AUSTRALIA'S LUCKY ESCAPE

by Jeremy Lee
Although not due until November, the US presidential election has been in full swing for months. With the field narrowing down to seven favoured candidates, the circus-hype will be stepped up over the coming months. Because there is no compulsory voting, whoever becomes the President in November will get there with support well short of 50 percent of the nation. In fact, if previous presidential elections are anything to go by, less than half the people will bother voting at all. Why?

Christopher Reed, writing in The Bulletin (25/1/2000) included these comments, disturbingly like Australia, although to a lesser degree:
".... A tiny fraction of super-rich citizens exercise vast political power, some of whom are the candidates themselves, running their own vanity campaigns on vast personal fortunes, while others exploit the political legacy of dynastic families.
The pretence of a two-party system disguises what one opposition critic, mostly ignored by a subservient press, describes more accurately as 'two factions of the business party quarrelling over the spoils.'
It is here in early November that a new president and numerous senators and Congress members will be 'elected' at a total estimated cost in campaign funds of $US3.5 billion ($5.3 billion) - an increase of more than one-third since 1996. Most of this loot comes from the corporate world, where the desire for a free and representative democracy is not the motivation…The attention the media devote to candidates and opinion polls demonstrates their complicity; they treat with unquestioning earnestness a system where the outcome has been pre-ordained…US politics is ... in thrall to money, with campaign 'contributions' acting as open bribes in all but name…"

Reed's research for his article comes in part from Noam Chomsky, a world-noted Jewish iconoclast whose findings seldom reach reviews in the mainstream US media. And this was what the Murdochs and Turnbulls wanted for Australia. The influence of big money already exists, with most party politicians learning early not to get out of step with those who fund their parties. But at least we don't have to go through this nauseating process to select our head of state! The monarchical system looks better by the moment.

AUSTRALIA'S SOVEREIGNTY UP FOR GRABS

A 'sub-committee" of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade is now taking submissions on Australia's relations with the United Nations. In its official advertisement for submissions the following comment is made:
"…Of particular interest is the increasing demand for and the changing nature of peacekeeping operations; the implications of these operations for national sovereignty; the question of a standing army for the United Nations; an International Criminal Court; and reform of the structure and financial arrangements for the United Nations…"

This raises huge issues for Australia. The current operation in East Timor is officially a United Nations one, although Australians serving there do so under their own commanders. Much attention in the US has been drawn to the case of a young Marine, imprisoned because his oath of loyalty was to his own country - not an international military force. Australia would be foolish to reduce in any way its own sovereign decision-making process over any use of its already inadequate armed forces.

The record of UN peacekeeping operations since the end of the war, starting with its infamous role in the Congo and Katanga, has been a tawdry one. The current Secretary-General of the UN, Kofi Annan, has had to accept personal blame for the despicable use of so-called "peace-keepers" in Ruanda. The UN's behaviour - and defeat - in Somalia was just as infamous.

Another issue exists. Section 68 of Australia's Constitution says the Governor General, as the Queen's representative, is commander-in-chief of the armed forces. It is not for any politician to transfer command powers to any other authority without the consent of the Australian people. It is essential that as many submissions as possible, raising these and other concerns, be submitted. The final date for submissions in February 21st - only four weeks away. They should be made to:
The Secretary, Sub-Committee on the United Nations, Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, Parliament House, CANBERRA, ACT 2600
Tel: [02] 6277 2313; Fax: [02] 6277 2221; E-mail: jscfadt@aph.gov.au
Website: https://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jfadt/U Nations/UNlndex.htm

STOP PRESS

I wonder how much the various State governments would get for the Dandenong and Flinders Ranges???
Read the following report and wonder!! - Peter H Davies

Olsen off to sell seaports for $500m. 23/1/2000
PORTS Corporation will be offered to Asian investors for an estimated $500 million during a two-week overseas trade mission by the SA Premier, John Olsen. The Premier, who will lead a top-level delegation leaving Adelaide on Tuesday, will:
· Meet with Mitsubishi officials in Tokyo over the future of the Tonsley plant amid fears up to 500 jobs could be in peril.
· Talk in Italy and Japan with two automotive components manufacturers about diversifying the South Australian auto industry.
· Inspect desalinisation plant technology in Dubai, which could have applications for opening tourism on Eyre and York Peninsulas.
· Open a trade office in Dubai - the gateway to the Middle East - to capitalise on the growing export opportunities, currently worth $204 million to SA.
· Launch a tourism first with every post office in Japan used to promote South Australia as a holiday destination.

