DROWNING IN A SEA OF RISING DEBT

by Eric D. Butler
Australia's most distinguished Roman Catholic commentator, Mr. B.A. Santamaria, has in recent times drawn attention to the mounting financial debt problem everywhere. In his column in The Weekend Australian of January l6th-l7th, Mr. Santamaria draws attention to the American debt burden inherited by new President Bill Clinton. Clinton has already made it clear that he is going to pursue "interventionist" policies and not rely upon the much publicised "market forces" advocated by the different schools of "monetarists".

The Clinton appointment of economist Laura D'Andrea Tyson to head the Council of Economic Advisers provides clear evidence that subsidies and trade protection policies are going to be actively pursued. Australian primary producers have been misled for years by the Farmers' Federation concerning the American situation. The American debt policies are forcing the American policy makers to intensify the growing international trade war.

As Santamaria points out, if President Clinton does nothing, the growth rate of the American deficit will accelerate: the current deficit of $400 billion will reach $950 billion by the end of Clinton's first term in 1996. But Clinton's "interventionist" policies indicate that he will rapidly increase the present rate of debt expansion. Interest charges will absorb an increasing amount of taxation. The end result must be disaster.

Not only the USA, but the whole world is now engulfed in a rising tide of debt. Irrespective of which set of politicians Australia elects at the coming Federal Elections, the debt burden will increase under the overall policy of creating the nation's money supply in the form of debt. Growing disasters are mathematically certain under debt finance.

While it is true that the de-regulation of the banking system has made it possible for the banks to engage in unethical activities, it is not very helpful to suggest, as some well meaning monetary reformers advocate, that the banks are creating "illegal" or "fraudulent" money in the form of bank credit. The banks have a licence to create financial credit, which is, in reality, money that everyone accepts. What is wanted, for a start, is the writing off of much of the debt burden, starting with the primary producers.

Any Australian Government has the constitutional power to direct the Reserve Bank to make some debt free credits available. But this is a political question and will only be resolved when the Australian people, through their elected representatives, demand that it be done. Events, more so than reasonable argument, are going to create a growing revolutionary situation, which will force a change in the policy of debt financing. If such a change does not take place, it is as certain as the sunrise that mankind is going to be threatened with social disintegration and ultimately, anarchy.

The late C.H. Douglas, author of Social Credit, predicted over 70 years ago that unless the debt financial system was changed, mankind was threatened with a new dark age. But he also said that a small body only of informed people who knew what to do and how to do it could prove the decisive factor in preventing complete collapse. The League of Rights has built up the only body of expertise available to provide an answer when the inevitable crisis becomes sufficiently acute. Maintaining and expanding the League is of the greatest importance at the present time.

RE-EDUCATING AUSTRALIANS

from David Thompson
Rather than reflecting the ancient principle that our beliefs, rights, liberties and laws derive from the people and their philosophical position, the art of government increasingly reflects the proposition that it is governments that should teach the people what to think, and take the lead in prompting the direction of social change.

To add insult to this injurious proposition, it is always assumed that the taxpayer should pay (and be grateful) for the dubious privilege of being told what and how to think. Justice Elizabeth Evatt proposes the re-education of Australia's judiciary following the South Australian case in which Justice Derek Bollen apparently included the remark that he thought it acceptable for a husband to use "rougher than usual handling" of wives reluctant to have sex, when instructing the jury. In the outcry that followed, no attempt was made to investigate the context in which this remark was made, but Justice Evatt, who recently took up an appointment with the United Nations Human Rights Commission, assured us that moves were under way to educate the whole judicial system in gender and racial issues".
She noted approvingly that the Western Australian Supreme Court had already adopted such a training scheme.

It is unlikely that those "training" or re-educating the judges will be theologically sound clergy - more likely to be radical feminists, or those who are campaigning for some other aggrieved minority group.

AIDS ATTITUDES POLITICALLY UNACCEPTABLE

The campaign launched early in January to counteract discrimination against those with HIV-AIDS, financed by the Federal Government to the tune of $2 million, is also a blatant exercise in re-education. It appears to be aimed primarily at health care professionals, who are understandably cautious about handling AIDS patients, with the contagious and fatal nature of the disorder.
The objective seems to be to bully all Australians into almost ignoring the consequences of the spread of AIDS in the attempt to justify and condone the lifestyle of those who mainly suffer from HIV-AIDS.

In the language of times now disappearing, "discrimination" used to imply impeccable judgment. Thus, to "discriminate" in the handling of contagious and (presently) quite fatal disorders like AIDS is not an unhealthy community attitude, but an important responsibility. We are encouraged to believe that AIDS can only be transmitted in certain ways, and that uncomfortable realities could be ignored. When a young prison officer was stabbed with a syringe contaminated with the blood of an AIDS prisoner in a NSW Prison, he was reassured that he had only a l-in-400 chance of contracting HIV. The prison guard now has HIV, and was paid a large sum of money in "compensation" on the condition that he never spoke to the press.

