Gaznazdiak wrote:Further to the above Patriot, does the name Huang Xiangmo not ring any bells?
This communist donated huge amounts, then after being refused permanent residency, demanded his money back, surely enough proof to anyone that he was expecting value for his money.
That's reason enough, wouldn't you think?
Patriot wrote:Gaznazdiak wrote:Further to the above Patriot, does the name Huang Xiangmo not ring any bells?
This communist donated huge amounts, then after being refused permanent residency, demanded his money back, surely enough proof to anyone that he was expecting value for his money.
That's reason enough, wouldn't you think?
Well mate if he was silly enough to trust a politician that’s his problem.
As I said what people do with their money is their business, not the business of the general public.
Gaznazdiak wrote:Patriot wrote:Gaznazdiak wrote:Further to the above Patriot, does the name Huang Xiangmo not ring any bells?
This communist donated huge amounts, then after being refused permanent residency, demanded his money back, surely enough proof to anyone that he was expecting value for his money.
That's reason enough, wouldn't you think?
Well mate if he was silly enough to trust a politician that’s his problem.
As I said what people do with their money is their business, not the business of the general public.
So you have no problem with the Chinese Communist Party buying influence with Australia's government?
Or a foreign media mogul like Murdoch?
Gaznazdiak wrote:I think it's time you took a reality check Patriot.
No offence mate, you a free to believe whatever you like but, facts have an annoying habit of getting in the way of fantasies.
Are you seriously suggesting we believe that political donations do not come with an expectation of quid pro quo?
That the likes Murdoch or the CCP just give away their money out of a sense of altruism?
"Political parties are not the Australian government"?
What are you smoking? What planet are you currently living on?
Political parties are the ONLY WAY to form government in this, or any other country, and you would have us believe they have nothing to do with it?
Seriously?
If a private citizen wants to donate to a charity or to a foundation promoting land rights for gay whales, that's their own business and a private matter.
If they are donating to organized groups who have the power to make laws and decisions that effect the lives of everyday people, groups with the power to send everyday people to their death in a war, then those everyday people have an absolute right to know who is influencing those laws and decisions.
If you don't like that, perhaps China or the DPRK would be a more attractive place for you to live.
TassieTiger wrote:Ummm. It matters not what is in the constitution re parties, if that’s what we currently have before us...which as you agree - is a corrupt system.
Do you know ANYONE in this country - who gives money away, without expecting a return?
What if it wasn’t a cash donation to a party - what if a party was gifted prime undeveloped land ? Do you think that party is then not going to lean on any development laws/amendments, to ensure their real estate gives them the biggest return? Of course they would...And then, what if the person that gifted the land - had land in the exact same area x 10 in size...that’s equal to sudo insider trading....you don’t think ppl should know this ?
Gaznazdiak wrote:G'day Patriot,
Mate I was having a cast iron bitch of a day yesterday, and I think I might have sprayed a bit of it your way, no call for that.
I still believe you are completely wrong on the secrecy issue, but there was no need for me to get hissy over it, so apologies for that.
I'm happy to agree to disagree on it if you are as it's not a life or death thing just differing views.
Gaznazdiak wrote:Their "representative" acts as an environmental dinosaur, purely because that's what those who fund him want him to be.
Abbott is far from stupid, he's a Rhode's Scholar, so he knows climate change is an existential threat to every living thing on the planet.
GojiraSteve wrote:Gaznazdiak wrote:Their "representative" acts as an environmental dinosaur, purely because that's what those who fund him want him to be.
Abbott is far from stupid, he's a Rhode's Scholar, so he knows climate change is an existential threat to every living thing on the planet.
I'm not so sure about that mate. While I agree he's smart enough to recognise that the science behind climate trends is solid, I've thought for a while that his base religiousity informed his veiw on climate change. In a "God gave us the earth, of course he wouldn't let us blow it up" kinda way. And I suspect he's far from the only politician basing their denial of climate change on this principle.