It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Australian PM John Howard, Son of a Nazi

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 08:04 PM
link   
My apologies if this topic has already been discussed. (Couldn't see a reference to it in a search, but I could've missed it).

Anyway, this topic incorporates a couple of other issues as well.

First things first, this article: www.cecaust.com.au...

John Howard's Father: A Member of the Fascist New Guard

At press conferences all over the nation on May 19, Citizens Electoral Council spokesmen released the shocking evidence indicating that Prime Minister John Howard's father had been a member of the 1930s fascist New Guard in Sydney, according to members of his own family, buttressed by evidence unearthed by CEC researchers. The Big Business-sponsored New Guard, like its fraternal bodies, the Old Guard and the Melbourne-based League of National Security, had planned to seize power from the federal Labor government of James Scullin and the NSW Labor government under Premier Jack Lang, rather than allow those governments to direct credit for job creation and the Common Good, in preference to paying debt to the City of London banks.

With a new great Depression looming today, CEC spokesmen charged that Howard is continuing the fascist tradition of his father, in ramming through draconian police-state laws, which already give the Government more power than Hitler had immediately after the Feb. 27, 1933 Reichstag fire, which the Nazis themselves set, in order to seize power. Then, the excuse was "fighting the Reds"; today, it is "fighting terrorism". In reality, such laws are to give the government police-state powers to control the population under Depression conditions, so that brutal austerity can be enforced on the Australian population on behalf of the financiers which own Howard and his government.

CEC spokesmen also announced that the CEC intends to mount a campaign against the latest police-state bill, the Anti-Terrorism Bill 2004, which, among other things, proposes to recognize, under Australian law, the offences under American law, which gave rise to the notorious hell-holes at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib in Iraq.

"The present Australian government is a 'beast-man' regime," charged CEC National Secretary Craig Isherwood at a press conference in Melbourne, "no different than the bestial regime of the Cheney and Rumsfeld-led neocons in the U.S." And Labor under Latham has now joined the push for a police state, Isherwood noted.

Beyond the barrage of fascist police-state laws passed over the past few years, which are far more sweeping than anything existing in the U.S. or U.K., "If you want to see the real character of the Howard government", said Isherwood, "look at its inhuman response to the recent Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission inquiry into the detention of children, which charged that such detention is 'cruel, inhumane and degrading'. Nurse Barbara Rogalla, who served at Woomera for three months, cited chapter and verse of the awful abuse to which the children were subject in her submission to the HREOC, and concluded, 'The Australian government is thereby culpable of torture of children.'

"Anyone who reads the HREOC report, along with the accompanying submissions, is forced to draw the same conclusions as Barbara Rogalla," emphasized Isherwood. "Howard and Vanstone have rejected the report and the HREOC's findings. It is time that the Australian population rejected them, beginning with this hideous new police state bill. Judging by his push for a police state, and his treatment of the most defenseless sector of our population, John Howard is indeed his New Guard father's son," concluded Isherwood.

---

The claim about the Prime Minister's father is quite shocking.. the issues of him lying, the refugee torture and police-state law weren't new to me, but in the context of being a Fascist's son, it is quite scary.

The other issue is the CEC itself, and its credibility. From what I've gathered from the other articles on the website, they have good research, and seem very professional. Someone recently told me Lyndon LaRouche is dodgy, but I don't know much about him yet, and it hasn't really been relevant yet, in regards to what I've read.

I'd like to hear what others think, whether they know more info about the story, and about the CEC, especially updates and/or debunkings.




posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Ow well,

No one truly cares or believes! GW Bush's grandfather was a Nazi supporter to the max. No one cares about that. It is written in financial history which is more accurate than what our children read in school. But that is what we read in school. Now football, baseball, and basketball are more important than true history. Not to mention golf, tennis, hockey, and reality TV. It does an effective job of eliminating the need for reality in any form. The CIA does not influence media, however.

