THE PEOPLE OF THE KANDOVAN VILLAGE IN IRAN KNOW GOD’S EARTH

In last week’s On Target we quoted Inkling Owen Barfield who insisted: “Science must itself become an art, and art a science; either they must mingle, or Western civilisation, as we know it, must perish, to make room for one that may have spirit enough to learn how to know God's earth as He actually made it”.

I thought of that statement whilst looking at the photographs of a village named Kandovan that is located in Iran. I think the people of the Kandovan village “have spirit enough to know God's earth as He actually made it” as their dwellings alone depict.

Their life may not have the amenities, or the luxuries and comforts of the western world, but their environment expresses their relation to God’s earth as He actually made it. A series of photographs showing the incredible "cave" dwellings cut into natural cone-shaped rock formations can be viewed.

CURRENT EXAMPLE OF A PEOPLE’S SOCIAL CREDIT BEING REALISED

“Mleeta, Khiam, Sabra, Shatila and Resistance in General” wrote musician and activist Gilard Atzmon: “Lebanon is incredible - an intoxicating blend of natural beauty, rebellious spirit, pious clarity, tolerance, wild night life and unbelievable hummus. I landed in Beirut four days ago. The purpose of my visit wasn’t all that clear. I knew that a talk and a musical performance were scheduled by Almayadeen TV, but I never expected such a spiritually transforming experience.
It was my second visit to the country. 30 years ago I crossed the Lebanese border along with an IDF convoy escorted by tanks and armed vehicles. Then I was an occupier, this time I came with only my saxophone and a desire to share my thoughts and deliver some beauty.

But it didn’t take me a couple of hours to realise that Lebanon is much more than just humus, shisha, the sea and some captivating rural scenery. Early on Friday we left Beirut for the south. Our first stop was Mleeta - a Hezbollah frontline outpost and a symbol of Lebanese defiance. Mleeta is located on top of a mountain, surrounded by the South Lebanese Massif which, until 2000, was controlled by the Israelis. From Mleeta, the Lebanese Mujahedeen launched daily attacks against the Israeli invader and gave the Israelis a true taste of their own medicine. Now Mleeta is a Jihadi tourist resort, there to tell the story of the heroic Hezbollah, those brave paramilitaries that confounded the 'best army in the world’. The truth is, though armed only with light weapons, they were well supplied with Shia, spiritual ammunition.

Mleeta provides an overview of three decades of Islamic resistance in Lebanon and, in exhibiting all that the fleeing IDF soldiers have left behind, it proudly demonstrates the reality of Israeli cowardice. Mleeta is a symbol of confidence - confidence that the IDF is gone, never to return. Because when, in the summer of 2006 Hezbollah routed the IDF, it also demolished their confidence forever. The Jewish state was taught a lesson it would never forget - their phantasmic expansionist dream had come to an end.

But Mleeta was just a beginning. South Lebanon is dripping with defiance – every village, house and person is an emblem of Shia’s heroic resistance with the villages bedecked with Hezbollah posters featuring Leader Hasan Nasrallah and the many martyrs who taught the IDF those very necessary lessons.

Like Mleeta, Khiam the notorious Detention Centre is also a monument to Israeli brutality. Khiam is where Israel detained and tortured its political opponents, in some cases, for as long as 14 years. My visit there reminded me of a devastating memory, which on occasion, I share with my audience. It concerns Ansar, an Israeli concentration camp located in South Lebanon. It was back in 1984, on a piece of flat land in the middle of the camp, I noticed a dozen concrete boxes with small metal doors, they looked like dog kennels being only about 80 cm high, 100 cm long and probably about 80cm wide. When I pointed out to the commanding officer that these concrete constructions weren’t suitable for dogs, he told me not to worry: no one would even think of putting dogs in them.
“Put a Palestinian in one of those for 24 hours,” he laughed, “And he’ll come out singing the Hatikvah.” They were solitary confinement units for Palestinian prisoners. That was it. Then and there, I realised that Israel was not my country.

In Khiam this week I saw the exact same Israeli torture facility where the Israelis would shove their political opponents into tiny metal boxes, lock them in for days and then occasionally hit the top with a heavy stone. This time I took a picture. But someone in Israel must have felt some shame at what Israel was leaving behind in Lebanon. In 2006 the IDF attempted to erase all trace of the detention centre at Khiam. In a desperate attempt to hide Israeli brutality, Israel sent in its engineering squads to blow up the cells and all remaining evidence of torture. But that clumsy effort to conceal the true reality of Israeli inhumanity achieved only the complete opposite. It now only affirms that Israel has, indeed, a lot to conceal.

