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

5 September 1980. Thought for the Week: "Monopolies and cartels are the natural forms of capitalist economy in its higher stage of development. It is impossible for an economy like America's to go back to the pre-monopoly stage. The free enterprise system is the freedom of capital to concentrate and centralise itself. We find in many circles of the capitalist class keener appreciation of this problem in its practical terms than we find in most of America's traditional liberals at the present time."
Earl Browder, American Communist leader during and after the Second World War.
No doubt David Rockefeller would endorse Comrade Browder's assessment!


A major article on The League of Rights, which appeared in the Bundaberg daily, "The Bundaberg News Mail" of August 26th, is typical of the spate of growing attacks upon the League. Author of the article, Mr. Andrew Stewart, is described as "The News Mail's State Writer." It is a classic example of the sloppy journalism now so prevalent. Mr. Stewart repeats the old Doug Anthony smear about the League being 'pro-Nazi', an allegation that Mr. Anthony subsequently withdrew.

League supporters will be astounded to know that in Victoria the League allegedly is partly responsible for turning electors from the National Party to the Liberal Party. An unnamed spokesman for the National Party is quoted as saying that the League is looking for "respectability". "It has a disreputable and racialist basis, but is trying to conceal this by an alliance with established institutions, particularly at present with the Country Party". The racial policy of the League is the same policy, which, up until a few years ago, was endorsed by both the Liberal and Country Parties. Presumably they were also "disreputable".

Liberal backbench Member Mr. Terry Gygar, who had the impudence to suggest that Mrs. Florence Bjelke-Petersen should not give a Paper at the League's recent Brisbane Seminar on "The Australian Family Under Attack" is quoted as saying that "It's unfortunate that a lot of genuine people have become tied up with the League." It never seems to occur to the Gygars that large numbers of responsible Australians have turned their backs in disgust on the type of vile anti-League smearing of which "The Bundaberg News Mail" article is an example.

Mr. Andrew Stewart quotes an unnamed League of Rights member "of several years", who "asked to remain anonymous for fear of retribution". This is one of the most hilarious allegations we have yet read. As is the claim by the anonymous member that the appearance of Mrs. Bjelke-Petersen at a Seminar sponsored jointly by The League and The Queensland Housewives' Association, "will boost membership". The League is a service organisation and membership is a privilege and restricted to those prepared to accept personal responsibility for the various activities of the League. People can freely choose to avail themselves of any of the League's many services.
The Gygars come and go, the sloppy journalists churn out their filth, but the League continues on. As the crisis gripping Civilisation deepens, we anticipate that the ravings of the anti-League smearers will continue.


Events over the past week have dented the smug complacency of the Fraser Government. It is now obvious that the Government is not going to have the easy run to the elections, which it confidently anticipated. There is increasing concern about what might happen in the Senate elections, which are almost certainly going to produce an evenly divided Senate, one in which Mr. Fraser, if he survives, might find himself in the same position as Mr. Whitlam did.

The desperate attitude of the Liberal Party has been highlighted by the open declaration that Tasmanian Independent Senator Brian Harradine must go. Clearly it is feared that Mr. Harradine could be one of those holding the balance of power in the next Senate. As Senator Harradine has been a responsible Senator, with a record of anti-Communism, which more than matches the wrist tapping of the Fraser Government, it is revealing that the Liberals should be attempting to defeat him.
Mr. J.F. Cotter, National convener of interstate DLP groups, points out that the Liberal Party decision could spell parliamentary disaster for a number of Liberal Members in all States, and particularly in Hobart's marginal seats of Denison and Franklin.

Never before has it been more imperative to ensure that the status of the Senate, as a genuine House of Review, acting as a curb on the Government, irrespective of label, be increased. We believe that large numbers of Australians will grasp the fact that it is much easier to make their vote count in the Senate elections than in the House of Representatives. The Senate elections will be much more vital than elections for the House of Representatives.

A massive vote for Mrs. Florence Bjelke Petersen in Queensland could ensure that one of Australia's best informed, and independently minded Senators, Senator Glen Sheil, survives. We have little doubt that the anti Flo Bjelke-Petersen campaign is designed in part to attempt to defeat Senator Sheil. An evenly divided Senate would, assuming that Mr. Fraser survives as Prime Minister, also strengthen the hand of those Government Senators who have been striving to elect their own Senate leader and generally to adopt a much more independent stance.


The move of former Minister for Immigration, Mr. M. Mackellar, was undoubtedly influenced by the growing campaign against non-European immigration being directed at Mr. Mackellar. The appointment of Mr. McPhee, representing what is traditionally a "safe" Liberal electorate, resulted in a much lower key approach to the Immigration issue.
We are informed that, aided by the media, both the Government and Opposition have tacitly agreed to "play down" the immigration issue.

Whichever party wins the Federal Elections, it can then be claimed that the electors have endorsed a policy of non-European immigration, which, in fact, is opposed by the overwhelming majority of Australians. However, as with all issues, there is always the unrehearsed event, which gains publicity. Mr. Gerald O'Neil, of Perth, has put the immigration issue on the front pages by boldly putting up a sign stating that his house is for sale to Australians but not to Asians. Mr. O'Neil does not sound like a man who can be easily intimidated by Mr. Al Grassby, stating that he does not care what Mr. Grassby has to say. "Grassby and the politicians are the ones filling this country up with Asians that the rest of us do not want," he says. Mr. O'Neil says that he has had a flood of telephone calls backing his stand. "Most people say that it is what they always wanted to do themselves but never had the guts".

