THE FAILURE OF ABORIGINAL SEPARATISM

by James Reed
The Aboriginal issue is being widely discussed at the present time. It is impossible to cover all facets of the present debate but there seems to be a growing recognition that separatism has been a disaster for Aborigines. Helen Hughes has recently published Land of Shame (Centre for Independent Studies, 2007) where she argues that following the 1967 referendum, Aborigines were streamed into a "separate" development pathway that has led to poverty, violence and social breakdown. Hughes argues that the Whitlam and Fraser governments, under the intellectual influence of H.C. "Nugget" Coombs went along the Marxist/homeland view. Malcolm Fraser replied that it was absurd to say that his government had pursued a form of apartheid. But the road to hell is often paved with politically correct intentions.

Hell is not an exaggeration to describe the light of most Aboriginal communities, and an extract from Hughes' book published in The Australian has the title "Hell of Best Intentions" (26-27/5/06 p.21). In particular the recently released report, Little Children are Sacred, report of the Northern territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse, is over three hundred pages of horror and shame. Alcohol-induced sexual predatory attacks of children were found in almost every community - fuelled also by degrading pornography, drug abuse and domestic violence.

White workers who should be helping Aborigines were found to be sexual predators, preying on underage Aboriginal girls. These are the worst sort of people, acting oh so politically correct on the surface - but given the slightest opportunity watch for the sleaze.

As an election is in the air, the Howard government has now found a "problem" and it is mobilizing resources using the police and army. Howard will ban alcohol and pornography. Last year I said that this should be done and I came under criticism from some readers as well as fellow writer Ian Wilson for undermining liberty. But it is the right move, even though Howard is acting now for election brownie points. But if he acted last year in a crusade to save Aboriginal Kids, maybe all those little Aboriginals who have been raped and brutalised, in the meantime would not have been. But that's politics.

I notice that John Howard has said: "What matters more: the constitutional niceties, or the care and protection of young children." (The Australian 22/6/07 p.1) What for the power grab once more? The issues of constitutional law and the care and protection of young children are not opposing issues. Beware of someone who speaks like that - they are looking to grab more centralised power. Who to blame? The argument of Helen Hughes needs to be taken much further. Leftist, politically correct approaches to the Aboriginal issue have been a disaster. Thus this issue gives us reason to believe that these approaches are incoherent in other areas of social policy, such as the environment, refugees and immigration. If they got it wrong there, then they are likely to be wrong everywhere.

IMPORTANT BOOKS: Australians should be reading to understand HOW their national sovereignty was whittled away by very clever and traitorous elites.
The issues of the plight of the Aboriginals, the untold resources wealth tied up in "Land Rights" and the takeover of Australia by the Corporatocracy (International Banks, International Big Business and Government) cannot each be looked at in isolation.
There are a number of important books the League carries which fill in the missing pieces of this section of the very large jigsaw puzzle.
They are:
"Red Over Black" by former communist Geoff McDonald (1982) - $10.00 posted;
"The Evidence," by Geoff McDonald, $10.00 posted;
"Land Rights, Birth Rights" by Peter English, $12.00 posted;
"Healing a Divided Nation," by Rev. Cedric Jacobs, $10.00 posted;
and the explosive book that no mainline medi

THE GLOBAL WARMING SCAM

by James Reed
Global warming is the latest weapon of the Left and one-worlders to wind back hard won freedoms and further dismantle national sovereignty. It is no surprise that the standard scientific body dealing with the reporting of this issue - the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change - is a United Nations initiative. The various IPCC reports although appearing politically-neutral are in my opinion - and I am not a climate scientist - constructed within a globalist one-worlder framework. And that is the rub - the science is complex if not bewildering. What is a fellow to do?

Fortunately there are excellent books debunking the science of global warming and exposing the politics. On the science issue S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery have published Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years (Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham 2007). These authors argue that the Earth is warming, but human emitted carbon dioxide plays a minor role. Based on an array of scientific evidence they argue that the present-day warming is part of natural 1,500 year cycle that has been occurring for a million years.

Henrik Svensmark and Nigel Calder in The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change, (Icon books, London 2007) argue that an especially violent sun has meant that less cosmic rays (high level energy rays from outer space) have reached Earth, producing less clouds. Human-induced carbon dioxide has had little to do with this.

The politics of global warming and its one world agenda have been well detailed in a most enjoyable book by Christopher Horner, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism, (Regnery Publishing Washington DC, 2007). This book clearly demonstrates that global warming is a political weapon for the one world agenda.

Leftists argue that the problem , being a global one can only be effectively dealt with by global organisations and directing them requires constraining the nation state and crushing our lifestyle.
For example, George Monbiot in Heat (Allan Lane London 2006) wants to see personal carbon allowances that cut emissions down so radically that our present lifestyles will need to be drastically modified.

