Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label, Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke

Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
"The third temptation of Christ: to acquire power over all the kingdoms of the earth (i.e. megapolitics) in return for an act of worship of the Evil One (i.e. that Power which corrupts politics) is a temptation impossible to resist by any person or group which sets out to improve the lot of Mankind in a big way. Indeed, few of those who automatically fall for it are aware that it is a temptation at all. It is taken for granted that if you want to do anything in a big way you must 'succeed' in attracting the favour of the Powers that Be, the greatest and most corrupting of which is the Money-Power."
The Local World by Geoffrey Dobbs, 1995

November-December 2002, Vol. 24, No. 5



When Winston Peters challenged the other parties, especially Labour and National, to a debate on immigration he could be fairly certain they would decline. Further he could be certain they would make all the usual accusations. After the last election Prime Minister Clark said that Peters had engaged in tactics designed to turn New Zealanders against New Zealanders. Later she added to her smear by describing him as a “Hansonite”, after Australian politician and opponent of Asianisation Pauline Hanson. Winston Peters has found himself in a niche political position. Unless he makes some serious mistakes his New Zealand First Party is guaranteed to regularly pick up a good percentage of ostracised voters. Because of the treachery and shallowness of the other parties New Zealand First is in practice the only party of opposition.

Though still the official Opposition, National was gutted at the last election — deservedly so. It has completely sold out to political correctness. Its leader Bill English is doggedly following the two previous leaders in supporting globalism and the Asianisation of New Zealand. National selected the disaffected and anti-European Chinese woman Pansy Wong as a candidate and she is now apparently the Party’s spokesman on Immigration. This helps explain why National studiously avoids saying anything about the country’s serious immigration situation. Wong was only selected because National hoped to pick up some of the Chinese vote. English himself may be the nice guy his image-makers portray but so far he has demonstrated less ability for original thought than a leg of frozen lamb. He is probably more terrified of doing or saying something non-PC than of presiding over the Party’s complete demise.

In fact all the mainline politicians are terrified of being non-PC, and the subject that frightens them the greatest is the race question. Most of them love the limelight and the ego-massaging that goes with the wining and dining and the overseas trips. Few of them are probably ideologically committed to multiculturalism like Prime Minister Clark, but they know with absolute clarity that they will be sent to the political equivalent of Siberia at the slightest public hint of unease with multiculturalism. The thought of being labelled “racist” sends shivers down their flesh (they don’t have spines). Even if they could escape the normal ostricisation after a tiny “error” they will certainly have destroyed their chance for party promotion and a well-paid cosy job after retiring or being sacked by the electors. Only the most shallow politician or media commentator really believes that the late Enoch Powell, former British MP, was anything other than an outstanding scholar, writer and gentleman. But Enoch Powell was ruthlessly pushed aside and smeared because he broke rank and opposed non-assimilable immigration. A little investigation shows that Powell had considerable support from immigrants and his suggestion of financially assisted, voluntary repatriation was never opposed by most immigrants — opposition to it always came from the main political parties, academic circles and the big media, who quite frankly don’t care in the least about people, immigrants or otherwise.

The dedicated liberal knows that the greatest threat to his idealised new world order is posed by a regenerated European, Christian culture. Not the culture of the academic but that of the hardy independent peasants who have an instinct for history and the poetry of life as opposed to the mechanistic world of the economists. For the same reason the Communists murdered and suppressed the small independent farmers and merchants in Russia along with the well-organised White Russians, and why the Zulus in South Africa were prevented from gaining any real political power and why it was the terrorist murderer Mugabe who was promoted to President in Rhodesia by Lord Carrington and Henry Kissinger and the Western press instead of the moderate Christian, Bishop Mosowera.

The mechanised, sanitised, cultureless, globalised new world order of the socialist academics and taxpayer-benefiting corporations will always be threatened if there are groups of people who have not been culturally destroyed. Rare individuals like Enoch Powell know there is more to life than being in the limelight of the front benches. Most politicians don’t.

Helen Clark’s deputy, Finance Minister Michael Cullen is so shallow he can’t see that a nation’s real wealth is something that can’t be recorded as a list of figures. He is presently basking in the glory of a budget surplus. Quietly forgotten are the hundreds of millions of dollars of pensioner funds he lost in speculating on the international money-go-round. Not mentioned is that the surplus can be traced, via privatisation, to the transfer of government debt to the private global corporations. Cullen, the academic, would appear to not have the slightest conception that there is any reality beyond figures. Early in 2002 he suggested that immigration should be doubled from the previous year to around 100,000 in order to keep the books looking good. On a per capita basis our immigration is already seven times higher than Australia’s, if Winston Peters’ figures are correct. But how does immigration make the “books look good”?

Several months ago an Auckland real estate company claimed, in some advertising, that the “housing market” had received a boost from a recent inflow of 10,000 people from mainland China and India. What this really means is that house prices are pushed up even further beyond what traditional New Zealanders can afford. Immigration has contributed to Auckland’s serious road congestion so new roads and motorways are being built or planned at great cost. In Auckland other infrastructure has had to be undertaken to accommodate the massive infill of new housing, including an expensive water pipeline to the Waikato river. The water and sewage systems are operating at times to almost beyond capacity. In the short term the budgets of the city councils are increased, along with greatly increased expenditure and an increasing urgency for the construction of more infrastructure. All of which adds to the amount of money that is exchanged. The government measures this in a variety of mysterious, religious-type, columns variously known by such terms as GDP or GNP or M1 or M3, etc. It is exclaimed that if there has been an increase in money exchanging hands then the nation is richer. If more people are homeless, or unable to afford a decent home, or not getting enough to eat, and drug addiction and alcoholism and the suicides rates are up also, we are still said to be “richer”. This is the world of propaganda and lies so brilliantly portrayed by George Orwell in Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty Four.

Race IS a factor in human affairs. It is not a matter of arguments about superiority. Everyone has the right to be proud of who they are and should be encouraged to feel so. The “rivers of blood” predicted by Enoch Powell may or may not have happened (as yet, anyhow) in the UK depending on one’s perspective. Helen Clark says that the UK can attribute some, or did she mean all, of its present economic success (it is successful compared to the continental European countries) to the resourcefulness of its recent immigrants. But she ignores the race riots, the slum areas filled with Africans and West Indians despite considerable government financial relief and the deep unease about a future of possible cultural and racial clashes.

For four decades we have had the doctrine of “assimilation” rammed down our throats. It has come at us from school teachers, journalists, politicians and pulpits. Yes, there are numerous individual examples of assimilation. The more successful examples always occur where the numbers of new people are small and the host population is not threatened. But how is assimilation to be measured except, as yet, by a variety of unproven theoretical formulas? Taken as a whole the religion of multiculturalism and its doctrines of equality and assimilation make no more sense than the suggestion that every family in a street will be better off if some members from each all move into the best house. Recently the US Government announced it was moving 12,000 Somalis to towns and cities across America. The report said that US officials accepted this will be hard for them but it will be better for the next generation. But will it? The financial cost will be considerable.

The same amount of money could surely help many more than 12,000 people inside Somalia. They would not be dragged away from their original locations, where perhaps their families have lived for untold generations. Wouldn’t they and their children be happier living closer to extended families and on the soil and in the climate they are accustomed to. There is surely in this approach a gross arrogance that says “we know best” just because we are economically stronger. In Auckland Somalis and Pacific Islanders have recently clashed with a couple of deaths. The government’s absurd answer is to run courses on things like “cultural awareness” or “cultural cooperation”. The Somalis are also receiving some absurd instructions from government boffins on why they should not hit their children. Presumably they need to be taught that New Zealand is not only a modern and “vibrant multicultural society”, but is a nice “violent-free” place — unlike violent Somalia, of course. No doubt the boffins will conveniently overlook to mention that much Third World violence can be traced to the Western liberals’ hurried anti-colonisation programme, Western transfer of debt and Western-supplied guns. They are unlikely to also be taught that not much more than a generation ago violent crimes were virtually unheard of in New Zealand and many people often never locked their houses.

But the liberals remain dedicated to their lies (or misconceptions) and the further destruction of the dominant host culture in New Zealand. Ian Wishart’s Investigate magazine (January, 2003) exposes the blatant hypocrisy of the television polls conducted in November when Winston Peters comments sparked some public debate. TV One in a One News Colmar-Brunton poll claimed that seventy-one percent of New Zealanders said Peters views increase tensions between Asian immigrants and the rest of New Zealand. Wishart, who has had wide experience as a TV presenter and researcher, writes (pg 70):
“You see, opinion polling is an art form. I know. I worked in the industry for a year. The answer you get in a poll is almost 100% dependent on what question you ask and how you tilt it. In a truly objective poll, questions are phrased as neutrally as possible so as not to skew the results. But in polls designed by news organisations, the questions are often far more obtruse”.

Wishart reports that TV One also interviewed Massey University sociologist Paul Spoonly who criticised Peters, but without telling listeners that Spoonly has been a regular critic of Peters and “is funded by the United Nations to help the UN plan for immigration”. Wishart then tells us that a TV 3 poll at the same time claimed fifty-three percent of New Zealanders “felt too many Asians were coming here.” The evidence would seem to suggest that the Labour Party does best from new immigrants, in that it picks up more of their votes. Can there be anything lower than a small political gang compromising the entire future of their own country for a bit of short term power and prestige?

