'THE CHOSEN' AND THE STATE OF THE WORLD

Last week's spectacle of Mr. Bob Hawke leaving Parliament in tears, following his emotional speech on the debate concerning the sending of Australian troops to the Middle East, highlighted the fact that not only Australia's future, but that of the whole non-Communist world, could be decided by further explosive developments in the Middle East.
We do not doubt Mr. Hawke's sincere emotional attachment to the State of Israel. But as Dr. Alfred Lilienthal and other anti-Zionist Jews have consistently stressed, the primary idea used to establish the State of Israel, was that the Jews were "chosen".

Closing their eyes to the terrorist campaigns of Begin and others, and the fact that the Soviet Union played a major role in the establishment of Israel at the expense of the indigenous Palestinians, large numbers of Christians have been mobilised in defence of Israel - again because the Jews are presented as God's "chosen people", and it is blasphemous to criticise what the Zionists do.

It is impossible to have rational discussion with any group who believe they have been "chosen". Try having a conversation with a Marxist, who believes that the proletariat has been "chosen"! In the jibe, which helped to upset Mr. Hawke, Prime Minister Fraser said that Hawke "has now embarked on the greatest betrayal of the only thing in which he ever had a really serious belief in his whole life - the people and State of Israel".

Without in any way appearing to support Mr. Hawke, we raise the question of just how is the sending of Australian troops to the Sinai going to contribute to peace in the Middle East? Mr. Fraser says that the Sinai force is essential to "secure Israel's southern flank". But the only risk to Israel's southern flank could come from Egypt, and they are allegedly in an agreement to withdraw from previously conquered Egyptian territory.

Mr. Fraser says that "On the basis of the confidence established at Camp David, Israel has withdrawn from approximately two-thirds of the Sinai". As this withdrawal has taken place without any international force, why cannot the final withdrawal take place in the same way? Any country contributing to a "peacekeeping" force in the Middle East can only create further hostility in the Moslem world. And when Opposition leader Bill Hayden says that Begin of Israel is the biggest threat to peace in the Middle East, he is merely stating what a number of anti-Zionist Jews are saying.

Dr. Lilienthal writes that the "idolatrous worship" of Israel makes it difficult for Zionists (and their supporters) to "discern that the gravest threat to peace stems not so much from geographic expansionism in the guise of security, or from the seizure of land belonging exclusively to the Palestinian Arabs for centuries, but from ideological expansionism which views Palestine as belonging exclusively to the Jewish people.

Moderate Arabs, headed by Jordan and Saudi Arabia, have made it clear that they are prepared to accept an independent Israeli State, providing that proper justice is provided for Arabs still living in Israel, that the Palestinians are provided with a self- governing homeland, and, more important, that Israel ceases to be the instrument of International Zionism.

In his most revealing book, "Ropes of Sand", subtitled "America's Failure in the Middle East", Wilbur Crane Eveland, a former adviser to the American Central Intelligence Agency, and a former member of the policy planning staffs of the White House and Pentagon, summarises the central issue of the Middle East:
"Can there be any justice in denying four million Palestinians, now living under Israeli occupation or abroad, the same rights of citizenship and statehood enjoyed by over three million Israelis and guaranteed (by Israel's Law of Return and Covenant with the World Zionist Organisation) to every Jew on the face of the earth."

Mr. Eveland's comments concerning the disastrous activities of Dr. Henry Kissinger, the Rockefellers and others in the Middle East prompt the question of how much pressure did Kissinger and Rockefeller bring to bear upon the Fraser Government during their recent visit to Australia. And there was at the same time the visit of the notorious ex-Senator Church, well-known internationalist, who addressed Zionist audiences and met with Prime Minister Fraser.
Following the visit of this high powered team of internationalists, even Mr. Andrew Peacock overcame his original objections and came out for Australia's involvement in Sinai.

