AUSTRALIA USED TO RIDE ON THE SHEEP’S BACK – NOW NRM RIDES OURS

Writes Peter Manuel, FLAG Australia Spokesman. “Not only are our farmers under threat by cheap foreign imports, rising costs, and pressure to sell to corporate farming monopolies, they must also battle ever increasing Government regulation, which threatens to drive them off their land.

Stop the Control! Farmers are increasingly expressing their frustrations at the excessive interference by the Government and its agencies, like Natural Resource Management Boards, in how they manage their properties, stock and water supply”. FLAG: Food Producers and Landowners Action Group Australia

Listen to Mr. Peter Manuel of FLAG AUSTRALIA Inc. He spoke about the NRMA Act 2004 and the burdensome regulations together with Red and Green tape that is driving Primary Producers to the wall.

Legislative Council of SA Ann Bressington MLC also spoke at recent Lord Monckton meeting: Watch her...

** Bravo Ann Bressington! You have the moral courage to speak out publically on Agenda 21 and the NWO.

The League carries a huge range of Books, Videos and DVDs on the history, background and development of the New World Order.
Ring Doug and Jean Holmes and ask them to recommend a fewof the DVDs for you to come to grips with the matter. Phone: 08 8396 1245.

1935 ITEM RELATING TO ‘AUSTRALIA RIDING ON THE SHEEP’S BACK’

It is a letter to, Mr. Harold W. Clapp, Chief Commissioner for Victorian Railways.
Dear Mr. Clapp,
Many an unfortunate family in Melbourne who would otherwise face the bitter winter nights with even more dread than they now face the cheerless winter days will bless your radio efforts towards providing them with an extra blanket. It is as good as it is rare to find a public man lending his own time to the forgotten poor. But has it occurred to you, Mr. Clapp, that personal charity, however praiseworthy, is a poor sort of substitute for social justice?

We are living in a country, which produces a quarter of the world's entire output of wool. Trying to get rid of our surplus wool is becoming a desperate national problem. As the Right Honourable the Secretary for the Dominions said to the Right Honourable the Prime Minister of Australia in London the other day: "You know, Joe, as well as I do, you don't mind much where your wool goes so long as you sell it."

There's the rub, Mr. Clapp—"sell it".
Our graziers cannot sell their wool to the destitute unemployed, who have not the money to buy it. And so the graziers unable to dispose of their wool, or forced to sacrifice it at ruinous prices, have difficulty in paying the freights which you must charge on the railways, even to obtain such an income as still leaves your department in financial difficulties every year.

Yet, Mr. Clapp, you are conducting a well-organised and up-to-date administration. Any shortcomings in it are not due either to inefficiency, to lack of willing workers, or to lack of railway tickets. They are due solely to lack of money tickets. And it is much the same with the graziers. The only thing needed is money in the hands of the consumers. Given this, we should soon have blankets for everyone without the stigma of public broadcast appeals. And you would have better freights and more passengers.

Have you ever considered, Mr. Clapp, the possibility that our total money supply, no matter how distributed by taxation or by charity, is chronically insufficient to enable all the goods produced to be sold? And has it ever crossed your mind that such a deficiency could be made up as easily and as precisely as you overcome any shortage of railway tickets? Why not make your slogan "Money tickets for all", instead of "Blankets for all"?

- - The New Times, Melbourne May 31, 1935

SENATOR BARNABY JOYCE – PRUDENCE IS NOT ENOUGH !

In a recent radio interview with Alan Jones, 2GB Radio, Nationals leader in the Senate Barnaby Joyce touched on a number of issues of concern for Australians – but never, ever, mentioned the creation, the origin of our debt-money system. That is, who issues Australia’s ‘money’ as well as who controls Australia’s ‘money’ system. Yes, he did berate the fabian-socialist Gillard federal government at present in power, that is, for their wasteful spending.
But look at history and he will note, socialist governments have been shown to be wasteful spenders, but sadly, Mr. Joyce but did not touch upon the gigantic elephant in the room. That gigantic elephant is the Moneylender, the Usurer, now holding the reins of power above our governments, state as well as federal.

