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

On Target

9 March 1979. Thought for the Week: "I suppose there can be few amongst us who think about the world in which we live, and perhaps fewer amongst the more obvious victims of it, who would not agree that its condition is serious and shows every sign of becoming worse. Many must have asked themselves why the ability of scientists, organisers, or educationists, brilliant and laudable in essence, seems to lead us only from one catastrophe to another, until it would appear that knowledge, invention and progress, so far from being our salvation, have doomed the world to almost inevitable destruction."
C.H. Douglas, in The Tragedy of Human Effort (1936)


"Mr. Hayden restated the Labor Party's determination to introduce a capital gains tax. - The Australian (March 3rd) In his Perth address on March 2nd, Mr. Bill Hayden, Leader of the Federal Opposition, once more trotted out his Socialist ideology, which can be summed up as "the rich are rich, because the poor are poor!" The nigger in the woodpile, once again, is "the massive and unearned capital gains of the wealthy." A tax on this wicked accretion of unearned money would, according to Mr. Hayden, swell the Treasury by some $300 million, and this revenue would be directed towards urgent social needs.

It all sounds so just and simple: and there's no question that there is dire need and deprivation in our so-called "affluent society", a myth in our opinion. The affluent society is a vision attributable to the economist's euphoria, floating on a sea of debt! One has only to drive up a "nice" little street, in a "nice" suburb in one of Australia's cities to see well kept cottages, with shiny late model automobiles in the drive, and no doubt good, modern furniture and appliances inside the same cottages, to hazard some sort of guess as to the tens of thousands of dollars (in that little street alone) which must be owing to banks, housing societies, insurance companies, hire purchase companies.
Why, every man, woman and child in Australia owes the hire purchase companies, ALONE, something approaching five hundred dollars. There is no "affluent" society; it only seems there is, as long as the financial institutions make credit available. The dream would soon be dispelled if the bank credit stopped - as happened in 1929.

Mr. Malcolm Fraser was quick to spring to the attack on Mr. Hayden (playing the party political game) - stating that a capital gains tax would devastate "hundreds of thousands" of farmers, small businessmen and shopkeepers. Whilst the "hundreds of thousands" sounds quite scary, we don't doubt that a great number of the above would take the knock, very many going on to the social service for which Mr. Hayden wants the revenue from a capital gains tax. The music goes round and round!

Supporters will readily recall that Mr. Fraser, himself, intended to scrape the barrel his way, by introducing a retail turnover tax: this was knocked out by grass roots pressure in the general community, with the retail merchants mounting an admirable campaign. So with a Budget deficit of perhaps a billion dollars facing the Government at the close of the financial year the Government has to pull a financial rabbit out of the hat, somehow. The retail turnover tax was a fizzer - what's next?!

Mr. Hayden knows as well as Mr. Fraser that the Government of the day, hooked on massive social security commitments, and with the grass roots pressure for more Defence spending building up, just must have more revenue. What's the answer? There is no answer: not under prevailing finance economic conventions. The standards of living, goods, (and even services) of Australians will continue to wind down.


"For all the contribution that our M.P.s make to real politik in this balance of power game, they might as well be a bunch of galahs" - Mr. Douglas Wilkie, in Sunday Press (Melbourne) March 4th.

The posturing of our pathetic little bunch of politicians, which we have in Canberra, must seem amusing to the power men in the Kremlin and Peking. The Fraser-Peacock "call" for an end of hostilities in Indo-China could only be for home consumption: surely, even they could not, in their wildest dreams, imagine that anything they could say or do would even disturb a mosquito in the world's Halls of Power.

Mr. Douglas Wilkie, in his Sunday Press column, lays it on the line in no uncertain manner, and we quote: "Foreign Minister Peacock's survey of the world scene was at least a sober estimate of the perils posed by an expansion of Russian strategic aims, backed by a massive military build up. Perhaps Mr. Peacock was most vulnerable in his emphasis on Australia's capacity to influence Third World countries, notably in Southern Africa.

That boast is an old favourite, cherished by both Liberal and Labor governments; but it was blown out before the end of the week by events in Namibia. There, the Marxist leader of S.W.A.P.O. (South West African People's Organisation) Mr. Nujoma, told an A.B.C. interviewer that his followers would fire on Australian troops if they took part in an U.N. peacekeeping force. Despite a U.N. contribution to his campaign fund, Mr. Nujoma won't have white men 'interfering' in an election he can't win, except by terrorism. So much for Canberra's reward after years of toadying to black African 'democracy', in order to win favour in the Third World for a non-racist Australia!"

The other Peacock we have in mind is the Peacock Throne of Iran (Persia), with the Shah forced out of the country; there are no prizes there either. We have more to say about this in this week's On Target Bulletin.

FROM BRITISH ON TARGET (Jan. 27th, 1979)

On the Rounds, by "Vigilia".

Multinationals Increase Our Unemployment
' The Guardian' June 7th, 78) reported: 'Dunlop, I.C.I. and other chemical and rubber multinationals were accused of 'sanctimonious hypocrisy' and 'industrial vandalism' in a trade union attack yesterday on their trading and technology links with Eastern bloc countries. Mr. David Warburton, national officer of the General and Municipal Workers' Union..told...Congress...that some of Britain's import problems were caused by the 'deliberate calculated actions' of major multinationals selling British know how to international competitors, and establishing factories in other countries.'
Mr. Warburton then showed how multinationals used British money to set up low wage factories behind the Iron Curtain, with the cost being met by imports that the factory produced, thus putting, Britons out of work.

