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

"Though the mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceedingly fine. . .
though with patience He stands waiting, with exactness grinds He all."
Friedrich von Logan

"The idea that the course of history derives from the inexorable working of great laws, such as dialectic process or natural selection or some cyclic theory, is repulsive. It abandons us to jockey for advantages in a glacial movement of events already determined. It takes human history out of the hands of human beings. And it denies the Christian doctrine of free will and corresponding accountability, whereas the Faith tells us that history is what we make it, today as yesterday.
Michael Lane in "How the West Was Lost", Triumph of the Past, June, 1997

September-October 2002, Vol. 24, No. 5


Where are the Davids and Georges?

Are we being 'softened up" for a new round of electricity price increases? It is being casually reported by the press that New Zealand is headed for electricity shortages within two to three years, necessitating new power stations which will need to be financed by increased power prices. If any small manufacturer, say, of garden folks, announced that due to an anticipated increase in consumer demand for garden folks, he was increasing his prices to pay for the building of a second factory he would be condemned or laughed at by nearly every businessman and financial adviser.

Until the mid-1980s the electricity network in New Zealand was treated as best organised and controlled as a public asset, in much the same way as roading. Whatever the merits, or otherwise, of that arrangement there was at least some responsible, on going study and planning for future electricity needs. The job was done by the old Ministry of Works and the engineers and staff of the ministry planned, designed and built the existing system of hydro, geothermal, coal and gas plants, as well as the national grid and Cook Straight cable. The planning and engineering was superb and of the highest standards. Some of the techniques used in dam construction and the development of geothermal generation were world firsts. The engineering of the underground canals and power station at Manapouri remain a marvel, and we didn¹t need any "foreign investment". New Zealand companies were given supply contracts in favour of foreign ones.

The down side was too much centralised control, making for an overemphasis on a small number of larger power stations, rather than a larger number of smaller plants. The centralisation problem was vividly highlighted in the latter 1970s when a Minister of Energy, Bill Birch, with Cabinet approval, quite ruthlessly imposed a completely unnecessary 50 percent retail price increase. The money was not needed for new construction as a consumer contribution had already provided for this. The excuse was "world parity pricing", at that time a catch phrase of the proponents of the insane idea that national sovereignties should be abandoned in favour of a world run by international committees of "experts". The centralised, "big is best" idea still pervades those in authority. It is the reason why Auckland city authorities chose the expensive pipeline to the Waikato River and could not bring themselves to consider even for a moment a policy to encourage homeowners to install rain water tanks. Auckland is in a high rainfall area. We don't know the figures, and probably they have never been gathered, but it is more than likely that even if only half of the city's houses, and all new houses installed rain water tanks, this would more than equate to what the pipeline will provide. An expensive water treatment and cleaning plant would not have been required.

Those who argue that air borne pollution would end up in rain tanks should consider how many chemicals are mixed into the existing piped water. Those privileged to normally bath or shower using rain water instantly recognise the headache-inducing smell of the heavily chlorinated city water. Those using home filters nearly always find that the city water blocks up filters more quickly than rain water. This can vary from one part of the city to another.

Hardly had the guns of WWII fallen silent than we began hearing calls about "big is best", or "get big or get out". By the 1960s this propaganda was intense in the rural areas. Financial policies made it evermore difficult for the smaller farmer to survive. Four decades later probably half of our old family farms have gone, amalgamated into large units. But what is the result. The younger members of farming families are leaving -- they don¹t want to face a life long battle of constant uncertainty. Bigger farms have simply meant bigger debts and more stress. If "big is best" really did work why, then, have companies like Enron and Xerox got themselves into trouble? Why is Rupurt Murdoch's media empire staggering under unbelievable debt levels? Why are American Airlines and United and British Airways in trouble? These are massive companies, the results of decades of takeovers and expansions? Why are all the world's largest companies constantly involved in takeovers and amalgamations, all of them with debt levels which only a few years ago would have been unthinkable?

The "get big or get out" policy comes from the philosophy of centralisation. It is the policy of both organised Socialism and Monopoly Capitalism. Although they claim to be different they pursue the same ideals. Both look upon people only as economic units. Both act as if people exist for the sake of the city, and the way one gets ahead is to become the boss of the city, or the corporation or one of the new global committees, like the WTO, which believes it is capable of "running" the world. But it will be a world controlled by a new Goliath, or a progeny of the legendary dragon slain by St. George. What New Zealand, and the world, really needs are modern day equivalents to little David and George. But isn't this a challenge to every one of us?

That we must think and act as if the city, the town, the suburb and the street exist for the sake of its members, and not the other way about, which is the perversion of the correct order of things. There is an old European principle called subsidiary which means, in its fuller sense, that nothing should be undertaken by a larger body that can be adequately done by a smaller body. This means the family farm instead of corporatised agriculture; it means the independent tradesman ahead of the giant construction company; it means local production and local shops ahead of isolated factories with concrete floors and global supermarket chains; it means houses before housing estates; it means smaller buildings with human proportion instead of twin towers.

We have created a perverse world, and the primary driving force behind it is the false belief that our man made money system is reality, while real things like the soil and the air and people are only something to be measured with statistics. But it is an increasingly shaky world -- a top-heavy monster There are, however, some Davids and maybe even an occasional George too. Prince Charles has just announced the launching of a new project, where woollen garments will be manufactured in rural workshops in Britain, using British wool. This follows the success of his organic range of biscuits. What a brilliant affront to the globalists. It will only be small with a few local workshops, but that is precisely why it is so good. What would be gained by establishing one large factory hundreds of miles from most wool producers and most consumers and with a board of directors who perhaps know little or nothing about the art of wool growing and the art of spinning and the art of knitting. Large factories promote wage slavery and road congestion. Prince Charles' conception of rural workshops envisages a place of activity and practical production where it is possible that the wholesome idea of an interplay of work, art and play will be more easily obtained. There is much value in writing books and magazines against globalisation. We need such information. But how much more valuable are practical examples of local production, and new local manufacturing ideas, instead of global manufacturing and massive resource-wasteful distribution networks? There are other examples.

In Victoria, Australia a small company has just won major supply contracts for its locally designed and manufactured aircraft, the Airvan ( Have a guess how many seedy international bankers and bureaucrats from the WTO and World Bank were involved in its design? We received this week an email advertising a wide range of production mini-plants in mobile containers, from a company called Science Network. The company offers "more than 700 portable production systems: Bakeries, Steel Nails, Welding Electrodes, Tire Retreading, Reinforcement Bar Bending for Construction Framework, Sheeting for Roofing, Ceilings and Facades, Plated Drums, Aluminum Buckets, Injected Polypropylene Housewares, Pressed Melamine Items (Glasses, Cups, Plates, Mugs, etc.), Mufflers, Construction Electrically Welded Mesh, Plastic Bags and Packaging, Mobile units of medical assistance, Sanitary Material, Hypodermic Syringes, Hemostatic Clamps, etc. "Science Network has started a process of Co-investment for the installation of small Assembly plants to manufacture in series the Mini-plants of portable production on the site, region or country where they may be required. . . Due to financial reasons, involving cost and social impact, the right thing to do is to set up assembly plants in the same countries and regions, using local resources. . ."(For more information: Mini-plants in mobile containers,

What a brilliant business concept. Yet it is actually what people used to do before the madness of globalisation and "free trade" and before we were saddled with the awful burden of centralised debt finance. What is to stop a group of diary farmers for example, fed up with the Fonterra monopoly, from setting up a small local plant to supply milk and milk products to their local town or city? An Israeli company sells a small milk processing plant for about $3 million dollars, though in grandma's day there was an even smaller plant called the family kitchen. If we really are going to become short of electricity, and if it isn't just a ploy to justify higher prices for our now foreign owned power companies, then the more logical approach would be to encourage householders to install a modern, very low maintenance, solar hot water heater.

Several years ago former Prime Minister Mike Moore, in one of his more sensible moments, said that a policy of encouraging householders to put a new insulation blanket over their hot water cylinders would save an amount of power then equivalent to a proposed new power station. There are a range of low wattage light bulbs made by Phillips available in shops throughout New Zealand. They use approximately one fifth of the power of a normal bulb, for the equivalent output of light. They cost more but are much longer lasting and the power savings make them cheaper in the long run. Would we still need a new power station if a large percentage of conventional bulbs were replaced with the low wattage bulbs? The electricity system wouldn't look so attractive to a foreign multinational -- nor Auckland's water system if every homeowner supplemented their supply from the rain -- if we promoted local initiatives to save on electricity which can be easily done in a multitude of ways. But, that's just too bad.
Of course, without a giant new power station there won't be any ribbon to cut at the grand opening and no plaque to record which wise politician cut it. (As an aside it would be interesting to see an honest study on the costs of new infrastructure required to support massive immigration. Politicians only tell us about the money immigrants are said to bring but how does this equate to the costs of extra infrastructure such as new power stations, highways and water pipelines.)

The regeneration of local communities, town and rural, requires not more large projects, but small ones, and until we get our national sovereignty back central government is not going to do it. Perhaps the key to local regeneration may begin with the further development of local credit systems.

