FINE WORDS ARE NOT NEARLY ENOUGH

by Betty Luks
For 'National Homeless Person's Week' a Melbourne newspaper carried an article by Chris Middendorp, Co-ordinater for the central division of the Sacred Heart Mission, The Age, 5/8/08. Mr. Middendorp wrote on the plight of the homeless and those without hope in great numbers in that great city.
He takes us to task in his article: "We should be deeply ashamed that we permit anyone to live like this. And because so many of our homeless are poorly educated and come from disadvantaged backgrounds with a limited capacity to speak out, we don't hear much about their plight. The powerless can be easy to ignore '" and goes on to explain what it means to these people to be homeless.

All fine words indeed appealing to our consciences for help in the plight of the homeless and hopeless. But are they enough? The Church I attend Mr. Middendorp has an outreach to the needy and gives generously to those within its own parish as well as others from across the other side of town. But, the core problem is not that people are miserly towards their neighbours in need.

The core problem is one of distribution and is financial and institutional.
As the greedy banking/financial system crumbles before our eyes and more and more people end up homeless and helpless, maybe the Church leaders could see their way clear to have a sustained look at what Jesus meant when warning us: "You can't serve God and mammon."
Or what 'idols of the mind' was Jesus referring to when he took the Jewish leaders to task for placing more value in the gold upon the altar than upon the Holy God whose presence dwelt there? (After all, since the time of Moses they had been commanded to destroy all their neighbour's physical idols, but couldn't see the idols they had built in their own minds).

'And when a man swears by the Temple he is swearing by that and by the One who dwells in it. 'And when a man swears by heaven he is swearing by the throne of God and by the One who is seated there… 'You blind men! For which is of greater worth, the offering or the altar that makes the offering sacred? Therefore, when a man swears by the altar he is swearing by that and by everything on it…
'Alas for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You who pay your tithe of mint and dill and cumin and have neglected the weightier matters of the Law--justice, mercy, good faith! These you should have practised, without neglecting the others. 'You blind guides! Straining out gnats and swallowing camels!'

In 1996 a Statement was issued by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales titled: "The Common Good: and the Catholic Church's Social Teaching" Anthony Cooney responded ("Fine Words Are Not Enough"*) trusting the "Bishops of the Church will address themselves to the absence of any consideration of the key role of the monetary system in our present" longing for something better than the present situation.
That request is just as relevant now as it was then - even more so today as we witness the crumbling of the financially debt-burdened economies of the world.

The Common Good and The Dignity of the Human Persons:
No. 13. "We believe each person possesses a basic dignity that comes from God, not from any human quality or accomplishment, not from race or gender, age or economic status. The test therefore of every institution or policy is whether it enhances or threatens human dignity and indeed human life itself. Policies which treat people as only economic units, or policies which reduce people to a passive state of dependency on welfare, do not do justice to the dignity of the human person.
No. 14. People who are poor and vulnerable have a special place in Catholic teaching: this is what is meant by the "preferential option for the poor. Scripture tells us we will be judged by our response to the "least of these", in which we see the suffering face of Christ himself '."

Key role of the monetary system in a modern money economy:
Cooney (himself a Roman Catholic) responded: "But nowhere in the Statement do the Bishops address themselves to the absence of any consideration of the key role of the monetary system in a modern money economy
Section, Option Against the Poor (paras. 81-98) gives no consideration to the monetary system. Is it not just possible, one must ask the authors, that the key to the operations of a monetary economy might be its monetary system? Paragraph 84 for example argues that "The search for profit must not be allowed to override all other moral considerations. For instance the creation and stimulation of markets by advertising ... ."
Is it not possible that both are a necessity of a monetary system which makes 'growth' mandatory? Paragraph 85 argues that "the idea that the individual is primarily to be considered as a consumer" is contrary to the Gospel; further (a pragmatic touch here) "It gravely disadvantages those who do not have wealth to spend."