There was time when New Zealanders were proud at the practical help we offered to poorer countries. The policies of party politics, debt finance, globalism and forced multiculturalism are so weakening us we may later have to extend our own hand in the hope a richer country will come to our aid. Perhaps Argentina will help!

On the issue of assimilation TV One’s Assignment (Nov. 14) reported that one in two Aucklanders say there is too much Asian immigration and that opposition was strongest amongst the young. No wonder the liberals will do anything to avoid a debate. They might be challenged on things like the Asian Immigration consultant and two associates presently before the courts who are charged with supplying about 30 false English language certificates to clients for around $13,000 each — a total profit of about $400,000. What would they have to say about the two Asians recently convicted of exporting millions of dollars of endangered paua? The two had earned a huge fortune while still claiming the dole for over a decade. And what would they say if asked about the advertisements in Asian newspapers offering partners for marriages of convenience. It is not Asians or Africans as such who threaten New Zealand but the liberal ideology which has firstly seen power enormously centralised, then followed by the ramming down our throats of this false ideology.

Bill Milne Immigration Consultant

Bill Milne is on Immigration Minister Lianne Dalziel’s Advisory Group on Immigration. Interviewed for TV One’s Assignment (Nov. 14) he said:
“When you bring an overload of any breed of people in, yes, it will cause problems. It will cause resistance. They come with a different culture. They come with a different way of thinking. They come with a different way of understanding what is good human practise, good business practise. In China if you want something done you go through this process. In New Zealand we call that corruption.”

Michael Lane, Charles Ferguson, the Capital College and New Booklets

Last October Michael Lane, editor of the U.S. publication, Triumph of the Past, addressed several meetings in Auckland and Hamilton, before travelling on to Australia as guest speaker for the Annual Seminar of the Australian League of Rights. Michael Lane is responsible for the recent rediscovery of the intriguing work of one Charles Ferguson. In the 1920s Ferguson had advocated the setting up of “Capital Colleges” — an association of business enterprises making much better use of the real credit available within a community or locality — which he claimed would rejuvenate existing towns and cities, or build new and better ones. Social Crediters are aware that there is a great deal of un-released real credit in society. The cause of this is the orthodox financial system which creates poverty amidst plenty. One of the beliefs of orthodox economics is that we live in a finite world of shortages and there will never be quite enough to go around — although it contradicts its own doctrine by claiming that perpetual industrial growth is possible.

Orthodox economics is linked to both Socialism and Capitalism in that both ideas accept the various theories of insufficiency. Social Credit has always maintained there is real or potential abundance, rather than insufficiency. Whereas Socialism says that the poor can only be assisted by taking something from the rich. Social Credit claims that our cultural heritage of accumulated knowledge and the increment of association, along with an observance of the real, rather than an imagined, world provides for abundance for all. Both Douglas and Charles Ferguson clearly accepted that a person, or a group of people, or a nation can be enriched simply by doing things differently, and no one else is the poorer. Being richer doesn’t necessarily mean having more plastic gadgets. It could mean having security and one’s needs met with less working hours, or earlier retirement from undesirable activities.

In his series of articles on Charles Ferguson and the Capital College proposal Michael Lane concludes that Ferguson can rightly be regarded as a “Herald of Social Credit”. Ferguson expressed the term Social Credit several years earlier than most us thought it had first been used. Lane’s articles have triggered a debate on the feasibility of what might be called a local Social Credit model or example. Our readers who also subscribe to the monthly New Times Survey will have already read of Jeremy Lee’s favourable and interesting comments on the suggestion.

We are delighted to announce that Michael Lane’s series on Ferguson is now available in a most attractively presented 58-page booklet. We urge all those seriously interested in practical answers to the growing problem of “poverty amidst plenty” and of the madness ensuing from the globalist “big is best” ideology to read it. Michael Lane writes generously and is far from dogmatic. The booklet is an invitation for all those interested in promoting civilised living to join an interesting and exciting discussion with the hope of practical results.

The Other New Booklets Along with Charles Ferguson: Herald of Social Credit We are delighted to offer five other new booklets. All have been published by the Australian Heritage Society and each is an outstanding example of brilliant artwork, presentation and content. They are presented under the general heading of “Freedom not Slavery, Credit not Debt”. The other booklets are: Human Ecology and Social Credit: The Legacy of Tom Robertson by Michael Lane. This, too, first appeared as a series of articles. Robertson will be more familiar to older readers. He was a homeopathic doctor (previously a GP) in Glasgow and in 1948 published an astounding book dealing with history, philosophy, money and debt, and civilisation called Human Ecology: The Science of Social Adjustment. Robertson had been profoundly influenced by C.H. Douglas. Robertson’s work can be considered a treatise on where and how the Western World went wrong when it went down the mechanistic, “science is God” road, resulting in the modern notion that truth is found by continually attempting to dissect everything rather than seeing things as being part of a functioning and living whole.
Michael Lane’s booklet is a timely and extensive review of Robertson’s work and it is to be hoped this will lead to sufficient interest to later have Robertson’s original book brought back into print.

Social Credit Asterisks by Anthony Cooney. For over 40-years Tony Cooney edited his own journal, Liverpool Newsletter, and has been an active campaigner for Distributism and Social Credit. He talent as a professional educator combines the great gifts of light-heartedness and ease of style, making his work a joy to read. His readers also benefit from his tremendous grasp of history and he has the happy ability to leave one believing there is more good news than bad and there is plenty of room for hope. This is a collection of his writings. 41-pages.

Clifford Hugh Douglas by Anthony Cooney. Heralded as the Einstein of economics, Douglas gave a glimpse of reality to the world. He warned that debt, heavy taxation and inflation was inevitable under centralised financial policies which are in need of correction. Jeremy Lee describes (New Times Survey, Nov. ‘02) Cooney’s booklets as “a picture of Douglas and Social Credit that turns me green with envy! He has the ‘guts of it’ in a few pages in terms that anyone can understand.” 17-pages.

Hilaire Belloc 1870-1953 by Anthony Cooney. An introduction to this celebrated thinker and writer who challenged the state on social and economic issues by contending that the dignity of man as a rational being require both freedom and security. “If we do not”, said Belloc, “restore the Institution of Property we cannot escape restoring the Institution of Slavery”. Belloc and G.K. Chesterton popularised the term Distributism. Douglas said that Distributism was the objective and Social Credit the mechanism of attaining it. 19-pages.

One Sword At Least: G.K. Chesterton by Anthony Cooney. A glimpse at the genius of Chesterton, author of over 100 books, poet, journalist, editor, controversialist, biographer, publisher, playwright, debater, traveller, lecturer, illustrator and prophet. Readers are challenged to discover Chesterton for themselves. 37-pages.

For a Good Playwright

Oh, what we would give for a good storyteller of the calibre of a Shakespeare or even a G.B. Shaw. The characters: Prime Minister Helen who tells us Britain is prospering because of multiculturalism while the producers of TV One’s Assignment report (Nov. 14) on the UK’s race riots, assimilation difficulties and mounting race tensions. An Immigration Minister Lianne Dalziel who first denies there are any immigration difficulties or dishonest practises and then says she’ll look into the matter when the Assignment presenters provided hard evidence (easily obtained from advertisements in Asian newspapers) that at least several unscrupulous Asians are charging huge fees to arrange for look-a-likes to sit exams on behalf of students or immigration applicants. Lianne’s husband Rob Davidson who told Pansy Wong at a public forum that it might have been a good thing if she hadn’t been allowed into the country. Lianne is reported to have enjoyed the joke as much as anyone. To the suggestion that Rob had been drinking we can only say that dutch courage is better than no courage. Race Relations Commissar Joris de Bres who said colonisation of New Zealand was “a sorry litany of cultural vandalism” and likened it to the Taliban’s destruction of the ancient Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan.

On your bike?
by Dele Oguntimoju,
director of publicity for the Movement for National Reformation of Nigeria.

Mr Oguntimoju’s article is reprinted from the November, 2002 issue of The Ecologist and shows how Globalisation sells Africans the Western dream while tougher immigration policies tell them they can't have it. The policies of debt and western liberalism are seriously disrupting and destroying the lives of countless millions of people everywhere: Those of you in the West who are feeling besieged by the latest wave of immigration would do well to consider the following:
people who choose to abandon the joy of every day contact with their immediate and extended families so as to live in foreign lands and take work they would not deign to do in their homelands do not do so lightly. We in the West do not know, because we are not told, how the youth in poor African cities are being seduced by global advertising to shed their native dress in favour of blue jeans, and retune their ears from traditional hi-life music to the drum and bass of Hip Hop and Brit Pop.

The sheer pressures heaped upon the poorer nations to modernise are incalculable — the techniques deployed, relentless. And when these brainwashed townies return to their villages they carry the contaminating gadgets and gizmos with them. In no time at all their contemporaries in the village have caught the Westernisation bug. The peace of mind and contentment that they once enjoyed is disturbed. Dick Whittington-like, their sole aim in life is to go to London or Paris to see with their own eyes the streets that are paved with gold. Even now the British Council is busy across Africa, training the next generation of migrants in the language of their destination country. Only when they arrive, there is no gold. Just images of Western progress that are flawed, if not false.

