Tag: Pauline Hanson

The Three Disciples and the Triangle of Hope







Banning Islam is not the answer but………….﻿

There is a lot of talk at the moment about the thought of banning Islam in Australia. Queensland Senator, and Leader of One Nation, Pauline Hanson has introduced this as part of her policy. Senator Hanson has recognised that before banning Islam, constitutional constraints hold this policy back. 

Section 116 of the Australian Constitution states:

116 Commonwealth not to legislate in respect of religion


One Nation has called for a Royal Commission into Islam to see whether or not it is a religion or a political ideology. By determining whether it is a political ideology or a religion, Senator Hanson believes this will solve the constitutional constraint to ban Islam.

The concern I have with such Royal Commission is that any religion that has a vast history such as Islam will always be determined as a religion not a political ideology. All religions have a certain degree of political ideology and that is due to it’s past existance. For example you only have to look at the Roman Empire to see that it had a catholic ideology behind it’s governance. Therefore having a Royal Commision into Islam would be a waste of time, effort and taxpayers money. 

One Nation could adopt a policy whereby that they will push to have a referendum to ammend section 116 of the Australian Constitution. This referendum would also cost taxpayers a lot of money and with a Double Majority rule for constitutional change, could mean that such move could be lost. Not many referendums are successful. On the otherhand One Nation will be giving the people a say on the matter.

The other areas where One Nation could focus their attention is to adopt a discriminatory immigration policy. One Nation has already upset the apple cart by saying that they want to ban Islam – as I pointed out this is hard to do – so by having a discriminatory immigration policy whereby there is a halt of immigration on those from Islamic Arab Nations, will slow down the rise of Islam in Australia and will not hinder One Nation’s political capital.

Many on the left, centre and even the right will say that we can’t have a discriminatory immigration program as it will take us back to the White Australia Policy – the fact is Australia already has a discriminatory immigration policy, we discriminate on the basis of health and occupation therefore this argument is flawed. Pauline Hanson’s One Nation as I see it right now is the only hope for Australia to follow in Trumps lead, they just need to clean up their policies first. 

A Green View of Democracy

Australia is such a wonderful place, amongst its pristine beaches and warm weather it espouses a Greek concept called Democracy. A system whereby we are all equal, no one is above the law and that we all must have equal access to the legislative process. Every three years Australians go to the polls to vote in a federal government. This notion is envied in many countries which don’t hold democracy as part of their values.

Sadly, there are some people who want to take advantage of the principles of democracy. On Wednesday 30th November 2016 protestors stormed Parliament House, glued their hands to railings and disrupted a democratic process called Question Time.
The Greens praised these ill-informed nitwits, congratulating them and saying that they are proud of their actions. Those with any form of decency have condemned the actions of these Marxists, but I note many on the left have stated that this is their democratic right to protest. As mentioned, Australia does have a proud history of the concept of Democracy, however there is a huge difference between protesting peacefully outside, and protesting in a house whereby it has rules and regulations to uphold the very same principle we espouse; DEMOCRACY.

What we have seen today is a Green View of Democracy. A viewpoint whereby we must shut down debate that is in opposition to the left-wing agenda. Those nitwit Marxists who protested today were not exercising their democratic right to protest, what they were doing was shutting down freedom of speech.
The right are not innocent either, I was the first to complain when the right stormed Gosford Anglican Church dressed as Islamists and disrupted the service provided by Father Rod, the difference between that incident and the one today at Parliament House, was that all those on the right, including Pauline Hanson, condemned the actions of those involved.

Richard Di Natale, as the Greens Party leader you must show leadership and condemn these actions and inform these protestors to go elsewhere to protest rather than holding our democratic process to ransom. Adam Bandt needs to apologies for his ungodly tweet praising the protestors and the rest of the Greens need to be educated on the concept of DEMOCRACY.

Having a leg on the Trump Train was everything but in vain.


American politics is something that I never really was interested in. Their system compared to the Westminster system is confusing and this is merely due to my ignorance. As a right wing advocate I have always leaned towards the Republican Party rather than the Democrats. I believe in low taxes, less spending and more protection of borders. In saying that I do believe in government assistance to the most vulnerable in our society. What we have seen in America and around the world, are leaders who have dismissed these beliefs and have only pushed agenda’s according to whoever has donated the most to their election campaign. The 2016 Presidential Election campaign offered a real alternative to the status quo of politics, Hillary Clinton was seen to represent the establishment whilst Donald Trump in the eyes of many political commentators represented the ‘forgotten people’. Never in my time have we seen two presidential candidates that had complete opposition views on issues, mind you I am only young.

Hillary Clinton is a polished politician with many decades of political ‘wisdom’ and ‘astuteness’, her husband is a former President and Hillary Clinton herself was a lawyer. This provided the Clinton Campaign both pro’s and negatives. Pro in that she has had experience in government and as a ‘leader’ but negative in that the electorate saw her as a typical politician.
Donald Trump isn’t a politician, he is a businessman, a multimillionaire and a reality tv star.
On face value Donald Trump appeared to be a ‘Clive Palmer’ of US politics and at times I agreed with this notion. Under the bedrock of this idea the electorate felt that they needed change, and like many countries around the world this change is growing; you can only look at the rise of UKIP, Gert Wilders Party and in Australia, Pauline Hanson’s One Nation.

