|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
6 March 1981. Thought for the Week: "If you wanted to run an economic system for the purpose that you would have to do to rectify the present position of providing employment, quite obviously the first thing - the only sensible thing to do - would be, as far as possible, to put the clock back about two or three hundred years. You would destroy as far as possible all your labour-saving machines; you would cease to use the power which you have developed from water and otherwise, and you would revert to handicraft, and in doing the handicraft you would avoid, as far as possible, the use of any tools which would facilitate that handicraft. You would do everything as laboriously as possible, and you would undoubtedly solve the unemployment problem. Everyone would undoubtedly have to work very hard indeed to get a living."
C.H. Douglas, in The Use of Money (Address, Christchurch, N.Z. 1934).
JEREMY LEE REPORTS FROM FORT ST. JOHN, BRITISH COLUMBIA
"Few in Canada have grasped how Trudeau's plans for a socialist constitution in Canada fit in to his plans for taking the country into the N.I.E.O. It is proving something of a shock to the Canadians who have attended the meetings so far!
In July last year Toronto was the venue
for the First Global Conference of the future, sponsored by
the World Future Society. This unlikely sounding assembly
was attended by over 5,000 from many parts of the world. Amongst
the speakers was Aurelio Peccei, leader of the nefarious Club
of Rome, and Orville Freeman, the C.F.R. member who is chairman
of the Board of Governors of the United Nations Association,
U.S.A. Canada's contribution to the panel was one Maurice
Strong, who ran the Canadian International Development Agency
for four years. He is currently chairman of Petro Canada,
the State controlled company now being used to nationalise
energy in Canada.
During the short period Trudeau was out
of office, a member of his party, Dr. Mark MacGuigan, introduced
a Private Member's Bill into the Canadian House of Commons,
on November 9th, 1979. This incredible motion was moved by
Dr. MacGuigan: "That, in the opinion of this House, a new
constitution for Canada should specifically commit Canada
to the goals of:
In his address, MacGuigan said that international
law should have precedence over domestic law. He was supported
by speakers from other parties. Once Trudeau was re-elected,
Dr. MacGuigan was appointed Canada's Minister for External
Affairs! Today he is in charge of direct negotiations on the
New International Economic Order!
MODEL LETTER PUBLISHED IN NATIONAL NEWSPAPER
The following letter was published in The Australian (Feb. 24th.) over the name of "Frances Allen". We consider it serves as a model for our actionists to emulate:
"Pay Packets are Mortgaged Before They're
Received (featured heading provided by Editor).
IS A DOUBLE DISSOLUTION OF FEDERAL PARLIAMENT LIKELY?
"The Federal Government is said to be looking at a plan to orchestrate a double dissolution of Parliament later this year".. Editorial, The Australian, March 2nd.
The Editorial further observed that the Government should stop looking and lift its eyes from contemplation of the tiny navel of its own political fears and shallow scheming, to the broad horizons of the national duty it was elected last October to perform. This is fair enough comment. This scheme was aired in the Weekend Australian by Mr. Russell Schneider, the political correspondent, who stated that constitutional grounds for a double dissolution of Federal Parliament could lie in the rejection of certain legislation in the former Parliament, which, if again rejected after a further presentation could provide the desired grounds. The Governor General would need to assent to any double dissolution, and it would appear that Malcolm Fraser anticipates no difficulties there.
What is it all about? The loss of control by the Government of the Senate after July 1st, when the Australian Democrats will hold the balance of power there. We are not surprised at reports that many Government ministers are jittery at the prospect before them. Many supporters will recall the Simultaneous Elections referendum held at the time of the federal elections in 1977. It was, most fortunately, rejected by the Australian electorate, and the League of Rights played a significant role in bringing about its rejection: the reason being that the passage of this amendment to the Australian Constitution would have significantly reduced the power and integrity of Australia's Upper House. The Government of the day would have been able to intimidate the Senate by calling an election and emptying out half the Senate whenever it was frustrated there.
Why do we recall this now? Because Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser, had the Simultaneous Elections amendment been passed in 1977, could now use this amendment to the Constitution to curb the power of the Australian Democrats who have been constitutionally elected to office by the Australian electorate. It would have been an ever-present threat, whereas a double dissolution of both Houses of Parliament presents far greater political difficulties for an Australian Government. The political commentators of the time remarked upon Mr. Fraser's extreme annoyance; one said "fury", that this amendment had been rejected. The Australian Editorial cautions the Prime Minister to "wait and see before surrendering to feelings of doom and disaster", and adds further - "while the Democrats are a largely unknown element and their policies are vague, there is no suggestion they will prevent the passage of legislation which is good and to the country's benefit". Against this, there is the character of our Prime Minister who has a short way with opposition. It is more likely that he will move to have the Senate ironed out by a double dissolution, than that he will patiently navigate shoals of opposition and frustration there.
FROM JONATHAN HUNTINGDON'S NOTE-BOOK
If you are curious as to what Argentina had to gain by breaking the Western grain embargo, here it is: 5 tonnes of heavy water for the Arbela power station. Heavy water is used as a moderator in reactors fuelled with natural uranium - which in turn produces weapons-grade uranium. What has the U.S.S.R. to gain? What else: the destabilisation of the Southern Americas and the disintegration of the Monroe doctrine. Moscow, playing the cards close to its chest said (on radio) - "Trade should not be subject to dogmatic considerations". Brazil's reaction is a foregone conclusion: millions of dollars diverted for cometing nuclear ambitions. The effect on the West? More critical commodities in jeopardy.
In the "oil war" in the Middle East, Russia is consolidating her position by using Syria to stymie Israel, and weakening Iran by using Iraq as a proxy. By reconciling the two Yemens, and arming them both heavily, Arabia is now under threat. (M.I.G. 25s, the U.S.S.R.'s top jet fighter, have been delivered). Libya's deep Sahara probes are being encouraged, and by consolidating strength in Afghanistan, China could be blocked out of that region. Russia's Ethiopian proxies now threaten land-locked Sudan and pro-Western Kenya. The Arab nations are on the edge of the abyss: they need our help (arms, and an honourable Palestinian settlement).
Often, with public opinion polls, the structure of the questions determines the answer. The Australian Press Council has published opinion poll guidelines: unfortunately they are not mandatory, which makes it all a bit of a whitewash. Almost every issue that the Australian League of Rights stands on is backed by the will of the Australian people expressed in polls over three decades: examples, Immigration, smaller more accountable government, defence, the family, flag etc. This makes the League a populist opposition of importance against ruling class elitism.
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|