One Nation misanthrope in hot water

Beudy mate, the right to be a bigot:

A One Nation candidate receiving Liberal preferences in the West Australian election once advocated killing Indonesian journalists, and attacked “poofters”, Muslims and black people on his now-deactivated Twitter account.

Richard Eldridge, a real estate agent contesting an upper house seat in the South Metropolitan region of Perth, called Muslims “little sheet heads”, derided gay relationships as “poo games” and advocated taking up arms against “extreme Muslims”.

…When contacted by Fairfax Media on Wednesday, Mr Eldridge initially said he could not explain the tweets because he could not remember them, before threatening to litigate if anything “derogatory or negative” were published.

After Fairfax Media emailed screenshots of the tweets, Mr Eldridge acknowledged they belonged to his now-deactivated account @hugetrouble, but dismissed them as “locker room talk” and apologised for any offensiveness.16tweetB729px16tweetA729px16tweetC729px

Civilisation striding forward, there. Tweeting to a public audience is hardly “locker room” (which is a closed room with lockers in it) talk!

Comments

  1. Re-raised the question – how come Geert’s party can stay united and how come UKIP can stay united while ONP is not.

    • Geert has had ‘members’ leave his party too. In fact, 22 since 2012. This website even tracks PVV members leaving the party. 😛
      http://www.isereenpvveropgestapt.nl/

      Unlike the other Dutch Parties which are run like a democracy (members vote on leadership etc) the PVV is run like a dictatorship. Geert’s way or the highway. PVV also refuses to be transparent about the PVV’s finances, although it is an open secret that US Zionists and anti-Islam groups donate quite a bit. Eg. the David Horowitz Freedom Center (DHFC) from Californië donated USD108,000 in 2015.

    • CornflakesMEMBER

      And UKIP losers MEPs fairly often too. Two so far this European Parliament and many more in the previous one.
      They don’t lose MPs because they barely have any.

  2. Jake GittesMEMBER

    It’s all ironic or moronic. One or the other. And to reflect Arthur Caldwell made a joke of Wongs and whites over 50 years ago.

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      Calwell’s remark in Parliament in 1947 that “Two Wongs don’t make a White” is widely quoted. The remark was intended as a joke, being a reference to a Chinese resident called Wong who was wrongly threatened with deportation, and a Liberal MP, Sir Thomas White.

      Calwell later wrote:

      It is important to me, at least, to set out the facts about a remark I made in the House of Representatives on December 2, 1947, which has been so often misrepresented it has become tiresome. On that day I was asked a question by Rupert Ryan, brother-in-law of Lord Casey, on the deportation of Malayan seamen, Chinese and other people who had contravened our immigration laws. I said, amongst other things, that an error may have been made in the case of two men named Wong. The Department had served a deportation notice on one of them, but it was the wrong Wong. I then said, and I quote from Hansard: “there are many Wongs in the Chinese community, but I have to say — and I am sure that the honorable Member for Balaclava will not mind doing so — that ‘two Wongs do not make a White'”.

      It was a jocose remark, made partly at the expense of the member for Balaclava, who was at the time the Hon T W (later Sir Thomas) White. I expected that I would have been correctly reported, as I was in Hansard and that the initial letter “W” on both the names “Wong” and “White” would have been written in capitals. But when the message got to Singapore, either because of some anti-Australian Asian journalist or perhaps because some Australian pressman with a chip on his shoulder, a Labor Party hater, the name of White was deliberately altered into a definition of colour, so as to read “two Wongs don’t make a white.” The story has lasted to this day. I have often answered questions about it from young Chinese students at universities in Melbourne and Sydney. I notice whenever reference is made to it in newspapers or periodicals, or whenever the quotation is used anywhere, the Singapore abomination is generally repeated. Latterly the true version is being printed.

