Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label, Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke

Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
3 February 1984. Thought for the Week: "The definition of cowardice is to see what is right and not to do it"


N.S.W. Law Professor Lachlan Chipman has aptly described the far-reaching powers proposed for the Human Rights Commission as "Orwellian". Use of the term "rights" is itself a chilling example of the double-speak mentioned by George Orwell in his classic, "1984". The Human Rights Commission is recommending amendments to the Racial Discrimination Act, which would destroy the very foundations of English Common Law, a system of law, which is rooted in the Christian view of the value and God given rights of every individual.

Under the proposed amendment to the Racial Discrimination Act an individual could be charged with creating racial intolerance even if the alleged offending statement was not intended to create such intolerance. The onus of proof of innocence would be the responsibility of the defendant. The ominous shape of things to come has emerged clearly in Canada, where Albertan schoolteacher Mr. Jim Keegstra, the centre of one of the most incredible smear campaigns in Canadian history, has now been charged by the Albertan Provincial Government with "willfully promoting hatred against a group". Under Common Law there is no such thing as group libel. But all that is being changed in Trudeau's Canada. The charge against Keegstra is that he did "by communicating statements while teaching the high school students at Eckville High School, willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, namely Jewish people, contrary to the Criminal Code".

The Albertan Government is described as conservative but few governments in Canada have been as active in promoting UN-type Human Rights proposals. The charge against Keegstra carries a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment. Keegstra was fired from his teaching post and the Alberta Teachers' Association recommended the withdrawal of his teaching certificate. What is Keegstra's alleged crime? He allegedly told his students in the course of teaching modern history that World War II Holocaust claims were exaggerated. A devout Christian, Keegstra apparently told his students about the role of Political Zionism in modern history and made available a number of books, which presented an alternative view to that being put, mainly by the media. One of the books recommended was Eric Butler's "Censored History".

One Canadian report states, "Jewish groups want the Criminal Code (amended) to say it is a crime to distort historical facts, such as by denying the Holocaust". Which means that Jewish authorities that also deny the accuracy of the Holocaust story will be proscribed. Dr. Alfred Lilienthal's monumental work, "The Zionist Connection", would be banned.
While Jim Keegstra is the first target in the totalitarian drive in Canada, the major objective is to try to silence the Canadian League of Rights, whose influence has been growing as a result of a widespread distribution of literature, which is generally kept off bookstalls.

We have no doubt that Australian Attorney-General Senator Evans, and the army of totalitarian secular humanists who seek to deny Australians the right to express a dissenting view and to oppose the different manifestations of a programme described to radically change Australian society, are well aware of Canadian developments. If Senator Evans has his way, it will become "illegal" for Australians to oppose an immigration policy designed to produce a multi-racial society, to criticise Political Zionism, to deny the nonsense about sex equality, and much else.

A growing army of bureaucrats operating in a host of Commissions, ranging from Sex Discrimination to Race Relations, is actively engaged in seeking to change the very foundations of tradition al Christian society in which freedom is directly linked with personal responsibility. Professor Chipman has made the important point that the present growing threat to the individual' s freedoms did not start with the Hawke Government, which has merely taken over the programme set in motion by the Liberals and Nationals.

It is important that all those groups now coming together to resist the totalitarian threat do not make the mistake of believing that all would be well if the Hawke Government were defeated. Our considered view, which we know is shared by some former traditional Liberal and National Party politicians, is that the greatest disaster, which could now befall Australia, would be the election, perhaps through the failures of the Hawke Government, of a Peacock-Sinclair Government. The present deadly threat to traditional Australian society could never have developed without the betrayals of a Fraser Government falsely presented as a conservative answer to the extremism of the Whitlam Government.

What is urgently needed as a preliminary to cleansing Australia's political stables, is the development of a non-partisan national patriotic movement designed to generate understanding of the threat of the "enemy within", and to create a climate of opinion in which only those political candidates who stand for traditional values, for the restoration of the Common Law rights of the individuals, and for the necessary changes which will bring the Federal Constitution under the control of the Australian people, will be elected to office. We are convinced that the potential for such a movement exists. It must be actively encouraged in every possible way.

("Censored History", $1.35 posted, and "The Zionist Connection", $18 posted, are available from all League bookshops.)


