Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label, Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke

Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction

Our Reason For Publishing This Service

Because a number of our readers are new readers, some the recipients of gift subscriptions, the following are a few notes on why we're in the publishing business.

Just what is this Service? It's a monthly report published by Canadian Intelligence Publications, a private firm engaged in research and education in defence of our Canadian heritage of freedom and responsibility. And why is it published? Because today, both within our country and abroad, some of the most fundamental values and aspects of our Christian heritage are under attack, and the minimum price of their survival requires an understanding of the nature of this struggle, and constructive action by those who are yet privileged to enjoy a measure of freedom.

We must understand some of the fronts, the ploys and the deceptions of the enemies of freedom and those societies that nurture freedom. For instance: For most of the past 55 years that we've been researching and publishing, one of the main aspects of the assault upon freedom operated under the front and label of 'Communism,' which this past decade or so seems to have lost its momentum, at least under that guise or label. Yet, the very essence of its evil -- the massive centralization of power, denial of human rights and national sovereignty -- now masquerading as 'Globalization' or 'World Government,' and nurtured by the greatest concentration of centralized power in history, including international finance and economic conglomerates, is now undermining and assaulting the human rights and freedoms of all peoples and the rights and sovereignty of every nation!

We'd better check behind the labels and propaganda.

Another grave threat to the future of our country as a genuinely free nation comes from within: from the current bureaucratic censorship and book-banning by the federal government of anything expressing a view considered by the Elitist Establishment to be 'politically incorrect,' and the escalating attack upon our fundamental rights of freedom of speech and assembly, and the right of dissent.

This assault upon the right of Canadians to examine all sides of any issue, and to dissent or express a 'politically incorrect' view, is being promoted under the pretense of combatting 'racism' or 'anti-Semitism.' The enemies of freedom are now exploiting the 'war against terrorism' as an excuse to actually pass legislation criminalizing dissent! Yet, this spurious ploy which now threatens the freedom of assembly, speech and communication of Canadians of all ethnic and religious backgrounds, under the pretense of defending 'human rights' and 'protecting minorities,' is in reality slipping the totalitarian shackles upon all Canadians.

Also, there are the shameful arrests and deportations of Canadian citizens for so-called 'war crimes' allegedly committed more than half a century ago in distant lands during the stress and duress of wartime. Significantly, under duly constituted courts of Canadian common law, Ottawa was never able to get a conviction in any of these cases. Obviously that's why they were switched over for judgment to 'human rights' tribunals, where accused are not protected by our common law and where truth is no defence and, as a matter of fact, irrelevant. These arrests and deportations are reminiscent of the former Soviet Union's brand of 'justice,' are motivated by a spirit of hate and vengeance. They are an outrageous waste of our tax-dollars; they constitute a denial of the Christian precept of love, forgiveness, reconciliation and regeneration. And they have no legitimate place in our great country.

The foregoing are just a few of the questions which we deal with.

Essential Weapons Essential weapons in today's defence of our country include facts, information, knowledge and understanding. And it is in researching and placing in your hands these essential 'weapons,' and challenging a renewal of faith, vision and dedication, that this Service plays a unique role in our nation's defence and future. And more than this, you'll find that we also consistently point out and underscore the constructive policies and reforms essential for the regeneration and rebuilding of our country. And so we welcome new readers to our family, but with the forewarning that it's a hardcore, dedicated family, and that you'll find our Service neither enjoyable nor pleasant reading. It is not written for the faint of heart. It deals fearlessly with the great and often 'controversial' and 'politically incorrect' issues of the hour, ugly as they may sometimes seem, but an understanding of which is essential to our survival as a free people. To all our readers, new and 'old,' may you throughout the coming year find our reports provocative, challenging, and useful in defence of God and Country. --Ron Gostick (Publisher)

A few further notes All policies are rooted in philosophies. And the philosophical roots of this Service's policy are the principles to be found in the Gospels of the New Testament. We might sum up our objectives in these terms:
To promote loyalty to the Christian concept of God, and to a society in which every individual enjoys inalienable rights derived from God, not from the State.
To defend the Free Society and its institutions -- private property, consumer control of production through genuinely free and responsible enterprise, and limited, decentralized government.
To promote financial policies which will reduce taxation, eliminate debt, and make possible material security for all with greater leisure time for cultural activities, now made possible by optimal utilization of high-tech development.
To oppose all forms of monopoly, whether described as public or private.
To encourage reform that would give the grassroots electorate more input and control over public policy, and make its public representatives and governments more accountable.
To support policies genuinely concerned with conserving and protecting natural resources, including the soil, and an environment reflecting (God's) natural laws.