The best part of a century has been spent attempting to get our government to implement a realistic financial policy to replace the anti-civil, unrealistic and unnecessary debt system. We have not yet been able to achieve that. Perhaps the answer lies in little local alternative credit schemes. Wherever successful these would increase local autonomy and add to the pressure on governments to alter their destructive financial policies. Lenin once suggested that the way to his utopian world order would be achieved by steps, over time. He said that nations should be encouraged to amalgamate into regional economic units, then these can be enlarged, until the final objective is obtained. We are at war against world dictatorship but in principle, so far as method is concerned, Lenin was correct.

New Zealand is made up of localities. So is the world. The proposal for some deeper creative thinking, some innovative action, is suggested in the excellent article by John Pearce (see below) It is the same suggestion being advocated by the American writer and philosopher Michael Lane. We mentioned Mr Lane in the last On Target. He is the editor/publisher of a scholarly monthly, Triumph of the Past. Two of Mr Lane's in-depth articles are due for release as booklets in Australia in a few weeks. A last minute decision to visit Australia in October means that Mr Lane will be in New Zealand over the first weekend of October and he has kindly agreed to address some meetings. This may be a once in a lifetime opportunity. It is regrettable that he cannot stay longer and travel to other centres. Details of his meetings are provided in the accompanying flyer. Please make every attempt to attend.
Tape recordings will be available of Mr Lane's addresses.

Australian League of Rights National Weekend

The National Weekend, from Friday, October 11th (Dinner) through to and including Sunday, October 13th (Action Conference), 2002, promises to be an outstanding event. As usual the Friday evening Dinner will be memorable. A special feature will be the launching, as booklets, of two of Mr Michael Lane's outstanding essays. Mr Lane is travelling from the United States and will deliver a short talk. The main Dinner speaker is Mr Phillip Benwell, MBE, speaking about "The Queen on her Jubilee". As mentioned in our last issue one of these essays looks at the extraordinary work and writings of one Charles Ferguson, who, like C.H. Douglas, was closely associated with mechanical engineering societies and also appreciated the practical application of Christianity and the system of financial credit. Nearly 100 years ago Ferguson had proposed what he called Capital Colleges, which would be self-financing, for the rebuilding of our towns and cities, or establishing new ones. Mr Lane's second booklet is a seminal review of Thomas Robertson's remarkable 1948 book Human Ecology: The Science of Social Adjustment.
An excellent line-up of speakers is planned for the Seminar on Saturday, October 12: - Phillip Benwell, National Chairman, Australian Monarchist League - Nigel Jackson, author, writer and prominent defender of freedom of speech - Jeremy Lee, authority on the New World Order, writer, author and lecturer - Michael Lane, editor of the American publication Triumph of the Past. All addresses will be available later from us on cassette tape.
The venue is the same as last year: The Hume Inn, 406 Wodonga Place, Albury, NSW (three hours by train from Melbourne). Besides the Hume Inn a wide choice of accommodation is available with many local service clubs also offering good meals. Bookings can be arranged by contacting the New Zealand League, or the Australian League directly on 0061 8 8395 9826, Fax: 0061 8 8395 9827, Email: Any bookings must be confirmed as soon as possible.

Show Me the Money!

The following excellent, and most timely article is reproduced from the current issue (September/October) of Organic NZ, journal of the Soil and Health Association. The author, Mr John Pearce, is an innovative organic farmer near Helensville, north of Auckland. The problem he highlights is a practical one faced by all farmers and communities. But most importantly he is pointing to the correct solution, and this is something all thinking people need to address. It is the same direction that Mr Michael Lane of Ohio, who will be addressing meetings in Auckland and Hamilton in early October, is pointing. Organic NZ is available in all health shops and most other book shops: For many people committed to the philosophy of Organics, the area that most often gives rise to an ethical compromise is money. Our current economic structures all too often undermine the environmental, ethical and social relationships Organics values so highly. One way out of this is a local money system that would support the local economy and protect it from the present economic system. That present system is always in search of the cheapest production location and in doing so it destroys the local autonomous structure. This in turn hinders us from living, working and growing in an environment that has a degree of security and permanence.

Three- to five-year growth cycles are great for politicians and accountants, but not for those of us who are serious about our families, friends and communities. New Zealanders have had enough time to evaluate the benefits and hardships demonstrated by a free market philosophy: there's no doubt a few have benefited but already it's obvious that many have not. It's therefore all the more important to look at ways to renew local and regional economies. The economic ups and downs of the world market can only be counteracted if the internal economy of a region acts as a stable complimentary system, in a balance with the global exchange of goods. Does it really make sense that we should pay a global price for local products such as meat and fish when a local contract with a farmer or fisherman can be demonstrated to be better for producer and consumer?

A locally based autonomous producer-consumer partnership is totally insulated from the influence of large corporations and state monopoly systems. Such a system is immune from local or international recession, compounding interest on debt, bad deals and money shortages. The world money systems can collapse, the world's financial markets can fall through the floor, employment can take us back as far as the 1930s. But a green dollar is guaranteed 100 percent by work and by goods because it generates no debt. It works by people co-operating in a direct exchange. No banks, no middle person soaking up profit. It's definitely a possibility, but it requires considerable trust and diligence to work and is in effect reversing the traditional pattern so that the farmer becomes a price maker rather than a price taker.

Creating the options When we see progressive local bodies, such as Rodney just north of Auckland city, encouraging every applicant for a building permit to think local, use local product and trades people, we have to be encouraged that there is another way -- maybe a little more sophisticated and taxable than the pure green dollars I've been suggesting. When we see that same council promoting itself as "organic friendly" and telling other local bodies, "We won't take any of your waste, at least until we've worked out sustainable ways to recycle it, and where possible we will work towards a high degree of self-sufficiency for such things as water and energy," then we have the beginning of a locally based economy that has a future, based on co-operation not on international competition. For many years the Swiss have demonstrated that an interest-free savings and loans scheme can work, just as our Prometheus system although much more limited, can also work. A similar low interest system in Germany, founded in the 1930s, with over 20,000 accounts amounting to over one billion Swiss francs turnover every six months, is another tried and true example. There are options with a history. They work. And there are other still more practical and personal ways to support local economies.

If one were to invest in a farm for instance, setting up a contract with a producer to supply a certain amount of produce on a regular basis, and were that money to be advanced either in full or say 50 percent (of course with guarantees both ways), we would have a personal involvement of the consumer with the producer. Such a partnership has to have enormous benefits over the present faceless debt-motivated system.

New moves by regulatory bodies to give assurance by instigating accountability systems through trace-back to producers are commendable. But, they still don't cover the middle ground where mishandling by transporter and distributor is overlooked and the consumer and producer remain far apart. When I look at our own situation -- one hour from a city of one million, with a mild climate and more than adequate amounts of rain, free of possums -- it's evident that with a high degree of co-operation we could quite possibly supply several hundred families with fresh fruit, vegetables, meat and fish on a daily basis. However, to justify such a change in land use from pastoral and forestry to intensive food production, either interest-free loans or consumer investment would be required, plus considerable bio-security in the form of local government land-use protection, and MAF surveillance and assistance where bio-security was breached. But what an amazing turn around it would be from the situation 20 years ago when our fledgling organic farm was seen to be a bio-security risk to our neighbours. Now it's the organic farmer that needs protection from adjacent chemical users.

Capital waste Another consideration when thinking sustainably is responsibility towards people and waste. Our young people in particular in rural areas too often get treated as waste -- sent off to be educated, recycled and never to return. Our greatest resource for tomorrow's farmers is from existing farm families. Unfortunately, through short-term economic thinking, both on the part of farm families and central government, these families are in survival mode. And the human and intellectual capital that their children represent has little option but to make its exit. No wonder few children stay on the land, no wonder few farmers would have their children ride the uncertainty of the agriculture roller-coaster. What a waste!

Long-term strategising is what makes waste management creative and not a burden for future generations. What is produced locally is used locally, its residue or byproducts rendered into useful resources or products for another end-user. It can be the same for a farm family if it becomes more self sufficient, and shakes off the debt burden and the self-ingratiating hyperbole of the chemical companies.

Fifty years ago, a farm family had a very secure future milking 100 cows; today, probably 250 cows will be milked on that same piece of land. And that family, the cows and the land will all be under stress. The quality of life in family terms will definitely be less, the cows will have an average life of less than five years as opposed to 10 years, and the soil and animal health chemical bills will be over 20 percent of any profit made. All because the price of land is so inflated -- twice the price of similar producing farmland in Australia -- that the farm family has to be in debt. Why? Because there is no protection from urban sprawl, speculation and overseas purchasing. Politicians, in both central and local government, need to know that the family farm needs protection. The children of farm families need education, health care and recreational facilities. Equally importantly, they need a creative on-farm involvement outside the mentality of competitiveness.

Ideally we see such creative involvement in an organic environment of co-operativeness. And consumers need to rediscover an acute awareness of real food and real producers of ethical food. Farmers are good people who need support in real dollar terms. Why pay three times the price for food in a supermarket when half of that invested in agriculture could deliver you real food? People wanting to participate physically in food production have that opportunity through the WOOFer [Workers On Organic Farms) scheme and by approaching producers, especially at harvest times.

At another level, small blocks are available on a few organic farms. Here one can have a full organic status as an adjunct grower in a speciality crop such as lavender, avocados or grapes, all of which are feasible on 5-10 acres, protected and nurtured by a surrounding organic investment.

1. Institute for a Natural Economic Order, Aarau, Postfash 3359, CH500I.
2. WIR - Economic Co-operative, trion Institute, Guberstr.9, D22767 Hamburg.