Prosecution of Mr. O'Neil could prove most embarrassing for the Government as it prepares for an election during which it hopes immigration will not be mentioned. If Mr. O'Neil's bold action contributes towards ensuring that immigration is a major election issue, it will be another encouraging demonstration of the power of individual initiative.


At this week's conference of Commonwealth leaders in Delhi, Mr. Fraser is the guest of the pro-Soviet Government of Mrs. Gandhi. There will be the usual criticism of "racism" and South Africa's policy of apartheid - separate development. But Mr. Fraser will make no reference to India's iniquitous caste system under which people born into the lowly status of night soil removers are not permitted to carry out any other work. They are born into, and live in, and marry in that caste. The function of this caste has been extended with daughters of the caste being designated by Brahmin priests to become members of the Devdasi cult, that is a prostitute.

Not even the media has been able to disguise the fact that currently there is a world glut of crude oil. The spot market for oil has witnessed some reductions in prices. Now comes the news that a new oil field on the Grand Banks, off Canada's East coast, might be among the biggest finds in recent years. Gulf Canada Resources Inc. states that the field could match the Alaskan Pruhhoe Bay field, which provides 11 percent of the U.S.A.'s oil. From Indonesia comes the report that oil reserves of nearly 40 million barrels and about 15 billion cubic feet of natural gas had been discovered in Indonesia this year. But still the propaganda claims that there is a worldwide "energy crisis" and that oil producing nations like Australia must be savagely taxed on their own oil.

As part of the Fraser Government's attempt to elevate defence into a major election issue, Defence Minister Killen gained the headlines with a warning about the build up in Soviet naval strength - a development we have been reporting for years. But the same Fraser Government which warns about the Soviet, now proposes to establish repair facilities, including a floating dock, in Hobart for use by Soviet fishing vessels. A report last week stated that the Soviet had threatened to curtail its expanding import of Australian exports unless the joint Australia-Soviet fishing venture went ahead. If the Hobart venture goes ahead, the Soviet will be able to maintain a permanent Soviet naval presence in Australian waters. We presume that Defence Minister Killen knows that the Soviet uses both fishing and maritime fleets as part of its long-term naval strategy. Acceptance of orthodox financial rules, which result in growing pressure to gain a "favourable balance of trade", makes a mockery of the Fraser Government's anti-Soviet comments.


Plant Variety Rights: Representatives - August 19th... Mr. M. Baume (Lib. Macarthur). "Is the Minister for Primary Industry aware of some public concern about the question of plant variety rights in Australia? What action does he intend to take on this matter?

Mr. Peter Nixon (N.C.P. Gippsland):.."The proposal for a plant variety rights scheme first came forward as a result of representations from the seed and plant breeders associations around Australia some years ago, and has been considered over the years by the Australian Agricultural Council. It was decided that legislation ought to be enacted. As a result of the differences of views between the seed industries I told them that they would have to come to a consensus on what form the legislation ought to take before I was prepared to move forward with the proposed legislation. In the event, they have since agreed, but the time had passed for the introduction of legislation into the Parliament this session. I informed them then that I would be prepared to introduce the legislation in the autumn session of Parliament next year."

Mr. M. Young (A.L.P.-Port Adelaide): "You will not be able to."

Mr. Nixon: "I have every confidence that I will be able to. In addition to that, at the Agricultural Council meeting in Brisbane a couple of weeks ago I gave the State Ministers the opportunity to reconsider their previous advice to the former Minister for Primary Industry, that they wanted such legislation. But I also told them that the proposed legislation, which would be in the House, could lie over the winter recess next year, and would be debated during the following Budget session. This means that the legislation will be available for public comment and consideration for some months. I think this is a pretty fair way of dealing with a piece of prospectively contentious legislation about which a lot of wrong things have been said."

Mr. Tom Uren (A.L.P.-Reid):...."...Is it a fact that Australia has entered into a contract to supply uranium to Finland and that that uranium will be enriched in the Soviet Union? Is it also a fact that the Soviet installations at which the Australian uranium would be enriched are used for the production of highly enriched uranium for military purposes? What guarantee can the Minister or the Government give that Australia's uranium will in no way be used to contribute to the production of Soviet nuclear weapons? "How does the Government reconcile allowing Australia's uranium to pass to the Soviet Union, with the Prime Minister's view that the Soviet Union's actions in Afghanistan represent the greatest threat to world peace since the Second World War?"

Mr. Doug Anthony (N.C.P.-Richmond): "…approximately 50% of the enriched uranium used in Western Europe in 1980 will have been treated in the Soviet Union - 50% for West Germany, 50% for Spain, 40% for Italy, 100% for Finland and approximately 20% for Belgium and the United Kingdom. It is also of interest to note that nuclear material of Canadian origin, which has been contracted for sale to Finland over the past three, or four years has also been enriched in the Soviet Union. We believe that, provided it conforms with the international safeguard arrangements, and the non-proliferation features are honoured it is in conformity with our international safeguard obligation."

Mr. Uren succeeded in his thrust at the Government's jugular on the Government's double standard with the Soviet Union: no Olympic Games, but plenty of trade in wool and uranium. Mr. Anthony attempts to blunt this thrust by saying, "everybody's doing it", and quoting "safeguard" arrangements which are nothing but a transparent "face saver" for the West's continuing trade with the Communists. The fact that "everybody's doing it" is mere confirmation that the moral rot is just as bad in other Western nations, as in Australia. That's all.

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