FUNDAMENTALS OF SOCIAL CREDIT

CARDBOARD CASTLES

FOUL ODOURS FROM THE U.S.

by James Reed

Potential Watergate: The New York Times has uncovered a potential Watergate for President Bush. Bush has admitted that he secretly authorised the National Security Agency to electronically eavesdrop on thousands of U.S. citizens without the required warrants from the courts needed for such surveillance. Bush has called the Times editor and the executive editor to the White House (aside: perhaps given the rising tide of colour in the U.S. a place more appropriately known as "the Brown House") to persuade them not to run with the story. That didn't work. Vice President Dick Cheney then went to Bush's defence saying that the actions were within the constitutional authority of the President and necessary to combat terrorism. Democrats see Bush's actions as contrary to the requirements of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the option of impeaching "honest George" could arise if the Democrats gain control of Congress at the mid-year 2006 elections.

Weather Wars: Have you noticed how odd the weather is lately? Must be global warming? Well, if you are in your sixties, you have seen the seasons come and go and have witnessed floods and storms. Nevertheless there could be something behind the greenies' concerns. Professor Michel Chossudovsky, a professor of economics at the university of Ottawa has said that the world's climate can be modified by a new generation of sophisticated climate weapons. Both the U.S. and Russia have the capacity to manipulate the weather. In the U.S. this technology is produced under the High-frequency Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) part of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI "Star Wars"). HAARP has the capacity of triggering floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes. Dr. Nicholas Begich has described HAARP as, "A super-powerful radiowave-beaming technology that lifts areas of the ionosphere [the upper layer of the atmosphere] by focusing a beam and heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce onto earth and penetrate everything - living and dead." HAARP has the ability to deliver the energy equivalent of an atomic bomb anywhere on earth by laser and particle beams, similar to the devices used by madmen in James Bond films.

But HAARP is even more sinister as Dr. Begich has said: "HAARP could contribute to climate change by intensively bombarding the atmosphere with high-frequency rays. Returning low-frequency waves at high intensity could also affect people's brains, and effects on tectonic movements cannot be ruled out." (Source: www.transnational.org/forum).
For those readers who think that it is far fetched to suppose that people's brains might be controlled by electromagnetic radiation, reflect upon the fact that the electronic media does a 'good enough' job in mind manipulation now. But "good enough" is never enough for the dark lords of the new world order.

TALKING SENSE ABOUT CHINA

by James Reed

John Mearsheimer published an insightful essay about the rise of China, The Australian 18 November 2005, which stated the simple and profound question: will the rise of China be peaceful? His answer was "no". Conflict and possibly war, lies ahead for China and the U.S. Mearsheimer argues on the basis of a well confirmed historical principle: that great powers attempt to maximize their power and eventually seek to dominate the world. This is a difficult task and most States come to dominate their region. In their region such States are highly territorial and strive to keep out the influence of other States. China will therefore attempt to dominate Asia and is already moving in that direction.

Other Asian powers such as India and established powers such as Japan view China's ambitions with alarm. They are likely to move to contain China's rise, as far as possible. Therein lies the potential for war. Finally, given Taiwan's strategic importance with respect to the sea lanes in East Asia, and China's ego about the return of Taiwan to China, there is a ready source of conflict available that could also lead to a hot war in East Asia. What Measheimer doesn't tell us is that China's rise to power has been financed by the same bankers in brotherhood in New York and the other centres of Western finance who brought you the Russian Revolution, that other great assault on Western civilisation.

WHAT THEY DON'T TELL THE UNDERGRADUATES

by Peter Ewer

"Dealers used to shoot off a firework to announce the arrival of a new supply of heroin. Now they text." This is a quotation from an article taken from The Australian 12 October 2005, "Family Link to Heroin". The article dealt with the Queensland DPP release of the names of the central suppliers of heroin in Queensland, Vietnamese-Australians Khanh Nhat Bui, his mother Cuc Thi Nguyen, father Phan Van Bui and three brothers Phong Nhat Bui, Vu Nhat Bui and Chung Nhat Bui.

Police have tried for years to get heroin possession convictions against the happy family but are now attempting to freeze and confiscate over $350,000 cash found in a stash on the family properties. Don't expect to find this story in any future edition of the immigration-is-good-for-you texts that universities ram down the throats of the young. For the multiculturalists, the money probably came from selling cucumbers.