TUT

Why is it so hard to believe serious people who have repeatedly warned us that powerful ruling elites are out to dominate "the masses?" Did we think Dwight Eisenhower was exaggerating when he warned of the extreme "danger" to democracy of "the military industrial complex?" Was Barry Goldwater just being a quaint old-fashioned John Bircher when he said that the Trilateral Commission was "David Rockefeller's latest scheme to take over the world, by taking over the government of the United States?" Were Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt or Joseph Kennedy just being class traitors when they talked about a small group of wealthy elites who operate as a hidden government behind the government? Especially after he died so mysteriously, why shouldn't we believe the late CIA Director William Colby, who bragged about how the CIA "owns everyone of any major significance in the major media?" etc..

Prescott Bush, the late, aristocratic senator from Connecticut, and grandfather of George W Bush, was not only a good friend of Allen Dulles, CIA director, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, and international business lawyer. He was also a client of Dulles' law firm. As such, he was the beneficiary of Dulles' miraculous ability to scrub the story of Bush's treasonous investments in the Third Reich out of the news media, where it might have interfered with Bush's political career . . . not to mention the presidential careers of his son and grandson.

Recently declassified US government documents, unearthed last October by investigative journalist John Buchanan at the New Hampshire Gazette, reveal that Prescott Bush's involvement in financing and arming the Nazis was more extensive than previously known. Not only was Bush managing director of the Union Banking Corporation, the American branch of Hitler's chief financier's banking network; but among the other companies where Bush was a director—and which were seized by the American government in 1942, under the Trading With the Enemy Act—were a shipping line which imported German spies; an energy company that supplied the Luftwaffe with high-ethyl fuel; and a steel company that employed Jewish slave labor from the Auschwitz concentration camp.Michael Hasty is a writer, activist, musician, carpenter and farmer. His award-winning column, "Thinking Locally," appeared for seven years in the Hampshire Review, West Virginia's oldest newspaper. His writing has also appeared in the Highlands Voice, the Washington Peace Letter, the Takoma Park Newsletter, the German magazine Generational Justice, and the Washington Post; and at the websites Common Dreams and Democrats.com. In January 1989, he was the media spokesperson for the counter-inaugural coalition at George Bush's Counter-Inaugural Banquet, which fed hundreds of DC's homeless in front of Union Station, where the official inaugural dinner was being held.
etc.....

Permission to reprint is granted, provided it includes this autobiographical note, and credit for first publication to Online Journal.

=================================================

There are an awful lot more pertinent facts that have been placed into order in this article, it is well worth reading and digesting.

TUT



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 10:57 PM
link   

No one truly cares or believes!


You're right, you know. I'd say the ratio of those who do, to those who don't, would be a lot different within the membership here, than in the general population though.

I really enjoyed those paragraphs from Michael Hasty. Thank you for posting that, and for introducing Michael and yourself to me.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by stoneskull
With a new great Depression looming today

I'd disagree with that point, there are no indicators that would suggest this, the Aus Economy is as strong as it has been for decades.

Really, Howard is a different man to his Father, and his father still went to at least one war for this country to fight against the Germans. Everyone is entitled to their own political opinions. Theres no point holding the fathers opinions against the son.

Nor is the Refugee issue able to be blamed entirely on Howard, nor are the Aus AntiTerror laws any stricter (not even close I think?) to the UK laws. US AT laws I'm not so sure about, but its somewhat of a moot point as they just get shipped of to Gitmo where the laws mean jack anyway.

The real killer is the fact that Howard almost certainly lied about the events surrounding Children-Overboard affair. If true, the fact that he openly lied to the Australian public regarding the pictures is an outrageous insult and abuse of trust. For that alone I think his ability to lead is thrown into question.


The other side of the coin is the fact that as far as which party should be in Government, it is still fairly clear that it is Liberal. Labour just doesn't appear to have the leader or the ability to continue to manage the Economy and Domestic affairs so successfully. So we are stucky with a tricky value judgement, vote out Howard for lying in the leadup to the last election, and risk the health of the nations Economy. Or stick with a winning team economically, but allow Howard to get away with lying to the public.

If only Labour still had Beazley in charge, they'd be a much more appealing option.



posted on Aug, 18 2004 @ 11:39 PM
link   
Heh, Arnold Schwarzenegger's father was a Nazi and he's government of Cali. However, Arnold's not under Nazi influence and does not share their beliefs so I think it's all good.



posted on Aug, 19 2004 @ 02:08 AM
link   
Kano, how can you like the Liberal party? They act like they're English, all snooty, snobby and superior.