"Ah" insists Anthony Cooney, " but they do!"
They have the common inheritance of wealth to spend. What they do not have is MONEY to spend. Whilst we agree that the individual is not merely a "consumer", that is not to say that the individual, in his function as consumer, should not be sovereign. (C.H.) Douglas once illustrated this point with a play on the word 'sovereign'. I paraphrase, since the passage is uncollected -
"When a man went into a shop and proffered a sovereign to justify his demand for an article on the shelf, he issued a chain of orders. For him ships sailed, farmers farmed, carriers carried, machinists machined, all to replace the article on the shelf."

There is no need to assume, as the authors of The Common Good sometimes seem to assume, that this work is done miserably and grudgingly, simply because it is paid for by some fraction of the 'sovereign' which set in motion the chain of commands. Might not some at least of those who worked to fill the demand have taken moral pleasure in doing so because they were "governed by moral considerations, not least the demands of justice"? To deny this possibility seems to me to concede absolutely the laissez-faire case.

Douglas ends his illustration however with this observation -
"The defect of laissez-faire was that not enough people had a 'sovereign' to make their demand for goods and services effective."

It is clearly not beyond the remit of The Common Good to consider the possibility that the monetary system is working unjustly, nor to ask if it might have some bearing upon the working of the production/consumption cycle.
Is it claimed that whereas the Free Market System is not "God-given natural law" the monetary system is, and must not be questioned nor examined by impious minds? '"

* Fine Words Are Not Enough" on League's website in Race/Culture/Nation section.

** Download the "Social Dynamics" Video/DVDs from the League's website front page and study for yourself the fraudulent overpowering role of the financial system in a modern money economy.

LITTLE MANILA : KISS ADELAIDE GOODBYE

by James Reed
Get ready for it Adelaide - you are going to get a dose of what the Eastern States have come to accept with numbness and paralysis. According to an 'exclusive' (M. Owen, "Little Manila," The Advertiser 12/7/08 p.1) the South Australian government has signed an immigration agreement with the Philippines, which the elites hope will bring 50,000 skilled workers to South Australia over the next decade.

This is a common practice for the Philippines, where nine million Filipinos work overseas, sending home 'remittances' of about $15 billion a year. South Australia is the first Australian State to do this, and it won't be the last if we don't stop this. The workers from the Philippines are expected to flow into SA early in 2009 and most will become permanent residents as occurred in Manitoba, Canada.

What is happening here is that Corporate Capitalism, just as it did before the implementation of the White Australia Policy, is attempting to recruit cheap Third World labour.
The government's agenda is to Asianise the Australian population, and, having got away with what it has done over the last 30 years, is moving on with ever bolder strokes.
Beyond all of this is the inevitability of endless chain migration as is occurring in Manitoba Canada. This alone will make Adelaide into a Fourth World Colony of the Philippines in a generation.

The Philippines is politically unstable and a full-scale war could erupt between southern Philippines insurgents and the status quo ("War in Philippines 'More Likely Than Not," The Australian, 1/7/08 p.11).This will speed up Adelaide's ethnic change as the inner city elites plea for more Filipino refugees.

With runaway immigration, multiculturalism and multiracialism, there is no hope of sustaining this nation as an expression of western civilisation. That is why the cultural wars are so important.

WOULD THE FOUNDING FATHERS HAVE BELIEVED THIS ?

by James Reed
The local council at Camden in outer south-western Sydney rejected plans for a 1,200 Muslim school. The Qu'ranic Society has said that the rejection is racially motivated and plans to take the case to the NSW land and Environment Court, where they expect to win. (The Australian 29/5/08 p.7).

In December last year, the local Aussies, almost 800 of them, protested about this development at a public meeting at the Camden town hall. That is their democratic right - even if some of them had racial motivations.
But the Rudd government, wringing its hands with guilt, is now going to run "anti-racism projects" in the area. For this read "Anglo-Saxon brainwashing."

The Parliamentary Secretary for Multicultural Affairs, Laurie Ferguson, was alarmed at "anti-Islamic xenophobia" and community racism. "You've got a community there with very few Muslims." Well, could it be that the long-suffering Aussies want to be left alone? "Anti-Islamic xenophobia" - that's just a propaganda phrase.

What would the Founding Fathers have thought if they could have seen the present day grand circus that is Australia?

ENRICHING BRITISH CULTURE ?

