WORLD GOVERNMENT WOLF PACK HOWLING FOR BLOOD OF SOUTH AFRICA

"Former Prime Minister, Mr. Malcolm Fraser, may be called in to help push the Hawke Government's tough stand against South Africa". The Sun (Melbourne), August 6th.

The report does not say "who", precisely, is to call Mr. Fraser in for a further demolition job in Southern Africa. He has already done the job for the World Government power brokers in Rhodesia. With that unconquerable insensitivity of the blinkered bigot, our former Prime Minister is only too eager to wreak more havoc, on top of that already perpetrated, perhaps to justify - in some sort of measure - what has been done. It could be that he feels that his work there is incomplete, and that further of his "initiatives" in Southern Africa will - at last - crown his actions with ultimate success; as when South Africa will have black majority rule, the glorious multi-cultural society, and such other "enlightened" aspects of modern social democracy. Who knows?

What we do know is that the power brokers for World Government, so strictly behind the United Nations scenes, use people like Malcolm Fraser pitifully, such people are given flattering headlines in the strictly controlled mass media; they are encouraged to strike moral postures (to 'world' applause); and to prance the world political stage, bathed in the glow of hallowed approval. Until they are of no further use; when they are tossed on the political scrap heap - like Joshua Nkomo, in Zimbabwe.

In his regular weekly column in The Herald (Melbourne July 31st), Mr. John Stone, former Head of the Treasury Canberra unleashes some of his piercing comments: "One thinks also of the people of Afghanistan, now steadily and surely being wiped out by a Russian policy of genocide. Yet their agony creates nothing more active than a yawn among all those busy people at the United Nations who this week have been waxing so indignant about South Africa.
"The Australian representative in the Security Council there duly did as he was told by Mr. Hayden and walked, sheep-like into the vote on mandatory sanctions. "I think of the Iranian experience - or the Vietnam experience when I observe the present happenings over South Africa. "Will our editorialists be satisfied when that country also has been taken over by the Russian-supported band of terrorists known as the African National Congress? Those terrorists, incidentally, have been welcomed to Australia's shores, and are now busy here not merely preaching their message of terror, but establishing their 'cells' within our country.
"South Africa is a much stronger country, and much more strongly ruled than was Iran under the Shah. "If and when it does go under, some decades will elapse before its new rulers succeed in reducing its economy to the ruins which now litter the rest of black Africa. "That process will, however, be no less certain for being more prolonged. "I doubt if the black people of South Africa will then be laughing much. "But the Russians, at least, will be - and quite rightly, at us."
That's telling us. He's right, too.

We read in The Age (Melbourne) August 6th, that the Hawke Government - according to the latest AGE-POLL, would be hurled from office, in a landslide, if an election were held now. What does this have to do with South Africa? Plenty, we do now believe. We strongly suspect that the Australian "street person" is sick and tired of the tirades against South Africa, when the all too obvious double standards, as itemised by John Stone, are applied. The Aussie likes fair play, and South Africa is not getting it. He knows that South Africa has formidable racial problems, but he also knows that these will not be solved by putting the political boot in.

We strongly suspect that the psychological war against South Africa is proving counter-productive: the people are wary of politicians, and are reacting. What about the multi-cultural society? What about Asian immigration? Who voted for them? No one! Who voted for a change in the National Anthem? Who voted for metrication? Who voted for a changed Australian Flag? NO ONE! All this rottenness and deceit is now having its effect and creating a backlash against politicians, who are now being increasingly suspected of NOT acting in the interests of their electors, who pay their absurdly inflated salaries. They are being overpaid to wreck our country.

But what is the answer? The people don't know. Only the dreadful League of Rights knows. Down with the League of Rights. The same goes for the Churches. The Bishops and other prelates are joining the howling chorus for South Africa's blood, not knowing the underlying facts at all. What will be the effect? Further division in, and fragmentation of, the Churches that's what. The Truth cleaves, and is cleaving. Well may the brilliant and eminent anthropologist of the early 20th Century be right. Yes, none other than Lothrop Stoddard, who in his great work, "The Rising Tide of Color" ($13.00 posted) foresaw racial wars at the close of the 20th Century and we must admit this is more than just a possibility as years of more discrimination against white nations are evidenced.

Whilst we are in this suspicious mood, we'll say that, in politics, chickens come home to roost. The Moral Law, which Christians recognise, applies in politics, as in all spheres of human activity. The vituperation, which Australian governments have directed against Rhodesia and South Africa, could well be redirected against Australia if and when South Africa is under black "majority rule". Then, could we see the United Nations call for 'mandatory international sanctions" against Australia - a new threat to world "peace" - unless it grants immediate land rights to Aborigines. No, more! The Makarrata could be called for in the Security Council. Two Australian nations - a Black and a White. The Black embraced by their brothers of the wonderful Third World. Immediate Cuban "aid", Naval and air bases built by their brothers of Vietnam, China, and the Soviets. Impossible? Who's kidding whom?

VALDER v. PEACOCK

Jeremy Lee comments
The party 'fracas' between Liberal President John Valder and the Leader of the Opposition, Andrew Peacock, concerns the matter of election policy. Peacock, conscious of the odium which now surrounds the Hawke Government appears to feel it a mistake to make any commitment, which might cause debate. It is enough for him to sit silently on the sidelines, waiting for an electoral backlash to eject Mr. Hawke, at which point he would merely step into the resulting vacuum without the embarrassment of pre-election commitments.
The Liberal President is at least conscious that something must be done about the size of government and the massive over regulation in Australia; at which point his common sense has deserted him. He believes that the only way to achieve a reduction in the size of government is to cut the Social Services Bill - unemployment and disability pensions, and other welfare areas.

