January 25th 2020

  Buy Issue 3060

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY Wildfires: Lessons from the past not yet learnt

EDITORIAL America 'resets' foreign policy on China and Russia

CANBERRA OBSERVED After the fires, we still need an economy and to power it

GENDER POLITICS In trans Newspeak, parental consent is a 'hurdle'

REFLECTION Conjugal honour: Love of husband and wife joined together in pure intimacy

LIFE ISSUES Pro-lifers punished for exposing baby harvesting

LAW AND SOCIETY Cardinal Pell and the Appeal Court judges

LITERATURE AND SOCIETY The poetry of Distributism

AUSTRALIAN HISTORY Botany Bay: Always more than a dumping ground

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS Finally getting Brexit done

HUMOUR The MacStuttles probe

MUSIC From retch to wretched

CINEMA Three times the bravura: 1917, The Gentlemen, Shaun the Sheep: Farmageddon

BOOK REVIEW The contradictions of the dominant ideology

BOOK REVIEW Novel celebrates inventor of literary fairytales



HUMAN RIGHTS A Magnitsky-style law for Australia?

Books promotion page


News Weekly, January 25, 2020


In the prosecution of George Cardinal Pell, the long process of appeal is now being subject to further prolonged delays. Even our more elite judicial officers are fallible and on some occasions make errors of judgement. To admit to such errors is what distinguishes great judicial offi-cers from mediocre ones.

In the Pell case, post-sentence and post-appeal evaluations by accredited experienced legal elites have stimulated my mind to reflect upon the observations recorded by American lawyer Robert G. Ingersoll: “We must remember that we have to make judges out of men, and that by being made judges, their prejudices are not diminished and their intelligence is not increased.”

The fragility of the prosecution of Pell is now confirmed. Now the High Court appeal either will restore a degree of national confidence or stimulate the decay currently fermenting our justice system.

Tom King,
Mansfield, Qld.



In his letter to News Weekly (November 2, 2019), Robert Bom wants to know “what there was to cheer and hug for in Parliament when the final votes were in? Since when is the right to kill vulnerable pre-born babies a cause for celebration?”

I agree, and also commend the 10 members of the New South Wales Legislative Council who signed a letter of protest.

A baby is nature’s child, whether he or she is lying in a crib, cot or mother’s womb and to kill is murder and the responsibility lies with all governments to protect all living humans in their charge.

This shows how barbaric the people and our representatives have become. These babies are our future children.

D. Egan,
Dubbo, NSW



The bill to decriminalise abortion in New South Wales has been the longest bill ever to be finalised, with heated debates among politicians, and unrest even among ordinary people in Australian society.

I attended the anti-abortion protests that took place in Sydney and saw firsthand the aggression, the anti-social behaviour and the fury from abortion supporters, which raises many questions about their ideas and beliefs.

First, note that the anti-abortion protesters in Sydney were peace-ful and non-violent, though their chants were rather loud, to get their message across. There was no aggression, no anti-social behaviour from them.

Abortion supporters, though, during their demonstrations in Sydney, were an angry, furious mob, yelling offensive things like, “We will fight, we will win, throw the fetus in the bin”.

Such are the “principles” of the abortion supporters. Moreover, a slogan like, “Keep your Rosaries off My Ovaries” is directly anti-Christian.

At anti-abortion protests, many women – and men too – in favour of abortion, would walk past peaceful protesters and insult them with the most foul words, yelling with rage in their faces.

Why so much anger from abortion supporters? If they believe their ideas and beliefs are correct in every way, why are they so angry, so abusive? Is it because of guilt? Hidden guilt buried deep inside these people, mainly women who stand for abortion?

I’m asking and answering my own question. Only guilt, to be wrong about something so grave, brings out from a person so much fury when confronted. Let’s be honest here. Abortion is murder. It kills unborn human persons. Everyone knows this truth, whether politi-cians, who vote for shameful bills, or abortion supporters.

Being abusive won’t change this truth. Anti-abortion protesters were only kindly inviting abortion supporters to talk about the issue. Yet, dialogue for abortion supporters is non-existent. For them, only yelling abuse seems to “justify” them.

When your beliefs are correct, are “the truth”, you show this to the world in peace. A belief system that makes a truth claim yet strives to spread it through violence only reveals itself to be deceitful.

How do the feminists who so passionately support this inhumane bill that allows female unborn babies to be killed justify themselves? Because this bill gives the right to gender selection.

Christos Christou,
Penshurst, NSW



Many thanks for two outstanding articles in the November 30, 2019, edition of News Weekly: Peter Westmore for so succinctly summing up the horrendous miscarriage of justice towards Cardinal Pell; and Lucy Sullivan’s complementary article, “Are we de-civilising?”

And thank you, too, for giving the address where we can send cards or letters of encouragement to Cardinal Pell. That we have to send it to a prison is evidence of man’s inhumanity to man.

Juliet Kirkpatrick,
Darling Point, NSW



Thousands of scientists have signed a declaration saying that there is a climate emergency and this has been covered all over the media. Yet, only recently thousands of other scientists signed another declaration – the Oregon Petition – saying the opposite: that there is no climate emergency and the whole thing is exaggerated.

It’s curious how that didn’t get a mention anywhere in mainstream media. I only know about this from watching Sky News.

I guess the “science” is only reported if it suits a certain narrative, and scientists are only reliable when they promote a certain cause.

Whatever happened to our right to know that various media outlets are campaigning for? I guess our right to know doesn’t include what the mainstream media outlets don’t want us to know.

Who watches the watchers?

Daniel Peckham,
Tamworth, NSW

Listen to
News Weekly Podcasts

All you need to know about
the wider impact of transgenderism on society.
TRANSGENDER: one shade of grey, 353pp, $39.99

Join email list

Join e-newsletter list

Your cart has 0 items

Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers

Trending articles

ROYAL COMMISSION Hatchet job on Cardinal Pell breached basic principle of fairness

COVER STORY Gearing up to ditch free-trade policy

CANBERRA OBSERVED Regret over our rushed marriage to China

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Crucial to get Virgin Australia flying again

CANBERRA OBSERVED What's China's beef with our barley?

EDITORIAL Rebuilding industry won't just happen: here's what's needed

EDITORIAL Post-covid19, create a national development bank

© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2017
Last Modified:
April 4, 2018, 6:45 pm