Australian Report

During August Bill Daly addressed a number of meetings in Western Australia, South Australia and Victoria. He offers the following impressions:

On my flight to Perth I sat near an older lady from Taranaki, a Maori. She was off to live in Perth, giving firstly her reasons of a better climate and to be closer to some of her family. Later, she said the old spirit had gone from her Taranaki town. She recalled that as a child people seldom locked their houses. Nearly everyone knew each other and there was considerable mutual help. There were opportunities in the town and surrounding districts for the younger people. It was not far to go to a school, hospital or post office. Now the young people leave, she said, crime is rampant, including violence and there is widespread drug abuse; welfare keeps people alive but offers no chance for people to get ahead. Australia, she said, unlike New Zealand now, looks after its older people. The pension is better and services are more generous. Of course, this in part is a case of the grass being greener on the other side of the fence. But in a number of small ways economic life is better across the Tasman, though it is only a matter of degree, because Australians and New Zealanders face the same problems and the same threats pervade both countries. And the past was never so idyllic as sometimes perceived.

Fifty years ago families could survive on a single wage and buy a heavily mortgaged house, but it was often a struggle. However, there was still then an ingrained respect across the whole country for the property of others and violent crime was almost never heard of. A murder would shock the entire nation for months. My travelling companion will find in due course that she will not have escaped the same pattern of social deterioration as is happening in New Zealand. A simple reading of the daily newspapers anywhere in Australia tells about hospital bed shortages, violence in schools and on the streets, drug related crime, insufficient government funding for services and infrastructure, etc.

I was struck, in Western Australia in particular, with the general view that large scale corruption within government and the police is endemic. Comments about their new police commissioner, a New Zealand lawyer, ranged from 'an idiot' to 'just as bad as the rest'. Someone, also in WA, with younger relatives in the police force, said demoralisation among staff is made worse by political correctness. Police bosses have given into the campaign, they said, that there must be the correct percentages of women and Aboriginals in the force, irrespective of merit. Also, that police have become so reluctant to face accusations of racism that much black crime is overlooked, while many petty crimes of whites will be pursued through the courts in order to show crime figures that are not 'discriminatory'.

The policies of virtually open immigration, free trade and globalisation, has led, like in New Zealand, to massive demographic alterations, large-scale foreign ownership, and the denial to Australians of the huge benefits they should be getting from living in what is supposed to be the richest country, in real terms, in the world.

Several years ago a World Bank report, which looked at the real wealth (minerals, land, forests , etc.) listed Australians as the richest people in the world. On a per capita basis Australians were listed as being worth about a million dollars each. As a demonstration of how divorced from reality New Zealand politicians and their expensive advisers are, almost exactly the same lines as spoken here are being spoken in the halls of power in Australia. The Howard Government in Canberra, along with most State politicians, cling irrevocably to the lie that Australia needs more foreign investment and that the few remaining Australian industries deserve to go if they can't compete with cheap imports from Asia or elsewhere. Many New Zealanders complain that so much of our industry is now owned by Australian companies. The reality is that most of Australia¹s industry is now also foreign owned. A close examination would probably reveal, such as in the case of the big banks, that what we here think of as Australian banks, are now merely the Australian branches of U.S.-based banks.

Australia's Federal Government, under Mr Howard, remains completely dedicated to privatising the last of its public assets and allowing even more foreign ownership. It is vigorously pushing the sale of its telecommunications company, Telstra. For the time being Mr Howard is not allowing foreign ownership of Qantas to go above 49 Percent, and Shell was prevented from taking over a large oil company, in the hope this will quell public opposition to the sale of Telstra. But after Telstra, what then? The chances are there would be a renewed push for a higher foreign ownership in Qantas.

It is ironic that in New Zealand there is a debate concerning whether Qantas should be allowed to take a major stake in Air New Zealand, while in Australia Qantas management complain that they cannot compete effectively unless they can grow bigger, and foreign investment is needed, they claim, to achieve this. Why don't they have a more sensible look at the giant airlines such as United and British Airways which are struggling to survive? Big is not always best, as many New Zealand dairy farmers are now discovering. It is only a year since the giant dairy company Fonterra was formed and many farmers are regretting the loss of their former smaller companies. Even some of Fonterra's management appear to be having second thoughts.

In WA, where there are huge reserves of natural gas, as there are in other parts of Australia, a massive 25-year deal has been struck to sell the gas to China. Japan is also taking large quantities. While Australians pay close to a dollar a litre for petrol and diesel, and a bit less for natural gas, the Chinese and Japanese are allowed to purchase Australian gas at approximately 3.5 cents a litre. A Western Australian newspaper hailed the Chinese deal as a great success that would bring about $50 million a year to the WA State Government. That is barely a drop in the bucket in terms of that Government's total budget. WA taxpayers certainly won't notice any difference. The gas which should be treated as a national asset and used conservatively to benefit many generations of Australians is to be used up as quickly as possible for the short term benefit of a handful of monopoly energy companies and a minor dividend to the government. It is a repeat story of the massive squandering by the Labour and National parties of our own Taranaki gas. What a difference it would make to Australian farmers and manufacturers, as well as everyone else, if they could get access to their own gas at 3.5 cents a litre and the extra few cents it would cost for distribution. It would considerably lower the cost structure within the nation.

The wife of a fencing contractor near Perth explained that due to new environmental laws they are finding it difficult obtaining good Jarrah timber for posts. Meanwhile a foreign aluminium mining company, operating on the outskirts of Perth, is permitted to burn large areas of Jarrah to clear land. Possibly as much as several millions of tonnes of Jarrah is being burnt in this way while fencing contractors and furniture makers face timber shortages. Clearly Australians feel just as frustrated by the globalist and other collectivist policies of unrestrained politicians as we do in New Zealand.

The above being said I always find it interesting and encouraging to hear about some of the constructive things people and communities are doing. Here and there farmers' markets are appearing in reaction to the tough times facing all rural areas. There has been a heightened awareness of the dangers of the Gats (General Agreement on Trades in Services). All sorts of interesting, often vital, information circulates via a host of private newsletters. People, who only a few years ago would not have had even the slightest interest in anything political, will now readily support movements such as Dick Smith's Buy Australia campaign. There are a number of alternative, or local credit, schemes operating, some now sufficiently developed or sophisticated to even offer the opportunity of first home ownership to people who could never obtain this from the normal banking system. They are growing and developing.

Across Australia, part locally-owned branches of the Bendigo Bank, have brought banking services back to many little towns that were abandoned by the big banks. Other little success stories include programmes to keep the manufacturing of Australian inventions in Australia, despite government contempt for such objectives. I believe that this is the beginnings of a revitalisation of the real spirit that pioneered Australia -- and New Zealand. A little is happening, and with a little creative thinking a lot more is surely possible.

The story of one dairy farmer who attended a house meeting a few hours south of Perth fascinated me. While his dairy farmer neighbour spends his time struggling through staff problems, the drought and expensive feed, and ever-rising costs, he was able to earn a comfortable living with a herd of just 32 milking cows on his 60 acre farm. His secret: 'You have to be smart', he said. I suspected that included not taking too much notice of the advice from his Agricultural Department. He explained that it meant not getting into debt, not throwing chemical and other fertilisers about the place indiscriminately, but having careful soil tests conducted from time to time to see what minerals were actually needed. By being small he had not locked himself into the trap of having to purchase feed from other growers, thus avoiding the supply risks and price fluctuations associated with problems such as drought. (Australia always seems to be having a drought but the present one is as severe as it can get, with awful consequences for thousands of rural families. Much of Australia is a harsh environment and it is a credit to its people who in only a few generations have built a tremendous infrastructure of towns and cities, ports, transport and communications.) The story of the 32-herd dairy farmer should be told in depth sometime. There is an invaluable lesson there for other farmers, as well as the rest of society. Two other farmers in his area also milked just 32 cows. His stated income per hectare for 'turning grass into milk' surprised me.

My first meeting was in Perth, at the annual West Australian State Dinner of the Australian League of Rights, where I shared a platform with a distinguished Mr Peter Davies, Mayor of the large South Australian coastal town of Port Lincoln. In my talk I covered: - the threat poised by Gats and other international treaties - that globalisation was only a fancy name for international monopolisation - that the Afghanistan situation can only be understood in light of the world oil monopoly's determination to ensure it never faces any real threat from a revitalised Russia or a reorganised dissident Moslem world - the strange lack of reaction by the US Airforce to the four hijacked aircraft on September 11, 2001, and the several conflicting reports that were issued by the White House - the failure of the US Government to investigate the massive out-of-character trading of shares in American Airlines and United during the fortnight before September 11 - the lack of coverage and follow-up reporting about the 120 Israeli spies arrested last March (see New Zealand Herald, March 7, 2002) in the US, some of whom were expelled, and who were suspected of some foreknowledge about September 11. - that far from providing any solutions globalisation is going to give us more problems, each of them more serious than before. The answer to globalisation is localisation. If governments cannot yet be persuaded then we must do what we can in our own local areas. Wherever any local action increases the stability and independence of local people it is another nail in the coffin of the global monopolists.

