It is with great excitement we take this opportunity to announce the official launch of Rise Up Australia Party at the National Press Club in Canberra on 11th Feb 2013 from 11am to 1pm.

The Key Note Speech will be delievered by Lord Christopher Monckton, from the Lord Mockton Foundation. He is a member of the British House of Lords and is world renowned for his stand against climate change.

The special guest artist at the launch would be Dave Davitio, one of the finalists from “Australia Got Talent”. He is a very well-known singer and song writer who performs all across Australia.

Rise Up Australia Party National President Daniel Nalliah will also address the gathering and speak on the Vision and Mission of the RUA Party, the importance of protecting Australia’s Judeo-Christian heritage and to take a stand against political correctness and Keep Australia Australian”.

RUA Party National President stated, “We must take a stand for our nation now or our children and grandchildren will pay a heavy price to re-take what we have lost. We cannot and must not miss this opportunity. The 2013 federal election is a window we cannot miss as the people have lost hope in our politicians in Canberra. We can bring back hope, get rid of dishonest politicians and be the voice of the people in parliament”.

We extend this invitation to you, your family & friends to be at the launch, and show your support to “Keep Australia Australian”.

Please make sure to bring your Australian flag.


8 Responses to “Rise Up Australia Party National Launch on 11th Feb 2013 at National Press Club in Canberra”

  1. 1 Hilton Travis

    Christopher Monckton is not and never was a member of the House of Lords, despite what he falsely claims: http://m.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jul/18/climate-monckton-member-house-lords

  2. 2 billie

    Christopher Monckton may be a hereditary peer but the House of Lords did not elect him to sit in the House of Lords or pass laws in UK

  3. 3 Toby Shepherd

    Lord Monkton is NOT a member of the House of Lords and the Clerk of the Parliaments has published the letter written to Lord Monkton to ask him to desist from making that inaccurate claim.

    Please correct your entry, in the interests of accuracy.

    http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2011/july/letter-to-viscount-monckton/

  4. 4 Matt Peters

    Just as Ithought…..remove my post and try to hide the truth. You haven’t got the guts to leave my post on your website and address the issue. You guys are just unaustralian and a fraud like the rest of them.

    For the record this is what I initially posted –
    You claim you want to get rid of dishonest politicians, protect Australia’s Judeo-Christian heritage and reach people into the Kingdom of God, and yet Lord Christopher Monckton is to be the keynote speaker at your launch. This man has never been, and is not now, a member of the British House of Lords and he was instructed to cease and desist from making this claim in a letter to him from the Clerk of the British Parliament in July 2011. He is at best a deceiver and a purveyor of tricky words and spin like so many of our politicians. You say your party will be different however it seems not. Clearly it will be the same as the rest.

  5. 5 Chris

    Dear Danny,

    As you say, the topic of Lord Monckton’s ‘membership’ of the House of Lords stirs up a hornet’s nest of jealous outrage.

    The most malicious accusation implies Lord Monckton is lying about his membership of the House of Lords and is therefore an untrustworthy ‘politician’ and therefore not fit to launch the Rise Up Australia Party at the National Press Club in Canberra.

    Now I am a sceptical person by nature and when I came across these ‘charges’ of deceit I was bemused. In my ignorance of the changes to the rules in the UK upper House I imagined the fuss was about the Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley calling himself a Lord. The dictionary made clear his right to do this. And as the House of Lords was where the Lords who so chose, gathered to consider legislation in the upper house, I couldn’t understand what the fuss was about. Clearly, those in the UK Labour Party who were attempting to stamp out the tradition of Hereditary Peerages felt they had succeeded in 1999 with the Act as described below.

    However, the one thing you can’t say about Lord Christopher Monckton is that he ignores and givers up on the facts; of history; of science; of the law; and the truth as he has discerned it to be.

    The Summary of Hugh O’Donoghue’s opinion on this topic in which the issues I discussed with you on the phone, follows:

    “I am asked to consider whether The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley was correct when, in a recent radio interview in Australia, he answered the question “Are you a member of the House of Lords?” by saying, “Yes, but without the right to sit or vote.” My conclusion is that Lord Monckton’s answer was and is correct at all points. We have the authority of two Law Lords in the Privileges Committee that the meaning of the words “membership of the House” in the Act is confined to the right to sit and vote. The implication is that in all other respects excluded Hereditary Peers remain members of the House. Also, the Letters Patent that created Peerages such as that of Monckton of Brenchley have not been revoked, and we have the recent authority both of the Leader of the House and of the High Court for that. Though the House of Lords Act 1999 purported to remove “membership of the House of Lords” from excluded Hereditary Peers including Lord Monckton’s late father, its constitutionality is questionable. Peerages entail membership of the House. Lord Monckton is correct to state that he does not at present have the right to sit or vote, though if the 1999 Act is unconstitutional the excluded Hereditary Peers are unlawfully excluded. Therefore, Lord Monckton remains a Member not only of the Peerage but also of the House of Lords, save only that he cannot for now sit or vote there, and he was and is fully entitled to say so.”