Mr. Olsen said the mission would be the basis for future exports and foreign investment, which were the key to SA's prosperity. "It's about investment which equals jobs for South Australians as we rejuvenate and rebuild the economy," Mr. Olsen told the Sunday Mail from Port Lincoln where he opened the Tunarama Festival yesterday.

In Hong Kong, Mr. Olsen will meet Mr. Victor Li, who has bought the State's electricity assets for $3.5 billion and is involved in the construction of the Adelaide-Darwin rail link. The Government will urge Mr. Li to open a regional office in Adelaide to explore future investment opportunities in SA. Mr. Olsen also will tell Hong Kong investors about the opportunities in SA, highlighting Ports Corporation, which has been up for sale since last April and is worth an estimated $500 million. "Given the example of the Li Ka Shing's investment (in ETSA and the Adelaide-Darwin railway), clearly SA is a good investment destination," Mr. Olsen said.
In the Middle East, the Chamber of Commerce and seafood businessman Michael Angelakis will join the delegation. They will aim to promote the automotive and aquacultural industry in Dubai. The mission also will visit Cyprus and Greece to strengthen the State's multicultural links between the two nations.

OH HYPOCRISY, THY NAME IS...

by Alfred King
The fact that the media/entertainment industry is so partisan cannot have escaped the reader's attention. As an example, the recent 'blockbuster' movie Saving Private Ryan is typical of its kind. Made with seemingly unlimited resources, given almost unlimited positive publicity and accolades, it was guaranteed to make a huge impression on our national psyche. Fifty-five years is an awfully long time. Yet fifty-five years after the end of the war, we are still being subjected to the most extreme conditioning: the Germans are depicted as being all evil to a man and all are guilty of atrocities: usually against innocent, helpless Jews. The reality is lost that in war both sides commit terrible acts. The Americans are depicted all good to a man, and if there happens to be a Jew in their ranks (which, being Hollywood, there usually is), he is depicted as being extra specially blessed in the goodness department.
There have been many wars since 1945 (coinciding strangely enough with the existence of the UN), providing a great deal of potential material for film-makers, but these have passed by relatively ignored by the film industry. Could this be connected with the fact that many of these conflicts have involved Communist aggression? What is the difference then between Communist and Nazi aggression? While there is no real difference in the two ideologies, making films about WW2 can be tremendously useful in generating guilt-support for, and increasing the power of Zionist-Jewry. While a film that probed too deeply into Communism, would have quite the opposite effect.

Today, Communist regimes continue to kill and torture many more individuals than happened under the Fascists, but the media is strangely silent on this fact. Instead they urge us only to increase trade with Communist nations, i.e., support their existence. Witness China's recent admission to the WTO.

Which brings us to the Kalejs 'case'. The fact is that without consulting the Australian people, a large amount of our money has been spent investigating this 'case' and other similar ones, all of which allegedly happened in another country on the other side of the world, over half a century ago. The Special Investigations Unit into War Crimes was formed, and headed by Robert Greenwood, QC. The resources were made available (though not to the defendants of course). The only evidence' that has been produced is a photo of Kalejs in an SS uniform, and his stating that he had lead an Arajs Kommando Unit.

For the media judiciary, this represents ample evidence because, when dealing with suspected Nazis, the presumption is guilty until proven innocent. Mr. Greenwood argues that anyone leading a unit in the Arajs Kommandos from mid-1940 to mid-1942 "would have to be considered a serious suspect". This is then whipped up in even greater fervour by the likes of Gerard Henderson, the well-known Zionist frontman, whose main concern is not that all Australian citizens should be considered equally fairly by the legal system. He objects to the comments of Immigration Minister, Phillip Ruddock (January 4th) that Kalejs "...is an Australian citizen and any Australian citizen is entitled, as a matter of law, to return to Australia".