Senator Joyce is worried about Australia’s debt – so are we. But Senator, to whom do we owe this debt, and pray tell me, what is the nature of this financial debt? Is its nature, that is what is it made up of, in the form of gold or silver, is it paper notes, or maybe it is in the form of coins made out of cheap metals? Or is it in the modern version of ‘money’ – that is, blips on computers?

How in God’s name did politicians ever come to believe computer blips were and are a form of debt that this nation has to borrow from the Money Lenders? The Uusurers. How did the world get itself into the present situation? How did the modern Usurers rise to such heights of power and control?

In which case don’t you think one of the questions Australians should be asking of you:
Why on earth do we owe the Money Changers, the Usurers, trillions of computer blips? Can not Australia as a sovereign, independent nation, produce its own computer blips and have them acting as the means by which we calculate our own national accounts?
The Parliaments of this Commonwealth and the States are but empty shadows of their former potentials – the substance and spirit are no longer there. Politics and economics are bound hand and foot by the static, abstract character of modern thought.

On the one hand, everything to do with industry and the possibility of substituting human labour by machinery has reached an unexampled pitch of perfection. But, when it comes to thinking in terms of distributing this wealth, when it is crucial that we think in terms of flow and rate of flow of Australia’s production, its real wealth, our so-called leaders and we ourselves, cannot even begin to rise to consider the abundance set before us.

Listen to MP3 “The Root of All Evil” by Eric D. Butler. It is a classic.OR send for the DVD version of "Root of All Evil" $12.00 + postage.  

IT’S SATIRE, BUT OOOOH… SO REAL

The right man for the job: Lanny Breuer, Department of Justice Cover Up Artist paves the way for the Wall Street get away

What a perfect symbol for the self-propelled human garbage that occupies the Department of Justice. Of course, Assistant Attorney General of the United States never said these things, but if he had they would have been the only honest words that came from his mouth.

Over one trillion dollars was looted from the world economy by a concerted fraud perpetrated by banks like JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs. Not one of these sleazebags were even investigated let alone indicted.
- - Brasscheck, USA.

DEATH BY CHINA: CHINA’S WAR HAS ALREADY BEGUN

by James Reed
Something must be happening when even queen Julia the suppressor (named in anticipation of the Labor Party’s complete suppression of free speech by the forthcoming anti-discrimination Act) identifies China and its on-going cyber war as a key security issue facing Australia. (“PM Points to China, Cyber War”, The Australian 21 January 2013, p.1). But wait – isn’t that “offensive” to the Chinese? Truth is no defence to the might of anti-discrimination.

Better be careful Julia or you might be hoisted by your own petard. (For some odd reason I thought a petard was some sort of pole arm like a halberd, but I looked it up and it turns out to mean a bomb for breaching walls in fortresses e.g., in the movie “The Two Towers” in the Helms Deep battle. But I still like the image of someone getting caught on their own spear, if that is possible, and just hanging there, whingeing.)

Cyber crime is just the top of a rather large iceberg as Peter Navarro and Greg Autry show in “Death by China: Confronting the Dragon – A Global Call to Action”, (Pearson Education, 2011). The authors open their book by saying that China is “rapidly turning into the planet’s most efficient assassin” (p.1).

Consumer products have been found to have toxic metals, toys to be dangerously flammable, vitamins have been laced with poisons such as arsenic and strychnine, electric products that explode or are otherwise unsafe and “if you’re hungry and suicidal, you can always feast on imported Chinese fish, fruit, meat, or vegetables delectably infected with all manner of banned antibiotics, putrefying bacteria, heavy metals, or illegal pesticides (p.1).
Chinese “junk and poisons” have already killed thousands, but Chinese economic warfare has systematically destroyed western industries, using “massive illegal export subsidies, the rampant counterfeiting of US intellectual property, pitifully lax environmental protections, and the pervasive use of slave labour” (p.2).

