islam. It is Britain, our mother country, home of the Magna Carta, that is most firmly betraying its own history and values.' 

The above are short extracts.  It is worth reading the full article -

 https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12375/in-the-european-appeasement-olympics-who-wins

The Western World generally:

Some Muslims have bigger ambitions than raping white girls and maybe killing a few infidels.  As the Koran advocates, they feel that the whole world should worship Allah and submit to Islamic law.  Canada, for example. The video below is a Toronto imam explaining why and how Islam will take over in Canada.  With Prime Minister Trudeau apparently bent on placating all things Muslim, they are off to an excellent start. 

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/trudeau-isis-fighters-returning-canada-can-powerful-voice-preventing-radicalization/
http://news.acdemocracy.org/toronto-imam-explains-how-canada-will-gradually-be-transformed-into-an-islamic-state/

https://www.facebook.com/worldnewsfox/videos/vb.605151956348622/707410959456054/?type=2&theater
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4fGa6GBx5g&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjpcp4gESsU
https://www.facebook.com/OriginalPOAtv/videos/609783209387609/UzpfSTEwMDAxMzA0NTIzNjY0ODo0NDI1ODgwNzI4NTI2OTc/

The ambition is to impose Islam and Sharia (Islamic Law)  on their adopted countries.  No doubt many of the flood of new immigrants into Europe and other Western countries are merely trying to make themselves a new life with productive work.  There are others who are actively trying to choose the country with the most generous social security system.  But there are also those whose ambition it is to have the ummah  cover the whole world and are working toward that goal. The numbers of Muslim immigrants and the fact that they have much bigger families means that the countries will be changed anyway, with or without intent.  (ummah - the Islamic community)  

Most Muslims, luckily, do not support what are generally called extremists, but are more accurately called 'purists' in that they try to follow the instructions of the 'holy' books and the warlike example of Muhammad. 

Below is the link to a video showing radical Muslims being challenged by moderates.

https://www.facebook.com/Channel4News/videos/10153464748691939/UzpfSTY2MjI5MzE5Mzg6Vks6MTAxNTM0NjQ3NDg2OTE5Mzk/

The more that Muslims oppose the extremists, the better for all of us. If only Islam could be reformed to keep only the peaceful aspects, those aspects in keeping with Western law and Western civilization, no-one would have an issue with it, or at least, no more than with any other religion. But since Islam forbids questioning, and asserts its Koran as the final word, that is difficult. And the Sharia punishment for leaving Islam, 'apostasy,'  is death. 

In Australia, there are  many examples of betrayals by those we have taken in, some major, as in jihadist killings by immigrants, often those who have been granted citizenship, others apparently more minor - such as special women only slots at public swimming pools. 

This is Islamisation.  We are witnessing it.  Many of us don't like it one little bit. 


Can countries be lost to Islamisation?  

Of course they can.  Historically, it has happened time and again. Islam was not spread by peaceful means. Muhammad tried that in Mecca, but it didn't work very well, and after he moved from Mecca to Medina,  the ideology of Islam turned to conquest by any means necessary. 

Look at Lebanon.  This was a state that used to be Christian/secular and is now firmly Islamic.  Brigitte Gabriel said: ‘We had open borders and welcomed everyone.  Today, I fight every day to warn my new country, America, to not make the same mistakes.’ 

http://conspiracyfiles.uk/other_files/we-had-open-borders-lebanese-womans-chilling-warning-to-america/

Erdogan

Islamic countries are becoming more strictly Islamic day by day.  The Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan,  recently made a call to all Muslims, everywhere, to join in the fight against Jews.  (Jews being 'dogs,' of course, and deserving only of death according to the Koran and Islamic teaching.) 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/erdogan-lashes-racist-israel-calls-for-muslims-to-flood-temple-mount/

Indonesia, Egypt, Malaysia, all are becoming more sternly Islamic. Women are feeling more pressure to veil, and in Indonesia, it was declared 'blasphemy' when a Christian candidate said that the Koran did not say that a Muslim had to vote only for a Muslim.  (The Koran doesn't mention voting at all, of course.)  But nevertheless, Ahok is now in prison with a sentence of two years for blasphemy.  And what that means is that Muslims will understand it to be sinful to vote for any other than a Muslim.  It is undoubtedly a factor in the rapid rise of Muslims in powerful positions in politics. In this case, democracy is working against us. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/09/jakarta-governor-ahok-found-guilty-of-blasphemy-jailed-for-two-years

There are problems when we allow our parliamentary democracy to be undermined by those who are traitors to Australian interests. 