Mr Davies gave an excellent outline of the government-sponsored subversion within Australia, as politicians pushed on blindly with their programme to globalise Australia. This included, said Mr Davies, Australian acceptance of the International Criminal Court which, along with numerous other international treaties, was wiping out Australia's own traditional legal system. Mayor Davies is soon to go before a hearing of his country's Human Rights Commission on a charge of inciting race hatred. As is well known Australia has been inundated with boat refugees. Most of the boats are launched by criminal gangs operating out of Indonesia. Many of the refugees have been released into Australian society by the Australian Government and get welfare. A number have not been accepted, and are offered return airfares to their own country and $A2000 in cash. Contrary to a number of malicious media reports the refugee camps are not the harsh places claimed. They have cost tens of millions of dollars to construct and maintain. Modern medical and other facilities are made available to those interned. Despite having broken Australia's laws by entering the country illegally, and despite quite good care provided by Australia, some of those refused permanent residence have gone on the rampage and caused considerable damage to facilities. As I understand it Mayor Davies reportedly said that if rioting illegal refugees cannot be prevented by normal means from causing vandalism then they could be shot in the leg - hence the charge by the Human Rights Thought Police.

Men like Peter Davies are great patriots. Far from being the monster some anti-Australians would like to make out, he speaks with conviction that every living human being has been given the gift of life and this must be acknowledged and respected. However, no society should be expected to commit cultural suicide just to appease the demands of insane ideologues.

After the Perth Seminar I addressed some meetings to the south, before flying on to Adelaide for the League's South Australian State Seminar and Dinner. There I was privileged to share a platform with Mrs Kathy Scarborough and Bishop John Hepworth. Mrs Scarborough, a mother of four daughters, spoke with conviction against the scare tactics used by Australia's Health departments to encourage parents into blindly accepting the now huge array of vaccinations being given to children. She spoke with authority on the dangers posed by some of the vaccines, this heightened when several vaccines are given to children and babies at the same time. Bishop Hepworth is from the Anglo-Catholic Church and gave a most refreshing and encouraging address, reminding us of the power of Faith and that 'with God, all things are possible'. It was an outstanding address by a man with a brilliant command of the English language and a great sense of humour. It was heartening to learn that following the recent South Australian State election the balance of power is held by an Independent, Mr Peter Lewis M.P. who has voiced strong support for SA to adopt Binding Citizens' Initiated Referenda. Readers are urged to write letters of encouragement to him and the SA Premier, Hon. Mike Rann at The House of Assembly, Parliament House, Adelaide, South Australia 5000 Letters in support of BCIR can also be sent to The Adelaide Advertiser, King William Street, Adelaide, S.A. 5000, or emailed to

After Adelaide I spoke to several meetings in Victoria, the last being a dinner meeting in Gippsland on the southern outskirts of Melbourne. At all the dinner meetings excellent loyal toasts and toasts to the League were made by supporters, reminding me of the enormous talents and creativity that so many people have. Everywhere I was treated with outstanding hospitality and it was a delight to renew some older friendships and make many new ones. One League supporter took me flying in his little Cessna aircraft, and the runway did, I am pleased to say, prove long enough. My driver host in Victoria introduced me to the CityLink road through Melbourne. This is privately owned and users much pay a substantial fee within 24 hours of using it or face a hefty fine. The private company polices the road by the use of cameras and has access to the home addresses of all Australian car owners. Part of the CityLink road passes along a route built and paid for by Victorians decades ago. But they most now pay again each time they use it. This will be the shape of things to come in New Zealand if we permit our politicians to follow their pattern of recent years.

I was disgusted to learn from the host of one meeting of his battle to keep the family farm out of the hands of obnoxious Victorian bureaucrats. Following a fall and hospitalisation of his elderly mother the bureaucrats at some obscure government department claimed power of attorney over her estate, even though her son was her trustee, heir and next of kin. A long battle has financially crippled the family, though they have managed to save their farm for now and a class action is pending against the department. If successful it will be the taxpayers who pay, not the bureaucrats. It made me think that a campaign should be directed at the actual bureaucrats who do such things, with their names and whatever personal details can be obtained, published far and wide through the Free Press, including the internet. Ordinary people may not be able to take on whole government departments, but we could make life very embarrassing for anyone daring to abuse their power.

At one Victorian meeting I was interested to be told by a member of the audience that he had been running his diesel-engined car on canola oil. Some service stations there are now selling a diesel variety that includes a percentage of canola oil. I was also told of a hope by one businessman to build an 'energy centre' consisting of a farm for growing fuel and a retail outlet. I wish him, and others like him, every success. It's what we should be also doing here.

We are able to offer cassette tapes of the addresses by Mayor Peter Davies, myself, Mrs Kathy Scarborough and Bishop Hepworth, for $5 each. Get all four and at no extra cost we will add an excellent tape by former Russian dissident Vladimir Bukovsky called Is the European Union the New Soviet Union? Mr Bukovsky¹s address was delivered at the British House of Lords.

". . .to imagine that the banking system is a neutral device simple taking in and paying out other people's money, and as it were a mere sub-station in the flow of economic life, is to erect a fatal mental barrier to its comprehension." -- Thomas Robertson, Human Ecology, 1948.

Misinformation on "Mad Cow" Disease Threatens America's Family Farms
from American Free Press (formerly Spotlight), May 27, 2002

The truth about the cause of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as "Mad Cow" disease in England and, to a lesser degree, in France is not what you have probably heard about in the major media. And now, as concerns about the disease are spreading to the United States, many health experts contend that small American family farms may be subjected to destructive government regulations that are being promulgated on false premises in the name of fighting the disease. This was the topic discussed on the April 28 broadcast of Radio Free America, the weekly call-in talk forum with host Tom Valentine, sponsored by American Free Press. Joining Valentine were two guests, Sally FalIon and Mark Purdy. Miss Fallon is the founder and president of the Weston A. Price Foundation and publisher of Wise Traditions newsletter. For more information, see the foundation's web site at or call U.S. (202) 333-4325 and request the free 12-page information packet that is available.
Mark Purdy is an organic dairy farmer from Somerset, England, who refused to obey British government orders to spray his cattle with organophosphates, a chemical, in order to fight the warble fly. Purdy went to court to challenge the order and won. His farm was exempted from using the spray. When the "Mad Cow" epidemic hit England, not one cow in Purdy's herd developed the disease. Purdy has studied the issue and argues that Mad Cow is not caused by a virus, but is a result of organophosphate pesticides and toxic mineral overload. What follows is an edited transcript of the interview.

Valentine's questions are in boldface. Purdy's responses are in regular text. Miss FalIon's comments are in italics:

Here in the United States, the media was full of hype about bovine encephalopathy, or "Mad Cow" disease, but you don't buy the official version of what causes it. Initially, I was very sceptical of the way the British government handled this thing. Foremost, they blamed it on the fact that cattle were fed with this meat and bonemeal ingredient. What I noticed, however, [was] that this was actually sold all over the world, including the Middle East, South America and South Africa and there were cattle in those countries that never had a case of BSE.

As an organic dairyman, do you use that kind of feed? It actually did go into organic feed in the early days, because you were allowed to use 20 percent of the conventional feed as it was called. So organic farmers did get that feed. But what was interesting was that there was never a single case of BSE in a cow that had been bred on an organic farm.

So it isn't necessarily the fact that animal parts are being fed back to an animal that eats grass that is the cause? No, I think this is a complete myth. There have been 40,000 cows in Britain that were born after the ban on meat and bonemeal, which was in 1998, and they have developed BSE. So how can the meat and bonemeal be the cause? Some of the other European countries have really over-reacted. Germany put down 40,000 cows just because of a problem in Bavaria with three herds. This is a massive overreaction for a disease that doesn't spread from cow to cow.

Were organophosphates used on those three cow herds in Germany? Yes. However, there are two factors involved in this disease. It's a mineral imbalance caused by the feeding of an artificial milk powder, laced with the metal manganese. When an animal is young, it can't control the amount of manganese that's taken up into the brain. What happens is that the brain of a calf that's been fed on this milk powder is overloaded with manganese to a toxic level. In later life when this animal is treated with a chemical such as a phosphate chemical, it interacts with the manganese and changes it from a safe form into a lethal, chain-reaction type phenomenon. It's a bit like a nuclear meltdown in the brain.

Humans have a problem with too much manganese. It can affect human babies. That's right. The soy infant formula is high in manganese and this is at a time when a baby has no protection against it. Mothers milk and cow's milk are very low in manganese and yet it is in the soy formula. I don't think people realize that baby calves are not given mothers milk. They are given what's called a 'milk replacer' a formula for calves, and they deliberately make it high in manganese to get certain types of growth.

So the combination of this pesticide to kill the warble fly and the manganese is what you believe is causing Mad Cow. This pesticide is so powerful that it is designed to penetrate the cow's skin and kill off the larvae of the warble fly that actually live inside the cow. They actually pour the pesticide on the back of the cow at the spinal cord, which is where BSE actually starts. This chemical's effect is to change the molecular shape of certain brain proteins that affect the nerves.

