What’s the Greens problem?
We know the Greens have issues. In fact the Greens have issues with anything and everything there is to have issues with.
This article I came across whilst searching its origins, really has to be read: The far-left history of the Australian Greens
The Australian Green movement grew as an environmental group from the United Tasmania Group in Tasmania over issues like the Franklin Dam, Lake Pedder and the Gordon River. I certainly didn’t know that the Communist Union Boss, Jack Mundey, was part of it, even though I remember his green ban in ‘The Rocks’. Without that activism ‘The Rocks’ would not be what it is today
I certainly wasn’t aware that..
The first Green Party in the world began in Australia in 1972, the United Tasmania Group, which grew out of pioneering Australian environmental campaigns, the official creation story on their website reads.
‘Early elections saw Greens representatives hold the balance of power at the state level, including Bob Brown and Christine Milne in Tasmania. In 1992, the Greens formed a national party.’
I can now see why the Greens are now hell bent on activism and opposing every little thing that comes their way.
I will hand it to them that they really did a great deal of good work in ‘saving’ Tasmania, though they may have more than slightly overdone it.
If anyone has driven into Queenstown in Tasmania, they know what a shock it is to see the area totally devoid of vegetation.
It really upset me when I saw it and drove down into the town.
It is really like ‘moonscape’ although it is geographically situated in a World Heritage Rainforest area.
This devastation was caused by copper mining in the early days of settlement. The forests were cut down for the smelters and the sulphur fumes from the smelters poisoned all the new vegetation.
In April 2011
The two founding fathers of the Greens, Norm Sanders and Drew Hutton say the split between the old-school environmentalists and the new generation of ideologically driven urban activists now swelling the parliamentary ranks could destabilise the party and alienate voters.
The man who gave up his seat in the Tasmanian parliament 29 years ago to launch Bob Brown’s political career, Norm Sanders, said the Greens had “lost the plot” by shifting away from their core business of the environment.
Norm Sanders, 78, said scathingly that the Greens were now “concerned with everything except the environment“.
“You hear them going on about the tax system, same-sex marriage, adoption, all these social equity issues, but they don’t talk about the environment much,” he said. The concerns of two such experienced and respected figures in the green movement will intensify the values debate that was kicked off by the actions of NSW Greens figures Fiona Byrne, a suburban mayor in Sydney who stood unsuccessfully at last month’s state election, and senator-elect Lee Rhiannon in backing the campaign for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel over its treatment of the Palestinians.
Drew Hutton, who in his late 70s and who co-founded the party in 1992 with Bob Brown, and who is still on the front line of environmental activism and Norm Saunders say..
“All those social issues they’re on about, that’s what the ALP’s for. Even the Liberal Party can handle some of them. The Greens have lost the plot, and who’s looking after the environment?”
“That Sarah Hanson-Young, she’s on television and radio all the time, but I’ve never heard her talking about the environment”
“Bob and Christine are the only ones who’ve been on the barricades.
They’re the only activists in the Greens. I don’t know where the rest come from.”
This article from The Australian. August 2013 called
SPEND, SPEND, SPEND.
Gives you some idea of where they are now. (The article is behind a Paywall)
A quick examination of the Greens’ spending plans based on a return to the original mining tax and new levies on the minerals industry, for example, shows that they have announced a range of proposals that cost far more than their new and revised taxes generate. In fact, their spending plans don’t just exceed taxation revenues, they potentially surpass total industry income.
Up to now, the Greens have publicly committed to spend more than $200 billion on projects, programs, plans and policies funded by new and expanded mining taxes. To give you some context, export revenue from minerals is forecast to be about $150bn in 2013-14.
The biggest Greens initiative of them all is $114bn for a very fast train on the east coast of Australia, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
There is $50bn-$60bn for the National Broadband Network, $14.3bn for Disability Care, $36bn for the Gonski education reforms, a $4bn national dental scheme, $23bn to fund free tertiary education, $650 million for small business, $700m on light rail in Canberra, $2bn for primary schools and $5bn for paid parental leave.
On top of that there are uncosted policies. This includes a sovereign wealth fund, a national resource fund, increased pay for aged-care workers, higher Newstart, Youth Allowance, Abstudy and single-parent payments and a plan to bridge the funding gap between public and private schools.
As the author Mitch Hooke says
Just how much all this would cost is anyone’s guess, but one thing is certain: when it comes to spending based on new and revised mining taxes, the Greens are blowing cash faster than an entire navy of drunken sailors.
The NSW Greens are at the forefront of the racist BDS – Boycotts, Divestments and Sanctions movement. Their involvement at State level cost them a seat in the State election, thanks to the Green Mayor and Councillors at Marrickville Council, who sought to boycott Israel at Council level.