RESPECTING the importance of the individual, this Service:
REJECTS the materialistic concept that the individual can do nothing, that he is but flotsam drifting on the sea of history;
BELIEVES that the individual does count;
AND FURTHER BELIEVES that the individual, calling upon God's grace and guidance, can be more than a helpless victim of environment; that the individual, working in association with others of faith and courage -- the dedicated minority -- can help to shape and mould history, and make a constructive contribution to the future of our country.

RESPECTING GOVERNMENT, this Service believes that:
It is not the legitimate role of government to do for people what they can and should do for themselves. The prime role of government should be to maintain law and order and the general conditions which encourage the exercise of personal initiative and responsibility by the people in looking after their own welfare.

Good news for Canada

The November 4th issue of The REPORT Newsmagazine published a full-page article by its Editor-Publisher Link Byfield, captioned "It had to happen eventually. After 29 years, we have a 'mission,'" Here it is, in full:

In our last edition, I took two pages to lay out why we are transferring this magazine to a new non-profit entity called (for now) The Report Foundation. I explained how over time, by pure happenstance, we have ended up as Canada's only consistent media defender of traditional principles in business, politics, law and society. And I proposed that the role of the new foundation should be to shift the conservative stance in Canada from defensive and reactionary (as it has been for as long as I can remember) to proactive and aggressive (as in the U.S.). This last being a very large ambition, it's worth elaborating on how we hope to fulfill it. How do we parlay a western-based magazine with 45,000 subscribers into a national movement?

For guidance, I tracked down a friend of mine in Arizona, Kevin Avram. I first met Kevin in 1989, after he had launched the Saskatchewan Taxpayers Association, and we at Alberta Report had started an anti-deficit group called Resolution One. By then, everyone except politicians and a few stubborn socialists could foresee national suicide in the refusal of governments to cut spending and balance budgets.

When he arrived in our office from Regina, Kevin gave me the impression of a large tractor left idling: big, imperturbable and folksy, but with a powerful promise of horsepower. He seemed to fill our little boardroom all by himself. Shortly thereafter, our two groups amalgamated to form the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF). I then returned to publishing magazines, and Kevin, aided by many others, went on to build the CTF to 90,000 supporters. It's still going strong, and very effective. Well, there was Kevin once again, a decade older and a bit grey, filling our little boardroom, with the big difference this time that the organization being formed was our own. And unlike the CTF, which was brand new, the present challenge is to expand a 30-year-old publishing operation, quite set in its ways, into a national force for positive change.
"You should start with a 'vision,'" he advised our assembled and guarded management group. "If you were to succeed in your overall plan, what would success look like?" Eyes rolled inwardly, I am sure. Ours has never been a "vision statement" kind of culture. News organizations don't have visions, they have nightmares, because their stock in trade is disaster, scandal, crime and strife. The point of this meeting was to get us thinking in larger and more positive terms.
"Typical non-profit groups think the whole point is to express their values," Kevin observed. "But instead they should be persuading other people to support policies that reflect their values. That's quite different."

When Kevin talks like this, I cringe -- not because he's wrong but because he's right. For many years, we have been content to state what we believe to be true, however shocking and unpleasant, and be done with it; we assume this is persuasion enough. But it isn't. It felt a bit like pulling one's own teeth. After much deliberation, we described our foundation's vision thus: "To play a central role in renewing and reshaping Canadian society through the restoration of traditional virtues and values in public and family life."

"Next," said Kevin, "you should define your 'mission.'" Several of us felt we all know what our mission is, so why bother? "If I'm being asked to support your foundation," said Kevin, "I'm going to say, 'What do you people do?' So tell me." This should have been a snap, but it wasn't. The truth is that the magazine has always spoken to several constituencies, and the new foundation must do the same if it is to realize its potential. There are conservatives who see life in economic and material terms, others who think within a framework of traditional moral absolutes, and populists who value social consensus almost regardless of what the consensus is. To effect change, you need all three. But how in a single statement do you draw in as many as possible? After intense discussion, we defined our mission thus: "To improve the quality of life for all Canadians by promoting policies that foster individual initiative and personal responsibility. We emphasize free markets, limited government, open democracy, and the natural rights of life, free speech, religion and property."

This might sound a bit windy, but it will serve a very practical purpose. When anyone now asks what sort of magazine we publish, I'm not left mumbling something about "a sort of western conservative perspective on the news." More to the point, the next time some agitated critic denounces us as homophobic extremists who are trying to send women back to the Dark Ages, I can smile pleasantly and say, "Actually, Sunera, you're mistaken. We want to improve the quality of life for all Canadians. We promote policies …," etc. And there is nothing on the list that she can rail against to any good effect. Can she demand instead "closed democracy" and a "natural right to death, censorship, atheism and state ownership?" Hardly.

