Watch this space!

Keith

Moderator
One of my Uncles back in the 1970's was a right hand man for Arnold Weinstock of GEC ( have i got the christian name right ? )
Anyway, he was briefed to keep a close eye on up and coming union reps and if they posed a threat of disruption....promote them, out of the way.
The oldest trick in the book, working class ( sic ) couldn't resist the money, while management of competing companies couldn't resist the ' honey pot ' sting... ( lets hope for my sake , there is no GEC as such anymore ..)

I would possibly be posting this as a head honcho in Dagenham were it not for a similar tale to above. Whilst working at Fomoco plant in Croydon Airport, I was invited to take an aptitude test for a Dagenham job vacancy of Foreman in Training. Doesn't sound much but Foremen in those days, ruled the day/night shifts and answered only to the Plant Manager.

Along with 2 dozen others, most of whom I knew + a Union Convenor that went by the name of 'Curly', a dullard if ever I saw one, we took the test.

1 week later, I was told that I had not only passed the test with flying colours, but I scored the highest marks ever recorded in such a test. As you know I don't consider myself as receiving an education beyond 12 years old, finally being removed from the system at 15, this might give you an indication as to the strength of the 'opposition.'

I was therefore told to prepare myself to move to Dagenham to commence my training. Brilliant!

One week later, I was told by an embarrassed Foreman, that they had, in fact given the job to Curly, the dullard Union Convenor. I was incensed and they said they hoped I would apply again, to which I verbally assigned the entire factory product of the day shift to be inserted into their worthless bottoms, and walked out never to return.

True story.....
 
What a load of cynical, cliched crap that closing ceremony was..

Thanks for helping me to not feel so alone Mr. Farley. I almost needed a bucket to throw up into watching it. Yet everyone else seems to think it was outstanding. The only impressive part was the light emmitters in amongst the seats.

Tiny Tempah? WTF. Who on earth thinks a name like that is cool? I bet it won't be long before some rapper calls himself 'silly twat' but spelt with a Z to make it more 'street'.

Still, if that crap represents British, I will work ever harder to become an expat
 

Keith

Moderator
Thanks for helping me to not feel so alone Mr. Farley. I almost needed a bucket to throw up into watching it. Yet everyone else seems to think it was outstanding. The only impressive part was the light emmitters in amongst the seats.

Tiny Tempah? WTF. Who on earth thinks a name like that is cool? I bet it won't be long before some rapper calls himself 'silly twat' but spelt with a Z to make it more 'street'.

Still, if that crap represents British, I will work ever harder to become an expat


Curmudgeons all. It was brilliant....
 
I thought it was pretty damn good from an outsider's viewpoint. I hate Rap
but apart from that It was really good IMHO.



On the whole, I think it was very spectacular, as an event/extravaganza. But as for the choice of performers to represent the entire nation? Just a little sucky.

Considering the massive cross-section of viewers of all ages, exactly how many would appreciate, understand, or even slightly enjoy the performance of Muse? Nice if you like that sort of thing, but.........
 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
Back to subject.


Part V

IS OUR PRIME MINISTER A CROOK?:

Julia wandered aimlessly around her Abbottsford home. She had been unemployed for almost six months since she was sacked from Slater & Gordon.
Her money had run out and her boyfriend, Bruce Wilson, had run off. Those lost six months were to mysteriously disappear from her CV.

If only things could have been different. She now knew she could never practise law again and anyway her Practising Certificate was soon to expire.

Julia had put her neck on the line for that bastard Wilson. He had promised her the world and she got peanuts from their clever scam. He was safe back in Perth with his wife, Francine, and the boys. She was left alone and with nothing.

The truth was Julia had knowingly help set up the infrastructure for Wilson’s money laundering. With the help of another Slater & Gordon Partner, Bernard Murphy, she had drawn up the documents that allowed Wilson to open a fraudulent account through which the extorted funds were to be laundered.

She had set up a Power of Attorney for Wilson to act on behalf of his friend Ralph Blewitt in laundering the funds. Wilson and she were living in the Kerr Street home bought with the stolen funds including a mortgage arranged in the name of Slater & Gordon’s Senior Partner, Jonathon Rothfield.

“Fall guy” Blewitt was blissfully unaware of the mortgage.

When the Kerr Street home was sold the money vanished. Blewitt, the oblivious owner, did not see a cent.