Horner's book is jam-packed with quotes from green-leftist types which will alarm even the most steel-hearted of actionists. For example Susan Sontag, Jewish Marxist, said in the Partisan Review Winter 1967:
"The white race is the cancer of human history. It is the white race and it alone - its ideologies and inventions - which eradicates autonomous civilisations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself."

As Horner aptly entitles one of his chapters, green is indeed the new red. I was pleased to see Horner have ago at James Lovelock's Gaia theory, which sees the earth itself as a holistic organism, a creation of the Earth goddess herself. On this view, people are "pollution" and as Lovelock argues in his latest book The Revenge of Gaia (2006) the end result of modernity will be a few breeding pairs of humans left at the poles after the rest have died off. Humanity is like a splinter in Gaia's finger, which will ultimately be eliminated.

The green world view is indeed one hostile to the value and dignity of individuals because it is fundamentally a red view.

YES, VIRGINIA THERE IS … AND HE CARRIES A HAND GUN!

by John Steele
The liberal elites are much like the little girl in the movie "Yes Virginia There is a Santa Claus," (1974) with the same desperate need to have their childlike faith restored. White American liberals believe that race doesn't matter (well, so long as you are white and non-Jewish) and that guns are an intrinsic evil.
Thus, even before the gun smoke had cleared at the Virginia Tech, Blocksburg Virginia, the gun control lobby was squawking that the massacre wouldn't have happened if there were no guns, or no hand guns, or… something. Sure, sure: the internet is full of ideas from budding junior urban terrorists about how to kill even more people without guns. If there is an intention to cause harm, a psycho like the killer Cho Seung-Hui will find a way.

One can argue more convincingly that it was the lack of guns at Virginia Tech - the Tech had a gun-free policy as a typical trendy liberal institution - which led to the massacre. Add to this the fact that officials communicated about the presence of the killer by internet/emails, not a loud speaker, (!!!) and one has all the ingredients for disaster. An armed teacher or student could have prevented the massive death toll by one good shot. US Firearms Sociology expert John Lott and William Landes in their study "Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws", found that the only policy to influence multiple victim public shootings is the passage of concealed handgun laws. When states passed these laws the rates of multiple-victim public shootings fell by 60 per cent. Virginia Tech was a gun-free zone and psycho-killers prefer gun-free zones. Remember: taking guns from law-abiding citizens does not mean less guns; it just means criminals have guns to prey upon the defenceless citizenry.

Johnny Howard of course milked the situation for political mileage, saying that he prevented a "gun culture" developing in Australia by the 1996 gun bans. Yet a few years back an Asian with an illegal handgun killed people at a Victorian university. That of course was an excuse to tighten up further on guns. But all this has done is create a black market. Sydney and Melbourne are awash with illegal guns - and that is an even worse "gun culture"!

The racial aspects of the Virginia Tech massacre are not even mentioned by the mainstream press. The trigger which set off this unbalanced Asian may have been a failed inter-racial romance, although there are some doubts about this. Well, why not blame that rather than guns? Why not blame the influence of violent movies (Saw, Texas Chain Saw Massacre) which seem to have influenced the killer's own artistic works? Why not indeed. And if the killer was white and the victims black, this would also be a race hate crime. You don't believe me? Radio shock jock (white) merely used rap talk to refer to Rutgers University women's basketball team as "nappy-headed ho's" and blam, he's fired. The basketball players claim to be scared for life. Pull the other law suit pay out!

As Lawrence Auster says at his blog site on the race connection:
"Has anyone ever added up the number of white Americans killed by non-white immigrants over the years, starting with the murder of Frank Lloyd Wright's mistress Margaret Cheney, her two children, and three house guests and the burning down of Wright's home Taliesen by a black immigrant servant in 1914, up to the murder of New York actress Adriennne Shelley by illegal alien Diego Pillco in November 2006? It is not an insignificant number. What ever the number, barely a week passes in which a white American is not killed by a non-white immigrant or illegal alien.

Is that a racist thing to say? The fact is that immigration is by itself a traumatic experience, and that the immigration of poor non-whites into a prosperous, majority-white country often (and predictably) triggers feelings of racial alienation, racial envy, and racial hostility on the part of the non-white immigrant toward the majority population."
Indeed, how long before White liberals in their never-ending desire for self-debasement and self-abuse see Cho as a victim of racism? Maybe these liberals could romanticise him - and as he raved about killed "rich kids" - make him into a Marxist hero like Che Guevara. From Che to Cho.

ADVANCE NOTICE FOR NATIONAL WEEKEND

The question to be tackled by Professor Andrew Fraser and Dr. David Mitchell: "Is the West's Future: Immigration Forever and a Day? The venue will be The Hume Inn, Albury, NSW.For those early birds Phone: 02 6021 2733 to make your accomodation bookings.

