IMMIGRATION FORCING THE FABIANS INTO A CORNER??

"The Prime Minister, Mr. Hawke, declared yesterday that he would fight the proposition that Asian immigration be cut, even if he thought it would cost him the next election." - The Age (Melbourne), August 8th.

Mr. Hawke appears to be being pushed into a corner on the Immigration issue, and is fighting back. He has defended multiculturalism aggressively in recent days, and now is snarling about an election on the issue. There can be no finality with an "election on the issue": elections are not fought on just one issue, alone; because so many other issues obtrude onto the electoral scene. Party politics, for example; many voters (lifetime Party people) - could not bring themselves to vote against their Party on one issue. Other voters would not consider the issue to be nearly as important as the politician's claim and the reverse. We recall that Mrs. Margaret Whitlam, when Gough Whitlam was Prime Minister, remarked that inflation "was a lot of hoo-ha". The million, or more, Australians who were struggling then on pensions and superannuation (with inflation at the time well over the 10%: it hit 20% under Whitlam) - did not think inflation was "hoo-ha".

An election on Immigration would not solve anything, really. But what would set the record straight would be a REFERENDUM on Immigration; and that is what we are not going to have. The advocates of multiculturalism will attempt to make mileage out of the fact that a part aboriginal lady, and a Vietnamese were successful Local Government candidates in Victoria over the weekend past. All this means is that these were good candidates: at least good enough to impress their voters in Local Government that they would do a good job in council.

We can't endorse the view that their success is an endorsement by their community of multiculturalism. However, we do agree with the Prime Minister that the issue of Australian citizenship should be taken far more seriously that it is at present. Yes, it is disappointing to read that 60% of such migrants are English/Irish. Many of these, of course, would think that they are Australian citizens, from the days when "British subjects" could move - effortlessly - from one British country to the next. It can be argued that if migrants pay their full taxes, then they are morally entitled to social security when the need for it arises; citizens or not. However, we do not believe that non-citizens should have the right to sponsor relatives to Australia.

Mr. Hawke complains that the political debate over Asian immigration could jeopardise Australia's trade with South-East Asia; meaning that Australia should retain - even step up - its rate of immigration from Vietnam (mainly) in order to gain some economic advantage thereby. This is most certainly wrong in principle. It is "buying off" these countries, rightly or wrongly (we think wrongly) for a short-term profit (the end result could be awful).

We can state clearly that other Asian nations would not have a bar of this! Japan and China for starters. These two nations must be among the most homogenous in the world. Indeed, the Chief of the Tokyo Police Department landed himself in hot water not all that long ago, for asserting (in the U.S.A., we believe) that the (relatively) low rate of crime in Japan is, in part, due to the fact of a strong, homogenous population in his country. China is most selective on the issue of immigration. Europeans have virtually no chance at all of gaining citizenship. These strong Asian nations, (China and Japan) would not lower their racial standards for a few million dollars worth of foreign trade. No way.

Foreign Awards
Whilst on the subject of Trade we have a few remarks to make about Mr. Bill Hayden and his foreign gong. (South Korean) - another issue which has been bungled by Messrs. Hawke and Hayden. The disrespect shown to the Queen by breaching protocol is yet a further reason why Mr. Hayden should not be Governor General. But we have other things to say.

Quite by chance, we were re-reading a small book - Manacles for Mankind published back in 1960 (No it is no longer available). The author is, or was, Mark Ewell. The "manacles" in the title refer to the "legal chains" now being forged for many nations, including Australia and New Zealand, via the United Nations. In 1960 such claims must have read quite ridiculously, but now the "chains" are all too real, and frightening.

Mark Ewell knew his subject and was an accurate prophet. In Chapter 22, Mark Ewell opens the Chapter by writing; "In attacking national sovereignty and advocating widespread and deliberate miscegenation, UNESCO follows the Communist line. The policy (is) to break down the resistance of all peoples and races to World Government."
Ewell continues; "At the first meeting of the U.S. Commission for UNESCO on September 23rd., 1946, William Benton made the position clear: "We are at the beginning of a long process of breaking down the walls of national sovereignty ... In this process UNESCO can be - and indeed must be - the pioneer...."

Yes, we are working up towards our main point; but first Mark Ewell inserts a footnote on miscegenation (race mixing): "Typical of the attitude considered enlightened in UNESCO circles is the advice of Mr. Brock Chisholm, the first Director General of the World Health Organisation (a United Nations body.... O.T.) who, in an article in Weekend Magazine, published by Toronto Telegram, told Canadian parents to practise birth control to reduce the number of children in their families and then to adopt the rest from other countries, preferably from the over populated brown or yellow races, remarking: "As far as I am concerned, the sooner we're all interbred the better."

Our Mr. Bill Hayden, the next Governor General of Australia, unless we can be spared this tragedy, stated on August 8th, 1983: "I believe that Australia will ultimately become a Eurasian country as Australian Europeans and Australian Asians marry one another, and I think that a desirable trend." This now (in) famous statement was well reported in the print media around Australia.

We are quoting from Dr. J.C.A. Dique's "gem", Immigration: The Quiet Invasion (1985). Dr. Dique quoted from the West Australian, September 13th 1983. We saw it in the Melbourne dailies at the time. Mr. John Howard, of course, is being viciously attacked by the masters of the political commentary "industry" as an evil person for, as one prominent "master" wrote - "Letting the racist Genie out of the bottle." A reference to Sinbad the Sailor in the "Arabian Nights" legends. Others have written that Australian politics will never be the same, Howard must go, etc. etc. Some (so called) "Christian" spokesmen are raising the moral issue: no , not the leaders of the mainline churches, as far as we have seen. They are silent (so far). If there is a moral issue at stake, then they should not be silent. We can't believe that a desire to protect and preserve one's racial heritage is Immoral (by Christian standards). Some "Christian" spokesmen are saying that it is. That is why, no doubt, Mark Ewell saved the quote from Pope Pius X11's Encyclical, Summi Pontificatus (1943) for the end of this Chapter: "…it is quite legitimate for nations to treat their differences as a sacred inheritance and guard them at all costs "

MR. WILSON TUCKEY AND AIDS

Wilson Tuckey has done it again: "outraged" many people with his blunt comments. Is he right or wrong? Well, he's not all wrong, and we are not making the basic error of intruding into a technical debate (medical issues), which are beyond our competence. From all that we have read we have been persuaded to hold the view that there is a veil of disinformation which has been drawn, officially, over the whole AIDS issue; but it hasn't "veiled" the truth altogether.

In the excellent booklet, AIDS: The Plague to End All Plagues, the Logos Foundation's Director, Howard Carter, writes on "Gay Politics". It is hard hitting stuff: there are ample instances quoted to convince the sceptical that AIDS has become politicised; the "Gay Lobby" votes cannot be ignored. What the politicians do not want the voting public to accept (true, we still believe) is that the homosexual factor is the principal factor in the transmission of AIDS. We are well aware that there are other factors, and that heterosexuals can become infected with the AIDS virus. We are well aware of reports that AIDS has been genetically engineered, etc. etc. We must leave these essentially technical matters to the technical experts. The politicisation of AIDS must be our concern. We urge readers to obtain a copy of the Logos booklet and heed what it reveals. The booklet carries an endorsement by Professor Anthony Radford, a most highly qualified medical expert, from "Primary Care and Community Medicine", Flinders University S.A. All medical statements have been thoroughly checked, by experts, for accuracy. Price: $4.00 posted from League bookshops.

BRIEF COMMENT