The journey to occupied Palestine’s Border is over the most beautiful, wild and rural terrain. But then, suddenly, we were there, faced with the Jewish ghetto walls, guarded by cameras, army posts and barbed wire. Israel clearly doesn’t even try to convince its neighbours that it belongs in the region. It looks different, it smells different, it sounds different - it is in fact, just one extended Jewish European shtetl that has matured into a neurotic, psychotic and murderous collective fuelled by PRE traumatic stress. In that regard, the Israelis indeed have great deal to keep under wraps.

Inspired by Lyotard’s “Heidegger and the Jews” and my visit to the south, I decided, in my talk in Beirut, to speak about ‘History as a form of concealment’. Instead of telling us ‘what really happened’, I argued that history is there to hide our shame, to repress that which we cannot even utter. It is, in effect, there to make us forget. Jewish history, for instance, is there to suppress Jewish shame, to disguise that which Jews prefer to hide from themselves. Jewish history is an attempt to talk about the past while avoiding the horrendous and embarrassing fact that Jews, throughout their history, have been bringing on themselves one Shoa after the other.

But concealment wasn’t invented by the Jews. The Brits also find it hard to cope with their past chain of murderous imperial genocides. This may explain why they entrusted the writing of Churchill’s biography to Jewish Zionist Sir Martin Gilbert, and why their historians have dedicated a whole floor of the Imperial War Museum to the Nazi Holocaust. As if Brits do not have enough shoas and suffering inflicted on others to remember. One of those British-inflicted shoas is obviously the Palestinian Nakba. Britain should own up to this disaster and perhaps find a little room for it also in its Imperial Museums. And like Britain, the Israelis have yet to acknowledge their own role in the original sin of 1948.

Looking at the state of the refugee camps in Lebanon, it became very clear to me that the Lebanese also might engage in some soul searching. For 65 years Palestinian refugees have lived in Lebanon and in other Arab countries in unbearable conditions and have suffered terrible discrimination. Palestinian refuge camps in Lebanon are nothing short of hell on earth. Palestinians cannot be naturalized. They are banned from certain professions and jobs such as medicine and law. In some ways, their situation is worse even than their brothers’ in Gaza or The West Bank, because for them there is not even any prospect of hope or change.

Those endless solidarity discussions about ‘One State’, ‘Two States’ or ‘BDS’ have zero significance or impact on their lives or their livelihoods. These displaced and dispossessed people need immediate change in their political status, but, being excluded from the political process, they lack the wherewithal to bring such change about. Not able to travel, their voice is hardly heard within the Western solidarity discourse and the International Palestinian solidarity movement is hardly engaged, or even concerned with their tragedy. Even that most absolute of rights, the right to return to their land has been compromised by the BDS in Ramallah and other prominent Palestinian leaders. On my last day in Beirut I visited Sabra and Shatilla. I saw the mass graveyards, I saw the poverty, I saw the piles of rubbish in the streets, the outcome of the complete absence of even the most elementary municipal services. I have been traveling around the world for many years but this is, without doubt, one of the saddest sights I have seen. But, in those camps, I also saw some of the kindest people on this planet. People who against all odds, in spite of being crushed, humiliated and tortured from more than six decades, still look forward, still live their lives.
They raise their kids and care about their education. They greet you in the warmest possible manner and, no sooner have you approached their shop, they have invited you for coffee. Surely, their suffering must be our primary concern.
Source:https://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/mleeta-khiam-sabra-shatila-and-resistance-in-general.html

*Over the years the League has done its best to expose the tyranny and corruption of western governments.
As an example further reading here…
Important reading in relation to the Middle East: “The Zionist Factor” by Ivor Benson 

