|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
11 November 1983. Thought for the Week: "One reason why the progress of Monopoly appears inevitable is that it has a clear idea where it is going and so can formulate its objectives. So far it has never had to face a body of people with equally clear, but opposite, objectives, which have the invincible advantage of being in keeping with 'the warp and woof of the universe'.
Dr. Geoffrey Dobbs, in Responsible Government in a Free Society.
DISINTEGRATION IN NORTH AMERICA
Mr. Eric Butler reports from Canada
The position is similar in Calgary, Alberta, where it is almost impossible to sell houses, even at give away prices. The Calgary Family Services Bureau reports that men who have been in the $300 bracket are walking the streets looking for work. Other former upper management are committing suicide reports the Canadian Council on Social development. Family life is breaking up as social disintegration spreads.
While the Trudeau Government presides over growing disintegration, Prime Minister Trudeau has set up a task force to propose policies to improve relations between the Communist and non-Communist worlds. Mr. Trudeau' s divorcement from reality may be judged by a statement to the effect that it was time to de-escalate the Cold War by treating the Soviets as human beings. This reminds one of President Roosevelt's view that the bloody handed monster Stalin was at heart a type of democrat with whom it was possible to co-operate to advance world peace.
The financial witchdoctors in both the USA and Canada continue to talk about an economic upturn while major companies continue to go bankrupt. Unemployment continues to remain high in both Canada and the U.S.A. The multiracial society in Canada is generating increasing friction. Non-European community leaders who, in many cases, have only lived in Canada for a few years, are openly criticising what they charge is "racial discrimination". Any reference to the fact that the biggest percentage of criminals are non-Europeans, is charged to be a manifestation of "racism".
A report from the U.S.A. says that one million whites have fled from New York City since 1970, the main reason being fearful of never knowing when one will be mugged, assaulted, raped or murdered. Buildings are being increasingly burned down to try to get insurance. In one area 25 percent of the mainly black children do not attend school, roaming the streets in gangs, robbing, looting and fighting other gangs. One of the most ominous developments is that the police have stopped caring. A few years ago Mayor Kevin White of Boston, after a visit to New York City, prophetically said, "This could be the beginning of the end of the American Civilisation".
Chicago is another major American city from which the whites are fleeing as the blacks move in. It is projected that by 2000 the city will be 80 percent coloured. Violence continues to grow, spilling over into the white suburbs. The Al Grassbys of Australia should be sent to New York, Chicago, and other North American centre where economic breakdown and multiculturalism are resulting in revolution, and then asked is this what they want for Australia. Australia still has time to call a halt to the madness afflicting so much of North America.
Mr. Chas Pinwill, Queensland State Director
The Australian Bill of Rights
"The Bill of Rights would require observance of rights relating to the criminal process" (criminals' rights, no doubt. On Target) "They (the Human Rights Commission) could be called in to aid any person in the course of any criminal, civil, or tribunal proceeding." Senator Evans said the Federal Government "planned to develop cooperative enforcement arrangements between the Human Rights Commission and State anti-discrimination bodies with the aim of providing 'one-stop shopping' for complaints under Federal and State law".
And how is this little 'Bill of Goods' to be delivered? Quoting Senator Gareth Evans again, "The Bill would be largely based on the Governments external affairs power, which was upheld by the High Court in the 1982 Koowarta ruling, and the Franklin Dam ruling". Again, "the Bill would aid people arrested for breaking laws against street assembly...it would over-ride State laws that denied equality of votes in elections". The Human Rights Commission will be turned into "a full time and professional organisation". Senator Evans said he "was leaning towards outlawing group defamation", in preference to "building on traditional criminal law sanctions".
It is now clear that unless a reversal of the external affairs power can be won the pressure on the Constitution will be relentless though perhaps subtle enough to try to destroy it in numerous easy stages
As Senator Evans relates, "the five referenda have been carefully chosen and modified to appeal to the widest possible cross-section of Australians". All this is simply a first step in Senator Evans' "renovation and reform plan" which, he says, if passed, will begin "with a bang, not a whimper, a much longer and more far reaching process of Constitutional renovation and reform".
In The Australian, October 29th,
Senator Gareth Evans spoke of some of his ambitions for the
future. They include:
He said he thinks it is "pretty crazy to have a majority of Australians frustrated by a handful of votes in a couple of States". In this is the Achilles Heel of the referenda proposals. Once again, Queensland, Tasmania, and Western Australia can stop them. The League of Rights will be supplying material for the "NO" case. Every supporter should be preparing now, and setting aside a few dollars in order to be able to inform the people in his area in the New Year. With sufficient effort Queensland and Tasmania might be expected to rebuff Senator Evans. Whether or not a third State will join them will probably decide the matter. More information will be supplied through On Target on these referenda in the coming months.
BRIEF COMMENTProfessor Geoffrey Sawer, of Canberra, draws attention (Canberra Times Nov. 2nd) to the "Goya Henry" aviation case, which was before the High Court in 1936. He says that the "Goya Henry" case laid down a limitation on Commonwealth power under the external affairs rubric which has not yet been disavowed: i.e. when Commonwealth legislation is based on an international treaty, the legislation must adhere reasonably closely to the terms of the treaty itself. Interesting, but academic we think. The only remedy to the deliberate attack on the Constitution is by appropriate national referendum.
VICTORIAN COUNCIL OF CIVIL LIBERTIESRacial Discrimination Act
The following submission was sent to the Secretary of the Task Force on Human Rights, c/- Attorney General, Canberra:
"The Victorian Council for Civil Liberties believes that new laws are not required to protect individuals and groups from racial defamation because:
1. Existing laws relating to conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace and defamation are adequate.
2. There is no demonstrable need for new laws and the Human Rights Commission has not demonstrated such a need.
3. Present laws already go too far in inhibiting freedom of speech and the Task Force should take steps to ensure freedom of speech is expanded and not restricted, especially in view of the remarkable timidity and conformity of most Australians and their reluctance to express their views on controversial issues.
4. A new law with penal sanctions for incitement to racial hatred could be counterproductive.
5. A new law, as above, could have unintended consequences, especially in relation to docudramas about World War 2, such as the "Winds of War".
6. A new law could be used to control the past, as in Orwell's 1984, by inhibiting historical research.
7. A new law could inhibit reportage in the media.
8. Australian law reform should be guided by demonstrated needs and not be guided by United Nations declarations agreed upon by countries that oppose freedom of speech.
9. The absence of any need for new laws has been demonstrated by commentators such as Creighton Burns, the Editor of The Age (1982 Freedom of Expression Seminar).
10. It is, and should remain the right of every Australian to express his views without criminal law sanctions, unless by so doing a breach of the peace may occur, or national security is threatened.
John Bennett, Secretary, Victorian Council for Civil Liberties.
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|