'That' Hanging: There was certainly a media frenzy to generate sympathy for the plight of convicted drug smuggler Nguyen Tuong Van who was finally hung in Singapore. It was of course quite dreadful that Van's mother had to endure such suffering. All the more reason for not smuggling and dealing in drugs in the first place. But where was the concern for those suffering from the actions of those like Van? Surely society has the right to protect itself from such socially destructive behaviour?

BRACKS TOUGHS IT OUT

by Betty Luks

Last October, 2005 the League hosted Pastor Danny Nalliah of "Catch the Fire Ministries" at the Albury National Seminar. Pastor Danny told us of his, and his fellow pastor's legal battles over Victoria's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act. We learned the Bracks government was considering amending the Act and waited with 'baited breath' to hear what eventuated.

Andrew Bolt of the Herald Sun disclosed to his readers, Bracks is looking to amend the Act - but only to make it tougher! "More weasel words" reads the Herald Sun headlines 2 December 2005, continuing, "Premier Bracks fails to deliver on his promise to soften his racial vilification laws. They are oppressive, divisive and deceitful."
"Steve Bracks has broken the September vow he gave to religious leaders to make his vilification laws less dangerous. Last week, the Premier's representatives finally revealed what he actually had in mind. Surprise. He will in fact make the bureaucrats running these "shut-up" laws not less powerful, but more. He will ensure they operate not in less secrecy, but more. And people who say "bad" things about, say, witches or the Koran, face not less punishment, but more," explained Andrew Bolt.

And "the penny finally dropped" for those church leaders who had originally, and so self-righteously, supported the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act - they'd been supporting the eventual suppression of their own freedoms It seems the Catholics, Anglicans and Presbyterians all asked for changes to the present Act, if not repeal. But what they got were tougher reforms. Andrew Bolt explains: "At a meeting with government in November they were handed a page and a half, listing three possible "reforms". Some were astonished, even angered, by what they read.

The following list of the proposals reveals just what is in store:
· First, Bracks wants to give the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) the power to throw out a case even before holding any hearings, to weed out the more worthless complaints.
· But this is only a partial cure to the disease. As it now is, a crank activist upset by something you've said can first take you to the Equal Opportunity Commission (EOC), where you must defend yourself - hiring lawyers, if you can afford it.
· Even if the EOC decides the case is crazy, the crank can still demand to go on to a hearing at VCAT, which will cost you even more.
· The Government's proposed change might save some defendants the cost of a full VCAT hearing, but the crank still gets two free whacks at you.
The remaining two proposals are even worse. The first is to give the EOC even more power in the first conciliation stage - usually held in private. It would be able to demand that you and the crank give information and attend conciliation meetings, and to fine you if you refuse to "comply with any directions". Fancy your chances with a tolerance commissar who can fine you for being unco-operative?

If you think the Government actually means by this to crack down on the crank rather than you, read its scrap of paper: this change is to "encourage" conciliation and "resolve tensions between persons who (as a result of their ignorance of the attributes of others and the effect that their conduct may have on others) vilify others on the ground of race or religious belief and activity and those who are vilified".
It's the accused, not their accusers, who have most to fear. Who are presumed guilty. Who must have their "ignorance" corrected by a campaigning bureaucrat armed with fines. The Government's final proposal proves it. It suggests more "remedies for non-compliance of VCAT orders", with VCAT "able to implement a non-monetary order and charge that back to the respondent".
You probably have no idea what that means. So, writes Andrew, let me explain, using the Christian pastors as an example.
The two pastors tell me they will not do what VCAT has now ordered - place expensive advertisements in the papers saying they were wrong in criticising the Koran. They cannot bear false witness, they say. Under the Government's proposals, those pastors - who already have immense legal bills - will find VCAT can place those ads for them, and bill them the cost. And if they refuse to pay . . .

As I said, Steve Bracks has broken his promise to make his laws less sinister. But worse, he has made it even more dangerous for us to speak our mind on some of the most pressing issues before us - religion and culture. How oppressive. How divisive. How deceitful." (emphasis added) Oh! shades of 1984!

