Racial Loyalty News

R.L. News => General News => Downunder News => Topic started by: Rev.Cambeul on 14 March 2015 at 02:13

Title: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 14 March 2015 at 02:13
Interview with Dr Jim Saleam.

Note: Dr Saleam (pronounced Sale-Em ... Dr Jim's of Greek origin) was the founder of Australia's first and (until the founding of AFP) only true White Nationalist political party, known as National Action, of which I - Reverend Cambeul - and many other older Australian Creators and other White Racial Loyalists were once members.

Read on and you will understand why the Church of Creativity in Australia, supports Dr Saleam and the Australia First Party.


We Spoke To Jim Saleam, The Most Dangerous Politician In Australia

By James (http://www.sneakymag.com/author/james-b/) | Sneaky Mag (http://www.sneakymag.com/) | February 2015

http://www.sneakymag.com/life/spoke-jim-saleam-dangerous-man-australian-politics (http://www.sneakymag.com/life/spoke-jim-saleam-dangerous-man-australian-politics)

Despite the massive amount of vitriol spewed from one side of the parliamentary bench to the other, politics in Australia is a rather bland affair. the differences between the two major parties are so minuscule that the whole thing ends up as a competition between two management teams whose policies are so similar on the major challenges facing Australia as to be almost identical.

Refugees? * ‘em. Economics? Both parties advocate a moderate capitalist system that has, for the most part, led to a large increase in the quality of living for the average Australian. 

Is this a good thing? Who knows really? Winston Churchill once said that democracy was the worst system of government – besides all the other systems. But I can’t be sure if we really live in a democracy when there are only two parties who ever hold the reigns of power.

Most of all, talking about politics in Australia is boring because everybody is so damn moderate. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing – in any modern society, politics being boring is the sign of a stable system of government. If it were truly interesting we’d be in Greece or Spain and everything would be *ed. But there’s still a large enough number of Australian political parties that sit on the fringes: socialists, communists and even some fascists.

With that in mind I spoke to Jim Saleam, leader of the Australia First Party, an extreme right wing group whose policies some might say are fascist.

I have no interest in deciding whether or not his policies and ideas are good or bad, smart or stupid, wholesome or evil. There are plenty of other writers who can tell you that. This article IS NOT an endorsment of his views. But I want to know what he thinks, because he’s been described by some as the most dangerous man in Australian politics.

I visited Dr. Saleam (he’s got a doctorate in political science from Sydney University) in the Tempe headquarters of Australia First.


Okay, so you’re a far right politician – and that’s something you admit to being. What’s your vision for what Australia should be?

There’s this idea that a lot of the world as we know it rests on the continuing development of globalism, the avoidance of war and never-ending economic growth. We don’t think that happy vision will turn out. We want to take Australia out of the global system. We want to acquire the resources of the country for our own use. We think it’s possible that the global economy is heading to a major smash-up, and endlessly they shuffle the money, find a new country to rob, maybe some poor bastards in the Third World whose minerals get monetised. And if the people don’t like the deal they cause a civil war, like in Sudan.

Our view is that the only influence we can have on a mass scale is in extraordinary circumstances. Consequently, we have to plan the organisation for those circumstances. In the short term we work in the present to do little things, but our goals don’t belong to the present. We don’t wish to be a government in the usual sense of the term. We wish to be a state power. That means that we seek to reorder the country in an entirely different way.

And culturally, you think Australia should try it’s best to stay white?

Yes, and other countries can be free to do as they choose. Although I don’t agree with things like Sharia law… that’s not an issue for Australia. If Afghanistan wants to say that women can be clitorally sterilised or gays can be stoned, I don’t agree with that, but that’s their culture. It’s up to them if they want things to change.

Your views seem primarily isolationist.

That’s right. An internal market, protected industry, domestic consumption, expansion of personal wealth… housing, hospitals, roads, libraries – all the things that people need. And a type of direct democracy. We think that there should be citizens’ initiated referendums and also delegated democracy where you send people to an assembly to get things done.

Sounds a little like socialism.

Well, the original Labour Party had most of those ideas – voters’ veto, citizens’ referendums, the armed population. It was part of the original Labour movement. The Commonwealth Bank ideal of minimal interest rates and nationalised banking was all in that tradition. If we trade with the world we trade for advantage, not because we’re paying off international loans. We go a bit further, we actually say we’ll repudiate the loans – we’ll default. They might have to send the Seventh Fleet to collect it but we take the view that enough is enough and Australia should leave the global economic order. We wish the same on all peoples. We take the view that there are a lot of minor nationalities in the world who have been ripped off – how they go about solving that is up to them, but their resources belong to them not to global banks and multinationals. All peoples should rebel against the global order and attempt to leave that system.

So I guess you advocate a complete and entirely economic and culturally isolated nation?

Yes, that’s right. But you can trade with the world and even help people who might get into trouble here and there – the current foreign aid program we don’t like – but genuine aid to people who are doing it tough is OK. The world has big issues – global population growth is the biggest elephant in the room. Nobody is addressing that. If Australia gives foreign aid we should give it to countries that restrain population, educate women and claim their own resources. We’re accused of things like racism. Internally, I’m the biggest bigot going. Externally, I’m the most liberal person you can find.

I guess the issue a lot of people might have with an implementation of the policies you’re talking about is that to actually action them would involve some kind of totalitarian government. It’s hard to reorganise a society in such a manner without oppressing some people.

It would have to be a dictatorship because it would have to enforce the new rules and create a new constitution. A revolutionary, democratic dictatorship. The capacity to reform the system inside its own rules no longer exists. It will not change and it will continue to globalise until it’s wiped this country off the map. Therefore to change it, if you could, you’d have to get your hands upon those who’ve profited off this country.

People like Gina Rinehart, Andrew Forrest, Clive Palmer, the people who own the Liberal Party… all of these people are culpable and should be penalised. That doesn’t mean to say you’re going to go down the French Revolutionary road, but what it does mean is that people who have exploited this country should be subject to penalty, their property should be seized and they should be banned from politics for life. They shouldn’t be harmed as individuals, but they should certainly pay for what they’ve done. Some people might say that it’s a radical attitude, but I think that what it’s come to in this country. The people who own the mines, own the banks and own the privatised corporations have become a ruling group and they do not intend to allow anyone to change that in a vote. I think these people deserve to be expropriated top to bottom. Everything they own, everything they have, the lot. So in a way, I’m supposed to be a person from the right but I’m probably more radical than my Trotskyite critics.

I think many on the far left might hold a similar view.

