Expressing Disappointment in Woolworths’ Decision Regarding Australia Day.

ED: I sent the following email to the CEO of Woolworths, Mr Brad Banducci MBA, LLB, BComm (Acc). Should you wish to send your own message his email address is [email protected]

Remember to be respectful if you wish to get your thought across. 

Att: Mr Brad Banducci MBA , LLB, BComm (Acc)

Dear Mr Banducci,

I trust this message finds you well. I am writing to express my deep disappointment and frustration concerning Woolworths’ recent decision not to actively promote Australia Day. While I understand the commercial considerations behind not endorsing an unprofitable product, it is disheartening to witness a lack of support for Australia Day, especially in light of Woolworths’ enthusiastic promotion of events such as Halloween.

The implications of this decision raise questions about the company’s trajectory and its alignment with the values of a significant portion of its customer base. This choice seems inconsistent with principles of inclusivity and a genuine understanding of the Australian way.

My initial disappointment with Woolworths arose when shareholder funds were used to support what I perceive as a misguided referendum. While I was willing to attribute this to a lapse in judgment, the decision on Australia Day further compounds my concerns. I feel compelled to express that it is my firm intention to seek alternatives to Woolworths whenever possible. This sentiment is shared by many of my network subscribers who harbor similar apprehensions about the company’s current direction.

The prevailing trend of “wokeness” in Woolworths and other corporations within the corporate landscape is, in my opinion, perplexing and not in line with the Australian way of life. The term “woke” itself has come to symbolize a feigned state of awareness that often disregards genuine self-reflection and justice within one’s own behaviour.

In conclusion, I earnestly hope that Woolworths takes a moment to reassess its decision-making processes and gives due consideration to the sentiments of its diverse customer base. Engaging in open dialogue and understanding the broader values of the Australian community would undoubtedly contribute to a more inclusive and customer-centric approach.

Thank you for your time, and I appreciate your consideration of my concerns.

Sincerely,

Ray Payne OAM

Frontline Veterans Network

[email protected]

 

WONG’S TRIP A MESSAGE: ‘AUSTRALIA MUST BE NEUTRAL’

ED: OOOOPS Sorry seems I forgot to post the link yesterday.

ALL the faux hysteria over the Albanese government’s “failure” to contribute further to operations in the Red Sea lacks understanding of Australia’s regional military history.

It also lacks understanding of a potentially long war Israel didn’t want but created through poor political leadership and ideological arrogance.

It was a situation foreseen by ardent Zionist Albert Einstein, who warned his close friend, first Israeli president David Ben Gurion of challenges maintaining a just and inclusive society.

He also warned militarisation created potential for enduring conflict with Israel’s neighbours.

Australia fought two Middle East wars out of misplaced Imperial loyalty rather than protecting its immediate interests.

CLICK LINK to continue reading.

WONG’S TRIP A MESSAGE: ‘AUSTRALIA MUST BE NEUTRAL’ | Australian Defence History, Policy and Veterans Issues (targetsdown.blogspot.com)

Roundabout rules explained.

There are thousands of roundabouts across Australia and frequent drivers would probably meet one every day. But, as common as they are, roundabout road rules are often misunderstood. Motorists should know what a roundabout is, what they’re for and the road rules that govern their use. So have a read of the below to refresh your understanding.

Roundabouts manage the traffic flow at intersections. They move traffic in one direction around a central island. Vehicles can turn left or right, go straight ahead, or make a full turn (U-turn). Part 9 of the Road Rules 2014 details the legislation that covers roundabouts. Reg 114 explains how to give way when entering or driving in a roundabout, and reg 118 outlines indicating when leaving a roundabout. The road rules do not change depending on the size of the roundabout.

The basic rules to remember.

The roundabout sign means Slow Down, prepare to Give Way and if necessary, stop to avoid a collision.

  • When approaching a roundabout, you must get into the correct lane, indicate if turning, and give way to traffic already on the roundabout.
  • Enter the roundabout when there is a safe gap in the traffic.
  • If you need to change lanes, you must indicate and give way to any vehicle in the lane you’re moving into. You can only change lanes where there’s a broken white line. You must not change lanes if the line is unbroken.
  • When exiting a roundabout, whether you are turning left, right or straight ahead, you must always indicate a left turn just before you exit, if practicable.
  • Look out for bicycles on a roundabout. They are entitled to use a full lane. Bicycle riders must follow the same rules as other drivers on roundabouts. However, on a multi-lane roundabout, they can use the left lane to turn right. When turning, they must give way to vehicles leaving the roundabout. Look out for bicycles stopped in the left lane who are giving way to vehicles leaving the roundabout.