Where's the sense in it all? While the following article relates to Britain one wonders how many Australian Muslims are fighting our troops in Afghanistan?
According to the Daily Telegraph's Con Coughlin, Duncan Gardham and Thomas Harding, 2 Aug 2008:-
British Muslims 'fighting with Taliban in Afghanistan': British Muslims are helping the Taliban in their war against UK soldiers in southern Afghanistan, according to the former commander of Britain's forces in Afghanistan. Brig. Ed Butler: 'There are British passport holders who live in the U.K. who are being found in places like Kandahar' Brig. Ed Butler, who spent six months commanding British forces in Afghanistan, also revealed fears that militant Islamic groups in south-east Asia are supporting terrorist plots in the UK.

The brigadier, a former head of the SAS, spoke exclusively to the Daily Telegraph in the week when the British death toll in Afghanistan reached 114, with 17 fatalities in the last two months.
UK forces have uncovered evidence that British Muslims are actively supporting the Taliban and al-Qa'eda in attacks on coalition forces in southern Afghanistan, Brig Butler said. "There are British passport holders who live in the U.K. who are being found in places like Kandahar."

Earlier this year, it was revealed that RAF Nimrod spy-planes monitoring Taliban radio signals in Afghanistan had heard militants speaking with Yorkshire and Midlands accents. Privately, British officers in Afghanistan estimate that several thousand Taliban fighters have been killed since 2006, among them people from outside the country.

One officer said: "While my troops have not actually found British passports on enemy dead there has been a suspicion that with the high number of Taliban casualties they have needed to recruit a lot of foreign fighters and some of these are likely to be of British-Muslim descent." Disturbingly, Brig Butler suggested the traffic between Britain and Afghanistan may flow in both directions, with some British Muslims returning from the region and posing a domestic security threat. Brig Butler, 46, said he had seen evidence that terror groups based in southern Afghanistan were plotting with Muslim extremists in Britain to carry out terror attacks in the UK. "There is a link between Kandahar and urban conurbations in the UK," said Brig. Butler. "This is something the military understands but the British public does not."

Western intelligence agencies are increasingly concerned that Afghanistan and its lawless border with Pakistan are now home to many training camps used by Jihadi groups to prepare radicals for attacks in the West.
A Whitehall source confirmed that the security services are aware of some radicalized British Muslims returning to the UK from Afghanstan. The source said: "There are very small numbers of British citizens travelling out there, being trained up and then returning to the UK."

YOU DON'T SEND ME LOVE (OR EVEN HATE) LETTERS

by James Reed
Put on Neil Diamond and Barbara Streisand's "You Don't Send Me Flowers Anymore" for this one. Josef Fitzl, the beast who locked his daughter in a cellar for 24 years and fathered seven children by her, has received hundreds of love letters from lonely women wanting romance! A common theme to these letters is that old Josef (aged 73) is misunderstood!

Mercy me - what has the West to work with here! If only these women would forget about romance and put their sexual energies - like many of us - into the quest to save civilisation, rather than help to bury it.

MAKING A GREAT, GREAT EVIL 'RESPECTABLE'

from James Petras' column: New York Times - Making Nuclear Extermination Respectable: July 2008

On July 18, 2008 The New York Times published an article by Israeli-Jewish historian, Professor Benny Morris, advocating an Israeli nuclear-genocidal attack on Iran with the likelihood of killing 70 million Iranians - 12 times the number of Jewish victims in the Nazi holocaust:

"Iran's leaders would do well to rethink their gamble and suspend their nuclear program. Barring this, the best they could hope for is that Israel's conventional air assault will destroy their nuclear facilities. To be sure, this would mean thousands of Iranian casualties and international humiliation. But the alternative is an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland."

Morris is a frequent lecturer and consultant to the Israeli political and military establishment and has unique access to Israeli strategic military planners. Morris' advocacy and public support of the massive, brutal expulsion of all Palestinians is on public record. Yet his genocidal views have not precluded his receiving numerous academic awards. His writings and views are published in Israel's leading newspapers and journals. Morris' views are not the idle ranting of a marginal psychopath, as witnessed by the recent publication of his latest op-ed article in the New York Times.