Yes, but they often come out in favour of the same things as the globalists. Open borders, immigration, no culture. It’s the program of globalism. A lot of them have a good heart and they’d like to see fairness and justice, but one of the terrible things is that they’re hooked on the idea that you can’t have any type of exclusive policy because it’s “racist” and racism is regarded as the ultimate moral evil.

Once you go down that road of being a “racist” you’re turned into a monster, which means you’re the enemy of the global proletariat. We don’t trade in bigotry, but we trade in pride. These guys have given that up. They don’t wish to have a nationality. In 1966, what was called the White Australia Policy was abandoned. Up to that time there had been a small number of folk in Australia who were not of European background – Australian-born Chinese and some others.

When White Australia was abandoned it was abandoned not to be moral. The people like Bob Hawke who worked to abolish it had the idea of the globalised country. They said they were bringing useful, qualified people to Australia to contribute economically. That’s not what they were doing. What they set out to do was to multiculturalise Australia. Then they declared that there was no such thing as an Australian culture. Australians were – quote – “all migrants”. So there were no longer Australians, there were only migrants. That was the first step. While that was going on, immigration was increased from the Third World and people began to enter the country from India, Africa, China, and so on. So today there is allegedly no such thing as an “Australian”.

It was then proclaimed that we didn’t even own the continent – that Australia had prior ownership. According to prior ownership, the only people who have a right to say anything about the country are our Aboriginal friends. Well, they don’t seem to get a say about which Chinaman gets which property, which multinational gets which mine, how many refugees arrive… We’re actually trying in a small way with some Aboriginal leaders on a way to get on and discuss the fundamental issues effecting the continent.

I regard the European state as legal, but I believe that justice is yet to be rendered to the Aborigines. The people who now govern the country say that the European settlement was not legal, and they’re saying that not to placate the Aboriginal folk, they’re saying it so they can open up the country to multinationals, investors and banks. We’re going to end up with armies of contract labour in the north of Australia – an Asian food bowl essentially. And they can’t do that if Australia is a sovereign entity so they’ve abolished sovereignty. They’ve abolished any sense of nationality – we don’t exist. The only thing Australia is now is a passport. They throw us “old Australians” ANZAC Day and Australia Day – the only times you can display any sense of Australian pride. So I suppose the only way that anyone who is an “old Australian” can have an identity is if he discovers that his grandfather was Greek or German, and that gives him an identity. The abolition of the Australian identity was the first step in opening up the country for an entirely different reality. I’ve said for years that multiculturalism is a fraud. The original and true Australian identity was created in the European style, not simply by the English but by all Europeans. That was the original nationality, and that’s what we say is the real Australian nationality.

How would you change Australia’s cultural makeup?

The policy of immigration should be slowly run in reverse. I think a lot of people who have recently acquired residency have not come as immigrants, they’ve come as settlers. And I’ll openly accuse the Chinese of that. I think the Chinese come now as settlers. They come on behalf of the Motherland. They are, in fact, invaders without guns.

Hang on. You believe there is an active policy on behalf of the Chinese government to populate Australia with Chinese nationals?

Exactly. I think that somewhere down the track China will be involved in a long war. I think it’s inevitable. Australia will become involved because China, to a certain extent, will be dependent on our exports. But it cuts two ways. If you make China dependent on your food and resources in Australia, there’s an automatic incentive for them to come and take it. I don’t regard the Chinese state as benign. It’s ruled over by a very aggressive, wealthy class of people. Chinese companies are constantly trying to buy property in Australia. Chinese immigration will continue to increase and there’s not even the slightest possibility of any type of assimilation. They come as settlers pure and simple.

So you think the plan is to settle enough Chinese in Australia so that when it does come to a conflict over food or resources there are so many Chinese nationals in Australia that we’d have to be on their side?

If they hadn’t thought of that, they’d be remiss.

Do you believe that’s an active policy?

I couldn’t say that it’s an active and deliberate policy with set guidelines, but the door is open and China continues to buy up more property and interests in Australia. There was the Chinese centre in Wagga, a massive plan to build a billion-dollar centre. We actually sank it. But that’s just the start of what they have in mind. That was a clever idea – they were going to command the economy of the

Riverina, destroy the farming and turn it into a mining area. There was to be 20,000 Chinese living in Wagga in a walled-off compound suburb. It’s all in the documentation of the council – they were going to build a huge suburb, they would upgrade Wagga airport, build a train to Canberra. It was a massive enterprise.The Chinese military has certainly looked at extending Chinese interests in the Pacific. They’re moving into poor countries, bribing these folk, they’re setting up embassies and big programs and throwing money everywhere. A lot of poor island nations buy it because they’re not politically sophisticated people. They’re easy marks. Australia is not an easy mark, but we’ve got a lot of people like Craig Emerson, Barry O’Farrell’s son, who now lives in China. Bob Hawke has had 90 trips to China since he was Prime Minister, selling real estate. There’s no end of people in Australia who are prepared to collaborate with China.

What’s your view on those ex-politicians you mention who have – in your opinion – used their connections to do business with China?

Oh look, it’s the way the system works.

I get the feeling you look at them as betrayers of Australia.

Yes, they’re traitors. I said earlier that people deserve to be expropriated. Bob Hawke, the pig, is worth $250million. Where did he get it? When he became Prime Minister he still had a mortgage on his house in Coburg and he drove an old car. Paul Keating is worth $40million. The former Liberal leader Hewson is worth $10million. Where did they get this money? By advocating the Asian economy and then filling their pockets personally. These people are opening Australia up and selling us to China. We live in a country now where you can’t get into a hospital, you can’t afford to ride a bus, there’s this breakdown in our society, but allegedly we’re super rich – there’s all this development. But it’s not coming to the average Australian. My kids go to uni and they’re now burdened with HECS bills. I went to Uni in ‘73 and I’ve never paid a penny. Why? It seems to me that everything is being sold – they want to sell Port Botany, the railways, Medicare and all of the public assets of Australia to superannuation funds. They’re telling us what a great idea that would be but the super funds are all hedged with New York banks. In fact, you might find your assets will end up owned by some cretin in a New York brothel. There’s all of this type of thieving that’s gone on and now they want cheap labour to drive down working conditions. There are a lot of folks in the Third World. These people in control want to bring them to Australia to exploit them, to become factory or mining fodder. Incedently, I believe in paying the refugees not to come. A lot of these people who say they’re refugees are not. Those who may be, I believe in funding them to return in armed struggle to take their own countries back. But the globalists only want cheap labour. In the north of Australia they’re looking to create a zone that will be all mining, all food bowl, everything for export. And that’s where they’ll be dumping all of their so-called refugees as the cheap labour force. The north of Australia will then be virtually detached from the rest of the country. What these globalists are planning is horrible. They may detach all of Australia north of the Tropic of Capricorn as a free trade zone to be ruled over by Serco – the same organisation that runs the refugee camps – as secret police and paramilitary.