Developments in the Middle East, threaten to draw all mankind into the catastrophe of another world war. The "great historical cataclysm" of which Alexander Solzhenitsyn warned, make it an urgent necessity to explore Zionism as one of the major forces shaping the history of our century.
In the handling of a subject so complex and multi-faceted, the method used in this book is to present a series of separate studies, each of which it is hoped will contribute something to a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of the long troubled relationship of Jew and gentile.
The word "Zionist" is preferred in the book's title as representing a much altered (now 21st century) Jewish presence in which the appetites of global power-politics have almost entirely superseded religion as the main source for the motivation of Jewish unity and exclusiveness.
The clearest distinction must be drawn between Judaism as a personal monotheistic religion - by none more clearly expounded than the Jewish savant Moses Maimonides, and in our time men like Moshe Menuhin - and Judaism as a rampant modem nationalism, the political and military executive arm of great financial power.
It is also necessary to distinguish between a monotheistic personal faith capable of making converts, as Judaism once did, and an exclusivist group spirit that prescribes a dual code of moral conduct - the cause of so much hostility encountered by the Jewish people down the ages.  Price: $12.00 + postage

POLITICAL SUPERSTORM THAT DEVASTATED NEW YORK

by Paul Driessen
The following report by Paul Driessen reminded me of a number of articles/books I have read over the last few months. One is by Rev. T. Dixon, “The Law of Nature and the Laws of Man” published nearly eighty years ago, and another is Prince Charles’ book “Harmony”. It would appear modern man is a very slow learner and/or really is disconnected from the real world.

But first Paul Driessen’s article
Paul is senior policy adviser for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT). I believe Lord Monkton works with the group. “Incompetence, stupidity, diversion, blame shifting, and false solutions to imaginary problems” :
“Superstorm” Sandy killed more than 100 people, destroyed thousands of homes and businesses, and left millions without food, water, electricity, sanitation or shelter for days or even weeks. Our thoughts and prayers remain focused on its victims, many of whom are still grieving as they struggle with the storm’s wintry aftermath and try to rebuild their lives. Unfortunately, too many politicians continue to use the storm to advance agendas, deflect blame for incompetence and mistakes, and obfuscate and magnify future risks from building and development projects that they have designed, promoted, permitted and profited from.

Sandy was “unprecedented”, the result of “weather on steroids”, various “experts” insist. “It’s global warming, stupid,” intoned Bloomberg BusinessWeek. “Anyone who says there is not a change in weather patterns is denying reality”, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo declared. We must protect the great NY metropolis from rising oceans, said the Washington Post. This storm should “compel all elected leaders to take immediate action” on climate change, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg pronounced.

Unfortunately for the politicians and spin-meisters, the facts do not support this obscene posturing
North America’s northeastern coast has been battered by hurricanes and other major storms throughout history. A 1775 hurricane killed 4,000 people in Newfoundland; an 1873 monster left 600 dead in Nova Scotia; others pummeled Canada’s Maritime Provinces in 1866, 1886, 1893, 1939, 1959, 1963 and 2003.

Manhattan got pounded in 1667 and by the Great Storm of 1693. They were followed by more behemoths in 1788, 1821, 1893, 1944, 1954 and 1992. Other “confluences of severe weather events” brought killer storms like the four-day Great Blizzard of 1888. The 1893 storm largely eradicated Hog Island, and the 1938 “Long Island Express” hit Long Island as a category 3 hurricane with wind gusts up to 180 mph.

Experts say such winds today would rip windows from skyscrapers and cause a deadly blizzard of flying glass, masonry, chairs, desks and other debris from high-rise offices and apartments. People would seek safety in subway tunnels, where they would drown as the tunnels flood.
Sandy was merely the latest “confluence” (tropical storm, northeaster and full-moon high tide) to blast the New York-New Jersey area. It was never a matter of if, but only of when, such a storm would hit.

People, planners and politicians should have been better prepared
Instead, we are feted with statements designed to dodge responsibility and culpability, by trying to blame global warming. The reality is, even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels rose to 391 ppm (0.0391%) today, average global temperatures have not changed in 16 years, and sea levels are rising no faster than in 1900. Even with Hurricane Sandy, November 2012 marked the quietest long-term hurricane period since the Civil War, with only one major hurricane strike on the US mainland in seven years. This is global warming and unprecedented weather on steroids?

In Hurricane Sandy’s aftermath – with millions freezing hungry in dark devastation – Mayor Bloomberg sidetracked police and sanitation workers for the NYC Marathon, until public outrage forced him to reconsider. While federal emergency teams struggled to get water, food and gasoline to victims, companies, religious groups, charities, local citizens and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie worked tirelessly to raise money and organize countless relief efforts.
Most outrageous of all, though, was how ill-prepared the region was for another major storm – and how many political decisions had virtually ensured that any repeat of the 1893, 1938, 1944 and other storms would bring devastation far worse than would likely have occurred in the absence of those decisions.