Australia's foreign policy is clearly based upon support for a "chosen" group, with further predictable disasters in the Middle East. Dr. Henry Kissinger, Mr. David Rockefeller and associates of the Trilateral Commission will then present such disasters as further evidence why the world needs a New International Economic Order and, ultimately, World Government. The Big Idea becomes clearer every day.

REALISM ACROSS THE TASMAN

Mr. Jeremy Lee reports from New Zealand:
"There is no doubt the Springbok tour made a profound impact throughout New Zealand. Many still find it hard to believe that such violence was possible. But it has also produced a new mood of realism, so obviously some good comes from the illest wind. The biggest nigger in the woodpile has been the Media. Indeed, even by Australian standards, the N.Z. media is appalling. More than one visiting journalist has been moved to comment on the mindless distortion and bias. Rather like the situation in Queensland, media 'overkill' in New Zealand has become counterproductive from a leftwing viewpoint, although the left is probably too silly and humourless to realise it. But Prime Minister Muldoon, a shrewd politician, has picked it, and knows that a bit of "media bashing" hasn't really harmed him at all; his personal popularity has jumped a couple of points since CHOGM.

In a column written personally by Muldoon in TRUTH (13/10/81) he gave his views on CHOGM:
"...It did confirm the misgivings I have expressed in recent months about the manner in which the organisation is being run. The Africans have always tended to dominate discussions at Commonwealth meetings, but on this occasion they were permitted to speak at such lengths on political matters during the first three days that it became obvious that the latter part of the agenda could not be dealt with adequately. Forty minute speeches on the sins of South Africa become thoroughly tedious after a while...I in no way blame Malcolm Fraser for wanting to make the Melbourne Declaration a big issue. After all, he was spending $20 million of the Australian taxpayers' money on the conference. The fault lay in the pedestrian nature at its content. The one principle regret I have in respect of the conference is that it again showed the Secretary General in a bad light. The arbitrary nature of his actions and his failure to adequately consult the Heads of Government was in the same character as the decision taken by the High Commissioners in London to cancel the finance meeting in Auckland. I was not the only Head of Government, who saw his attitude as being unacceptable, and any suggestion that he could one day become Secretary General of the United Nations would now be seen to be ludicrous... .On the question of human rights and civil liberties, my Commonwealth colleagues backed off from an argument so rapidly that there was no need even to raise the matter. There was not one of them prepared to point the finger at New Zealand...."

So Muldoon is one leader at least who came away from CHOGM without black boot polish all over his tongue!

BRIEF COMMENTS

Following his bold statement that Australia should market its own diamonds and not be co-operating with De Beers, Prime Minister Fraser quickly went into reverse - and silence. Harry Oppenheimer of the De Beers - Anglo American group, an affiliate of the Rothschilds, who works closely with the Soviet Union, no doubt let Mr. Fraser know he was getting into deep water.

The admission of a former British Military Intelligence officer that he was a Soviet agent during World War 2, that he worked with Anthony Blunt and that he was guaranteed immunity from prosecution, is a blow to Mrs. Thatcher. She claimed in the House of Commons that Blunt was the only agent to have been given immunity. Clearly the big cover up in high places continues.

The following letter to the Adelaide Advertiser given the title, "Vietnam and Idealism", by the Editor, was published:
"If I had been a member of the Campaign for Peace in Vietnam, I would be conscience stricken after reading the article on Vietnam ("The Advertiser" 10.9.81). "The complacent idealists still seem to see no connection between their activities 11 years ago and the plight of the Vietnamese today. "They will not admit that those who prophesied disaster if the Communists over ran the South, were right. "Now they are saddled with trying to solve the problems of large numbers of refugees while the people left in Vietnam are worse off than they were, even during the war. If the peace campaigners had put as much effort into urging that America try to win the war as they did into sabotaging the war effort we might now have a country which was rehabilitated as Japan was after W.W.2."
We agree with Robin Moore, who wrote the excellent book - "Rhodesia", that Vietnam and Korea were political defeats for the United States of America, (and for the West, for that matter). They were certainly not military defeats - as they could have been won, quite easily, if the will had been there.