Has your research had any effect on the British viewpoint? No, the British have such a reductionist mindset on this whole thing. Now, when I look at the humans who are dying of this disease, I think it's just scandalous. They will not look at any alternative theory that dissents from the government's theory. The government's theory has no evidence whatsoever, but this theory has a load of evidence. For instance, at Cambridge University - and you can't get any better than that - they did a cell culture study where they looked at a brain cell and bombarded it with manganese and took out the copper and this produced the exact abnormality found in the brains of animals that have died of BSE. Even though this was published in a prestigious journal, it was completely ignored.
The Americans are being much wiser. When the warble fly comes out on the back of the cow, they use organophosphates but they use it as a water-based pour on, or as a powder. So it doesn't go through the skin and get into the spinal cord. The organophosphate pesticide is very economical, but the organic farmers I know don't want to touch it. It was never used in America on dairy cows because it can contaminate the milk, but in Britain we were using it at an exclusively high-dose rate. I'm sure this caused the massive epidemic of BSE. In fact, the government compelled the high dose rate. That's why they won't accept the alternative explanation, for it would point to the government's liability for massive damages.

If your thesis is correct, then the more than 100 people who have contracted the human equivalent of BSE didn't necessarily all eat meat from a BSE cow. I think in humans it is the same sort of toxic template. If you look at the clusters of human infection in Britain, which are all in rural and coastal areas, not in towns, if it were a matter of beef consumption it would be spread more evenly. I've done environmental studies of these clusters and found very high levels of manganese. They're all high in oxidizing agents. A lot of the people in Britain who have provided me information indicate, for example, that their children have used head-lice shampoos which contain the same kind of organophosphates. So I think this is probably half of the problem. In addition, consider the possibility that some of these children affected may have also been brought up on soy-based formula. I think there is also a genetic element. A lack of copper in the body also seems to be a susceptibility factor. We get copper from animal foods: meat and seafood and so forth. Manganese is a necessary dietary element. But when it accumulates in the brain, that's when it is a problem.

We Americans should not take this BSE thing for granted. The story that the U.S. Department of Agriculture is putting out is that animals that are outside are much more likely to contract these wasting diseases and I have a feeling that this is going to he used against small farmers and grass-based farms. We do need to be armed with the truth in regard to what is going on with this disease. The growing concentration in the American food industry is a real problem. We have four processors controlling 80 percent of the beef that goes to four companies that control 90 percent of the meat sales in America. Our Justice Department doesn't see a problem with this kind of monopoly. The situation is much worse than when Sinclair Lewis wrote The Jungle. The conditions in these packing plants are just horrendous. It all ties in to the BSE problem: the industrialisation of livestock management, the use of heavy chemicals, inappropriate feeding and the use of milk substitutes. They want to raise the cows as fast as they can and as cheaply as they can. Human nutrition is never considered. However, the alternative system of grass-based farming is growing by leaps and hounds and I'm afraid that the beef industry is going to use the concern over BSE as a method to block the growth of the competition from grass-based farming. We recognize the need for some type of animal food in the diet, whether it is milk or meat, but when these foods move into the hands of the industry, they become denatured and we get inferior products. We want to get back to small farms and direct sales between farmers and consumers. In certain states they are already moving against small grass-based farms, such as the chicken farms in Mississippi. The big interests want chickens to be produced on industrial farms.

Mark, do you drink your cows' milk? I've raised All of my eight children on my cows' milk and they are the picture of health.

Outside the U.S. Radio Free America can be heard via the internet by contacting then clicking on Radio Free America on the main menu.

In the Czech Republic, government officials responded to a Mad Cow scare with the only solution that has been presented so far - they slaughtered herds of cattle suspected of being contaminated with the disease. Today, there is growing concern among American farmers that a similar rash response will take place at the first indications that the strange illness has hit U.S. cattle. Is bovine spongiform encephalopathy as virulent as officials want the world to believe? Many researchers say no. (end of American Free Press report)

While on the subject of health we offer the following brief extracts from a New Zealand Herald report of May 15, 2002:

"Rising sales of soaps, bath and shower products, and baby wipes are being blamed for a huge rise in the number of children suffering from eczema by a skin specialist". Dr Michael Cork has told patients to cut down on soapy detergents and baby wipes and switch to moisturising emollients. Dr Cork, from the University of Sheffield, who is investigating the genetic causes of eczema, has found a strong correlation between detergent use and the incidence of skin disease.
"Since the 1950s the proportion of British children affected by eczema has grown continuously from about 3 per cent to more than 20 per cent. . .The amount of water used for personal washing in Britain more than quadrupled between 1961 and 1998 - from 11 litres a person a day to 51 litres. Sales of bath and shower washing products rocketed from 76 million units in 1981 to 453 million last year. "Demand for baby wipes, which can contain alcohol and crude detergents, shot up from 39 million units to 110 million in 2000. Scientists already knew that detergents can increase the risk of eczema by stripping the skin of protective fats. As a result, cells which form the Obricks' in the skin wall shrink, allowing irritants and allergy triggers to slip through. . ."
(end of Herald article)

There is an opinion which suggests that regular use of antiseptics is unhealthy since our skins and insides are covered in natural, essential, bacteria and their constant depletion is a health threat. Besides, who knows what the constant use of an array of chemicals, often in combinations that have never been tested, may do. Those interested in the health issue and the latest revelations on natural health, and why the incidence of serious illnesses is on the increase are encouraged to attend one of the Phillip Day lectures in New Zealand in November and December. We are not connected with Mr Day but feel he has a valuable service to offer to those interested in taking personal responsibility for their health. He is highly respected as a lecturer and writer on alternative health. Elsewhere in this On Target we have listed his itinerary.

Steve Hatfill, Anthrax, And Bushwah
by Fred Reed (, August 2002)

This isn't going to be a cute column. It may be a bit long. Some things need saying, so I'm going to say them. Recently stories have appeared in the press implying that Steve Hatfill, among other things a former ebola researcher at the Army's biological-warfare research centre at Fort Detrick, Md, sent the notorious anthrax-bearing letters to people around the country. The implication is that he is a murderer. I know Hatfill socially, though we are not intimate. We met years back in Washington at a party held by a common friend. We have the occasional beer, bump into each other every year or so at parties, and infrequently participate in minor pub crawls. Hatfill interested me because, aside from being good company, he was smart and knew a great deal about things technical, as for example ebola. I regard him as a friend, and will continue to do so until it is established that he has been killing people, which I think unlikely.

My involvement: In August of 1997, I published in The Washington Times a column I wrote with Steve's help on the vulnerability of the US to biological terrorism. At the time I was writing a weekly police column. . . The column re-emerged in connection with the Hatfill-as-murderer stories. Since then, though on vacation in Mexico, I have gotten email from countless media outlets asking for interviews about him: The New York Post, Nightline, the New York Times, and such. In most cases I begged off. I know what television is, and know better than to subject myself to its directed editing. However, I have followed the stories. Overall the coverage has been contemptible, being half stampede and half lynch mob. When the professional crosses into the personal, writing gets difficult. Personally, I'd trust Steve with my life. Journalistically, I can't tell you he didn't do it. How could I know? I don't think he did, but that is a judgment, not a fact.

Jeff Dahmer seemed to be a nice fellow until you learned of his grazing habits. Neither can I prove that you didn't do it, or that Steve isn't a robotic space-alien disguised as an ebola researcher. I can tell you, however, that the stories have embodied every trait that makes people detest the press. They have been mostly innuendo. They rely almost totally on unnamed sources, and largely fail to make sense. Many have been of the sort that run, "Sources say that Smith was seen walking past the parking lot. The next day a body was found there." The reader is invited to make the connection. It makes me want to wash. As one example chosen from many, Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, one of those who emailed me about Hatfill, wrote in a column about "Mr. Z," recognizably Hatfill. Asks Kristof, "Have you [the FBI] examined whether Mr. Z has connections to the biggest anthrax outbreak among humans ever recorded, the one that sickened more than 10,000 black farmers in Zimbabwe in 1978-79?" Hatfill is now promoted to mass murderer. No evidence, no facts, just the leading question. The implication is one of guilt by geography. Hatfill went to medical school in Zimbabwe and served in the Selous Scouts. Kristof doesn't have the guts to make an accusation, or the honesty to admit that he has nothing to go on - so he relies on innuendo. Welcome to journalism. Personally, before I implied that anyone had endeavored to kill many thousands of people, I'd want a tad better evidence.

I am not familiar with the incident in Zimbabwe. However, anthrax comes in three varieties: intestinal, cutaneous, and "inhalation". The inhalation variety, the only one useful in warfare, doesn't sicken people. It kills them. If ten thousand people die of inhalation anthrax, there is no doubt that it has been done deliberately. Did they? Kristof doesn't say. If it wasn't the inhalation variety, what was it? Kristof doesn't say. How you give 10,000 farmers intestinal anthrax isn't obvious. How clear is it that the incident, if any, was in fact deliberate? What did Hatfill have to do with it? The reporting is so bad as to be meaningless.

Laura Rozen, in The American Prospect, June 27, writes that genetic "analysis of the letter-anthrax suggested that it was indistinguishable from a strain developed by USAMRIID [i.e., the US Army.]"

Unstated implication: Hatfill had access to the bug, so he must be guilty. Is this plausible? Hatfill would of course know that the bacillus would be DNA-sequenced and immediately traced to military sources. Why would he use a traceable variety? Conceivably he is secretly a space-alien psychotic android killer-bot. Stupid he isn't. "Suggested that it was indistinguishable."? That is careful reportorial weasel-wording. Was it indistinguishable, or was it not? Was the strain available elsewhere also?

