STONE-THROWING

by Jeremy Lee
In mid-October On Target, the weekly newsletter of the Australian League of Rights, was taken to task by Paul Barry, compere of the ABC's Media Watch, for reprinting a letter-to-the-Editor, which appeared in The Cairns Post almost four months earlier (June 12th). The implication of Paul Barry's censure was that the League of Rights, a nasty, racist, anti-semitic organisation may have had something to do with this letter, as the author, Lennie Creek, did not live at the address given, and people in the vicinity said he did not exist. Suitably chastened, the League printed a correction in On Target, October 20th.

In his zeal to single out the League for excoriation Barry somehow failed to mention that the matter of Lennie Creek's existence had been dealt with shortly after its publication in The Cairns Post by a seasoned and well-respected journalist, Lawrie Kavanagh, in Queensland's main paper, The Courier-Mail on June 27th - a couple of weeks after the letter first appeared (and well before On Target carried it).

After pointing out that a number of Aborigines disagreed with some of the claims made about the Stolen Generation issue, Kavanagh continued: ".... One man with similar ideas is Lenny Creek, a mysterious north Queensland Aborigine, who recently wrote to The Cairns Post stating in reasoned tones that he and some of his mates were fed up 'with all this harping about stolen children, land rights and reconciliation'.
The children were not stolen, they were taken away for their own good, as they did not fit in with the full-bloods,' he wrote in a letter to the editor which has raised eyebrows in the north.
'Land rights are a joke. Some tribes are claiming land they never had anything to do with. I know because being an Aborigine I hear all these things. The white lawyers are a lot to blame…"

It was a commonsense letter for those of us not caught up with the breast-beating minority and gave hope that there might be light way down the reconciliation tunnel. To ancient blokes like me and the man who sent me the newspaper cutting of Creek's letter Ingham's 83-year-old Bob Dunbar, a Protector of Aborigines in the Gulf Country during the '50s, it was not so much the contents of the letter, but the guts of the writer that impressed us.

As old Bob wrote, 'That Creek bloke will have the bone pointed at him for sure by Mr. Perkins and the like …' "It would have taken a very brave Aboriginal man to write it and yesterday I contacted a northern Aboriginal acquaintance to track down Creek for an interview, or simply to shake his hand. The best I could get was that Lenny Creek does exist. "'He's the man who wrote the letter,' said my contact. 'He's from the grassroots level and that's his idea of the situation. Whatever he went through he's probably just gotten sick of it. We read the letter and it's caused a big bloomin' ruckus up here, all right.'

Creek letter speaks volumes and one particular section held special interest for old Bob Dunbar, whose job as Normanton's Chief of Petty Sessions made him responsible for Aboriginal welfare from Burketown to Weipa in 1950-55. It said: 'If there is to be reconciliation between whites and blacks then the truth has to be told about what both sides did to each other.
According to Dunbar, that's not the way it is...."

Kavanagh's article went on to disclose Bob Dunbar's scathing criticism of Sir Ronald Wilson's report from the Stolen Generations Inquiry. Dunbar wrote: "They gave me a book on the Commission which investigated the alleged stolen generation - about 700 pages. In it they interviewed about 550, mostly Aboriginals and mixed-bloods - most of them appeared biased and on the side of trying to make this episode as disgraceful as possible.
There was not one person interviewed who gave the commission the other side ... the white side ... of it all. To my mind it's a gigantic scam, a total fantasy. I believe white lawyers could see that there was the possibility of lots and lots of compensation being made to the 'terribly hurt, injured and damaged' people who were removed and that they wanted a share of the spoils.'

All of which while the truth, may be too 'politically incorrect' for Media Watch Kavanagh went on to say that Territory Patrol officers who volunteered to give evidence at the Inquiry were not called. He went on: "…In 1996, one of them, Leslie Newton Penhall, recorded his experiences as a postwar patrol officer, detailing the grave danger facing children of mixed blood, hoping such first-hand information would assist the Inquiry. But Sir Ronald wasn't interested.