Henderson argues in The Age that the problem with this response is that Kalejs is not like any Australian citizen because he did not fully reveal his role in the war when he arrived in Australia in 1950. Hendersons main argument is that war crimes are "...hot issue in North America and Europe" and that Australia must therefore show the rest of the world that it is doing all it can to bring any war criminals living in Australia to 'justice'.

Why then doesn't the righteous Mr. Henderson show the same outrage at the news last month that the British Solicitor-General has decided not to prosecute five Britons for spying for the Soviets in the 1950s? The evidence against them is much stronger than against Kalejs. The crimes of the Soviets are at least as abhorrent as those of wartime Germans.
These five individuals were exposed by a KGB defector, Vasili Mitrokin, who published memoirs based on thousands of documents smuggled out of Russia in the early 1990s. One of them, Mrs. Melita Norwood, confessed in September to having passed nuclear secrets to the Russians shortly after WW2 and kept in touch with KGB contacts over four decades. There is no need to send a taxpayer-funded team to Latvia to find a photo of Mrs. Norwood in a Nazi uniform - it is well known that she has been a proud member of the Communist Party for many years. She remains unrepentant, in December she underlined, "I know what I did was wrong in the eyes of the law, but I still believe that what I did was for the right reasons."
No doubt Gerard Henderson's thoughts are, "Bless her heart."

HOW FAR HAVE WE COME?

by Alfred King
In the final days of 1999 all the newspapers carried columns reflecting on the state of our country at this point in history, and how far the human race has come in all its endeavours. They tended to focus particularly on the increases in computing power (apparently it doubles every 18 months), and what they would term 'economic progress'. Yet one can't help but be struck by the similarities between our society and those symptoms of great civilisations in decline agreed on by all the great classical historians:
1. Society loses touch with its heritage.
2. The moral decline becomes more and more rapid.
3. Massive debt-finance problems at both individual and state level.

Not surprisingly, one aspect the mainstream press has neglected is the huge increase over the same period in the manipulation of society's mind, in which they have been a main player, which results in confusion, ineptitude and misapplication of effort. Alan Gurley makes the point, "deceit has been with us a long time, but this kind of '1984 Big Brother' programme has increased rapidly over the last 100 years and massively over the last fifty years. In fact, with the gulf War, Big Brother made the New World Order official.

At this time of reflection, we are reminded again that 'change' is not the same thing as 'progress' even though the wordsmiths describe it as such. The change we are witnessing is that we are retreating further and further back upon our principles and our heritage. Economic progress on its own is of restricted value. The only true progress is moral progress. We have to learn again to apply spiritual truths in a practical way. We need a central core of belief as a starting reference point against which to measure reality and progress. The individual must then be free to decide upon and control the individual issues that affect him and his family.

In our Society, the government has a legitimate and a specific place that is defined by Jesus: "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and render unto God that which belongs to God." All past civilisations disappeared because they could not solve this problem - where does good government stop? We must have some government, as anarchy is not helpful to anyone, but how to stop government from becoming too large and corrupt, given that the natural tendency of all government is to try to increase its own power? We need to learn the lessons of the past to avoid the abyss we are now hurtling towards.

In spite of multiculturalism and the other divisive mandates imposed on us against our will by the UN, the fact remains that we are one people. We do have a long history of dealing with the problem of decentralisation of power. We have not yet perfected this, but we moved a long way forward and achieved far more in this area than any other people. But we have been betrayed. Today, all our national and international relationships are measured in money terms. The betrayal has been initiated in the area of Finance. The globalisation of trade has left us at the mercy of huge multinational corporations who care nothing for the individual. In today's Australia, corruption spreads down from the top. To return to a more just society, we have to reverse the process. A true generation of conscience must come from the grass roots level of society to spread out and permeate upwards.

