On Target

POLITICAL ZIONISM AND THE DAVID IRVING AFFAIR

by Eric D. Butler
The Political Zionists may be congratulating themselves on having kept, at least for a short period, British historian David Irving out of Australia. But in the process they have suffered a major defeat, which will become increasingly obvious as events unfold. Comments concerning the powers of a small number of Zionist Jews have been publicised.

Writing in The Weekend Australian of February 20th-2lst, regular columnist Humphrey McQueen says that the banning of Irving "is political in the meanest sense because even without the election the Labor Party is terrified of losing votes and donations from local Zionists". McQueen could also have said that the "Opposition" Parties are also terrified, as demonstrated by the cowardly behaviour of their spokesmen, who are also endorsing the Irving ban. This is helping to strengthen the growing perception in the community that there are no basic differences between the Parties.

A survey of the Australian media reveals that every daily paper in Australia, including provincial dailies like the Albury (NSW) Border Morning Mail, has criticised the Irving ban, most, of course, observing how "obnoxious" Irving's views are, but that a nation allegedly committed to freedom of speech should permit Irving to express his views. Clearly the Irving case is not going to go away, as witnessed by the growing interest in the case.

David Irving has been given millions of dollars of free publicity. People who had never previously heard about David Irving now know about him, and are asking questions. Even amongst the torrent of sloppy and vicious writing about Irving, with large numbers of elementary errors of fact, a glimpse of Irving's views has come through. Mass circulation Herald-Sun, whose editorial opposing the ban on Irving was relatively one of the best, felt obliged to commission Irving to write an article, this appearing in the Saturday, February 20th, edition. Here Irving outlines how his 30 years of research in the world's archives had led him to the view that while tens of thousands of Jews, along with others, had been murdered by some of the Nazis, the story of the alleged mass gassing of Jews at Auschwitz was obviously a gigantic hoax. A recognised master of research, Irving quotes from intelligence sources which tens of thousands of Australians are reading about for the first time. This is explosive material, as is the video film of the director of the Auschwitz museum, Dr. Piper, admitting that the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz were built after the war.

David Irving concludes his Herald-Sun article by asking, "Why the hysteria against Irving? Why have Australians like Dr. Jacques Adler and Professor Konrad refused invitations to debate me? What are my opponents frightened of?" What they are frightened of is that the world's greatest authority on documents and other information concerning the Second World War is destroying the foundations of a gigantic hoax, which is still being exploited in the interests of an ongoing global programme.

As far as possible the Zionist strategists are going to avoid open public debate with Irving, taking refuge in the claim that debating with Irving only serves to give him credibility. But Irving has already forced them to show their real motives. If the Zionists leaders had any commonsense, they would perhaps have achieved more by ignoring Irving. But the Zionists desperately require some method by which Irving can be prevented from extending his growing international influence.

A study of the Jewish press reveals that the introduction of the Racial Vilification legislation is a top priority. This legislation would take Australia towards the German situation where it is, as David Irving has found, a criminal offence to publicly dispute the Auschwitz myth. A major battle concerning the future of what is left of Christian Civilisation is now being fought out in Australia. But at last the eyes of the Australian people are being opened to the nature of the Zionist terror machine.

BRIEF COMMENTS

One of the most absurd comments on the David Irving affair came from Foreign Minister Gareth Evans who told ABC Melbourne interviewer Ranald McDonald that the Government had acted as it did because of tensions in the community. Evans said, "It's because those (Irving's) views are so palpably offensive to such a significant proportion of the Australian community that the judgment was made that it was likely to generate, particularly in the volatile pre election atmosphere, a violent community response." Presumably those directing Evans did not bother to tell him that David Irving was scheduled to visit Australia AFTER, not BEFORE, the coming Federal Elections! It is to be hoped that Evans is better informed on foreign affairs than he is about David Irving's proposed Australian visit.

