What happens in America usually comes – like a disease – to Australia, hence it is wise to watch what is happening across the “pond.”
On the negative side, an academic from the Northwestern University had “argued” that Christian fundamentalism poses a greater threat to the United States than Islamic terrorism. (Breitbart.com, October 27, 2016) Apparently radical Christians have access to all those nuclear weapons that could blow up the world. This academic also argues that Jesus would be a socialist and advocate for “the just sharing of the world’s resources.” Ok, let the Pope start the process, as Peter West has said.

On the positive side, an African-American professor at Harvard University, James Sidanius (et al), “Ethnic Enclaves and the Dynamics of Social Identity on the College Campus: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 87, 2004, pp. 96-110, has shown that “safe spaces” for minorities does more harm than good, primarily by damaging relationships with other ethnic groups. Your Queensland student case may be an illustration of this principle.

This issue has relevance to your section 18 C (I write as an American in Australia). The point arises from Donald Trump’s closing ad which targeted the globalists such as Soros, which has been said to have “anti-Semitic over tunes.” (Huffington Post.com November 6, 2016) The ad which defended “Americanism” against “globalism” and used expressions such as “global power structure,” was said by various groups to involve “stereotypes” and “baseless conspiracy theories.”

But the “conspiracy theories” are not baseless. The evidence is clear that Soros is not a helpless man living on the streets. He is in fact a globalist with enormous financial power who acts to further an agenda against nationalism. A multitude of leaked emails confirm this. So, should Soros and others be beyond criticism?
If there was an Australian Trump you can be sure that section 18 C would be cranked up to full volume and used against this hypothetical individual’s many statements about crime, ethnicities and immigration, made in an Australian context. That is one reason why section 18 C is so wrong and why it is a pity that the Australian Constitution, an enabling document, does not have a right of free speech.

Prince Harry has made what the Huffington Post calls an “extraordinary attack on press treatment of girlfriend Meghan Markle” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/11/08/prince-harry-makes-extraordinary-attack-on-press-treatment-of-gi/) Before going on, we should note that Markle is Jewish in terms of religion, and racially is “black,” having an African-American mother. See: http://www.ethniccelebs.com/meghan-markle, and http://www.celebritybeliefs.com/meghan-markle/.

Kensington Place on November 8, 2016 issued a statement addressed to the press saying that a line had been crossed with the media harassment of Markle and her family, with smears on national newspapers, “outright sexism and racism” and her mother having to battle reporters just to get to her front door.  Some reporters and photographers even attempted to break into her home.
Bribes were offered to her ex-boyfriend for “dirt” and the reporters harassed anyone from family to friends to get a story on her, the more controversial the better.
It is a shame to see the young love birds having their relationship torn apart by a predatorial media and the British tabloid one is as vicious as the American one and almost as bad as the Australian media.

Here are some further disturbing signs of what is to come in the gender agenda. First, a German court has ruled that a 16-year-old-girl can continue having a sexual relationship with her uncle – yes, her uncle, aged 48 – which began when she was 14. The “prohibition of love is a threat to the child’s well-being.” (DailyMail.com, November 4, 2016) What!

Forgetting about the incest angle, the age of sexual consent in Germany is 14 so long as a person over the age of 21 does not exploit the child’s “capacity for sexual self-determination.” How could it be otherwise, for it is a child that we are talking about here. What hope have German’s got?
In Ontario, Canada, “mother” and “father” are terms set to be scrapped by the government of Kathbeen Waynne in the Children’s Law Reform Act, being replaced by “birth parent” and “parent,” respectively. Along with sexual and gender identity teachings the social engineering of the family is well underway, as it is in Australia.

The issue of Chinese domination has taken a back seat to other issues, but let us revive the issue.
There was “alarm” by the US about the influence of China in Australian politics, and US ambassador John Berry said, noting that foreign donations were illegal in America: “It is an entirely different matter when the government of China is able to directly funnel funds to political candidates to advance their national interests in your national campaign. That, to us, is of concern. We cannot conceive of a case where a foreign donation from any government, friend or foe, would be considered legitimate in terms of that democracy.” (The Australian, September 14, 2016, p. 1)

Previous to that, an article at Afr.com, August 30, 2016, reported on the Briefing Book given to all senators and members by the Parliamentary Library, pointing out that “Beijing’s plan to spend billions on infrastructure projects in the region, including in northern Australia, (is) an attempt to gain a strategic advantage and validate its claims over disputed waters in the South China Sea.”
Our Asianised, politically correct, foreign investment-drunk politicians do not appear to be listening to these words of warning.  Time for an Australian version of Donald Trump, only much stronger and cleaner living.