Currency is manipulated to stimulate Chinese exports and tax western manufacturers. Where the US and Australia adopt liberal cosmopolitan ideals of open borders, China is protectionist so companies wanting to sell to the local market need to give their technology to Chinese partners, leading to their ultimate demise. More sinister, China is moving to establish a colonial empire through Africa, Asia and Latin America. Low interest loans are given to establish infrastructure in exchange for raw materials and access to local markets. Then China brings in its own workers and the raw materials flow back to China which then dumps its goods on local markets destroying local industries. Sound familiar? China is arming itself to the teeth and beyond and is well prepared for war with the United States with ballistic missiles to target US cities, and aircraft carriers and weapons systems to destroy satellites. While the US still has technological superiority the point is often lost on Americans that China has industrial manufacturing superiority over the US and doesn’t need a better jet fighter if it can fill the skies with J-20 jets (p.126).

As well, most of the components and parts needed to keep military hardware going is – you’ve guessed it – made in China! Fighting back against thus “death by China” will involve the West waking up to nonsense such as this by President Barak Obama (who needs Chinese finance to keep his socialist programmes afloat): “I absolutely believe that China’s peaceful peace rise is good for the world and its good for America” (p.223).

It involves the West waking up to the fact that China is not on a level playing field or practising “free trade”. Most importantly, though people need to protect themselves by working at the grass roots, not to buy “Chinese junk and poison” (p.234) even if it is cheap; buy China-free (p.237) or not at all.

There are of course numerous things governments must do, but they all involve developing national protection against China, and the cosmopolitan open borders ethos now rules. Obama, as I see it is incapable of following Navarro and Autry’s recommendations, and Gillard with decisions about foreign investment and Chinese migration is virtually a CEO for China. The Chinese threat is perhaps even greater than the internal undermining that Western countries face.  

THE ART OF WAR – THE RECONQUEST OF AFRICA

With the removal of Africa’s iron gate and crown -- the Libyan Jamahiriya -- and its fearless voice against foreign adventure -- Muammar Qadhafi -- the future is bleak for Africa with unfettered ‘intervention’ to plunder resources [now] underway.

At the very moment when the Democratic Party President Barack Obama reiterated in his inaugural address that the United States “must be a source of hope for the poor” and will “support democracy from Asia to Africa,” giant U.S. C-17 aircraft were carrying French troops into Mali, where Washington a year before had put in power Captain Sanogo, trained in the U.S. by the Pentagon and CIA, exacerbating Mali’s internal conflicts.

The speed with which France launched the operation, ostensibly to protect the Mali from the advance of Islamic rebels, shows that it had long since been planned by France’s Socialist Party President Francois Hollande.
The immediate co-operation of the United States and the European Union, which also decided to send military specialists to Mali to carry out training and command functions, shows that it was planned jointly with Washington, Paris, London and other capitals.

The Western powers, whose multinational corporations vie with each other to grab markets and sources of raw materials, come together when their common interests are at stake, such as those in Africa endangered by popular uprisings and Chinese competition. Mali, one of the poorest countries in the world (with a per capita income one-sixtieth of Italy’s, and with more than half of the population below the poverty line), is rich in raw materials. Mali exports gold and Coltan, the proceeds of which, however, ends in the pockets of multinational corporations and the local elite.

The same is true in neighbouring Niger, which is even poorer (with a per capita income less than one-one-hundredth Italy’s) despite being one of the richest countries in uranium, whose extraction and export is in the hands of the French multinational Areva. Not surprisingly, at the same time as the operation in Mali, Paris has sent special forces into Niger.

A similar situation exists in Chad, whose rich oil deposits are exploited by the U.S. ExxonMobil and other corporations (but Chinese companies are also coming): what remains of the proceeds go into the pockets of the local elite. For criticizing such a mechanism, Bishop Comboni Michele Russo was expelled from Chad last October.