Meanwhile, back in Perth, Wilson was living the life of Riley. He had bought a restaurant called “Rumbrellas” and had spent $330,000 on renovations. Unfortunately, although Wilson was a dab hand at stealing, his business acumen was appalling. “Rumbrellas” was soon in liquidation. Wilson was broke.

He asked his offsider Ralph Blewitt for a $20,000 loan. Blewitt refused. Wilson suggested to Blewitt that one phone call to Big Bill Ludwig and Blewitt would never work again. That wasn’t true of course but Blewitt loaned him the money anyway. The loan was never repaid.

Back at Abbottsford, Julia called a friend, Carol Pyke, who had ALP connections in Victoria and asked her if she would move in to help defray the costs. She did and Julia eventually sold her half of the Abbottsford property.

Despite her known involvement in the extortion/money laundering affair, Julia was still determined to enter Parliament. But each time she sought pre-selection she was thwarted by her own Party. Centre Unity faction members of the ALP insisted Julia Gillard, of the Socialist Left faction, was an unsuitable candidate because of the known scandal.

[Many years later, power broker, Mark Abib, was to negotiate Gillard swapping factions to allow her to become Prime Minister... and without reference to Caucus.]

The focus is now back on Slater & Gordon. Although a listed company they still refuse to come clean on what went on. Why was their client, the AWU, not alerted to the false accounts? Why was the AWU not told of the funds, the laundering, the house, the conveyancing, the mortgage, the profit from the sale of the house?

They refuse to release the conveyancing details of the Kerr Street property claiming privilege. Yet there is no privilege associated with conveyancing.

It was rightfully AWU members’ money. It was Slater & Gordon’s Partners Gillard and Murphy and senior Partner Rothfield who set the whole thing up!

Convicted Partners of Keddies Law firm, owned by Slater & Gordon, have outwitted creditors of millions, according to a report in tomorrow’s Sydney Morning Herald.

Disclosure of Freedom of Information documents is being thwarted by the Victorian Police. “Too busy”, they say.
They have sat on the application for two months and say it may be another two months. Regulations demand a period of no longer than 30 days.

In the meantime “Pickering Post” is being constantly attacked by hackers using DDoS.

They may silence us for a while but the truth will out.

Larry Pickering or Larry Pickering | Facebook or http://pickeringpost.com

Much more to come.
 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
Come on you two, go and play silly buggars in someone else's thread:evil:

This is remarkable, we have one journalist, Larry Pickering calling the Prime Minister, corrupt and guilty of helping to set up money laundering accounts for union officials.
Almost begging a large law firm Slater and Gorden to sue him and the silence
From the mainstream press is deafening. Allegedly two mainstream journos have lost the jobs for even hinting at mentioning this.

The silence from the opposition is also remarkable, given that they could be asking questions in the house under privilege.
Methinks perhaps they don't want to stir the shit in case some rubs off on them.
Watch this space this is far from over.
 

Peter Delaney

GT40s Supporter
Spin, deflection & denial - just amazing ! I have been following Larry Pickering avidly and have also wondered why the mainstream press (& the Liberals) have been so reluctant to pick it up.

The Press : threats of censorship (amongst other threats), etc

The Liberals : Maybe there is a small chance that Julia has something similar on the Libs & that they have both agreed to let it all lie, or much more likely, the Libs are trying to "keep their powder dry" until just before the election !

Riveting Stuff !!!

Kind Regards,

Peter D.
 
"Did I hear her say, "join the dots". "how is something that may have happened 17 years ago, relevant to her work as Prime Minister?"

I think I must be going crazy!