Ref: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-case-for-a-universal-basic-income-no-questions-asked-20161118-gssj23.html

As automation steadily eliminates even the kind of well-paid jobs most of us have always wanted, that time (for a universal basic income-ed) may be approaching.

To The Australian 
Noel Pearson's hagiography of Paul Keating is unconvincing ('A visionary of power', 22/11). It ignores the fact that the Australian people soon recognised, within one term of government, that their country was being led in the wrong direction by Keating. They chose as replacement a much greater prime minister and re-elected him several times.

Pearson's potted account of the 'three defining moments' of our history is misleading. Australia is first and fundamentally a British nation. The facts that long ago people crossed the Torres Strait land bridge and that there has been much non-British immigration in the last half century do not affect this truth. Keating attacked the prime foundation stone of our British culture - the Australian monarchy. Australians didn't buy that and they won't buy the current 'reconciliation' campaign - really a hypocritical power grab - either.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic                  

To The Age
Louise Adler correctly says that the best cartoonists 'make us reflect on our prejudices and blind spots' ('It's no laughing matter', 22/11). However, she is on less secure ground in bluntly asserting that 'in a civil society racism or sexism is deemed unacceptable' and that legislation such as 18C 'serves as an educative tool and a moral compass for a decent society'.

One problem is that opinions differ on what is or is not sexist or racist. Adler's phrase 'moral compass' tends to suggest that all good people see things the same way. They don't.
Another problem is that, as a matter of fact, laws against racial hatred and vilification have been used in many countries to achieve political censorship. Perhaps oversensitivity to alleged slurs is one of Adler's blind spots.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic                  

There is some concern over the demise of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) since President-elect, Donald Trump, has announced the US will withdraw from the agreement.
There need be no concern really.  Donald Trump is withdrawing because it will be in the interest of his country and the same applies to Australia.

We can agree to trade in a much more simple way where goods can be exchanged without hundreds of pages of fine print which implicate us beyond reasonable trade matters. Australian primary production has world-wide appeal, so selling it does not present any problem.
KG, Naracoorte  SA 

Ref: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/jennifer-oriel/open-borders-inevitably-stoke-xenophobia/news-story/4d7e85601106514769a8ae16d7ab82c4

Jennifer Oriel refers to the 'once great UN' ('Open borders inevitably stoke xenophobia', 31/10), but the UN was never great: it has always been an instrument devised by elites to achieve the control of populations. In 1963 Rumania's former anti-communist foreign minister Prince Michael Sturdza exposed the wickedness of the UN operation in the early 1960s against Katanga in his essay 'World Government and International Assassination'. A year later G. Edward Griffin published a devastating full-length critique of the UN in his book 'The Fearful Master'. And in 1973 Jean Raspail gave us his novel 'The Camp of the Saints' warning of the danger to Europe of uncontrolled third-world immigration.
Almost the whole of Oriel's thesis has been known and promoted for forty years by right-wing Australians. What a pity that the left-wing establishment in this nation suppressed the truth so rigorously for so long!  The UN has not been alone in censoring the truth about the corruption of Western European nations by ruthless elites uncaring of the interests of ordinary people.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

Ref: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/separatism-through-indigenous-recognition-an-irrational-fear/news-story/b042fef00118e5a6b727bdaf9ee731b2
Shireen Morris unjustly and ineffectively disparages concerns that the push for Aboriginal constitutional recognition masks a plan to press for full Aboriginal sovereignty involving the political division of this continent ('"Separatism" through recognition an irrational fear', 29-30/10). Her claim that 'very few indigenous Australians want a separate state in the international sense' contradicts Keith Windschuttle's view, based on his quotation of mainstream Aboriginal leaders such as Patrick Dodson and Marcia Langton. Morris simply ignores the detailed evidence he provided, wrongly suggesting that only 'far Left' Aboriginal extremists seek full sovereignty and that they pose no threat.

