Guessing

Maybe you are the warm hearted type.

good guess, my heart is open. lol.

I propose you take in some refugees, in your own home, give up your job so they can have one and then devote your life to educating them on your cultural ways. If you are not prepared to do all of these things then you are full of hot air and enjoy hearing your own voice for your own pleasure.

yeah right. its not up to me personally to save the world- I do what I can but I'm battling like everyone else.

Originally posted by lifecitizen

What? you don't believe we would fight against foreign military invaders? surely you jest, Nah we have no culture,lifestyle or anything like do we? I really don't know what the hell take away food has to do with anything,do countries with "culture" not partake in eating food from other countries?

Of course we have a lifestyle- generally speaking we are laid back, we like to drink, we like to swear, watch the footy and cricket, have bbqs and hang out for our rostered days off.

We have an indigenous culture which we cant claim as ours.

My point with the food was, if [some] people here hate immigrants so much you would think you would have a problem with eating their food. To alot of the different nationalities here, food is a big part of their culture.

My point about how close Indonesia etc was, as global warming/climate change continues to happen, humans will be forced to migrate, just like we have always done.
There's how many of them? and how many of us?
This isnt going to happen tomorrow but there's nothing surer than earth changes and nothing surer than human migration. We are going to have to work something out before that time or we're here for the taking.
Attitudes towards refugees/ boat people will have to change, Im appalled at the lack of compassion a lot of Aussies have towards such people. ffs we all smile in the same language!

If we take 200 million Indo's as you suggest our country will be a poverty stricken hell hole,that may be the future you want for Australia, but i reckon you would have trouble convincing any sane Aussie that,

Yes we will work something out,A BIGGER DEFENSE FORCE,

Lack of compassion ? if not wanting our country to go down the toilet is showing a lack of compassion then i guess i lack compassion,

The whole idea of democracy is to achieve liberty through the separation (hence limitation) of powers, based on the understanding that power corrupts and that absolute power corrupts absolutely. How a global government is supposed to behave better than nations is beyond reason. Simply put, it's a lie. It's based on the premise that others act poorly through an inferior moral compass, implying that those who are deemed worthy through having the "right" views are essentially less fallible. Sound familiar? Thousands of years of religions centred on claimed infallibility have gone up in smoke through the revelation of widespread pedophilia within its ranks, and Bob Brown reckons he's rediscovered it through the moral superiority of environmentalism? This from the man who scoffs at the notion of religious or papal infallibility. Hypocrite.

The man who despised One Nation espouses the glory of a One World Government? Hypocrite. Apart from the xenophobic overtones of One Nation, what he truly despised was the concept of a party running on the platform of national sovereignty. So here we have a man who's party is hellbent on undermining Australian sovereignty, whose policy is to eradicate all coal-fired power stations in Australia, a country with no nuclear power and limited hydro power due to the Green's opposition to ANY new dams. A party who manipulated the majority party of government to introduce a carbon tax which only taxes Australian industry; a form of reverse tariff, and a tax which essentially exports coal-powered industry to foreign nations with less efficient industry; the end result being a net INCREASE in global carbon emissions.

That his party as of July 1 holds the balance of power shows that this boast in no coincidence. People like Bob Brown believe that a One World government is assured, and his full speech suggests precisely that. That he is now acting like he's drunk with power is yet more proof that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Even the infallible.

Originally posted by captainblood
The whole idea of democracy is to achieve liberty through the separation (hence limitation) of powers, based on the understanding that power corrupts and that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Yes. Don't we see the same principle at play in this great global warming scam? Where is the line that separates scientific authority from governmental policy?

Traditional separation of power was between religion and the state. With the Enlightenment and 'age of reason', science replaced religion as a major public power, and was perfectly matched to civil authority by way of a mutual rejection of any higher authority than the human will to power. Thus Science and the Global Political Architecture are both atheistic and humanistic by definition. Neither want nor need a God. Perfect match. Indeed, leaders in the scientific revolution like Bacon and Descartes envisaged such a world where Science ruled and drove social progress through the mechanisms of Government, not blind faith and financial devotion to the Church.....how ironic. Contemporary SoP is between the civil insititutions of Governmental, Legal, Financial and Enforcement powers. Science has now joined the ranks of these that should be separated from one another.

This should be a chapter from my yet to be upcoming book 'what really killed our ability to think independently?' Edward Bernays style.

Now Bob Brown is a 'Politican' with a Scientific (read: globo-socio-communo-environmentalismist-tug-at-your-heart-strings) agenda. And Tim Flannery, for example, is a 'Scientist' with a Political agenda (read: globo-socio-communo-environmentalismist-tug-at-your-heart-strings).

That's to say, Governments the world over, local to global seem to be albe to 'fund research' (buy support?) that wonderfully justifies their policy with near impunity. And we can only assume that the reason we hardly hear public voices opposing the 'research' is because Governments have close Connections of Power to yet another public power institution that should be separated from the rest (and perhaps the furthest!) --> Corporate Mass Media.

It seems like we can sum up the whole New World Order conspiracy theoreists' view on the structure and development of a One World Government as the wholesale erosion of the separation of powers, local up to global. Across the globe we are giving UP our power. A carbon tax is tangible proof of the implementation of a transfer of power UPwards, in the form of wealth, higher up the pyramid, if you like. And this is acieved through the co-mingling interests and Connections of Power shared between Scientific policy and Political science, in the case of so called climate change.

We see a similar thing when a global agri-business like Viterra can move into South Australia and buy control of near every grain storage facility from Adelaide to Port Augusta and beyond. Transfer of power into fewer hands, i.e., UP the pyramid. We see the same thing when Coles or Woolworths can buy into and take over the retail liqour and hotel industry. That's a step away from the hospitaility industry, which is two steps away from the entire food supply chain: Wesfarmers owns the farms, the coles supermarkets and your local pub, - food and drink from the ground to your mouth, with a little stop over at their mates house, Viterra, for a short mark up in price and mutual investment. Shouldn't we recognise this as a breach of the separation of powers that ensures our sovreignity as indiviuals and communities?

Fantastic point you raised. Very pertinent.