I always thought you Australian types didn't put up with crap like that, suffer fools badly and were quick to clout someone around the ears if they took the piss? Was I wrong all this time? Aussies' gone soft?
 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
Chewing Off Your Own Leg
Paul Zanetti • 22/08/2012 15:51 (3.51pm)
One of the pillars of our great democracy is freedom of the press.
Press Freedom and its offspring, the public right to know, is part of the fabric that makes our country the envy of oppressed people worldwide. The daily stream of boat arrivals clearly demonstrate that people are ready to forgo their homeland, possessions, money, family and risk everything, their life included, on the open seas for a chance at a better life in Australia. My parents left their homeland to build a future in this great country, as did millions of others.
Yet, the hard fought freedom of expression and the press, which we value and take for granted, has a darkening cloud looming over it.
A year or so ago that dark cloud hovered over my drawing board. I was unexpectedly notified by an editor about a complaint to The Press Council by then Greens leader, Bob Brown, over a couple of cartoons. Brown was not happy with my portrayal of him. I'd lampooned his obsession with 'the hate media'. Anyone who disagreed with Brown was in the firing line. He'd decided to wage a campaign to intimidate, pressure, reprimand, penalise or shut down scrutiny which had held him, a publicly elected politician, to account. I exercised my artistic and satirical licence, as I've done a million times in 30 years cartooning. In this case I depicted Brown in a green shirt with swastikas, referencing a previous national socialist regime that burnt books, records and information in an effort to control and eliminate opinions and thoughts.
Bob Brown was ropable. He decided the best way to deal with me wasn't a protest letter to the newspaper to disagree with me, explain his position. Nor did he call the editor and ask for a right to reply (which the editor said he would have been given if requested). Brown went in hard asking for a list of all the newspapers that published my cartoons, which I refused. The clear impression I got was that he was out to intimidate the cartoonist or bring pressure to bear on publishers and editors to take whatever course he deemed appropriate to whip the cartoonist into shape. This didn't go down well with me or the editor. It was a clumsy, oafish effort. We defended our right to free speech. The upshot was that Brown's complaint was heard in a phone hearing with the editor, the head of the Press Council, Brown with a full staff of taxpayer funded minders, note-takers and assistants gathered to listen to and record this momentous historical turning point (oops, satirical licence taken again).
At the end of the hearing, the Press Council asked Brown what it was he wanted. In a nutshell, he wanted me to be told to not do it again. Seriously.
Nothing more heard ever again as Brown came off as the school nerd prefect who cried to the teacher because he was made fun of. When the principal asked what would make little Bob stop crying, he sniffled, "I dunno. Just make him stop it." A footnote to this was that nine months or so earlier Brown's staff had contacted me requesting two cartoons showing Brown in a flattering light (sitting in the PM's office chair. He loved that one). These flattering inoffensive cartoons that soothed the ego were described by Brown's staff member as 'awesome works'. See where's this is going? If you agree, you're flattered. If not, you're threatened and intimidated. Preferably, the cartoonist or opinion writer must at all times toe the government line.
Shortly after, another ominous development ensued. A newspaper reporter, Glenn Milne, lost his job, as did Sydney radio broadcaster, Michael Smith, for reporting on a scandal in the PM's past where she was romantically involved with a union crook 17 years ago. They reported Gillard had set up a fraudulent incorporated association for her boyfriend which was used to siphon hundreds of thousands of dollars for his own (and possibly her) benefit. Gillard defends her involvement explaining she was 'young and naive' and 'did nothing wrong'. Apart from that she refers all questions back to those statements refusing to answer detailed or specific questions about her role meaning the stench of doubt and suspicion remain. As of writing she has still not explained, yet a taped and transcribed interview after an internal investigation by her law firm partners confirms she did nothing right or proper, but everything wrong (to say the least). Gillard cannot make a statement to parliament. She knows if she tells the truth she is finished, and if she lies to parliament she is finished. Another fine mess she's got herself into.
The most disturbing part of this affair, apart from questions of disclosure, transparency, truth, accuracy, accountability and integrity that go to the centre of the holder of the highest office in the land, is the way it's been handled by the Prime Minister. It's been extraordinary. Unprecedented. PM Gillard has made demands and threats to the CEO of News Ltd (while 'incandescent with rage') and is suspected in doing the same in the case of the radio station at which Smith worked. Her intervention resulted in journalists losing their job. While addressing the media she uttered direct threats with 'serious questions to answer' in regard to local phone hacking. She and Brown initiated a media review by a sympathetic Raymond Finklestein with the end game understood to be to muzzle the media through intimidation. More recently one of Gillard's fellow Labor MPs called for 'commercially significant' penalties for media outlets which published misleading information. My response is we could start closer to the MP's home by imposing suggested penalties on the most common practitioners of misleading information; politicians. A certain misleading carbon tax promise springs immediately to mind. How about immediate disendorsement from their cushy parliamentary seats, removal of any perks and superannuation entitlements, just for starters? Now, that would be in the public interest. Practise what you preach, you temporary public servants. A case of do what I say and not what I do.
Now, the attention has turned to The Pickering Post, a news, opinion and blog site with which I'm involved. This site has been asking questions and telling a story of the Prime Minister's past that up until then had been dropped by the mainstream media for fear of her retributions. Larry Pickering picked up the ball and ran with it, doing the job, asking questions, talking to informants and publishing vital documents and information. He chose a melodramatic style, that would gain the attention this story required. It worked.