What does the publication by the New York Times of an article, which calls for the nuclear incineration of 70 million Iranians and the contamination of the better part of a billion people in the Middle East, Asia and Europe, tell us about US politics and culture?
For it is the NYT, which informs the 'educated classes' in the US, its Sunday supplements, literary and editorial pages and which serves as the 'moral conscience' of important sectors of the cultural, economic and political elite.

Zionofascism beyond criticism ?
The New York Times provides a certain respectability to mass murder, which Morris' views otherwise would not possess if say, they were published in the neo-conservative weeklies or monthlies. The fact that the NYT considers the prospect of an Israeli mass extermination of millions of Iranians part of the policy debate in the Middle East reveals the degree to which Zionofascism has infected the 'higher' cultural and journalist circles of the United States.
Truth to say, this is the logical outgrowth of the Times public endorsement of Israel's economic blockade to starve 1.4 million Palestinians in Gaza; the Times' cover-up of Israeli-Zionist-AIPAC influence in launching the US invasion of Iraq leading to over one million murdered Iraqi citizens.

The Times sets the tone for the entire New York cultural scene, which privileges Israeli interests, to the point of assimilating into the US political discourse not only its routine violations of international law, but its threats, indeed promises, to scorch vast areas of the earth in pursuit of its regional supremacy.
The willingness of the NYT to publish an Israeli genocide-ethnocide advocate tells us about the strength of the ties between a purportedly 'liberal establishment' pro-Israel publication and the totalitarian Israeli right: It is as if to say that for the liberal pro-Israel establishment, the non-Jewish Nazis are off limits, but the views and policies of Judeo-fascists need careful consideration and possible implementation.

Morris' New York Times 'nuclear-extermination' article did not provoke any opposition from the 52 Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations (PMAJO) because, in its daily information bulletin, Daily Alert, it has frequently published articles by Israeli and US Zionists advocating an Israeli and/or US nuclear attack on Iran.
In other words, Morris' totalitarian views are part of the cultural matrix deeply embedded in the Zionist organizational networks and its extensive 'reach' in US cultural and political circles. What the Times did in publishing Morris' lunacy has taken genocidal discourse out of the limited circulation of Zionist influentials and into the mainstream of millions of American readers.

Apart from a handful of writers (Gentile and Jewish) publishing in marginal web sites, there was no political or moral condemnation from the entire literary, political and journalistic world of this affront to our humanity. No attempt was made to link Morris' totalitarian genocidal policies to Israel's public official threats and preparations for nuclear war. There is no anti-nuclear campaign led by our most influential public intellectuals to repudiate the state (Israel) and its public intellectuals who prepare a nuclear war with the potential to exterminate more than ten times the number of Jews slaughtered by the Nazis.

Hitler's counterpart of extermination
A nuclear incineration of the nation of Iran is the Israeli counterpart of Hitler's gas chambers and ovens writ large. Extermination is the last stage of Zionism: Informed by the doctrine of rule the Middle East or ruin the air and land of the world. That is the explicit message of Benny Morris (and his official Israeli sponsors), who like Hitler, issues ultimatums to the Iranians, 'surrender or be destroyed' and who threatens the US, join us in bombing Iran or face a world ecological and economic catastrophe.

That Morris is utterly, starkly and clinically insane is beyond question
That the New York Times in publishing his genocidal ravings provides new signs of how power and wealth has contributed to the degeneration of Jewish intellectual and cultural life in the US.
To comprehend the dimensions of this decay we need only compare the brilliant tragic-romantic German-Jewish writer, Walter Benjamin, desperately fleeing the advance of totalitarian Nazi terror to the Israeli-Jewish writer, Benny Morris' criminal advocacy of Zionist nuclear terror published in the New York Times.

U.S mass media providing a platform for mass murder and global contamination
The question of Zionist power in America is not merely a question of a 'lobby' influencing Congressional and White House decisions concerning foreign aid to Israel.
What is at stake today are the related questions of the advocacy of a nuclear war in which 70 million Iranians face extermination and the complicity of the US mass media in providing a platform, nay a certain political respectability for mass murder and global contamination.
Unlike the Nazi past, we cannot claim, as the good Germans did, that 'we did not know' or 'we weren't notified', because it was written by an eminent Israeli academic and was published in the New York Times.