wright

Throughout my wanderings I met a number of individuals who have impressed me by their candid, fearless and refreshingly honest approach to life. They had constructed for themselves a world view within which I could breathe easy. There was no envy, no excessive pursuit of any material possessions, but a determined will to see that justice and mercy prevailed. They were no angels either, but they had not lost their humanity, something I find so lacking in those individuals who now attempt to silence me because I seem to pose a threat to their held world-view.

Interestingly, the following Australians all topped that proverbial three score and ten years by another decade at least, and remained mentally alert until they passed on.

Sir James Darling was an educator who practised what he preached; Sir Edward Barber was a practising legal eagle whose sense of justice and compassion benefited many individuals. It was Sir Edward who managed to get a small settlement for the then widow of former University of Tasmania philosophy lecturer, S S Orr; Sir Douglas Wright was a man whose moral and intellectual integrity remained in-tact.

When in September 1990, The University of Melbourne Gazette, celebrated its own Sir Douglas, I wrote the following:

"In 1961 Sir Douglas Wright wrote a Prologue to the disturbing W H C Eddy book Orr. This Prologue has provided many victims of conspiracies with much-needed moral support because it offers a succinct analysis of this subtle elimination process.

1. Defame the victim's professional competence, mental balance, truthfulness, etc.

7. Usually this leads to the victim's resignation which is taken as proof of guilt. Dismissal occurs if the victim refuses to resign.

9. People in authority perpetuate their own types because no one wishes to be shamed by his successor.

10. Employees are as courageous as their security of livelihood and reputation permits.

11. A governing body of an institution devoted to truth and justice is corrupt if it obstructs enquiry into its stewardship.

Sir Douglas concluded his analysis with a timeless warning: 'Such state of affairs is the antithesis of democratic processes and places the society in imminent danger.'

It is in this sense that I personally ask: Where are our present-day Wrights?"

When I reflect on the legal process that gave rise to the 17 September 2002 Federal Court of Australia judgment, then it is clear to me that there is a great dearth of 'Wrights' within the legal profession, and elsewhere within our community.

Mention the 'Holocaust' and individuals go to seed. Some years ago, Australia's grand-daddy of Revisionism, lawyer John Bennett, walked along a Melbourne street and a QC, later to become a judge, came towards him and spat on the ground before Bennett's feet.

[Notice that we have deleted the judge's name for the sake of avoiding legal action. But anyone wishing to know the name, is welcomed to ask.]

Only recently, the fellow who operates www.crikey.com.au/ was quite pleased to run an add for John Bennett's Your Rights, a valuable legal primer that has passed the 20th edition mark. Admittedly, Bennett paid for this service, but was surprised that an offer came his way that the add would be run twice more without charge.

Then suddenly, it all stopped. The gentleman operating the website didn't want to know Bennett anymore. He had received emails that defamed Bennett with the usual shut-up words: 'hater', 'Holocaust denier', 'antisemite', 'racist', 'neo-Nazi'.

Here we have another example of a man who bends to the Zionist pressure without exercising his moral and intellectual integrity to the full.

Yet, in all fairness to those who do bend, as Professor Robert Faurisson pointed out to me, imagine the pressure under which our public figures are to tow the line on this 'Holocaust' nonsense.

I have now begun to talk about the heap of feces that has been placed in my lounge and that I have been poking a stick at these past nine years, failing to dislodge it.

Recently workmen broke into my home and put this heap of feces in a wooden box, then nailed this box firmly to the floor. There is now a notice on the box that says I must never touch the box, let alone attempt to remove it.

The political Zionists are at work persuading Australian law enforcers to act against us. The pattern of attack is pre-determined, and the following example from Sweden will soon become a part of Australia's political landscape.

Mr Rami likens the confiscation of his computers to the behaviour of US President Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Sharon towards the Iraqi people - to resolve all problems with force.

"And now all Muslims stand accused as being guilty because they refuse to support Sharon and Bush's policies," said Mr Rami. "Proof of innocence is if you support Sharon and Bush! "This is a part of the Jewish humour because the Jews are occupying Palestine, and Zionism will, according to them, liberate the Jewish people from all moral and international law, and from the mutual respect and equality between peoples.

Mr Rami advises that he expects the legal process to begin very soon. He sees parallels with what is happening to him and to Fredrick Töben. In both instances the media spokespersons for the persecutors talk about safeguarding freedom of speech and democracy

So, we have reached the level of total hypocrisy - and the questions that need to be asked are:

ACTIVELY RADICAL TV
P.O. Box 3275 Marrickville Metro LPO 2204 Ph: 0417 220 504

September 16, 2002

ARTV STATEMENT

On August 28th, 2002 Channel 31 received a letter of complaint from the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, a body reporting to be the 'roof body' of the Jewish community in NSW.

The complaint referred to Actively Radical TV’s coverage of the ongoing conflict in Palestine. The letter accuses ARTV of “bias, distortion and errors of fact”, as well as broadcasting material “which has incited racial hatred’’. The board has made a formal complaint to the Australian Broadcasting Authority.

The letter of complaint lists no concrete examples of how ARTV has incited racial hatred, nor of any “errors of fact”. Like other segments broadcast on ARTV The Palestine Report is designed to give voice to those in the community whose points of view are marginalised or ignored by mainstream media outlets. The Palestine Report aims to publicise the issues of the Palestinian people living under Israeli occupation. It seeks to give viewers an insight into the effects of Israeli imposed curfews, road closures, military incursion/invasions, land confiscation and house demolition and the building of illegal Israeli settlements in Palestinian areas.

ARTV emphatically rejects the accusation that it’s material incites hatred against Israeli citizens, specifically and members of the Jewish community more generally. ARTV feels that the motivation behind the board’s complaint has little or nothing to do with the alleged “errors of fact”. The Jewish board of deputies has a history of trying to censor those in the media who present views critical of Israel.

We believe that the complaints about ARTV are simply another attack on peoples’ ability to speak freely on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

If you would like to support ARTV against such accusations:

1) watch ARTV program on Sundays 9 – 11pm on Channel 31;
2) write a letter of support and send it to the Australian Broadcasting Authority, ARTV and/or Channel 31
3) sign the petition attached seeking support for the broadcasting of alternative views on TV and
4) send a donation to the ARTV’s campaign against censorship.