You feel Australia is at risk of becoming,essentially a mining region and a place for cheap labour, all for China?

Yes, run by multinationals and banks and ruled over by secret police where law might not even operate. That’s the sort of lunatic world into which we’re headed, and it worries me absolutely. Not just for Australia. As I said, I might be styled as a bigot, but for other countries – the sort of politics waged in Africa and the Middle East is a disaster for the whole world. We need to get out of this capitalist, globalised system. China is becoming more dangerous than the USSR ever was. The USSR probably had no intention to go to war, but the tensions between the USA and China could end up in real world war. And this takes place amongst growing poverty, massive population growth, wars for resources and even water. We think that opting out of this system is the best self defence.

What about ethinic communities that already live here?

Incentives should be offered to people to resettle back home. A lot of these people now live very marginal existences on welfare. You have the degeneration of traditional rules that our society used to operate under. People complain about youth violence, murder rates, sexual crime. Fixing this should be something aimed at the younger people in those communities. If we’re saying you should run an immigration policy in reverse, the best way to run it is to target it at the younger people – persuade younger people that their real futures do not belong here. Pay them, assist them to return to their own countries, and the older folk in those communities in Australia live out their lives. Eventually the number of people of different backgrounds who are difficult to handle in this country will fall, and you’ll reach a plateau where there’ll be a number of people left in the country whose presence serves some purpose and you’ll find some empathy and arrangement with them. But we have a situation now where there’s a massive explosion of some groups who cause trouble, not only against the majority of Australians but against each other. This is a scary aspect of this system – there are some groups that are so alien to each other that nothing keeps them together, so the communal violence between these groups is real, and already manifests itself in things like drug turf wars and insults to women.

Say we’re in an Australia where you’re starting to see the kind of conditions that allow for your revolutionary economic and cultural ideas, what happens if you start instigating these policies – for example, the one that involves paying ethnic minorities to essentially go back to their own countries – and people refuse?

Well, I’m sure some will refuse. And we just don’t know what to do with them. The situation hasn’t happened when a problem has been created for you by a system and that system disappears. Where it all leads, no one knows.

You haven’t thought about what you would do in those situations?

Well it’s hard to visualise. Imagine a situation like this: we ask that certain Chinese economic criminals be taken back by China and then China refuses. They regard them as collateral in a war to acquire resources. What can you do? These people are then stateless, they’re unwelcome but they’re here. What do you do? Very difficult to answer. It’s unknown political territory but I believe that territory is going to come whether we like it or not.

I get the feeling that it’s something you might feel is politically risky for you to articulate.

No, it’s something that’s unknown. Because Australia has long since passed over into very grey social areas. We’re no longer even sure, in this country, what being an Australian means. We don’t know what borders mean, we don’t know what culture means. We’re globalised, people struggle for existence, a lot of institutions are breaking down – traditional institutions like unions and churches. I’m not a religious person but the old Christian religions are being challenged and they don’t know how to address the fact that there are other faiths in the community. People are confronted with every variety of change possible and we’ve moved into a very murky area. From my point of view the most important thing is to acquire the state power in Australia somehow. But the issues of how such a state would survive are unknown.

I get the sense you almost hope some kind of disaster befalls Australia to give a jolt to your policies.

That’s probably coming anyway. Look at the situation in Greece, with unemployment at 30%, the takeover of their national assets to pay debts, the police don’t work, the welfare system doesn’t work. Our system in Australia survives, but if things stop working then you’ve got the potential for some radical change. Without that big disaster there can be no change. Does anyone want pain and suffering? No. But there is going to be pain and suffering in Australia. We assume we’re insulated against that sort of drama. I don’t believe that. One group that’s started to experience that is our Aboriginal friends. They’re being told where they can go, what they can do. Companies now tell them they don’t have the rights to the land. They’re getting told to shift because mining companies have an economic interest in the land. That’s going to start happening to other folk before too long.

Obviously you advocate returning to a white Australia. What’s your view on what is fair to Aboriginals?

Justice. Justice for Aboriginies can’t take place inside a globalist, United Nations framework. It’s got to take place in an Australian framework as some sort of dialogue between the European state and the Aboriginal groups. Groups plural – there’s no such thing as an “Aboriginal”. They’re groups of different people. That means we’re dealing with ancient rules in many cases. And their rules have to be accepted as the rules inside those communities. It also means that somehow they have to find a way to economically survive.

So you would just leave that up to those communities?

A high degree of self determination needs to be put in place. They need to assert themselves, to articulate what it is they desire as tribal people. Now there are people who are of only part-Aboriginal origin who claim to represent the community. That’s problematical. In some cases there may be proper identification, but certainly the people who live in a tribal manner, who attempt to live to certain cultural rules – there needs to be a recognition that they must be able to do so. The old 1930s policy of forced assimilation was absolutely wrong. But the current situation with alcohol and drugs is also wrong. Self determination for tribal groups and some kind of other dialogue for city groups needs to be determined.

Would you say that Aboriginal groups have ownership of Australia?

Yes, but not without there being responsibility too. When you have custodianship over an area of land you have to maintain it too.

Finally, do you care what people think of you?

Past a certain point we really don’t care what people say about us. There are a few things that might rankle, people might say things that are untrue or a total misrepresentation. But generally speaking we’re not concerned with what others say. A lot of people think that you have to have a good image and that the media has to some way or another like you. I don’t think Rupert Murdoch would like me – I’d like to sign his expropriation order.

Well, he’s not a citizen anymore.

We’d have to kidnap him for trial! So we’re looking for a different type of acceptance. It’s not electoral. It’s about building up a feeling in the community that there is a different attitude. It doesn’t mean to say we like being reviled, but it’s being able to put up with abuse, with harassment, with violence. We have a fundamentalist idea of where we think Australia should go. So if you don’t accept that you’re either a coward to your principals or you’re foolish. I understand there’s a lot of people who don’t like us. We’re not here for popularity, we’re here for principals, and we fight for those principals.
Title: Re: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 10 June 2015 at 02:59
Announcement from Australia First Party


https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=848402638567968&id=643159555758945 (https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=848402638567968&id=643159555758945)

We read the comments from 'Great Aussie Patriot' last night that the neo-nazi Squadron 88 group based in Sydney had tried to involve someone in distributing anti Jewish flyers in Caulfield, a heavily Jewish suburb of Melbourne.