      There was never any intention in my mind to raise any question of colour. I have repudiated the whole story so often that I suppose there is nothing more I can do about it. But I put the facts on record in this book.[10]:109
      In fact, Calwell did not refer in Parliament to two men called Wong. The full quotation is:

      The [deportation] policy which I have just mentioned relates to evacuees who came to Australia during the war. This Chinese is said to have been here for twenty years, and obviously, therefore, is not a wartime evacuee. Speaking generally, I think there is some claim for him to be regarded as a resident of Australia, and I have no doubt his certificate can be extended from time to time as it has been extended in the past. An error may have been made in his case. The gentleman’s name is Wong. There are many Wongs in the Chinese community, but I have to say — and I am sure that the Honourable Member for Balaclava will not mind me doing so — that “two Wongs do not make a White”.[11]

      In his 1978 biography of Calwell, Colm Kiernan wrote:

      Was Calwell a racist? All Australians who upheld the White Australia policy were racist in the sense that they upheld a policy which discriminated against coloured migrants… Calwell never denied the discriminatory reality of the laws: “It is true that a measure of discrimination on racial grounds is exercised in the administration of our immigration policy.” But he did not consider himself to be superior to any Asian.[12]

      Calwell also said in Parliament: “I have no racial animosity.”[13] Kiernan further says:

      Calwell had many friends among the Chinese community in Melbourne. This would have been impossible if he had been prejudiced against them. Anthony Wang, the first Chinese councillor of the City of Melbourne, has acknowledged Calwell’s support and friendship. He liked the Chinese people so much that he learnt Mandarin in which language he could converse.[14]

      Kiernan is correct to observe that until the 1950s virtually all Australians supported the White Australian policy, that Calwell’s views were entirely within the political mainstream at that time, and Calwell believed himself to be free of personal prejudice against people of other races. This is reflected by Calwell’s comments in his 1972 memoirs, Be Just and Fear Not, in which he made it clear that he maintained his view that non-European people should not be allowed to settle in Australia. He wrote:

      I am proud of my white skin, just as a Chinese is proud of his yellow skin, a Japanese of his brown skin, and the Indians of their various hues from black to coffee-coloured. Anybody who is not proud of his race is not a man at all. And any man who tries to stigmatize the Australian community as racist because they want to preserve this country for the white race is doing our nation great harm… I reject, in conscience, the idea that Australia should or ever can become a multi-racial society and survive.[15]

      Calwell’s attitude to Indigenous Australians should also be considered. In his memoirs he wrote: “If any people are homeless in Australia today, it is the Aboriginals, They are the only non-European descended people to whom we owe any debt. Some day, I hope, we will do justice to them.”[16]

      • robert2013MEMBER

        Thanks for sharing. Colwell sounds like a very sensible bloke. Now to find out how exactly how keeping your country for your family and friends became racist. Can you please share the footnotes too?

  3. A good opportunity for One Nation to distance themselves from extremists that want to ride on their coattails.

    • One Nation are extremists, mate. All of em. They’ve an Anglo-Saxon supremacy doctrine with a firm belief that this country belongs to the white folks who stole it off the brown folks that were here first. If you’re a reasonable sort who finds their policies appealing, you should reconsider your position.

      I shudder every time I read that, because they oppose the population ponzi, their other sins should be forgiven. They are horrible, closed minded, racist reactionaries. Consider old mate who believes NASA fabricated climate change. They should be thrown in the bin.

      • All of them racists extremists? How many of them have been convicted of racism under current anti-discrimination laws?

        What do you think of the elements of Greens that want to abolish democracy and capitalism? Are they extremists?

        Do you even have half a clue as to why One Nation is about to kick the Greens’ butt at the next election? or are you assuming everyone who will vote for them is also a racist extremist?

      • Yep – when you’ve an elected senator who laments Australia losing its Anglo-Saxon identity and the fact that he doesn’t feel the country explicitly belongs to people who look, talk, act and think like him – sounds like racism to me. In fact, as someone with an ethnic name and ethnic face who was born here, it sounds damn scary to me.

        Requiring a conviction is a pretty high bar for racism.

        Regarding the greens and those imaginary elements within the party that you’ve fabricated and never said or done the things attributed to them – I guess they’re the worst. Although, using your “people can only be described as a bad thing if they’re convicted of it” standard, since no one in the greens has been convicted of doing the fake things you’ve made up, then I guess none of them have done it.

      • What do you think of the elements of Greens that want to abolish democracy and capitalism?