Although Penhall and former work mates were not given a chance to appear before the Inquiry, all were branded by association with acts of genocide in Wilson's misguided, unquestioned findings. These are the fantasies posing as history today. The real history will be buried in Canberra archives along with old Bob Dunbar's first-hand account of his time as Protector of Aborigines in The Gulf.

That's why I would some day like to shake Lenny Creek's hand because, as he wrote: 'If there is to be any hope of reconciliation between whites and blacks then the truth has to be told about what both sides did to each other ....'

Can we expect Media Watch to at least correct some of the misconceptions for which it was responsible? Frankly we're doubtful. It doesn't always apply to its own performance the strict objectivity and accuracy it demands from others. Still, we're always prepared to be pleasantly surprised.

OTHERS ALSO HAVE DISPLAYED COURAGE

Frank Devine another journalist of the old school, wrote in The Australian (30/11/2000) of the death at the age of 80 of another courageous Aborigine, Bertha Gollan: ".... What she did to become famous and a hero in the 75th year of a life of obscure, dogged achievement was to sit at her kitchen table with her sister-in-law Dulcie Wilson and her best friend Dorothy Wilson and decide with them that there was not a skerrick of truth to the talk in those days about Hindmarsh Island, at the mouth of the Murray River, being a sacred site of secret women's business…"

A senior member of the Ngarrindjeri people, Bertha and her friends decided to go public. Devine went on: "What a storm the three women walked into when they accepted as unavoidable duty the need to speak out against an intrinsically contemptuous exploitation of their heritage…We of the media ranged, alas, between indifference and hostility toward the (oddly named) 'dissident women' who grew in number from the original three to about a dozen while the going remained hard… They were reviled and threatened - with death more than once - by their own people. Friendships that went back generations blew apart when the dissidents testified at the royal commission, proponents, who had refused to give evidence, cursed them from the spectator area. The astonishingly brave dissidents stood their ground - together…

When royal commissioner Iris Stevens found the secret women's business of Hindmarsh Island to be a falsehood, most of the dissidents, Kenny reported, sat around Bertha's kitchen table, weeping with joy…

There are many other equally courageous stories. That of the Rev. Cedric Jacobs. MBE a full blood Aborigine is one. Finding himself at the age of nine suffering malnutrition, he was taken to a Christian Mission at Mogumber. He worked through life to being a member of the National Aboriginal Conference - a precursor to ATSIC - between 1977 and 1981. He also helped found the Aboriginal Evangelical Fellowship of Australia.
His book "Healing a Divided Nation" is a challenging contrast to the attrition which often goes under the name 'reconciliation'.
Neither was Cedric Jacobs 'politically correct' being expelled from the Uniting Church for his disagreement with that Church's line on racial policy.

Behind the public face of ATSIC there is a story waiting to be told, which speaks of strong dissent among both black and white. If Media Watch has any claim to fame it is to "keep the Fourth Estate honest". This means in particular it is to make sure all sides of major issues are put objectively. In the case of Lennie Creek and On Target it has failed. It has had some spectacular successes - the "Cash-for-Comment" issue obviously being one. The real test is whether it is prepared to put its own house in order.
Merry Christmas, Paul Barry!

ECONOMICS - THREE ALLIED ACTIVITIES

by Betty Luks
Broadly, an economic system is comprised of three allied activities: production, consumption and distribution. Production is the term applied to all those activities and processes of industry whereby things are produced as goods and services for consumption. Consumption is the term applied to the utilising of the goods and services. Distribution is the term given to the process of transporting the goods and services from production to consumption.

Distribution and not production is the real economic problem in this industrialised, automated, computerised technological age. What is lacking is a guiding philosophy of freedom and service - and the political will.

From a Christian viewpoint, the goal of economics is to join goods and services to needs; if the activities of distribution do this, then economics has reached its true end, the purpose for which it was instituted.

The accounting of the distribution system in a money economy - is money! Therefore, we must insist on changes in financial policies to ensure economics reaches its true end. Until we insist on this economic policy of goods and services meeting the needs of the people, the preference for money, above all other considerations, will continue to result in all the kinds of evil we - and the whole world - are experiencing!