Not just anyone, but a fellow reported as "Glen Anderson" who had turned up at the Richmond Town Hall demonstration held by the United Patriots Front (UPF) ten days ago, while wearing a swastika T-Shirt. According to the extreme-left, this event somehow signified that the UPF was some sort of neo-nazi conspiracy.

If this "Glen Anderson" had done as requested at Caulfield and been caught doing it (we would say that was inevitable), then the UPF would have been 'linked' to neo-nazism.

We are sure the media would then have played the game with the extreme-left, right down to burying the corpse of UPF in an unmarked grave.

No leaflets will be distributed in Caulfield, because it seems that "Glen Anderson" revealed the whole approach and refused to do it.

The first question might be - how did this Squadron get his phone number, why did it approach him?

Even more so, this Squadron was clearly playing with the reputations of others, the activities of UPF and really didn't care bloody less.

It beggars belief to say that the person who made the approach to Glen Anderson "Tyler" (he said) did not know exactly what he was doing. What was the motive?

If the matter had gone ahead, it would have been provocation pure and simple.

There is only one label that can be pinned on Squadron 88 - they are provocateurs. They should be treated that way.


When I was at the Adelaide protest the other month waiting in the park for events to begin, I was chatting with a couple of decent young blokes with similar hair styles to mine. One was wearing an 88 t-shirt - just the number. An organiser came over to ask if we were Squadron 88, and no of course none of us were. We assumed - wrongly - that Squadron 88 was expected and welcome, while our well known groups were to be evicted.

Of course those fair-weather, weekend-warrior, small "n" nationalists would have called the coppers and had us removed had they known who we were, but as they found, we didn't cause problems for them for the same reasons we do not cause problems for ourselves. It was the media that declared the weekend-warriors as evidence of a "Nazi" takeover of Australia, and the media didn't need any prompting from any of us that they'd made a career bashing in the media!

Squadron 88 and other well known Agent Provocateurs such as they have proved time and again that they are incapable of doing anything other than what the media, the government and local supremacist agents of foreign governments like the Executive Council of Australian Jewry crave; but perhaps, these weekend-warriors that so despise the rest of us, thanks to what they've read in the media, are now beginning to notice how truly devious and hateful of the European Australian ethos are their precious political parties and multicultural propaganda outlets.

Title: Re: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 10 June 2015 at 11:52
I have met that Ross "the skull" May, from Squadron 88. This guys is a fellow that is openly racist and pro Nazi for sure. While his methods are quite in your face and loud. I do admire the fact that he is out there, unashamedly standing up for his beliefs.I don't think I'd have the guts to go as loud as him.. but I have to give him credit for getting out there.

If a man went to the rally in Melbourne in a swastika shirt , so what? Yes you couldn't wear a louder shirt. However that is an ancient Aryan symbol too. Why should he be politically persecuted just because of clothing?

I can see how some Kosher conservative right wing  people don't like this attire.. but he did what he did because he wanted to upset the reds! It was all shock value. Sid Vicious had a Swastika shirt too.

All this "let's ban hate groups with the bikies" sort of crap. That is a load of B/S! Why can't Squadron 88 be called a "racial love group?". They have as much right to be any other place other Australian citizens can go.
Title: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 04 October 2016 at 02:31
Drop The Charges Against Chris Shortis!


Chris Shortis, a member of the Australia First Party in Victoria, now faces four charges relating to a stunt in Bendigo a year ago. The stunt, a mock beheading of a dummy outside the Council building, was street theatre designed to highlight the threat to Australia from Islamist terrorism. Chris was then a member of the United Patriots Front (UPF).  It is believed two other persons, one a member and the other a non-member of the UPF, will also face court with him.

Chris is charged with malicious damage to a footpath and the ‘back up charge’ of defacement to the footpath and with an offence under the Racial And Religious Tolerance Act (it is alleged he has incited hatred against Muslims) and its back up – offensive behaviour.

The charges arose after Chris, an avid shooter, had his firearms licence revoked and he won his licence back on appeal. The Victorian Commissioner of Police is to challenge that verdict. It is obvious Chris Shortis is being targeted because of his nationalist opinions and that the directions for this ‘operation’ come from the political sections of the Victoria Police.

The Victorian thought crime legislation and the specific charge will be challenged by means of a public campaign. People’s struggle, not legal contention, is the key in winning this battle.

In recent times, the Victorian Police leadership has confronted the issue of street confrontations between ‘patriot’ groups and the extreme-left. It has adopted the false position that it is ‘neutral’ and keeping the peace between two ‘extremes’. In point of fact, the secret police apparatus in Australia has deep cover connections to the extreme-left and favours its violence as a controlling factor against all nationalist and patriot organisations, intervening only when only if the useful idiots go one step too far.

Dr. Jim Saleam, president of Australia First Party, said today:

Quote from: Private
I will call on the affiliates to the Australian Coalition of Nationalists, all genuine patriot groups and other concerned people, to rally to the cause of Chris Shortis and the other accused. The thought crime drivel charge must be exposed and brought into mass contempt. When police leaders and courts are used to rubber stamp political intimidation, they too become targets of political contest and also deserve to be held in contempt. The Racial And Religious Tolerance Act, like other Federal and State legislation, will not survive in its purpose to intimidate patriotic Australians to silence.

We will report further as the campaign for Chris Shortis and the other accused gets under way.

Drop The Charges Against Chris Shortis - Update

As we advised you last week, Chris Shortis, a member of the Australia First Party in Victoria, now faces four charges relating to a stunt in Bendigo a year ago. The stunt, a mock beheading of a dummy outside the Council building, was street theatre designed to highlight the threat to Australia from Islamist terrorism. Chris was then a member of the United Patriots Front (UPF).  Two other persons, one a member and the other a non-member of the UPF, have also been charged. We understand the two persons are: the chairman of UPF Blair Cottrell and a certain Neil Erikson who was expelled from UPF under dishonourable circumstances.

This case will set case law for free speech.

Australia First Party will defend Chris absolutely. He has spoken up for everybody and he deserves our full support.

Chris who is also a licensed shooter now faces a further court appeal by the Commission of Police to strip him of his gun licence after he won his case in the tribunal. Chris will also be calling upon firearms groups for support.

Some video material from Chris is currently on our national Facebook page.
Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 26 October 2016 at 00:47
Drop The Charges Against Chris Shortis - Update

A bank account for the Chris Shortis legal battles has been established. This case will be one of the biggest battles for civil liberty for years. Three men are threatened with gaol for a bit of street theatre warning about Islamist terrorism. We may take up the slogan: I am Chris Shortis, following a major newspaper’s defence of  a cartoonist accused of vilification.