The late Dr. Fred Hollows was a classical example of those sincere people attracted to Communism, not by studying Karl Marx on capitalism, but for emotional reasons - concern for the underdog and sympathy for those he perceived to being unjustly discriminated against. However, Hollows lost much of his charm for the liberal psuedo-intellectuals when in latter years he criticised those whites and part whites who were manipulating the land rights movements in their own interests, and for his politically incorrect statements on the AIDS question. An essentially honest man, he came to understand the brutal nature of the African National Congress, lamenting how as a Communist sympathiser he had suffered because he had participated in protests against the South African Government. His scathing comments were in typical Hollows lurid style!

Someone should direct Prime Minister Paul Keating's attention to a significant development in Hawaii, where an upsurge of support for greater Hawaiian sovereignty against the dictates of Big Brother in Washington, has resulted in a recent State order which bans the flying of the American Stars and Stripes flag on official buildings, these replaced by the traditional Hawaiian flag, which has a large Union Jack in the left hand corner. Affection for Britain has remained high in Hawaii. The ban on the American flag has been proclaimed by John Walhee, the first native Hawaiian governor. The upsurge in national feeling is so strong that Washington has become most concerned. The Hawaiian experience is another striking manifestation of a worldwide upsurge of different groups seeking to go back to their roots.

HISTORIC LAUNCH IN MILDURA

The recently formed Union of Farmers announces that in Mildura on Monday, March 8th, it will be launching a programme, which will then extend nation-wide. The launch will take place in the Mildura Football Club rooms, starting at 10.00 a.m. A feature of the launch will be the showing of a professionally produced video film of Mrs. Jeanine McCrae, current administrator of the Union of Farmers, in a powerful appeal to all Australian women to take a lead in saving what is left of traditional Australia. The video will be on sale at the launch.

There will also be a professionally produced video of an expert on the Bank Watch programme outlining the steps people can take in dealing with their banks -the first of its kind in Australia. This video will also be on sale. Those attending the launch will also have the opportunity to purchase bulk supplies of a striking 12-page journal, STRIKE A LIGHT, packed with hard hitting material on all aspects of the national crisis. We have been given a preview of this journal and are most impressed. National distribution will start with the Mildura launch. A light lunch will be available at the Football Club and there will be a three-course dinner at a charge of $16.00. It is anticipated that there will be adequate motel accommodation available for those coming in from interstate.

Mildura is a major Provincial City and is well served with planes, buses and trains. A well known national speaker will be addressing the dinner. In a hard-hitting news release, Bank Watch founder Mr. Jim Cronin paints a grim picture of the extent of the national crisis, warning that the Federal Elections will not resolve the crisis. Those requiring information concerning the Union of Farmers and the Mildura launch, may contact Mrs. Jeanine McCrae, (069) 651 383; Fax (069) 651 205. Visitors can book at Grand Hotel - Toll Free Number 008 034 228, mentioning Union of Farmers.

GOVERNMENT BY TELEVISION

by David Thompson
Since the decision to televise Parliamentary Question Time, Government has increasingly been driven, by the television 'image'. The art of manipulating the press conference is becoming more important than even genuine Ministerial ability. The natural progression from Government by television is to election campaign by advertising agency. In his weekly column, Bob Hawke openly admits that "the two most important people in the campaign from here on in are not Keating and Hewson but John Singleton and Geoff Cousins …"

What do Singleton and Cousins have to do with it? Neither are in Parliament, nor even candidates. Singleton heads the A.L.P's. advertising agency, and Cousins is the Liberal Party's ad-guru. Neither could be regarded as deep philosophical thinkers, but it is not for this that they are paid. They are employed to 'massage' the electorate, to separate the voter from the real world, blunt his reason, dull the mind, glaze the eyes, and reduce him to a virtual zombie who will respond with some enthusiasm to the election jingle of one team, and with calculated contempt to the campaign slogan of the other.

Although Hawke admits that last week's campaigning went "against" Mr. Keating, he places his faith not in Keating's ability (and certainly not in his policies) but in the rat cunning of his old mate John Singleton: "If anyone can do this, it's Singo." League representatives are often asked what part we are playing in the election campaign. We have regrettably reached the decision that it is now unwise to invest scarce resources in a short period of intense madness. We do not propose to compete with "Singo" as he electronically measures our fear of the G.S.T., our complete indifference to "One Nation III", or whatever threadbare strategy is expected to "win" either leader the next television debate.

