The Pickering Post
Thursday, 13th December 2018

If you would like to be involved or support the upkeep and further development of this site, it would be very welcome no matter how small.


Larry Pickering

Four-time Walkley Award winning political commentator and Churchill Fellow, has returned to the fray over concern that the integrity of news dissemination is continually being threatened by a partisan media.


After Kathy first detailed her harrowing experience of rape to the in a two-part series, a rape she claimed was brutally forced on her by Bill Shorten, a number of media outlets contacted me asking for more details. 

Needless to say there was no interest shown by Fairfax or the ABC but a number of other newspapers and TV channels appeared to be keen to follow up on the seriously convincing allegations made by Kathy.

This morning, the Herald Sun and the Daily Telegraph decided to dip their toes in the dangerous litigation waters of accusing an alternative Prime Minister of rape. 

I had spoken at length to a David Hurley and assisted him in every way possible but it appears the Herald Sun’s legal boys have gutted the story, paring it down to merely a claim of police inaction.

I think I’ll give Fairfax’s David Marr a call, he’s not intimidated by claims made against alternative Prime Ministers, after all he spent almost an entire quarterly essay detailing how another Leader of the Opposition at the time, Tony Abbott, was accused of having punched a wall 35 years ago. 

No-one claims to have seen this punch but it certainly stirred the ABC and the Left Press into a week-long frenzy of in depth reportage.

Bill Shorten is this morning backing away from his claim that, “it didn’t happen” with the old Julia Gillard response of, “please refer to my previous answer”.

Kathy’s real story, in two parts, is here... make up your own mind:


As we are going forward to have the sharia low in Australia they need to have 4 mail wetness to see the rap has been commuted and that will convect Mr Bill Shorten

Labor will stand by Bill Shorten just as they did Craig Thompson. He was guilty, but the former Prime Minister Julia Gillard stood by him. Most Labor People in Government have no Morals and they stand for nothing. Most got there by been Union Hacks.

What about those cases in the US, where criminal charges failed but civil compensation cases were successful. OJ Simpson and others.

Ask Bills ex wife and babysitters about his pants antics....Bill knows there is a lot more dirt in his file to come out...

I hope Kathy gets justice and lots of support , shortie will get sorted at the next party meeting .

Perhaps if she threw a burka on , Milne and Greens would be right behind her.

Where's Gillards's support for this lovely person.

Bill Shorterm... great name. Up there with Electricity Bill!

Wow, she has come out and revealed herself! What a gutsy lady! All strength to her. Good luck.

Anyone from EMILY's List been in touch to support her so far?

Gillard is doing a good job burying herself ... she is a low life tramp who was dangerous, but even as this she is losing her footing ! Hard to believe now that she was ever our Prime Minister ... although of course never elected by the people !

Shorten would be wise to cut and run now ... but then we know he is not wise !

Thanks for the warning.

The Shorten rape allegation got an airing on the ABC tonight

This is Kathy's page. Show her some respect. The burqa story is just nextdoor.

Bruce your sincerity and best of intentions is never in question, certainly by me. You are not a "run of the mill poster " in any regard. I suspect that sometimes there are some who like to " have a go ". The old saying " through to the keeper " is most appropriate when posts are " having a go ". Keep up the good work.

It is a pity that the many very beautiful ME women are hidden under these blankets.

Where's ABC's Virginia Hausseger support now????
Ban unAustralian Burka

By Virginia Haussegger (abc reporter)

This article first appeared in The Canberra Times, 27 June 2009

I 've seen it elsewhere around the world, but I didn't expect to see it here. Certainly not on a hot summer's afternoon at the Canberra Centre. But there it was. A ghostly figure walking towards me, clad from head to toe in a heavy black niqab, black gloves and dark shoes. She was trailing along behind her husband and four little children.

The sight of this hideously shrouded figure in an Australian shopping mall is confronting and offensive. And it makes me angry, very angry.