It is Commonwealth Bank
BSB 063698
Acc No. 10376210
Account name Christopher Neil Shortis
Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 26 November 2016 at 01:38


The legal defence of the upcoming case against myself and my co-accused for the mock beheading October 4th, 2015, at Bendigo Council Chambers creates an important precedent. The plaintiff is the Victorian Police and not the Islamic Community.

It is politically motivated and an attack on freedom of expression and legitimate criticism.

I am asking for donations for my (Chris Shortis') legal Defence.

This case affects everyone and must be fought against and any contributions will be warmly appreciated.

Message Chris Neil via Australia First Party on Facebook if you want to donate.

Please note that this is solely for the purpose of my own defence, and not those other of the others charged.

BSB 063698
Acc No. 1037 6210

Chris Shortis

Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 14 January 2017 at 07:25
In a legal first, the Bendigo Three will face a Melbourne Magistrates court charged under the Racial & Religious Tolerance Act section 25 (2). There is no plaintiff and the State has taken free speech on. No Islamic group has complained ...

Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 10 February 2017 at 10:35
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/antiracism-cory-bernardi-protest-tensions-boil-over-before-st-kilda-fundraiser-speaking-engagement/news-story/4d0c6734174084c1d998e2c6e08659e3 (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/antiracism-cory-bernardi-protest-tensions-boil-over-before-st-kilda-fundraiser-speaking-engagement/news-story/4d0c6734174084c1d998e2c6e08659e3)

TENSIONS have boiled over as more than 100 anti-racism activists blockaded a bus transporting guests to a fundraising event where Senator Cory Bernardi is speaking at.

Protesters surrounded the bus and hurled abuse as it arrived in St Kilda about 5:30pm in an attempt to prevent attendees of the Q Society fundraiser from boarding.
Scuffles broke out between activists and attendees as the crowd blocked the doors to the bus.

Cori Bernardi is a "Neo Nazi" to these people now?! He has nothing to do with National Socialism![/size][/font]

Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 07 March 2017 at 07:38
March 6th: Bendigo Three appear in court in a mention hearing. UNA was there and interviewed Christopher Shortis co-admin of UNA and AFP member along with AFP Party President Jim Saleam.

Title: Re: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 23 April 2017 at 10:35
If a man went to the rally in Melbourne in a swastika shirt , so what?

The swastika shirt plays to our enemies, scaring little old ladies and forcing otherwise decent but brainwashed White men to spit at their TV's and chew their newspaper edges with society endorse hatred of logic and common sense. Put the swastika to bed for now; Creativity is the future.

Why can't Squadron 88 be called a "racial love group?".

Because without old Ross the Skull, it's a non-existent Facebook group of fools and trolls.

All this "let's ban hate groups with the bikies" sort of crap. That is a load of B/S!

As for bikers: Banning bike clubs is another political tactic to ban Independent White Men's Groups - groups of White individuals that may just think ... And also, it's a tactic the JOG use to come down on the Sand-Niggers while placing the blame on decent White folk. Just phone the NSW Middle Eastern Crime Squad and ask them ... They'll then arrange for the average copper to arrest you and me and ten of our White Racialist brothers and/or sisters in order to prove that coppers are not "racist" ... and the Middle Eastern Crime Squad then go off to catch one dirty Sand-Nigger from somewhere or another.

Use of bikers to ban criminal Sand-Niggers today will lead to other politicians banning us tomorrow - and there's already been plenty of calls for that yesterday.

Title: Re: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 23 April 2017 at 10:53
Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 06 May 2017 at 22:29
Boycott the anti-Australian Bendigo Bank ...

Bendigo Bank closes account of anti-mosque group

Simon Lauder | ABC (http://www.abc.net.au/) (Australia) | 8 April 2014


Extract: The Bendigo Bank last week informed the Stop the Mosque group that it was closing the group's account, saying the bank only wants to do business with organisations that share its values.

The group was raising funds for its fight against a mosque which is proposed for a site near Bendigo's airport.

Local councillor Elise Chapman has accused the bank of trying to be the 'moral police'.

"There's a lot of other people - there's murderers, paedophiles, criminals - everybody banks, and I'm sure that those people also have bank accounts at the bank," Ms Chapman said.
Title: Re: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 10 May 2017 at 03:40
Australian Labor Party rips off Australia First Party: Labor get accused of White Supremacy by mainstream media ...

Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 21 May 2017 at 09:42
Rally and Fight For Freedom
Tuesday 23rd May 2017
Melbourne Magistrates Court

Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 23 May 2017 at 07:31
Report from MSM ...

Members of the United Patriots Front have extolled their anti-Islamic beliefs as they clashed with protesters and media in fiery scenes outside a Melbourne court.

Video showed the far-right group’s masked supporters as they cheered "Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, oi, oi, oi," and unfurled a Donald Trump flag in front of a large police presence this morning.

A man in the far-right group punched a camera operator in the stomach while another grabbed a protester's phone and threw it on the ground.

Opposing protesters shouted, "Muslims welcome, racists not," as they held placards emblazoned with crossed-out swastikas.

It came after United Patriots Front leader Blair Cottrell, 35, and supporters Neil Erikson, 32, and Christopher Shortis, 45, faced Melbourne Magistrates' Court accused of offending Muslims.

The trio are facing charges under Victoria's racial vilification laws after a mock beheading of an effigy during protests against a Bendigo mosque in 2015.

They are accused of making a video aiming to incite contempt for Muslims and defacing a footpath and garden bed wall at the city’s council offices.

"We happen to be charged because we had the audacity to question a certain doctrine of Islam," Mr Shortis said outside court.

"We did the mock beheading to alert the fact that Bendigo residents were concerned about Muslim immigration into this country.

"Because there is a correlation between increased numbers and increased acts of terrorism."

Mr Erikson said he is going to subpoena Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews and Police Commissioner Graham Ashton to give evidence in the case.

"They have pushed for this case. I think it's a conspiracy against right-wing politics," he said.

"Daniel Andrews has a lot of skeletons in his closet. He had a hand in this and we all know it."

Facing court without legal representation, Mr Cottrell said the case was weak and a waste of time, and should be thrown out.

But the magistrate said the case must go ahead and it will return to court on September 4.

Source: http://www.9news.com.au/national/2017/05/23/13/53/supporters-of-far-right-group-clash-with-protesters-outside-melbourne-court
Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 23 May 2017 at 22:17
Some truthful information about the court battle yesterday
From https://www.facebook.com/Blaircottrell89 (https://www.facebook.com/Blaircottrell89)

Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 26 May 2017 at 10:09
Court appearance overshadowed by Muslim bombing in Manchester ...