The other thing that struck me as we inched forward is how immense this new assignment is, and how carefully the footings must be laid. In building a house, the longest, dullest and least satisfying part is the foundation. People wait impatiently to see the frame go up, all the new rooms and stairways, and the roofline. Yet, for weeks, there you are down in the mud, out of sight, messing with levels and plumb bobs. But there's no escaping it. A good house needs a strong foundation. (End of Link Byfield's article)

A most constructive move
By Ron Gostick

Link Byfield, in the October 21st Report newsmagazine -- the issue immediately prior to the one quoted above -- and in another document sent to subscribers, outlined the reasons for transforming this magazine into a major instrument in an educational foundation designed to broaden the understanding and perspective of Canadians on major problems and issues facing our country. As a non-profit foundation, it could do much more than a mere privately owned publication: for instance, continue to sell subscriptions, but also solicit funding for research, radio programs and other educational activities. Another compelling reason Link Byfield explained for this movement in strategy is this: For nearly thirty years the magazine has been focussing upon and exposing the attack on our fundamental freedoms and human rights; but merely concentrating upon what is wrong in the country isn't enough, is seen as merely negative. It's now time to move onto the positive and start focussing on the regenerating and rebuilding of our country, giving our nation a vision of its inherent potential and magnificent possibilities.

I was pleased and encouraged to read these words of Link Byfield's: "Instead of just one magazine going out every two weeks to 45,000 subscribers, we could undertake a daily radio program that might reach hundreds of thousands. "We could produce a weekly bulletin or commentary and distribute it to members, weekly papers, elected officials, and other interested parties. "We could establish a properly endowed legal defence fund to protect and advance the core freedoms of speech, religion, life and property that are being so rapidly obliterated by activist judges and negligent politicians. We could delve more deeply for constructive answers to problems like climate change, the misery of aboriginal citizens, integration of immigrants, crime and punishment, welfare dependence, the corruption of democracy -- the list is long, and getting longer.

"Additionally, as a non-profit organization supported by tens of thousands of Canadians we could meet with decision-makers to advance real solutions to our country's problems. "On the very day that we launch, we will immediately become one of the largest and most prominent advocacy and policy organizations in the country.

"If you think about it, what causes Canadian malaise is this: no coherent alternative has been formed to replace the left-liberal agenda that has governed the country for the past two generations. "I don't mean political parties, I'm talking about ideas - I'm talking about vision. I think the mistake conservatives make is that we tend to think in the short term, not the long term. We think we can fix the country by changing the government. In reality, we have to change the way people think -- the media, the politicians, the teachers and professionals, and the ordinary citizen."

And I was further encouraged to read Ted Byfield's message: "I have-to say that in the 29 years since we began publishing a magazine, (this) proposal is the most positive and promising we have ever taken." This is great news for Canadians, even those who don't yet know it! For those of us associated with this Service, except for the Christmas message itself, it's the most encouraging and inspiring message we've had in our long battle to regenerate and rebuild our country. In our view the Report Magazine is by far the finest publication of its kind in Canada. Those interested in further information or in supporting its new "foundation" structure, can reach Link Byfield c/o
The Report Magazine, 17327 - 106A Ave, NW, Edmonton, Alberta T5S 9Z9.

On Target Section

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK: "A modern war is a collective prize fight, promoted by outsiders for the benefit of themselves and the destruction of the contestants, who would much prefer not to be involved and would not be if they were not 'organized.' "All visible governments are mere executives of a dictated policy. The dictators of the policy are the arch-criminals and are responsible for the Misery of the Ages." -- C.H. Douglas Bashing and Breaking

The above "thought for the week" item and the following reports by Jeremy Lee, are reprinted from the November 15th issue of the Australian ON TARGET weekly newsletter. - Ed.

I never thought I'd live to see the day when television portrayed private homes being invaded by balaclava-clad storm-troopers in Australia, without warrants and armed, along with their automatic weapons, on no more than suspicion. We might as well be in the middle of some NYPD or Chicago Police gun-battle as in one of the old Commonwealth countries noted for their high level of individual rights.

We once believed that the individual was innocent until proven guilty; that private homes could not be entered without a magistrate's warrant; that efforts were made not to distress women and children, etc. When such principles were scrupulously observed, the police were unarmed, and woe betide those who injured a policeman. The public supported all law-enforcement officials because of the way they did their duty. Those involved in planning or co-ordinating terrorist activities deserve the full force of the law and the severest penalties. But, until convicted, if they have been accepted as Australian citizens they should have all the legal rights that go with citizenship.

If we are going to argue that the situation is now too complex to allow the usual principles to apply, we should declare a state of emergency. We have always prided ourselves, as do Canadians, Britons and New Zealanders, that we have elevated personal freedoms to a level that doesn't exist in most other countries. If we are prepared to abandon them, we become the very thing against which we claim to fight. We bow to a culture alien and inferior to our own.