In one of the most obvious, architects, city planners, mayors and governors alike thought nothing of placing generators in the basements of hospitals and skyscrapers built in areas that are barely above sea level. Past storms have brought surges12 to 18 feet high onto Long Island, and studies have warned that a category 3 direct hit could put much of New York City and its key infrastructure under 30 feet of water. Sandy’s 9-foot surges (plus five feet of high tide) flooded those basements, rendering generators useless, and leaving buildings cold and dark. Perhaps if Mayor Bloomberg had worried less about 32-oz sodas and seas that are rising a mere foot per century, he could have devoted more time to critical issues.

The mayor has also obsessed about urban sprawl. However, when new developments mean high rents, high taxes and photo-op ground breakings, he has a different philosophy.
Mr. Bloomberg’s Arverne by the Sea initiative transformed what he called “a swath of vacant land” into a “vibrant and growing oceanfront community,” with “affordable” homes starting at $559,000. (The land was vacant because a 1950 storm wiped it clean of structures.) The new homes were built on 167 acres of land raised five feet above the surrounding Far Rockaway area.
Those Arverne homes mostly survived Sandy. But the high ground caused storm surges to rise higher and move faster elsewhere than they would have on Rockaway lowlands that are always hit head-on by northward moving storms.

If Sandy had been a category 3 hurricane like its 1938 ancestor, the devastation would have been of biblical proportions – as winds, waves and surges slammed into expensive homes, businesses and high-rises, and roared up waterways rendered progressively narrower by hundreds of construction projects.
Lower Manhattan has doubled in width over the centuries. World Trade Center construction alone contributed 1.2 million cubic yards to build Battery Park City, narrowing the Hudson River by another 700 feet. The East River has likewise been hemmed in, while other water channels have been completely filled. Buildings, malls and raised roadways constructed on former potato fields, forests, grasslands and marshlands have further constricted passageways for storm surges and runoff. As a result, storms like Sandy or the Long Island Express send monstrous volumes of water up ever more confined corridors. With nowhere else to go, the surges rise higher, travel faster and pack more power. It’s elementary physics – which governors, mayors, planners and developers ignore at their peril.

No wonder, Mayor Bloomberg, Governor Cuomo and other politicos prefer to talk about global warming, rising seas and worsening weather – to deflect attention and blame from decisions that have put more people in the path of greater danger. Indeed, the very notion of packing more and more people into “sustainable, energy-efficient” coastal cities in the NY-NJ area is itself madness on steroids. Worst of all, politicians are increasingly and intentionally obscuring and misrepresenting the nature, frequency and severity of storm, flood and surge risks, so that they can promote and permit more construction in high-risk areas, and secure more money and power. They insist that they can prevent or control climate change and sea level rise, by regulating CO2 emission – while they ignore real, known dangers that have arisen before and will arise again, exacerbated by their politicized decisions.

As a result, unsuspecting business and home owners continue to buy, build and rebuild in areas that are increasingly at risk from hurricanes, northeasters and “perfect storms” of natural and political events. And as the population density increases in this NY-NJ area, the ability to evacuate people plummets, especially when roadways, tunnels and other escape routes are submerged. Let the buyer beware.

Sandy may have been a rare (but hardly unprecedented) confluence of weather events. But the political decisions and blame avoidance are an all-too-common confluence of human tendencies – worsened by the dogged determination of our ruling classes to acquire greater power and control, coupled with steadily declining transparency, accountability and liability.

How nice it must be to have convenient scapegoats like “dangerous manmade global warming” and insurance companies – today’s equivalent of the witches whom our predecessors blamed for storms, droughts, crop failures, disease and destruction. It’s time to use the witches’ brooms to clean house. (emphasis added…ed).

THE LAWS OF NATURE AND THE LAWS OF MAN

by Rev. T. Dixon, B.A.
In the early days of the Social Credit movement, the Reverend T. Dixon explained the difference between natural law and human law, and, as the reader will have noted, the main characters in the article above ignored both.