Millions are being slaughtered by ISIL in Iraq and these brainless idiots oppose help the victims of terror.
On Monday, 1 September 2014
At the beginning of parliament on Monday, Greens leader Christine Milne moved to suspend standing orders to allow a debate in the upper house regarding sending aid to Iraq.
She said ..
‘I believe that it is time that the Australian parliament was brought into this debate.
There is no greater responsibility that a parliament has, that a prime minister has, than to send our armed service men and women into a war zone, into a war.’
In a fiery exchange Christine Milne tried to force a debate on the deployment of Australian troops but the move was rejected by the government and opposition as a “political stunt”.
Senator Milne accused Mr Abbott of blindly following the United States into the conflict, comparing it to Australia’s engagement in Iraq in 2003 – “and what a mess that left”.
“Very few people believe that the Prime Minister of Australia has got a strategic plan for Australia’s engagement in Iraq,”
“Everybody believes that we are simply running behind President Obama who himself last week said he has not got a strategy.
“We want to know what the objective is.
“I would like to hear from the government why they think there is any likelihood of success when there has not been success before from following the United States into these conflicts.”
The move came a day after Prime Minister Tony Abbott announced Australia would take part in an international airlift of military equipment to Kurdish forces fighting Islamic extremists in northern Iraq.
Read more here;
In a statement to the House of Representatives on Monday, Mr Abbott reaffirmed the government’s intention to join American, British, Canadian, French and Italian aircraft in delivering supplies, including military equipment, to the Kurdish regional government in Erbil.
“So far, Madam Speaker, there has been no request for military action itself,”
The Prime Minister repeated previous statements that any request from the Obama administration for such action would be considered against strict criteria, including adequate risk assessment and clear humanitarian objectives that were in Australia’s national interest.
“Like President Obama, Australia has no intention to commit combat troops on the ground. But we’re not inclined to stand by in the face of preventable genocide either.”
The Prime Minister told the Parliament he refused to call the “hideous movement” Islamic State “because it is not a state, it’s a death cult”.
“So in good conscience, Madam Speaker, Australia cannot leave the Iraqi people to face this horror, this pure evil, alone or ask others to do in the name of human decency what we won’t do ourselves”.
“It is right to do what we prudently and proportionately can to alleviate this suffering to prevent its spread and to deal with its perpetrators.”
The Greens motion was defeated after Labor rejected it as a “stunt to score cheap political points“.
The motion went down by 44 to 13, with crossbench senators David Leyonhjelm, Jacqui Lambie and Nick Xenophon voting with the Greens.
Even UN Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon backed the delivery of goods to Iraq and said it was important nations such as Australia help address the situation
“Without addressing this issue through certain means, including some military and counter-terrorist actions, we will just end up allowing these terrorist activities to continue,”
he told reporters in Auckland on Tuesday.
Shame Christine Milne and the Greens don’t believe in saving lives.
Andrew Bolt says in his Blog:
Senator Milne’s apparent solution to ISIS barbarism: Let their victims die.
I HAVE a question for Greens leader Christine Milne about what she agrees is the “slaughter of innocent people” in Iraq and Syria.
So, Senator, what would you have us do?
I ask politely — no abuse, no anger — because what you said last week struck me as so horrible and heartless that there must be some mistake.
Senator, I must have misunderstood you.
You cannot possibly be so dead to what you say are the “images of barbaric behaviour” we’ve all seen from the Islamic State.
You cannot possibly mean what I understood you to say: Let them die.
Let the men be decapitated or crucified.
Let the women be raped and sold into slavery.
Let us not answer the screams for help from Christians, Yazidis, Shi’ites and Sunnis the jihadists deem not sufficiently devout.
Let our soldiers and airmen stay at home, watching on TV the astonishing cruelty they know they could stop if you would let them.
Am I right, Senator Milne? Is that what you really mean?
I ask because your words were not as clear and plain as mine.
So maybe I’m just slow to understand anything not simple. Or maybe — just maybe — you lacked the guts to tell us precisely what you’re urging.
So let me politely repeat what you actually told us last week, to see if I’ve been unfair.
You demanded the Prime Minister “rule out sending troops to Iraq for a third war”.
You said: “We cannot fix the tragedies and conflicts of the Middle East with more and more war. It is madness.”
You had deputy Adam Bandt echo: “I don’t think we should be going to war again.”
To be fair, you didn’t say we should do nothing at all.
“The Greens have said all along that we support humanitarian assistance,” you added.
Well, that’s nice, Senator. But here is what I don’t understand.
What humanitarian assistance do you want sent to the hundreds of men, like US photojournalist James Foley, who have had their heads cut off?
Not to be outdone on Saturday, September 6, 2014 the Green Left Weekly published an article
Once again their anti-Americanism reared its ugly head. Never mind the bloodshed, the disease, the starvation and displacement of innocent men, women and children, they have to get their point across.