Few dare say that the present situation is the result of multiculturalism -- but that is what it is. The build-up of Islamic communities in English-speaking and European communities has wrought havoc with harmony and peace. Britain, France, Holland, Italy, Germany, the United States and New Zealand, as well as Australia, have built for themselves time-bombs for future generations. It has largely occurred through the effects of sloppy-thinking idealists who have never had to face the real, on-the-ground problems of communities where cultures clash; and by the indifference of ordinary communities which are only forced to face up when it is almost too late.

Where does loyalty lie? A survey of the almost 2 million Muslims in Britain, carried out by The Sunday Telegraph (UK) in October, 2001, asked which was the most important -- to be Muslim or to be British? -- 68 percent answered Muslim. The result is that large numbers refuse allegiance to the Queen, and will not serve in the police or armed forces. During the same month we had a series of fires and bombs in churches in Sydney. Gareth Kimberley's excellent newsletter (now, sadly, forced to close after he was warned of possible reprisals to his family), in its October 14th, 2002, issue reviewed earlier articles as a result of the Bali bombing. One said: "A church hall was firebombed early yesterday (Oct. 9) and a church under construction attacked by vandals, its altar-site covered with spray-painted hate slogans proclaiming 'Osama the Great' and 'Christianity Must Die.' Vandals set fire to prayer books in the hall which is used as a temporary church by parishioners at Lidcombe's St. Ephraim Syrian Orthodox Church. The attack is the seventh in less than two weeks on Christian Churches. Yesterday's attack was the most brazen yet as vandals showed their support for terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. Most attackers have smashed windows and fire-bombed churches, but graffiti yesterday backed bin Laden with hate messages like 'Bin Laden the Greatest,' 'Holy War Jihad' and 'Kill Jews 1 by 1.'

"The wringing of hands by politicians, and sanctimonious sentiments expressed at interfaith services will do nothing to alter the situation." The Daily Telegraph (Sydney, 1/10-/02) pointed out:
"Sydney's Muslim population is as diverse as it is large -- a microcosm of the faiths worldwide. While most non-Muslim Sydneysiders could identify with the Kakemba Mosque and its predominantly Lebanese following, Muslim communities are spread across the Metropolitan area. Suburbs including Auburn, Zetland, Sefton and Dee Why, catering to nationalities from Lebanese to Sudanese, Indonesian, Turkish and Algerian, form part of the 'rich tapestry' of the growing Muslim community.

"According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the nation's Muslim community grew by a staggering 30% between 1996 and 2001, and now numbers more than 300,000. The bulk of them live in Sydney where there are 40 ethnic Muslim communities. But there are significant differences within the Muslim community with the two main 'branches' being the Shi'ites and the Sunnis, divided by different interpretations of the Koran …"

At least 5,000 children attend Muslim schools in Sydney, with long waiting lists. The Noor Al Houda College at Condell Park, which charges students $1,200 annually, also receives State and Federal funding. The curriculum, naturally, has an Islamic rather than a Christian focus.
Any possible terrorist attacks on Australian soil -- and we have been warned of such a likelihood -- will escalate interracial and religious feelings to a white-hot level, exposing the fallacy of a "happy, successful multicultural society." It will create the pretext for the Government, under the thinking of men like Attorney-General Darryl Williams, to suspend further standards, rights and liberties. Innocent Australians of all persuasions will be the main sufferers.

Why on earth Australians have been led to believe they can create harmony between wildly different races, cultures and religions when similar experiments round the world have failed dismally, is impossible to fathom. In the end we must accept that if we increase the mixture of foreign cultures further we will dash any hope of a stable future. And with the biggest nation in the world, Indonesia, directly to our north, which harbours little goodwill and friendship for Australia, it is time to face the facts.

Latin American underbelly to the U.S. Venezuela is the fifth biggest oil producer in the world. But it is currently undergoing a Castro-like socialist revolution which has seen $US25-billion leave the country this year, with a further $80-billion in capital funds in offshore bank accounts. With no overseas investment the economy is expected to shrink by 6% this year. Responding to George Bush's proposal for a "Free Trade Area of the Americas" (FTAA), Brazil's new President, 'Lulu' da Silva, has remarked dryly that the US should start the ball rolling by cutting protection for US farmers ... Brazil has 50% of Latin America's population, and 60% of the Continent's economic output. Its currency is wobbling, having fallen in value 30% this year, with a possible debt-default imminent. The Argentine is a cot-case. Fifty-three percent of the population is classified as living in poverty, on $US2 a day or less. Although it can produce enough food for 300-million, a quarter of its 35-million people go to bed hungry. The crisis in Latin America may well bring down the world's economy. The suffering nations have no love for America, which they see as the power behind the IMF (International Monetary Fund) and World Bank. None are supporting the possible war against Iraq. The US is building enemies for itself day by day. (End of Mr. Lee's reports)

COMMENT: If a nation permits the international money-changers to use itself as their headquarters from which to direct, impose and enforce its policy, then it's to be expected that nation will be held responsible for the consequences of their actions.