Other matters Windschuttle mentioned that are also inadequately addressed by Morris include: (1) the danger of UNO interference through its Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (partly written by Dodson!), (2) the possibility of ill-advised constitutional change through 'legal adventurism' by High Court judges, and (3) the likelihood of an Aboriginal state's forming alliances with other nations against Australia's interests.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

The gun control debate recently resurfaced over the issue of the import ban of the Adler A110 lever action shotgun, which has become the latest hate symbol of the castrating gun control lobby. Turnbull and Abbott had a tiff about whether horse-trading had taken place to get NSW senator David Leyonhjelm’s vote. Leyonhjelm said that the federal government backed out of a written agreement to trade his vote on other legislation in exchange for an end to the Adler prohibitions and he claims being deceived by the Coalition. Yet more “rigging”.

Tony Abbott denied that any citizens outside of those protecting pollies, such as law enforcement, require a rapid-fire gun, and said the idea was just “crackers,” especially with terrorists out there. (The Australian, October 20, 2016, p. 4) That is a good reason why Abbott lost his position as prime minister because he doesn’t act and think like a classical liberal, but is more of the mold of Hillary Clinton.

I have been criticising section 18 C of the Race Discrimination Act for many years now. I have read much on the topic and have yet to see any sound intellectual defences of it; it remains in the domain of ethnic power politics.
The best legal and journalistic minds have torn its ideological foundations to pieces, but like the “walking dead,” the law remains, spreading a plague of misery.

We have seen increasingly absurd consequences of this suppression of free speech, from the university students case, now to the cartoon case of Bill Leak, which by the way, has been said to be an accurate portrayal of what police face, according to the Western Australian Police Commissioner. (The Australian, October 21, 2016, p. 1)

I am not amazed at the bias shown by the print media against Donald Trump, since even given his inadequacies – which are many – he has come to represent a challenge to our politically corrupt globalist system.

The Australian has been examined by this American (me) now temporary in Australia, and I found that the usual articles, even if stating that Clinton was “unfit to be president” because of well, all the scandals (more below), Trump was worse! (The Weekend Australian, October 29-30, 2016, p. 22) Trump is “sexist” and “racist” and a “deplorable human being.” No mention is made of Hillary Clinton’s 1996 comments about black children in gangs being “super-predators,” without conscience or empathy, who should be brought to “heal,” presumably like dogs: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ronda-lee/hillarys-superpredator-comment_b_9655052.html. Hillary Clinton is “a clear and unequivocal lesser of evils.” And everybody Bernard Salt knows is anti-Trump (The Weekend Australian Magazine), October 29-30, 2016), which says more about his circle of friends than Trump.

It’s been exhausting covering the US election for readers, with my fellow Aussie/American journalist friend here, Chris Knight. Everyday there seems to be new revelations of Clinton evil, but she just gets away with it, so far.
Beginning in no particular order, the Clinton foundation itself has confirmed that it accepted a $1million gift from Qatar while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. She had signed an ethics agreement in order to become Secretary of State to notify the State Department’s ethics official if a foreign government such as Qatar wanted to make donations, so that any concerns could be raised. However, the State Department found no record of the Clinton Foundation submitting the Qatar gift for review and that it was “incumbent on the foundation to notify the department about donations that needed review.”
At least eight other countries donated to the Foundation without the State Department being informed:  http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-foundation-idUSKBN12Z2SL. This is but one more example of Clinton placing herself above the rule of law, let alone morality. Conflicts of interest seem to matter nothing to the Clintons.                                        

The Remnant (http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/itemlist/user/607-elizabethyore),  reports on the Soros/Clinton/Vatican partnership, or should we call it conspiracy.  Soros’ Open society granted $650,000 to PICO, a radical organisation for a meeting in the Vatican about the 2016 election. Here is what the article says about the outcome:

In terms of the theme of “the system is rigged,” how about these two items of cultural war from the gender agenda?
First, the federal government funds a website on student health and wellbeing. That sounds good. But the site “has potentially exposed young people to explicit information about anal sex, gay saunas and searching for sex online.” (The Australian, October 24, 2016, p. 3) Don’t worry, the links have now been removed. Surely no innocent students, legal minors, would have been curious and surfed the world of gay sex online? They just would have ignored the links and done extra maths work, wouldn’t they?

Not to worry, we can always direct our children to hating men, who, we have been told by another program are “globally and historically,” “the greatest threat to women.” (The Australian, October 25, 2016, p. 1) That nonsense is apparently taught in some Western Australian “top schools” by a group running a “respectful relationships education program.” The slide pushing this was shown at a “Men of Respect” workshop at a Perth high school. A student photographed the slide using his trusty mobile phone and placed it online.