The Federal Government's tactic now seems clear - to keep the attention of the public focused on the 'colgate' smile of the Prime Minister, with its "ring of confidence" as he swans from one sporting fixture to another before an entirely abject and uncritical media, while the 'backroom' boys in the Cabinet work feverishly on the plan to dismantle Australia. Mr. Hawke, oozing joviality and bonhomie, has become the guru of a new cult of "togetherness" and largesse. In his Australia day comments, he told the nation that, while he personally favoured the idea of a republic, nothing would be done to foist such a change - or, for that matter, a new flag - on Australia until the people had indicated they were ready for it. Such pragmatism - which, on the surface, appears to contrast so strongly with the feverish fanaticism of Senator Evans and Ryan - is comforting to those who fear a repeat of the Whitlam revolution.

The truth is that the Hawke approach is even more dangerous. The Weekend Australian (January 28-29, '84) contained this brief article, almost invisible behind Bob Hawke's larger-than-life assurances: "A bid to change the Australian flag has begun at the official Federal Government level. The newly reinstated Special Minister for State, Mr. Young, and his stand-in for the past six months, the Aviation Minister Mr. Beazley have been actively examining how this political hot potato should be handled. It is understood that Federal Cabinet will soon decide how best to ignite the debate on the pros and cons of changing the flag before the issue is put to a national vote before the 1988 bicentenary year.
The Minister for Housing and Construction, Mr. Hurford, yesterday publicly revealed that the Government had not allowed weighty economic discussions to completely swamp Cabinet debate on the flag.
"There is thinking going on - there have been deliberations on the issue, Mr. Hurford said. "Provided we can get that popular support that we want, and if we can possibly get it going across the political spectrum, that is what we want to achieve - we will be moving...."

No doubt Senator Evans will be seeking a million dollars or so for a "Yes" campaign, as he did for his postponed referendum. But isn't it awful that all this should be going on without the knowledge of the Prime Minister, Bob Hawke?


It seems clear that Israel has no intention of leaving southern Lebanon, previous assurances not withstanding. In an effort to counter increasing resistance, Israel is reported to be turning to another hatchet man - one Etienne Saqr and his militia - to counter guerilla fighters. The Weekend Australian (Jan 28-29, '84) reports: "... Some members of his 2000 strong private army have already moved into Israel's zone of the Awali River. Saqr has just returned from Jerusalem where he urged Israel and America to keep their troops in Lebanon and praised Israel for its humanitarianism in Lebanon. "He is a good friend of Israel", an Israeli official said this week. But in Lebanon itself, he has a far more chilling reputation as a fanatic whose militiamen demonstrated their hatred for Palestinians during the civil war by dragging them alive behind taxis through the streets of Beirut..."

We have just received a most devastating first hand account, by a Christian educator, Dr. Ken Bailey, of events in Lebanon during the Israeli invasion, hardly any of which has appeared in the media of the West. Dr. Bailey describes how American television teams filmed much of the cold blooded killing of thousands of Palestinian and Lebanese civilians, but who observed that none of it would ever be shown. When Dr. Bailey's tape is available, readers will be notified. We recommend that the tape be passed on to Church leaders and fellow Christians. We must warn that it makes appalling listening, but the Truth must be faced. Watch for further announcement.


The Newspeak and Doublethink Generation: (From "F & L" News-sheets Edition 2, Nos. 3 & 4, dealing with the theme of "1984":
"Examples of 'doublethink': "Peace means WAR:- the PEACE movement is funded (not just money but also propaganda, planning, and publicity) by socialist One World Government agencies and supporters. It is part of the WAR against democracy.
"Human Rights means SUPPRESSION of human rights: the Human Rights movement, like the Peace Movement, is supported by the socialist One World Government programme. By setting down human rights legislation, not only are the rights restricted to the letter of the law, but the law is restricted to the interpretation of the State. "Human Rights means STATES' rights to control human behaviour. "The U.S.S.R. has excellent human rights legislation but in practice the people have no rights outside those considered beneficial to the state (State, meaning - those who control the State). England has no 'Bill of Rights', but people of the British Commonwealth, up to now, have led the way in human freedom....
"In Doublethink, ANTI-RACIST means RACIST, or vice versa "White Australians are being made to feel guilty of murdering our black brothers and of stealing their land. We are being asked to give back large areas and to make huge royalty (compensation) payments. Oddly enough, we are not asked to leave this land by our white brothers, those who are so abusive of whites and so accommodating of blacks. Nor are they trying to stop further immigration; on the contrary, they are urging in immigrants from other races as if to multiply the sin they claim the white race has committed. "If we really have a racist problem you might expect that the saintly anti-racists would try to avoid compounding the crime. But not only do they insist on bringing more racial groups into the country, but also they promote Apartheid (separate development) for aborigines, and assimilation for all other races. We may wonder why they are so insistent that Europeans are depriving all other races of their rights and treating them in a despicable way. This is especially intriguing when we realise that the leaders are themselves almost exclusively and predominantly of European stock.
"To be confused by the behaviour of the saintly anti-racists is to assume they really have some human concern for people and are not purely intent on achieving some entirely different and secret purpose...."