I wanted to stop and ask why she had such disrespect for herself and our culture that she would hide her face and body under all that black cloth, designed to render her shapeless and inhuman. But her husband shot me a glance, and I was silenced. Dumbfounded.

I abhor the burka, and the niqab. I hate what it does to women. I am appalled that women are separated from the world in this way. And I am furious that some women will continue to choose to wear it. But then, throughout history, feeble women who are afraid of modernity have always been complicit in their own oppression.

The burka, with its tiny window of mesh over the eyes, and the niqab, with its letter-slit opening, are tools of patriarchy used to subjugate women. This shroud of cloth thrown over women defies freedom. It is a symbol of control. Wearing it signifies an acceptance of segregation of the sexes. The cultures which demand such segregation are societies in which men are considered the natural superiors to women.

The fact that Western, democratic governments allow this garb to be worn in secular societies is evidence that "gender equality" and the "liberation of women" are still just vague aspirations, mouthed with weak intent. Unless of course you're French.

In an historic address on Monday the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, called for an outright ban on this hideous instrument of control. "The burka is not a sign of religion," he said, "it is a sign of enslavement. It is a sign of subservience." His rally cry has been brewing for years, as the French parliament has watched with alarm the growing number of burkas and niqabs appearing in French cities.

The Urban Affairs Minister, Fadela Amara, who is also a passionate advocate for Muslim women's rights, says the ugly shroud is akin to putting a woman in a "tomb". She's called on France to "stop burkas from spreading". It's a tough call, given there are around five million Muslims in France.

The 2004 ban on wearing hijabs at school, or in public offices, was met with furious protests around the country. A ban on the burka has the potential to ignite riots. Sarkozy knows that. And yet he is still determined to push ahead. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd must do the same.

The burka is not yet common here, but it's only a matter of time. Australia is positioned in a region being transformed by the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. Radical Islam's plan for domination is utterly incompatible with women's equality. Put bluntly, Islamic fundamentalists view Australia, and all Western democracies, as immoral and decadent - because the women are free. Australia must not allow that radical and overt tool of fundamentalism - the burka - to be worn here. It defies our cherished values of equality and freedom.

Wearing the burka - or niqab - in Australia is an aggressive way of saying "I will not integrate into your society, and I care nothing for the cultural mores and social traditions of this country". Instead, the woman wearing it is demonstrating that she would rather submit to gender apartheid than embrace the social norms of this place. The burka is an arrogant display of disrespect to Australia and the Australian way of life.

Covering women like this, and rendering them sexless and shapeless, is apparently to stop men looking at them. It is to ensure the sexual urges of men are not stirred or tempted. It is also a fierce display of proving a man's power over his woman, and his ownership of her. The Koran calls on both men and women to display modesty. Why then don't men wear burkas? Women too are sexual beings, who may also have their urges stirred and tempted by the sight of a man. But of course that doesn't register in societies that view females only as sexual objects and temptresses.

By covering herself in a burka, a woman is relinquishing the right to express herself as a female. She is agreeing to suppress her own sexuality.

For a woman to argue she feels more comfortable hidden beneath her burka, away from the gaze of men, is unacceptable in modern society. Such a claim represents total submission to sexual subordination. That sort of thing might have been understandable - perhaps even forgivable - when women were uneducated and utterly dependent on men for food, shelter and protection. But women must no longer agree to such secondary status. And most certainly, not when they are in Australia.

There is no place here for the burka. Australians must rally to have the burka banned.


Some of the media mugs may be frightened to pursue Rape allegations as they may have a few 'allegations hidden in their own closets?

The Rape allegation against Silly Billy will be over shadowed by TA expressing his 'wishes' that the Burga was not so forcibly worn in som eof our high security venues.! Now ! That has gotta be more newsworthy than a ancient history rape of an innocent young woman and her lifetime of emotional and mental agonies? UNles the OLD GG ma in law arches up!! for her daughter' dignity and a hefty property settlement?