While it is true that a huge number of Australians have been forced into dependency on government 'hand-outs' - largely as a result of high taxes and the resulting decimation of the private sector - no cut in welfare is justifiable without the provision of genuine incentives elsewhere. Worthwhile opportunities for unemployed youth, for example, to find worthwhile and creative occupations must be provided before existing support systems are cut away.

In orthodox terms, it is a Catch-22 situation. But there is an alternative which - although it would have both Andrew Peacock and John Valder shivering in their shoes - offers the chance to rebuild hope and productive incentive without the preceding and devastating squeeze which so many orthodox economists and politicians believe to be the only choice we have.
Total government expenditure in Australia now exceeds $80 billion. Of this, just on $30 billion goes in debt and interest payments. Cutting this area would allow tax-cuts without any further squeezes. But it would mean putting the pressure on the moneylenders - and that is what has politicians and parties so terrified.

Recent news tells us that Australia's money supply - M3 - has "blown out" to an increase of 17.2 percent. If the Government would use its banking powers to fund the bigger part of this "blow-out" with a new issue of debt-free and interest-free credit, to be specifically spent on tax reductions, Australia would have the "trigger break-through" needed to steer the economy back onto course. We fear it is going to take bigger men than Andrew Peacock, John Valder, or, for that matter, Ian Sinclair, to look this issue fairly in the face and take the necessary action. It's so much easier to allow "the little people" - farmers, small businessmen etc, to carry the burden, than to do a Jack-and-the-Beanstalk, and tackle the giants!

FROM THE QUEENSLAND IMMIGRATION CONTROL ASSOCIATION

"In Australia the level of fertility is currently about 7% below replacement and is projected to settle at about 10% below replacement in the long term…a disproportionately large number of immigrants are in or yet to enter their childbearing years. As a result immigration makes a significant contribution to natural increases." - Australia's Population Trends & Prospects. 1984: p.32.

What the Government publication is announcing, loud and clear, is that as a result of deliberate over taxation policy adopted by successive governments, the birthrate has been lowered to a "17% below replacement level" and will fall lower, and that the required replacement will be made up of births to immigrants of whom approximately 49-50% are from Asia, according to published statistics (Catalogue number - 3401.0 for 1984).

"Both the Hawke and Peacock teams can take the discredit for having achieved zero population growth in this country, and then replacing the population by aliens. "As shown in Australia's Declining Birthrate ($3.00 posted), the fall in births in this country has closely followed the fall in marriages in every State since 1970 onwards. These falls have corresponded with rising inflation and the massive over taxation to which the population has been subjected...."

SOVIET DRYDOCK IN ALBANY, W.A.

"The proposal for a Soviet dry-dock to be sited in Albany (W.A.) was first suggested by the Labor candidate for the town, Mrs. Jo Lynch, following the Government's refusal to guarantee a loan for the Bunbury Port Authority to buy the facility. Albany-Advertiser (W.A.) July 23rd.

There is really a "paper war" going on in this part of Australia: and we'll wager that not one in a thousand Australians in the Eastern States knows anything about it. As should be expected, many W.A. businessmen are "all for" a Soviet dry-dock in Albany. It will "open up" the area for further developments: it will put umpteen thousands of dollars in their pockets. The usual "money talk" that blinds dull and greedy people to reality. All we can do now in the limited space available to us in O.T. Bulletin, is to reprint two letters - one from Mrs. Jo Lynch, and another from the opposite viewpoint.

Firstly, Mrs. Jo Lynch, who has the credit for advocating a Soviet dry-dock in Albany:
"In reply to M. Lynn (July 4) I would like to make the following points:
1) The floating dry-dock was seriously considered for Bunbury, but was rejected by the Government because of Bunbury's proximity to Cockburn Sound and its military establishments.
2) I don't need to go to the U.S.S.R. as I already have been there. (We bet she has...O.T.) I agree with the comment that it is a great privilege to live in Australia and believe that none of the countries I have visited (23) can compare with our way of life.
3) The dry-dock would be an Australian facility, manned by Australians. It would be able to service the fishing fleet of any nation, not just those of the U.S.S.R.
4) It is unfortunate that the prejudice of a very few people can cloud the facts of an important issue.
5) I have stressed on every occasion that what I am calling for is a feasibility study to see if the floating dry-dock, manned by Australians, but servicing Russian vessels, poses a threat to our national security. If it does, then we certainly do not want one. However, if it does not, then the people of Albany deserve the employment and economic benefits which will flow from this facility."

Now for the letter by a known loyal Australian
"I find it extraordinary that the Soviet proposal to set up dry-dock facilities in Albany should receive any consideration at all. Apparently dollars or the prospect of them over ride common sense. Lenin did say we would be overcome through trade, in other words, greed. The Soviet has bases around the Indian Ocean, has now greater military, naval and nuclear power than America. She is the major threat to world peace, continually expanding her power, both overtly and covertly.
It is naive to have dealings of any kind with her. Her record in Afghanistan is only the latest in a long history of similar occurrences. Three million Afghans have fled their country, a people noted for their bravery.
I find it sickening and hypocritical that we refuse dealings on the simplest level with South Africa, but bow in homage to Russia. Is misery by the million more acceptable than the odd one or two? How many people have fled in terror from South Africa? Have you considered that if South Africa falls to Marxism (as Rhodesia did, with our assistance) Africa will be largely Marxist?
I might add that while we hear endless criticism and sniping at the sins of the Western world, I have yet to notice a mass exodus of our people to Marxist countries. Rather the reverse, I would have thought,
Surely that teaches us something. Indeed, it does teach us something!