Dates are: New Times Dinner: Friday evening 5th October. Seminar and Action Conference: Saturday and Sunday, 6th and 7th October 2007.

FILM-MAKER MICHAEL MOORE HAS SAID 9/11 COULD BE INSIDE JOB

"Academy Award winner Michael Moore answered questions on 9/11 truth during a sneak peak of his new documentary, SiCKO, in New York . Our reporters were initially avoided by Moore, but he subsequently decided to approach We Are Change.org/ Infowars.com reporters for a discussion.

Moore brought up his lingering questions on 9/11, which are a clear departure from the 'government negligence' picture he painted in his film Fahrenheit 9/11, released some three years ago. Moore told reporters, "I've had a number of fire fighters tell me over the years and since Fahrenheit 9/11 that they heard these explosions--that they believe there's MUCH more to the story than we've been told. I don't think the official investigations have told us the complete truth-- they haven't even told us half the truth."

Michael Moore brought up the blackout of video at the site of the alleged Pentagon plane crash on his own, appearing quite willing to discuss subjects that so-called left gatekeepers have previously refused to raise questions about. "I've filmed there before down at the Pentagon-- before 9/11-- there's got to be at least 100 cameras, ringing that building, in the trees, everywhere. They've got that plane coming in with 100 angles. How come we haven't seen the straight-- I'm not talking about stop-action photos, I'm talking about the video. I want to see the video; I want to see the 100 videos that exist of this," Moore said.

He went on to imply the implausibility of a pilot executing the flight pattern of the flight that allegedly hit the Pentagon. "Why don't they want us to see that plane coming into the building? Because, if you know anything about flying a plane, when you're going 500 miles per hour, if you're off by that much, you're in the river. So, they hit a building that's only 5 stories high ...[unclear] that expertly. I believe that there will be answers in that video tape and we should demand that that tape is released."

Michael Moore was not vague or bashful in discussing 9/11 truth--rather, he demanded a "new investigation before we get too far away from this-- to find out the whole truth." "And I intend, in my own way, to find some answers," Moore added. "Thank you for doing whatever you're doing."…
Moore's most recent comments on 9/11 are a far cry from statements he made to Alex Jones during the 2004 RNC convention when he told Jones, tongue-in-cheek, that he didn't report on NORAD standing down because "it would be un-American." This is a huge development in public figures going public with 9/11 questions-- particularly on the part of 'liberals' and others who identify with the 'left.' Despite overwhelming discontent with the Bush Administration, many such voices dismiss the importance of investigating 9/11 or simply decline to discuss any outstanding questions or relevant evidence. Noam Chomsky, for one, suggested that it wouldn't matter" even if 9/11 had been hatched from a government plot.

Will the mainstream media continue to ignore the fact that the official story on 9/11 is all but dead, and more and more figures are coming forth to demand the truth?" Source: https://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/moore_911_could_be_inside_job.htm

DVD - "9/11 AND THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH":
The League has obtained copies of three various DVDs dealing with the 2001 attack on the Twin Towers in America, now known as 9/11.
For those readers who would like either a DVD or a Video copy, we can supply either one for $10.00 each including postage.

Please indicate which title you wish to receive.
The titles are: 1. Confronting the Evidence ; 2. Painful Deceptions ; 3. Loose Change II.
Send for a copy with your cheque/money order to Heritage Books, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley 5159.

THE FALKLANDS WAR AND DUTY TO HIS COUNTRY

From David Flint's Opinion Column

Background source: Wipedia: When the Falkland Islands were invaded by Argentina on 2 April 1982, an event that led to the Falklands War, Prince Andrew's ship, HMS Invincible was one of only two operational aircraft carriers available to the Royal Navy, and as such was to play a major role in the Royal Navy taskforce being assembled to sail south to retake the islands.

At first the British government were apprehensive of allowing Prince Andrew to remain on Invincible, and wished to move him to a desk job. The prospect of the son of the Queen being killed in action was a possibility, and the government wished to avoid such a circumstance. However, the Queen insisted that Prince Andrew be allowed to remain with his ship, and so he joined the Invincible as it sailed south, as a Sea King helicopter co-pilot.

Throughout the conflict Prince Andrew flew on various missions, including Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) and Anti-Surface Warfare search (ASuW), as well as other missions. He also helped in casualty evacuation, transport and Search and Air Rescue (SAR). When the conflict ended, and Invincible returned to Portsmouth, the Queen and Prince Philip joined other families of the crew to welcome the vessel home.

The Prince remained with HMS Invincible, with brief assignments to the carrier HMS Illustrious, Culdrose, and the Joint Services School of Intelligence, Ashford, Kent, until 1983.

