A birther is a racist member of the Tea Party if the USA Republican party.
The Tea Party is an extremist right part of the political party full of religious and other nutters.
The birthers are the racists who don't believe President Obama has a legitimate USA birth certificate. He does.
I am named a birther because of what I am trying to do with Tony Abbott. I am not right wing and I am not a racist. I will be asking my solicitor to have a look at suing the next journalist who calls me one
.
The facts are Tony Abbott was born in England to a pommie father and got automatic British citizenship. He got Australian citizenship in 1981 and in October 2014 his own Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet said his renunciation of British citizenship paperwork does not exist.
If someone does their university degree as a creative writer or communications graduate or just plain journalism they can be forgiven for not being interested in facts, they would never have seen any in their university life and seeing them now might scare them a bit. But journalists are well trained and expected to be asking questions and the biggest question a journalist always has to ask is of themselves. These professionals have gone straight for the racist Tea Party tag instead of asking why is this person doing this and is there any evidence in what he is presenting. Ask yourselves why you went straight for the birther.
The worst is Tim Watts a labour MP who used to work for one of the biggest legal firms in the world. Lawyers know about facts,know how to spot them and know the questions to ask to find out more about the facts. He called racist Tea Party in
this protecting the Prime Minister from someone trying to find out if he was in the job legally. Why would you do that Mr Watts? And stranger is the new star in the Abbott ministry is Mr Frydenberg, he too worked for the same huge international law firm as Mr Watts. Did they work there together, I don't know? Was the birther article in The Age done for a former work mate? Why would a labour politician go so far out on a limb to protect an adversary in parliament? Surely as a lawyer Mr Watts knew about the various state Crimes Acts that look down on people who cover up crimes or decide for themselves that something isn't a crime.
I wrote the piece below in September 2014, in October 2014 Jan Olsons
bombshell exploded, the PM&C FOI/2014/15 showing the documents do
not
exist.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Most people are wondering why I have been at Tony Abbott to
tell the WHEN of his renunciation of his British citizenship. I am not a
birther. I do know when he was born,
where he was born, who were his parents. I do know when he got his Australian citizenship
and why. The missing bit is the WHEN of
his renunciation.
I was born in the UK in the same year as the Prime Minister,
we both came to Australia as part of the ten pound pom programme. In my case I was an addendum to a sheet of
paper in my father’s passport, the sheet of paper showed mum was dad’s
wife. We were a little better than the
Abbotts, we flew.
In 2013 around the time of the election I decided to have a
look at the other ten pound pom and see his story. And things didn’t quite add up. There was talk of him getting citizenship by
descent which seemed to wipe out his pommieness, there was talk of him never
being British, of him having two Australian parents, or one Aussie one pommie. So being one of the sort of people who needs
to know why things aren’t quite sitting right I looked.
In February 2014 I was looking at his Australian citizenship
papers in the National Archive of Australia when they went secret. Disappeared
off the screen and out of the NAA online archive. Strange and stranger.
I delved deeper and found out about the constitution section
44 which stops dual nationals from being parliamentarians. So off to the Department of Prime Minister
and Cabinet to see how I go about getting a look at his renunciation
papers. I found out these were called
the form RN. I had never applied for an
FOI request so I asked the public servants in the department how you go about
it. Peta Credlin contacted me and said
if I ever lodged an application for an FOI peek at the form RN she would refuse
it.
Another WHY. Why would she say that? Why would
the Chief of Staff of the Prime Minister suddenly become a clerk class 5 or 6
and do FOI requests? Me being who I am
waited until she was off in Washington with the boss before lodging the FOI application.
I figured that being a liberal she couldn’t resist the chance of a holiday part
paid by the public purse, I bet she would stay away for a holiday. It seems she did and the public servant I was
talking to at PM&C was “that close “ to releasing the results of my FOI
request. And big red head came home.
Peta Credlin found my application and refused it.
Similar story in the British Home Office, FOI requests by
law have to be done within 3 weeks over there.
Mine was held up for about a month as they went to and from the Foreign
Office to decide if information could be released. They refused to release information about his
form RN.
So the form is still being kept hidden. WHY? This has gone
beyond a nutter trying to cause trouble, which I never ever set out to do. This is the Prime Minister of Australia
hiding the only form that can prove he is in the job legally.
I wrote to my local MP Mal Brough and sent similar letters
to George Brandis, a Queensland senator and also the primo law officer in the
land, the Attorney General and to the boss of the house of representatives, the
Speaker, Bronwyn Bishop. I didn’t rant
or call for mass sackings I asked the three of them to try and get the Prime
Minister to sort things out before the G20. We have 19 huge and important
governments and the rest of the world watching us in September and it would be
rancidly bad for the country if our PM was under a cloud of suspicion for not
being in the job legally.
If it turns out Mr Abbott has signed false statutory declarations
to enter parliament then everything he has done becomes null and void. His ministerial and prime ministerial decrees
and decisions go out the window, the sale of uranium to India becomes null and
void. His health department decrees as
minister for Health are at best now dubious.
He has to tell the people WHEN he renounced his British
citizenship. As an aside, from watching
the man, from reading about him and reading about his belief of citizenship he
seems to think citizenship by descent overturns his British citizenship, but
according to the Home Office and the High Commission in Canberra that is just
not so. He became a dual national when he filled out the application form to
become Australian in 1981, coincidentally to get the dollars from Rhodes. Rhodes Trust has since changed their rules to
make sure no one ever does an Abbott on them again.
And the citizenship by descent, Mrs Abbott had
to give up her Australian citizenship and become a pom so she could get on the
ten pound pom boat trip. Or she did what
my mother did, came across as a sheet of paper in her husband’s passport and if
she remained Australian she and her children can probably be considered illegal
boat people. Now that tickled my funny
bone. I am not in any way condoning anything
to happen to mummy Abbott, shit happens.
If you want to keep me out of poverty, please send a penny or two. I am one of those pov-liners who can't afford to drive a car and for who a cup of coffee or a glass of beer is out of the question.