Little Johnny knowingly lying is more than an issue of whether he's a good leader (and he's not our leader, btw, he's our minister, as in he works for us, not the other way round). It's offensive, and yes, a huge betrayal, and he should be out on his ear.

Kim Beazley lost the last election because of the Tampa. Before that he was clear favourite. And he'll be up on the front bench as Defence Minister if Labor win, so it'll be a pretty good team. Mark Latham is an Aussie to me. He's real, pretty honest and doesn't act like he's Royal.

8 years is plenty. We need a change in government at least for a breath of fresh air. I don't care if Liberal wins next time, but it's beginning to make me, and a lot of others I know, sick. We remember the ideals of free education and free healthcare, the philosophy of a secure social security net, the value of supporting the Arts, and quality journalism... and these things, the things that really made us a lucky country, are disappearing within economist-speak.

Next election I'll be running as an Independent in my electorate, I procrastinated too long before this one, and I hope I win. While I'm not an ALP member or lover, I do hope they win the majority of seats this election. It would raise the Happiness Meter of the country to an Orange.

PS Blackout, I guess you haven't read the interview of Arnie saying how he admired Hitler, or where he said he hated blacks - that they were inferior.



posted on Aug, 19 2004 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackout
Heh, Arnold Schwarzenegger's father was a Nazi and he's government of Cali. However, Arnold's not under Nazi influence and does not share their beliefs so I think it's all good.



Keep flying that plane, hold your wings on the horizon, I know you can not See anything else. Arnooooold is Arnold have you ever watched his movies, he is SUPERIOR. Ask his wife,

TUT



posted on Aug, 19 2004 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackout
Heh, Arnold Schwarzenegger's father was a Nazi and he's government of Cali. However, Arnold's not under Nazi influence and does not share their beliefs so I think it's all good.



I presume you got all this in a private chat you had with the guvner, where you really got down the the "real" arnie?



posted on Aug, 19 2004 @ 08:03 PM
link   
I'm not sure what you mean by 'acting like they are English'. But to say the Prime Minister is not the Leader of the Nation is just foolish. Sure technically the Head of State is the GG, but the PM is the leader of the Government, and is internationally looked upon as the Leader of Australia. As far as preferred leader, even in light of this Howard still has to come in ahead of Latham. I wouldn't let Latham borrow my car, let alone run my country. Beazley would be a much safer and better respected option I think. (Mind you Kim lives in Rockingham, so I dunno if I'd let him take the car either.
)

All these ideals are useless without an economy to build them on. Stronger education, healthcare etc all stem from a strong Economy. To ignore this would be a massive folly. Even though its cheap or free for the consumer, there are still bills to be footed by someone (ie the govt) somewhere down the line. The stronger the Economy, the more the govt can safely afford to pay for on behalf of the public. Most of these things are also investments in the economy (ie education healthcare etc). So to not reinvest in them is also a mistake. Welfare is a different issue and I think the entire welfare system needs a good overhaul to streamline the security for those who actually need it and crack down on those who are abusing the system.

I understand and kind of agree with the 'breath of fresh air' argument. That dynamic is what makes a democracy great. But at the moment I feel the Liberal team is doing too much of a good job, and Labour is simply looking too shaky to take over. But I guess we find out soon enough.

On a side note, why is it that Foreign Ministers are always pansies, whats with that? Downer or Rudd, great choices.



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 03:06 AM
link   
Kano - That's fair enough, and we will find out soon enough who wins. And I didn't mean Head of State, I meant the politicians are not leaders, they are our representatives. Personally, I would've turfed Johnny out on his ear when he joined the "Coalition of the Willing" and helped invade Iraq, when at least 70% of us, a clear two-thirds majority, didn't want to. By English, I meant upper-class types.. that plum-in-mouth superior attitude. As for Social Security recipient "crackdowns" I think that's just an easy target, and picking on the weakest people. I'd rather see an overhaul of the tax laws, to crack down on high-income earners using loop-holes and tricky accountants to avoid paying their tax, as well as re-regulation of banks and an overhaul of the Reserve Bank of Australia.