"G. K. Chesterton once said something to the effect that if a man leaps over the edge of a cliff he does not break the law of gravity: he illustrates it. That observation is applicable to all physical laws. All events which take place on the physical plane are so many illustrations of the laws of the physical universe - laws which are irrefragable, unassailable and beyond the control or abrogation of man. These laws cannot be disobeyed: the sanctions which enforce them are irresistible. They are enthroned on the seat from which the universe is governed… In the passage [from] Cicero [he] claimed an equal place on that seat for an all-pervading moral law which governs all human conduct. Sophists, both before and after Cicero, have questioned his assumption of the existence of such a universal moral law. Platonists, Stoics and Christians likewise, both before and after Cicero, have affirmed it. This article does not seek to argue the point. It is addressed exclusively to those who, like the writer, share the Ciceronian view.

But let us elaborate and discuss that view
The Ciceronian moral law is inherent in the nature of the universe. It cannot, therefore, be dissociated from physical laws. In the Ciceronian conception of it, the moral law, just as much as the laws of the physical universe, is part of the law of nature. The law of nature includes both.

In a word, the laws of the physical order and the laws of the moral order are separate manifestations of the natural law, which was "originated" and "proposed" by God, Who "arbitrates concerning it". (C.H. Douglas was once asked, “What is ‘moral’?” He answered words to the effect: “That which works best”.)

Reverend Dixon continues:
In its physical manifestation, the irrefragability of the natural law is apparent to the crudest perception. If I leap over the edge of a cliff I am killed or maimed. If I place my head in a fire I am burnt. If I remain under water for a sufficient length of time I am drowned. In no case have I broken the law of nature. I have ignored it: I have attempted to act in despite of it; and I have inevitably been checked.

The application of the moral sanctions of the natural law is more subtle, but no less real. If I attempt to act in despite of the natural law in its moral manifestations, I suffer spiritual injury which is no less real. There is a personal spiritual integrity as well as a personal physical integrity, and the one can be killed or maimed as well as the other. The man who acts in opposition to his own ethical values (which, as an aside to the Sophists, constitute the language in which the universal moral law is promulgated to him) has attempted to act in despite of the natural law in its moral manifestation. The appropriate check is applied in the form of an injury to his own spiritual integrity. He has played false to himself, "and by this very fact shall pay greatest penalties".

The natural law, in both its moral and physical manifestations, is automatic in its action. Its action can be neither arrested nor mitigated. In this sense it sets certain well-defined limits upon the freedom of human action. It might be regarded as placing around man impregnable prison walls, beyond which he cannot go. Yet the metaphor of the prison creates a false picture, since a prison is inimical to its occupants. It is truer and more satisfying to regard the natural law as a rhythm beating through the whole universe. Only when his movements synchronise with that beat can a man move freely.

Nay, even that metaphor implies too rigid a constraint. Let us say that it is sufficient, though imperatively necessary, that a man's movements shall harmonise with the universal rhythm of the natural law. Let there be imagined the abundant freedom of all conceivable harmonious variations. The outstanding characteristics, then, of the natural law are that it is automatic in its action, and that it allows of an abundant, though limited freedom.

Human laws bear neither of these outstanding characteristics
If a mother tells a child that if he puts his finger in the fire he will be burnt, she is stating a natural law. If, however, she tells him that if he goes near the fire she will punish him, she is stating a law of an entirely different character. She is stating a human law. Let us see in what respects these two species of law differ from each other.
It is observable that the natural law allows the child the widest possible freedom. It allows him to approach the fire: he can even play with it. He can poke it and use it for a large number of purposes. It is not until he actually touches it that he is burnt.
The human law, however, takes a great deal of freedom away from the child. Far from being able to poke the fire or play with it, he is not allowed even to approach it. A certain amount of freedom of action is taken away from him.

Human laws, then, are more constraining than the natural law. They build a prison which is narrower in extent than our former prison. A number of the harmonious variations with which human action can accompany the rhythm of the natural law are disallowed. Human laws exhibit a further difference from the natural law, in that they are not automatic in their action. Although the mother has told the child that if he approaches the fire he will be punished, the law will not necessarily take effect. The mother may see the child near the fire, or even playing with the fire, but she will not necessarily carry out her threat to punish him.
The chances are, indeed, that if the boy burns himself at the fire, he will be rewarded with kisses and more substantial benefits. Instead of being automatic in their action, human laws are arbitrary, and may even be capricious… Human laws, then, in contrast to the natural law, bear a very unsavoury character… This is not to say that they are unnecessary. They are necessary protection against the activities of the unwise immoral individual, both in the interests of himself and in the interests of society. Yet, so long as this necessary protection is obtained, it is obviously desirable that human laws should be as few, as simple and as unconstraining as possible…