As usual, the politicians are focusing their efforts on dealing with the symptoms rather than the root of the problem. One can only despair at the shallowness of the measures that Western politicians are adopting to keep at bay those who are thus wrenched from their way of life by the globalisers. Spain was reported to be spending £80m on a 350-mile 'electronic wall' across its Mediterranean coast. Not to be outdone, UK Home Secretary David Blunkett is reported to be producing a video nasty to scare off the hopeful: unsuccessful asylum seekers will be shown being deported. But how this is going to counteract the hypnotic effect of multi-billion dollar advertising campaigns remains to be seen. And what of environmental refugees — many millions, possibly hundreds of millions, of whom will be rendered destitute by the very same forces of globalisation that Mr Blunkett's government endorses?

Tougher immigration and asylum policies will not cure the problem of the 'uprooted people'. Such policies are as misguided as the fortresses that the few over-rich in Africa build around their homes so as to keep their beggarly neighbours out. What the former fail to appreciate is that it is their monopoly on opportunity that leaves their neighbours no alternative but to come to them. To underline the myopia of these attempted solutions to the 'immigration problem', a distinction has been drawn between asylum seekers who are fleeing political persecution and economic migrants who are just seeking a better life. It seems not to be appreciated that those who are coming in search of a better life are being subjected to economic and psychological persecution by the global economy that is, in some respects, more unbearable than state persecution. Both forms of persecution make it impossible for victims to live as they would wish in their own countries. Loss of contentment with one's way of life is no easier for a human being to live with than loss of personal liberty. One is a closed prison, the other an open one. It may, in any event, be asked what an 'economic migrant' is.

If globalisation is the order of the day, surely economic migrants are simply doing what Norman Tebbit once said his father did when there were no jobs in his locality: getting on their bikes and going to where the jobs are. Most commentators have been dealing with the 'opportunities' of globalisation and the 'problems' of immigration as if they are separate and unconnected. They fail to appreciate that globalisation will bring in a new generation of immigrants, just as colonialism brought in an earlier wave. We will get our countries back not through tighter immigration and asylum policies but by restoring opportunities to the villages and the hamlets, and preventing people being sucked into the turbines of global trade. Just as many of the Irish immigrants who were once despised in England returned home when Ireland started to boom economically, so other immigrants will start going back to their countries and potential ones will stay put when Britain and the West recognise that when God gave each nation its own land and its own means of sustenance he probably knew what he was doing.


The Commerce Department under the first Bush administration also authorized eight shipments of cultures that the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention later classified as having "biological warfare significance." Between 1985 and 1989, the Senate testimony shows, Iraq received at least 72 U.S. shipments of clones, germs and chemicals ranging from substances that could destroy wheat crops, give children and animals the bone-deforming disease rickets, to a nerve gas rated a million times more lethal than Sarin. Disclosures about such shipments in the late 1980s not only highlight questions about old policies but pose new ones, such as how well the American military forces would be protected against such an arsenal — if one exists — should the United States invade Iraq.

Testimony on these shipments was offered in 1994 to the Senate Banking Committee headed by then-Sens. Donald Riegle Jr., D-Mich., and Alfonse M. D'Amato, R-N.Y., who were critics of the policy. The testimony, which occurred during hearings that were held about the poor health of some returning Gulf War veterans, was brought to the attention of The Buffalo News by associates of Riegle. The committee oversees the work of the U.S. Export Administration of the Commerce Department, which licensed the shipments of the dangerous biological agents.

"Saddam (Hussein) took full advantage of the arrangement," Riegle said in an interview with The News late last week. "They seemed to give him anything he wanted. Even so, it's right out of a science fiction movie as to why we would send this kind of stuff to anybody." The new Bush administration, he said, claims Hussein is adding to his bioweapons capability. "If that's the case, then the issue needs discussion and clarity," Riegle said. "But it's not something anybody wants to talk about." The shipments were sent to Iraq in the late 1980s, when that country was engaged in a war with Iran, and Presidents Reagan and George Bush were trying to diminish the influence of a nation that took Americans hostages a decade earlier and was still aiding anti-Israeli terrorists.

"Iraq was considered an ally of the U.S. in the 1980s," said Nancy Wysocki, vice-president for public relations for one of the U.S. organizations that provided the materials to Hussein's regime. "All these (shipments) were properly licensed by the government, otherwise they would not have been sent," said Wysocki, who works for American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, Va., a nonprofit bioinformatics firm. The shipments not only raise serious questions about the wisdom of former administrations, Riegle said, but also questions about what steps the Defense Department is taking to protect American military personnel against Saddam's biological arsenal in the event of an invasion.

Riegle said there are 100,000 names on a national registry of gulf veterans who have reported illnesses they believe stem from their tours of duty there. "Some of these people, who went over there as young able-bodied Americans, are now desperately ill," he said. "Some of them have died. One of the obvious questions for today is: How has our Defense Department adjusted to this threat to our own troops?" he said. "How might this potential war proceed differently so that we don't have the same outcome? How would our troops be protected? What kind of sensors do we have now?

In the Gulf War, the battlefield sensors went off tens of thousands of times. The Defense Department says they were false alarms." U.S. bioinformatics firms in the 1980s received requests from a wide variety of Iraqi agencies, all claiming the materials were intended for civilian research purposes. The congressional testimony from 1994 cites an American Type shipment in 1985 to the Iraq Ministry of Higher Education of a substance that resembles tuberculosis and influenza and causes enlargement of the liver and spleen. It can also infect the brain, lungs, heart and spinal column. The substance is called histoplasma capsulatum. American Type also provided clones used in the development of germs that would kill plants. The material went to the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission, which the U.S. government says is a front for Saddam's military.

An organization called the State Company for Drug Industries received a pneumonia virus, and E. coli, salmonella and staphylcoccus in August 1987 under U.S. licence, according to the Senate testimony. The country's Ministry of Trade got 33 batches of deadly germs, including anthrax and botulism in 1988. Ten months after the first President Bush was inaugurated in 1988, an unnamed U.S. firm sent eight substances, including the germ that causes strep throat, to Iraq's University of Basrah. An unnamed office in Basrah, Iraq, got "West Nile Fever Virus" from an unnamed U.S. company in 1985, the Senate testimony shows. While there is no proof that the recent outbreak of West Nile virus in the United States stemmed from anything Iraq did, Riegle said, "You have to ask yourself, might there be a connection?"

Researchers at the Center for Strategic and International Studies said American companies were not the only ones that sent anthrax cultures to Iraq. British firms sold cultures to the University of Baghdad that were transferred to the Iraqi military, the Center for Strategic and International Studies said. The Swiss also sent cultures. The data on American shipments of deadly biological agents to Iraq was developed for the Senate Banking Committee in the winter of 1994 by the panel's chief investigator, James Tuite, and other staffers, and entered into the committee record May 25, 1994. The committee was trying to establish that thousands of service personnel were harmed by exposure to Iraqi chemical weapons during the Gulf War, particularly following a U.S. air attack on a munitions dump — a theory that the Defense Department and much of official Washington have always downplayed.

* *

"The Cultural Heritage: A society's industrial power. . . consists of its artistic and scientific capabilities. This is the chief hereditament of civilization; it consists of a precious complex of talents bred into a race. It is an intellectual estate in which every member of society has equitably an undivided interest. This estate in the solid things of the mind is by rights a good half of the common wealth of the people. And [every man] should be a sharer in the usufruct of this invaluable transmitted and accumulated power. . . The root of social iniquity is in the embezzlement from the mass of the people of their right and interest in the artistic and scientific competencies — the intellectual estate that has accumulated in the race.”
From Charles Ferguson: Herald of Social Credit by Michael Lane, 2002

* *


Source: website of The Barnes Review, at

Readers will have to make their own minds up over some of the allegations in the following article. However it is a fact that at the time of the Twin Towers attack many news media in the U.S. and elsewhere reported extensive unusual share trading in shares of United Airlines, American Airlines and some insurance companies. There has been silence from authorities concerning any investigation of this

Between August 26 and September 11, 2001, a group of speculators, identified by the American Securities and Exchange Commission as Israeli citizens, sold “short” a list of 38 stocks that could reasonably be expected to fall in value as a result of the pending attacks. These speculators operated out of the Toronto, Canada and Frankfurt, Germany, stock exchanges and their profits were specifically stated to be “in the millions of dollars.” Short selling of stocks involves the opportunity to gain large profits by passing shares to a friendly third party, then buying them back when the price falls. Historically, if this precedes a traumatic event, it is an indication of foreknowledge. It is widely known that the CIA uses the Promis software to routinely monitor stock trades as a possible warning sign of a terrorist attack or suspicious economic behavior. A week after the Sept.11 attacks, the London Times reported that the CIA had asked regulators for the Financial Services Authority in London to investigate the suspicious sales of millions of shares of stock just prior to the terrorist acts. It was hoped the business paper trail might lead to the terrorists. Investigators from numerous government agencies are part of a clandestine but official effort to resolve the market manipulations There has been a great deal of talk about insider trading of American stocks by certain Israeli groups both in Canada and Germany between August 26 and the Sept.11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Lynne Howard, a spokeswoman for the Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE), stated that information about who made the trades was available immediately. "We would have been aware of any unusual activity right away. It would have been triggered by any unusual volume. There is an automated system called 'blue sheeting,' or the CBOE Market Surveillance System, that everyone in the business knows about. It provides information on the trades - the name and even the Social Security number on an account - and these surveillance systems are set up specifically to look into insider trading. The system would look at the volume, and then a real person would take over and review it, going back in time and looking at other unusual activity."

