WHAT WILL MR. GOUGH WHITLAM DO AT UNESCO?

Apart from the revelation that Australia's security services appear to be in a deplorable state, and publicity surrounding a silly criticism of the ABC by Senator Button, perhaps the major item of news last week was the appointment of former Prime Minister Whitlam to the United Nations Educational and Cultural Organisation. There was no criticism from the Opposition about "jobs for the boys"; apparently Mr. Andrew Peacock and his colleagues welcomed the appointment. But what will Mr. Whitlam do at UNESCO?

Veteran columnist Douglas Wilkie, writing in "The Sun", Melbourne, on May 6th, makes some penetrating and informative comment which deserves the widest possible circulation. We can provide some extracts only because of space limitations:
"Founded in 1945 as a specialised agency of the U.N., it (UNESCO) was to be 'above politics' in its role of demonstrating 'the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind.' Its marble halls, with pink facings, house 1,200 bureaucrats, most of them equally pink, who are paid high salaries, tax free, to dispense UNESCO's $100 million annual budget…
"Its initial aim was to enable the people in all UNESCO's member states to reach a consensus on human rights, social injustice and fundamental freedoms, based on the universal verities to be found in all great literature and art.
"Alas, as UNESCO's bureaucracy became infiltrated by professional radicals, and heavily politicised, its rhetoric became ever more strident and divisive, its debates more and more like excerpts from George Orwell's '1984'.
"Similar hypocrisy marks UNESCO propaganda in its role of self appointed guardian of the 'world heritage'. "Black African and Arab countries, notably Libya, with least claim to ecological concern at home, have been foremost in trying to 'bind' Western nations to abandon industrial projects, such as the Franklin dam....
"He'll (Whitlam) be just in time to explain UNESCO's majority mix of K.G.B. agents, mad mullahs, African loudmouths and Cuban cheer leaders, the obstructive niceties of the Australian Constitution. Who better for the task than Gough?".

THE REV. FRED NILE, M.L.C. JOINS ANTI-LEAGUE CAMPAIGN

The Rev. Fred Nile, who first came to public attention because of his activities associated with the Festival of Light and who was elected to the N.S.W. Legislative Council at the last N.S.W. State Elections, has seen fit to attempt to smear The Australian League of Rights in the form of a question asked in the N.SW. Legislative Council on March 30th.

On page 5365 of No. 49 N.S.W. "Hansard" the following appears:
"Reverend the Hon. F.J. Nile:
I ask the Attorney General, Minister of Justice, Minister for Consumer Affairs, and Vice President of the Executive Council a question without notice. In view of the reports concerning an offensive Australian League of Rights sponsored exhibition now on display in Adelaide's Constitutional Museum, which falsely claims that the slaughter of six million Jews was a hoax, and never happened, and reports that the exhibition will be displayed in other States, I ask what action will or could the Government take to prevent this obscene exhibition being displayed in a public place in N.S.W.? I ask this question, having in mind that this exhibition would cause extreme offence to the Jewish community and other citizens of New South Wales, which has already occurred in Adelaide where the South Australian Jewish Board of Deputies is considering legal action.

"The Hon. D. P. Landa:
I share the honorable member's concern in this matter. The question of legal action is not one that has been contemplated at this stage because, first, the exhibition is not on view in this State. Neither I nor the law officers of this State have had an opportunity to see the exhibition and assess whether it breaches any law in this State. However, I am sure that all honorable members would abhor such a racist, divisive and sectarian exhibition being brought to this State where the full odium of thinking people would be visited upon it. I have made known on a number of occasions my views on censorship. I have said that I am totally opposed to sponsorship (censorship?) in relation to adults, and I have no doubt that the Jewish community and the thinking community of the State will be able to allow people to know that this type of material is rejected by us in a free and voluntary way without the need to resort to the force of law. However, I do not want to close off any option. Should there be a breach of the law in relation to this matter, the law officers will not in any way be impeded by me. They will be instructed to do their duty under the law."