Both major Australian political parties are once again standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the US, in support of what amounts to a new military intervention in Iraq.
The process began with the dropping of humanitarian aid supplies to the Yezidi. It has now moved on to the delivery of weapons and munitions to Kurdish Peshmerga forces.
All of this has happened with scarcely any discussion — in or outside parliament. No questioning or dissent has been heard in this drive towards intervention and, possibly, eventual war.
Even the proposal that there be a parliamentary debate about the intervention, so that the government could make its case to the Australian people, has been opposed by both major parties. Nor has the Abbott government explained the sudden need to switch from aid to arms.
Sending yet more arms to the area, which is already wracked by years of warfare, will not reduce the level of violence it is experiencing. The area needs less weaponry, not more.
I posted a comment, which naturally didn’t make it through moderation.
What a surprise!
Once again I have been censored by the Loony Left. By the very people who scream and cry that they are being denied their freedom of speech, yet are always the first to deny others theirs.
My comment was
“ Oh I see what you want.
Let these people be , but at least let them be killed with a full stomach, because that is what you are advocating.
Dead but fed!!”
On September 3rd in question time, Mr Abbott said that he hoped upcoming trip to India would strengthen Australia’s trade relationship in areas including mining, finance and education, while signalling a deal was in the offing to sell uranium and help India meet soaring demand for electricity.
“I am hoping to sign a nuclear co-operation agreement that will enable uranium sales by Australia to India,”
Greens leader Christine Milne lashed the prospect of a deal with India, describing Mr Abbott’s approach to trade in uranium as cavalier.
And Greens senator Scott Ludlam said Mr Abbott should not open
“a new line of atomic instability with India, which has refused to sign up to international legal agreements on non-proliferation and disarmament”.
“We should be getting out of this industry rather than getting further in it.”
On Sept 4th. Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson presented his theory that Islamic State terrorists are not, in fact, terrorists.
I will post most of the article as it is so ludicrous and behind a pay wall.
GREENS senator Peter Whish-Wilson has been condemned for suggesting Islamic State fighters should not be described as “terrorists” because Australian forces could also be viewed by some as terrorists.
The Tasmanian senator, in a speech to parliament, claimed that describing the militants as terrorists “demonises people” and “implies a very one-sided view of the world”.
“I think we need to find better words than ‘terrorist’ and ‘terrorism’ because, to me, this implies a very one-sided view of the world,” Senator Whish-Wilson told the upper house on Monday night.
“Often our forces could be seen by Iraqi civilians as being terrorists.
“Anything that creates terror is, by definition, terrorism. We use that word because it is a very simple word to use and it demonises people.”
Liberal MP Andrew Nikolic, a former commander of Australian forces in southern Iraq, accused Senator Whish-Wilson of “playing ideological, peripheral word games” while civilians face danger.
“While Peter Whish-Wilson is playing word games, thousands of people are dying in Syria at the hands of what should properly be described as a barbaric and evil organisation”.
“The Greens have got this issue terribly wrong. They should consider what the international community thinks and reflect on the words of (UN Secretary-General) Ban Ki-moon and President Barack Obama and (British prime minister) David Cameron and others. The world community is united on opposing this sort of barbarism that we’ve only seen before in our medieval past.
“The Greens have dealt themselves out of rational debate by playing these ideological, peripheral word games. It’s easy for the Greens to do because they know they will never have to deal substantively with these issues so they can just sit on the sidelines playing games.”
Senator Whish-Wilson today defended his remarks, claiming
“some have chosen to make mischief with this view”.
“By using heightened language to describe the situation, we obscure insight and our ability to understand what creates the instability that fosters extremism. And without clear understanding, we cannot, as a country, act in the most sensible and prudent way to ever win the peace,” he told the Senate.
“Dehumanising and demonising our enemies is an effective tool for leading a nation to war, but this type of propaganda won’t bring peace. This is a lesson of history.”
THE Greens are a national disgrace. They surely must be the only group in the country that does not recognise the barbarism of the so-called Islamic state for what it is. Greens leader Christine Milne even wanted a parliamentary inquiry when Tony Abbott announced Australia’s intended actions of supplying humanitarian aid to the innocents under attack.
Milne’s call came despite the government’s plan having the unequivocal support of Labor. The Liberals, Labor and Nationals were in accord on this, but that wasn’t good enough for Milne.
Well, senator, if you’ve been reading The Australian these past several weeks, or watching television news, you would know these people have engaged in the mass slaughter of innocent men, women and children, have conducted summary executions, have sold women and girls into slavery, and have crucified others.
I don’t know of any better word than terrorism for these actions. I also don’t know how any Australian could give their vote to the Greens unless the party recants its departure from the values the rest of us hold dear.