Alberta farmers off to jail!

The November 18th issue of The Report magazine published a 5-page report concerning some incredible actions of The Canadian Wheat Board in Western Canada, captioned "Against the grain," with the subheading: "Alberta farmers go to jail to fight the Canadian Wheat Board over freedom, private property and justice." Following, are three short sections of this article, with their respective captions:

"Thirteen farming fellons. Thirteen men-of honour" "Here are the names of the 13 farmers being jailed for defying the Canadian Wheat Board, and details of their offences.
"Gary Brandt, 33, who farms near Viking, faces 62 days in jail. He took a bag of wheat across the border, forgot about it and ended up carrying it back to Canada.
"Jim Chatenay, 59, of Red Deer: 62 days. He took a bushel of wheat to the U.S. and donated it to a 4-H club.
"Ron Duffy, 50, of Lacombe faced a $6,500 fine and as of October 30 had not been formally notified of the length of sentence in lieu of payment. He took one bag across the border, and after the law was changed, took a commercial quantity of wheat across the line to challenge it.
"Martin Hall, 42, of Vulcan, 131 days. He took a semi-trailer full of wheat and sold it.
"Rod Hanger, 32, of Three Hills, 75 days. Took a commercial load of wheat across the border and sold it.
"Noel Hyslip, 42, of Vulcan, 180 days. Carried a bag of wheat across the border and later sold a truckload.
" Ike Lanier, 72, of Lethbridge, 60 days. Trucked 300 bushels across the line.
"Bill Moore, 63, Red Deer, 131 days. Donated a bag of wheat to 4-H Club, then took a truck of wheat across the border.
"Jim Ness, 58, New Brigden, 25 days. Drove 100 pounds of barley across the border.
"Mark Peterson 42, Cereal, 124 days. Hauled a truckload of wheat across the border.
"Nick Strankman, 49, 180 days. Took 756 bushels of wheat across the line and sold them for $1.50 per bushel higher than the Canadian price.
"John Tucato, 42, Taber, 131 days. Drove 900 bushels of barley across the border.
"Darren Winczura, 35, Viking, 25 days. Drove a bag of wheat across the border.

"All the farmers had the opportunity to pay fines, but chose -- on principle -- not to."

"A cheering send-off for the courageous 13 "There were few dry eyes in front of the Lethbridge courthouse Halloween afternoon as 13 upstanding citizens hugged their loved ones and marched resolutely off to prison. 'I lived my childhood in the dirty thirties, but no one had to go to jail for trying to make a living,' said Vivian Hapke, who noted through her tears that she did not even know any of the farmers. 'It's a sad day, but good. We were brought up not to rock the boat, but the upcoming generation will not be so accommodating; there will be change.'
The wives and children were still composing themselves in the courthouse after the wrenching experience of watching their men disappear behind a huge, clanging metal door, when the first offer of financial support came in. An Ontario miller who had watched the rally on television phoned to say he had not realized what western farmers go through, and offered $5,000 toward the total of $66,000 fines the farmers face. 'I don't even know if that's what the farmers want to do (pay the fines),' marvelled Farmers for Justice spokeswoman Colleen Bianchi. 'They went in on principle.' She planned to post their future decision on the group's Website,
"Premier Ralph Klein told the crowd of 600 to give the farmers a cheering, clapping send-off. 'When decent, hard-working Alberta farmers are willing to take the extreme measure of going to jail for the sake of fundamental freedoms, there's something wrong with the laws of the land,' said Mr. Klein. 'It's a system that has to be changed.' "

Farmers were convicted on policy, not law "Farmers in western Canada who have been sent to jail for selling their own grain broke no law, and the transcripts of many trials confirm this. In fact one judge in Manitoba declared that nowhere is it explicitly written that a farmer must have an export licence to export grain. However, he went on to say that one must construe the intent of Parliament (policy) so as to create harmony between the two acts (the Canadian Wheat Board Act and the Customs Act). In other words, the judge's view was that if there was no law, then one must rely on policy, and it was then that the policy resulted in the conviction. The often-repeated policy enunciated by the federal government was that 'the integrity of the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly must be maintained' and 'the law must be upheld' -- even though there were no law. This is what the convictions were based on and what the judges bought into.