THE 'CHICKENS ARE NOW COMING HOME TO ROOST'

Who remembers Eric Butler's warnings of the future troubles the political parties were importing into this country with their bipartisan push for some idealistic 'multicultural' and 'multiracial' Australia? The League also warned the hard-nosed world planners behind the scenes knew the real effect would be the fragmentation and disintegration of a young but strong British-Australian nation.

It might be appropriate to ponder a portion of an address retired detective Tim Priest presented to guests at a Quadrant Dinner 12 November 2005.
"In February 2001 when I appeared before the Cabramatta inquiry, I gave evidence which at the time was controversial and attracted the usual claque of ratbags, lunatics from the ABC and their associates at the Sydney Morning Herald as well as that fruit loop Mike Carlton from 2UE. I said that this city is going to be torn apart by gang warfare the likes of which we have never seen before. In 2003 I was finally proven right, but I take no comfort from that.
However, the criticism I received was unprecedented. I was a nutter, a liar, a racist, a disgruntled detective - but I was right. The critics still refuse to concede that we have a problem. They are still clinging to the multicultural theme. To highlight the problems with Middle Eastern communities in this city is to threaten to tear down the multicultural facade.

The amount of money spent on the multicultural industry beggars belief. It is a lucrative and sustainable position for many. Governments pay huge money to anything that bears the word multicultural. Indeed the police department, like other government departments, spends vast amounts on multicultural issues, multicultural jobs, multicultural consultancies, education packages, legal advice, public relations and the rest. Having expended large amounts of money on multiculturalism, they are hardly likely to criticise it. Those that feed off multiculturalism are not likely to question it. When I gave evidence to the Cabramatta inquiry, I risked my career and my safety in coming forward. I did it because I had sworn an oath to protect the community I served. That community was Cabramatta. Cabramatta is made up almost entirely of residents born outside this country, mostly South-East Asians, and their children. But when I went forward and exposed the shame of Cabramatta, the residents were not Asians in my eyes, but Australians no matter where they came from. It was my duty to speak up for them and to protect them. Race was never an issue. I have received many awards in my police career but the ones I hold dearest are those I received from the Cabramatta community.

One old man who had spent seven years in refugee camps in South-East Asia before coming to Australia said the day he landed in Australia was like dying and coming to heaven. Cabramatta was a community of ordinary people like that old man, who recognised the problems of drugs and organised crime in their community and spoke up and agitated for change… It was a slightly built Vietnamese man named Thung Ngo who led the charge on behalf of a community that had had enough of crime and forced a parliamentary inquiry into Cabramatta which ultimately saved their community from destruction…

But I have not heard anything like that from the Middle Eastern community. Initially the gang rapes were the fault of Australian culture, according to one religious leader in the south-west. I note that he has now softened his stance and is calling for change among Middle Eastern youth. But they are just words; there seem to be no Thung Ngos among them. What is it that draws such defence for this community from certain sections of the media? Why didn't they join in to defend the Asian community during the fallout from the Cabramatta inquiry?

And where are these apologists when it comes to the plight of our first Australians, our indigenous peoples? Our indigenous people hardly rate a mention: Their cause is not trendy enough, not global like the refugee or Islamic issues. Yet one of the most depressing sights that has confronted me as a policeman is the shame of Redfern. I first saw Everleigh Street some twenty-two years ago, and nothing has changed since. The atmosphere of sheer hopelessness and desperation still hangs around the neck of every young Aborigine who lives in those ghettos, yet they hardly ever rate a mention.

The Middle Eastern crime groups and their associates number in the thousands, not the hundreds as the government and senior police would have you believe. It is the biggest crime problem we have ever faced, and it is growing. Hardly a day goes past without some violent crime involving a "male of Middle Eastern appearance", though I see lately that description is watered down now to include "and / or Mediterranean appearance"… My prediction is that within ten years, Middle Eastern crime groups will spread rapidly across Australia as they seek to expand their enterprises. There will be no-go areas in south-western Sydney, just like Paris…"

THE WILD WEST

by David Whiteside

"Kabul was supposed to be saved from the repressive rule of the Taliban by the American-led invasion after September 11. But now that moral code has been replaced by drunken gunfights and sexual-free-for-alls as mercenaries and aid workers party like there's no tomorrow." (The Advertiser Review 19 November 2005). Welcome to Afghanistan today, a country which conforms more to Hollywood's depiction of the "Wild West" then a thriving democracy. Westerners live life like there is no tomorrow and party every night. Chinese prostitutes, working a multitude of brothels disguised as Chinese restaurants, pepper the cityscape of Kabul. Such practices were once unthinkable but are now freely practised.