The number and the character of the laws of all civilised States provide much scope for improvement in this respect; but the laws which are most clearly open to objection are the unwritten laws which govern the conduct of the world of commerce and finance. These laws are objectionable, not only because they are too many, too complex and too constraining; but also because they are apparently framed in direct opposition to the natural law…

Men must be made free to move in harmony with the rhythm of the natural law. They must be made free to follow the leadership of the wise physicists and saints, who are what they are because the rhythm of the natural law has beat its measure on their pulses." (emphasis added…ed)  

MATT TAIBBI, ANOTHER WALL STREET SCANDAL - AND INTEREST RATES

In one of his latest hard-hitting articles, Rolling Stones’ Matt Taibbi explained the core of the ‘Libor Scandal’ as Alternet website explained: “Matt Taibbi has skewered his fair share of financial faux pas (their actions were criminal not ‘a blunder’ as the term suggests…ed) and corporate bigwigs throughout 2012. Yet his prize for the Biggest Wall Street Story of the Year goes to the massive - but little understood - Libor scandal.

"If it's true that the 16 biggest banks in the world were fixing global interest rates, then it's hard not to argue that that's not the biggest financial corruption case in history", Taibbi says in a web exclusive for Current TV. "I fully expect that we'll find out in the end that American banks were involved in this scandal".

At the heart of the Libor scandal is the simple, primary function of banks: facilitating the borrowing and lending of money. They do this job and still turn a profit using a nifty little trick called interest rates, which essentially means if I borrow money from a bank, I pay back a little extra for their service. Simple? (Social crediters would question the accuracy of that definition of the role of the banks…ed) Sort of, except once again the banks have fixed this simple game so that--as in a casino--the house always wins.

As Robert Reich at Business Insider explains:
How is this interest rate determined? We trust that the banking system is setting today's rate based on its best guess about the future worth of the money. And we assume that guess is based, in turn, on the cumulative market predictions of countless lenders and borrowers all over the world about the future supply and demand for the dough.

But suppose our assumption is wrong. Suppose the bankers are manipulating the interest rate so they can place bets with the money you lend or repay them - bets that will pay off big for them because they have inside information on what the market is really predicting, which they're not sharing with you.

That would be a mammoth violation of public trust. And it would amount to a rip-off of almost cosmic proportion - trillions of dollars that you and I and other average people would otherwise have received or saved on our lending and borrowing that have been going instead to the bankers. It would make the other abuses of trust we've witnessed look like child's play by comparison. This is insider trading on a gigantic scale. It makes the bankers winners and the rest of us - whose money they've used to make their bets - losers and chumps. Source: https://www.alternet.org/economy/matt-taibbi-biggest-walI-street-scandal-201 2  

MODERN BANKING: ADAPTATION OF MONEY CHANGER’S (USURER’S) CRAFT

Whilst I have appreciated Matt Taibbi’s earlier articles exposing the huge corruption and fraud within Wall Street, I must take exception to his explanation of the role of modern banks. If you do not understand the foundation upon which the modern Money Changers, Bankers, (usurers) ‘do business’ then you will never understand how they came to be as powerful as they are. You will never understand why it is that money is more important to them than human life.

What appears to be a ‘modern’ problem has roots that go far back into history. Reverend Henry Swabey thoroughly researched the history of money and usury in the 1990s, and his research titled “Usury and the Church of England” is available online to download. Go to … “Usury and the Church of England” by Rev. Henry Swabey.

For me a key section in Rev. Swabey’s research is found in Chapter 5. Church Mints:
He writes: The prohibition of usury was a negative way of protecting the social order that had been achieved. But positive action was also taken by Church and State to render usury unnecessary. In our century it has, broadly speaking, been assumed that money can only be issued - and pound notes etc. printed - to represent a fixed quantity of gold held by certain individuals or companies, the bankers. These notes - or a credit for so many hundred or thousand pounds - are, we have been led to suppose, lent by the owners (the Bankers) and after the money has assisted a cycle of production to take place, it must be repaid and the debts contracted be cancelled.

Such ideas are deeply embedded in our thinking about money and are not much affected by nationalization. The nation, we are again apt to imagine, had merely bought the gold or cover for money from the private bankers. But we shall have to rid ourselves of all such theories if we are to understand the significance of Church Mints.