The treatment of contagious diseases is a medical, not a political problem. In times past, tuberculosis sufferers were isolated, sometimes for years. In Cuba, HIV-AIDS patients are isolated in their own village, and well cared for until a 'cure' is recognised. Rather than browbeating the Australian public (with their own money) to accept that we should ignore the realities of AIDS so as to not hurt the feelings of AIDS sufferers and their families, Australians should be facing up to the implications of a medical epidemic, and treating it accordingly. It is only a totalitarian system that must direct the thought processes of its people. The free society fosters the difference of opinion, and freedom of expression. The thought police in Australia are presently in the ascendancy.

BRIEF COMMENTS

David Irving is an Englishman with no criminal record. But he was convicted in Germany for making a statement that he did not believe any gas chambers existed in Auschwitz. Irving was fined for allegedly defaming the dead. This fine was cited as a reason for denying Irving access to Canada, where he was arrested at a public meeting, held in custody and, after a short hearing before an immigration official, was deported in handcuffs.

Shortly afterwards another Englishman, Salmon Rushdie, who was convicted in Iran before an Islamic Court for making statements about Mohammed the Prophet, sacred to the memory of 500 million Muslims, arrived in Canada and was met by members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and escorted to Parliament House to meet prominent politicians. Prime Minister Mulroney stated in the House of Commons that Canada challenged the death sentence as a direct challenge to freedom of expression.

This raises some interesting questions: Is the alleged Holocaust a more sacred religion that Islam? Is it permitted to blaspheme Mohammed the Prophet, while defaming the memory of dead Jews is illegal in Canada? Does the Prime Minister's statement mean that the German conviction of Irving is not an attack on freedom of speech? And is the Holocaust now a Canadian State religion, which no visitor can question without fear of being deported?

The Zionist campaign to deny Irving entry to Australia suggests that the Zionists want the Holocaust to be elevated to the status of a type of State religion immune from all criticism. But presumably there would be no objection to a British historian arriving who had been critical of Australian troops' performance in the defence of Singapore.

BILL SLIPS UNDER GUARD

from Sunday Herald-Sun (Melbourne), January 17th, 1993. Article by David Hampson

"Multiculturalism is all about the happy co-existence of mutually hostile enclaves" - Terry Lane ... "No messing about. This is serious. The Thought Police have indeed been active. Their timing here is more than suspicious. It borders on the devious, if not the sinister. "At 8.01 p.m., on December 16, the last day of the parliamentary sitting year, one of the most insidious pieces of legislation ever seen in this country was quietly slipped into Federal Parliament. "Known as the Racial Discrimination Legislation Amendment Bill 1992, it hopes to jail us, and our children, for writing, speaking, making gestures, or wearing T-shirts that might perhaps be considered racially offensive.

"The reason given for introducing this bill at such a time was so that it 'could invite public comment over the summer break'. Yes, you heard right ... over the summer break; when most people are away from work, relaxing at home, or in some way out of touch.

"Just before Christmas, a concerned citizen, Mr. Mark Uhlmann from the ACT, made inquiries to the Attorney General's office to obtain a copy of the legislation. "He was told to buy the draft bill from Government bookshops. Attempts to do this in two States were met with blank stares. "Nursing the usual New Year's hangover, and not concentrating much on business, work, or even pleasure, I happened to glance through a paper - Saturday morning, January 2. "By accident, I stumbled across a fairly small advertisement headed: 'Racial Vilification'. "This ad invited anyone wishing to comment on the legislation to obtain a copy by phoning (06) 2506737. Public comments were to be made by February. "I rang the number, but nobody answered until Monday morning. When I gave the reason, a puzzled voice at first claimed no knowledge. "Then it said the person in charge was away on holidays. Nine days later (January 17) an envelope arrived. It contained the five-page law, along with an explanatory memorandum.

"This law defines racial vilification as 'the publication, public expression or promotion of opinions which may invite hatred, serious contempt or severe ridicule on the grounds of race, color, national or ethnic origin'. "The penalty is up to two years in jail. "Racism includes 'any act by which words, sounds, images or writing are communicated to the public, including the display or distribution of documents or the broadcasting, telecasting, screening or playing of any kind of material; or any conduct that is seen by the public, including gestures or the wearing or display of clothing, signs, flags, emblems or insignia'.

"Read this carefully. If that's not enough to throw a scare into anyone who values freedom, we can kiss our liberty goodbye right now. And hand the country over, lock, stock, and gun barrel, to the ideological Nazis. "Under this law, newspapers, radio and T.V. would be history. Anyone waving Australian (or West Indian or Pakistan) flags at cricket matches could become a serious criminal.