        Who are these Greens that want to “abolish democracy” ?

        SAP has a far more comprehensive, coherent and evidence-driven policy platform than ON, a core part of which is reducing immigration. So, yes, if people are leaning towards ON in preference, they’re probably not being motivated mainly by reducing immigration.

        If you think PH would be bothered by a couple of hundred thousand immigrants each year from the “right” countries like the UK, you’re off in la-la-land.

  4. Australia get’s what it deserves if despicable people like this get in. You don’t even need to a be a progressive to find that abhorrent.

    • Yep. Just like November. The real left had a chance to regroup around Bernie, he sells out and we end up with Trump of all people as the last stand against globalism.

      Where are the parties of the worker and the environment calling for severe cuts to 457s and the rest of the destructive immigration ponzi? Nowhere to be seen.

      The seeds for ON were sewn by the betrayal of the working class.

      • Terror Australis

        Excuse me but saying “Bernie sold out” is not correct.
        He lost the Dem primary (in unfair circumstances, no disputing that) but in the general election he made the only reasonable choice which was to chose to support Clinton, the lesser of the two evils when compared to the Orange Fascist Buffoon she was running against.

      • If Bernie was really as idealistic as he claimed, he could have raised absolute hell after what they did to him. The evidence was undeniable, so much so that the DNC chair was rolled. Instead, he shut his mouth and asked his supporters to vote for a literal war criminal. You know, leftists.

        The orange one has many faults, but so far he hasn’t given weapons and political cover to Wahabists for use against minorities throughout the MENA.

        Bernie turned out to be just another lifer politician, here to get paid.

      • Talk about moving goalposts. The DNC is supposed to be neutral, and it wasn’t. Even the article agrees. I’m not even going to broach the astonishing bullshit being peddled as truth in that article, like how it was Russian agent-provocateurs who put a rod up the asses of Bernie supporters.

        As for the argument about anti-Bernie emails coming in from May onward, here’s some actual facts – go to wikileaks.org and search for “Clinton” or “Sanders” in the DNC leak. You’re gonna find that the overwhelming bulk of real, non-automated emails start … in late April.

        This means that the leak only revealed one time period. Unless you or the article’s author can cough up emails from earlier, then the argument is bunk – it is a lie by omission.

        But luckily, you don’t have to just accept that. John Podesta delivered! http://observer.com/2016/10/latest-wikileaks-releases-boost-case-for-dnc-class-action-lawsuit/

        Check out DNC Vice-chair Donna Brazile sending them Sanders’ campaign strategy. In January. And telling them that she supports them to the hilt.

        I’m sure feeling mighty debunked here.

      • @tony
        Now you are just using bullsh!t tabloid.

        The New York Observer is a news website which focuses on the city’s culture, real estate, media, politics and the entertainment and publishing industries. Its current owner, Jared Kushner, is Donald Trump’s son-in-law and a senior advisor to him.

    • Spot on Dave…I was going to the UN or NATO because those tweets could very well cause ww3. I’m off the my safe room now.

      • I see this kind of stuff from acquaintance’s on the Facebook. I just ignore it, but the reality is that many won’t say these things out loud or post it on Facebook, but many are indeed thinking along these lines but have a better filter / muzzle on it.

      • Jack, do you think it’s a good thing that someone who would like to be a representative of the people posts juvenile, racist messages in public?

        I hope you have an understanding employer.

    • Dave, do you think it’s a good thing to stop people’s free speech to make juvenile, racist massages in public? Obliviously you haven’t been paying attention, Mr trump who has been making juvenile, racist massages in public has just been voted in by the American people. What is my take home from that event…is the people really don’t care if other people make juvenile, racist massages in public, if they did trump wouldn’t be in power.

      • I didnt suggest stopping peoples free speech to make juvenile, racist comments. Social media is wonderful for that. Its a shame that people feel that way but thats life

        I’m just suggesting that people who do such be appropriately called out

  5. You should see what Geert says and does – Geert is extremely offensive and provocative compared to Pauline. Yet, Geert will be the next PM of Nederlands.

    Geert has been living under police protection since 2005 or earlier.

