POLITICAL TREASON AND BOMB HALT IN VIETNAM

"President Ho Chi-minh of North Vietnam, today described the American bombing halt as 'only an initial victory' and called on his people to sweep every aggressor out of the country", - The Age, November 4.

The "victory" being hailed by Ho Chi-minh is no victory for the superiority of communist military strength, but is a victory over the diseased minds of his political opponents in the West, who have in essence become the thing they were supposed to be fighting.
The objectives of the Communists and American political leadership, and in fact the leadership of most western leaders is practically identical.
Commentators in the West are now saying that with Vietnam out of the way there is no world issue, which the combined forces of United States and the Soviet cannot solve.

In the battle for the minds of its opponents, while Communism has defeated the effete western leadership, there still remains the resolute opposition of those that know they have nothing to gain by compromising with the Communists. While President Johnson and Hubert Humphrey are lamenting the opposition of President Thieu for his uncompromising opposition to accept the right of the communist arm of the Viet Cong, the NLF to take part in any discussions with Hanoi representatives in Paris, other Asian leaders are rallying to the moral support of the South Vietnamese leaders.
Spokesmen in Thailand, Laos and South Korea are reported as accepting the American decision as a defeat for the U.S. and the realisation that they now must fight alone.

The extent to which the American leadership has been intent on forcing defeat on the South Vietnam Government can be gauged from the number of interviews American Ambassador, Ellsworth Bunker, has had with President Thieu in the past few weeks. Almost daily the press have reported yet another visit by the notorious appeaser of Communism to President Thieu. The South Vietnam leader must have been under tremendous diplomatic and psychological pressure from international sources, to whom the process of war making does not take into account the opposition of small time national patriots like President Thieu.
So confident were they of his capitulation to their terms that the world press of October 19 headlined his acceptance of the bombing halt and the representation of the NLF in the Paris talks. Thieu forced an apology from the press for misrepresentation, and when President Johnson finally announced the bombing halt he made it clear this had been done without his consent, saying he was not in the position to stop such a decision.

Thieu and his fellow members of the South Vietnam Government clearly stand in the path of a complete sell-out in Vietnam. A sell-out which responsible correspondents like Roy McCartney of The Melbourne Age knew had been arranged when he wrote on October 18, (probably anticipating the announcement which came on the 19th)
"Viet Cong financial cadres told their taxpayers: 'This is the last year you'll need to pay taxes to us. Next year you can pay your taxes to the coalition Government in Saigon".
Clearly the information McCartney was working on included the capitulation of the South Vietnam leaders to accept the NLF in a coalition Government.

It may be that in the resoluteness of the South Vietnamese leadership against compromise with Communism we are to witness another small miracle like Rhodesia. There is no doubt that the South Vietnamese people are fully united behind their leaders. Ian Ward, writing in The Australian November 5, said "in five years of reporting the Vietnam tragedy, I have never witnessed such national fervor and wholehearted support for a local Government or its policy as that which followed President Thieu's announcement... Australian patriots should ensure their Government is not party to any shameful sell-out.
Prime Minister Gorton must be asked bluntly whether he stands by his words of April 1, after President Johnson's announcement of the initial retreat on March 31.

In a report from New Zealand where he was visiting at the time, Mr. Gorton is quoted by Allan Barnes in The Age, "Australia does not favour the creation of a composite government which would give strong representation to the communists . . . We are not interested in things that are called peace talks but in fact are surrender talks".
Here is clear and unequivocal opposition to what the Americans now propose. Will Australia capitulate also?

MIDDLE EAST CRISIS DEEPENS

"Western diplomats yesterday expressed deep concern for the mission of the United Nations Middle East mediator, Dr. Cunnar Jarring owing the week-end artillery duel initiated by Egypt against Israeli forces across the Suez Canal. The immediate effect of the clash was to harden the Israeli position and render unlikely any timetable for troop withdrawal from occupied Arab territories, writes Robert H. Esrabrook of the Washington Post" - The Australian, October 30.

Having successfully made a major forward move against NATO through Czechoslovakia, with a tremendous increase in psychological pressure on the West Germans, the Soviet strategists have now started to intensify their pressures in the Middle East. It is significant that for the first time the Egyptian forces used Soviet-supplied Luna rockets, a ground-to-ground missile with a range of 44 miles. These missiles cannot be used without the permission of the Soviet, who now have an estimated 3000 experts with the Egyptian army, 1000 with the Syrian army and 1000 with other Arab countries.