It is time for us to discriminate.  Discrimination is not a bad thing.  We need to discriminate against criminals and we need to discriminate against traitors. 'Multiculturalism' is only successful when the cultures are not too far apart -  Danish, Swedish, Italian, Greek -  these have all integrated successfully.  Later immigrants have not.  

We need to be far more fussy whom we allow into Australia, and far, far more fussy about whom we allow the privilege of citizenship.  As for government, we have to exclude all of those with conflicting loyalties.  We can be fussy if we choose.  It is not 'racist,'  or 'xenophobic' or any of the other adjectives used to stop argument and promote someone else's agenda.  There is no reason why we cannot keep Australia as a  civilised Western nation if we choose.  We only have to choose.

Live Export of animals for slaughter

We have to phase out the export of live animals for slaughter.

When we take on an animal, whether for companionship, for use in sport, or farming for sale as food, we owe a responsibility to that animal, to take care of its wellbeing as best we can. Our dogs and cats, we will usually keep for life, and when it is time, a responsible owner will give them an easy death.  Pet birds in an aviary are kept fed and watered, and so are our goldfish.

We tend to think of  farm animals as different, but all the same, a decent farmer will look after his stock as best as he can, even if they are raised for slaughter. No farmer hurts his stock if he can avoid it. The farmer also has his responsibility to each animal in his care.

Selling a farm animal for slaughter is accepted. It is normal. Usual. But it should not be the end of responsibility for that animal. We would never sell a pet dog for use in illegal dog fights, or our pet cat for target practice. We might sell 300 fat lambs to market, but Australian abattoirs will treat its animals with some consideration, and each animal will be stunned before killing. It is very difficult to kill an animal entirely without hurting it,  but that hurt can be minimised, and must be minimised.

When animals are sent overseas, it is often subjected to Halal slaughter. But this sort of killing is brutal - cutting the throat of an animal while conscious and letting it bleed out. Even if you are Muslim, instructions laid down 1400 years ago should not be a part of today's more enlightened views. Pray over the animal once it is meat on your plate if you like, that will make it Halal enough and even the Koran says that it is not all that important. 

In 2011, there was a row about the appalling treatment of cattle, during the shipping, and particularly,  the treatment they receive in the slaughter house once at its destination.  In a reflex action, the government of the time abruptly shut down the trade. Farmers were thrown into bankruptcy, and the animals left in limbo - I don't know what happened to the cattle which had been waiting for their transport, though I would hope it would have been not as cruel as the transport and then slaughter in some extremely poor abattoirs.

After a time, the ban was dropped. There are supposed to be much better safeguards for the animals now. 

But recently, we saw even more distressing images, this time of dead and dying sheep on a transport ship - overcrowded, not looked after, and in the searing heat of a summer in the Middle East.  It appalled all of us. 

All the same, an abrupt end to live export of either sheep or cattle is not possible without a nasty jolt to our export income, and just as important,  throwing the farmers out of business.  Instead,  there are more safeguards being put in place, more inspectors, rulings about over-crowding, and more severe penalties for non compliance.  

See full report - https://www.sbs.com.au/news/government-makes-live-sheep-export-changes-but-won-t-ban-the-trade

This might help, but it is not enough.  We have a responsibility for our animals, and this trade must be phased out. The phasing out should be over a period of at least five years, and there should be careful attention to the livelihoods of farmers, even if that means government funded abattoirs and freezing plants. I have nothing against the export of frozen or otherwise preserved meat, even to the most barbaric of countries.

Meantime, we must have the decency to see that profit is less important than humanity. We have to stop all live export of animals for slaughter. 

I have not reproduced the appalling pictures of dead and dying sheep we saw recently.  The picture opposite is how we like our sheep - looked after, cared for, whether or not their ultimate destiny is on our dinner plate.

AnzacDay, Lest We Forget.

Lest We Forget:

I loved Anzac Day when I was small,

the crowds,  the bands,  the bugle call.

My Dad was there and he followed the band,

and I walked beside him and held his hand.

I marched beside him with love and pride,

and I wondered why my mother cried.

I see the march now in a small-town street,

older women and men on weary feet,

mourning the comrades who fought and died,

and I understand now why my mother cried.

******

Poem by Alison McRae, 

whose father was in WW1, and whose husband was in WW2.

****

Anzac Day, 2018, is under attack as Australia Day has been.  It is too important to be stolen from the Australian people by those who have an agenda that has nothing to do with Australian values.

Anzac Day is in honour of all of  those who fought and died for Australia.  Lest we forget. 

Some died during the war, some lived to very old.
Probably none are still alive now.
Lest we forget.

Australia Day, 26th January.

Australia Day is important and it is important that we celebrate it on the 26th of January, the day of most significance in the founding of a nation.  