Sometimes, even Reds admit to an inalienable right to Freedom of Speech ...

Title: Re: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 22 July 2017 at 07:28
Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 05 September 2017 at 04:12

Invalid Tweet ID
Invalid Tweet ID
Invalid Tweet ID
Invalid Tweet ID
Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 05 September 2017 at 10:33
Three men who made a video of a mock beheading with cries of ‘Allahu Akbar’ to urge people to rally against a proposed mosque in Bendigo, have become the first people convicted under Victoria’s Racial and Religious Tolerance Act.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/united-patriots-front-members-defend-mock-beheading-stunt/news-story/7bcfeac17f751d863d765fd4507c3936 (https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjJ1suqko7WAhUCi7wKHQdsCrgQqOcBCCgwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fnews%2Fnation%2Funited-patriots-front-members-defend-mock-beheading-stunt%2Fnews-story%2F7bcfeac17f751d863d765fd4507c3936&usg=AFQjCNFC_wZ9e4npNVraMqX5-AEn_VNeyw)

Blair Cottrell, the leader of the far-right activist group United Patriots Front, Christopher Shortis and Neil Erikson were charged with knowingly engaging in conduct with the intention of inciting serious contempt for, or revulsion of a class of persons, namely Muslims.

The men appeared before the Melbourne Magistrates Court for a contested hearing of the charge relating to the October 2015 video which was posted on the United Patriots Front Facebook page.

Today Magistrate John Hardy found the trio guilty and ordered each man to pay a $2000 fine.

He said he rejected the submission by Mr Shortis that the video dealt with a tenet of Islam and the beheading, not the religion itself.

He said he accepted prosecution submissions that in this case it was not necessary to prove that the video would incite such responses or that it did so, only that it was intended to incite contempt or revulsion.

Mr Hardy said in his view the video was made in effect to induce as many like-minded persons as possible to attend their rally.

The three men have indicated their intention to appeal the judgement.

Earlier, the men claimed the stunt beheading a mock dummy was an act of free speech rather than religious vilification.

The Victorian Office of Public Prosecutions has effectively charged the three men with blasphemy over their participation in a video which depicted a beheading of a mannequin and the shouting of “Allahu Akbar’’, one of the men has told the Melbourne Magistrates Court.

Christopher Shortis is charged along with United Patriots Front leader Blair Cottrell and Neil Erikson with knowingly engaging in conduct with the intention of inciting serious contempt for or revulsion of a class of people, namely Muslims, under the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act.

The men faced the court today in relation to the video they made in October 2015 which promoted a rally opposing the building of a mosque in Bendigo.

The court yesterday heard the prosecution case regarding the cost of cleaning up the fake blood which spilled from the effigy and the men were expected to take the witness stand today.

However this morning the trio told Magistrate John Hardy they had changed their minds and would not be giving evidence in the witness box.

Instead, the three launched into submissions to the Magistrate about why criticising an extremist practice was not intended to incite contempt, revulsion or ridicule for Muslims as a group.

In closing submissions prosecutor Fran Dalziel said the additional charges of wilful damage and defacing property were alternative charges to the incitement charge.

She said the men played to the camera which showed they were aware of their actions and their words in thanking Bendigo for building a mosque demonstrated the video was clearly directed to Muslims.

She said the beheading of the mannequin with the phrase “Allahu Akbar” and the wearing of a Middle Eastern headdress further contributed to the charge.

Prosecutor Ms Dalziel said the beheading itself clearly referenced well publicised and tragic acts of terrorists purporting to act in the name of Islam.

“They are imputing acts of terrorists as part of general acts of Islam,” she said.

More at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/sep/05/united-patriots-front-trio-say-beheading-stunt-during-bendigo-mosque-protest-an-act-of-free-speech



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/united-patriots-front-trio-claim-beheading-video-stunt-was-act-of-free-speech/news-story/af6e2ef331d46130112d6826d7fcc50a (https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwip_u6KnY7WAhXET7wKHemUBQIQqOcBCCgwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heraldsun.com.au%2Fnews%2Flaw-order%2Funited-patriots-front-trio-claim-beheading-video-stunt-was-act-of-free-speech%2Fnews-story%2Faf6e2ef331d46130112d6826d7fcc50a&usg=AFQjCNHAMvWShkdPkvikVpRewZN1Ya02oQ)




Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 05 September 2017 at 13:32
These three fine upstanding men - the Bendigo Three - were not convicted for Religious Vilification as the Victorian courts claim. These three men were convicted for lawful political dissidence; these three men were convicted because of (anti-White) Racial Vilification; and they were convicted as Scapegoats of the Multicultural Empire.

The Bendigo Three are Free Speech Martyrs.


https://www.facebook.com/AusFirstParty/posts/1581149881959903 (https://www.facebook.com/AusFirstParty/posts/1581149881959903)

A Personal Message for Magistrate John Hardy

If your Muslim friends don't first cut your head off while screaming "ALLAHU AKBAR" then you're going to be hanged, drawn and quartered in the coming revolution.

Sleep well, Judge.
Title: Re: Australia First Party: Lawful Demonstration Leads to Hate-Crime Charges
Post by: Private on 05 September 2017 at 20:28
I guess under these laws you can forget about doing any "black face" theatre?


Then the ABC has a show with Abos parodying themselves "black comedy". I guess that won't be touched just because they did it? Even though there isn't a definition on what is an Abo here?


Title: Marxists Vandalise Homes of Australia First Party Leader and Rep.
Post by: Private on 07 December 2017 at 02:42


https://www.facebook.com/AusFirstParty/videos/vb.643159555758945/1691094560965434 (https://www.facebook.com/AusFirstParty/videos/vb.643159555758945/1691094560965434)


Images and CCTV footage released today by United Nationalists Australia identifies the thug who has been stalking nationalists in Sydney’s inner suburbs.

The leftist criminal struck twice this morning at both the Tempe headquarters of the Australia First Party and the private address of an Australian nationalist. The events occurred as follows: at 4:40am on December 7 the Australia First Party president was awoken by banging at the side gate. When he investigated he was confronted by a youngish Australian male with facial hair who proceeded to threaten the party president’s life after repeatedly entreating him to come downstairs for a “fight”.

In a grab for justification of his criminal actions, the lumpen made random accusations of the AFP leader, such as him being involved with ASIO, and other gibberish. This is a signature mark of this particular leftist lout who struck at the inner-Sydney home of an Australian Nationalist and AFP member less than half-an-hour later.

Piping a firehose through the open window of the sleeping Nationalist after having banged at his door to get attention, the sewer rat proceeded to flood the premises with a nearby firehose. He was caught on camera. What cannot be heard is him yelling, “You’re a paedophile and a Nazi, Nick Folkes sent us!”