Israel's Deputy Prime Minister, General Yigal Allon, told the Israeli Parliament following the Egyptian-Israeli clash "that Israel would not remain isolated in the event of a Soviet military intervention against her", the inference being that the United States would act.
But there is no likelihood of any immediate direct Soviet move against Israel.

Soviet strategy is to exploit the Arab-Israeli friction to steadily penetrate and take over the whole of the Middle East, and with it the vital oil supplies without which Western Europe would be in chaos. The Soviet is rapidly building up its naval forces in the Mediterranean and has recently brought in dredges from the Soviet which suggests that the Soviet strategists may be considering an attempt to open the Suez Canal to enable them to move much more readily into the Red Sea and to build up their thrust into the Indian Ocean.

As shown by British expert Sir John Clubb in his book, The Middle East Crisis, while the Western powers refuse to come to grips with the problem of Israel, they force the whole Arab world into the Soviet's trap. A Soviet victory in the Middle East would mean the end for Western Europe.

SYDNEY MEETING TO HEAR ERIC BUTLER

FEDERAL TREASURER ACCEPTS INFLATION AS INEVITABLE

"The Federal Treasurer, Mr. McMahon, told farmers in Canberra yesterday that there was no completely satisfactory solution in sight for Australia's vexing cost-of-production problems...I would say that our wage-fixing system - and the diverse pressures and interests which surround it - is a fact of life in Australia. It is simply not realistic to argue that things can be ordered very differently" - The Australian, October 31

The Federal Treasurer's clear statement that he has no answer to progressive inflation should automatically disqualify him from holding his position. One of the primary tasks of Government is to ensure that the monetary unit bears a proper relationship to economic realities, in the same way that weights and measures inspectors ensure that people are not defrauded. Inflation is a gigantic fraud, a type of modern coin clipping, but unlike the earlier coin-clippers the modern defrauders are not punished.
Modern inflation is the direct and indirect result of Fabian Socialist methods of expanding financial credit. These methods are based upon a blind acceptance of Keynesian economics.

Mr. McMahon correctly observes that countries like Canada, New Zealand, Denmark and Argentine also have inflation although they have different wage-fixing systems. So does the United States. All these countries have improved their economic efficiency.
Real costs of production have fallen.
A realistic credit system should reflect this fact. But the very opposite is taking place.

The end-result of this process of inflation is the complete destruction of the free enterprise economy. That is what the Fabian Socialists have planned, and they are delighted when a Liberal Treasurer like Mr. McMahon endorses their programme of destruction. He also endorses the Fabian Socialist programme for eroding the sovereignty of the States through financial centralism.

Before the 1949 Federal Elections, which ended Labor Government at Canberra, Liberal and Country Party spokesmen said that they would put the shillings back into the pound. They obviously believed that this was possible. Mr. McMahon should be asked some searching questions about why he does not believe it is possible to have at least a stable price level at a time when production is more efficient than ever.

THE R.S.L. AND THE NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY

"The Returned Servicemen's League yesterday urged the Federal Government to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The League said: 'on balance there seems to be compelling reasons why we should, subject to certain safeguards, sign the treaty'". - The Age. Melbourne, October 30.

The submission of the R.S.L. to the government pointed out that Australia has "assurances that we come under the U.S. nuclear umbrella". The assurances the League asked for are, adequate inspection, and that such inspections will not hamper the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. It should not be necessary to point out that the Soviet would never promote any treaty, or agree to any type of liason which did nor have advantages to her. Anyone thinking otherwise is quite naive.

The facts are that the Soviet stands to gain immensely by the signing of the nonproliferation treaty. West Germany now under direct threat from Soviet troops would know that any attack on her could not be countered by the use of nuclear weapons, while communist satellites such as East Germany who are not bound by the treaty could be armed with nuclear weapons by the Soviet.
Major General Thomas Lane, eminent American military commentator observes, "The Non-Proliferation Treaty illustrates the extremes to which impractical peace-seekers can be driven by a shrewd enemy. This instrument would align the United States with the Soviet Union against our allies and associates in West Germany, Japan and India...This treaty is indeed a triumph of Soviet diplomacy".

It is one thing to have a treaty of friendship and mutual defence, it is another to give away the right to maintain your own defence and the right to arm yourself with the best possible means of defence. Professor Titterton, Australia's foremost expert on nuclear energy has made it clear that we have the ability to arm ourselves with nuclear weapons, the choice we have is whether we can afford it or not. That choice should not be compromised by a treaty with the one power, which would like to keep us defenceless.

NEWS IN BRIEF