There have been two character examinations of Senator Gareth Evans in two recent issues of The Weekend Australian. In an interview with journalist, Anne Maria Nicholson, issue of Jan. 14th, Senator Evans is reported as saying: "This business of denying us money to spend on the YES campaign is very destructive… the whole history of referenda is that the YES case, whatever it is, is fighting an uphill battle because of the emotionalism that gets generated by the NO case. And this time we've got the full range of loonies against us. They're neurotic and pathetic about change...."

The loonies are those people who disagree with the main views of Senator Gareth Evans, and who see great dangers, including loss of freedom for the individual, in his attempts to centralise all power in the Canberra central Government. Senator Evans is both arrogant, and ignorant of the destruction he intends to unleash. He is the complete IDEOLOGUE: his socialist ideology is both truth and reality to him - opposing views just must be wholly wrong. In the issue of The Weekend Australian December 3lst, journalist Sean Regan is quite outspoken on the dangers to our freedoms inherent in Senator Gareth Evans' "new" legislation; "The erosion of liberty in a country like ours is not going to come about in one dramatic revolutionary splurge, leading to the dictatorship of sadistic maniacs like O'Brien ("1984"); but rather in a quiet insidious way, gnawing at the heels of everything worth having, to usher in the reign of honourable and charming men like Senator Gareth Evans.
"His outrageous defence of the Government's attempt to reserve public funding for its own campaign in the recently mooted referenda is, in fact, one of the clearest indications yet of the manner in which establishment seeks to get its own way.
"Referenda, he piously intoned, have traditionally favoured the conservative side. Thus if voters in these next referenda are to have a proper chance of appreciating the rational position - which is by definition the position taken by the Government - the other side must be deprived of the effective means to counter Labor Party propaganda.
"No Joseph Stalin this, no Augusto Pinochet, but a well turned out, sensitive, academic lawyer and statesman who just happens to have access to The Truth and doesn't see why the taxpayers' money should be wasted giving poor benighted fools in the Opposition the right to put their clearly irrational case...." (the arrogance!)


In The Advertiser (Adelaide), January 17th appeared a rare warning (above) from AAP-Reuter. "If the Reagan administration does not tackle the huge (American) Federal deficit, the U.S. economic recovery may start to evaporate as early as next year. This warning is from the O.E.C.D. (organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).

As we have reported elsewhere, President Reagan is seeking a second term of office, and is delaying the implementation of restrictive economic conventions. The O.E.C.D. is inclined to the opinion that the present "recovery' will be sustained through 1984, but that unless the deficit problem is tackled, and hard, then the "recovery" will evaporate, to be followed by further recession, if not depression.

We have reported that under present finance economic conventions, a permanent sustained economic recovery is impossible. The Hawke Government has pitched its political and fiscal programme on a sustained economic recovery in the U.S.A., to "spill over" to the other nations of the Western world. Mr. Hawke is riding high at present because there have been certain areas of recovery in the Australian economy; the media have all united in a campaign to "sell" the idea of the "recovery" (partly because it is a fact that large volumes of "liquidity" are locked away in savings and other accounts because of consumer caution). We observe, however, that there has been no significant fall in the level of unemployment: rather do we expect this level to further increase with the passage of time...The upward curve of unemployment will display the occasional drop; but it will still sweep upwards, nevertheless.

If Mr. Hawke and his colleagues have confidence that their "quiet revolution" will spread over Australia behind a wave of "recovery" euphoria, then they will soon face the political facts of life. Senator Susan Ryan, for one, will face shock when she will discover that there will be no jobs at all for all those women she intends to "liberate" from the kitchen and nursery.