---

So any opinions on the CEC, Lyndon LaRouche and/or more info on John Howard's dad out there? Somone told me John Howard is a Freemason, but I haven't confirmed this. Any info about that at all out there?

[edit on 20/8/04 by stoneskull]



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Only weeks before the Port Arthur massacre, Mr John Howard warned Australians via the media that unless Australia has tougher gun laws, there would soon be a massacre in Australia. Coincidence?

After the massacre, John Howard illegally (no referendum) brought in laws to disarm the nation. He gave a speech almost identical to the following:-

"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilised nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!" Adolph Hitler, 1935.

“In reaching a historic agreement on prohibition of weapons, we made a mighty contribution to delivering a safer and more secure Australian society.” John Howard, 1997, Australian Prime Minister.

from www.downunderwebsites.com...



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by stoneskull

After the massacre, John Howard illegally (no referendum) brought in laws to disarm the nation. He gave a speech almost identical to the following:-



It wasn't illegal, guns aren't enshrined in our constitittion. The laws are passed just like any other laws through parliament.

PS. Do you really think a labor government could run this great nation
We've just spent 8 years paying off $100 billion of labor debt.



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Under the Queen, we are still protected (or are supposed to be protected) by the 1688 Bill of Rights.

PS Hey, how about we just declare the Liberal party the Australian Royal family, and let them rule forever.

PPS Show me where it mentions political parties in the constitution. The parliament is supposed to be representatives of the electorates, not representatives of "parties". I'm not stuck in the false left/right paradigm mate, I don't support political parties, but I'm sick, literally, of these tyrants wrecking Australia.

I'm not talking about money, I'm talking about soul.



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Well, it seems from your previous posts that you're a Labor supporter. I'm not saying I am a fan of politicians, but I have seen what the Liberal Government has been able to for the the economy. Something thta Labor really has no idea about.



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Well, out of Liberal and Labor, I am a little biased, and toward the Labor party. This is partly because of my poor upbringing, and most adults around me as a youngster were Labor supporters, but mainly because of my interest in the history of Unions (going back to the sheep shearers), and the bashing they get from the Liberals.

Anyways...

TUT - let me give you a hand. You were right.



posted on Aug, 22 2004 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corinthas

Originally posted by Blackout
Heh, Arnold Schwarzenegger's father was a Nazi and he's government of Cali. However, Arnold's not under Nazi influence and does not share their beliefs so I think it's all good.



I presume you got all this in a private chat you had with the guvner, where you really got down the the "real" arnie?


www.sfgate.com.../chronicle/archive/2003/07/13/MN243790.DTL



posted on Aug, 22 2004 @ 07:22 PM
link   
As a military man, I love Little Johnny.

While war is not always the answer, he has kept ties with the US strong, and face it we need all the support we can get from both the US and UK.

I suer as hell know I'm voting for Little Johnny.

Latham with his beadly little eyes looks like he he going to get up to no good if (ha) he gets the job. He has already been causing troubles with the relationship with the US.

God Bless America,
oh, and Johnny too.



posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 02:47 AM
link   
"Thou Shall Not Kill"
"Thou Shall Not Steal"

Are these commandments from the same God you want to bless America?

Are you in John Howard's electorate?

Do you think Australia is a US pawn?

Should John Howard ignore the wishes of the people who live here?

If over 70% of Australia doesn't want to go invade and kill people in another country, a country that posed no threat whatsoever to Australia, then the Prime Minister should follow. He is obliged to obey the people, noone else, not even the the country with more Weapons of Mass Destruction than all the other countries put together - the US of America.



posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by stoneskull
"Thou Shall Not Kill"
"Thou Shall Not Steal"

Are these commandments from the same God you want to bless America?

Are you in John Howard's electorate?

Do you think Australia is a US pawn?

Should John Howard ignore the wishes of the people who live here?

If over 70% of Australia doesn't want to go invade and kill people in another country, a country that posed no threat whatsoever to Australia, then the Prime Minister should follow. He is obliged to obey the people, noone else, not even the the country with more Weapons of Mass Destruction than all the other countries put together - the US of America.


I agree.

