Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
 
 
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
 
 
Home blog.alor.org Newtimes Survey The Cross-Roads Library
OnTarget Archives The Social Crediter Archives NewTimes Survey Archives Brighteon Video Channel Veritas Books

NewTimes Survey


WHEN AMERICA GOES DOWN

by James Reed

When the rising god of history starts to beat the drums of doom,
When this rich and diverse culture seals its democratic tomb;
Will we march along in sorrow with a dumb funeral tread?
Will we make love tomorrow when America is dead?
- Vic Olivir


Republican congressional leaders had proposed cracking down on the 12 million undocumented illegals, mostly Hispanics from Mexico. Protests designed to show Hispanic electoral power erupted across America. Hispanics are America's largest and fastest growing minority, numbering 41 million or 14 per cent of the population. By 2050, or sooner, they will number 100 million or 25 per cent of the population. The wave of protests caused the weak traitorous Republicans to abandon plans of enforcing the rule of law. Seven million illegals will get US citizenship and 3 million will be sent home, but they can have temporary visas, return and get citizenship. The opinion polls showed that the majority of Americans wanted illegal aliens deported as US law permits.
President Bush supported the proposal of letting these aliens remain. In fact Bush opened the door to free migration of Mexicans to the US by a guest-worker programme to make Republicans who want cheap Mexican labour in slave-like conditions, happy. Senator John McCain, frontrunner for the republican presidential nomination in 2008 has co-sponsored an immigration reform bill with Democrats Senator Edward Kennedy that will give amnesty and citizenship to the illegals.

Senator Kennedy was the frontrunner of the immigration reform movement of the 1960s which abandoned the national quota system and which led to a massive flow of Third World immigration to America. At the time he said that immigration reforms would lead to very few of the Third World coming to America. Today he is really into the spirit of things and speaks of America's "immigration future". Maybe he should give the illegals "special pensions" now to celebrate their "diversity", "colour" and "sheer richness". He could say that very few people would want "pensions: or that very few more Mexican illegals would come. Get into the spirit of things Teddy boy!
Of course there is no "immigrant future". Hispanics largely want to regain the lost south western States and make a new nation of Atzlan, which will probably merge into Mexico. In other words Hispanic immigration means the end of at least America as it has been known. Senator Kennedy and his ilk should be able to see this because even the proverbial Blind Freddy can. Thus he supports Mexico over the US.

The immigration reformers in Australia in the 1960s also said that elimination of White Australia policy would mean that only a few thousand Asians got in. Today there is an official government policy of Asianisation, which by immigration is transforming Australia : racially, economically and culturally. Australia as it has been known will, given present policies, cease to exist this century. This racial annihilation is what the elites want.
America is set to join the Third World, before cracking up and disintegrating. Thirty one per cent of America's post 2000 immigrants have not completed high school (3½ times the rate for "natives"). The proportion of immigrant-headed households using welfare is 29 per cent compared to 18 per cent for "natives". The poverty rate for immigrants is 18.4 per cent; for natives 11.7 per cent. Even immigrants who have been in the US for 14-15 years still have much higher rates of poverty and welfare than "natives". (The Social Contract, Winter 2005-2006, p.129) This is a sleeping bomb waiting to explode into social chaos.
The "war on terrorism" is a con-game. The real terrorists who are destroying America are in government. They do more harm, as agents of the forces of greed and evil than a thousand bombs.

When France Goes Down
In France over one million people took to the streets in often violent protest, including battles with police, and torching businesses. The protesters vented their fury at France's new labour laws which make it easier to sack young workers. Young protesters set vehicles and businesses on fire. As these riots were going on the French elites, including Dominique de Villepin, Chirac's mastermind of these laws, probably sipped vintage champagne at lunch (said to be a regular thing done by Villepin). In aid of the new world order philosophy of serving the great god of M&M (Money and the Market) these "power elites" are willing to dismantle all that was stable in French society. Thus France has an under 25 unemployment rate of 23 per cent. Italy also has a youth unemployment rate of 24 per cent with multitudes of adults staying at home well into their 30s because of lack of opportunity. The birth rate shrinks at an ever-alarming rate.