As much as we despise Nick Folkes, we realise this is an amateur attempt by the member of a militant organisation to attempt to create confusion.

This same character turned up at the same address on October 1. Sporting sunglasses, a hat and shorts, in a boneheaded attempt to be incognito he issued a death threat based on similar charges of “Nazi and paedophile”. This came after the publicised sentencing of so-called neo-Nazi Mike Holt on weapons and child pornography charges. Both incidents were reported to Newtown police, for what it’s worth, with authorities now being in possession of the perpetrator’s image. However, it is one of four incidents involving the same person and the Sydney Nationalist. The lefty ugh is possibly a Newtown local operating in and around the Enmore area.

The same rock ape has previously been seen in the company of an Aboriginal woman and others sporting CFMEU T-shirts. He is also reported to have attempted to assault a mobility-scooter bound Newtown identity who is not affiliated with AFP or Australian nationalism.

We have no doubt whatsoever that he links to the criminal blogger “Andy” (aka Rob Sparrow and others) of Slackbastard infamy. He is doubtless also affiliated with rogue Fairfax troll Luke McMahon, and Pete Smith, the administrator of the Anonykatz Facebook page, who resides at a Balmain address.

The attacks come after the weekend’s commemoration of the Eureka Rebellion at Ballarat by Aussie Nationalists.

UNA will later be releasing the identity of the author of the Antifascist Action Sydney blog which has been defaming Nationalists, Patriots, and sundry others for years. Gotcha!

Save and Share: https://gabfiles.blob.core.windows.net/image/5a28abbe77d64.png

Title: Re: Marxists Vandalise Homes of Australia First Party Leader and Rep.
Post by: Private on 08 December 2017 at 06:54
https://www.facebook.com/AusFirstParty/posts/1691378107603746 (https://www.facebook.com/AusFirstParty/posts/1691378107603746)

Title: Re: Marxists Vandalise Homes of Australia First Party Leader and Rep.
Post by: Private on 14 January 2018 at 04:26
Update: Police have been ordered to abandon the investigation of the Anarchist psychopath that threatened violence and committed acts which could have resulted in the death of Australian White Nationalists. As we Creators expected, the multiCULTural authorities believe anyone that isn't currently brown-nosing their nearest maggot-ridden black poofter's bum is an outlaw. i.e. White Racial Loyalists of all calibres do not have any rights under the law. What that means is, we must take the law into our own hands; and damn the consequences.

Quote from: Private
In historical legal systems, an outlaw is declared as outside the protection of the law. In pre-modern societies, the criminal is withdrawn all legal protection, so that anyone is legally empowered to persecute or kill them. Outlawry was thus one of the harshest penalties in the legal system. In early Germanic law, the death penalty is conspicuously absent, and outlawing is the most extreme punishment, presumably amounting to a death sentence in practice. The concept is known from Roman law, as the status of homo sacer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sacer), and persisted throughout the Middle Ages.

In the common law of England, a "Writ of Outlawry" made the pronouncement Caput lupinum. Not only was the subject deprived of all legal rights of the law being outside the "law", but others could kill him on sight as if he were a wolf or other wild animal.

White Revolution is the Only Solution



Quote from: Private
Extract: Eyes concealed behind servo-bought eyeshades, peaked cap topping a cropped brown scalp and uniform shorts and a T-Shirt, Dave Gull consciously establishes his working-class chic.  It is an identity that he wields like a crowbar.

He is so devoted to these bogan accessories that he complains of habitually losing his cap or sunnies whenever out on the turps. We guess that happens often.

Gull or Gullis as we’re informed is his real name, is a Sydney scaffolder and fanatical member of the militant CFMEU. He is a communist too and aligned with Antifascist Action Sydney. He is also a psychopath.

https://www.facebook.com/AusFirstParty/posts/1698171230257767 (https://www.facebook.com/AusFirstParty/posts/1698171230257767)

Title: Re: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 23 October 2019 at 11:15

Australia’s best known patriot activist Blair Cottrell has received a new trial date of November 11 from the County Court of Victoria for his appeal against his 2017 blasphemy conviction.

Blasphemy Charge and Trial

Cottrell along with fellow patriot activists and former United Patriots Front colleagues Neil Erikson and Christopher Shortis was found guilty of “intent to incite ridicule or contempt of Muslims” under Victoria’s Racial and Religious Tolerance Act in a trial at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court in September 2017.

The charges against the trio or Bendigo Three as they became to be known related to a mock beheading stunt they performed outside Bendigo’s Council building during the United Patriots Front’s activism against the construction of a Mosque in the regional Victorian city in 2015.

The mock beheading was published on Facebook and was designed to demonstrate the potential dangers of further allowing the Islamisation of Australia and its regional cities. The mosque only broke ground in Bendigo in July this year, the Mosque construction received a $400,000 grant of Victorian taxpayer funds from Premier Daniel Andrews.

Appeal Process

Cottrell decided to appeal his conviction and $2,000 fine and engaged the services of patriot lawyer John Bolton. The appeals process has taken many twists and turns over the past year. Cottrell is challenging his conviction on the grounds that Victoria’s Racial and Religious Tolerance Act is constitutionally invalid under Australians’ implied right to freedom of political communication.

Originally given it was a matter of constitutional law they were directed to lodge an appeal directly with the High Court of Australia. In December 2018 the High Court directed Bolton and Cottrell to the County Court of Victoria to lodge their appeal, as they would not hear the case until all other appeal avenues had been exhausted by either side

Proceedings began in the County Court in February of this year with a mention in February. The presiding Judge at the time Lisa Hannan after initially expressing uneasiness about hearing a constitutional matter set the appeal for trial in August

A further development occurred in June when the Victorian Government through Attorney-General Jill Hennessy joined the Director of Public Prosecutions in the appeal proceedings. This was due to their belief that defending the validity of the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act was necessary to protect all laws against hate speech and to safeguard community cohesion

But then in July the Victorian Government admitted that Cottrell’s conviction under the Racial Religious Tolerance Act could conflict with its own Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. Specifically the human right to freedom of expression under section 33 of the charter and the freedom of political discourse under section 18

Another mention was held on this development where John Bolton argued this question of state law should be held in Victoria’s highest court the Supreme Court. The DDP and State Government disagreed and argued that the trial should take place in the County Court in August as scheduled in the interest of expediency

Judge Lisa Hannan one week later ruled that both the state and constitutional matters of law could be decided by the County Court at the trial beginning August 12.