"When judges extrapolated policy into law and convicted, it created a situation where the Crown Prosecutors were able to boastfully declare that they 'now have jurisprudence where it did not previously exist.' It is policy turned into jurisprudence that convicted the Alberta farmers. "There needs to be a complete review ... with the purpose of determining to what extent the Canadian Wheat Board and Revenue Canada manipulated the judicial system. Relying on policy to convict farmers when there was no law must have been approved at the highest level of this Liberal government and likely included people in the Privy Council." --MP Maurice Vellacott, Alliance Critic for the Wheat Board

A Thought Concerning Christmas JOHN 3:16 tells us: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

This month we who profess the Christian faith celebrate Christmas -- the birth of Christ. And the Apostle John also tells us the reason for this miraculous birth and divine, redemptive intervention into the lives of sinful mankind: that every individual, despite his sins and weaknesses, by faith in Christ and His redemptive act on Calvary can enjoy eternal life.

Then, in JAMES 2:20, we read: "But wilt thou know, 0 vain man, that faith without works is dead?"

Which surely means that while the Christian is to be strong in his faith, he must strive in all his labours, associations and works to practice and reflect the values he claims to cherish and uphold in that faith. Otherwise, his faith is dead. Or, to put it another way: While salvation is by faith, not works, without the reflection of faith in our everyday life and works, our 'faith' is little more than an act of hypocrisy.

In short, Christianity is more than a mere religious creed; it is a way of life, or it's nothing. May our readers this Christmas and throughout the coming year, be blessed with good health, happy in their mission and work, and strong in their faith.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil., is that good men and women do nothing.
With apologies to Edmund Burke

Enterprise Section

How to shut up your critics with a single word

We received an October 22nd e-mail from Ingrid Rimland in the United States, reproducing under its above caption the following report by the great British journalist, Robert Fisk, which was published in the October 21st issue of the United Kingdom daily, The Independent.

Thank God, I often say, for the Israeli press. For where else will you find the sort of courageous condemnation of Israel's cruel and brutal treatment of the Palestinians? Where else can we read that Moshe Ya'alon, Ariel Sharon's new chief of staff, described the "Palestinian threat" as "like a cancer -- there are all sorts of solutions to cancerous manifestations. For the time being, I am applying chemotherapy."
Where else can we read that the Israeli Herut Party chairman, Michael Kleiner, said that "for every victim of ours there must be 1,000 dead Palestinians."
Where else can we read that Eitan Ben Eliahu, the former Israeli Air Force commander, said that "eventually we will have to thin out the number of Palestinians living in the territories."
Where else can we read that the new head of Mossad, General Meir Dagan -- a close personal friend of Mr. Sharon -- believes in "liquidation units," that other Mossad men regard him as a threat because "if Dagan brings his morality to the Mossad, Israel could become a country in which no normal Jew would want to live."

You will have to read all this in Ma'ariv, Ha'aretz or Yediot Ahronot because in much of the Western world, a vicious campaign of slander is being waged against any journalist or activist who dares to criticize Israeli policies or those that shape them. The all-purpose slander of "anti-Semitism" is now used with ever-increasing promiscuity against anyone -- people who condemn the wickedness of Palestinian suicide bombings every bit as much as they do the cruelty of Israel's repeated killing of children -- in an attempt to shut them up.

Daniel Pipes and Martin Kramer of the Middle East Forum now run a website in the United States to denounce academics who are deemed to have shown "hatred of Israel." One of the eight professors already on this contemptible McCarthyite list -- it is grotesquely called "Campus Watch" -- committed the unpardonable sin of signing a petition in support of the Palestinian scholar Edward Said. Pipes wants students to inform on professors who are guilty of "campus anti-Semitism."
The University of North Carolina is being targeted -- apparently because freshmen were required to read passages from the Koran -- along with Harvard where, like students in many other US universities, undergraduates are demanding that their colleges disinvest in companies that sell weapons to Israel. In some cases, American universities -- which happily disinvested in tobacco companies -- have now taken the step of blocking all student access to their records of investment. Lawrence Summers, the Jewish president of Harvard, has denounced "profoundly anti-Israel views" in "progressively intellectual communities," that are -- I enjoyed this academic sleight of hand - "advocating and taking actions that are anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent." Mr. Said himself has already described all this as a campaign "to ask students and faculty to inform against pro-Palestinian colleagues, intimidating the right of free speech and seriously curtailing academic freedom."

Ted Honderich, a Canadian-born philosopher who teaches at University College London, tells me that Oxfam has refused to accept £5,OOO plus other royalties from his new book, After the Terror, following a campaign against him in the Toronto-based Globe and Mail. Now I happen to take issue with some of Professor Honderich's conclusions and I think his book -- praised by the American-Jewish scholar Noam Chomsky -- meanders. I especially don't like his assertion that Palestinians, in trying to free themselves from occupation, have a "moral right to terrorism." Blowing up children in pizzerias -- and Professor Honderich's book is not an endorsement of such atrocities -- is a crime against humanity. There is no moral right to do this. But what in God's name is Oxfam doing refusing Professor Honderich's money for its humanitarian work? Who was behind this?