Unless we look to moral progress rather than economic progress, we will move towards only equality in life, i.e., no quality of life for anyone of us. People cannot be forced to do good or behave well. We have to decide for ourselves. The examples we are set have a large influence on what we decide. Certainly the current crop of politicians and 'celebrities' do not draw us upwards. We need an apolitical royal family, answerable to God Himself, to whom we have emotional attachment, to lead us to aspire upwards.

IN BRIEF

Was the War Crimes Amendment Bill 1999 - under pressure from the Jewish lobbyists? - pushed through Parliament (with a dead silence on the part of the media) in order to facilitate extradition of alleged 'war criminals' to anywhere in the world? Liberal parliamentary member, Petro Georgiou's speech - recorded in Hansard - should be carefully studied; the main argument used is that we should not insist on our common law procedures as they make it hard for civil code countries to get extradition. [from N.J.]

UK BILLS
In the United Kingdom two Bills are in the pipeline:
1: Criminal Justice (Mode of Trial) Bill which will have the effect, if passed, of taking away a person's right to a trial by jury - one of the most fundamental rights in any democratic country.
2: There is proposed legislation giving police and authorities very wide powers to arrest and detain anybody who might be considered to be 'a terrorist'. On the face of it this sounds harmless, but in the small print it is clear that this wide generalisation can, and no doubt will, include political activists, peaceful demonstrators and anybody who encourages others to protest, e.g., those who marched in Seattle against the World Trade Organisation.

DAVID IRVING CLAIMS HE IS A SOCIAL PARIAH

AUSTRALIANS' PRE-CHRISTMAS DEBT-SPENDING BINGE

by Tom Fielder
"Humanism", the religion of Socialism, postulates that mankind evolved from a 'slug' into the human race. That is about probable as giving one hundred monkeys a hundred pianos and expecting them to play Mozart in harmony together. On the other hand, Christians know that we were created by God and given a Garden of Eden in which to live. Above all other creatures, man was given a further gift - 'free-will'. At some stage down through the ages of history, "Mr. Man and his Wife" thought that they could improve on the Garden of Eden. By using their free will to create something unnecessary that did not exist before, they came to know evil and to be totally dominated by the effects of that evil. By creating a monstrous idea contrary to the laws of nature, civilisation itself is disintegrating and the once fertile planet earth, according to the predictions of some scientists, may not be able to sustain human life indefinitely into the future.

Having lived for many generations in a 'money culture' we have accepted ephemeral visions as a reality. We believe and demand that we consume today's 'needs and wants' with purchasing power that will not be in our hands until some time in the future. Obviously, only goods on the shelf can be consumed now. But it does not occur to the customer that the 'purchasing power' to do so, can, and should be available also. As the late Professor Walter Murdoch of Perth University said in his revealing essay of more than fifty years ago, "Give the people money, since money can be easily created in whatever quantity it is required..."
He continued, "Here in Australia, the financial experts put their hands together and devise a plan for restoring prosperity by cutting down on wages and diminishing the buying-power of the people, when any spark of common-sense should tell us that to lesson people's power of buying could only result in an increase of unemployment and a deepening of the depression..."

It seems to be beyond the comprehension of today's educated society to distinguish the differences between lend and give and to visualise a situation where debt ceases to exist as an economic factor in human life. Debt, or bank loans at interest are the greatest threat to the continuation of a stable and civilised human society, locally, nationally or globally. Consider the recent Christmas spending. Up by $1 l/2billion on last year, bringing credit card debt to $13.5 billion on which 95% of disposable income will be required for debt service in the near future leaving only 5% of wage earnings to purchase the household 'needs and wants' in that period.
Millions of Australian families now face an unsustainable debt burden. Any serious attempt to reduce this debt will push the nation into another uncontrollable recession (depression).

For an expansion of these notes listen to the tapes: The Fertiliser Conspiracy Anon. None Dare Call it Conspiracy Gary Allen. Tapes: $10.50 from MEA Tapes, Box 184, The Basin, Vic. 3154

DAVID IRVING IN THE NEWS AGAIN