More info on Lang Hancock at LangHancock.info/. See also GinaRinehart.info/, where every criticism of her is disposed of and comments are not censored. For a great Dave Allen libertarian sketch, see: economics.org.au/2011/04/dave-....
Just looked this up after it being featured on the Weekly with Charlie Pickering. I recognised Dave Allen, and wondered how he had come to interview Lang. Most of what Lang wanted to happen has happened, but he certainly seemed confused about what he meant by succession.
How can you confuse when landing ? Lol. I gave Ct Cook my house in the self sufficient garden to use while they in Tonga.Outdoor Garden. Its not our Job man to dress up the Corpse.
Dave had a little bit of experience in the newspaper business back in Ireland circa early 1950s, and had also made some comedy programmes on Aussie tv in '74/'75, and was popular and well-spoken, so that's probably why someone thought of him to do this interview. It does seem an unusual choice though, but he does do a great job.
Why don't you support the idea that New Zealand should be seceded from Australia? Hancock’s own view is to equate W.A. and New Zealand whose capitals of Perth and Wellington are both separated from Canberra by about the same distance of nothingness - sand in one case, sea in the other. He sees no more reason why W.A. should be associated with the Canberra-Sydney-Melbourne axis than should New Zealanders.
NZ never seceded from Australia. Australia wasnt even a country when NZ was established. NZ was notionally under the jurisdiction of the colony of NSW but the British Colonial Office created NZ as a seperate Colony after the Treaty of Waitangi was signed in 1840 between the British and Maori. Australian was created by an Act of the UK Parliament in 1901some 60 years later. Canberra wasnt founded till 1913 some sevety years later. Hancock is an embicille, and is a wonderful example proving money doesnt mean you have a brain or any sense. This is serious stupid speak.