Our own John Pilger made a programme for Carlton Television called Palestine Is Still The Issue. I have watched it three times. It is accurate in every historical detail; indeed its historical adviser was a left-wing Israeli academic. But Carlton's own chairman, Michael Green -- in one of the most gutless statements in recent British journalism -- announced that it was "a tragedy for Israel so far as accuracy is concerned." Why Mr. Green should want to utter such trash is beyond me. But what does he mean by "tragedy"? Is he comparing Pilger to a suicide bomber? And so it goes on.
It is left, of course, to the likes of Uri Avneri in Israel to state that "the Sharon government is a giant laboratory for the growing of the anti-Semitism virus." He rightly says that by smearing those who detest the persecution of the Palestinians as anti-Semites, "the sting is taken out of this word, giving it something approaching respectability."

But we can take comfort that 28 brave academics have signed a petition condemning President George Bush's build-up to war and Israel's support for it and warning that the Israeli government may be contemplating crimes against humanity on the Palestinians, including ethnic cleansing. Have Mr. Pipes and his chums put the names of these good men and women on their hate list? You bet they haven't. Because all of them are Israeli scholars at Israeli universities. I wonder why we weren't told about this. (End of Robert Fisk's report)

COMMENT: Perhaps Canadians and Americans, after a careful reading of the following report, will begin to understand why we've been getting very little in the way of balanced reporting and commentary in our North American newsmedia respecting the Palestinian's plight in today's Middle-East tragedy. --R.G.

Displacing a Culture

On October 17th, from the same source as the foregoing report, we received another e-mail, with these opening paragraphs: "From a somewhat garbled e-mail I gleaned the following -- to which I would comment: Extremely well put, though I would not put it so pessimistically:

"Two days ago, somebody in a newsgroup, apparently, picked up the preface to the paperback edition of 'Culture of Critique' by Kevin MacDonald, and commented: " '100 years from now, if our kids survive, they may well view this book as the single most accurate and important description of the 20th century. If our kids don't survive, MacDonald's book will be lost along with them. For the paperback edition, MacDonald permits himself to make some observations about Jewish influence on contemporary events, including 9-11.' "Below is the conclusion; for the entire preface see the link below": http;//

"Culture of Critique" is really an attempt to understand the 20th century as a Jewish century -- a century in which Jews and Jewish organizations were deeply involved in all the pivotal events. From the Jewish viewpoint it has been a period of great progress, though punctuated by one of its darkest tragedies. In the late 19th century the great bulk of the Jewish population lived in Eastern Europe, with many Jews mired in poverty and all surrounded by hostile populations and unsympathetic governments. A century later, Israel is firmly established in the Middle East, and Jews have become the wealthiest and most powerful group in the United States and have achieved elite status in other Western countries.
The critical Jewish role in radical leftism has been sanitized, while Jewish victimization by the Nazis has achieved the status of a moral touchstone and is a prime weapon in the push for large-scale non-European immigration, multi-culturalism and advancing other Jewish causes.

Opponents have been relegated to the fringe of intellectual and political discourse and there are powerful movements afoot that would silence them entirely.

The profound idealization, the missionary zeal, and the moral fervor that surround the veneration of figures like Celan, Kafka, Adorno and Freud, characterize all of the Jewish intellectual movements discussed in "Culture Critique" (see Ch. 6 for a summary). That these figures are now avidly embraced by the vast majority of non-Jewish intellectuals as well shows that the Western intellectual world has become Judaized -- that Jewish attitudes and interests, Jewish likes and dislikes, now constitute the culture of the West, internalized by Jews and non-Jews alike.

The Judaization of the West is nowhere more obvious than in the veneration of the Holocaust as the central moral icon of the entire civilization. These developments constitute a profound transformation from the tradition of critical and scientific individualism that had formed the Western tradition since the Enlightenment. More importantly, because of the deep-seated Jewish hostility toward traditional Western culture, the Judaization of the West means that the peoples who created the culture and traditions of the West have been made to feel deeply ashamed of their own history -- surely the prelude to their demise as a culture and as a people.

The present Judaized cultural imperium in the West is maintained bv a pervasive thought control propagated by the mass media and extending to self-censorship by academics, politicians, and others well aware of the dire personal and professional consequences of crossing the boundaries of acceptable thought and speech about Jews and Jewish issues. It is maintained by zealously promulgated, self-serving, and essentially false theories of the nature and history of Judaism and the nature and causes of anti-Semitism.