But the party will soon end. Parliamentary elections resulted in a back-lash against the American-installed liberals and a shift in power toward Islamic conservatives who openly profess that their goal is to take Afghanistan back to the Islamism of the Taliban. And this will all be through the "democratic" process. So when this happens, will the United States of lassez-faire invade once more, to re-establish "freedom"? And will the wheel of "democracy" turn, one more time?

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

John Demjanjuk: To the Editor of The Age, 30th December 2005:
Institutionalised cruelty, unethical but hiding behind a veneer of morality, seems to be becoming more and more a part of the contemporary world. The proposed deportation of John Demjanjuk to the Ukraine ('"Ivan the Terrible" lookalike to be deported', 30/12) is the latest shocking example.
This man was in the past unjustly deported to Israel, corruptly found guilty in a show trial and only released when the collapse of Soviet communism produced irrefutable proof of the miscarriage of justice.
One would have thought that, after that, his opponents would feel he had more than expiated any alleged war crimes and leave him in peace. Instead in his eighties he is to be taken from the land he has lived in for fifty or more years, separated from his family, including children and grandchildren and forced to end his life in what is now virtually a foreign land for him.
And the 'evidence' on which he has been deemed a 'willing' participant with the Nazis in 'exploiting and exterminating Jews in Poland' may be as spurious as those many testimonies exposed in his second Israel trial.
- Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Victoria.

Call to alert sleepy Australians:
With the so-called anti terrorist laws in place, I believe it is most important to continue to do what we can to alert the sleepy Australian people to this attack on our freedom My call to all On Target subscribers is to write letters to the editors of as many newspapers as possible with the following message (verbatim if desired): Now that the so-called anti-terrorist laws have been rushed through Parliament without time for debate by our representatives and without considering the deliberations of our Judiciary, legal profession or the people, it is vital that all Australians, especially the young on whom these new laws will impact most in the future understand that HISTORY HAS TAUGHT US THAT WHEN A PEOPLE TRADE OFF THEIR FREEDOM FOR SECURITY, THEY INVARIABLY END UP LOSING BOTH!
It is important that the message be kept brief refraining from the multitude of arguments against this Bill, as these will be too much to remember and detract from the simple message which, if it can be grasped and remembered and repeated throughout communities, will set people to thinking about the words as they watch events unfold. This could be expanded by a deluge of emails to Senators and MHRs and by using the technology of the ability of the mobile phone to send a multitude of Text messages to reach the young (a bit out of my league but we can ask the young people to explain the procedure).
- Edward Paterson, Kingscliff, NSW.

Letter to: Hon. Peter Batchelor MLA, Parliament House, Melbourne 3000
Dear Sir, I have read, and noted with interest your letter published in the Weekly Times (December 14) and your reported statements in the Ballarat Courier and Wimmera Mail-Times (Horsham) regarding the condition of the rail tracks throughout rural Victoria.
There seems to be some confusion as to who owns what. Your government spent a lot of money refurbishing the Ballarat-Ararat section to reopen it to passenger trains. The kudos from that achievement was taken by the government in reversing a Kennett initiative. You are also spending big, and claiming kudos, for the section from Ballarat to Melbourne.
If the tracks are not publicly owned why are you doing this? In the meantime there is considerable angst among grain growers that the condition of the grain-only tracks will not carry what promises to be a large harvest. The risk of derailments is high. The possibility that train drivers will refuse to take the risk is also high. If the rail network fails to move the grain it will place added strain on our already crumbling road system.
I understand that the privatisation contract did not include the infrastructure. If the tracks are, indeed publicly owned why is the asset not being maintained? Again, does Pacific National pay any sort of fee, lease, rent, right of passage or whatever for using the infrastructure?
- Yours truly, Ron Fischer Ballarat Victoria.
Editor's questions: Where within the legal structure can ordinary over burdened tax-paying Australians find an authority to look after their interests? Who has the power to insist governments of all persuasions must disclose to the public the terms of the 'privatisation' agreements? Just when can the Australian people expect to see some benefits - not always burdens - from the privatisation agreements?