THE BOMBING OF MULTICULTURALISM

by James Reed
It is interesting to observe the Australian media's response to the multiculturalism angle on the London bombings, given that the terrorist cell of suicide bombers were "home grown" - three of the four suicide bombers were British-born of Pakistani origin. Yet, they had such a hatred for their "homeland" that they were prepared to die themselves to kill the British. If ever there was an argument against the creation of multiracial/multicultural societies, this is it.
Britain has bent over backwards to stamp out "racism" - meaning, opposition by White Britains to coloured immigration and multiculturalism. Thus, the High Wycombe church was told by the Local Council that it could not publicise its Christmas services because it might offend other religions. There are thousands of examples of this. White nationalists are prosecuted and imprisoned for objecting to what is effectively a policy of genocide. However, extremist Muslim clerics have been free to preach anti-West hatred and recruit British Muslims for the Taliban.

Britain has been planning a law against incitement to racial hatred, along the lines of the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act of our own Victoria. The aim of the law was to prevent people making a link between terrorist attacks and Islam. However, the law would not be enforced against the extremist clerics for as we well know, these laws are put in place to keep White Europeans in their place. A recent poll by ICM in Britain found that 13 per cent of Britain's 1.6. million Muslims support al Qaida - and that is 206,000 people. One would have thought that if anything constituted a 'link", that did. But not so in Britain.
The suicide bombers came from comfortable families and were not economically destitute. They had no criminal records. They were "assimilated", part of the melting pot. Mike Steketee of The Australian (The Weekend Australian, 16-17 July, 2005, p.28) is a long term defender of immigration and multiculturalism. He dismissed the idea that Australia could follow in Britain's footsteps as ethnic conflicts "seldom take root in Australia in a violent way". Really? Australia has yet to have a death toll to rival the London bombings, but it has had bombing, arson attacks, murder, race-based rapes and riots, all of which have spread from ethnic racial conflict.
It is true that Australia has less Muslims, and certainly less radical Muslims than Britain, as Steketee notes. That doesn't show that a terrorist attack is less probable; the probability of a terrorist attack is not related in any mechanical way to population densities. A more important factor is vulnerability and terror impact.
Steketee and others cannot seriously face the prospect that Australia faces exactly the same threat as Britain, as that would mean that Australian multiculturalism, a religion for the new class intellectuals, was also flawed.

Greg Sheridan ("Europe's Big Challenge," The Australian 21 July, 2005, p.11) has said that a Muslim majority in Europe "will present daunting problems for an integrated Continent". Muslims will outnumber non-Muslims in all of Western Europe by mid-century. That view is at the high-end, but is likely to be true given what we know about the eclipse of White populations elsewhere in the world. After a certain point Muslims would reach such political power that they would control the nation's immigration policy, so that ethnic swamping would occur. Europe has the lowest fertility rate in the world (thanks to women's lib) and the Middle East and North Africa the second highest.
Even Sheridan is concerned that this demographic change will bring problems. Remember this is the writer who for years joyfully embraced the Asianisation of Australia and the eclipsing of the Anglo-Australian population. For one thing 1-2 per cent of Europe's Muslims are involved in "extremist activities" - that is, up to 480,000 potential suicide bombers.
Maybe it is time for a genuine debate - and referendum - on the questions of immigration and multiculturalism.

"OUTING' THE RACIST"

DESTRUCTIVE DECONSTRUCTIVE NONSENSE

by James Reed
The Weekend Australian, 23-24 July, 2005, devoted a number of articles to the issue of postmodernism in secondary schools and lower. Postmodernism is the creation of largely French and European Jewish intellectuals (Lyotard, Foucault and Derrida, etc) which sees mainstream Western literature as racist and oppressive of the coloured people of the world, women, homosexuals and other "cool folk". "Texts" need to be deconstructed or exposed as ideology. The problem here is that there is no objective meaning or truth in the postmodern world, so the choice of supporting the oppressed is purely arbitrary. One could just as easily opt for neo-Nazism or radical Islam on the same philosophy. And if history is just a myth, events such as the Holocaust and World War II itself for the likes of Derrida and other radical relativists must also be bunk. For these reasons postmodernism is out of fashion in today's post 9/11 university. Sure, politically correct ideologies like Feminism flourish, but an alternative non-relativist (i.e., all truth is relative) foundation is sought.