Anthrax has been the subject of all manner of research by civilian scientists. They get specimens from somewhere, probably ordinary biological supply houses (though I don't know). Kristof also says, "FBI profilers are convinced that the real anthrax attacks last year were conducted by an American scientist trying to pin the blame on Arabs." I see. Then it really makes sense to use a variety identifiably developed by the US military, doesn't it? Exactly what Arabs would have. By the way, Nick, which profilers? Name one. Oh. Virtually all of the sources given in these stories are anonymous. "FBI profilers", "some of Hatfill's colleagues", etc. Now, I'm in the journalism racket. I know about anonymous sources. There's a saying, "You can bullshit the fans, but you can't bullshit the players".

When anonymous sources exist, and they don't always, they have agendas, which the reader doesn't know about, and they play stupid reporters like cheap pianos. Reporters, characteristically, are writing about things they don't understand. I'd give heavy odds not one in 500 knows purines from pyrimidines, PCR from RFLP, electrophoresis from a performing bear. Such things are the baby talk of genetics. Aside from the shoddy reporting, a tremendous naiveté runs through this stuff. Kristof berates the FBI for not having an expert compare the handwriting on the letters with Hatfill's. This implies that Hatfill wouldn't know that handwriting is distinctive. Likely, don't you think?

Another story reported that one of the letters had been mailed from near Hatfill's residence. A child of ten knows about postmarks. Kristof wants the stamps DNA tested to identify whoever licked them. Does he think that Hatfill, a first-rate bio-research guy, doesn't know about DNA sequencing? All of this is smear by unsubstantiated implication. Speaking as a sometimes reporter, the stories stink. If there is solid evidence that Hatfill is guilty, then publish it. But lame journalism craftedly skirting the libel laws doesn't cut it. ©Fred Reed 2002

The YES Men vs the WTO (from The Ecologist, July-August, 2002)

"On a lighter note, the best culture jammers in the world have struck again. The Yes Men, a shadowy bunch of anti growth troublemakers, sprung to life in 2000, when they set up a website ( which is such a close parody of the official WTO site that they were contacted by a conference of international lawyers and asked to give an official talk, The Yes Men sent along a fake WTO representative, "Dr Andreas Bichlbauer", who explained to the stony-faced lawyers that the WTO viewed the Italian siesta as a barrier to trade, and supported plans to allow citizens to auction their votes to the highest corporate bidder. "The lawyers had no idea they were listening to an imposter. Neither did a group of textile manufacturers, who invited the 'WTO' to talk to them last year in Finland. The Yes Men's WTO man "Hank Hardy Unruh" explained that the US Civil War had been a waste of time and resources. According to economic logic, slavery would eventually have been replaced anyway by the cheaper system of sweatshop labour that we have today. "Unruh" also explained that Gandhi's ideal of village self-sufficiency was an unacceptable protectionist measure.
"³Now the Yes Men/WTO nexus has announced the winding-up of the WTO, and its replacement with a 'trade regulation organisation' based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The real WTO is furious, and has placed a message on its website ( warning of the Yes Men's activities. The Yes Men, meanwhile, hope to continue their speaking tours. "We think the ethical thing to do", they say, "is to represent the WTO more honestly than they represent themselves".

Be very Afraid - Bush Productions Preparing to Go Into Action
by Robert Fisk, The Independent (UK), August 17th, 2002

I have always been a sucker for wide-screen epics. Ever since my dad took me to see Quo Vadis - which ends with centurion Robert Taylor heading off to his execution with his bride on his arm - I've been on the movie roller-coaster. My dad didn't make a great distinction between the big pictures and B-movies; he managed to squeeze Hercules Unchained in between Ben Hur and Spartacus. But the extraordinary suspension of disbelief provided by the cinema carried me right through to Titanic, Pearl Harbor and Gladiator. Awful they may be. Spectacular they are. But the important thing, as my dad used to tell me, was to remember that the cinema did not really imitate reality. Newly converted Christian centurions did not go so blithely to their deaths nor did love reign supreme on the Titanic. The fighter pilots of Pearl Harbor did not perform so heroically, nor did wicked Roman emperors die so young. From John Wayne's The Green Berets, war films have lied to us about life and death. After the crimes against humanity in New York and Washington last September, I suppose it was inevitable that the Pentagon and the CIA would call on Hollywood for ideas - yes, the movie boys actually did go to Washington to do a little synergy with the local princes of darkness. But when Vice-President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld turned up together for the premiere of Black Hawk Down, I began to get worried."


Warnings of Dangerous ASIO Bill
by Geoff Muirden, Research Officer, Australian Civil Liberties Union (Australian On Target, August 30, 2002)

If the report given on the front page of the Sunday Age, (18/8/02) is correct, the Federal government is guilty of pushing for draconian legislation in the form of an ASIO [Australian Security Intelligence Organisation] bill that makes further assaults on what little remains of personal freedom. It should be the task of Senators to question these draconian laws, not only in terms of the present situation, but in the legacy of totalitarian State control they leave to future generations. The Sunday Age summarises many of the concerns in such an able manner that they can readily be stated here:
(1) The notion that ASIO can readily detain minors as young as 14 years of age defies warnings from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on ASIO, the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) and the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) calling for ASIO not to detain people younger than 18. Minors as young as 14 are surely too young to understand the ramifications of the questions they are being forced to answer if arrested and interrogated.
(2) Denial of sunset clause. Calls for a sunset clause that would render the legislation invalid after three years have been denied. Legislation of this totalitarian nature, which should not be presented in the first place, should at least be reassessed and not be set in "concrete" as a permanent law of the land.
(3) The planned ASIO law would allow "legal" detention of citizens without proof that they had done anything wrong, who could be held incommunicado for up to 48 hours, without right to silence or right to a lawyer for that period. This constitutes a denial of proper principles of justice, which would allow right to a lawyer, the right to silence, and an obligation on the part of the arresting authorities to prove such detention is justified.
An ASIO agent is to be present at all discussions, denying clients any right to private discussions. This type of authoritarian control is being set in place at a time when it seems likely that the US may go to war with Iraq, a war in which the Australian government would be involved, and which sets the groundwork for martial law. Laws of this kind are unjust, immoral and draconian, denying basic civil liberties. It should be the task of Senators to question the morality and necessity of laws of this kind and to refuse to pass them into law. . .

Jeremy Lee Writes from Australia
Consequences of Un-natural Farming

An interesting and ominous brochure has been dropped in Queensland letter-boxes by the Department of Primary Industries, Queensland Government. It gave Queenslanders "An important warning about feeding animals. Food scraps may contain exotic animal disease viruses like Foot and Mouth Disease". It goes on: "Do not feed food scraps containing any meat or imported dairy products to livestock". All of which raises some repellent possibilities. As one with a few chooks which live on the contents of a daily scrap bucket, do I now fear for their future? If the scraps from my table are a threat to my chooks, why would they not equally be a threat to my family? Why the mention of "foreign" products? Is this a subliminal message from the Queensland Government that "foreign" food sold in Australia does not meet traditional Australian standards? And why Foot and Mouth? There has been no evidence of the disease in Australia in recent times. Do the authorities fear that one of the prices we must pay for a level playing field in a global free market is a borderless world as far as diseases are concerned?
Our traditional view that "If it's good enough for us, it's good enough for our chooks" has been shattered!

In times past Australia has been vigilant in quarantine programmes that kept us free of exotic human and animal diseases endemic in other parts of the world. It was the late Sir Raphael Cilento, a world-renowned expert in tropical medicine, who warned that Asian immigration - and by implication large numbers of refugees - could re-introduce into Australia diseases previously eliminated. But the issue goes further. Large-scale factory farming and monoculture, with the elimination of rotational cropping and the fallowing of land, breaks down soil structure and health. C.H. Douglas addressed this problem long before the epidemic of de-natured food and soil destruction we see round the world today. He wrote:
". . . At the bottom, there is little doubt that there are two irreconcilable ideas in conflict. The first of these is that the world in which we live is an organism and that men and animals have intricate relations with the earth - not amorphous but specific and infinitely varied, which can only be disregarded at the peril both of men and the earth they live on. I do not mean in the least by this that a universal back to the land movement is either necessary or even desirable, but I do think that the idea that the earth is merely something to be exploited and Olived on' is quite fatal. "
" The second and antithetic idea is that the world is merely the raw material for a factory, that the nearer agriculture approximates to Mr. Ford's conveyor belt principles, and towns emulate Stalingrad, the better we shall be. I do not think I am unduly squeamish, but I have to plead guilty to a wave of real nausea at the description as progress, of egg factories in which hundreds of thousands of hens are kept under electric light from birth to death, confined in little boxes, never allowed out, laying eggs. I don't want to eat those eggs, and I have a strong conviction that they are not good to eat, whatever their superficial taste may be. The idea - the Encyclopaedist idea - that everything can be put into a nice watertight compartment, and card indexed, is the philosophy of a frozen Hell." (The Land for the Chosen People Racket, 1942)

Writing of the great agricultural scientist, Sir Albert Howard, The New Times (June 3rd, 1955) commented:
" Policies in all fields stem from philosophy and unfortunately most of the policies of planning the earth today - big-scale flood control dams, more and more deadly chemical sprays, which provide 'full employment' in industries developed to make these soil-poisoners, are based upon a philosophy of materialism. . . The more individuals accept large-scale centralized planning in one field, the easier it becomes for the advocates of centralized planning to impose totalitarian policies in other fields. The fight for genuine freedom must be fought on all fronts. The soil is the very basis of life and therefore control and management of soil and water concern the control of life itself. The importance of this matter cannot be too strongly emphasized. . ."