'One recent deal involved I.C.I., Davy, Power & Klockner, who were to survey two Methanol plants in the Soviet Union which could have a productive capacity of 2,500 tonnes a day .... as part of that deal Russia will export 300,000 tonnes of Methanol a year to the West. And who is Britain's Methanol producer?... I.C.I.'

Another example was the rubber industry which complained of imported tyres; yet, as Mr. Warburton alleged, the British importers of Rumanian tyres were indirectly owned by Dunlop." "As ever, we have to look to an apparently Left wing source to find out facts which would never be revealed by so called patriots of Mrs. Thatcher's 'Conservative Party"'.

Note: This ludicrous course of action is only made 'necessary' because no solution is found to the two contradictory policies of automation and full employment under current conventional finance economic rules. Until such time as the benefits of the technological age are passed on to the members of society through an appropriate financial mechanism such madness will continue. What is happening at present is production for production's sake; under current rules, aided by the manipulation referred to in this item by "Vigilia", the big multinationals have found a mechanism to reduce their financial costs. For a more detailed analysis of this question, we would recommend readers study 'Economic Democracy' by C.H. Douglas". (end of British On Target item). "Economic Democracy" is available from all Australian League of Rights offices. Price: $3.45 posted.


Mrs. Joy Mein, the Victorian State President of the Liberal Party says that her Party will not enter a coalition government with the National Party. Brave words. Other Liberal hearties also whistled in the dark at the recent Victorian Liberal Conference, and gave each other moral support in what could be the Year of the Boot for the Victorian Liberals. Our opinion is that, if the Liberals survive in Victoria at the May poll, they will most probably be forced into a coalition with the National Party. As the National Party in Victoria has a policy of opposition to Fluoridation, what effect will this have on Mr. Hamer's dogged policy of compulsory fluoridation of Victoria's water supplies? The little Victorian Liberals like to inform electors that they stand for "freedom of choice"; but to paraphrase George Orwell (1984!).. ."some freedoms are more equal than other freedoms". If Mr. Hamer and his cohorts do get the Order of the Boot, they will have no one to blame but themselves.

The issue of Intelligence Digest (U.K. March 1st) sees some indications that the events that have recently rocked Iran could be repeated in Turkey. We have for some time held the view that if an Islamic "revolution" does get under way, then it could sweep the Middle East with cataclysmic and unpredictable results. Intelligence Digest observes: "Although it would be dangerous to attempt to draw a close parallel between the relentless tragedy in Iran and some manifestations emerging in Turkey, there are nevertheless similarities that are uncomfortable similarities with the position in Iran as it was six months ago. In Turkey, too a militant Islamic revivalist movement, the National Salvation Party, is suddenly beginning to flex its muscles...."

A Pennsylvanie (U.S.A.) actionist has sent us a most interesting extract from The Patriot (Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Feb. 13th). The extract from The Patriot is the regular column "Washington Merry-Go-Round" by Jack Anderson. The title of this particular "Merry-Go-Round is "Did Carter Know Iran Situation?" We can report that in a "B.B.C. World Round Up" Session in recent days, there was criticism of the United States for doing little or nothing to save the Shah of Iran. We can't possibly reproduce the entire Jack Anderson article:
"President Jimmy Carter and the Central Intelligence Agency have been getting their lumps from just about everybody for not knowing what was going on in Iran, supporting the Shah until it was too late and failing to cultivate contacts with the exiled Muslim Leader, Ayatollah Khomeiny. "But there is one man, perhaps the only man in the world, who believes just the opposite: Shah Mohammed Reza Paylevi. Embittered and increasingly paranoid since he was forced last month to flee the nation he has ruled and looted, the Shah believes Carter and the C.I.A. knew all too well what was happening in Iran. In fact, he actually believes the C.I.A. engineered his fall from power and the ascendancy of Khomeiny…
He (the Shah) had a private talk with Egyptian President Anwat Sadat on Jan. 16 (79): intelligence sources have provided us with a detailed report on this top-secret conversation. …..
"The U. S. Embassy in Teheran convinced him, said the Shah, that a prerequisite for a better understanding of Carter was the dismissal of General Nematollah Nassiri, head of Iran's secret police. When he fired Nassiri on June 6th, 78 under U.S. pressure…Left wing, Moscow led groups in Iran interpreted this as a sign of weakness and stepped up their opposition with massive strikes. …"The Shah said that 'the most disgusting double-crossing and treason (sic) was carried out in the final days of the January crisis in Teheran. The Shah, acting on American advice, decided to leave Iran temporarily to enable the military and his other supporters to keep Khomeiny from returning, and to pave the way for the Shah's eventual return to power. "Actually, according to the Shah's unique view of events, the Americans were warning the Iranian military that if they tried to seize control and bring the Shah back, the United States would cut off all supplies and assistance. This warning was delivered, the Shah told Sadat, to top Iranian brass by General Robert E. Huyser, Second-in-Command of American forces in Europe, and word of the warning was passed on to Khomeiny in Paris.
"It was this sneaky power play, the Shah said, that made it possible for Khomeiny to return from exile and which thwarted the Shah's plan to regain his throne. In light of his experience, the Shah told Sadat, the Egyptian President should not trust the Carter administration or take its advice.
Footnote: A C.I.A. spokesman said the Agency could not comment on the Shah's interpretation of events."

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