    I can imagine Trump saying all of the above (except for the killing journalists bit) and Trump is president.

    • Geert Wilders will not be PM.

      Most parties have already openly stated they will not form a coalition with him. Only the VVD (Liberals) remains cagey but I suspect that is to prevent people voting PVV if the option of a VVD-PVV coalition is dismissed upfront. VVD sees the PVV as its main competitor and is hoping to become a ‘decent’ alternative to PVV by adopting similar but toned down language.

      PVV and VVD together will still not be able to form a majority.

      • PVV will win more seats than any other party but still not be able to form government?

        I guess it depends on how power hungry the other parties and if they get Geert to simply reduce immigration and get out of the EU rather than attacking Muslims.

        In the 2010 federal election of AUS, there was a hung parliament and Gillard formed government with Greens.


      • In the 2010 federal election of AUS, there was a hung parliament and Gillard formed government with Greens.

        Yes – the ALP won 72 seats in the 150 seat House of Reps compared with the 12 seats won by PVV in the equal size Dutch House of Reps at the last election. And where else are extra seats for PVV going to come from, other than parties they are most likely to form a coalition with?

      • CornflakesMEMBER

        For the looks of it the currently the PvdA (Labour) seems to be collapsing but they aren’t losing votes to PVV but to the Green Left and the centrist D66. The government looks like it will be a rainbow but then again the Dutch can cope with that, they invented the Polder Model after all.

      • You’ve got to understand The NL uses a fundamentally different system.

        PVV currently looks to become the biggest party with 30 seats, or 1/5 of Parliament. That is stil nowhere near a majority… a problem for a party which no one wants to form a coalition with.

        PVV votes are mostly blue collar, people disfranchised with PvdA (Labour) and some who think VVD (Liberals) is not right-wing enough. Remember that populist parties combine Left welfare policies with anti-immigration.

        The NL has had a very fragmented political landscape for a while now. Coalition forming will be very difficult. I would not rule out a 5 party coalition like happened in the 70s before several parties amalgamated.

      • @AnonNL:


        I would not rule out a 5 party coalition like happened in the 70s before several parties amalgamated.

        Does it therefore follow that the crucial question in this case will be how well Geert plays with others (in which case the Gillard example is a little bit instructive, as she remained Prime Minister seemingly by more effectively courting the independents that Mr Abbott)?

      • Normally, yes. However, PVV previously did not play nicely by walking out of coalition negotiations after a significant amount of time was already invested.

        Also, Geert Wilders has uttered some pretty offensive things in publicwhich led all paries, except VVD, to explicitely state that they will not form a coalition with PVV.

        I personally think he does not want to govern at all. PVV flourishes in opposition.

  6. FiftiesFibroShack

    People like this guy and the Malcolm Roberts types are a big reason I’d never vote One Nation; the party and its core support is riddled with the worst of us.

    • This is the exact reason I am voting for them. Can you imagine a country where Port Arthur hoaxers control 30% of the parliament?

      It gets destroyed!

  7. Can’t One Nation just find someone who never had a twitter or Facebook account as a candidate?

    • The problem is Facebook and Twitter, shut them down now! Thus fixing the problem once and for all.

      • Dunno, mate – if you shut down twitter, people will start to look for what they’ve been saying to each other in sub-sub reddits. Could backfire dramatically.

  8. Mining BoganMEMBER

    We have a coffee mug from Canadia. On it it has a moose, a bear and a beaver, all in mountie hats, paddling a canoe. When guests see it they will laugh, tell us how cute it is or say just damn awesome. Everyone knows though that it’s unpossible.

    One Nation is kinda the same.

  9. Jumping jack flash

    FFS Pauline, vet your candidates.
    I don’t know, maybe some kind of psychological stress testing perhaps?
    A background check or two wouldn’t hurt either. Surely you’re not that desperate for people?

    • Maybe they’re being herded that way due to the current crop of monopolists winning? Time to upend the board?

      Hopefully with a better calibre than that though………

  10. At least he said what he thought, more people should start calling things what they are, breaking globalists and population / debt masters imposed taboos, maybe not in these extreme forms, as it casts shadow on the whole conservative movement.