I SALUTE OUR SERVICEMEN THEN AND NOW - PRINCE ANDREW:
By The Prince Andrew, Duke of York on the 25th Anniversary of the liberation of the Falkland Islands.

"I am not a war correspondent, but a veteran of a campaign to recover the Falkland Islands from what was a friendly nation, Argentina, whose leadership embarked upon an expedition to forcibly take a group of British islands in the South Atlantic, 8,000 miles from here.

I wrote on the occasion of the 20th anniversary:
"The experience of war is one of the most life-changing experiences anyone can have." I haven't changed my opinion of this immutable fact. I am sure that those who have experienced the current conflicts in which we are engaged as a nation would agree. My prayers and thoughts go to all the families and friends of those who have lost loved ones as a result of the Falklands conflict, and as a result of the conflicts we now find ourselves engaged in.

Without doubt, the nature of conflict has changed since I was at war. When we set off for the Falklands, in 1982, circumstances were completely different from those we find ourselves in today. Back then, it was a clear case of British territory being invaded by an aggressor nation. It is just as clear to me now that it was our duty to go those 8,000 miles to recover those islands. We were dispatched, as I remember it, with a great sense of national pride. We were on a recovery mission, plain and simple.

Circumstances today more complex and contentious:
The circumstances in which our Armed Services find themselves today are far from those of 25 years ago and a great deal more complex and contentious. I have previously said about the Falklands war:
"There was a knowledge that war was not as glamorous as depicted in war films - it was dirty; it was exhausting; and it was monotonous. People really bled and death might be a consequence." Today, our Armed Services and their families fully understand this reality. In 1982, as a nation, we supported our troops as they "yomped" across the Falkland Islands to take back Port Stanley. The fighting around the islands' capital was fierce and often hand-to-hand. But the conflicts we find ourselves engaged in today are so different from the one I fought in that it is almost impossible to relate the differing circumstances.

"It is only because of my continued personal relationships with naval and military units, and because I have visited Iraq on two occasions, that I have an understanding of what our Servicemen and women are facing today. I recall there was a poster slogan from the Second World War: "Careless Talk Costs Lives". It is true today. And in my opinion it is even more vital today because of the advances in media communications, 24-hour news channels and internet connectivity.

Whatever your view about the rights and wrongs:
"Free information given to an enemy predisposed to target an individual or British troops in general gives me genuine cause for concern about any speculation on operational deployments or plans. In my experience in the Falklands, and since, it is vital that we try to avoid this potential gift to the enemy. Today our Armed Services are in harm's way and, whatever your view about the rights and wrongs of our involvement, our men and women serving in these inhospitable places need our support.

Camaraderie (it's Aussie mateship…ed):
Five years ago I also wrote: "Camaraderie is a sense of wellbeing among people who have gone through similar experiences that are hard to communicate to others. I found that, in my squadron, there was a high degree of camaraderie, as we were experiencing the same things every day. That feeling can never be taken away from us and we will always have that special connection or bond."

"I recently held a reunion dinner for those of us who served in 820 Naval Air Squadron and Invincible and I can truly say that that bond is as evident today as it was 25 years ago. On Sunday, many of us Falkland veterans will be on Horse Guards to commemorate that event and, at the same time, go some way to recognising the people of this great nation for their support as we toiled all those miles away. In this way, we can demonstrate our thanks for the unlimited support we received, as was shown when we departed Portsmouth at the beginning of April and on our return in August.

Circumstances well beyond the understanding of many people:
"As for my contribution 25 years ago; I went to the Falklands as a small cog in a huge machine. I was not special when it came to the totality of the Falklands campaign. It was just that I am who I am and as a consequence, there was a greater interest. I was privileged to serve with so many wonderful other "small cogs".
The ultimate reason we won was that we were able to make all those cogs work together as a team more successfully than our enemy. Wars are won by teamwork, dedication to the task and loyalty to the cause.

"In 2007, I salute my colleagues from 25 years ago for their heroism and sacrifice. It is one hell of a lot more difficult today for our current Armed Services, who continue to hold the torch and lead the way in succession to us.
I salute your bravery, loyalty and devotion to duty in the face of an unquestionably dangerous opposition and in circumstances well beyond the understanding of many people."

WANTED - WANTED - COPIES OF "THE NEW TIMES" FOR POSTERITY

The following copies on our files of The New Times are missing, and we are looking to our older readers to help us in the search for them. Would any subscriber who is able to help please contact the Melbourne Office and leave their telephone number. They will then be contacted.

Numbers missing:
1956 Vol. 22 No. 15 : 1957 Vol. 23 No. 20 : Vol. 23 No. 22.
All of the years: 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962
1978 Vol. 43 No. 6 : 1982 Vol. 46a No. 10 : 1983 Vol. 47 No. 4 : 1984 Vol. 48 No. 7 : 1987 Vol. 51 No. 11