Howard continued, "The system is so smart that even if there is a news event that triggers a market event it can go back in time, and even the parameters can be changed depending on what is being looked at. It's a very clever system and it is instantaneous. Even with the system, though, we have very experienced and savvy staff in our market-regulations area who are always looking for things that might be unusual. They're trained to put the pieces of the puzzle together. Even if it's offshore, it might take a little longer, but all offshore accounts have to go through U.S. member firms - members of the CBOE - and it is easily and quickly identifiable who made the trades. The member firm who made the trades has to have identifiable information about the client under the 'Know Your Customer' regulations (and we share all information with the Securities and Exchange Commission.)"

Given all of this, at a minimum the CBOE and government regulators who are conducting the secret investigations have known for some time who made the options puts on a total of 38 stocks that might reasonably be anticipated to have a sharp drop in value because of an attack similar to the 9/11 episode. The silence from the investigating camps could mean several things: Either terrorists are responsible for the puts on the listed stocks or others besides terrorists had foreknowledge of the attack and used this knowledge to reap a nice financial harvest from the tragedy.

Adam Hamilton of Zeal LLC, a North Dakota-based private consulting company that publishes research on markets worldwide, stated that "I heard that $22 million in profits was made on these put options. Federal investigators are continuing to be so closed-mouthed about these stock trades, and it is clear that a much wider net has been cast, apparently looking for bigger international fish involved in dubious financial activity relating to the 9/11 attacks on the world stock markets. Just a month after the attacks the SEC sent out a list of stocks to various securities firms around the world looking for information. The list includes stocks of American, United, Continental, Northwest, Southwest and US Airways airlines, as well as Martin, Boeing, Lockheed Martin Corp., AIG, American Express Corp, American International Group, AMR Corporation, Axa SA, Bank of America Corp, Bank of New York Corp, Bank One Corp, Cigna Group, CNA Financial, Carnival Corp, Chubb Group, John Hancock Financial Services, Hercules Inc, L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc., LTV Corporation, Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc., MetLife, Progressive Corp., General Motors, Raytheon, W.R. Grace, Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., Lone Star Technologies, American Express, the Citigroup Inc. ,Royal & Sun Alliance, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc., Vornado Reality Trust, Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter & Co., XL Capital Ltd., and Bear Stearns.

The Times said market regulators in Germany, Japan and the US all had received information concerning the short selling of insurance, airlines and arms companies stock, all of which fell sharply in the wake of the attacks. City of London broker and analyst Richard Crossley noted that someone sold shares in unusually large quantities beginning three weeks before the assault on the WTC and Pentagon. He said he took this as evidence that someone had insider foreknowledge of the attacks. "What is more awful than he should aim a stiletto blow at the heart of Western financial markets?" he added. "But to profit from it? Words fail me."

The US Government also admitted it was investigating short selling, which evinced a compellingly strong foreknowledge of the coming Arab attack. There was unusually heavy trading in airline and insurance stocks several days before Sept.11, which essentially bet on a drop in the worth of the stocks. It was reported by the Interdisciplinary Center, a counter-terrorism think tank involving former Israeli intelligence officers, that insiders made nearly $16 million profit by short selling shares in American and United Airlines, the two airlines that suffered hijacking, and the investment firm of Morgan Stanley, which occupied 22 floors of the WTC. Apparently none of the suspicious transactions could be traced to bin Laden because this news item quietly dropped from sight, leaving many people wondering if it tracked back to American firms or intelligence agencies.

Most of these transactions were handled primarily by Deutsche Bank-A.B.Brown, a firm which until 1998 was chaired by A. B."Buzzy" Krongard, who later became executive director of the CIA. More serious was an article in the Sept. 28, 2001 edition of the Washington Post stating that officials with the instant messaging firm of Odigo in New York confirmed that two employees in Israel received text messages warning of an attack on the WTC two hours before the planes crashed into the buildings! The firm's vice-president of sales and marketing, Alex Diamandis said it was possible that the warning was sent to other Odigo members, but they had not received any reports of such. The day after, the Jerusalem Post claimed two Israelis died on the hijacked airplanes and that 4,000 were missing at the WTC. A week later, a Beirut television station reported that 4,000 Israeli employees of the WTC were absent the day of the attack. This information spread across the Internet but was quickly branded a hoax. On Sept. 19, the Washington Post reported about 113 Israelis were missing at the WTC and the next day, President Bush noted more than 130 Israelis were victims. Finally, on Sept. 22, the New York Times stated "There were, in fact, only three Israelis who had been confirmed as dead: two on the planes and another who had been visiting the towers on business and who was identified and buried."

Investigators from numerous government agencies are part of a clandestine but official effort to resolve the market manipulations There has been a great deal of talk about the insider trading of American stocks by certain Israeli groups both in Canada and Germany between August 26 and the Sept.11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Government investigators have maintained a diplomatic silence about a Department of Justice (DOJ) probe of possible profiteering by interested parties with advance knowledge of the attack.

On Sept. 6, 2001, the Thursday before the tragedy, 2,075 put options were made on United Airlines and on Sept. 10, the day before the attacks, 2,282 put options were recorded for American Airlines. Given the prices at the time, this could have yielded speculators between $2 million and $4 million in profit. The matter still is under investigation and none of the government investigating bodies — including the FBI, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and DOJ — are speaking to reporters about insider trading. Even so, suspicion of insider trading to profit from the Sept. 11 attacks is not limited to U.S. regulators. Investigations were initiated in a number of places including Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Luxembourg, Hong Kong, Switzerland and Spain. As in the United States, all are treating these inquiries as if they were state secrets.

* *

“Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is a necessary evil; in its worst state, and intolerable one.” — Thomas Paine
“The people’s Government is made for the people, made by the people, and is answerable to the people.” — Daniel Webster.

* *

European Superstate or New Tower of Babel

The European Foundation Intelligence Digest provides an excellent, regular, and free, email information service. Those interested in receiving it can send an email to The Foundation’s postal address is 61, Pall Mall, London SW1Y 5HZ, or phone 0044 20 7930 7319. The following snippits are taken from the November, 2002 email bulletin

The European Parliament used this little ceremony to practise its translation services in an enlarged EU. Needless to say, all EU texts and all speeches in the European Parliament will have to be translated into all the languages spoken in the enlarged EU. If the EU enlarges to admit 25 new member states, as it may do soon, there will be 21 languages and 420 possible combinations of languages. This figure rises to 24 languages and 552 combinations if there are 28 members. There are also 80,000 pages of European legislation to translate, not to mention the mountains of paper generated during the ordinary course of every day in Brussels and Strasbourg. The translation service currently costs (Euro)€1 billion a year or 1% of the EU budget; enlargement will double these costs. The Commission plans to recruit, for each new language, 110 translators and 40 interpreters, in addition to the 2,000 who already do this job for the existing languages. The Parliament will recruit 166 people per new language. These figures could rise, though, if multi-lingualism is practised at all levels of the EU administration. But the Parliament hopes to save some money by allowing some combinations, e.g. from Lithuanian into Greek, to be translated via a third language, e.g. English. This could lead to “English as she is spoke” style problems. [Libération, 20th November 2002]

Sweden to vote on euro in 2003

The Swedish Social Democratic government has called a referendum on the euro. It is now likely that the poll will take place in the autumn of 2003. The Prime Minister, Goran Persson, said that the result would be “close”. He did not dare predict a victory for the Yes campaign, even though the latest polls are favourable. The opponents of the euro, which include several Social Democrat ministers, have started their campaign, arguing that Sweden is doing very well outside the euro.

* *


The following is taken from the website of The Campaign For Truth in Europe, a companion website of the British-based Campaign for Truth in Medicine, run by health researcher, Phillip Day. Contact details are CTM, PO Box 3, Tonbridge, Kent TN12 9zy, UK, or

On 1st January 1973, Conservative British Prime Minister Edward Heath took Britain into the European Common Market after he had added his name to the Treaty of Rome the year before. Heath reassured Parliament and the British people at the time that sovereignty would not be affected and that we were just joining a trading partnership. His 1971 Government White Paper stated the following: "There is no question of Britain losing essential national sovereignty." Subsequent papers came to light which unequivocally showed that Edward Heath had recognised at the time the full implications of what he was doing. Years later, in a BBC interview in 1998, Heath was asked if he had known all along that Britain was signing up to a federal Europe. His exact reply was, "Of course I bloody did!"