Giving way when entering or driving in a roundabout

  • A driver entering a roundabout must give way to:

(a) any vehicle in the roundabout, and

(b) a tram that is entering or approaching the roundabout.

For this rule, give way means the driver must slow down and, if necessary, stop to avoid a collision. There is no specific legislation stating one must give way to the other if entering the roundabout at the same time, only that you must give way to any vehicle already in the roundabout.

However, common sense must prevail. As the rule states, a driver must slow down enough to be able to stop to avoid a collision if necessary. Many drivers enter and approach roundabouts too fast and if there was a collision and it was a result of them not slowing to be able to avoid a collision, then they may face penalties from the authorities.

Roundabout risks to watch for:

  • Take extra care whenever you drive in a roundabout.
  • Keep an eye out for cars that are leaving the roundabout.
  • Be careful if changing lanes in a roundabout, particularly when leaving.
  • Look out for vehicles that are making a full turn.
  • Watch for pedestrians, bicycles, long vehicles and motorcycles.

 

“It’s a great honour and blessing to be confronting America directly.”

In a dramatic twist of events, Yemen’s Houthi rebels have boldly declared their direct confrontation with the United States, as revealed by the organization’s leader in a gripping televised speech. The leader fervently vowed to persist in their campaign of targeting ships in the Red Sea until the blockade of Gaza by Israel is lifted.

As tension escalated, the U.S. intensified its strikes on Houthi targets, prompting President Joe Biden to candidly admit to reporters that the military actions undertaken by his administration so far had not achieved their intended effect. In a challenging exchange with journalists in Washington, D.C., Biden questioned the efficacy of the strikes, acknowledging that they had not succeeded in halting the Houthi rebels and indicating that the attacks would persist.

Adding to the escalating narrative, the White House, in a surprising move, redesignated the Houthi rebels as a terrorist organization, reversing the decision made in 2021 to delist the group. This decision set the stage for further confrontations between the U.S. and the Houthi rebels.

Thursday night witnessed the fifth airstrike by the U.S. on Houthi targets in Yemen. American jets focused on anti-ship missiles, which U.S. Central Command revealed were poised for launch into the southern Red Sea. The situation intensified as the conflict unfolded on multiple fronts.

In a personal attack on the American president, the Houthi leader, Al-Houthi, scorned Biden as “an elderly man that has trouble climbing the stairs of an airplane yet is traveling 9,000 miles to attack those that wanted to stand by the oppressed people of Gaza.” The war of words heightened the animosity between the two sides.

The origins of this conflict trace back to the Houthi rebels’ retaliation against Israel’s relentless bombardment of the Gaza Strip, coupled with their objection to U.S. support for such actions. The Biden administration, along with the U.K. government, initiated retaliatory strikes against the Houthi rebels on January 12, following weeks of the group’s numerous attacks on ships navigating the Red Sea.

The plot thickens as the U.S. reclassified the Houthi rebels as a “Specially Designated Global Terrorist,” a decision that drew retrospective criticism as it reversed the delisting in 2021. The consequences of this intricate geopolitical saga unfold, leaving the world on edge and wondering about the next chapter in this unfolding story of conflict and confrontation.

 

Republic of Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation

ED: I sent this out back in August 2023 and I’ve been asked to send it out again.

The Republic of Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation (the Citation) was awarded by the former Government of the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam) to military units that distinguished themselves in battle. Initially, only a limited number of Australian units across the three services were approved to accept and wear the Citation emblem.

All Australian military units under the operational control of the United States Military Assistance Command Vietnam are now eligible for the Citation emblem.

Eligibility

Eligible units/elements of the three Services, including qualifying dates, are documented at the specific links below:

List of Navy Units Eligible for the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation (PDF, 178.6 KB)

List of Air Force Units Eligible for the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation (PDF, 181.01 KB)

List of Army Units eligible for the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation (PDF, 191.07 KB)

Application

Eligible individuals can submit an application. Under ‘Application Type’ select Republic of Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with PUC.

Applications will be assessed against veteran service records and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs Nominal Roll of Vietnam Veterans.

Personal records do not need to be supplied in order for Defence to assess an application for the Citation emblem. The Directorate of Honours and Awards will make contact if further details are required.

Family members of deceased Vietnam veterans who may be eligible are asked to submit an application. See Granting of Unissued Service Awards of Deceased Members.

Wearing

Individuals are not eligible to wear the Citation emblem until they have been formally approved to do so through the application process.