The truth is that election campaigns now consist almost entirely of "form" with very little "substance". The only chance the genuine voter has in such an environment is to do two things. First, find the most promising candidate for his electorate, and attempt to separate him from the unreality of campaigning long enough to secure - in writing - a few simple undertakings from him about what he will attempt to do on behalf of his electorate.

Second, make the most intelligent assessment possible of the Senate candidates, and devise a way of voting below the line for any genuine independent or Small Party candidates, and against the main Parties. At worst, this should produce a Parliament in which the Government does not control the Senate. At best, it may even produce one or two Independents who actually hold the balance of power in the House of Representatives, which no one is presently discussing, except Mr. Ted Mack, who is working hard to hold his own seat.

Although events have forced a few concessions from the major groups like the maintenance of sugar tariffs, genuine policy changes must be somehow forced after the election. The relentless pace of events could yet force some significant changes.

IRVING

The following three letters from Herald-Sun (Melbourne), February 22nd:

"Your news report on the banning of British historian David Irving (13/2) should not have been headed 'Nazi author', because Mr. Irving is not a Nazi but a Christian and a British traditionalist. "The position taken by the Victorian Council for Civil Liberties appears to be inconsistent. If the Council supports Irving's right to free speech, it should offer him practical support to overturn the ban." (Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic.)

"On behalf of the Al-Moharer Al-Australia, and indeed all Arab-Australians who cherish free speech, I would like to express our outrage and concern over the Federal Government's decision to ban British historian David Irving from entering Australia. "While we do not necessarily endorse Mr. Irving's interpretation of history, we do believe in the right of freedom of speech and expression that is so fundamental to a multicultural, democratic and free society. "We believe the decision to ban Mr. Irving sets a dangerous and potentially divisive precedent. "One is left to wonder whether the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Mr. Gerry Hand, would ban the entry to Australia of former Israeli P.M. Yitzhak (Shamir) or former Israeli Defence Minister Ariel Sharon. "Shouldn't Australian citizens have the right to hear any speaker, no matter how controversial their position?" (Fouad Elhage, Director, Al-Moharer Al-Australia, 110 Powell Street, Yarraville, Vic.)

"When author Salmon Rushdie wrote his controversial book, The Satanic Verses, many of the Moslem communities around the world felt angry and betrayed. "Fanatical leaders such as Khomeini were even impelled to impose the death sentences upon Rushdie. "Why does the Immigration Minister, Mr. Hand, assume that Australians are unable to determine the difference between fact and fiction, when he made his decision to ban British author, Mr. David Irving, from visiting this country? "Why is more weight given to one group's protest than the other? Surely this unfair, political vote scoring reaction will cause more community unrest than Mr. Irving's lecture tour." (Timothy A. Martin, Williamstown, Vic.)

FAMILY STUDIES

from Herald-Sun (Melbourne), February 17th
Family studies has shown that 62% of women with children aged 0-5 years wish to remain at home with their children; 34% prefer part-time work and only 6% wish to do full-time paid work. "Yet Mr. Keating, at a time of high unemployment, is holding out a huge carrot to entice these mothers back to paid work against their will. "This is nothing but economic conscription.

"There is no satisfactory studies available to us yet of the effects on children of long-term day care, but many parents hold a conviction that the best form of care for their children is their own care. "Most women, delighting in the company of their young children, wish to claim a few short years to devote exclusively to them. "Only 18% of Australian children are receiving formal child care, the other 82% are in either parental or informal care (relative, neighbours, friends, etc.), thus this is hardly the way to secure the women's vote.

"Women who care for their children save the Australian taxpayer millions of dollars a year by doing so but get nothing out of this economic statement but a door slammed in their face. "It is time the discrimination ended and childcare payments were made directly to parents to return to them the choice as to how their children are cared for." (Pauline Smit, National Secretary, Women's Action Alliance, Camberwell, Vic.)