I had a leg on the Trump train because of three reasons.
Firstly, as mentioned earlier, I believe in three principles;
1. Low Taxes
2. Low Spending (whilst protecting the most vulnerable)
3. Strong Border Protection
Unfortunately Hillary Clinton and the Democrats have never held these beliefs. The Democrats like the Australian Labor Party believe in higher taxes to be able to afford more social programs rather than empowering people to find work and earn a living. As Australia’s former Prime Minister Tony Abbott once said “..the best form of welfare is a job.” This is something the left no matter where you are in the world does not believe in.
In regards to Border Protection, this clearly has been an issue in America, like it is currently in most Western Countries, the only candidate that addressed this issue regardless of how extreme it is which in my opinion isn’t that extreme, was Trump.
Automatically I was compelled towards the trump factor.
Second reason why I had a leg on the Trump train is because around the world the media have been taken over by left-wing liberal socialists who kept down-playing the rise of support for Trump. We saw this during the Brexit campaign. As a result of this bias I felt that supporting trump would be putting the middle finger up to the chardonnay latte sipping socialists.
Thirdly, the Western World needs change, and given that United States of America are the leaders of the Western World it is important that this change starts with them. The fact that Trump now is President it makes it easier for people to vote for an alternative political party or candidate. It sends a message to the electorate, regardless of country, that it is okay to vote for UKIP, it is okay to vote for One Nation, it is okay to vote for Gert Wilde. This is a game changer.

These reasons why I had a leg on the Trump train clearly has resonated across America. I was over in New York during the election. All media outlets, including the ultra right-wing Fox News even thought Trump wasn’t going to win prior to the closing of the Polls. What we have seen is a revolution. The electorate wants action, they want change, they want to be listened to. This is a wake up call to both the media and our political elites that the system they have put in, under the right circumstances, can actually backfire on them. People Power.

Myth Busters on Pauline Hanson



  • Pauline Hanson hates Asians.






  • Pauline Hanson hates Aboriginals.




  • Pauline Hanson is Islamophobic


  • Royal Commission into Islam
  • No More Islamic Migration
  • No More Mosques
  • CCTV In Mosques











  • Hanson has no economic credibility.




Is One Nation, Australia’s UKIP?

When the Liberal Party knifed Tony Abbott last year they should have known that it would create controversy amongst the rank and file conservatives who pay $100 a year to be Party members. They should have also known that non party members who lean towards the right would also be disgruntled to see a Malcolm Turnbull resurrection. Unfortunately they believed that Malcolm Turnbull, despite alienating the right, would attract those on the left and subsequently those on the right would still vote Liberal because let’s be honest, do we want a Labor Government? Little did the Liberal Party elite know that someone, a blast from the past, a nagging former Liberal and a figurehead for the right was working tirelessly to reform her political party and provide an alternative to the two major parties. Pauline Hanson and her One Nation Party.

Pauline Hanson became famous in 1996 when she stood up and spoke what the majority were thinking, she formed Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party in 1997 but failed to retain her seat in 1998 Federal Election but her party gained one senate seat in Queensland. The Queensland based Party gained 11 seats in State Parliament, 8 more seats than the Liberal Party, the Liberals had a measly 3 seats. In Western Australia in 2001 it gained 3 upper house seats and produced 3 excellent MLC’s. Problems arose for One Nation with infighting rife in all state divisions of the Party and ultimately it destroyed itself from within. Last year, Pauline Hanson took over the reigns of the Party and rebrand it with a new colourful Logo. It has produced policies, or broad policy statements if we want to get technical that doesn’t just talk about Immigration. Pauline Hanson has managed to improve her public speaking skills and has managed to get with the times with the use of social media and acquiring a plane which has the party logo on it, not as big as Clive Palmer’s plane though. Pauline has also obtained a vehicle which is heavily signed, great form of advertising. Pauline Hanson has been invited on many news programs such as Paul Murray Live, Today Show, Sunrise and has been heard on many radio stations. It’s safe to say Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Political Party is back and is ready to fill that void the Liberal Party has created by knifing Tony Abbott. The question remains though, can Pauline Hanson do it? Can One Nation ultimately rise to be the third major conservative voice in Australian Politics? In other words, is One Nation the UKIP of Australia?

As mentioned in previous posts we have seen a rise in the number of right-wing political parties such as:

  • Rise Up Australia
  • Australian Liberty Alliance
  • Katters Australia Party
  • Australia First
  • Hinch Justice Party
  • Jacquie Lambie Network
  • and more! 

The difference between these political parties and One Nation is Pauline Hanson. Pauline Hanson is a great figurehead for One Nation, her brand has been around since 1996 and the party gained a lot of electoral support. It has been proven without Pauline Hanson the party failed to continue to sustain their electoral successes.
There has been talk that many disgruntled Liberals have gone over to the newly created Australian Liberty Alliance but unfortunately they have not gained much media attention unlike Hanson therefore it would be hard to see ALA as a potential third major conservative party, this leaves One Nation on top.

The issue now is can Pauline Hanson’s One Nation continue to rise? In order to cement themselves to be that third major conservative force it is imperative that Pauline Hanson is elected into the Senate in Queensland. If she is elected into the Senate, it will give One Nation Political Party some focus, a means for people to join. At the moment they are classified as a micro party, with a member of parliament, people will see that One Nation has potential and purpose. If Pauline Hanson fails to win a senate seat, I think it could be over for One Nation as an organisation unless they remain focus and on top of the issues especially if Malcolm Turnbull or Bill Shorten remain as leaders of their retrospective parties.

I see great things for One Nation, the knifing of Tony Abbott and the infighting amongst the factions within the Liberal Party is a blessing in disguise for Australia as it does open the door for a third major conservative political party. It makes sense for One Nation to fill that void as it has already been established, has community recognition, has a figurehead and a potential youth movement called Young Nation, which can be reformed. It all comes down to whether or not Hanson can gain that senate seat.