The Citation is a singular emblem, and once approved and received following assessment, should be worn in accordance with respective Service guidelines.

Please note that approval to wear the Citation emblem does not give a person the authority to wear the Republic of Vietnam Cross of Gallantry (Medal) which is an individual decoration awarded to a number of Australians by the Government of the Republic of Vietnam in recognition of individual acts of gallantry.

Exchange

The Palm device on the Citation emblem is bronze. Some Citations were historically issued incorrectly with a gold Palm device. Personnel in possession of an incorrectly issued Citation emblem may return it for replacement.

Ensure full name, service number, address and contact details are included with the returned device to the address below:

Directorate of Honours and Awards
Exchange Citations
PO BOX 7952
Canberra BC ACT 2610

 

Debunking Net Zero Agenda in the Australian Transport Industry

Despite the skepticism surrounding the feasibility of Labor’s Net Zero commitment, there are concerns within the Australian transport industry, particularly among some truck operators who have fallen prey to what is perceived as a myth. This skepticism is rooted in the belief that the National Road Transport Association has compromised the industry’s interests by embracing the Net Zero agenda without considering the broader implications for businesses.

One of the primary concerns raised involves the adoption of lithium-powered trucks, viewed as ticking time bombs due to potential safety hazards. Critics argue that the lithium batteries, akin to the explosive nature witnessed in some electric cars, pose an even greater risk in the context of heavy-duty trucks. The fear extends beyond incidents occurring during the charging process, as the explosion of a massive truck battery, priced at $120,000 and measuring 2m x 1.2m, could result in catastrophic consequences, potentially devastating half a block.

Moreover, critics point to the lack of adequate charging infrastructure for commercial electric trucks in Australia. The prevailing concern is that these vehicles, with their substantial lithium batteries, are rendered unreliable due to the scarcity of stations capable of swapping batteries. This limitation restricts the trucks to predetermined routes, inhibiting flexibility and posing challenges for those needing to deviate from their chartered courses. The cost of investing $120,000 in batteries and an additional $85,000 for fitting becomes questionable when confronted with the practical challenges of limited charging options and potential operational constraints.

A key argument against the viability of electric trucks in Australia lies in the fact that the lithium batteries, despite being heralded as environmentally friendly, rely on coal-fired power for recharging. Critics question the logic of investing in these batteries when the energy source contradicts the purported environmental benefits. This discrepancy, coupled with the overall lack of infrastructure, raises doubts about the practicality of transitioning to electric trucks.

Detractors of electric trucks in Australia underscore the geographical challenges posed by the vast distances and varied terrains. The argument is that diesel remains the more practical and efficient choice for transporting heavy loads, particularly when considering the country’s unique landscape. At $2 per litre, diesel fuel continues to be an appealing option, offering greater efficacy compared to the uncertainties associated with electric alternatives.

While concerns about the practicality and safety of electric trucks persist within the Australian transport industry, it is crucial to separate factual concerns from hyperbole. Addressing these concerns requires a comprehensive examination of charging infrastructure, safety standards, and the environmental impact of power sources. As the industry navigates these challenges, a balanced and informed discussion is essential to determine the most viable and sustainable path forward.

ED: It should be noted that defence is also pushing forward with electric vehicles.

WONG’S TRIP A MESSAGE: ‘AUSTRALIA MUST BE NEUTRAL’

ALL the faux hysteria over the Albanese government’s “failure” to contribute further to operations in the Red Sea lacks understanding of Australia’s regional military history.

It also lacks understanding of a potentially long war Israel didn’t want but created through poor political leadership and ideological arrogance.

It was a situation foreseen by ardent Zionist Albert Einstein, who warned his close friend, first Israeli president David Ben Gurion of challenges maintaining a just and inclusive society.

He also warned militarisation created potential for enduring conflict with Israel’s neighbours.

Australia fought two Middle East wars out of misplaced Imperial loyalty rather than protecting its immediate interests.

CLICK LINK to continue reading.

Unmanned Ships Complete Pacific Cruise.

The groundbreaking deployment of four unmanned surface vessels (USVs) by the US Navy in the Pacific marked a pivotal moment in naval innovation, as it sought to assess and integrate autonomous capabilities into crewed fleet operations. Over a span of five months, the Sea Hunter, Sea Hawk, Mariner, and Ranger operated in a forward-deployed environment, navigating the vast Pacific waters with real sailors and Marines on board operational ships.