I am therefore going to continue, suicidal though it may be, in passing my scraps on to my chooks. They are given time for grazing and scratching each day, and I hope they pick up enough minerals to fortify their immune systems. I will certainly attempt to save them from imported food; and hope, in consequence, that I live as long as they do!

Bush Going Backwards

Dare we hope that a faint gleam of sanity is beginning to break through in world affairs? There is a belated backlash against the idea of declaring war on Iraq, and blasting another lot of women and children into oblivion The latest Weekend Australian Newspoll (17/18-8-02) shows 50 percent of Australians opposed to Australian involvement in another Iraqi war, 30 percent strongly. Unless another disaster such as the Twin Towers happens again, the war rhetoric is wearing thin. Even Prime Minister Howard is toning down the belligerence, while Alexander Eiderdown [Downer], the Rambo warrior of Foreign Affairs, has had to do a couple of somersaults. Tony Blair in Britain is running into stiff resistance in Parliament, including from his own party.

The Australian Financial Review ((20/8/02) under the heading "Rambos Having a Downer" said: "Foreign Minister Downer was 'hung out to dry' yesterday by Prime Minister John Howard, in view of his parliamentary colleagues. "And just in case Downer, whose clumsy intervention in the Iraq debate has caused the Government all sorts of problems, failed to get the message Howard used a reference to Rambo rhetoric in answer to a question on corporate governance to add to the Foreign Minister's discomfort. . . By yesterday Downer, who manifested the hang-dog look of someone who has been taken to the woodshed by his superiors, was sounding like someone who had suddenly lost all his earlier enthusiasm for any sort of military adventure. . ."

We can only speculate on the sigh of relief that must be going up in Saddam Hussein's bunker! But it was Howard who started the war-talk in the first place. The possible loss of a $800 million wheat market, and the antipathy in Australia to more war, has obviously had some impact.

US Debt and the Money Supply

Even George Bush is muffling the war-drums, although he is still under pressure to go to war, for a number of reasons: firstly, the Zionists in his Cabinet - notably Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle - support Ariel Sharon's need for a diversion in Iraq to cover his intended expulsion of the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza. Secondly, the Carlyle Group, which includes Bush himself, Dick Cheney and such unlikely characters as former British PM John Major, have major vested interests in armaments and Middle East oil; and, thirdly, Bush needs something - anything - to get a stagnant and sinking American economy moving again.
The US Budget position tells its own story. . . The figures show that we are looking at trillions of dollars. The American federal budget is now over $2 trillion. This has fallen short of expenditure by $337 billion in the last twelve months. The nation is running a massive trade deficit of over $300 billion annually. The US National Debt (government debt) now exceeds $6 trillion, rising by almost $500 billion in the last 12 months, which is an increase of over $500 million per hour!

The 'Key' is to See Them As Human Beings

There is much ferment within certain Jewish circles over the treatment meted out to the Palestinians by the Israelis. Those with a sense of right and wrong are questioning and protesting at the barbaric treatment these people are being subjected to. The following letter appeared in - August 10th, 2002

Dear Steven Salaita, I read your piece, "From the other perspective" in As an Israeli, I wanted to send you some words of hope. No doubt, the situation is dark beyond belief - my country's actions are horrifying and I'm deeply ashamed, as a human being, as a Jew, and as an Israeli. I've always felt and known that the key to reconciliation is for Israel to be able to see the Palestinians as human beings. It's that simple, yet the hardest task of all. The degradation of the other to a lesser status is the root of all evil, in the life of the individual and the life of a nation. Atrocities can only be done to those whom you don't consider as human as yourself. There's a Jewish saying that speaks to that simple truth: "Love thy fellow man as you love yourself." This is the principle my country has wished to forget because of fear, greed, confusion, the heavy burden of moral responsibility, and because of ignorance. But how shall we again awaken this realization in the hearts of my brothers and sisters? How shall we remind them of their moral obligation? How shall we help them repent? I don't claim to have the answers but I deeply feel that weaving new ties between Palestinians and Israelis - ties of respect, humanity, and love - has to be done by individuals in Israel, in Palestine, and all over the world.Only by reaching out to one another as human beings can we hope to counter our 'leaders' hatred with our love of life. It is for this reason that I write to you: to strengthen your heart, to beg you not to lose hope, and to assure you that there are many open hearts among Israelis who yearn to do the same. We must find each other. This is our only hope and not a moment too soon. I beg for your forgiveness for all the wrongs done to your people in my name. With respect and hope, Haggai Kupermintz, Assistant Professor, University of Colorado - United States.

In Response: The following letter is columnist Steven Salaita's response to Haggai Kupermintz:
Dear Professor Kupermintz, Thank you very much for this lovely message; it is warmly appreciated. I was in tears as I read it. I can't imagine anybody making a more beautiful statement, and I pray to God that what you desire comes true. I am in the run-down computer lab in the Shatila Refugee Camp in Lebanon. I called over some of my students - kids and teenagers - to read your message. They were extremely touched. They just asked me to tell you that they send God's blessings to you and your family. You are always welcome here, they say. "He is really from Israel?" they keep asking me. "Of course," I answer. "Inshallah, he will be your neighbor one day." It's difficult for them to get past the idea that all Israelis are aggressive. There are two main reasons: ? because that's generally what Israel has shown them of itself; and ? because that's what they are taught from the moment of birth. You did a great service to us all by showing them a human face. It's impossible for Arabs to do it with our own words. The taboo is especially strong in refugee camps. Please don't send apologies. You have no need to. If we all were compelled to apologize for the actions of our nations, then humanity would never get past the word "sorry". My warmest regards to you. Thanks again for taking the time to write and share such personal thoughts. Salaam and Shalom, Steven Salaita, columnist
(On Target readers might like to send messages of encouragement to both correspondents.)

A New Treaty on the Web

Whatever else is said about the World-Wide-Web, with all its vulgarities and excesses, it has enabled an exchange of information that has been a thorn in the side of autocratic government. Politicians have been forced to defend their actions over matters which would never have come to public attention before the Web made it possible. Alliances of concerned people in different nations are now discovering each other and working together. Now we have on the horizon an international treaty arising from the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments, which aims to establish enforceable international protocols for handling "international violations" of the Web, especially where national laws are in conflict. The Convention's 52-member nations would agree to enforce each others' commercial laws. Any company, Internet Service Provider or individual could be held accountable for violating a foreign law, even though it is permissible in his home country. The web, says the treaty, makes it possible to break a law from thousands of miles away. Thus, Germany's 'Truth in History" laws, which make it a crime to question details of the Holocaust, could be applied to the citizens of other countries where no such bans exist. All it would require is for a German citizen to click on the website and make an official complaint, and someone the other side of the globe, acting in conformity with the laws of his own country, would face prosecution. Who would adjudicate in such cases? The World Court? The International Criminal Court? Or a new international tribunal yet to be established?

. . . the real battle in Australia in the 21st century is not to preserve our Constitution, but to retrieve it from the intrigue and manipulation of politicians prepared to jeopardize their nation by playing with international treaties for a little short-term power.

Wall Street Woes Continue

Another big drop on Wall Street, followed by a minor bounce, but we still have a long way to go. Robert Gottliebsen (The Australian 5-9-02) said ominously:
"...The analysts are beginning to understand the extent of the layoffs planned by big US companies and the effect this will have on consumer confidence. They also realize that their largest bank, Citigroup, is getting into more and more hot water over apparently doctored client share advice to win merchant bank accounts. The resulting writs could be enormous. ³
"Later, they will realize that the greatest threat of all is that ordinary people in South American countries such as Brazil and Argentina may have given up on the system. Others may follow. . ."

Gottliebsen suggests that Australia won't avoid being hit. No wonder George Bush is frantic for a war as soon as possible!

Multiculturalism Unravels

The fanciful idea of viable multicultural societies is being exposed and destroyed by reality. There is no such thing as a successful society which accommodates a multitude of philosophies and religions. The break-point comes when religious belief is put into practice in the form of law. Unless made practical in a way of life, religion remains no more than an abstract idea. Sooner or later it dies - or else spills over into the way people relate and govern themselves. A little common sense will acknowledge this. What is really happening is the eradication of traditional beliefs, and their resultant legal provisions, by a new religion - Humanism.
Humanism has been described as a religion by the US Supreme Court. But it denies the Supernatural. The Humanist Manifesto II, published in 1973, made this quite clear: ". . . We find insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of a supernatural; it is either meaningless or irrelevant in the question of the survival and fulfilment of the human race. As non-theists, we begin with humans not God, nature not deity . . . we can discover no divine purpose for the human species. . ."

All policies come from philosophies, as Douglas so accurately pointed out. How does a society survive when different faiths advocate different norms? One faith, for instance. may urge polygamy, while another espouses monogamy. One may see vengeance as justice, while another believes in mercy. Even the clothes we wear are signs of cultural difference. In Britain, for instance, there have been heated arguments as to whether Islamic policemen should be allowed to keep their turbans instead of helmets. Now we have an Islamic movement within the British police which see wearing the Crown - to whom they are supposed to give their allegiance - as against their religion. One cannot even play a game of cricket unless there is agreement on the rules and acceptance of the umpire. Britain is now facing an invasion, not only of other races, but an explosion of cultures which endanger Common Law and the traditional way of life.