The recent release of government papers has confirmed that Edward Heath lied to the British people. Through further amendments to the Treaty of Rome, the original Common Market has gradually been changed by stealth into the European Union of today. The British people have never given their consent, nor have properly understood the implications of the European Union. The reason successive British governments have deliberately lied and misled the public over Europe is because they knew the British people would be horrified and would not tolerate the destruction and loss of control of their own country. Europe's new autonomous police force, Europol, has taken on frightening new powers to investigate and compile a huge number of records on European citizens. Unlike the UK's police force, Europol cannot be held responsible by European law for its actions. Ironically, or perhaps not so, her main base of operations, housing 350 officers, is quartered in the old Gestapo headquarters building in The Hague. Eventually there will be 5,000 of them.

Supporters of today's European Union claim that an integrated Europe will prevent future war. Yet true democracies do not provoke war, whereas forced or premature conglomerations of disparate nations have a proven history of causing turmoil and bloodshed (e.g. the Roman Empire, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and much of Africa). "The European parliament and the commission are allies against the member states. Together we have to prevent the member states from taking back power." President of the European parliament, speaking on BBC Radio 4, July 1999 "The top priority is to turn the EU into a single political state." Joshka Fischer, German foreign minister, quoted in The Times, November 1998

"Why does Europe need fifteen foreign ministers when one is enough? Why do member states still need national armies? One European army is enough." Hans Eichel, German finance minister, Nov. 1999. When politicians tell you that European integration is inevitable, they are lying. The reality is, the EU ultimately needs Britain's continued membership herself to survive. Britain has been behaving like a junkie towards Europe, told by her politicians that continued membership is her only real hope for future prosperity. Again, nothing could be further from the truth. Consider the points below, and then ask yourself who needs who?

* Membership of the EU costs the UK £1.25 million every hour of every day — enough to pay for all the hospitals, doctors, nurses, schools, teachers and police we could ever need, and leave money over for tax cuts.
* The EU has imposed 30,000 new regulations and directives on the UK since we joined and adds another 3,000 every year. France routinely ignores regulations which don't suit her, whereas Britain, with her long tradition of playing by the rules, is ridiculed by Europe when she tries to obey every one.

Did you know that European and international legislation is proposing to:
• Ban over 300 natural ingredients from free sale
• Restrict the dosage level of 'approved' nutrients to levels that will render them ineffective
• Ban herbal remedies for no other reason than that they don't have a 30 year history of use
• Ban any statements about the effectiveness of nutrients in dealing with disease
• Give governments the right to re-classify safe and effective natural remedies as medicines — at will

* No politician of any party has ever given a straight and specific answer to the simple question — what are the benefits of EU membership? That's because there aren't any.
* The politicians of Europe, and indeed their peoples, are completely clear that the EU represents the formation of a federal superstate. No leading British politician dares tell the British people that the EU's ultimate aim is the destruction of Britain.
* Britain's fishing industry has been destroyed by the EU, and farming is going the same way. Dozens of other industries and tens of thousands of individuals have had their lives or livelihoods damaged or destroyed by the EU, and there is no end in sight.
* The EU is endemically corrupt and cannot be reformed from within, according to many of the senior staff who have left or been dismissed over the years. Billions of euros disappear down the drain of fraud every year and the Court of Auditors has failed to stop it — despite having never once signed off the EU's annual accounts as audited and correct! Any UK company running its books of account in the same way would have seen the directors in jail long ago.
* The EU is systematically destroying British legal safeguards. Habeus corpus, the presumption of innocence, double jeopardy (preventing the state being able to appeal against a not-guilty verdict and go on doing so until it gets a conviction), and trial by jury are all actively under threat already. The independence of the judiciary — which is intended to ensure that the law is upheld — is being increasingly undermined by the appointment of full-time state-employed judges, as per EU instructions.

* The EU has already become an unelected, unaccountable government with tyrannical powers. The European Parliament is no more than a talking shop. It has no legislative powers, cannot create, amend or vote down any EU laws. It is merely a public fig-leaf of supposed democracy.
* If MEPs are absent from a vote, they are taken to have voted with the Commission. If the parliament votes against the Commission, it is assumed to have made a mistake, and the result is reversed.

* Why do most British politicians love the idea of the EU? Traditionally, politicians in Britain have had a reasonably short 'shelf life' before having to return to private life, and for good reason! Today however, Brussels can guarantee a loyal politician a job for life with vast remuneration even if that person is a political failure in their own country. Neil Kinnock and his family, for instance, receive a staggering £500,000 each year in EU salaries and expenses, paid for by the beleaguered taxpayer.
* Joining the euro would cost a minimum of a massive £36 BILLION (£631 for every man, woman and child in the country) and cause immediate price hikes, just as it has done on the Continent. Some estimates put the cost of joining as high as £100 BILLION.
* Joining the euro would entail handing over to Brussels all the UK's gold and dollar reserves, all its oil reserves, the power to set interest rates and, ultimately, the power to raise taxes. And the British parliament could do absolutely nothing to stop unelected Euro Commissioners making decisions which would threaten to destroy our economy.
* Joining the euro, and thus the EU, as a full member would be irreversible. That means, if Britain didn't like the results, as others don't today, the only way we could free ourselves would be to go to war for our independence. It boils down to this — if the British government no longer controls taxpayers' money, the country cannot defend itself against any external threat, whether physical or economic. Is this truly what you want for your own future and that of your children? Most ordinary citizens of Britain and her Commonwealth don't see themselves as any sort of 'activists'. The time for silent anger and dissent however is at an end. Britain herself is dying at the hands of the European stranglehold. Evidence of this can be seen daily in the newspapers. The heartening news is that polls indicate that over 60% of the British people would unequivocally support Britain leaving the EU immediately if they knew this would not harm us and we could continue to trade with Europe. This figure of 60% is estimated to rise to over 80% if British people were properly educated on the dangers we now collectively face as a nation from the threat of the EU. Consider whether the following nation would be able to make it on its own!

* Britain is a nation of 58 million people.
* She is the fourth largest economy in the world by Gross Domestic Product.
* She owns the largest financial trading centre in the world, centred in London. There are more US banks in London than in New York and more German banks in London than in Frankfurt. London handles more euro transactions than the whole of the European Union COMBINED.
* Britain earns £100 billion a year from her £1,931 billion of global asset investments, second only to America.
* Britain has the lowest inflation and unemployment rate in the EU by far.
* Unemployment across the EU is a staggering 18 million. No increase in jobs has been achieved in the past 20 years. Britain has created 2.3 million jobs during that period.
* Britain invented the computer, the jet engine, the hovercraft, the steam engine and railways, the telephone and television. We invented mail services and discovered nuclear physics.
* Over the past 250 years, British scientists and engineers have been responsible for almost four out of every five major inventions, discoveries and new technologies.
* Recent Japanese research shows that more than half of the world's useful inventions since 1945 were made by Britons, whether they lived in Britain at the time or not. America's contribution was under 20%.
* Adjusted for population, this means that the British are ten times more inventive. Both Britain and America can claim 75% of all the world's useful inventions.
* Britain invented a free press, a Briton was the first to sail around the world and we invented football, cricket and rugby. World-class British statesmen, artists and musicians can be reeled off without number.
* We have the only oil industry in the EU. We have a world-class financial services sector with huge pensions assets, while Europe has a combined pensions liability totalling $1.2 trillion for which it has no underpinning assets to cover it.
* Britain has a massive tourism market based on its unique blend of tradition, monarchy, history and craftsmanship.
* Britons have been at the forefront of developing and taking advantage of the massive boom in Internet sector technologies to boost our global trade. British is the language of the Internet.
* The British are the true global traders of Europe. Most countries on the continent just trade with each other.
* Britain has strong links with America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, much of Asia and South America. Almost all European nations do not.
* English is the most widely used language across the world and is used in business globally. English is virtually a compulsory second language for everyone on the face of the Earth.
* Britain is the EU's best customer, creating 5 million European jobs. If Britain were to pull out of the EU and negotiate a proper trading agreement, the EU simply couldn't afford to upset or close the door on its best customer, given the Union's current shaky financial state of affairs.
* Won't the Germans still want to sell us their cars, the French their fine champagne and wines, the Dutch their bacon, and the Mediterranean countries their tourist destinations? Besides, continued trade, even if Britain left the EU, is guaranteed by the World Trade Organisation (WTO), to which almost every nation on the planet subscribes.

Recommended Cassete Tape: Is the European Union the New Soviet Union? by Vladimir Buksky. $5 from Conservative Tapes, PO Box 12-752, Penrose, Auckland.