Under the careful oversight of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, the deployment aimed to rigorously test existing concepts of operations, challenge crewing assumptions, and evaluate predicted maintenance needs. The inclusion of actual personnel on the operational ships allowed for a comprehensive examination of the interaction between autonomous vessels and their human counterparts, providing invaluable insights into the practicality and efficiency of this innovative approach.

The success of the deployment has propelled the concepts for operations and sustainment to the brink of readiness for widespread implementation. The lessons learned from this real-world testing phase have not only validated the viability of integrating USVs into naval fleets but have also accelerated the development of refined operational procedures and maintenance protocols.

The Navy’s readiness to order the construction of the first operational large or medium unmanned surface vessel (USV) signifies a bold step towards the future of naval warfare. If such an order were placed today, the accumulated knowledge and experience gained from the recent deployment would expedite the finalisation of concepts, ensuring that they are honed and ready for implementation by the time the cutting-edge vessel is delivered to the fleet.

This leap into autonomous naval capabilities not only showcases the Navy’s commitment to technological advancements but also underscores its adaptability to evolving strategic landscapes. As the maritime domain embraces the era of unmanned surface vessels, the U.S. Navy stands poised to lead the way, capitalizing on the success of this pivotal deployment to usher in a new era of maritime operations that seamlessly integrate human expertise with the precision and efficiency of unmanned technologies.

Veterans’ and Families’ Hubs extend into Northern Adelaide

Veterans and families across Northern Adelaide will soon have greater access to support and services.

Today, the Government awarded Lives Lived Well a $5 million grant to establish the Northern Adelaide Veterans’ and Families’ Hub.

The Hub will be open to all current and former Australian Defence Force members, including reservists, and families. It will provide enhanced access to a range of services to support health and wellbeing, advocacy, education, skills and employment, housing and accommodation support, and more.

Lives Lived Well is a not-for-profit organisation with more than 40 years of experience in mental health and wellbeing support. Lives Lived Well has also recently established the Veterans’ and Families’ Hub in Caboolture, Queensland.

Lives Lived Well will take its direction from the unique needs of the local veteran community and will partner with several ex-service and other community organisations, and government agencies to deliver the best possible support for veterans and families across Northern Adelaide.

The Northern Adelaide Hub is one of eight new Veterans’ and Families’ Hubs being established under a $46.7 million Government commitment to develop a network of Veterans’ and Families’ Hubs across the country.

Visit the Veterans’ and Families’ Hubs webpage to learn more.

Call to Arms: The Liberation of East Timor | ABC News Documentary.

The liberation of East Timor marked a pivotal moment in the complex relationship between Australia and Indonesia, as well as the birth of a new nation through the intricate dance of diplomacy and a crucial peacekeeping mission. The events that unfolded underscored the challenges and opportunities inherent in navigating international relations during times of political upheaval.

In 1975, when East Timor declared its independence from Portuguese colonial rule, it found itself thrust into a tumultuous struggle for sovereignty. However, Indonesia, under the leadership of President Suharto, viewed East Timor as a potential threat to its territorial integrity and swiftly annexed the region, sparking a brutal occupation that lasted for nearly a quarter of a century.

The situation reached a boiling point in 1999 when, amidst escalating violence and human rights abuses, East Timor sought to break free from Indonesian rule. This quest for independence triggered a tense and delicate diplomatic dance between Australia and Indonesia. Australia, positioned in the region and sensitive to the humanitarian crisis unfolding, found itself at odds with Indonesia, a historically significant neighbor.

As the tension escalated, Australia, along with the international community, faced a moral dilemma. Balancing its commitment to human rights and regional stability with the need to maintain a cooperative relationship with Indonesia, Australia sought to find a diplomatic solution. International pressure mounted, and the United Nations eventually intervened to facilitate a referendum in East Timor, allowing the people to decide their political future.

The outcome of the referendum, held in 1999, was a resounding vote for independence. However, the aftermath was marred by violence and chaos, as pro-Indonesian militias rampaged through East Timor, causing widespread devastation. In response to the escalating crisis, Australia led a multinational peacekeeping force, INTERFET (International Force for East Timor), to restore order and protect the fledgling nation.

Through the joint efforts of diplomatic negotiations and the peacekeeping mission, East Timor finally achieved its long-sought independence on May 20, 2002. The birth of the new nation represented a triumph of diplomacy over confrontation, showcasing the potential for international collaboration in resolving complex conflicts. However, the scars of the past lingered, and the events surrounding East Timor’s liberation serve as a poignant reminder of the delicate balance required in navigating the intricate web of geopolitics and humanitarian imperatives.