A special article in The Times (UK), August 7th, 2002, said:
"The unprecedented wave of immigration from the poor world to Britain is leading to huge and rapidly growing communities from almost every Third World country. There are a million Indians, almost 700,000 Pakistanis, 260,000 Bangladeshis, up to a million Nigerians, over 100,000 Iraqis. And numbers are increasing rapidly - in the past five years, while the white population grew by 1 percent, the Bangladeshi community grew by 30 percent, the black African population by 37 percent and the Pakistani community by 13 percent. "The number of people allowed to settle permanently in the UK has more than doubled in the past few years, reaching 125,000 in 2000 - almost all from the Third World and Eastern Europe. . . The route of entry is irrelevant. Whether it is never-get-deported asylum, arranged marriages, bringing over parents, grandparents, children or fiancés, holiday visas that mean never going home, temporary work visas that inevitably lead to citizenship five years down the line, or simply a clandestine ride on the back of a lorry, the effect is the same. Almost all are certain to stay. . .
". . . what is happening now is the result of sustained migration pressure the likes of which the world has never seen before. For the first time, the world has huge disparities of wealth, widespread knowledge in the poor world of how the rich world lives and how to get there through TV and global telecommunications, and cheap, quick worldwide transport. It is easier for them to get here, and far more difficult to make them leave: the revolution in 'human rights' means that as soon as anyone gets past passport control they are pretty much guaranteed to stay. More than 47,000 illegal immigrants were detected in 2000, but just 6,000 were sent home. . "

Nor are the British people giving their consent: survey after survey shows that the large majority of British people - including around half of ethnic minorities
- think there is too much immigration to Britain; but fear of accusations of racism and the power of the immigration lobby means that no mainstream political party dare reflect public opinion . . ."

Australia's Back Door

While, through the efforts of Immigration Minister Ruddock, the flow of illegal boat people has been staunched for the moment, there seems to be a mass of unguarded entry points yet to be addressed. An article from a New Zealand paper, The Ashburton Guardian (2-8-02), headed Concerns Raised NZ is 'Back Door Entry' to Australia for Refugees, said:
" . . . New Zealand has had a net loss of immigrants in the past few years with large numbers moving out of New Zealand. . . In the past immigrants had moved to New Zealand, only to move to Australia once they had gained New Zealand residency. . . In Christchurch refugees are reported to be leaving in droves. About half of Christchurch's Somali community, which numbered more than 500 in 2000 have crossed the Tasman, Refugee and Resettlement Support said. "Manager Felicite Jardine said some of the 200 or so who were left intend to follow and even recent Afghan refugees who had yet to get their New Zealand citizenship have signalled that they too will move to Australia. The trend is not new but appears to have been spurred by recent legislative change in Australia. The Australian Government last year cut permanent residency rights for New Zealanders, putting them on the same footing as other migrants. The change was made partly to address concerns that New Zealand was a 'back-door' entry to Australia after it was revealed that one in three New Zealanders emigrating to Australia was not born here. Ms. Jardine confirmed that there was a 'significant exodus' of refugees from Christchurch and other New Zealand main centres last year, just before the rules changed. 'Hundreds of people went last year.' Refugees traditionally moved across the Tasman once they gained their New Zealand citizenship, she said.

"The Cambodian community, once about 1,200, now numbered fewer that 500 after many refugees and their families moved to Australia. 'Employment opportunities are better and it's a more multicultural country,' she said.'

Growing Backlash: As more and more experience first hand the pain that oozes from forced multiculturalism, the muted grumbling grows louder and finally breaks into the open. A new movement in Britain, Migration Watch UK, has caused heated debate. Its leader, Dr. Coleman, recently claimed Australia's asylum policy was the best way to handle mass people movements within the terms of the Geneva Convention. The Australian Financial Review (26-8-02) reported:
". . . Dr. Coleman, who is a reader in demography at Oxford University, said Australia's asylum-seeker stance 'seems by far the best way to do it'. . . and described Australia's policy of mandatory detention as 'utterly unobjectionable'.". . . 'If you permit people to claim residency simply by uttering the magic word 'asylum', you will become a magnet [to illegal immigrants] and the idea that you can then sort them out is just a mirage,¹ he said. . ."
Dr. Coleman recently addressed a closed-door seminar on the subject, attended by Mr Ruddock.

Phillip Day

Phillip Day is becoming well known world wide as a knowledgable and skilled writer and lecturer on the background causes of modern diseases and alternative therapies. He toured New Zealand and Australia last year and is doing so again in November and December. At some meetings more than a thousand people attended. We have no connection with Mr Day but have been impressed with the material in his books and on his tapes. His books are Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know the Truth; Health Wars; World Without Aids and The Mind Game. These will be sold at his meetings. Information on them, and the present Australian supplier can also be obtained from the web site or by phoning 0061-3-9891 7883 or faxing 0061-3-9891 7766.

There is a charge for attending the meetings. The following are a few extracts from Mr Day's advertising flyer:
"Heart disease - have we completely misunderstood the root cause? Why are at least 18 cultures living long, disease-free lives, in many cases in excess of 100 years? Can we do what they do? Discover the harmful toxins we innocently allow into our homes that are contributing to our misery, physical handicap and early death.

Non-Government Health Warning
Attending this Lecture Could Seriously Improve Your Health. "With over 16 years of research in the health field, medical researcher and journalist Phillip Day reports on the exciting and straight forward results of scientific research into today's most concerning health issues. Learn how to prevent or treat these conditions simply and affordably with nutrition and lifestyle changes. . .'
The following are Mr Day's advertised meetings. there is an entrance cost (more information from
Auckland, 2pm. Sat, 23 Nov. Aotea Centre, The Edge, NZI Room.
Hamilton, 7.30pm. Monday, 25 Nov. Quality Hotel, 100 Garnett Ave, Te Rapa.
Tauranga, 7.30pm. Tues., 26 Nov. Armitage Hotel, Washington Room, Cnr. Willow & Park St.
Taupo, 7.30pm. Wed., 27 Nov. Great Lake Centre Theatre, Story Pl.
Wanganui, 7.30pm. Thurs., 28 Nov. Wanganui Collegiate School, Liverpool St.
Wellington, 2pm. Saturday, 30 Nov. (venue not given yet)
Christchurch, 7.30pm. Monday, 2 Dec. Christchurch Convention Centre, 86 Kilmore St.
Dunedin, 7.30pm. Wed., 4 Dec. (venue not given yet)
Queenstown, 7.30pm. Fri., 6 Dec. Millennium Hotel, Cnr. Frankston & Stanley St.

Briefly: The Globalisation Monster knows no bounds. Multinational corporations are buying water rights wherever they can around the world and anticipate large profits from decreasing water quantities and quality over the next 20 years. One giant company, a manufacturer of a certain cola drink, has reportedly purchased one of the purist sources of mineral water in New Zealand, near the town of Putaruru.

A long out of print book, The Free Press, by Hilaire Belloc, has been republished in the United States. We will have stocks soon. Amongst other things Belloc reveals that at the beginning of the 20th Century some British industrialists planned to import tens of thousands of Chinese Coolie labourers to the UK, following the import of 47,000 such labourers to South Africa after the Boar War. Only near riots by British workers fouled the plot, which the industrialists involved had attempted to keep secret.

The late Enoch Powell is hated by liberals. Back in the 1960s as a British MP and potential PM he warned against further non-assimilable immigration. Reflecting a proper sense of humanity he attacked the multicultural advocates, not immigrants. He said Britain should offer generous financial compensation to those willing to voluntarily return to their own countries and he received considerable support from non-Europeans in Britain, a fact that is always suppressed. Peter Brown, deputy leader of NZ First has bravely referred to the warnings of Enoch Powell. NZ First leader Winston Peters says Powell "Was one of the finest minds that passed through the House of Commons." (The Press, 12-8-02).
According to the same report Helen Clark prefers to believe "Britain was now a model multicultural Western democracy, with significantly higher living standards than New Zealand's. Part of the success was that, for a long time, it had imported the best and brightest from many countries, she said".
It's funny why Mrs Clark should think this since it's rare to find British people who would agree. Most feel betrayed by government immigration policy.

Peter Brown says "he disagreed that Mr Powell gave racism respectability and said the British politician was espousing views of the average working person.' And that's the difference. Mrs Clark does not think the views of ordinary working people have any validity, only those of the liberal, academic elites who agree with her. Peter Brown and Winston Peters deserve to be congratulated for their courage. In truth it is the liberals like Clark who are causing racial strife and conveniently dismiss the difficulties caused to the immigrates themselves.

Say NO to GATS - Tell YOUR MP Now! The Government wants to ratify the General Agreement on Trade in Services which will let foreign corporations take over government-provided services. If you don't want this then it's time you told your MP or wrote a letter to your paper. As we understand it Gats was signed by many countries back in 1994 with a ten year implementation period which suggests it comes into full effect in 2004-5. Labour and National have both, treacherously, favoured it. Gats involves calling worldwide tenders for services provided to the New Zealand people. Under its provisions even local bodies could be denied the right to favour a local contractor, say, for collecting the rubbish. In Australia the Federal Government has already made it illegal for local bodies and state governments to favour local contractors. They are legally obliged to always give the contract to the lowest bidder. With Gats this nonsense is extended world wide. It means a company from anywhere in the world could undercut a local contractor for weed control in your local town, or running the hospital meal service, or mowing the park grounds.