At the same time, Niger and Chad are providing thousands of soldiers who, under French command, have been sent to Mali to open a second front. The invasion launched in Mali with French forces as spearhead is therefore one of vast range, extending from the Sahel extends to West and East Africa. It is joined to the one in North Africa that began with the destruction of the Libyan state and manoeuvres to stifle, in Egypt and elsewhere, the popular rebellions.
This is a long-term operation that is part of the strategic plan aimed at putting the whole continent under the military control of the “great democracies,” which are returning to Africa with their colonial pith helmets painted in the colours of peace.  

Source: https://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=632518 2013/02/04

BUT NOT UNDER THE SAME TYPE AND QUALITY OF LEADERS!

The usurpers are undermining nations the world over. Older League supporters will remember the Rhodesian tragedy. The nation (now known as Zimbabwe) was sold out by the West. It was nigh on 45 years ago the following report appeared -16 December, 1966.

Do take special note it was a UK fabian-socialist prime minister Harold Wilson who handed the peaceful Rhodesian nation over to the communists:

"So far and no further", said Mr. Ian Smith in his Independence speech, and the world has been waiting for those words for many, many years. The leaders of Rhodesia and South Africa, by opposing themselves to the sea of sorrows, which loomed, have not ended, but staved them off.
The world is still a mad one, my masters, but it looks a little better now than it did a year ago".

- - Douglas Reed in "The Battle for Rhodesia"

Harold Wilson Demanded Rhodesian Surrender on H.M.S. Tiger:
In his address at the Rhodesian Rally in Melbourne last Sunday, December 11, League of Rights National Director, Mr. Eric Butler, revealed the brutal demands made by Socialist Harold Wilson on Rhodesian Prime Minister Mr. Ian Smith.
These were: -

• The present Rhodesian Government to go out of existence and to be replaced by a more "broadly based" Government in which African extremists would be represented.
• The surrender to a British Government representative of Rhodesia's armed forces.
• The surrender also of control of the police and the maintenance of law and order.
• British Government control of all Rhodesian Government executive positions, and the civil service.
• British Government control of the Rhodesian Budget.
• The permanent right for British troops to be based in Rhodesia if and when a new constitution was arranged.
• Press censorship to be lifted and control of Rhodesian radio and television to be placed under British control.
• Political terrorists to be released.

The essence of the Wilson concept of reaching an agreement with the Rhodesians is that the Rhodesians should first surrender control of their country for an indefinite period to [a] Quisling Government while a new Constitution was negotiated. It is not surprising that following the rejection of the Wilson demands by the Rhodesian Government, Prime Minister Ian Smith said that those demands were "repugnant" to the Rhodesians.

He said that the Wilson proposals were a "departure of a major nature from the accepted principles of parliamentary democracy which has existed in this country for 43 years. Mr. Smith also said that to expect his Government to abandon the present Rhodesian Constitution before a new constitution had been finally secured and put to the test of public opinion "is utterly irresponsible. ... The Rhodesian Government would be extremely foolish were they to abandon the substance of the present Constitution for the shadow of a mythical constitution yet to be evolved".

The "free" press of the world, which is so critical of press censorship in Rhodesia, has not seen fit to publicise the full truth about what really happened on H.M.S. Tiger. It has carried the Wilson propaganda line, which has projected a picture of the Socialist leader as a "moderate" man offering Mr. Smith honourable terms.
It has also been claimed that Mr. Smith agreed substantially with Mr. Wilson on H.M.S. Tiger and then allowed himself to be swayed by the "right-wing extremists" in his Cabinet. There is not a word of truth in this. Mr. Smith made it clear from the start that he had no power to reach a settlement. He did not agree to recommend the terms of Mr. Wilson's proposals to the Rhodesian Cabinet. All that he agreed to do was to place these proposals before his Cabinet colleagues and to provide the British Government with a "yes" or "no" answer within a certain time limit.