And when Howard refused to make an official apology to the the Koori people for the massacres, and the Lost Generation, he cast a shadow of shame on the great nation that is Australia.

U.



posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 06:11 AM
link   
I am not in Johnny's electorate.

We are not a pawn, I was military and don't feel like a pawn. We are partners.

As for the 70% vote 'statistic', those crappy numbers are made up of a small percentage of the population, I surely don't remember being asked for my opinion in any formal matter. The study was probably done in Nimbin.

As for the aboriginies, I have no hate for the race itself, but a hate for what they have done to themselves in recent history. Aboriginies in my area travel 100km into our town for the SOLE purpose of alcohol, as their home town is dry. FOR A REASON.

I do not truly think Howard should or needs to apologise, will it even fix any thing? Most of these so-called 'stolen children' actually had a better life than mot white people in the day, out of pure love of their adopted white parents who saw the poverty and violence in their own communities.

In 2000 a radio announcer was suspended after a sarcastic on-air apology to Aborigines from other Australians.

"We feel that we must apologise for building hundreds of homes for you, which you have vandalised and destroyed," said breakfast broadcaster Olivia Scott from central Queensland radio station 4RO, based at Rockhampton, in 2000.

"We apologise for giving you law and order, which has helped prevent you from slaughtering one another.

"We apologise for working hard to pay the taxes that finance your welfare, medical care, education et cetera to the tune of $10 billion a year."

Radio 4RO general manager Paul Sweeney said the broadcast showed an appalling lack of judgment and sensitivity.


I'm all for equal rights mind you, but freedom of speech must be preserved, especially when the matter is so valid.

Once more an Australian utilising their freedom of speech has been cut down, like the rest of us, Olivia Scott suffers from a thing which is frowned upon in Australia, it's called 'the truth'. Now I know alot of you reading this will be wondering what the hell I'm talking about, so I'll help you out a little;

Australian aboriginies have, over the years, become more and more demanding, to the point where over $10 billion per year is spent on their 'welfare', not very many of them work, and not very many of them want to work. I know a few good 'black fellahs' who have worked all their life, and never exploited our welfare system, but unfortunately alot arn't like that.

Recently they have been threatening our country with riots and violence, saying all they want is an apology for us 'taking over their land'. They don't seem to remember that that was 200 years ago, and that before them, there were other humans here, promagnun man was arbitrarily exterminated, like a roach infestation, by the current 'aboriginies', but no one ever seems to mention this.

I have a strong feeling the reason no one speaks out is, unfortunately in this trendy facist world, where everyone attempts to be 'politically correcter than thou', if you ever speak out against someone and you happen to be white, no matter how relevant your point, then you're instantly dismissed as a racist.

So what has happened? Anti-racism, ie: the word and oppinions of white people are down trodden by even other white people, we have no freedom of speech in such matters, and your average Australian's oppinion is ignored when it comes to sensationalistic media. What Olivia Scott said was true, but because she's not aboriginal, she must be a racist.

We have no mouths, but every day we're bombarded with what the media want us to hear, and what the media want us to know, that's their form of ownership over this country. And unfortunately, alot of Australian's believe everything the media tells them, and believe this is the country the media say. Actually, so does the rest of the world. A friend in Canada was talking to me recently about how brilliant he thought this country was, after I told him more about the place he couldn't believe the lies he'd heard from the media and from our government.

We have no freedom of speech anymore. But I can honestly say, we are not sorry for what was done 200 years ago, because they're not sorry for making an entire species of humans on this continent extinct. We are not sorry for giving them money, for them never having to work (legally, or morally), and for them destroying everything we create for them.

I work hard every day, 6 days a week, in an attempt to make a living. I don't get free money, I don't get free housing, I'm still quite young, and I work my arse off every day. But my opinion is not important, because I'm white. I don't understand this.

Oh hang on, if we can't call Aboriginies or African Americans 'black' should they be able to call us 'white' or 'crackers' as they are still getting away with? Equal rights, equal oportunity. I don't want to have to clarify if I am an 'indiginous' australian when I enrol for univeristy - why the hell should that matter.

Oh no, I feel the burn of a flame already.

- Thanks go to Valiant for info.

[edit on 23-8-2004 by Ezekial]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join