* *

“. . . The truth we have to grasp is that the fortunes of religion are quite mysteriously tied up with the fortunes of language. The Greek writer Longinus wrote a book On the Sublime. He wrote that ‘truly elevated speech lifts the soul filling it with such pride and joy as if it had itself invented what it had heard. And this is because the soul becomes aware of its own nature.’
“Now becoming aware of your own nature is the same as remembering who you are. And this is what prayer and the [Common] Prayer Book does for you. It gathers together the scattered fragments of you and me and makes us ourselves again.
“St Augustine said that we are all like the words of a sentence, which because they are jumbled up, no longer make sense. What the Prayer Book does is to collect us — to get the sentence back together in the right order so that we become intelligible to ourselves and to other people.
“And there is more. There is the little matter of eternal truth. St Augustine also said that we long to be recollected together from old times so that we do not lose touch with eternal truth: ‘Entering into the spacious fields and palaces of the memory, we find not only images of the past but timeless truths — and more, the memory of that home from which we have gone out. And so we are returned to the origin from which we flowed out in many directions.’ ” — Fr. Michael Shier SSC, in The Rock, 15-6-02 (quarterly journal for traditional Anglicans, 10989 Hilsea Cres, Ladysmith, B.C. V9G 2A3, Canada)

* *

Who Has the “Weapons of Mass Destruction”

The propaganda has got to the stage where some people say they will scream if they hear once more the term “weapons of mass destruction”. Bill Berkowitz is a conservative journalist with his own Internet Site. A recent story from him (WorkingForChange looks at some of the new “non-lethal” weapons being investigated or developed by some governments, particularly the US and Britain. They include various types and quantities of gas such as used by police in the recent Russian hostage situation. Other weapons being dreamed up or developed could be used by "agents designed to disable criminals, terrorists and protesters." Being considered is a laser gun that would cook the moisture in a victims skin by heating it to 130 degrees C. in two seconds and another gun that can blind the victim; microwave weapons that "produce a split-second spike of energy powerful enough to damage electronic components and scramble computer memories”. But Mr Bush says it’s only Iraq that has, or has an interest in, “weapons of mass destruction”. And Mr Bush isn’t telling his listeners that it was his country which supplied in the 1980s most of the materials for Iraq’s chemical weapons arsenal, most of which may now well be either depleted or outdated.

* *

The War Party's Imperial Plans by Patrick J. Buchanan (Sept. 28, 2002, 8:39PM)

The fires had not yet gone out at the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, a year ago, before the War Party had introduced its revised plans for an American empire. What many saw as an horrific atrocity and tragedy, they saw instantly as an opportunity to achieve U.S. hegemony over an alienated Islamic world. President Bush initially directed America's righteous wrath and military power at al-Qaida. But in his "axis-of-evil" address, he signed on to the War Party's agenda. What lies ahead?
When America invades Iraq, it will have to destroy Saddam and all his weapons of mass destruction. Else, the war will have been a failure. And to ensure destruction of those weapons, we must occupy Iraq. If you would see what follows, pull out a map. With Americans controlling Iraq, Syria is virtually surrounded by hostile powers: Israel on the Golan, Turks and Kurds to the north, U.S. power to the west in Iraq and south in Jordan. Syrian President Assad will be forced to pull his army out of Lebanon, leaving Israel free to re-invade Lebanon to settle accounts with Hezbollah. Now look to Iran. With Americans occupying Iraq, Iran is completely surrounded: Americans and Turks to the west, U.S. power in the Gulf and Arabian Sea to the south, in Afghanistan to the east and in the old Soviet republics to the north. U.S. warplanes will be positioned to interdict any flights to Lebanon to support Hezbollah. Iraq is the key to the Middle East. As long as we occupy Iraq, we are the hegemonic power in the region. And after we occupy it, a window of opportunity will open - to attack Syria and Iran before they acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is the vision that enthralls the War Party - "World War IV," as they call it — a series of "cakewalks," short sharp wars on Iraq, Syria and Iran to eliminate the Islamic terrorist threat to us and Israel for generations.

No wonder Ariel Sharon and his Amen Corner are exhilarated. They see America's war on Iraq as killing off one enemy and giving Israel freedom to deal summarily with two more: Hezbollah and the Palestinians. Two jumps ahead of us, the Israelis are already talking up the need for us to deal with Libya, as well. Anyone who believes America can finish Saddam and go home deceives himself. With Iraq's military crushed, the country will come apart. Kurds in the north and Shi'ites in the south will try to break away, and Iraq will be at the mercy of its mortal enemy, Iran. U.S. troops will have to remain to hold Iraq together, to find and destroy those weapons, to democratize the regime, and to deter Iran from biting off a chunk and dominating the Gulf.

Recall: After we crushed Germany and Japan in World War II, both were powerless to resume their historic roles of containing Russia and China. So, America, at a cost of 100,000 dead in Vietnam and Korea, had to assume those roles. With Iraq in ruins, America will have to assume the permanent role of Policeman of the Persian Gulf. But is this not a splendid vision, asks the War Party? After all, is this not America's day in the sun, her moment in history? And is not the crushing of Islam and the modernization of the Arab world a cause worthy of a superpower's investment of considerable treasure and blood?

What is wrong with the War Party's vision? Just this: Pro-American regimes in Cairo, Amman and Riyadh will be shaken to their foundations by the cataclysm unleashed as Americans smash Iraq, while Israelis crush Palestinians. Nor is Iran likely to passively await encirclement. Terror attacks seem certain. Nor is a militant Islam that holds in thrall scores of millions of believers from Morocco to Indonesia likely to welcome infidel America and Israel dictating the destiny of the Muslim world. As for the pro-American regimes in Kabul and Pakistan, they are but one bullet away from becoming anti-American. And should the Royal House of Saudi come crashing down, as the War Party ardently hopes, do they seriously believe a Vermont-style democracy will arise?

Since Desert Storm, America has chopped its fleets, air wings and ground troops by near 50 percent, while adding military commitments in the Balkans, Afghanistan, the Gulf and Central Asia. Invading and occupying Iraq will require hundreds of thousands of more troops. We are running out of army. And while Americans have shown they will back wars fought with no conscripts and few casualties, the day is not far off when they will be asked to draft their sons to fight for empire, and many of those sons will not be coming home. That day, Americans will tell us whether they really wish to pay the blood tax that is the price of policing the War Party's empire.

* *

Troops Out! Or In?
From Liverpool Newsletter, Autumn 2002. Third Way Publications, PO Box 1243, London SW7 3PB, U.K.

Now where do you suppose the regiments of "Troops Out" protesters are? To their credit some leftists have protested at Blair's sabre rattling against Iraq, but where are the mass rallies in Trafalgar Square, the riots in Whitehall, the siege of No-10? I only ask because I'd like to know. Whilst on this point, what exactly has Saddam done to attract Blair's odium? We are told that his regime is totalitarian. So is that of Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Libya. We are told that he is stockpiling chemical and biological weapons. So is the U.K., U.S.A. and Russia. We are told that he is trying to make a nuclear bomb. The U.S.A., the U.K., Russia, Ukraine, India, Pakistan, France and Israel already have them. Ah but! Only for self-defence you understand. Might not Iraq feel the same need?

We are told that Saddam promotes terrorism. Well actually its Syria, and more lately Saudi Arabia which do that. Saddam threatens Israel? Well, of course, he has to go through the motions, but as Iraq and Israel do not have a common frontier the threats are rather empty. The fact is that Saddam's regime, unelected as it may be, is somewhat more liberal than those of other Muslim states. Christians are not oppressed as they are in Egypt. There are Christian churches in Iraq — Syrian, Greek, Latin and Anglican. There are none permitted in Saudi Arabia. Iraq also permits the sale and consumption of alcohol, not only by non-Muslims but by those Muslims who ignore the ban on wine. The others have the choice of not drinking it. So what is it about Saddam that merits present bellicosity? Could it be oil?

* *

Muslim nations sign up to liberate 'debt slaves'

Peter Challen of the U.K. Christian Council for Monetary Reform has provided the following:
Reuters report the significant Malaysian initiative which Rodney Shakespeare saw in Kuala Lumpur in August and which was announced to Muslim leaders in October: KUALA LUMPUR. Eight Muslim countries launched a global agency this week to set standards for an Islamic financial system that will end "debt slavery", says Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. The basic principle of Islamic banking is the prohibition of usury or interest. It also outlaws investments in companies involved in gambling, alcohol or pig farming. The Islamic Financial Services Board (IFSB), inaugurated in the Malaysian capital, Kuala Lumpur, is entrusted with setting standards for Islamic institutions and ensuring they conform with principles of Islamic sharia laws. Mahathir, in an address to about 1000 delegates from around the Muslim world, said a hallmark of the Islamic system was that risk was equally shared between lender and borrower. The international banking system stacked deals heavily in favour of lenders, he said, and some countries ended up in "debt slavery". "They are not going to lend if they cannot gain control over their borrowers in order to recover their loans, irrespective of the misery this might cause.

Clearly, debt slavery has not been abolished in the international financial system," said Mahathir, who refused to accept a bail-out from the International Monetary Fund during the Asian crisis in the late 1990s, or submit to IMF policies that caused economic pain for neighbours. Bankers attending the inauguration of the board said growing demand for ethical investments cut across religions, and non-Muslims were increasingly investing in Islamic concerns. Some Arabs who withdrew investments from the United States in fear of a backlash after the September 11 attacks were also putting more money into Islamic banks, they said. "The backlash against Muslims following September 11 is in fact helping Islamic banks," said one Malaysian banker. One estimate said about US$200 billion of Muslim funds had fled the United States. A Western banker said Islamic funds run by mainstream Western banks were also attracting interest from non-Muslims riding an ethical investment bandwagon. There are about 200 Islamic banking institutions in at least 48 countries with combined assets of about US$170 billion ($345 billion). Under Islamic laws, banks make money through profit-sharing from returns and approved investments.

