CORPORATISING THE SNOWY HYDRO SCHEME

by Betty Luks
Presented as a great political breakthrough and a magnificent bid to rescue the Snowy River from extinction The Australian (7-8/10/2000) announced the deal between the Federal, NSW and Victorian State Governments, with "John Howard pledging to 'take a constructive attitude' to a groundbreaking two-state pact to save the ailing waterway." Victorian Premier Steve Bracks said "the deal had historical resonance. To leave behind a legacy of the Snowy River running again for future generations ... is something" he is very proud of. Not to be outdone, New South Wales Premier, Bob Carr conceded, "the river's salvation owed much to Victorian Labor's reliance on Save the Snowy Independent MP Craig Ingram".

Presented as a great achievement for all concerned - a win-win situation for us all - it is only when we read the fine print does it hit home at what cost to the Australian people is the 'flow' of the river to be achieved. The Snowy River Hydro-scheme is being set up to be corporatised! The next step in the process will more than likely be 'privatisation'. The States' $300 million rescue deal approved by Howard "will be administered by a joint venture company between the States... The new body, yet to be named, will dole out money on a range of water saving projects..."

In his book "Water's Fall" Christopher Sheil, visiting fellow in the school of history at the University of New South Wales, explains how the government version of 'corporatisation' works. "The theory of corporatisation has one objective around which all its other rationales are clustered, or from which all its justifications are derived. It aims to increase the commercial value of public assets... it seeks to increase the rate-of-return on public assets, as measured against, and in competition with, the returns available from other comparable market investment opportunities... In plain words, the idea is to convert water and other public services into valuable corporate commercial activities, which means subordinating public content to commercial imperatives."

Mr. Sheil tells us, "Since the 1990-91 special premiers' conferences, corporatisation has practically become universal." He goes on to list the corporatisation of government bodies once responsible for Australia's water supplies: Hunter, Sydney, Melbourne, West Australia, South Australia, Hobart and Northern Territory water authorities. It was attempted by the ACT government in 1999 but the move was defeated by the ACT's parliament.

PRIVATISATION NEXT STEP?

Judging by their track record, the Howard Government's next step will be to sell off the Snowy Hydro corporation - privatise - and examples of this likely scenario are many. In 1991 the NSW government approved the construction of four privately built, owned and operated water treatment plants and has since sold off its public irrigation schemes in the Murrumbidgee, Murray and Llachlan Valleys. South Australia is streaks ahead in the 'privatisation' of its water resources.

Professor Shiel writes, "In 1995 it contracted out the entire management, operation and maintenance of Adelaide's water and sewerage system, including its capital works programme... (the government) has also sold its corporation's manufacturing and fabrication division, and opted for building ten private water treatment plants." He reminds us that these utilities "have the most natural of geographic monopolies". Quite!

Corporatisation and then Privatisation of Australia's water resources is simply a sneaky way of 'globalising' our water. It is the surrender of our local and community assets and resources to the transnational corporations who are - usually - the buyers of these assets and resources. We have been warned of the grim state of Australia's environment by the State of the Environment Report released in 1996 by the Environment Advisory Committee. The Executive Summary released by the Minister of Environment, Senator Robert Hill, says that Australians are destroying their environment through population growth, land clearing and the overuse of water resources. Although Australia "has the highest per capita quantity of fresh water of any nation (primarily because of its low population density not because of its richness of water resources)...this is threatened by the pollution of its waterways by salts, sediments, sewage, agricultural and industrial pollution and algal blooms" warns Dr. Joseph Smith

Healing a Wounded World
Quoting R. Humphries Greenpeace Australia News 3 1992, he writes, "In 1991 (algal) blooms rendered water in South Australia's two biggest fresh water lakes, Albert and Alexandrina, unfit for human consumption and contact, for more than three months. If the Murray-Darling Basin becomes subject to further algal bloom pollution, not only would fresh water for Adelaide, the capital of South Australia, be threatened, but $AUS10,000 million worth of agricultural production would also be endangered.

"It has been said that the shape of global conflict in the twenty-first century may well be based on water. You can be sure that the frightening powers involved in the control of water has not escaped the notice of the One Worlders. Water is the first necessity of life, but is easily centralised; and yet one of the first conditions on which we live upon this earth is that it should be to a large extent, decentralised.