France's decline and social breakdown is more complex than that of the US - and also appears to be progressing quicker. The most recent riots are the product of liberal laissez-faire economic policies - the economic wing of the globalist philosophy. Previously France was torched and burnt from the English Channel to the Pyrenees and from the Atlantic Ocean to the Rhine River by rampaging Muslim Arab and African youths. These rioters, pillaged, burned and killed in a frenzy. They objected to French police entering Muslim enclaves (banlieues) or housing projects (habitation a loyer modere). Rioters wanted Islamic Sharia law, not French law, to apply to Muslims in France and the creation of an Islamic State in France.
Naïve do-gooders and bleeding heart liberals speak of French "racism", "lack of religious tolerance" and "poverty" as the real causes. But still the Muslim migrants come. France has a Muslim population of 5 million or 12 per cent of its total population and 3,000 mosques. The Muslim birthrate is four-times that of French natives.
Melanie Phillips in the UK Daily Mail 7 November 2005, observed that burning France was part and parcel of an Islamisation process that has been continuing fro some time. It was a French intifada "an uprising by French Muslims against the State." It was a "war being waged for separate development" - or in other words apartheid. Many Muslims want the introduction of the ancient Ottoman "millet system" of separate development. The French police are not welcome in the territory "they feel they have conquered from the French State with which they feel no identification." Phillips notes that the Muslim ghettoes arose in the first place "because Muslim violence and harassment forced every one else out." Thus "they became no-go areas for the police, seen by the Muslims as occupation forces entering their territory." She concludes: "The ghettoes are a way of ensuring a separate Islamic existence without having to assimilate into French society."

The War with the West
Then there is the question of "political Islam". Concern with 'political Islam" is not limited to "our side" of politics. The Australia-Israel Review of April 2006 published an article by Daniel Goldhagen (author of "Hitler's Willing Executioners") entitled "Offensive Ends : The Radical Politics of Islamic Fundamentalism". This article states that "political Islam", aggressive, totalitarian" in the "blink of the political eye" has undergone "widespread social mobilisation," across the world. Goldhagen says about this problem:
"Political Islam is on the march in the three loci of politics: the street, the halls of power, and the field of battle. Its largest targets are both domestic (to suppress freedom and dissent within Islamic countries; Sharia is already becoming the rule in Gaza) and international (to spread its sway and impose orthodoxy abroad). While its international power is still circumscribed, political Islam's ambitions are extensive, violent, and frightening - with its members sensing its growing potential… A Sunni Muslim cleric, having helped organise anti-cartoon protests in his hometown and in Beirut, explained the protests' significance : "The way I see it, the war [with the West] has already started." We have been warned.


Is the Australian Constitution a Failed Document?

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Doug Harrison, sub-editor of the freedom movement publication The Strategy (April 2006) has concluded that the Australian Constitution is a "failed document". As an alternative The Strategy has presented a draft "Charter of Governance" and a draft "Charter of Liberties". Both documents are based upon a legal philosophy (jurisprudence) of natural law, resting upon a foundation of God's law.

First, why is the Australian Constitution a failed document?

One argument given by Harrison is that the power elites have been able to manipulate the Constitution. The High Court from its very beginnings moved to centralise power in Canberra and support internationalism. This is all true. However it is more an argument against the High Court and the treachery of lawyers than it is against the Constitution.
No legal document is "lawyer proof" - whatever drafting is made treachery and sophistry will find a way of perverting it. On this issue, given that the age of great wise men and women with the wisdom to engineer society in accordance with truth, justice and goodness has passed - we should be sceptical of any proposed Bill of Rights because it is likely to have hidden "viruses" within it.
But Victoria has a proposed Bill of Rights, for example, where even the viruses are not so well hidden. Half of the document relates to rights of criminals, making this a criminal's Bill of Rights. Section 8 (1) gives every person a right to life which can't be arbitrarily deprived, but the next section qualifies this right saying that it only applies to a person from the time they are born, thus legitimating abortion.
But it is all arbitrary: no rights one minute before birth, rights one minute after. How can the journey down the birth canal confer human rights?

The Charter of Governance doesn't embody such new class politically correct values, and does exhibit an attempt to make a Christian document. But the fundamental problem of the treachery of lawyers still remains. Intrinsic to systems with a written Constitution which limits the power of parliament is the granting of the power of interpretation of the Constitution to an elite unelected group : High court judges.
If these judges have a political agenda - which the High Court has had as Harrison rightly observes - then interpretation of the Charter of Governance would be at the mercy of these essentially undemocratic rulers.

Consider proposition 8 of the Charter of Governance:
"Federal Parliament ought to be held frequently." How frequently? We are not told.
Proposition 11 says : "No law whatsoever shall be made to grant advantage to non-citizens or foreign entities over Australian citizens." It is far from clear what "grant advantage" means and the High Court will decide its meaning.
So it goes for almost everything drafted in the Charter of Governance. Watch its freedoms get washed away. I myself believe that the Australian Constitution, produced as a contract between the six existing colonies, was limited by not recognising two basic rights that the American Constitution did : the right of freedom of speech and to bear arms.
But looking at the American situation we see that these rights have been qualified and whittled away by judicial interpretation. These rights are obstacles that have slowed the lawyers down, but which have not stopped them. The problem which we face is that we are now ruled by an alien new class committed to internationalist ideals and ideologies. They have won "the long march" through the institutions. The criminals and insane now rule the asylum. This problem of real politics is the one which must be addressed before debating matters of constitutional change.

© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159