|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 April 1984. Thought for the Week: "As the internationalists become increasingly desperate because time is on our side, they have necessarily to become more and more blatant."
Dr. Michael Hurry, in "Who Holds the Balance?" (1983)
THAT DEFENCE LEAK
"The most amazing thing about the so-called leak of the Government's Strategic Basis papers last week is that there seems to be some attempt to treat it with old fashioned shock and horror".. Peter Robinson, in The Sun-Herald (Sydney), April 1st.
In reference to Mr. Ian Sinclair, and hardly flattering, Mr. Robinson sets the tone of his usually reliable comment by stating that, "it was difficult to avoid doubling up with laughter when that well-known politician of wide ranging probity, Mr. Ian Sinclair, began talking about "a massive security breach".
Most Australians "feel" that all is not well in the military defence area of Australia's thinking. True, we have all those Hornet fighter bombers on order, and some small naval craft; and those Panzer tanks are out there, somewhere: but so what?!' Morale in the defence forces is low, and it seems - getting lower. We don't seem to know where we are going. There is confusion in our defence thinking; e.g. the controversy, spilling over into the public arena, of the merits or demerits of the possession of an aircraft carrier for our Navy. The man and woman in the Australian street are left scratching their heads.
Mr. Geoff McDonald, author of "Red
Over Black" and "The Evidence" (both books detailing,
chapter and verse, the reality of the Communist thrust behind
the Aboriginal Land Rights movement) has consistently pointed
out the fallibility of Australia's Defence formulas if Australia's
own population is not homogeneous, meaning that a common will
for the defence of Australia may not exist.
Never mind about that Great Chimera, "World Opinion": suppose we deal with the realities. The present Defence confusion was not made by the Hawke Government; it was well and truly inherited from the disastrous Fraser Government. The Service top brass has manipulated and does manipulate politicians: most of the Defence brass are highly intelligent and capable people (for which we give thanks!) and often have their way, not necessarily always in the best interests of the overall defence of our country.
The ANZUS pact doesn't mean very much now that it has been relegated to some sort of "mutual statement of support" rather than a "down-to-tin-tacks" military aid and assistance treaty. Other nations in our region of the world carefully monitor Australia's military hardware, and assess our intentions, or non-intentions. What is obvious is that there would be nothing in the so-called "Defence Leaks" that other nations in our region have not already assessed. The Federal Opposition (if it can be found!) will be hard put to make much political capital out of the foregoing.
A DISTANT CLAMOUR
"It is not much above a low rumble yet, but the sound of anger and frustration coming from the people known as the mature age unemployed could develop into a political earthquake during the next few years." Employment Section, The Age (Melbourne) March 31st.
This article was headed - "A Distant
Clamour Warns of An Approaching Army", and this, of course,
refers to "an army" of "Mature age unemployed". In "The
Breakdown of the Employment System", delivered in Newcastle
U.K., January 1923, C.H.Douglas stated:
The "Approaching Army" referred to above will indeed be made up of not only mature age unemployed, but other unemployed as well. Young people who will never know what it is like to have a permanent job; unskilled and semi-skilled people, rendered redundant by the onward march of technology. Production, production; massive production everywhere; but shops and warehouses bulging with unsold goods, along with intense competition and dumping of goods and services by one nation upon another.
We have, most of us, seen the middle ranking executive demoted or pushed sideways (again at a lower salary) the purpose of which is to provoke that employee into resignation. This, with the bitterness of the rejected youthful unemployed, feed resentment, which can be exploited by the politically cunning for their own ends, and especially the radical Left who accept as Holy Writ the dogma that Capitalism is in its death throes, and that only revolution will usher in the New Dawn (K.G.B. style!). On the surface of events it is understandable that Communists take this view; but then they don't understand the fallacious finance economic system under which we grind, and which is, even now, in a state of fragmentation. This is really what Dr. Michael Hurry is driving at in this issue's "Thought for the Week".
The International Financial system is breaking down, and nothing will stop it: and these gentlemen at the helm of International Finance well know it too. Hence the "blatant" rush to have introduced a One World Order in which rigid control of nations and peoples will, it is thought, impose a successfully stable system of government throughout the world, even if it is a tyranny. We believe that World Government is an impossibility; but the drive for it is well and truly "on". (notice the rush of United Nations restrictive legislation now being prepared in our own neck of the woods, Australia) The present architect of this is Senator Gareth Evans; all in the interests of "Human Rights", meaning far less rights for the individual.