History records the control of water was the basis upon which the first centralised State arose on the banks of the Nile. We were told "God sends the rain on the just and the unjust" but such an arrangement is not what the One Worlders have in mind. They would prefer that the rain should be gathered into one place - or under centralised control - and then 'delegated' at their pleasure.
South Australians - in particular - are at the end of the water life-line (the Murray River); the corporatisation and privatisation of water resources should be of serious concern to them.

A DARK MOMENT FOR AUSTRALIA

by Nigel Jackson
The case of Mr.Konrad Kalejs, Mr. Antanas Gudelis and other Australians in danger of being extradited to Latvia, Lithuania or elsewhere to face charges of war crimes and genocide relating to WWII. The following public statement was sent to Prime Minster John Howard with a request urging him to appoint an impartial and independent legal tribunal to assess the situation.

Yesterday, the three main newspapers read in Melbourne (30/9/2000) announced that Latvia has pressed such charges against Konrads Kalejs and that his extradition to Latvia now appears likely. The Herald Sun quoted "prominent Jewish businessman Joseph Gutnick" as saying that Mr. Kalejs "must not be allowed to flee Australia and escape justice". Such a statement appears to equate justice with condemnation.

The Age quoted "Australia Israel Jewish Affairs Council executive director Dr. Colin Rubenstein" as welcoming the Latvian decision and urging the Australian Government "to act expeditiously to ensure that Mr. Kalejs is available for extradition to Latvia the moment a request is in hand from Latvian authorities."

The Australian also published Dr. Rubenstein's views. None of the three newspapers included any statements by Australians opposed to extraditions such as that proposed for Mr. Kalejs, nor any statements by Mr. Kalejs himself or by spokespeople for the Latvian and Lithuanian communities in Australia. Nor did these newspapers show any sign of concern at the possibility that the proposed treatment of men in their late eighties in such a context might not only be unjust and inhumane, but even likely to cause a deep blot of dishonour on the record of Australian justice.

The reports were characteristic. It is fair to claim that the whole issue of proceedings against so-called "Nazi war criminals" has not been adequately discussed in the Australian media and other intellectual forums during the past year or more. Many substantial reasons can be adduced to show that men like Mr. Kalejs should not be subject to such extraditions. They are too old and frail to be able to adequately defend themselves. The events concerned happened too long ago and in a context of war, in which ordinary human behaviour cannot be expected. Many of the witnesses that defendants might need are dead. Disquieting reports have occasionally appeared which suggest that Latvia and Lithuania may have been under improper pressure to proceed with actions against Mr. Kalejs and others. These matters have been brought to the attention of the Prime Minister and not satisfactorily answered.

Distinguished Melbourne barrister Dr. I.C.F. Spry has published a major argument against such extraditions, but it appears to have been ignored by the Government and the major media alike. Under the circumstances a prima facie case can be mounted that Australia is in the process of witnessing a bi-partisan acquiescence by Government and opposition (for ALP justice spokesman Mr. Duncan Kerr has also applauded the moves towards extradition, as reported in The Australian) in a campaign initiated for their own interests by the Jewish lobbies in Australia and overseas. In this case there is the possibility of very great corruption at the highest levels of government in Australia in a matter which could set precedents involving the civic rights of all Australians.

There is an old saying that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done... These serious concerns cannot be lightly laid aside. Thus, I suggest that the Prime Minister should establish an independent Australian legal tribunal, chaired by someone of the calibre of, say, former High Court chief justice Sir Harry Gibbs, to assess the whole situation... I call upon the Prime Minister and the Australian Government to ensure that our nation creates no "Australian Demjanjuks".

THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST MR. KALEJS

JEWISH COMPOSER SPEAKS OUT ON GENOCIDE AGAINST IRAQ

MASS MURDERERS IN DARK SUITS

Mass murderers are generally considered as mentally disturbed individuals who commit their heinous crimes in the shadow of the night. When they are found, such individuals are normally arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to lengthy imprisonment. Mass media usually follow-up such cases in detail, both as regards the acts committed and the persons involved.