But that is being disputed, with the excuse that it is ‘divisive.’ We all know that there are people now who make a career out of being constantly offended. There has been too much apologising to them, too many attempts at appeasement, but that has only encouraged more and more demands, and more and more unreasonable demands. I think the ‘constantly-offended’ syndrome comes from the desire to have power over others.  It is odd that one can claim victimhood in order to have power, but that is the core of political correctness. At its core, political correctness is bullying.

A very brief history.

In 1786, it was decided to send a fleet to colonise the new territory that Captain Cook had explored.  The fleet set out from England in 1787. It consisted of two naval vessels, six transports and three store ships. The cargo was mostly unwanted convicts.

Governor Phillip had strict instructions in regard to the natives of the new land:

"You are to endeavour by every possible means to open an intercourse with the natives, and to conciliate their affections, enjoining all our subjects to live in amity and kindness with them. And if any of our subjects shall wantonly destroy them, or give them any unnecessary interruption in the exercise of their several occupations, it is our will and pleasure that you do cause such offenders to be brought to punishment."

On first landing – was there a mass slaughter and the beginning of genocide as some have been claiming?  Was it in any way, an ‘invasion?’  Hardly.

Friday, 18th January, 1788.  Several officers and men went ashore to explore, especially looking for fresh water. They failed then, but a little later, they saw a group of natives, put the boats ashore again, and here I quote from the diaries of Lieutenant King.

'They immediately got up and called to us in a menacing tone and at the same time brandishing their spears or lances. However, the Governor showed them some beads and ordered a man to fasten them to the stem of the canoe. We then made signs that we wanted water, when they pointed round the point on which they stood and invited us to land there; on landing, they directed us by pointing to a very fine stream of fresh water. Governor Phillip then advanced toward them alone and unarmed, on which one of them advanced towards him but would not come near enough to receive the beads which the Governor held out for him, but seemed very desirous of having them and made signs for them to be laid upon the ground, which was done. He (the Native) came on with fear and trembling and took them up, and by degrees came so near as to receive looking glasses, etc, and seemed quite astonished at the figure we cut in being clothed. I think it is very easy to conceive the ridiculous figure we must appear to these poor creatures, who were perfectly naked. We soon after took leave of them and returned on board.'

There were more contacts between the new arrivals and the natives, marked by amity and mutual curiosity. Note: amity and mutual curiosity.

Over the next few days,  the remainder of the fleet arrived.

Monday, 21st January, one called Bowes describes the natives.

 'They were all perfectly naked, rather slender made, of a dark black colour, their hair not woolly, but short and curly. Everyone had the tooth next the foretooth in the upper jaw knocked out and many of them had a piece of stick about the size of a tobacco pipe, and 6 or 8 inches in length, run through the septum of the nostrils, to which, from its great similitude, we ludicrously gave the name of a sprit sail yard. They all cut their backs bodies and arm which heal up in large ridges and scars. They live in miserable wigwams near the water, which are nothing more than 2 or 3 pieces of the bark of a tree set up sideways against a ridge pole fastened to 2 upright stick at each end. They are about 2 or 3 feet high and few amongst them are to be found which are weather proof.'

Saturday, 26th January, 1788

By the 26^th January, all of the ships had arrived at Sydney Cove, which was deemed the best place for a new colony. And that day was when a flagstaff was erected, the Union Jack raised,  and possession was taken in the name of the king.

Work parties of convicts did various jobs over the next few days, more convicts were allowed ashore, and finally, Wednesday, 6th February, the women convicts were disembarked.  

These were not good and decent citizens, these convicts. Some say that the Marines and sailors were little better.  In any case, when the women were off-loaded, according to one account (Bowes) : 'The men got to them very soon after they landed, and it is beyond my abilities to describe the scene of debauchery and riot that ensued during the night.' And there was a storm, the sort of storm that Sydney very well knows how to put on. 'the most violent storm of thunder lightning and rain I ever saw. The lightning was incessant during the whole night and I never heard it rain faster.' 

A scene of debauchery, women raped. Not Aboriginal women, but the women convicts. That was the 6th February. That would not be a suitable day to celebrate.

And yet, from these beginnings, a new country began. The land had never been cultivated, its unwilling pioneers were not hand-picked farmers and tradesmen, but instead, those men and women who'd been convicted of a crime not serious enough for execution, but serious enough for the punishment of transportation.

And yet we made it.  We have so much to be proud of. Australia now is one of those countries that people will risk their lives to get to. Australia is a good country to live in.

Aboriginals?  They say it was the beginning of a genocide. But that is nonsense. Those early weeks and months were marked by amity between the natives and the new immigrants, the whites. There were difficult times for the newcomers - they nearly starved to begin with;  they were trying to farm on poor land and the climate was often severe and has always been erratic. A supply ship failed to arrive, rations were cut, and then more convicts arrived, the second fleet. That was 1890.