As the story unfolded it gained the attention of the media and political circles. Some mainstream media (MSM) began to run with it again, starting first with Alan Jones, five days after The Pickering Post published: GILLARD: The Story She Tried To Kill', with Jones reading on air from Pickering's piece word-for-word. Andrew Bolt then referred to it, other media followed. Emails, messages and phone calls flowed in. It became an 18 hour a day, seven day a week job for Pickering to carefully sift though and corroborate all the information. Pickering would tell me he had so much stuff he didn't know where to start, "This is even bigger than I imagined. So many people involved from unionists to current Labor figures." (the event, the cover ups, the betrayals and the alliances). He decided to write and publish in a deliberately calculated, unfolding melodramatic style that Pickering knew would intrigue, seduce, shock and create a stir. His intention was to get this story noticed. It sure did that. He knew he was on firm legal ground and has since issued challenges to the PM to answer the questions or to issue him with a defamation writ. Some weeks later, she's done neither. Instead she's allowed this story to continue, as Pickering releases more chapters to the awaiting interested public. The Pickering Post website became so overloaded it crashed (now back up).
Members of the 'establishment' mainstream media club were caught out, embarrassed and humiliated. They'd missed out on, or were afraid to touch, one of the biggest stories in Australian political history. What to do? Some, such as Hedley Thomas and Matthew Franklin of The Australian decided to grab the ball and run, too, with questions to answer. Editor, Rick Feneley, of Fairfax's Sun Herald appointed reporter Natalie O'Brien to start asking questions and publish. Paul Kelly, respected political stalwart from the Australian took Gillard head-on, live on TV, in a battle of dogged questions and Prime Ministerial obfuscations.
Others such as Peter van Onselen decided to defend the PM, attack Pickering on air, making a preliminary uninformed judgement call to absolve the PM, in an effort to placate her to appear on his little watched pay TV show. Fawning like a lovestruck teenager, he gushed on air, "I believe you, Prime Minister". She eyed him up and down, snapping back contemptuously about his 'grand naivety'. It wasn't one of the proudest moments in TV journalism, with van Onselen showing political and media students what not to do when faced with a unique opportunity to get facts on one of the biggest political story I can remember. Others decided to make Pickering the story, betraying their own journalistic responsibilities, scurrying to excuse their own public failures ('there's nothing in this' they ignorantly informed a curious public, without actually having the facts), excusing and exposing their own ineptness, cowardice, tent circling, backside-covering, rank-closing and cloud gazing. Look everywhere but at the elephant in the room.
Mark 'no mates' Latham, publicly defended Gillard without question and for personal interest. A political freak show in his day and a cartoonists dream who lost the unlosable election to John Howard, Latham became infamous for his explosive temper, breaking a taxi driver's arm over a cab fare dispute, smashing a newspaper photographer's camera, attempting to veer his car into a TV news cameraman and intimidating an elderly lady at a children's swimming pool. Protect Gillard at any cost, even if that cost is exposed in his own transparent bias, while revisiting his admitted hatred for Kevin Rudd. There's a growing Rudd bloc within the ALP and Latham will say whatever it takes to keep his former rival from The Lodge. He sees Kevin Rudd shadows everywhere. To this end, he has attacked this story of Gillard's past as a right wing conspiracy. Far from it, I can attest this is all coming from ALP sources.
There's not been one conservative piece of input into this. The likes of Nicola Roxon and Tanya Plibersek desperately turn their misguided pot shots at Tony Abbott for something he knows nothing about, except what he reads, and with which he has no connection. I occasionally read Latham as a reminder why he was not fit to be the PM - the AFR embittered village idiot who is published not for his insightful wisdom but for his outlandish view of the world.
Others of less note have decided to shoot the messenger, without any basis, simply exposing their own bias in protecting a publicly elected politician when it's surely their duty to readers, viewers and listeners to act in the public interest. They're failing the public by acting in their own interest and the political interest. The ever expanding Prime Ministerial spin doctors will be soon put out of work by the compliant (su)press. The media should not be the PR arm of the government.
In another era Pickering showed what one man could do with a brush and bottle of ink. Today it's a keyboard and a phone line. We're watching people power at work as the public reclaims the agenda, demanding accountability and answers. Paradigms are shifting. Institutions are under threat. Traditional old media is being usurped by social media. The government responds by standing on the beach holding up a stop sign to the incoming social media tsunami. Cosy political deals and alliances are shaking as the internet demands accountability and transparency. Reputations are at stake.
Pickering sits at his phone and keyboard and creates earthquakes. He did it with his cartoons in the 1970s and today doing it with a monitor. Different medium, same brilliant mind at work. He's an unbeatable poker player when he has a good hand and we're watching a fascinating poker game here.
Pickering has so embarrassed the majority of the mainstream media some have have chosen to attack and discredit him, but they cannot ignore him. Pickering will have the last laugh and a lot of so-called journalists reputation will need a good looking at. Remember the names of those who failed in their job(s).
The mainstream media majority is turning on itself and chewing off its own leg as it remains caught in a trap of its own making. The government so wishes this would all just go away. Caucus was in a tizz last night deciding the best way to handle this affair. As of writing Caucus has urged the Prime Minister to 'go harder' with media reforms and regulations. The PM vowed to proceed with media reforms by the end of the year. Shutting down press freedom and social media will sign the death warrant of the Labor Party for a generation, while making a public hero of Pickering. It will be intriguing to see if the PM makes another disastrous judgement call.
We've got a front row seat to history being made right now.
 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
Part VIII
IS OUR PRIME MINISTER A CROOK?:

Peeling back the putrid layers

Julia Gillard employs no fewer than 1,600 media advisers. (Spin doctors). The cost? $150,000,000 pa. There are more, but Ministers like Albanese won’t disclose details.

It appears much more of our taxes needs to be spent on spin doctors if our chief spinster Gillard’s involvement in massive union corruption is to remain undetected.

I would like to take you on a little trip to the WA Goldfields... to Kalgoorlie’s twin city, Boulder.

WA newspaper archives show Bruce Wilson travelled to Boulder/Kalgoorlie in 1992 to attempt to allay union members' concerns about his (Wilson’s) decision to transfer the management of large sums of union members’ money to a new AWU account in Northbridge, Perth.

The money resided at the time in a separate account called, “The Goldfields Fatal Accident and Death Fund”. This money, donated from union members themselves, was to financially assist bereaved families of deceased union members.

Wilson wanted management the account shifted to the AWU’s head office in Perth. Wilson was the then WA boss of the AWU. He and Ralph Blewitt were to be sole signatories on the account and union members were justifiably apprehensive.
They were wary of Wilson’s alleged fraudulent activities and demanded a meeting. It was set down for 8pm in the Boulder Town Hall.

Wilson knew he would never convince members of the legitimacy of the proposed move himself. So he introduced to the stage a person of high legal authority to assure union members there was no need for concern.

The person he introduced was Julia Gillard. Members were unaware Gillard was his lover. She was presented as an important Industrial Lawyer from Victoria and an official representative of the Labor stalwart law firm, Slater & Gordon.

Gillard addressed union members at length explaining why the money should be moved and that there was nothing to worry about. She insisted the members were in the good hands of Slater & Gordon and their best interests would at all times be protected.

Gillard must have done an excellent job because the account containing approximately $1 million was shifted to a private Northbridge, Perth account. The address for all correspondence was nominated as Northbridge Post Office, Box 253.

Three years later, police were asked by incoming AWU State Secretary, Tim Daly, to investigate one amount of $145,000 withdrawn from “The Goldfields Fatal Accident and Death Fund” to buy two holiday units in Kalbarri.

[I should say at this point that Ralph Blewitt never questioned what Wilson wanted. He simply signed whatever he was asked to. He was to sign fraudulent documents Gillard had drawn up for Wilson in the name of Workplace Reform Association Inc. Blewitt was also totally unaware of a mortgage, arranged in his name by Slater & Gordon, over another house Wilson bought from stolen AWU funds in Kerr Street, Fitzroy. Wilson, according to police files, used a stamp of Blewitt’s signature whenever he needed it.]

Despite the WA Major Fraud Squad’s Detective David McAlpine’s keenness to lay charges, it didn’t happen. The Kalbarri holiday units, were subsequently sold. Again the laundered money vanished. It was only the tip of a very large iceberg.

Wilson was also negotiating a “Workplace Reform Agreement” with Thiess at their Dawesville (Mandurah) site. He had invoiced Thiess himself for 220 hours worked per month, every month, at a rate of $36.00 per hour. But did not on any occasion even visit the site.

Thiess raised cheques on each of Wilson’s invoices. Each cheque was deposited in, and promptly withdrawn from, the sham Northbridge account. This is commonly known as a “secret commission”. It is highly illegal.
Thiess didn’t seem to care that Wilson was never seen.