None of this should be surprising. Jewish populations have always had enormous effects on the societies where they reside because of two qualities that are central to Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy: High intelligence (including the usefulness of intelligence in attaining wealth) and the ability to co-operate in highly organized, cohesive groups (MacDonald 1994). This has led repeatedly to Jews becoming an elite and powerful group in societies where they reside in sufficient numbers -- as much in the 20th-century United States and the Soviet Union as in 15th-century Spain or Alexandria in the ancient world. History often repeats itself after all.

Indeed, recent data indicate that Jewish per capita income in the United States is almost double that of non-Jews, a bigger difference than the black-white income gap. Although Jews make up less than 3 percent of the population, they constitute more than a quarter of the people on the Forbes magazine list of the richest four hundred Americans. A remarkable 87 percent of college-age Jews are currently enrolled in institutions of higher education, as compared with 40 percent for the population as a whole (Thernstrom & Thernstrom 1997). Jews are indeed an elite group in American society (see also Chapter 8).

My perception is that the Jewish community in the U.S. is moving aggressively ahead, ignoring the huge disruptions Jewish organizations have caused in the West (now mainly via successful advocacy of massive non-European immigration) and in the Islamic world (via the treatment of Palestinians by Israel). Whatever the justification for such beliefs, U.S. support for Israel is by all accounts an emotionally compelling issue in the Arab world. A true test of Jewish power in the United States will be whether support for Israel is maintained even in the face of the enormous costs that have already been paid by the U.S. in terms of loss of life, economic disruption, hatred and distrust throughout the Muslim world, and loss of civil liberties at home.

As of this writing, while Jewish organizations are bracing for a backlash against Jews in the U.S. and while there is considerable concern among Jews about the Bush Administration's pressure on Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians in order to placate the Muslim world (e.g., Rosenblatt 2001), all signs point to no basic changes in the political culture of the United States vis-à-vis Israel as a result of the events of 9-11-01. (End of Displacing a Culture e-mail)

COMMENT (by Ron Gostick): Confirming the validity and accuracy of the foregoing "Displacing a Culture" item, consider the following:
Alan M. Dershowitz, the renowned American lawyer and dean of the Harvard Law School, in 1997 authored a 395-page book titled The Vanishing American Jew -- his own historical ethnic group. Here are his opening words:
"The good news is that American Jews -- as individuals -- have never been more secure, more accepted, more affluent, and less victimized by discrimination or anti-Semitism. The bad news is that American Jews -- as people -- have never been in greater danger of disappearing through assimilation, intermarriage, and low birthrates. The even worse news is that our very successs as individuals contributes to our vulnerability as people. The even better news is that we can overcome this new threat to the continuity of American Jewish life and emerge with a more positive Judaism for the twenty-first century…"

And what constitutes Prof. Dershowitz' 'more positive Judaism'? A more aggressive and brazen demeanour (chutzpah), designed to further increase his group's power and control despite its shrinking numbers (5.5% of U.S. population less than a century ago but 2% today!).

In short, says this learned sage of Zion, our answer is: to Judaize the whole of America. And it hardly takes 20/20 vision to note they've got a rather good start!

Violating United Nations Resolutions: Iraq and Israel

PMWATCH - September 17, 2002 https://www.pmwatch.or/pmw/index.asp

Are you tired of straight-faced expressions of outrage and indignation over Iraqi violations of UN resolutions, trampling on the human rights of civilians, aggression against neighbor states -- all without mention of the one state that stands accused and convicted of each of those violations on a much more massive scale, Israel? For a list of United Nations resolutions against Israel and Iraq, see below:

Iraq: UN Resolutions violated, ignored: 16;
Countries attacked, invaded, violated: Iran, Kuwait;
Countries occupied for years: NONE;
Countries currently occupying: NONE;
Territory illegally annexed: NONE;
Wars started: 1980, 1990;
Possesses weapons of mass destruction: To be determined;
Possesses nuclear weapons: No;
Most notable atrocity against civilians: 5,000 Kurdish civilians were killed in the village of Halabja, March 1988;
and Currently under a regime of UN sanctions: Yes.

Israel: UN Resolutions violated, ignored: 68;
Countries attacked, invaded, violated: Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Tunisia;
Countries occupied for years: Egypt, Lebanon, Syria;
Countries currently occupying: Syria;
Territory illegally annexed: Golan Heights, Jerusalem, Palestinian Territories;
Wars started: 1956, 1967, 1982;
Possesses weapons of mass destruction: Yes;
Possesses nuclear weapons: Yes;
Most notable atrocity against civilians: 17,500 Lebanese civilians killed in 1982 invasion of Lebanon;
and Currently under a regime of UN sanctions: No.

The above item is reprinted from the October 21, 2002 issue of Christian News, published in New Haven, MO, USA.

© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159