But the colony did not die. It survived, and gradually began to manage better and better, though it was not until gold was discovered in 1850 that it can really be said to have thrived.

The Aboriginals did not do so well. From April, 1789, an epidemic of Small Pox decimated their numbers, with casualties guessed at as around 70% in those areas close to the NSW colony, and there were reports that it spread a lot further.  Accurate figures would have been impossible to get, so we still know little of just how far it spread and how badly the majority of the Aboriginal population was affected. Some have alleged that it was deliberately introduced, but the chance of that having happening is infinitesimal. For a start, there was no reason to attack the natives. There was no conflict at that time.  And the sophistication of bacteriological warfare in 1778?  Hardly.

Probably, one of the whites was a carrier, and that man came into too close contact with a native, possibly a woman, since women’s favours were bartered from very early.  (King’s diary, 20^th January, natives indicated the women ‘and made us understand their persons were at our service.) The natives’ casualness when offering women for use was probably partly because the relationship between sex and babies was not understood.

Small Pox - I remember a diary entry of the time. The writer speaks of finding a small group of Aboriginals in a ‘piteous condition,’ wanting to help, but they ran from him.

So yes, Aboriginals suffered, and some of that suffering was a direct consequence of the arrival of Europeans. The same has happened in other places, when a native population comes into contact with newcomers bringing new diseases.

But remember that our Australian Aboriginals lived then on the edge of survival. Our land is subject to very severe droughts. Many would have starved in those times. Those who could not keep up with the tribe when they moved on were left to fend for themselves. There would have been no very old people. A diary entry (Tench?) speaks of a baby, whose mother had died, tossed, still alive, into the grave along with its dead mother. No-one had been able or willing to raise it.

The point is that Aboriginals never lived in the sort of idyll that some people seem to imagine. Aboriginals, along with the rest of us, have a great deal to celebrate. 

What about all the massacres they say happened?  What about the 'genocide?'I will not say there were no murders, no massacres. There was a massacre at Myall Creek, for instance. In 1838, between 20 or 30 Aboriginals were killed and their bodies burnt. A couple of girls were saved for use by the men. 

But it was reported to the police, nearly all of the culprits arrested, tried, found guilty and hanged.  If the killing of Aboriginals was routine and sanctioned, as is stated as politically correct ‘fact’ these days, there would have been no arrests, no trials and no hangings. White farmers never made it a weekend sport to kill blacks. That is one of those nonsensical allegations that have become fashionable among certain segments of the population.

These allegations have led to a push to change the date. It is ‘invasion day,’ they say. And that day marked an invasion complete with hundreds of thousands of massacred Aboriginals, a ‘genocide,’ in fact,  and rapes of women.

But it did not happen. Not that day, not ever. There was never a genocide, though obviously there were incidents, as there were incidents of settlers being killed and white children stolen. There was conflict.

But look what we have built together. We do have something to celebrate.  Aboriginals no longer have a mere humpy to call home, they have clothing, reliable food and shelter. There are no longer convicts in chains. 

And the best date to celebrate, the date of the most significance, is January 26^th, when it really began. January 26^th, when the flag was raised.  January 26^th was the birth of a nation. This is Australia Day.  It was celebrated first as Foundation Day or First Landing Day or Anniversary Day, and then in 1818, Governor Macquarie named it a public holiday. In the 1930s, it was changed to the nearest Monday in order to make a ‘long weekend,’ but in 1994, it was decided that the date was too significant to be sacrificed just for a long weekend, and it was celebrated again on January 26^th, whatever the day of the week.

And if the PC mob manage to get it changed, then we should ignore that change. It does not matter if the official date is changed; we celebrate on our day. Because custom and culture come from the people; they are not dictated top down.

Reference
Sydney Cove, 1788.  In the words of Australia's first settlers: the true story of a nation's birth.

Compiled by John Cobley, published 1962.  Note:  published 1962, before any of us had heard of political correctness, and before facts were regarded as problematical if they did not follow the preferred narrative.

 So how will we celebrate on January 26th?  Well, the barbeque has become traditional.

The traditional sausage sizzle

At the pub. 

Or maybe a gathering at the pub?

At the beach

At the  beach?

Boating?

Or in sheer relaxation?

We celebrate on the 26th January.  The politically correct constantly-offended minority have a habit of success right now.  But so what if they succeed in going against what most of us want?

We ignore them.  The official date can be whatever they say,  but there is nothing, NOT A THING! to stop us celebrating on the day that we choose - Australia Day, January 26th.

This web-page belongs to M. A. McRae, author.

------------------------------------------------