"Policy always has a metaphysical source in Philosophy, whilst Policy and Methods have a cause and effect relationship." (Anthony Cooney).

SA LIBERALS TO SELL OFF PORTS CORPORATION

by Betty Luks
With the support of the Democrats, the SA Liberals have pushed through a Bill in the Legislative Council (Upper House), which will pave the way for South Australia's Ports Corporation to be 'privatised' - sold off. Of course, it has been presented as of benefit to us! The trade-off, according to the economic rationalists, is the money from the sale will be used to help clean up the salinity problems in our soils and water!

Upon hearing the news of the sell-off, this writer was reminded of the passage in Thomas Robertson's book Human Ecology under the section titled The World Disease. After having depicted the techniques of a usurious money system (as old as - at least - the Sumerian civilisation) by which debt is created and through which power is centralised, he warns the reader the results of usury are not so easily perceived, because of the slowness of the cycle of operations, which usually extend over several centuries. It may be only one generation in many will witness the disastrous results, because it takes a few centuries for the technique to come to fruition - by their fruits you will know them.

To perceive the sequence of events, and come to grips with why this generation is experiencing such chaos and disorder, we must consult history. That is why we were told, "the love of money (the preference for, above all other considerations) is the root of all kinds of evil". Robertson turns to the subject of Usury in the Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol.27, 11th Edition for an extraordinary piece of history, certainly a situation present-day Australians can relate to.

In Athens about 594BC
'The bulk of the population, who had originally been small proprietors or metayers became gradually indebted to the rich to such an extent that they were practically slaves. Usury had given all the power of the State to a small plutocracy.
When we turn to Rome at the same period, we find exactly the same difficulties arising... Unfortunately, however, no alteration was made in the law of debt...In the course of two or three centuries the small free farmers were utterly destroyed. By the pressure of war and taxes they were all driven into debt and debt ended practically if not technically, in slavery. It would be difficult to overestimate the importance of the influence of usury on the social and economic history of the Roman Republic..."

All we need to do is replace the name of Athens or Rome with that of Australia, bearing in mind what has happened in this country over the last two hundred years, and the story is similar. The Liberals, along with the Democrats and Labor, are bereft, have absolutely no answers, no suitable policies, to the diabolical aims of those who control the system of usury and debt!

Until they strive for, and put in place, policies, which will free the people from the usurious debt system, nothing will change, Australia will continue on the course of debt and financial slavery.

ROBOTS AND SOCIAL CREDIT

by Antonia Feitz
In a recent issue of News Report, Jeremy Lee commented on the increasing use of robots in the workforce. As he rightly said, given the proliferation of robots 'it's hardly likely that the "New Economy" is going to absorb the world's unemployed.' Lee's comment neatly brings us back to Viviane Forrester's questions recently reported in NewsWeek.
She asked, in an age where only a few need to work to produce the whole world's requirements. "Why is employment seen as a must?" and "Why not look for a mode of distribution and survival that would not depend on wages?" As she suggested. unless we find an alternative system, we're looking down the barrel of the horror where people will be exterminated for no other reason that that they are superfluous.

People and especially politicians have to understand that the problems of manufacturing and production have long been solved. The earth is awash, groaning with food and goods that people can't afford. It's absurd. Clearly what hasn't been solved is the problem of the distribution of the world's wealth. The twentieth century has proved beyond all doubt that communism and socialism are not the answer. So maybe it's an opportune time to present the idea of Social Credit to a new generation. The fact that orthodox economists deride Social Credit should commend the idea to our readers, especially the young.

Here's an example of Social Credit in action
The Alaska Permanent Fund was formed in 1976 to give all Alaskans a direct share of the profits their state government received from the Prudhoe Bay oil fields. By 1998 through property, stock market and other investments, the Fund was providing greater returns than the oil itself. Half of the Fund's annual income is distributed to the residents of Alaska as a dividend. For example in 1998 every man, woman and newborn baby in Alaska received a dividend of US $l.300 (Australian Financial Review, 27-28/6/98). In 1998 that equated to Au $2,151. On the Fund's profit sharing, a family of four would receive $8,604. A family of five, $10,755.