Please listen to Alan Jones who talks about the threat to our underground water as talks to the former senior Queensland bureaucrat (Water Allocation and Planning) about the threat of damage from mines in the Galilee Basin and 200 square kilometres
Learn about the threat of 1^1/2-2million tonnes of salt being fed into into the Great Artesian Basin.
Listen here… http://www.2gb.com/article/alan-jones-%E2%80%93-tom-crothers#oKg9RkR44R4MusYy.01
 
A VERY SERIOUS QUESTION FOR THE KATTER PARTY
David Pascoe’s Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/OVHRepro/?hc_ref=PAGES_TIMELINE&fref=nf
Yesterday you voted with the LNP to give mining companies free access to all the water they want.
The water trigger laws will give mining companies rights over the farmers and rural communities access to water
So here’s a question for you. How did the donations that have been made by the CFMEU to your party affect your decision to vote against the farmers?
We know the role the CFMEU is playing right now as the stooge union for New Hope Group - and we know they are 'looking after the numbers' for the vote in Queensland Parliament.
So tell us, boys.
Has a party that the people of Queensland always believed to be decent, hardworking and fair dinkum now lined up to get their little pink snouts in the trough as well?
What an absolute tragedy. We thought you were so much better than this, but that vote clearly seems to tell us otherwise.
Political parties can no longer afford to use the old “job jobs “ mantra over the nations requirements for its food and water security.
We will only support parties that are willing to put our nation first – and their own political careers second.
Shame on you. The people of rural and regional Queensland have always believed in you and put their trust in you - and now you turn around and do this to them.
Sold out for a drink of water. Now, that's quite an epitaph for a party headstone, isn't it?

Apart from the philosophical implications of section 18 C, from a legal perspective, I am concerned about the consequences of a successful “Yes” vote from the constitutional recognition of Aborigines. This issue is pushed as a big social justice issue, like same sex marriage, and dissents are slammed for disagreeing. Probably discrimination law will be used to silence any critics, because that is the real reason the elites put it in place.

hus it is good to see social critic Keith Windschuttle speaking up. (The Weekend Australian, October 22-23, 2016, p. 20), saying: “Australia as we know it will not survive the agenda of those seeking greater autonomy.” The aim of many, if not most, in the Aboriginal movement, is not to make the constitution complete, but to “get their country back,” and he quotes the title of a recent book on this, It’s Our Country, to illustrate the thought processes. The aim is political autonomy and sovereignty, traditional law in their own separate nation. It is not explained how all of this fits in with multiculturalism and Asianisation, but no doubt, as I see it, China will work all of this out for “us” in the future.

of THE AUSTRALIAN
It is puzzling that Michael Sexton finds it 'puzzling that several groups representing the Jewish community' have not defended free speech ('Section 18C as it now stands is here to stay despite its obvious faults', 3/11). Their determination to suppress Holocaust revisionism played a major role in the passing of the Racial Hatred Act in 1994, as ALP MP Graeme Campbell noted in the debate in Parliament at that time. They have maintained their opposition to free public debate on this topic ever since.

What is more puzzling is why this aspect of the free speech debate has hardly been mentioned in the enormous coverage of the controversy over 18C in recent months. Repeal of 18C is needed for several reasons, one of which is to ensure that historical revisionists are not wrongfully punished in Australia as they are in Germany, France and other European nations.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

Obama is going into immoral panic mode for Hillary Clinton, and has said in an interview with Gina Rodriguez that illegal aliens should vote, for Hillary Clinton of course, and that they won’t be caught, deported or punished.
According to “the man,” the illegals are citizens because they contribute to the economy – presumably the cash-in-hand economy: http://www.naturalnews.com/055906_illegal_aliens_voting_Obama_interview.html.

This is an extraordinary example of the open political corruption which the West has fallen into. It is against the black letter law for illegals to vote, yet here is Obama advocating that people should break the law.
For him, and all cosmopolitanists, the law is strictly what they make it to be. This is a form of lawlessness because the fundamental principle of the rule of law is that the laws stand above people and constrain all. Obama and the Clintons put themselves above the law. So, Obama in failing to uphold his presidential oath, is a real traitor.