MORE DANGEROUS NONSENSE FROM MR. PAUL HASLUCK

" It might sound immodest, but I think I've established a quite considerable reputation as a person who doesn't talk', he (Mr. Hasluck) said. This was not an apology for Mr. Hasluck's wide reputation for being almost inaccessible to the Australian news media. It was an explanation of why he thought his recent meeting with President Tito of Yugoslavia had gone so well. For, although Mr. Hasluck did not say so, the inference was that their two hours of talks had been so successful because each had been so frank with the other" - The Australian, November 19.

Mr. Hasluck's reported statements concerning his meeting with Communist leader Tito, provide further evidence that Australia urgently requires a Minister for External Affairs with a much more realistic understanding of Communism than that possessed by Mr. Hasluck. In his special assessment of the strategic significance of the Soviet thrust into Czechoslovakia (available from the League of Rights for 50 cents per dozen) Mr. Eric Butler quotes Mr. Hasluck's incredible statement that
"The Australian Government's objective is to influence and moderate the policies of the Soviet Union…"
The idea that Mr. Hasluck can with orthodox diplomacy influence the hard-nosed criminals of the Kremlin belongs to the world of make-believe.

And now Mr. Hasluck suggests that Australia's interests were served by a "good meeting" with another Communist criminal, Tito. The Australian Embassy in Belgrade expressed "surprise" that President Tito had insisted on wanting to see the Australian visitor". As a hard-core Communist with a long history of dedicated service to the International Communist Conspiracy, Tito has fooled many Western politicians in his time.
Why shouldn't he take the opportunity of fooling Mr. Hasluck, too?

Mr. Hasluck relates, "The presidential train was put on specially to take me the 200 miles north. I then went another 20 or 30 miles by car to the hunting lodge where the President was staying the night. He extended our meeting to just short of two hours, all of which I was told was quite unprecedented". Mr. Hasluck states that he found Tito "very realistic".
We have no doubt about Tito's realism. But how realistic is Mr. Hasluck?

The Herald, (Melbourne) of November 13 published the following report from Belgrade:
"Yugoslavia and Australia today expressed their adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter, including the right of every member State to independence and territorial integrity, without threats or interference from abroad. A communiqué issued in Belgrade at the end of a four-day visit by the Minister for External Affairs, Mr. Hasluck said that the two countries agreed that peaceful solutions should be sought to world problems to reduce world tensions".
The Communists are, of course; naturally keen about the United Nations. They played a key role in its creation.

We wonder if Mr. Hasluck has ever had a close look at Tito's record in the United Nations?
To be specific, where does he stand on Vietnam?
As Mr. Hasluck's memory may be a little faulty, we would like to take him back to 1956, when the Soviet brutally crushed the Hungarian revolt against Communism. Tito backed that action by that "mellow" Communist Khrushchev. Of course Hungary is next door to Yugoslavia, and Tito did not want to have his own local tyranny threatened by an anti-Communist Hungary!
So much for Tito's verbal support for "peaceful solutions".

Tito has spent the whole of his life serving the International Communist Conspiracy. He is a convinced Marxist-Leninist. This means that he no more believes in the possibility of "peaceful solutions to reduce world tensions" than does any other Marxist-Leninist. Mr. Hasluck announced before leaving Belgrade that a Yugoslav trade mission would visit Australia and that he had talks about promoting trade between the two countries.

Clearly Mr. Hasluck's "experts" on Communism have never briefed him on the Communist use of trade to advance the programme for Communist world conquest. Mr. Hasluck has undoubtedly deluded himself that he has achieved a major victory (for what?) by visiting Communist Tito. But he has not deluded Tito, who has often shown his contempt for Western politicians.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF STUDENT P0WER

"The formation of a union for secondary students in NSW, announced by three of its founders yesterday, is a radical move in anybody's language… The union already has 234 members drawn from 64 State and Private schools . . .. With a potential membership of 230,000, it has a big future if its idealistic young leaders get their way" -The Australian, November 13.

There is nothing new about the tendency of normal young people to tend to revolt against their elders and authority. But what is new is the exploitation of youth in the service of a conspiracy, which seeks to deprive young people of an opportunity to express their idealism and energy in a constructive manner. We can sympathise with the view of one of the students responsible for the new students' union in N.S.W.; "We believe education should be a stimulating process, enabling students to understand society and themselves better. This just doesn't happen under our present system".
But no real understanding of society is possible without a thorough grasp of the fundamental truth that society is a complex human association, and that to be successful such an association must conform to the principles underlying all forms of human association.