What happened on H.M.S. Tiger was that Mr. Wilson demanded complete capitulation to his demands backed by the threat of worldwide mandatory sanctions. He also said to Mr. Smith: "I ask you to make no assumptions on the use of military force." Here was the real Harold Wilson, the Socialist totalitarian, serving the forces of world revolution. He must have known that the Rhodesians would never accept his surrender demand.

The H.M.S. Tiger exercise was merely a smokescreen to mask his intention of placing the Rhodesian question under the control of the Communist-dominated UN.  (emphasis added...ed)

LABOR’S NEW VILIFICATION LAWS: “SECULAR VERSION OF INQUISITION”

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
“A secular version of the Spanish Inquisition” is how one interfaith group described the proposed national anti-discrimination laws. The Coalition has described them as “some sort of ideological crusade to control what people say”. (The Australian 10 January 2013, p.1) The Australian media has even made a rare united submission, saying that the law would encourage people to be thin-skinned and that media outlets would restrict content. (The Australian 9 January 2013, p.1)

The (former) attorney general Nicola Roxon “addressed” these concerns in her article “Protecting Speech is a Balancing Act”, The Australian 10 January 2013, p.10. Citing an example, the new law is needed to address cases such as a French woman in Melbourne subjected to racial abuse while riding a bus. But, clearly, cases like this can readily be dealt with under the existing law and even without a Racial Discrimination Act.

The new law takes discrimination to relate conduct that “offends, insults or intimidates” a person(s) in relation to 18 different protected attributes e.g., race. A subjective test is applied, rather than a reasonableness test that exists at present under the Racial Discrimination Act. Hence it will be ridiculously easy to prosecute people along the lines of the Andrew Bolt case. Unlike, in that case, the burden of proof is now placed upon the accused.

Roxon opened her article with examples to illustrate the new “offence” category. It may be offensive, but it is not illegal to tell someone their football team is hopeless, or their artwork is ugly. But make reference to a “protected attribute” and it’s a different story: “telling a team they are hopeless “like all Asians” or telling a female staff member “shorter skirts would be better for all girls in the office” might well breach discrimination laws”. Welcome to the Labor Party’s version of Brave New World and 1984 combined.

These examples indicate what the destroyers of free speech have in mind. Any criticism of a racial group will necessarily be caught. Tony Abbott’s support of traditional sex roles is regarded in Gillard’s speech as not just sexist, but misogynist, that is, hating women. Gillard said this in the context of defending House Speaker peter Slipper, who had made remarks about female genitalia that most people regarded as “sick”. So Slipper’s remarks are not illegal, but Abbott’s, in principle, are?
In one sweep the evil Labor Party is set to destroy all free speech, and extend a politically correct attack upon traditional beliefs such as Christianity. We probably won’t be able to even say that these people are evil anymore.

What then to do? Clearly they won’t stop there and the law makers will grow bolder in their tyrannical destruction of our freedoms. The expression of opposition by Church and business leaders is good. However, as I see it, the arrogant new class will not back down and wants these sorts of laws. Consequently the laws need to be Constitutionally challenged. Ironically, the law is arguably in violation of our international obligations to maintain free speech. Laws which can trap anyone in daily life are ultimately unworkable. Will all Australia be put in gaol? Who will do the dirty work for the new class then?

Anglo-Australians should, if the new law gets through, use this law to defend their tribe against all attacks, present and past, upon their ethno-racial group. I, for one, am offended that Anglo-Australians are not mentioned as founding “Australia” in the Constitution. Others will be offended by aspects of feminism and the attack on manhood. Whatever the “bee in your bonnet” get it done before we are all put in the concentration camps.

OBAMA’S FOOD STAMP NATION

At November 2012, 47.7 million Americans were “living” on food stamps, paid for by the American tax payer. That is one out of seven Americans living on food stamps and one out of every four children. And that number is expected to grow so that at least half of all American children will be on food stamps at least once before they turn 18. According to the US census Bureau the number of people living in poverty is now a record high of 49.7 million. One out of four workers earns a wage below the federal poverty level. America thus has almost 100 million poor.

