Hi Bill,

BV> I heard him say that the legislation was drafted so that it *must*
BV> revert back to the previous level.
BG> I also heard him say that there would be NO new taxes, and Rod
BG> reckons that he also promised that existing taxes would not be
BG> raised.  Yeah, sure.

I don't think he was anticipating 35 people being shot in Tasmania
either. Personally, I'm surprised that the media haven't kicked up a
stink and tried to wind everyone up over it. It was probably some
bloody idiot in the media that proposed the buy-back scheme in the
first place. It's obvious that the country is being run by the media.
All you've got to do is not pay any attention to the media for a few
days or weeks. Ignore it. Then when you've totally lost track of
what is happening in the world, listen, read, and watch. You'll soon
see who is running the country and it's not the government.

It is unquestionable that the majority of people in Australia would be
very happ to see a total ban on *all* firearms and I think that John
is right with what he is doing. I wouldn't even be surprised if he
was hoping that they try to block it in the Senate. Could you imagine
it if they did. He'd shut up both houses af parliament and would be
voted back in with such a large majority in both houses that he
could do anything. Including a GST.

BV> I really don't think he would try to mislead us on that as it would only
BV> blow up in his face later.
BG> ROFL!  When has that ever stopped a pollie from making a complete cunt
BG> of himself (or herself, as the case may be) ?

True, but I think that John plans to be around for the long haul.

BV> What I *am* concerned about is the precedence that it now sets.
BG> Like the 3x3 petrol tax, you mean?  9 years and counting...

No. More like, "Oh, no probs. We'll just raise the Medicare levy",
whenever they need to slip in another tax that isn't a tax.

Regards, Brenton
@EOT:

---