It is also essential for youth to be taught that real freedom is impossible without proper authority and an acceptance of personal responsibility. We note with interest that one of the three Sydney students responsible for the new secondary students' union is a Mr. Mark Aarons. It would be instructive to know whether Master Aarons is a member of the well-known Communist family bearing the same name.
There is a mass of documentary and other evidence that the Communists have cynically decided that students offer the most potent revolutionary force now available to serve their purposes. They will continue to exploit that force unless the parents of students, and other matured and responsible members of society, take the trouble to ensure that young people are adequately instructed on those immortal truths without which no genuine human progress is possible.

FINANCIAL APPEAL FACES CRISIS

The League of Rights has always operated on the basis that nothing, absolutely nothing, can be achieved in the struggle in which it is involved, without facing the truth, no matter how unpleasant it may be. We must therefore report that the response to date to the campaign to finance the League's 1969 programme has indicated that the League must consider a major re-trenchment at the very moment when expansion is not only urgently possible, but is most essential.
Since last week only a further 16 people have contributed and/or pledged a further $500, taking the total to $4814.80. This rate of response makes the League's position quite impossible. Only a total of 67 people have responded.

The League will make a final decision concerning the appeal at the end of this month. This decision will be governed by the response to that date. Northern N.S.W. and Queensland readers should send their donations and/or pledges to Mr. Don Martin. P.O. Box 3, Paddington, Brisbane, Queensland.
Contributors are requested to note that in order to save on unnecessary expenses receipts will only be forwarded to those requesting them.

WHAT TYPE OF SOVIET PEACE?

"Russia today welcomed President Johnson's Vietnam bombing halt as 'a move in the right direction'. And it hinted that Moscow was ready to help in reaching a peace agreement. The new conciliatory Soviet tone came from Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko, in a Budapest Press conference. AAP - Reuter said he appeared to be offering Soviet aid to help solve world problems, in return for what he termed a 'more realistic' Western appreciation of the Czech situation" - The Herald, Melbourne, November 19.

A highly co-ordinated Soviet global strategy, which overall is consistently aggressive, enables the Moscow strategists to make attractive offers to their defensive Western opponents that they are prepared to take the pressure off the one front so long as there is no real opposition on other fronts. As Hanoi has had to rely heavily upon the Soviet not only to sustain it with vast quantities of military and economic aid, but to maintain a world-wide propaganda and revolutionary offensive against the USA on Vietnam, it is certain that the Soviet strategists have played a major role in developing the Paris "peace" talks.
The type of "peace" envisaged has already been spelt out by the Communist press everywhere: some type of coalition Government for a beginning, this eventually to lead to a complete Communist take-over.

A reluctant South Vietnamese Government is now being subjected to an international smear campaign, which claims that it is a "barrier" to peace. Being completely dependent upon the Americans for their military equipment and much vital economic aid, the South Vietnamese are in an extremely vulnerable position. By openly supporting President Johnson, President-elect Richard Nixon has not only helped to increase the pressure on the Saigon Government to participate in the Paris "peace" talks, but has confirmed the view of those who have expressed grave doubts about Mr. Nixon's willingness to stand up to Communist global strategy.

Since President Johnson ordered the bombing pause on the eve of the American elections, the Communists have blatantly violated the agreements allegedly made with the Americans. On November 11 the U.S.A. military authorities reported that Communist gunners had initiated six artillery attacks on allied positions from emplacements inside the Demilitarised Zone. There has been other military aggression. The pattern of developments follows closely that of what happened in Korea, where the Americans suffered more casualties after the "peace" talks started than in all the fighting previously!

The Americans are in process of surrendering in Vietnam, not because they could not have won, but because of treachery and gullibility in high places inside the U.S.A. At long last this harsh truth is starting to dawn on some prominent Australian anti-Communists who had previously rejected all suggestion of treason inside the U.S.A. If the appropriate lessons can be learned from the defeat on the Vietnam issue, Communist global strategy can yet be defeated.

While the Soviet is talking about assisting to bring "peace" in Vietnam, Soviet newspaper Izvestia "called on the United States Navy to abandon the Mediterranean. It also proclaimed Russia a Mediterranean power". (vide The Australian, November 13)
The Herald (Melbourne) of November 13 provided a further example of the type of "peace" proposed by the Soviet: "Vice-Admiral Nikolai Smirnov accused the 6th Fleet of trying to dominate the Mediterranean 'in order to be prepared to strike blows from the sea and air against enemy targets'. The Americans were ready to use nuclear as well as conventional weapons, he said in the Defence Ministry newspaper Red Star".

The same Herald, report, in which details of the Soviet build-up in the Mediterranean are given, states that "Allied intelligence sources said that the Soviet Union has from 6,000 to 15,000 troops in Algeria, mainly in training missions or acting in technical capacities at French military airfields and the vast multi-million-dollar former French naval base at Mers-el-Kebir, near Oran.
Allied diplomats and French officials fear the Soviets are actually seeking to establish bases to reinforce the Soviet naval build-up in the Mediterranean".

WEEK IN BRIEF