Mass murderers in dark suits are a totally different sort of people. Even when found guilty, they are treated with great reverence. The most known among them is probably Adolf Eichmann, one of the top Nazi leaders who presided over the annihilation of Hungarian Jewry in World War II. In his trial in Jerusalem Eichmann declared that he never hated Jews. His participation in genocide was merely the accomplishment of orders given by superiors, which he attempted to fulfil as conscientiously as possible.

Most heinous crimes of our times are in fact committed by gentlemen in dark suits: National leaders and high-ranking public officials. Their weapon is the pen, not guns or napalm bombs. These people never see their victims cry for mercy and die slowly in agonizing pain. The act of murder is often committed thousands of miles away from the place of death. Is there any human act more abhorrent than to kill people without incurring oneself the slightest risk ?

From August 1990 until this day governments across the world have participated in the extermination of 750,000 Iraqi children. Why? It appears that these children's "Godfather" (Saddam Hussein) is threatening world peace, whatever that term means. As "world peace" is as elusive as ever, and as there are still children remaining in Iraq, the infernal machine continues to grind to death 6 Iraqi children an hour, day and night, seven days a week. The weapon inflicting death are the so-called "UN trade sanctions against Iraq", a misnomer for what is an "economic siege of the entire Iraqi population".

This collective punishment of an entire nation has led to large-scale food and medicine shortages, epidemics, permanent health damage and death, to name but a few of the dramatic consequences. God have mercy upon those, such as Madeleine Albright, US Secretary of State, who consider such human sacrifices as "worth it".

It is sometimes maintained that the aim of the "trade sanctions" is not to hurt Iraqi civilians but to force the Iraqi authorities to respect UN resolutions (by imposing "hardship" on the civilian population). The massive deaths of Iraqi children is thus claimed to be an unfortunate "collateral" in the accomplishment of a noble aim, a price which "we" must be ready to pay.

Trade sanctions is a weapon. When they are aimed at an entire nation, they become a weapon of mass annihilation. Those who wield this weapon are fully aware of the consequences ensuing from its use. That's why they push the trigger again, and again. But who are the people who wield this deadly weapon ? They are well groomed gentlemen, known as cabinet members. And known to each other as members of an international platoon. Among the members of this platoon you will probably identify your own Minister of Foreign Affairs, believing himself (herself?) to represent you in summarily executing Iraqi children.

And when an international platoon of ministers executes somebody, somewhere, none is responsible. Absolutely none of them. Because not one of them knows for sure who had inflicted the fatal signature. When somebody inadvertently asks what they have been doing in this platoon, these cowards wail: "It is not me who killed the innocent infant, it is not me." But they return next day to execute a new batch of infants.

Adolf Eichmann sent half a million human beings to death. He fulfilled his duty conscientiously in accordance with a superior order. For this he was rightfully hanged, his body burnt and the remaining ashes spread over the sea. The act was primarily symbolic for it is not humanly possible to punish one person for killing half a million people. What can, what should be done with the members of the international platoon who individually and collectively signed the death warrant of over one million Iraqi civilians, and cannot even claim that they were just following superior orders? Taken from MER website.

DEATH OF HITLER 'DIARIES' FORGER

David Irving has reported the death of Konrad Kujau, German forger of the fake Hitler 'Diaries'. In one of the biggest journalistic hoaxes ever attempted, Kujau, a Stuttgart dealer in military and Nazi memorabilia, collaborated with Gerd Heidemann, a Stern magazine writer, in the attempt to present the forged 'diaries' as authentic. They claimed the documents were salvaged from a crashed aircraft in East Germany which was carrying material from Hitler's personal archives to safety towards the end of the 1939-45 war.

Lord Dacre, better known as Sir Hugh Trevor-Roper, at first thought the Diaries were genuine, but then he changed his mind.

David Irving recalls: The press conference of Der Stern magazine on April 25, 1983, in Hamburg, at which they presented their "Hitler diaries find" to the world, was one of the most memorable points in my career so far; the scholars and academics crowded the podium, eager for the glory. From the floor I then took the microphone, whispered to the Bild editor standing next to me the words "Torpedo Running!" and produced the documents proving that the diaries were fake. There is now a History Channel TV programme on the scandal; originally, I was shown in the press conference demolishing the "diaries", although not identified by name. My image has now (2000) been discreetly edited out of the film as well, in the name of political correctness. From David Irving website.