The Islamic banking industry, which has grown more than 10 per cent a year over the past 40 years, is expected to grow by the same rate over the next decades, says the Bahrain-based General Council for Islamic Banks and Financial Institutions. Efforts are also underway to develop an Islamic capital market to tap the estimated US$1.3 trillion in Islamic funds that are invested in conventional markets. Mainly Muslim Malaysia has been running an Islamic banking system alongside a conventional financial system, a trend that Mahathir said would continue. Malaysia's central Bank Negara governor, Zeti Akhtar Aziz, said Islamic banking and finance had been described as a "mirror of the sea". "For until and unless we have the courage to explore its depth, we would never be able to uncover the treasures that reside within," she said. Islamic banks in Malaysia represent about 8.8 per cent of the country's total banking assets, worth about 65 billion ringgit ($35.4 billion). In June, Malaysia completed the world's first Islamic global bond issue, lead-managed by HSBC. The IFSB's founding members are Malaysia, Indonesia, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, Kuwait and Pakistan.

* *

The Return of the Gold Dinar by Umar Ibrahim Vadillo

Although we do not support the theory that a money system needs to be backed by a precious metal, the following highlights how large sections of the Islamic world are getting to the stage where they could rebel against the international debt system. The item below is taken from the website of and our attention was drawn to it by Mr Bill Sardi an investigative journalist writing from San Dimas, California. You can visit his public affairs website at Mr Sardi also publishes a wide range of interesting articles on natural health and the breakdown of conventional medicine. His website is

The Muslim world has found a novel way to strike back at the West — or at least at Western bankers who rule the world's currencies — introduce a gold coin. Malaysia expects to use gold dinars to trade only between Islamic countries beginning in 2003. The gold dinar, which is 4.25 grams of 24-carat gold, would unite Muslim nations who blame "greedy" currency traders for Asia's downfall in the economic crisis of 1997-98. There is also a silver Islamic Dirham coin of 3.0 grams silver. The dinar is being privately used in 22 countries and is minted in 4 countries. The Malaysian premier, Prime Minister Mahathir Modamad, last year proposed that the gold dinar would eliminate paper money which has no intrinsic value and would cease making exchange rates arbitrary and subject to manipulation as seen during the Asian financial crisis. "The risk of speculation can be reduced to almost nothing. World trade can actually expand because the cost of business will be much reduced as the need to hedge will practically disappear," said Modamad.

The Islamic world has historically used a gold coin, the Dinar. Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad says "Muslims cannot escape the fact that gold is our money. Instead of fighting the will of Allah, I propose that we embrace it. If the one billion Muslims of the world would use gold as their unit of account the volatility would stabilize."

Gold dinar, Syria, 720 AD The dollar, franc, mark, pound, rupee, and all the other currencies of the world are called fiat currencies, that is, they are paper money made legal by law or fiat, although not backed by gold or silver and not necessarily redeemable in coin. The result of a gold-backed currency in the world could cause the US dollar to crash in value. Some suggest the gold dinar would cause a shift in economic power from the West to the East. Trading in Islamic dinars is also planned to open up on the Internet.
Bill Sardi is an investigative journalist writing from San Dimas, California. Visit his public affairs website. Copyright © 2002 Bill Sardi Word of Knowledge Agency, San Dimas, California. Reprinted with kind permission of the author.

Our comment: Advocates of precious metal-backed currencies usually describe non-backed currencies as fiat money. US Congressman Ron Paul an outspoken critic of the monopoly and policies of the US Federal Reserve also criticises what he calls fiat money. Our view, derived from the Social Credit analysis, is that the only sensible financial policy is one that recognises the role of money as the most efficient method of distributing the goods and services desired by people and which are able to be supplied by the production system. The argument in favour of using a precious metal falls down when there is an example of a nation with a well developed production system but little or no gold or silver, and, likewise, a nation with plenty of gold but an inadequate, collapsed or undeveloped production system. The man in the desert soon discovers that a straw hat and glass of water are real wealth and that gold is of no more real use than a fistful of sand. This aside, the Moslem world may yet present a challenge to the West’s debt system which is driving the world into decay and destruction. The transfer of much of the West’s industrial base to Asia and the third world, this financed by the Western bankers, does not enhance the West’s future.

• The late Mr Ivor Benson, a brilliant analyst of world affairs, stressed a point that the threat to the West’s financial-banking elite from the Moslem world was less to do with any conflict between Christianity and Islam, and more to do with a potential future Moslem rebellion against the debt money system. This, along with the ambitions of the Zionist State of Israel and the Zionist control of US foreign policy, and not oil, may well be the primary influence behind Bush’s demand firstly for war in Afghanistan, now Iraq, and his inclusion in earlier speeches of this war campaign including also Iran. In this respect David Duke of the European-American Unity and Rights Organisation (EURO) makes some interesting points in his Online Radio Report ( of November 29. The following are brief extracts:

“. . . Today, I will exam the economic consequences of the Iraqi war. The first question is ‘Do we have to go to war with Iraq to get its oil?’ The answer is: ‘Of course we don't.’ We bought oil from Saddam Hussein before the Gulf War, and we can buy it now. If America, by this war, makes a regime change in Iraq, the American government is not simply going to pump the oil out of the ground and put the proceeds in our treasury. Those in political control in Iraq will still control the oil and still sell it to the world at the international prevailing spot oil prices. . . The Bush family ties to the oil industry are often cited. . . it is one thousand times easier in America to speak about conspiracies of the big bad Oil companies than to speak of the more open and more obvious Jewish conspiracies. “Talk about big Oil conspiracies and some will call you wrong, but no one will accuse you of the great blasphemy of our age, the most evil of all heresies: so-called ‘anti-Semitism.’. . . By floating the idea that the war is about oil, a resource vital to America and Europe, the suggestion is that somehow it is in America's and Europe's economic interest to invade Iraq. . . A few obvious facts coupled with plain, old-fashioned reason will show you that the war against Iraq holds no real advantage for big Oil, in fact it offers them much peril.

As far as concerning American and European economic interests at large, the war in Iraq will have devastating consequences, to say nothing of causing anti-American political unrest and horrendous terrorism. . . Giving Iraqi oil easier access to the world's markets will, after the flurry of wartime higher oil prices, eventually depress the price of oil. What does this mean to the big American and European oil companies who have the great bulk of their oil investments in the United States (such as in Texas, Louisiana and Alaska), in the North Sea, in Russia and in South America?. . . “Perhaps even more importantly, an American invasion would be throwing gasoline on the already glowing fires of terrorism throughout the Middle East. . . It's the traitors in the United States government and in the media who will sacrifice American lives, security and economic well-being in order to support the criminal activities of Israel and its mass-murderer, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. There is now a wholesale attack by the Jewish press in America on Saudi Arabia because a Saudi Princess helped pay for the medical expenses of an injured Arab woman. It turned out she was the wife of a Saudi man who is alleged to have been later involved in the hijacking. Even though this not even remotely proves official Saudi involvement in 911, no media personalities refer to allegations of Saudi government involvement in 911 as an ‘anti-Arab’ or as an ‘anti-Semitic canard’ (Arabs are, of course, a Semitic people). But if you dare to lay out the clear and copious evidence of past Israeli terrorism against America and Israel's obvious foreknowledge of the attacks of 911, then you are automatically labelled "anti-Semitic," probably the most hateful and onerous title that can be conferred on a human being. ”

* *

Book Review by Anthony Cooney, Liverpool, U.K.

SOCIAL CREDIT? SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED by Frances Hutchinson, UK. R. P. Publications, P.O. Box 322, Silsden, Keighley, BD2O OYE, A5, p/b, 50 pgs, £5 plus P&P. Almost fifty years ago I had an interview with the late Dr. Tudor Jones, Advisory Chairman of the Social Credit Secretariat in direct succession to Douglas. Rather naively I asked him, "if I, without any qualifications in either Maths, or Economics, can see that Social Credit is correct why cannot the politicians see that and jump on it as an election winner?" Dr. Tudor Jones’ reply was that they had "different objectives," objectives to which Social Credit was inimical. They did not want Social Credit to be true! C.H. Douglas himself had come to this conclusion by the 'Thirties and the rest of his life was devoted to a search for sanctions against politicians and the controllers of credit. What was plain was that even the most patient advocacy and erudite argument had failed to move those in power.

Is there then a place for, a "penny primer," which expounds and enlarges upon the technical aspects of Social Credit — the "AB Theorem," the "National Dividend" and the "National Discount"?
Mrs. Frances Hutchinson, the current Chairwoman of the Secretariat, clearly thinks that there is, and in this she is right. One reason why the several sanctions which Douglas devised were ineffective was, quite simply, shortage of manpower, and that applies much more so today. People cannot be persuaded to a course of action if they do not understand the foundation upon which the objectives stand; the facts from which the methods are derived. What Social Credit advocacy and action has lost since the war is its indignation, but indignation is fuelled by facts. This booklet is intended to supply the facts.