Festival of Light
As The Australian League of Rights has always supported the objectives of The Festival of Light as far as they go, and as the Rev. Fred Nile has appeared on a League of Rights platform and has also had friendly contact with several League of Rights supporters, it would he instructive to know why he felt it necessary to make an anti-League attack under the guise of asking a question in the N.S.W. Legislative Council. It is always distressing to have to point out that many sincere people calling themselves Christians are prepared on some issues to act in a most irresponsible manner. The Rev. Fred Nile had obviously not seen the Adelaide Exhibition when he asked his question. If he had seen the Exhibition he would be open to the serious charge of being blatantly dishonest.

His question is a reflection of hysterical allegations made by Zionists and others. Anyone who took legal action because of the Exhibition would become the object of national amusement. As those who saw the Adelaide Exhibition know, it was primarily concerned with presenting the origins, growth, structure, educational and political activities of The League of Rights. It was NOT an Exhibition on "the Holocaust" as implied by many critics. One panel out of 15 was devoted to the type of exposure literature the League makes available concerning major issues.

The League makes available suppressed books like "The Hoax of The Twentieth Century" which demonstrate that it is absurd nonsense to keep on saying that six million Jews were gassed in Germany during the Second World War. It has tried to make available books like "The Zionist Connection", by the distinguished American anti-Zionist Jew, Dr. Lilienthal, and other anti-Zionist Jews. Presumably the Rev. Fred Nile would have such books banned as "obscene"!

It was the brilliant anti-Zionist Jewish writer, Dr. Oscar Levy, who said that the "Jewish Question" was of the greatest importance and that every honest thinker should face it. The Zionists have not only split the Jewish people, but unfortunately have badly divided the Christians. Mr. Nile's friend, Mr. Jerry Falwell of The Moral Majority Movement in the U.S.A., created a national furor amongst American Christians when he not only defended the terrorist Israeli Prime Minister Begin at the time of the Beirut massacres last year, but also implied that God would punish those who opposed Begin. Presumably this also meant large numbers of Israelis!

As Mr. Nile has seen fit to smear the League, as a Member of the N.S.W. Parliament, we trust he will not mind if we ask if his paper, "Solidarity" is still being financed by Zionists, as once claimed in the Australian Jewish press? Christians in particular must be concerned about searching for the Truth. The League welcomes all such searching.

BRIEF COMMENTS

"The Weekend Australian" of May 7-8, started to republish a series of articles from "The Economist", London, on the international debt question. There were no references to the basic function of the banking system, the creation of the bulk of the nation's money supplies in the form of bank credit, issued as an interest-bearing debt. But we are informed that 1982 started with international debt in "a very fragile state", and that "Western banks had outstanding loans of about $U560,000 million to Eastern Europe (including Russia) and more than $U5180,000 million to Latin America." The escalation of debt everywhere is mathematically inevitable under present financial policies, with both Communist and non-Communist countries enmeshed in unrepayable debt.

The momentous decision by the Roman Catholic Bishops of the U.S.A. to join the anti-nuclear movement is unpleasant news for President Reagan. The tragedy about the nuclear debate is that it obscures the vital fact that America's most formidable weapon is a peaceful one: a policy of complete economic sanctions against the Soviet and all other Communist nations. But while President Reagan is urging more spending on nuclear weapons, his trade officials are engaged in ensuring that American grain, on credit, continues to flow to the Soviet Union. Those who react to boycott suggestions by claiming that the Western nations ''cannot afford" to export to the Communists, are merely confirming the Marxist taunt, first made by Lenin, that they are so decadent they will provide the Communists with the rope to hang them.

It is not often that we find ourselves in agreement with Federal Treasurer Paul Keating. But his tightening up against foreign investment in Australia is a step in the right direction. Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen's Achilles heel is his acceptance of the dangerous view that it is legitimate to attempt to overcome a shortage of financial credit inside Australia by encouraging foreign investments or loans. As the distinguished Queensland consulting economist, Mr. W.H.Herbert, has explained on many occasions, foreign investments merely mean writing figures in bank ledgers in Australia against figures written in bank ledgers in other countries. Australian resources can be developed without South Korean investments.

The Institute of Public Affairs has rendered a valuable service by pointing out that in the twelve months to March 1983, public sector prices - Federal, State and Municipal governments - increased by 18 percent compared with a 10 percent increase in the private sector. Socialist supporters might care to explain the reason why governments make the biggest contribution to inflation.