Although the WA Police wanted Blewitt and Wilson charged they could not convince Thiess to co-operate.
From FOI material we have recently received from the WA Major Fraud Squad, it is clear that Thiess WA was reluctant to press charges of any kind. Thiess insisted they believed they were paying a branch of the AWU. Their reluctance to press charges may have been due to not wanting to rock the AWU boat, acquiescence in the deal or the interesting relationship between Wilson and Thiess’ CEO, Joe Trio; Trio is Wilson’s brother-in-law.

Another seven cheques totalling $112,000 found their way into the Northbridge, Perth account curiously from Melbourne Water, a Statutory Vic. Government Authority.
Now, you might ask, why the hell would a Victorian Government QUANGO be paying a Perth-based union for any damn thing?

The connection is this: Gillard was, and still is, a very close friend of a Robyn Mcleod. McCleod was Gillard’s house-mate and she bought half of Gillard’s Abbottsford property.
Remember, Wilson was joint boss of WA and Vic AWU for this period and was drawing two wages
And guess who Wilson engaged to negotiate the Melbourne Water contract?
Yep, the $300,000 pa, SA Rann Govt Water Commissioner, Robyn Mcleod. The plot thickens by the minute and we nut-jobs are supposed to stop asking questions?

The question that must be asked, and will soon be answered, is how could Gillard have been Wilson’s lover for over four years and not know what was going on? He carried a wad of notes that would choke a horse and was purchasing multiple properties for cash with extorted funds.

Gillard admits she was involved and indeed complicit in the fraud, but now claims she didn’t know what Wilson’s intentions were. Mmmm, didn’t know? Really? Convincing workers in Boulder to part with their hard-earned funeral savings to buy holiday units and she didn’t know? Where did she think the mouth of this river of money’s source was?

To say she didn’t know beggars belief. Either she is a simpleton (which she is not) or she is treating us as simpletons. The latest photo depicts her as definitely not blonde and she was an industrial lawyer and partner in the most notorious law firm in the land. She didn’t know what she, or he, was doing?

When Gillard acrimoniously broke-up with Wilson, she was more familiar with his scams than poor Blewitt. So, why didn’t she go to the police? After all, they were champing on the bit waiting to charge him. All they needed was some corroborative evidence. Could it be that she and others would be found guilty of aiding and abetting?

So, why are police never successful in prosecuting union fraud cases? Simply because union bosses and developers refuse to cooperate. They will neither supply nor give evidence to enable a successful prosecution for fear of retribution or incrimination.

The glacial HSU East branch investigation by the union-dominated FWA is testimony to the futility of expecting delinquent crooks to investigate delinquent crooks.

Ian Cambridge, when an AWU Boss, called for a Royal Commission into his union! He has since been silenced by Gillard appointing him as Commissioner to FWA. Now he can’t discuss the matter.

We ‘nut-job, sexist misogynists’ are really not supposed to ask these questions? Not one has been answered.
As I have said repeatedly, Abbott refuses to be involved. I can’t blame him. But the only Honourable Member left in the Labor Party, Former Attorney General Rob McClelland, will not rest until these matters are resolved. Gillard sacked him.

Criminal elements, like small fish Craig Thomson, (who had Gillard’s “full confidence” until the bitter end) are deeply embedded in the ALP. They are protected by the ALP and their court costs are covered by the ALP via the unions. HSU’s Williamson has ripped $20 million from lowly paid workers.

The money these mobsters embezzle from innocent workers is tax exempt. It’s like taking prize candy from a kid and there are no penalties when caught.

It is the Labor system, it is the culture and it has become enmeshed in the sophisticated involvement of Left wing Law Firms like Slater & Gordon and Maurice Blackburn who have made an art form of ripping off needy claimants.

Abbott refrains from demanding an immediate Royal Commission because Gillard and her Union mobsters must never be allowed to set narrow terms of reference. My information is that Abbott will move on the unions as soon as he gains Office. His will be a Royal Commission with the widest possible terms of reference.

The main protector from union prosecution is Bill Shorten, another product of a Left wing law firm. He has successfully shut down the HSU investigation by sequestrating the union and is currently busy trying to bury the AWU/Gillard/Wilson investigation.

Isolated cases eh? Try keeping a lid on this one, Billy boy... we have much more on you.

www.lpickering.net or Larry Pickering | Facebook or Home - The Pickering Post
 
Back
Top