Money had not in the distant days we are to consider attained to its later sanctity, and was rather considered as a convenience of man which man could create when he needed it. In fact, it is only as the Middle Ages advanced in England that money was used to a large degree and payment was often made by service.
Money was certainly not considered the monopoly of private bankers or even of a caucus in charge of a nationalized bank. (emphasis added..ed)

The circulating medium - silver and gold - had a value in itself, but money was used as a measure of price and a claim, not as a means to power. Perhaps it was an unconscious dread of this that spurred our ancestors against the Usurer. For there can be no question but that Modern Banking is an adaptation of the Usurer's craft. In this matter of issuing coins, King and Church worked side by side for many centuries and not only kept out the Usurer but held the price level steady - an achievement that has baffled the modern specialists and experts. It might be easier to work backwards from the present to the times of the local mints, but the historical process will clarify itself if followed through from the beginning…”

Usury, that is debt-finance, ends up by destroying any stable community. The evil is in the destruction of the social order, the social fabric. It is a cancerous growth on the body social – as we are witnessing so dramatically in this 21st century.  

THERE WILL BE NO MORE CAPITALISTS LIKE HER

by Mrs. Vera West:
Dame Elisabeth Murdoch died last December 2012 aged 103 years. There are of course many angles that writers can go with this story. There is the Jewish origin slant. There is the mother of Rupert Murdoch angle as well. We are not the only ones to see Rupert’s contribution to society primarily as a leveler but there was no indication that this grand old lady felt “shame” à la Jones about what her son got up to and continues to do. But, that was not her role.

On the positive side Dame Elisabeth Murdoch devoted an enormous amount of her time and energy to public service. Personally she did much good. As well, she had an honour and commitment to her late husband, Keith Murdoch which was very moving; she married him when she was eighteen and he 42. He died in 1952 when she was only 43. She did not remarry but looked after four children on her own. When she was 100 she said in an interview: “Very often, perhaps in bed at night, I’m half awake and think, ‘Oh I must tell Keith that’”. Contrast that loyalty to her man with the attitude of the modern Sex in the City inner suburban woman of today, who sees men as disposable.

Finally, Dame Elisabeth Murdoch shows up the capitalist class of today for what it did. The old school capitalists felt that they had to put something back into society and contributed to social capital through building universities and hospitals. Today’s rich, like George Soros, usually have a political agenda. There will be no more capitalists like her; she lived so long as to become a woman out of time.  

TIME FOR ACADEMICS TO PAY

by James Reed
It was good to see academic Philippa Martyr saying that academics who want to pursue esoteric research topics should put up their own money (The Weekend Australian 1-2-December 2012, p.7). Academics should consider whether their pursuit of truth is worth going into debt for, as students go into debt for their degrees.

Beyond this, how about making it mandatory that, say, 25 per cent of the Australian Research Council budget goes for fellowships devoted to criticisms of the current regime – of immigrationism, multiculturalism and Asianisation?

No funds have ever been spent from tax-payer money putting the opposing case. So how about a democratic balance? We won’t hold our breath though, we are more likely to see the universities closed down before we get a balanced debate.  

SLUSHY UNIONS AND ROUTINE ROTTENNESS

by James Reed
The editorial of The Australian 4 December, 2012, puts the Gillard/AWU slush fund affair in the right light. Gillard did not, and still does not see anything unusual in union officials having their slush funds: “This did not strike me as a non-standard transaction”, and was “a matter that at the time struck me as pretty routine, pretty low level. Indeed so low-level that I didn’t even charge for it”, she said at her press conference.

The editorial pointed out that corporate executives doing the same thing would be in breach of their fiduciary duty to share holders, and that union officials are also bound by a similar fiduciary duty standard.

Too many Unions leaders though operate with a mobster mentality, often extorting money from corporations to prevent industrial disputes. The Editorial says: “The mobster behavior would be called blackmail in any other walk of life, yet the union culture has become so morally corrupt that some officials are prepared to go to any lengths to line their pockets. How did it come to this? How did the once noble institutions that protected the workers’ rights turn into private fiefdoms for the exercise of private gain?”

A good question, and one not restricted to unionism. The Labor and Liberal Parties have failed their traditional national roots and are both politically correct parties openly serving globalist interests. Likewise for the universities and churches. To regain Australia, we first have to realize that the Australia we knew has been lost.