OLGA SCULLY AND THE HREOC

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commissioner, Anthony Cavanough, has found that Mrs. Olga Scully has distributed material around Launceston, Tasmania, which "was bound to offend, insult, humiliate and intimidate Jews". (The Australian, 28/9/2000).

The Executive Council of Australian Jewry, acting on behalf of the 60-strong Tasmanian Jewish community, last year took Mrs. Scully to the Human Rights Commission. Objecting to the fact that truth was not a defence, Olga walked out of the hearing. The Commissioner has now insisted that she has to apologise but Olga says she will not. The Commission cannot enforce its finding and the next step for the Jewish community would be to take the case to the Federal Court.

Bruce Montgomery of The Australian goes on to report that if the Jewish community was successful in the Federal Court and Olga continued to distribute her material she could be charged with contempt of court which could ultimately mean jail. Not deterred by this prospect, Olga insists she will continue to distribute the material as she is quite prepared to go to jail, "I've lived through worse horrors in my childhood, certainly my family did." Her grievance against the Jews is founded on the fact that both her grandfathers were killed by Jewish revolutionaries, one in the 1918 revolution and the other in a labour camp on the White Sea in 1938. When only a baby, Olga was taken by her parents, with her brothers, to Germany to escape the persecution; she said the German people were extraordinarily kind to them. They put the family up and fed them, and if she can do a little bit to repay that kindness then she will. "It's a whole lot of lies that they are all Nazis who gassed 6 million Jews. Most Jews who died at Auschwitz died of natural causes," says Olga.

The Executive Council of Jewry said Olga had distributed leaflets claiming, among other things, "the Port Arthur massacre was a Jewish conspiracy, Jews practised sodomy and had intercourse with babies, and that Russian Jews controlled pornography."

On the October 4th the following letter from Olga Scully appeared in the letters page of The Australian: HOLOCAUST DEATHS: "I refer to your article Anti-semite thumbs nose at judgement (28/10). In the caption under the photograph you quote me correctly as saying that most Jews at Auschwitz died of natural causes. "This is the conclusion reached by the Jewish Princeton professor Arno Mayer after many years of research. In his book, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken, he wrote that more Jews died at Auschwitz from natural causes than by gassing or shooting. "Forensic and documentary evidence is piling up to disprove the PC version of the Holocaust. There are two untrue statements in the article. I have never said that the Port Arthur massacre was a Jewish conspiracy and I did not say that Jews practise sodomy and intercourse with babies. Let's stick to the truth, not lies." - Olga Scully, Launceston, Tas.

WEST AUSTRALIA'S 34th ANNUAL SEMINAR & DINNER

ADELAIDE CONSERVATIVE SPEAKERS' CLUB

The next CSC will be held on Monday, November 6th, 2000. Guest speaker will be Mr. Kai Richmond. He now lives in Macclesfield, but grew up in Warrawong. A qualified accountant, Mr. Richmond has worked in Community Aid Abroad, Trades Hall and also the Information Industry. Added to this, he is Webmaster for the Adelaide Institute and mentions he is willing to help anyone set up their own website - especially a 'freedom of speech' site.
He will touch on the Greenhouse, Deforestation, Species Decline and in passing will mention Whitlam's Shame, Keating's Betrayal, Ancient Egyptians in Australia and Myths of Whites in New Zealand. With such a 'smorgasbord' every one will go away well 'fed'!

Come along to this Adelaide pre-Christmas CSC and enjoy the friendship and fellowship of like-minded people. Dinner to be served from 6.30pm and the public address commences at 7.30pm. Venue is the Public Schools' Club, 207 East Terrace, (Cnr. Carrington) Adelaide. For dinner bookings phone: 8395 9826. Bookings in by Thursday, 2nd November. After this meeting there will be a break until February 5th next year.

NATIONAL DIRECTOR FOR HORSHAM MEETING