Financial Deplatforming

Since deciding to launch his appeal Blair Cottrell had been crowdfunding donations to cover his legal expenses using PayPal. His PayPal was shut down in December 2018 as part of a purge by the platform of “extreme far-right” figures

Blair Cottrell then used his personal Westpac bank account to solicit donations for his appeal. That account was shut down in June for “commercial reason”. Since then other Australian patriots have had their personal bank accounts closed for unspecified reasons.

Trial Rescheduling

The trial did not take place as scheduled on August 12. Bolton and Cottrell were informed that Judge Hannan could no longer hear the case. It was revealed in September that this was due to Lisa Hannan accepting a new appointment as Chief Magistrate of the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria.

A rescheduled trial date has now been confirmed to begin on Monday 11th November. It will be heard by the Chief Judge of the County Court of Victoria Peter Kidd. Kidd’s most recent high profile case was presiding over Cardinal George Pell two jury trials in 2018 on child sexual abuse charges

Judge Kidd after the jury at the retrial reached a unanimous guilty verdict and after another trial on a separate child sexual abuse incident was dropped sentenced Pell to six years in prison.

Peter Kidd has been Chief Judge of the County Court of Victoria since his appointment in September 2015. He was appointed concurrently as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Victoria in May 2016. He has previously been an international war crimes prosecutor and a Victorian Crown Prosecutor.

Blair Cottrell’s Take

Blair Cottrell since being charged under Victoria’s Racial and Religious Tolerance Act in early 2017 has been banned by Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. He can still communicate with his followers on free speech social media, his Gab account has accumulated over 3k followers since March this year.

Blair shared his own analysis and expectations on the upcoming rescheduled trial on his Gab account. He has also been reposting his Gabs on his new Telegram channel on the encrypted messaging app.

Blair Cottrell’s take on Gab
He also gave an overview of this legal saga to date from the charge, to the conviction and appeals process

The mainstream media despite pressure from left-wing activists on Twitter have still reported on Blair Cottrell’s appeal, but usually refer to him as a white supremacist neo-Nazi. news.com.au has consistently used a photo shopped image of Blair in front of a Nazi flag in their news reports about either him or Australian nationalism.

The mainstream media will be at the trial on November 11th but so will the Unshackled and other Australian alt-media to provide truly independent coverage
Title: Re: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 10 January 2020 at 19:18
Update on Australia First’s Westpac Struggle / AFP newsletter 11-1-20

Westpac Would Control Who Australia First Chooses As Its Officials:
Unprecedented Attack Upon Freedom Of Association
Westpac intensified its attack upon Australia First this week.
As members know, the bank ‘froze’ an account before Christmas.  It turned out we were obliged to authenticate our signatories and the status of the committee governing the account. We did so.
And then the ‘bombshell’. Westpac announced that our party president Jim Saleam, was not acceptable as a person to verify the account. It was pointed out to the Westpac legal team by the business manager at the relevant branch that it was one thing for the bank to deny him the status of customer (he was never one) or to be a signatory to an account, it was another thing to tell the organisation that it could not have him as an office bearer. The bank kept to its position.
Of course, that means in theory that the bank can at any time refuse to accept any officer of any registered party as it sees fit. That is not the bank’s business unless the person is reasonably committing certain offences.
Because this account relates to the New South Wales councils campaign in 2020, we have written to the New South Wales Electoral Commissioner, pointing out that we are required to maintain accounts and operate from them, but will be denied that right by the “commercial decision” (read: political decision) of a bank. We will be writing again to the New South Wales Council For Civil Liberties. It seems that a Federal Court action against the bank may be needed both for us to regain power over our account and to restore the party president to any and all of our accounts as we determine. This may be necessary because, before too long, the bank will extend this freeze to the two national accounts which the party president also recently confirmed.
We are well aware that other banks have made ‘commercial decisions’ against certain customers in recent months. We recall that only a fortnight ago, the ANZ refused to transfer money to European nationalist Mr. Nick Griffin, who had been invited for an Australian speaking tour.
Jim Saleam commented to us: “We will make a stand against Westpac on the behalf of free association. The High Court of Australia had ruled previously about the ‘right to political communication’ as a right arising from the Commonwealth Constitution which establishes the process of elections. The Court determined that people have to ‘communicate’ in order to participate. We shall see. Yet, it can be properly said that a system only targets groups it fears. While the fight proceeds, we may take positive comfort in that.”
Title: Re: Australia First Party
Post by: Private on 10 January 2020 at 20:11
it can be properly said that a system only targets groups it fears. While the fight proceeds, we may take positive comfort in that.

That's bullshit. The system often attacks those it hates. Don't meet the politically correct agenda of the bank? Then they wish for you piss off and die. And if the bank can assist your demise, it will, in whatever way it can.

Back in the early 90's, I'd been with Westpac for years. Had even had a personal loan from them in the 80's which I'd paid off in under two years. As far as their records were concerned, I was a soldier with a long history with Westpac from the age of 15, when I was forced to bank with them due to an employer switching to bank paid wages.

So, what I did was open a new account, close a joint account I had with my ex wife, along with - at their insistence - my original account. I was then refused permission to have a key-card. No phone banking,  ATM's or EFTPOS transactions allowed. I was told I was welcome to go into the bank and stand in line whenever a wished to make a withdrawl or deposit. And then, each time I wanted to do a transaction, they wanted me to supply full identification: Driver's License, Birth Certificate, Medicare Card - Army ID was not accepted as legit identification, even though it had been perfectly legit ID in order to close the other accounts. Only then - and they made this very clear - would they determine whether or not I had the right to progress with my transaction.

Was it because I was a soldier? I certainly wasn't going to tell them that I was unemployed at that time. Was it because I had rocked up on a motorcycle bought and paid by a loan through Westpac? Either way, a hippy bank manager was responsible. I probably ticked both its Hate Boxes.

I complained to the Banking Ombudsman and I was told that because I was technically a new customer, that branch of Wespac Bank had the right to discriminate on the basis that they do not know who I am. It took me some weeks redirecting wages to another new bank account before I can shut down any connection with Westpac.

It's thanks to reading Ben Klassen in TTT that I learned to spread any money I have around. I now use four different banking companies with seven accounts, and I can shift and accept money anywhere in the world without any issues. I do not use PayPal or Westpac - the only two financial institutions that have intentionally banned me from business in the last 35 years.

Ben Klassen had five accounts because he did not trust the IRS. If one or more accounts were seized, he reasoned he could empty the rest before they got to them. I do not trust the Australian Tax Office or the American IRS - who knows what bullshit they will attempt - but it's the banks themselves I have the most distrust for. They don't need legal reasons to turn on you, they just need to have a grudge against you and your account will be frozen.