PARLIAMENTARY ANARCHY REFLECTS GOVERNMENTAL COLLAPSE

"This was not a sporadic flare-up of temper, "Mr. McEwen said. "It was a violent challenge to law and order in a place where laws are made." - The Age, April 10.

While agreeing with the consensus of the remarks made by Mr. McEwen, he, his party and the Liberal Party are not innocent of the responsibility, which led to the situation. Few people understand the underlying realities of last week's open display of revolt against the authority and dignity of parliament. This was more than the uncouth behaviour of politicians unfit for the high office usurped through a combination of trade union - Tammany Hall - party politics. Criticism brought out the fact that parliament has been reduced to the function of channeling endless legislation through the chamber; prepared by the huge and growing bureaucracy and presented for the perfunctory confirmation of those occupying the parliamentary benches. The fact that they are often forced to post midnight sittings to maintain the schedule set by their bureaucratic masters is part of the price they pay. As a socialist structure is built under bureaucratic control and the Federal Government intrudes on increasing areas of domestic activity of the Australian community, this process of endless production of legislation will increase, and situations witnessed last week will also increase.

WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING

"A visiting Russian professor hastily called a Press conference last night and denied that he was a Soviet spy. Professor Bododzhan Gafurov described allegations in Canberra's "Sunday Post," yesterday that he was a leading Russian secret serviceman and notorious veteran KGB operator as a "crude joke". . .One Canberra source said it was unlikely that Professor Gafurov was a spy, but he had a reputation as a Communist Party "fixer". It was conceivable that he was in Australia as a result of the Australian Communist Party split which recently resulted in pro-Moscow elements losing their places on the central committee.
About twelve years ago a Soviet defector, Mr. Khaznacheeve, alleged in published memoirs that Professor Gafurov was involved in manipulation of the Burmese Communist Party during a visit to Rangoon. " Adelaide Advertiser. April 6th, 1970.

Among those who have taken the matter up is Senator McManus. Professor Gafurov admitted to reporters that he was at one time a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. He also admitted that he was deputy-Chairman of a committee of solidarity with African and Asian people in Moscow, the task of which was to help people engaged in "wars of liberation." What is the Professor doing in Australia? He is on a ten-day visit to the Australian National University, discussing a possible exchange scheme between the ANU and the Institute of Oriental Studies in the Soviet Academy of Sciences.

The Institute of Oriental Studies was set up in the Soviet Union in 1921 as a prelude to Lenin's strategy of reaching London and Paris by way of Peking. Many African and Asian revolutionaries have trained there in the tactics of "Wars of liberation. " Gafurov would no doubt like to add some exchange students from Australian Universities to the list. We listen for an outraged roar of indignation from the Gorton Government at the very impertinence of this latest maneuver by the Communists. Or is it in that bemused state so aptly described by Nikita Kruschev when he said, "We will spit in their faces, and they will think it is dew."

A late news item as we go to press came to hand in The Age, April 15 under the heading Ford grant to Asian congress. The president of the National Civic Council (Mr. R. Santamaria) said last week if the congress received major financial backing it would be used to finance 'a Russian propaganda stunt to back Soviet policy in Southern Asia'.
He made the charge as part of a series of allegations against the Director of the 'Russian Institute of Asian Peoples' Mr. Gafurov who was in Australia to make arrangements for the congress.

Mr. Santamaria's fears are more than justified on past performances of the Ford Foundation. The authoritative book, None Dare Call it Treason (84 cents posted) has one chapter devoted to exposing the pro-communist policies of the Ford Foundation and other charitable institutions operating on a tax free basis to promote revolutionary causes.

DEFICIENCY FUND MOVES FORWARD

THE CANADIAN REVOLUTION

Mr. Eric Butler reports from Canada

At the same time that Australian farmers were marching in Melbourne, Western Canadian farmers were participating in protest marches in Edmonton, Alberta, Regina, Saskatchewan, and Winnipeg, Manitoba. In Canada, as in Australia, there is a high-powered campaign to organise primary producers into one centralised union, the claim being made that the primary producers will then be able to speak with "one voice". It is also significant that many of the politicians in both countries are urging the primary producers to amalgamate into one union so that they can present a "common case" which the Government can consider.
Those in favour of centralising control of the primary producer's organisations are generally the very people who refuse to attack the basic cause of the primary producers' problems.
In Canada the spokesmen for one centralised Canadian Farmers' Union are known Socialists, who call for more centralised controls of the farmer, imposed by Governments. This fits neatly into the Fabian Socialist campaign to revolutionise the rural communities of the Free World.

