return to menu
The case of the Filipino woman Ms Solon totally appals me, not because of any actions by Amanda Vanstone but because of the terrorist possibilities of so called [by lawyers marketing such services] "sham marriages". In simple terms, for every single boat person detained and deported under our "strict" Migration/Terrorism policies/laws a jumbo jet of Asian or Russian sham marriage women arrive via our International Airports and not one check is made into their background, essentially for the reason that under the "jobs for the boys" arrangement, no government [Liberal or Labor] would dream of interfering with the business activities of their lawyer mates.
Here is an extract from my affirmed affidavit provided to my hero Amanda [for PM] in an attempt to lift the lid on the farcicle attack on her by the media [particularly the ABC] and their string pullers.
1. In 1996 I attended a peaceful protest outside the Family Court in Sydney and was approached by a woman of Asian appearance who asked "where do I sign petition?", whereupon I asked her "what petition, I don't think there is one, but what is your problem with family law?"
2. She handed me her business card which had a Chinese Surname with an "adopted" English Christian name [in the normal manner] followed by her credentials as a Law Graduate of Sydney University, and an office address nearby in Haymarket [a.k.a. China Town], and said to me "we do sham marriages and the package includes introduction, one way airfare, and divorce fee, and this rise of $250 in the divorce fee by the court will kill our small margins on these jobs".
3. I was dumbfounded by the total openness of her explanation, which obviously told me that although the deal sounded both illegal and unethical [even for a lawyer] it was totally condoned by "those in power", in various levels of law enforcement, government and Laws Society.
Almost 10 years down the track and in a totally different millennium since 9/11/2001 with a "War on Terror" I was again appalled by yet another soap opera instigated by Health Minister Tony Abbott [the DNA Kid, from an earlier soapie] where he dobbed in his own Liberal Party colleague John Brogden for using the expression "mail order bride" in an inappropriate context. I was unable to come to grips with there being any offence or stigma in those words, save for the realisation that, as a lawyer, he may well have been using the words as a euphemism for sham marriage.
In any event the soapie [and Abbott suspiciously bobbing up beside the latest Bali bomb for another photo opportunity] prompted me to revisit my recollections of the 1996 event and certain other matters since then which seemed to all fit into the solution of a single terrorism puzzle.
In 2002 I purchased the book "Others Unknown - the Oklahoma Bombing Case and Conspiracy" by Stephen Jones the defence attorney for Timothy McVeigh. The book was released before 9/11, but virtually forecasts that a person named Osama bin Laden was behind the whole thing. The "conspiracy" aspect is that the court, via the government, covered up all the evidence by not allowing it to be brought before the court. It goes without saying that 9/11 itself was simply the main event, bin Laden having used Oklahoma as the pre match dancing girls.
McVeigh was executed, so he could not tell us who the others unknown were and Terry Nichols refused to have his life sentence reduced by telling. But it all became academic once 9/11 happened as the horse had bolted. But the chilling link to our own home grown Abbott soap operas is that a Filipino mail order bride [for Terry Nichols] named Marife Torres was the "glue" between the mules Nichols [and possibly McVeigh] in USA and bin Laden and the crew in the Philippines. And it was in fact a sham marriage, albeit that there was no divorce for obvious reasons.
My understanding is that Australia is more of a target [than America] for sham marriages [and hence more of a terrorism target] because we are far more accommodating in the rules that allow these women to actually divorce and stay [and of course live off social security]. My further understanding is they are "bonded" to the husband, but there are "domestic violence loopholes" whereby if the sponsor husband is accused of DV [as all husbands will be once they get caught up in the family law industry] then the wife can divorce as well as get social security on an "expedited basis".
Here is a SMH clip from 1996 by a bleeding heart police reporter [as part of the huge conglomerate of police, lawyers and women's groups that rule the DV Industry, presently headed up by Kay Patterson and Pru Goward]. It details some 35,000 Filipino women fell under the sham category some 10 years ago. However I was approached by another woman at the same protest meeting asking me to help her with her web site for "From Russia with Love" sham marriage agency which she claimed imported far more Russian girls than the Asian agencies and was "worth a fortune". When she answered my question regarding where the money came from as "from the stupid blokes of course", I declined her offer.
Note, if you will/are able, how skilfully the spin and marketing by this particular conglomerate turns these gold-diggers [or the Brits call them LBFMs] into victims, setting their husbands up for tens of thousands of matters in the family court, with the added bonus of "relocation matters" once these women decide to return home with their pot of gold and the kids. We have seen a slightly differently constituted conglomerate [and now with a fully feminised/lawyerised ABC] using the same skills over the last 4 years to fool the very same Australian public with "those gold-diggers who came by boat and not jumbo jet". In fact as a final act of utter hypocrisy the ABC dropped their favourite Baktiari family "like a Rodent thrown overboard".
Last Tuesday morning 4 October 2005 the 7AM news broadcast had an interview with Mr Baktiari back in Pakistan saying in a very Indian accent "sorry, sorry, sorry - we caused a lot of trouble but we were put up to all of it by Mr Var.......", and the clip was clipped before he could say Vardarlas, and by 5PM, with no further mention of Baktiaris during the day, the twin glove puppets of Colvin and McCrutch were back to bashing Amanda over the Ms Solon gold-digger. What sort of a police state do we live in when our National Broadcaster is not allowed to criticise blood sucking lawyers ripping off the taxpayer for millions of dollars?
The anecdotal evidence is the women are trained by the DV Industry to be pro active in getting a DV Order, and as just one case example I was phoned by a man who like myself was a Vietnam War conscript so was no shrinking violet. He had imported a Vietnam bride and after only a month of married bliss she followed him around the house hitting him with whatever she could. She also progressively removed all his property while he was at work. She would stand over the bed at night with a carving knife so he was unable to sleep. He rang me in tears after no sleep for 3 days and the police laughing at him [as they do if a man reports DV]. He had no alternative but to leave her the house [and of course her legal aid lawyers were able to make that officially hers once the settlement got under way.]
However this article is not about family law atrocities [we all know about them] but about the "clear and present danger" posed by this Industry. We are talking of women from poor countries for whom our rates of social security are far more than a professional wage in their country, but as we see with Marife Torres I would wager that most of these women would think nothing of making far more money by facilitating whatever "task" might be put to them.
In other words there are other ways to make money such as working as maids for the wealthy in Singapore and such countries and sending funds home to their families, and those ladies with higher morals would always do that before entering a sham marriage contract. And I am confirming that from my own personal experiences as an ex-pat and "getting to know" how all these things work. So in this way the sham marriage gals are virtually a "self sorted" pool available for terrorist matters. In fact many a person including myself would say the act of terrorising a husband at the invite of feminist fundamentalists of the Germaine Greer breed carrying out a Jihad against men is already a form of terrorism.
In closing I am still mystified why the John Howard terrorism fridge sticker [on looking for reds under the bed], says to watch out for fertiliser stockpiles as they "might be used in bombs like Oklahoma". That was the original suggestion by the prosecution but even they resiled from it before the matter got to court, and the policeman, Sgt. Terry Yeakey, who stumbled on the real truth while trying to drag victims out of the rubble was murdered by the FBI. It is frightening to think that the most reasonable excuse for the USA government giving bin Laden free passage in Oklahoma is that it dovetails perfectly with the very plausible theory of Mike Moore that bin Laden was in fact asked to do 9/11. But what I don't understand is why the Australian government would tells its citizens big porkies in a fridge magnet.
So I will now pose a series of questions under separate cover to my MP to ascertain what [and I suspect nothing] is done to assess the security risk of such women.
return to menu