"And it appears this law is almost working class specific - intellectuals, academics and artists are exempt. If someone from a university screams that white South Africans are vicious animals, that's O.K. "Or if someone hangs an art show depicting black South Africans as primitive savages, no sweat.

"Proponents of this diabolical attack on freedom, claim it is based on three reports. "They're either misleading themselves here, or telling porkies. The first, the Black Deaths in Custody report, was and is, a separate issue. "The second, the Law Reform Commission's report, Multiculturalism and the Law, recommended against making racial vilification a crime because it would 'restrict freedom of speech unduly'. "No, this law is based on one report only by the Federal Race Discrimination Commissioner, Ms. Irene Moss. "And guess who will obtain the powers of a federal court judge if this law gets through? "Yet in her 535-page report, she gave less than five pages to inter-ethnic racial violence. "Ms. Moss's report dismissed this violence as irrelevant. Apparently ethnic violence doesn't count as racist violence, even when people get killed.

"Racism, Ms. Moss concluded, is predominantly perpetrated by white, native born Australians (male, of course). "That Australia happens to be one of the most warm hearted, non-racist nations on earth - a historical fact - is apparently lost on Ms. Moss. "Even with such views, Ms. Moss still stands to gain the enormous power of administering this act. "That she has aired her views publicly, by 'words, images, and writings', could perhaps see her silenced and maybe prosecuted by her very own laws. "And even though I find Ms. Moss's prejudice abhorrent, I respect her right to hold these views.
"As a great man once said, 'I may disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it'.

"That's my submission. If freedom means anything at all, send a letter now, to Mr. Thami Nqayi, Principal Counsel, Human Rights Branch, Attorney General' s Department, Robert Garran Offices, Barton, ACT, 2600."

BIG BROTHER WATCH

Mr. Buzz Kennedy is a well-known columnist with The Australian, his writings generally revealing him as a traditionalist on many issues. In The Weekend Australian Review of January 2nd-3rd, Kennedy hits out vigorously against Big Brother, revealing how after receiving a small disability allowance for a back wound in World War II for many years, he has been ordered by the Department to provide information which can be matched with that of the Tax Office and "may be" used to compare information about Kennedy held by the Departments of Social Security, Employment, Education and Training, and Health, Housing and Community Services. Kennedy writes that the letter says that the purpose of the "exercise" is to identify those people who are receiving payments to which they are not entitled or are being paid more than they are entitled to receive.

Kennedy observes that the bureaucracy has had more than 20 years to check on his entitlement, and asks, "as it is not taxable, why is it necessary to involve the Tax Office?" Kennedy was also asked to supply his wife's Taxation File Number although she receives no government payments of any kind. Commenting on the assurance that the information sought would be shared with four other departments, but would be kept private, Kennedy says, "Of course it will - apart from being available to maybe 10,000 public servants with access to departmental computer records."

Kennedy was told that while he did not have to supply his Tax File Number, "the law is quite clear that if you choose not to supply (it) your payments will be stopped". Buzz Kennedy says that the money involved is small enough to be negligible - "but the principle is large. This 'exercise' is another step in compiling dossiers on all Australians, each identified by a TFN and available for inspection by any of the tens of thousands of poke-noses with access to Canberra's central computer system."

Kennedy recommends that a New Year resolution should be to prevent Big Brother grinding people down.

GLOBAL WARMING MINOR FOR 13 YEARS

from John L. Daly, The Australian, January 6th
The alarming predictions of human induced global warming are becoming even less tenable with the latest results from N.A.S.A. satellite surveys. "Two TIROS-N satellites, NOAA-y and NOAA-7, have been maintaining continuous surveillance on the Earth's atmospheric temperature since January, 1979. The first results were published in 1989 by scientists at the Marshall Space Flight Centre, Huntsville, Alabama, indicating no change to Earth's lower atmosphere temperature for that first decade. "This was in direct conflict with predictions of greenhouse warming at that time, which claimed that the 1980s had seen an overall warming. "Three more years have passed, giving a longer 13-year data set, and the latest situation, as of November 30, 1992, is still - no change.
There has been no significant net warming or cooling globally for the past 13 years in spite of all the hype and exaggerated predictions.

"While many blame the media for the increasingly discredited greenhouse scare, the real responsibility resides with over funded scientific institutions who prospered in the greenhouse industry. "It is easy to demonstrate that global warming induced by fossil fuel use, if it ever happens, will be barely measurable only in tenths of a degree, not the whole degrees we have been led to expect. "Such a warming would be insignificant and hardly noticed by anyone. The latest N.A.S.A. results support that conclusion." John L. Daly (Hadspen, Tas.)