The Trudeau Government's White Paper on Taxation, to which I have previously referred, is going to further the proposed rural revolution. A Winnipeg tax consultant, recently speaking to a farm and business forum, said, "The effect of 1968 increases in estate and gift taxes and the current proposals in the white paper. .might well lead to the destruction of the family farms as we know them today." It does not appear that this will unduly worry the new Canadian Government's top finance "adviser", Mr. Sol Simon Reisman, who has taken over from his fellow London School of Economics colleague, Mr. Robert B. Bryce. A press report quotes Mr. Reisman as having said recently that the fight against inflation must be pursued, even to the extent of 'leaving some blood around the place." This attitude is typical amongst Fabian Socialist advisers the world over, who regard themselves as members of en elite which knows what is best for individuals.
The so-called anti-inflation programme in Canada is certainly "leaving some blood around the place."

Unemployment figures are still mounting, and more and more businessmen are feeling the impact. There is a continuing flood of letters of opposition to the White Paper on Taxation, one Federal Member stating that he had never seen anything like this flood of letters in his 17 years in Parliament. But there is no evidence that the flood is having much real impact on the Government, which is openly contemptuous of the lack of serious Opposition. Prime Minister Trudeau has placed himself in a strong position by encouraging comment on the White Paper, but by then shrewdly telling his opponents to tell the Government in "constructive" terms what alternatives they have to offer which are better. The best that most opponents can suggest is that the Trudeau Government is redistributing the tax burden wrongly. But there is no attack upon the underlying concept of high taxation, and the contributing causes such as high interest bills on mounting public debts.

The White Paper openly proposes that Canadians move faster along the Fabian Socialist road they have been advancing along for a long time. But every English-speaking nation is doing basically the same irrespective of the label on the Governments. Prime Minister Gorton is moving in the same direction as Prime Minister Trudeau, towards greater centralisation of power. Prime Ministers come and go, but centralised power remains centralised until sufficient electors equip themselves to associate constructively to force the progressive decentralisation of power.

MARCHES DEMAND VIETNAM VICTORY

"Proclaiming God will give victory," thousands of people carrying the American flag marched here today to demand stronger action to win the war in Vietnam. The marchers, estimated between 10,000 and 15,000 carried red, white and blue placards proclaiming "Win the War, " and "Blockade Haiphong harbor," Adelaide Advertiser April 6th, 1970.

The report referred to a march in Washington. For some inexplicable reason, it did not get front-page headlines, but was tucked away in small print. Had the demonstrators raped, strangled or burnt a few innocent victims, no doubt it would have been considered "newsworthy." As it was, marchers were reported to be "polite and subdued." They carefully stayed off the grass and apologised whenever they jostled each other." It's a wonder they even got a mention.

Here in Australia the press is co-operating to the full with the revolutionaries to give them a full coverage of Moratorium Against the War in Vietnam. No tucking reports of this exercise away in back pages without headlines. Nor do we expect the Citizens for Freedom who has produced a well-presented brochure, Unmasking The Moratorium to receive any publicity in their campaign to warn the Australian people about the facts behind this latest propaganda exercise of the international communist conspiracy.
As we noted previously, none of these people promoting the Moratorium campaign sought to question the actions of the Soviet fatherland when it was aiding the slaughter of millions of Biafrans some few short months ago.

Those wishing to obtain a copy of Unmasking the Moratorium should write to Citizens For Freedom G.P.O. Box 1881, Brisbane, 4001.

THE MONARCH DEFIES WILSON

"The guards outside Buckingham Palace have been asked to abandon their bearskins and wear blue berets in honour of the 25th birthday of the United Nations this year." - The Age, April 9.

The report in The Age is written in such a way to minimise the significance of this incident. It was presented as a minor storm in a mini teacup, but reading between the lines there is no doubt this exercise was conducted as a fundamental attack on the authority of the Crown. The symbolism of the blue beret of the UN was meant to convey the message that it was the superior authority and that the Monarch had abdicated in its favour.

When first commanded by the British Government through the Minister for Defence, Mr. Healy (Defence of what?) the guards fought a delaying action on the question of protocol. Mr. Healy persisted, and the Foreign Secretary, Mr. Stewart was brought in. The report says the Guards continued to refuse with "memo delaying tactics: "but the Ministry of Defence persisted, and it was only when categorical refusal came from the Palace itself that the matter was dropped. We trust the same stubbornness and strength will be evident if ever any "British" parliament seeks to have the Queen sign away the heritage of British people into a Council of Europe. Had such strength been demonstrated when Her Majesty's government in Rhodesia sought to present their case, and a hearing been given, it is doubtful if the internationalists in Britain would today be endeavouring to strip the last vestige of authority from the Crown.