I am generally no fan of leftwing magazines such as New Internationalist, but credit where credit is due – the January/February 2013 issue on “The Feral Rich” is superb. While most of the world’s people are getting poorer, the High Net Worth Individuals, a global elite, get wealthier.

The richest man in the world is Mexican Telecom tycoon Carlos Slim Helú worth $US 69 billion and the richest woman is Australian Gina Rinehart worth $US 29 billion. She has said that the minimum wage should be reduced.
These are just two of the 1,200 individual billionaires in the world and 29 million, millionaires. “Financiers are disproportionately well represented among the wealthiest”.

The new global super rich plutocrats are a breed that desire more money the more they have. Many millionaires and billionaires feel insecure about their wealth and want more, more, more! Collectively they have created what has been called “Totalitarian Capitalism” as their collective greed destroys communities, nations and the Earth. And, ultimately, it will destroy them as well.  

WHY SOCIOLOGY IS A PSEUDOSCIENCE

Sociology, even more than neo-classical economics, is a creation of the Left. Its very origin is based in Marx, Weber and Durkheim’s analysis of capitalism. Excluded from this picture was any biologically-based view of human nature. Human beings were social constructions, pure creations of the environment.

In his paper “Sociology as Alchemy”, biosocial theorist Frank Salter deals with the issue of sociology’s lack of scientificity. He clearly relates this to the discipline’s extreme environmentalism and social determinism. Sociology has deliberately eschewed the study of the biological and evolutionary basis of human behaviour and as such is flooded by a multitude of mutually inconsistent “theories” – if they can be called that.

All of them see humans as radically distinct from the rest of nature. This philosophy also runs through neo-classical economics, which like sociology, is another form of reductionism. There is not much that can be done with disciplines as thoroughly corrupt as these: they need to die out, to be replaced by true science which sees man as a part of nature.  

KNOCKING ON HEAVEN’S DOOR

by Chris Knight
Neurosurgeon Eben Alexander in his book “Proof of Heaven”, describes how an extremely severe case of bacterial meningitis led to him clinically dying. His brain actually died in the sense that synapses shut down. This means, according to mainstream neurology, that Alexander was dead. But somehow he returned from the dead when the E. coli bacteria were stopped.

During this period of death Alexander experienced reality at a deeper level than we do in daily life. His mind had not died, but was being liberated from his body. In his book, the distinguished neurologist comes to reject materialism, the idea that the mind is identical to the body. The fundamental reality is mental, not physical, he argues using quantum mechanics.

The door is open for a rational acceptance of God, the Soul and Heaven. In the face of eternity, our concerns about what Queen Juliana is getting up to seem rather petty.  

THE MULTICULTURAL CULT OF DIVERSITY

by Peter West
The Coalition have called for Australia to move beyond multiculturalism and its obsession with diversity for diversity’s sake, and instead focus on Australian values, respect for existing institutions, the rule of law and the English language. Predictably enough Labor and the Greens, infested with Leftoid ideology, have screamed about this, some claiming that the Coalition have blamed socio-cultural tensions on newly-arrived migrants.
Newly-arrived migrants (NAMS) are greatly loved by the politically correct, being the most exotic. The chattering classes love to sit and dine on fine wine and high saturated fat food, while ritualistically recounting how “diversity” made life so much “richer”.

Liberal Malcolm Turnbull, who would be more at home in the Labor Party, praised multiculturalism saying that Australia had created the “most successful multicultural society in the world” and despite “the asylum-seeker controversy, there remains contrary to most developed countries, strong support for our immigration program” which made Australians “global citizens”.
Add to this, Turnbull said that his differences with other Liberals on this issue “might be more semantic than anything else”. Talk about having your cake and eating it too, over and over…

Contrary to Turnbull, there is majority opposition to the present “Big Australia” immigration programme, to multiculturalism and foreign investment. This is a natural opposition without a vanguard party (as Australians Against Further Immigration once was) to articulate it. The time is ripe for another such party so that Australian immigration opposition is in line with Europe.