19 July 1985. Thought for the Week: "Since
probably the majority of people are at heart religious, but
terribly confused, a religious revival is entirely possible,
given conscious and informed leadership. Evangelists quickly
get large followings, but they do not challenge with correctly
informed authority the totalitarian precepts, which now inform
governments everywhere. The Church should once more put the
fear of God into politicians. I do not doubt that the totalitarians
in so-called free countries have a greater fear of genuine
religious revival than of anything else on earth. But the
overtly totalitarian countries have no such fear, for they
have the secret police.... "
B.W.Monahan, in Mystery, Magic, Music and Metaphysics |
A PROGRAMME FOR NATIONAL SURVIVALThe future of Australia depends upon how the growing rural crisis is resolved. As pointed out by the League of Rights over many years, there is a long-term strategy behind the destruction of independent farmers throughout the Free World. In a special videotaped address in Echuca, Victoria, on Monday of last week, Mr. Jeremy Lee, National Secretary of The Institute of Economic Democracy, and author of the revealing book, Australia's Looming Farm Disaster ($5 posted) outlined a programme of survival, one which was warmly received by those present at the meeting. Mr. Jeremy Lee outlined the following
"minimum" list of policy objectives on which there should
be no dissent, and which would also earn considerable support
from other sectors of Australian society: Mr. Lee went on to outline a non-party strategy whereby Australia's primary producers could start to generate a political force which in essence would require all candidates to enter into a firm written contract with their electors, assuring them they would pledge themselves to work and to vote for the type of financial programme outlined. Mr. Lee warned that if primary producers did not use their votes constructively, they were doomed. The President of the National Farmers Federation, Mr. Ian McLachlan, had given a lead following the Canberra rally, by stating that in future the farmers would be looking closely at all political parties and candidates. A statement that aroused the ire of National Party leader, Mr. Ian Sinclair. (A videotape of Mr. Jeremy Lee's Echuca address may be obtained from Mr. Ian Roberts, Hopetoun, Victoria, for $30 post free. Highly recommended for playing to meetings of farmers and their friends. |
THE BILL OF RIGHTSFrom the March, '85 Newsletter of the
Australian Civil Liberties Union: The above letter has been sent to the Prime Minister, Mr. R. Hawke, Similar letters have been sent to the various State Premiers, the media, and the Senate Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs. The 1985 edition of "Your Rights", the annual publication of the Australian Civil Liberties Union is available from all League bookshops. Price: $4.00 posted. |
LIBERAL LEADER TAKES STAND AGAINST I.D. CARDSWhilst the Federal Liberal Opposition is dickering around with the I.D. Card issue, (perched right on top of the fence to wait for clearer voter intentions on the matter) - Mr. Hassell, Leader of the Opposition in Western Australia, has nailed his colours to the mast. Mr. Hassell stated (Western Mail 4/7) that it would be unconstitutional to make people use identity cards. He added 'I would refrain from using one (I.D. Card) till I was prosecuted, and then defend the prosecution.' In Western Australia the State Presidents of both the Young Labor and Young Liberal Movement have joined together to condemn the proposed national identity card scheme. Both Leaders stated that whereas tax evasion and social security fraud were serious problems they did not justify the infringement of civil liberties. Regrettably, we have no confidence that the High Court of Australia would uphold the sovereignty of the individual with respect to the I.D. issue. It did not uphold the sovereignty of the States on the matters of the Koowarta decision, nor again the Franklin Dam decision. The Murphy affair could possibly alter the overall situation, as this could produce ramifications, which we cannot even now foresee. Whilst on this matter, we briefly comment that we are in agreement with Professor Colin Howard, Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Melbourne, who stated on an A.B.C. News or Current Affairs session that Justice Lionel Murphy should promptly resign irrespective of any outcome of an appeal, if sentence is passed. The reason? The damage of doubt already brought upon the High Court of Australia, on which there should not be the slightest suggestion of any impropriety. Against this, the Socialist ideologues have put in their oar, before any sentence is passed; and before any appeal; to throw doubt on Australia's judicial processes. The salvation of a brother radical Socialist is uppermost in their intent: the maintenance of the integrity of the Law comes a very poor second. |
FROM NEW ZEALAND 'ON TARGET'(July 1st): "While the (N.Z.) League of Rights has, as yet, heard nothing more from the Race Relations Office or Human Rights Commission, concerning the book-banning issue, the New Zealand Herald for June 27th, reports that a Christchurch bookshop is to be prosecuted by Race Relations for selling books which allegedly incite racial hatred. The Herald names the two books as "The Hoax of the 20th Century" by Professor Arthur Butz, and "The International Jew" by Henry Ford. We understand that the proprietor of the bookshop in question has previously offered to remove the books from his shelves if any part of their contents can be found to be incorrect. It seems the "Thought Police" are more interested in political expediency than establishing truth. As an interesting footnote to this issue, the books in question are apparently available from University libraries. Are the books to be removed from there?" |
IMMIGRATIONThe following letter was published in The Age Melbourne, July l3th, over the name of a "Raymond Watson" of South Yarra, Vic."What is the point of the Minister for Immigration, Mr. Hurford, commissioning a survey of Australians' attitudes towards immigration intake levels? (Most Believe Migrant Intake Too High, The Age, 6/7) if he is going to reject totally the outcome, i.e. that the majority surveyed, including no doubt many recent migrants, believe the projected intake levels are far too high? "He hasn't even bothered to make a politician's promise to review them in the light of the findings. "Neither the Liberal Party nor the Labor Party has been prepared to ascertain the views of the electorate on immigration levels in order to formulate their immigration policies. "Sure, both parties are prepared to use the issue to cause 'flak' while in opposition, but Australians - apparently the majority of them too - are given no referendum or electoral opportunities to express their concern about the immigration intake levels while this bipartisan approach is stubbornly clung to. "Perhaps the point of the survey for Mr. Hurford was only to access how big a job he has to force us to conform to his views. This is evidenced by his remarks. "The survey showed him that 'immigration was not as popular as it should be'. Rather than reacting to the survey results by taking a second look at the immigration intake levels, Mr. Hurford believes he has 'a duty to change these perceptions'. "Has anybody 'proved' that current immigration levels 'do not' affect unemployment levels? "If the majority of Australians are in fact incorrect in their attitudes towards immigration levels, Mr. Hurford has to show us with hard facts and figures, and also convince us that he would be prepared to change his policies if they are totally out of step with the electorate's wishes." |