If I have a criticism it is that the answer to Question 3 — “Where does Social Credit stand in the political spectrum?” could have been argued at a deeper level in its refutation of the Left/Right dichotomy. In pre-war days Social Credit was considered to be "of the Left," and in post-war days "of the Right." The confusion arises from a misunderstanding and misuse of the terms. "Right" and "Left" are terms of the Revolution. In the French Revolution the "Left" was not the Republicans and the "Right" the Ancien Regime. The "Right" were the constitutionalist revolutionaries and the "Left" were the Girondin, Anarchists who wanted the dismantlement of the State. The Centrists were Danton, Robespierre, St. Just and the monstrous Carnot, author of the Terror. It was not the "Right" which massacred the Girondin, it was the Centrists. It was not the "Left" which suppressed the Constitutionalists, it was the Centrists. The extremism of the Centre is the worst of all extremisms.

Social Credit is neither of the "Right" nor the "Left," it is the reconciliation of the aspirations of both, not in the extremism of the Centre, but in the Tradition of the Nation. As the Social Credit poet, Alex Anderson has so neatly put it: "

Avoid and shun the Right Hand Snake,
The greater, bearded clapped out fake;
Switched off and slowly fading too,
A piddling animus come true.

Pity him, the Left Hand Snake,
Bemused, confused and half awake;
Just fill his idle hours and slow
With what it’s safe for him to know."

As the authoress acknowledges, her book is based upon a famous booklet by John Hargraves, Social Credit Clearly Explained: 101 Questions Answered. The questions and answers have been reduced to eighty-two, but the content has been widened to include the impact Social Credit would have on the major ecological problems of the 21st Century. An impression was created by some pre-war advocacy that Social Credit would be an orgy of consumerism with hedonistic citizens rushing to spend their "National Dividend" on the endless stream of goods pouring from the cornucopia of automated factories. The book sets out to correct this impression. It needs to he stressed that Social Credit would mean less production, not more. The matter can he put in simple terms. Is it more wasteful of materials and energy to build one car which will last twenty years or ten cars in succession each of which will last only two years? The answer is obvious, so why do we have factories the size of airfields churning out an endless stream of inferior cars and the colossal waste of resources which this entails? Why do we not have quality production and things made to last? The answer from orthodox economists and politicians is "To distribute purchasing power in the form of wages, salaries and dividends." But the Social Credit Dividend would distribute sufficient purchasing power without waste production. Social Crediters who have thought through all the ramifications of the Douglas theory will not find anything in the book with which they are not familiar, so the eighty-third question is, "Why buy it if it only tells me what I already know?" The eighty-third answer lies in Chesterton’s epigram, “I always preach to the converted, because the converted do not know their own religion." One can also pass it on to someone else who will find it a revelation.

* *

Phillip Day on Medicine and Europe

Phillip Day describes himself as a health researcher. He lectured throughout Australia and New Zealand during November and December, in most places to very large audiences. His most interesting and informative website ( is available to those with the equipment. A companion website (quoted from elsewhere in this On Target) provides a brilliant criticism of the European Union dictatorship and makes an excellent case for Britain’s complete withdrawal from the EU. During 2003 his movement will be running an extensive campaign to get Britain out of the EU. One of Phillip Day’s most appealing features is that he says he is proud to be an Englishman. What a contrast to the limp specimens of flesh of those politicians who measure their country’s history and independence as counting for nothing. Day is a prolific writer, author and lecturer and generous with his time and talents. Those interested in his up-to-date reports on natural health (as opposed to the mass medication approach of the monopolist pharmaceutical companies and government health bureaucracies) can subscribe for free to his Campaign For Truth in Medicine E-club bulletin by sending an email to: Those without email facility can get on the mailing list for his quality Health Review magazine by writing to Credence, PO Box 3, Tonbridge, Kent TN12 9ZY, UK. The Winter/Spring 2002/2003 issue of Health Review includes one of the best researched articles we have seen on the mammography nonsense, which spreads fear and exposes women to unnecessary danger. We will happily send a photocopy of this to anyone interested. Day is youthful, energetic, patriotic and not frightened to say there is a God. He rightly points to the materialistic and mechanistic approach of monopoly “science” and materialistic-Darwinism as scourges of the modern world and clearly feels that decentralisation and personal responsibility are essential if we are to enjoy good health and good societies. There is a New Zealand outlet for his books, videos and cassettes. If interested please contact Credence Publications, PO Box 12-540, Penrose, Auckland. Phone: 09 575 7071, Fax: 09 525 2227, Email: Available books are: The Essiac Handbook; Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know the Truth; Plague, Pestilence and the Pursuit of Power; World Without AIDS; Food for Thought; Health wars; B17 Metabolic Therapy: A Technical Manual; Toxic Bite; The Mind Game; Great News on Cancer in the 21st Century; Vigilance. Cassettes: Cancer Politics: The real war; Cancer: The Winnable War; Health Wars. Videos: Health Wars (independently produced); The Euro: The Facts (independently produced).

* *

Making the World Safe for Bankers! by Henry Makow, Ph.D. (, 27-9-02)

International bankers live in fear. Not of starvation, disease or war. These are the concerns of children in the Third World. Bankers are terrified we might object to paying them billions each year in interest for money they create out of nothing, guaranteed by our taxes. (The Federal Reserve Board, a private cartel of mostly foreign banks, finagled this monopoly in 1913.) The bankers are frightened that, like the homeless man's dog, we might say "I can do this myself." They are scared the government might go even further and "default" on trillions of make-believe "debt." They are frightened of losing "control." In order to sleep more soundly, the bankers have taken "steps." These precautions help us to understand the world we live in, why it is becoming safer for bankers but less safe and more bizarre for everyone else. First, people with money machines tend to have a lot of friends. The bankers helped their friends establish monopolies in oil, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, transportation, media, etc. and took a healthy stake. As you can imagine, these people are thick as thieves. Lawyers, journalists and intellectuals all vie for a piece of the action. (Servicing this cartel of cartels is what passes for success these days.)

The bankers' first precaution is to buy all the politicians. The second is to buy the major media outlets in order to promote the illusion politicians make decisions and represent our interests. The third precaution is to take control of the education system, ensuring that people stop thinking at an early age. Then the bankers use the government and media to convince us that religion, nationalism and nuclear family are unfashionable, and WE want what THEY want. . . The bankers need to eliminate nation states, freedom and democracy in order to streamline their business and consolidate their power. The UN, the IMF and World Bank, — glorified loan sharks and collectors — will make the laws. . . Countries are not allowed to maintain their national identities or traditions.

Last Christmas, Gary Doer, my provincial premier [Canada] tried to rename the Christmas tree at the legislature a "multicultural tree." Diversity is respecting every culture but our own. Every nation must be heterogeneous and disparate as a box of Smarties — no one [is to be] in a position to challenge the bankers. Or take "feminism." Masquerading as equal rights for women, this Marxist-Lesbian ideology is designed to destroy the nuclear family (the basic building block of society) by undermining paternal authority. Cultural differences between men and women are not "stereotypes." But signatories to the latest UN "CEDAW" Convention (recently passed by the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee) will be required to "take all appropriate measures to modify all social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women." (Article 5) This kind of Communist-inspired social engineering is quite simply persecution of heterosexuals. It is intended to arrest our natural development: the birth rate has halved while the divorce rate has doubled. An army of highly paid lawyers, social workers and bureaucrats treat the casualties. These self-serving do-gooders are the bankers' biggest constituency. People — stunted, love-starved, sex-obsessed — without family, religious or national identity, are easy to control. (They'll join anything; they are looking for a family.) But in case of resistance, the bankers have created a bogeyman, "terrorism" to justify a huge security apparatus. . . .

Soviet agents/US diplomats Alger Hiss and Harry Hopkins established the United Nations on land donated by John D. Rockefeller. One of the UN's first acts was to create the State of Israel. Ben Hecht (A Child of the Century) wrote "the Twentieth Century was cut off at its knees by World War One." Before committing suicide in 1942, Stefan Zweig (The World of Yesterday) spoke in the same tones about the demise of Western Civilization. The planet has been hijacked. Our leaders are dupes, opportunists, traitors or all three. Almost everything we know about modern history is a hoax. A stench of moral compromise hangs over our public and cultural life. Anything promoted by the media, education, or government is suspect. This is what happens when we deny God. This is what our children will inherit, a world that is safe — for international bankers.

* *

A few weeks ago Alistair Cooke in his famous Letter from America BBC radio talk took umbrage at the new practise of some to offering the greeting “Happy Holidays” at this time of the year. We concur fully with Cooke’s objection. About the same time we received the following by email which cleverly employs mockery against political correctness: Please accept with no obligation, implied or expressed, my best wish for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress, non addictive, gender neutral, celebration of the holiday of your choice on or about the winter solstice, practised within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all, and a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2003, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped to make America great (not to imply that America is greater than any other country or is the only "America" in the western hemisphere) and without regard to the race, creed, colour, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

* *

“Fish will not live where the water is too clear. But if there is duckweed or something, the fish will hide under its shadow and thrive. Thus, the people will live in tranquillity if certain matters are a bit overlooked or left unheard.” — Yamamoto, Hagakure 24

* *

Subscription and Books in NZ Dollars
On Target Sub. One Year $20
Charles Ferguson: Herald of Social Credit $13
Human Ecology & Social Credit $11
Social Credit Asterisks $10
Clifford Hugh Douglas $8
Hilaire Belloc $9
G.K. Chesterton $10
Social Credit: Some Questions Answered $25