Secondary school English today pushes postmodernism and is also seen in the form of "critical literacy". Thus one secondary school teaching guide instructs children to look behind the story to find the concealed ideology - which of course is then looked at in typical crass Leftist fashion. The "Three Little Pigs" is a capitalist story about the virtues of property ownership. Well, so what? What's wrong with the freedom and independence that an individual gets from owning private property, Ms Feminist Teacher? Sorry James, you just failed Year 12 English Lit!
The imposition of debunked philosophical garbage upon the young diminishes their ability to appreciate literature and to develop their literary skills. Trendoid philosophies such as postmodernism are really ideological weapons, used in an on-going psycho-political war, where at stake is the survival of Western civilisation. For our politically correct secondary teachers, it seems that being able to read, write and comprehend without major errors is intrinsically 'right wing'. All students then need to be reduced to the level of non-English speaking, or, English as second language refugees, so as to obtain a state of politically correct grace.

"OPERATION KRATOS"

London Met Police Special Operations Unit "Shoot to Kill" by Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is the author of a forthcoming book, America's War on Terrorism, Global Research, 2005.
British 'Cops' Trained in Israel:
The cold blooded murder of Jean Charles de Menezes, in the Stockwell underground was no accident. London Metropolitan Police had approved a policy of "shoot to kill": a controversial tactic deployed only in the most extreme circumstances but one police have been preparing to use for the last two weeks.
The shoot to kill policy was undertaken under the auspices of "Operation Kratos", named after the mythical Spartan hero. It was carried out by the London Metropolitan's elite SO19 firearms unit often referred to as the Blue Berets. The latter are described as the equivalent to the US SWAT teams, yet in this particular case, they were not wearing uniforms.
The training of the S019 marksmen was patterned on that of Israel. They had been briefed "by officers who had been to Israel to meet their counterparts there and pick up tips gleaned from the experience of dealing with Hamas bombers".
"During the Kratos briefings, the Met team were told that, contrary to their normal arms training, they should fire at the head rather than the chest. Although the chest is easier to hit, it is not as reliable in causing instant death, giving a bomber a chance to detonate his device..." (The Scottish Daily Record, 23 July, 2005).

The "Israeli counterparts" refers to Israel's National Police (INP), Shin Bet (the Israel Security Agency) and Israel's Ministry of Internal Security. But the police antiterrorist operations conducted by the INP against Hamas and Islamic Jihad are carried out in close coordination with the Military (Israeli Defense Force) and Mossad. Israel has also collaborated in the training of members of the FBI and the LAPD. Top law enforcement officers of the FBI were trained in Israel under a program sponsored by the Jewish Institute for national Security.
See:- https://www.jinsa.org/articles/articles.html/function/view/categoryid/2168/documentid/3020/history/3,2359,2166,2168,3020

SO13: The Anti-terrorist Branch
Of significance in setting the antiterrorist policy under "Operation Kratos", is the so-called SO13 or Antiterrorist Branch.
The various special operations units including SO13, Special Branch and SO19 of the Met police are overseen by Andy Hayman, the recently appointed assistant commissioner. The SO19 is one of several entities under the jurisdiction of the Met police.
Once SO13 and Special Branch decided to carry out Operation Kratos, specific guidelines were provided to SO19 to carry out the "shoot to kill" agenda.
Essentially what we are dealing with is the formation of a death squadron mentality under the auspices of what is still officially considered a "civilian police force".
Despite the controversy surrounding the shoot-to-kill operations, London mayor Ken Livingstone "had nothing but praise for the police". Rather than condemning the killing and calling for an investigation, he casually laid the blame for the death of Jean Charles de Menezes on the terrorists:
"The police acted to do what they believed necessary to protect the lives of the public... This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility." (BBC, 23 July 2005)

THE COMMON LAW AND COMMON SENSE

CONFESSIONS OF A COMMUNIST

MORE ON ANTI-SEMITISM

If you wish to learn more about the "new anti-Semitism" have a look at the article by Rodney Gouttman in Quadrant, July-August 2005. There you will be told that the new anti-Semitism goes under the disguise of anti-Zionism: "there is little doubt that much of what passes as anti-Zionism today rests on anti-Semitism. The belief that Jews have no right to exist has morphed into one asserting that Israel has no right to exist." Pierre-Andre Taguieff has written that anti-Zionism avoids the directness of anti-Semitism". It is now the Left, with its hatred of Israel and the US, along with fundamentalist Islam, which constitute the main anti-Semitic threats, although the old war horses from the Extreme Right are still there. "Topping the Islamist non-Muslim reading list are The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf, both taught religiously in the Arab-Islamic precinct as factual".