It doesn't take much imagination to see how the distribution of such dividends to the citizens and their dependants would benefit the local economy. A very likely spin-off might even be that with increased financial security, women would again be willing to bear that longed-for and demographically important third baby.

HUMAN FRAILTY?

by Antonia Feitz
Where is the fault in regarding the taxpayers of a state as shareholders entitled to a dividend? That's how companies work, so why not a nation? After all, it's the people's taxes that financed the infrastructure. Why shouldn't they benefit from it? Multinational Scrooges and their tame governments will say people will 'waste' their dividends. And governments don't?
Families and individuals could spend the dividend or they could save it, or invest it.

Think of the entrepreneurial possibilities if people could look forward to some interest-free start-up capital, financed from the existing wealth. Local economies would hum and more people would have the opportunity to work at what they enjoyed doing.

An economics professor at the University of Alaska, Dr. Scott Goldsmith, who initially warned that declining oil revenue and rising government spending would result in a fiscal gap, has repudiated his former view. He now says there's no reason the situation shouldn't continue forever. Nor is there -unless the Alaskan government treacherously privatises. Apart from sharing in the wealth of their state via a dividend, Alaskans pay no state income tax or sales tax. This system is the very opposite of socialism. It returns to individuals their proper share in the wealth of their state, to do with as THEY please.

LETTER

The Editor
"I wish to reply to the article in on Target, "HAD ENOUGH? VOTE SITTING MEMBER LAST".
I believe it sends the wrong message to readers and would not be a "social creditors" course of action.

Very important!
First and foremost: we are not about changing politicians/representatives but CHANGING POLICIES. However, if politicians become the victims of our objectives then, too bad for them! I believe our role is to work with our representatives wherever possible to change bad/unwanted policies and this requires a good working relationship which is not enhanced by advocating "placing the candidate last".
I have been involved in a campaign, which took this line, and it was counter productive.

How can you work with an elected representative whom you have publicly stated, "is the worst of a bad lot"? Placing the sitting member last, might, and I stress might, get rid of the sitting member but in a two-party preferred vote, will see 'Tweedledum" elected, and further, you are still voting for the lesser of the "evils" on offer.... get it? ... still voting evil!

Is there an alternative?
I believe there is! If we look back in the recent past we note that the one thing all political parties were frightened of was the "Langer Vote"; see how quickly they colluded to change the ballot rules when Hanson threatened. I believe we can use this to our advantage even though it will be a null and void vote. For those who don't know, a "Langer Vote" is where a candidate is numbered 1 and all others equal last i.e.. 1 2 2 2 or 1 2 3 3 3. The vote was only distributed as far as it was certain. This was allowed under the electoral act because the wording said to effect, "if the voter does not follow the voting instructions but otherwise clearly indicates their intentions, then it is a valid vote".

Where does this leave the voter in his relationship with the representative?
Easy answer ... "I wanted to vote for you but I cannot give you a valid vote because you do not represent my views in the Parliament." With the present state of division in politics it won't be long before candidates will be asking: "How do I get your vote?" They will be asking you! There is a likely spin-off in a very close election. With a number of "Langer Votes" declared informal, a court challenge could see a magistrate overturn the ruling on the votes and declare them valid -because the voters have clearly indicated their intention! The politicians would be hoisted on their own petard!
Make no mistake - a "Langer Vote" for the sitting member will be noted!!

There is something else which is possibly more important, a change of Party in the past has not resulted in a change of Policy. If the sitting member is removed and replaced by someone else, will this result in a change of direction or will the same advisers still formulate policy?

I could add much else but readers would do better to read Jeremy Lee's articles, "How to Vote Like a Christian" and "Conscience Voting" which come highly recommended. Don't allow your valued vote into the system where you have no control, Vote 1 for the sitting member and all others equal last. Control your vote!" - L. Cook, Numurkah, Vic.

AUSTRALIA IS WAKING UP!