It's not only happening here; the same restrictive legislation is being pushed in most other Western countries, and in some is further down the road that it is in Australia. Why has the issue of unemployment taken us to the breakdown of the employment system, and World Government? Because it's all of a piece: Finance creates the strains and stresses in any society that are then capable of manipulation and exploitation by the political subversives. The desperate and bitter unemployed, and their kin will readily listen to the politically radical.
No solution to our ills is possible
that does not transgress the tenets of orthodox finance. Those
who want to know more should study:
We read that Sir James Hardy, winemaker and yachtsman, has resigned from the Chairmanship of the Ausflag 1988 committee. He says that his resignation was forced on him by pressure from the Returned Services League applied to his company because of refusal by some R.S.L. clubs to buy Hardy's wines. We do not feel any sympathy for Sir James Hardy. He was pleased enough to accept knighthood from the Queen, and then he wants to erase the Union Jack from the Australian Flag! No deal. That is why Mr. Bruce Ruxton, President of the Victorian Branch of the R.S.L. expressed approval of Sir James Hardy's resignation from the Ausflag 1988 Committee.
Ladies Line is the monthly journal (published in Queensland) of the Australian League of Rights Queensland Council. The April issue covers - "Pacifism: A Dangerous Malady", "Unesco: Hopeless: Wasteful", the usual excellent Education Sheet detailing S.T.O.P. and C.A.R.E.; "What Is to Become of Our Common Law System", and other attention grippers. Write to the Melbourne Office for a copy of the April issue, or to "Ladies Line", P.0.Brigalow, Qld., 4412. Price: $1.00 posted. The annual subscription to "Ladies Line" is still an incredible $6.00 yearly.
AUSTRALIA 'SETTLED' OR 'CONQUERED'?The following letter was sent to the Editor of Queensland Country Life by Mr. Jeremy Lee:
"The current delegation claiming to speak for Aborigines, led by Mr. Paul Coe of the Aboriginal Legal Aid Department, which is seeking support from the U.N. Human Rights Commission to take its case to the International Court of Justice, deserves the attention of all thinking Australians. "The delegation's contention, on which it wants the acquiescence of the International Court, is that Australia's white settlement occurred by 'conquest', rather than by 'settlement'. "The difference in the legal meaning of these two definitions is profound. Should it be found that Captain Cook and his contempories 'conquered' Australia, international law then recognises the sovereignty of the original indigenous people, and an entitlement to sovereignty as one means of restitution. The consequences could legally be that 12.5% of the Australian land mass currently granted to Aborigines, and also impending claims, become areas of separate nationhood. The implications, regarding communications, defence, and harmonious race relations, would be catastrophic. "Needless to say, these moves for the 'balkanisation' of Australia appear to be taking place with the complicity of the Federal Government".
AUSTRALIA BENEFITS FROM BEING HAVEN FOR REFUGEESThe following letter was published in The Age (Melbourne) April 2nd, over the name of "Isi J. Liebler". Mr. Liebler is President of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry.
"As a community made up in large measure of migrants, refugees and their descendants, Australian Jews have every reason to pay special attention to any public debate on immigration. We know how much this country has meant to our own wartime survivors, to those feeling persecution, and to those seeking a better life. So we cannot ignore the danger of letting any minority of newcomers bear the brunt of racism and intolerance. "We want to therefore express our concern in the present controversy at the danger of unfairly singling out the latest group of refugees, the Indo-China arrivals and their families who are following them, and allowing them, through default or apathy, to become the objects of prejudice and discrimination. "All Australians, old and new, stand to be the losers if such an attitude were to spread.
"As the representative body of Australian Jewry we have consistently supported the policy of the previous and present Governments on the acceptance of Indo-China refugees and have urged Canberra to extend that policy wherever possible. We believe Australia has benefited from previous migrations and other refugees.
"In calling for a continuation of a non-discriminary and enlightened immigration policy we are particularly concerned that all mainstream political parties should recognise the importance of the moral dimensions at stake and avoid partisanship on this sensitive issue. We call on them, and on all responsible opinion makers, to set the example by offering leadership designed to eliminate any suggestion that Australia might degenerate to a society in which social bigotry and resentment of minorities assume menacing proportions."
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|