The author continues: "it is not surprising then that franchised Islamism is replete with reference to Israeli blood libels against Palestinians, the Jewish murder of the Prophet Jesus, Zionist money and media power, the validity of the Nazis' attitude to the Jews, Holocaust denial, and the discontinuity between ancient and modern Jewry".

Muslim majority in 2050?
Some authorities predict that Europe will have a Muslim majority by 2050. If so, with this immense political power it is interesting to speculate about the fate of the Jews in such a world. Is it in Jewish interests to continue to support an open immigration policy, or liberal non-discriminating immigration, if in the long term the replacement of the host Northern European population by a population which may turn out to be more hostile to Jewish interests, is realised? In America, Dr. Steinlight, a leading Jewish academic, has questioned the open door immigration policy but there is no appreciation of this threat to Jewry by Australian Jewish intellectuals. Dr. Gouttman's article does not even consider these issues, beyond saying that Australia "has yet to suffer the full effects of the "new anti-Semitism".

NOT A NEW DEFINITION OF "ANTI-SEMITISM":
An article which first appeared September 1983 in the League's "Intelligence Survey" recorded the forward planning of the Zionists in order to counter the expected backlash from the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians. Remember this article was written in 1983 - 22 years ago.
"As demonstrated by Dr. Alfred Lilienthal and other Jewish writers, the most telling criticism of Political Zionism and the policies of the State of Israel, has come from anti-Zionist Jews.
In his great classic, The Controversy of Zion, which the Zionists have countered by pretending it doesn't exist, Douglas Reed shows how Political Zionism emerged at a time when increasing numbers of Jews were being assimilated in the countries of residence. They were joining what might be termed the mainstream of history. Political Zionist smear merchants have used some of their most diabolical terror tactics against anti-Zionist Jews.
C.H. Douglas predicted that by establishing the Zionist State of Israel, the Zionists would produce an open debate on the "Jewish Question". That debate is taking place with Israel's holocaust policies coming under increasing criticism from Israelis and Jews around the world.
Any regular reader of Zionist literature can note the growing concern about the rising criticism of the policies of Israel. Masters of what has been graphically described as Talmudic dialectics, the Zionist propagandists have now decided that all manifestations of anti-Zionism must be smeared as "anti-semitism", this smear to be used against Jews as well as non-Jews.

The Australian Jewish News of 20 May, 1983 carries a major article by Mr. Leon Wieseltier, a senior editor of New Republic, in response to a series of questions put by The Institute of Jewish Affairs in London, one question being, 'Are we now experiencing entirely new forms of anti-semitism, which comes from the extreme Left as well as from the Right, and are expressed in the form of 'anti-Zionism'?"
Mr. Wieseltier argues that "anti-Zionism" is anti-semitism in theory and in practice. It is anti-semitism in theory for the following reason. The unit of historical legitimacy in the modern world is the nation. According to the principles of modern politics, every nation has a right to a State. "The converse, too, has consequences: whoever has no right to a State is not a nation. Anti-Zionism is the denial of a Jewish right to a State. It is, therefore, a denial of the Jewish status as a nation. And this, in turn, is a denial of the historical legitimacy of the Jews."

Mr. Wieseltier neglects to point out that the Zionist claim to nationhood is uniquely different from all other forms of nationhood, with Jews claiming that they both have the right to live amongst other nations, making decisions concerning the policies of those nations, while at the same time having a prior allegiance to the State of Israel. It is this Zionist demand for a dual loyalty which is unacceptable to anti-Zionist Jews like Dr. Lilienthal, who insist that they are loyal citizens of the countries in which they reside, practising their own religion.
Wieselthier claims that "The Jews are Jews before they are anybody else. They have their own right to live in Israel. Obviously the Palestinians, who were expelled by force and terror from the country in which they and their forbears had lived for two thousand years, have no right to continue living in their own country.
Wieselthier concludes with the charge that "The Jew is the victim of anti-semitism, not its cause ... Anti-semitism cannot be cured. It can only be fought. And it has been demonstrated many times that Jews are the only people who can be counted upon to fight it".

The philosophy of the one-way street
In simple English, all other peoples in the world are out of step except one "chosen" group, whose leaders claim that because they are "chosen", they are always right…The reality is that Zionists require what they term anti-semitism in an endeavour to use the rank and file of Jews for purposes they do not understand. Jews who attempt to break with the Zionist Messianic concept are to be abused as "anti-semites" along with non-Jews. Those who see this as a form of madness are correct. The future of the world depends upon a freeing of minds from all concepts of "chosen" groups and the philosophy of collectivism." Prophetic words indeed!