    The full opinion which includes a marvelous and enlightening meander through the history of the British Peerage and associated constitutional issues can be found here:

    http://lordmoncktonfoundation.com/i/u/10152887/f/odonoghue-monckton-lords-opinion.pdf

    I trust this will be both controversial and defendable enough for you to keep the ‘barbarians’ at bay.

    Regards

    Chris

  6. 6 Alan Baxter

    Monckton is NOT internationally renowned ” for his stand against climate change”. He is an uneducated denier, who makes things up as he goes along.

  7. 7 Michelle

    Why does the fact that Monckton calls himself lord, and may or may not be a member of an unelected British parliamentary body which persists because it rarely makes trouble for the government, make him a fit person to be a speaker at the launch of an Australian political party?

    And while we’re at it, your children and children’s children will probably be too tired and suffering from heat exhaustion to do anything about fighting for their rights. What they will do is curse you for believing your nearsighted white male christians first attitude.

    All the best
    Michelle

    P.S Bet you won’t post this

  8. 8 Phillip

    I hope CTFM doesn’t publish this because they must be weary of me and I get weary of me, myself. I have this thing about world view getting mixed up with science. Politely stifle the yawns.

    Our planet which we call home has been here for at the very least, four thousand million years. Simplest plant-category life existed right back at planetary coalescence. Now I have just now been excommunicated by certain expounders of the Bible, which interests me and should interest the reader as much as my having never been admitted to the fellowship of the fairies at the bottom of the garden, which is the current world view. Only, modern enlightened science simply classes itself atheist, and doesn’t specifically name Titania, Oberon, Pea’s Blossom and co. as operatives. The following scrawl is barely year one. It is merely elementary school faith and common sense. So much for our education system – keep saying it, Pr. D, — there are improvements to be made.

    Unlike the major components of our atmosphere – nitrogen and oxygen – carbon is removed by natural processes and buried. This process of burial has been going on, in varying but generally increasing amounts, for four thousand million years. Replenishment of atmospheric carbon ( which is found mostly as Carbon dioxide) to the best of human knowledge could have been by volcanic emission from underground, or perhaps – perhaps – by re-supply from Space (dry ice comets).

    A comparable scenario — ocean salinity. Salts constantly leach from the land masses and their only possible destination is the oceans. Salinity could only have been kept at acceptable levels through periodic evaporation of large bodies of water, followed by burial of the evaporates. In fact the complete Mediterranean was sealed off and evaporated at one stage. The salt beds were buried.

    Life on Earth requires a fine balancing act. Titania, Oberon, and Pea’s Blossom must have kept busy.

    There is approximately 50 times as much carbon in our oceans as in our atmosphere. There is approximately 600 times as much carbon buried in the earth through geologic processes as there is currently carbon in the oceans, atmosphere and biomass. Since industrialization began (I am no friend of madcap clearing of the land) atmospheric carbon has risen from 0.0003 atmospheres to 0.00038 atm. Going on the carbon buried through sedimentary processes, if all the carbon buried beneath our feet had originally been in our atmosphere at the same moment in history, it would have been roughly a 12 atmosphere contribution.

    So, our atmosphere processed 12 atmosphere’s worth of carbon and life survived. Those fairies?

    Fifty years ago, geologists were calling for an inflow of carbon to save vegetable life and save the planet. 0.0003 is a crisis level, seldom was carbon lower in concentration in the past four thousand million years. Had it sunk lower, life would have ceased to exist, within perhaps a matter of a few tens of centuries(?).

    That’s essentially quoted from the world’s most highly respected geology texts. The most elementary understanding of Space and our place in it tells anyone capable of the most elementary comprehension that at any moment, circumstances could conspire to turn this planet into an icebox on one hand or an oven on the other. 0.00008 atm. CO2 will not mean anything, should this happen. Because it did not happen, the Earth remained habitable. It will remain habitable.

    Titania, Oberon, Julia, Bob, Ross. Malcolm, Al., & co., notwithstanding.

    The reason CTFM is correct in listening to Lord Monckton is not his title – it’s because Australia has had enough of the fairies at the bottom of the garden.

Leave a Reply





3K2 theme by Hakan Aydin