BASIC FUND

MR. CHARLES ZENTAI

LETTER TO KIM BEASLEY

Dear Mr. Beasley,
In ancient times, according to the fragments of legends handed down to us, the Athenians would contribute seven youths and seven maidens to be sacrificed each year to the Cretan Minotaur, that is, until Thesius put an end to this Monster.
Perhaps humans have not changed much since the time of Thesius, for it seems the descendants of the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic people have, during the twentieth century and beyond, sacrificed the cream of their young men and women on numerous occasions to a creature far more destructive than the legendary Minotaur, not in small numbers like seven at a time, but in millions, as in the two major wars of the twentieth century which were mainly designed to preserve the life of this Monster. What is more, it seems they are determined to continue the practice.

The creature to whom this modern sacrifice is made is an extremely ancient debt-structured finance accounting system, very efficient for the purpose of robbery, and known to many contemporary students of historical financial systems as The Babylonian Woe, who may, if the missing pieces of the jig-saw puzzle ever be found, be a close relative of the Minotaur itself.

I understand that elected Members to the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia have a Duty to care for and apply the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. I also realise that many elected Members of Parliament have betrayed the people of Australia by working to undermine and corrupt our Constitution.
I will enclose an item written by the late Arthur A. Chresby, one time Federal Member for Griffith, and research analyst in constitutional law, as published in The Chronicle (Toowoomba) December 1, 1982. The editor's comment next day is also included. I am certain that if Arthur was alive today he would agree that the financial system is of public nature and should not be controlled as at present by private interests. This does not mean the answer to our present day problem is to nationalise the banks. Far from it!

I would like to leave you with a reported comment by Major Clifford Hugh Douglas when answering questions after his address delivered at the Central Hall, Liverpool, on October 30th, 1936. Note the year and his prophetic comment:
Most dangerous Man: "The most dangerous man at the present time, said Major Douglas in answer to another question, was the man who wanted to get everyone back to work, for he perverts means into ends. This is leading straight to the next war - which will provide plenty of work for everyone." (From "The Tragedy of Human Effort"). It certainly DID!

We have an extremely dangerous man in the present Prime Minister, who is determined to do this very thing, and also introduce piddling wages. We do not now need prophecy, for Howard has already involved this nation in an illegal, immoral, and illogical war with a country that has done us no harm. That, I believe, is just the mere beginning of our tribulation. Surely Adolph had a more legitimate reason to invade Poland than George Bush, Tony Blair and John Winston Howard had to invade Iraq! Are not these also War Criminals?
I was pleased to hear your speech at the recent rallies for there is no need to impoverish Australians. We badly need people who seek and speak the truth, for we haven't been receiving much of that for a long time.
Yours sincerely, John D.S. Barton, Collarenebri. 4th July, 2005.

DR. DAVID MITCHELL FOR SOUTH AUSTRALIAN STATE WEEKEND

NATIONAL WEEKEND

IMPORTANT BOOKS

"Confessions of an Economic Hit Man," by John Perkins: The inside story of how America turned from a respected republic into a feared empire. "Economic hit men," John Perkins writes, "are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex and murder." John Perkins should know - he was an economic hit man. His job was to convince countries that are strategically important to the U.S. - from Indonesia to Panama - to accept enormous loans for infrastructure development, and to make sure that the lucrative profits were contracted to the U.S. corporations. Saddled with huge debts these countries came under the control of the United States government, World Bank and other U.S. dominated aid agencies that acted like loan sharks. This extraordinary real-life tale exposes international intrigue, corruption, and little-known government and corporate activities that have dire consequences for American democracy and the world. Price: $52.95 posted.

"The Church and Farming," by Rev. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp., D.D., D. Ph., BA. Written by Father Denis Fahey this book is particularly important at this time, as the rural sector struggles to survive. Father Fahey brings together the relationship between the spiritual and practical applications of living with and working the soil for the betterment of mankind, in harmony with God's laws. It touches on all aspects of rural life and economics... It cannot be too often repeated how much the work of the land generates physical and moral health, for nothing does more to brace the system than this beneficent contact with nature which proceeds directly from the hand of the Creator. The land is not a betrayer, it is our salvation. An essential back to basics book available from all League Book Services. Price: $17.00 posted.