|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
8 March 1985. Thought for the Week: "There are women who have cultural contributions to make to society. There are women who battle for the right of women to have an honoured place in the community, not because they want the impossible but for love of justice. The most socially useful of these fight to have expressed in public and preserved in privacy the predominantly feminine values. No peoples are really civilised unless the worth of the feminine values to society be recognised by them"
Dorah Watts, in Chattels of the Modern World
THE MEGABANKS AND THE NEW INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER
"The entry of sixteen foreign banks is a triumph for Paul Keating - and a breathtaking somersault by him". - Michelle Grattan, in The Age (Melbourne) February 28th
There has been so much distilled waffle being talked about the entry into Australia of the foreign Megabanks that the mind of the ordinary citizen must be numbed. Perhaps this is what is desired! Generally, the editorials of the metropolitan dailies are ecstatic that we are at the dawn of a golden future ("golden" not used to denote our mesmerisation by the mystical qualities of gold in modern day finance economics). Many see Paul Keating, who won some overseas prize for economic performance, and then was witness to the incredible slump of the Australian dollar - as the Whizz Kid of finance economics who will put Australia up there with the Big League: really Trilateralist, Club of Rome stuff.
Once again we must deflate the Hollywood balloon. Yes prophets have no honour in their own land. We are reminded of the story of the Fathers of ancient Rome who were warned by messengers of the approach of Barbarians. What happened? Oh no, they didn't take steps to defend the City they put the messengers to death! The barbarians marched onwards and sacked Rome.
The big advantage that Australia will
derive from the Megabanks so we are told is competition that,
apparently, will benefit everyone. This remains to be seen.
What Mr. & Mrs. Australia want to see will be lower interest
rates on their borrowings particularly on home loans and mortgages.
Will they see this? Most unlikely; for example, the Megabanks
will not be geared to government fiscal controls, say, on
Those millions to the mining corporations; those tens of millions for oil and mineral exploitation. For example, the Bank of Tokyo could be expected to be very much concerned with the flow of essential raw materials from Australia to Japan; and the supply of finance to Australian manufacturers and traders for the purchase of tens of millions of dollars worth of Japanese goods and services. The Deutsche Bank of Germany will, similarly, be eager to provide those millions for the flow of German goods and services into Australia. We wonder if anyone has yet asked what effect this will have on our native, Australian, industries. Well, they are to be phased out as per New International Economic Order.
Under the United Nations UNCTAD programme, to which Australia is a signatory and has already given ratification, the "Integrated Programme for Commodities" for International control over production, pricing, and distribution of the world's foodstuffs, fibers, and minerals is already being established. We can be sure that one Megabank viz, the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, will be most interested in the movement of Australian fibres, minerals, and foodstuffs to China, and with its trading and commercial connections and contacts, it will carry out this task more efficiently than the local Australian banks.
Mr. Paul Keating is right here, but Mr. Keating did not talk along these lines when in Opposition. He wrote: "Foreign banks would 'inevitably' push up interest rates. They would concentrate on wholesale banking (which will be the case...O.T.) placing enormous pressure on Australian banks to substantially re-orientate their activities away from retail banking. They would increase the pressure for deregulation. "As to the argument that foreign bank entry will increasingly link Australia to the general instability in the international banking system, and lessen a Federal Government's control over domestic monetary policy, there is no doubt that this must be the case. That was Paul Keating in February 1983 in The Age (Melbourne).
Michelle Grattan dryly observes that - "But then, politics is all about standing on your head, without your face going red'. It is as obvious as it can be to us that Paul Keating has, himself, been taken up into a high mountain, and shown all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time".
Whose servant is Paul Keating NOW?? He is serving an ideology; that of Socialist One Worldism. Yes, but whose POLICY is One Worldism? We can do no better than quote from "Centralisation, The Policy of Satanism", by L.D.Byrne: "The policy of centralisation of power is the denial of the right of men and women to freedom. It is the denial of the sanctity of human personality. It is a denial of the omnipotence of God and the antithesis of the social policy inherent in Christ's teachings".
The New International Economic Order is a plan; rather a plot, to centralise the resources of the nations of the world, and then the peoples of the world. The Megabanks in Australia are but a tool to carry out this policy more efficiently.
We have all heard about this "affirmative action", which is, tearing away the waffle, discrimination in reverse. All manner of anomalies will arise as this absurd programme is pushed by the Socialists/Humanists in Canberra and the State Capitals. Now the tertiary institutions ("journalese" for universities and technical colleges) are watching the penny tumble. The Humanist Equalisers want a certain percentage of women and ethnics to occupy staff positions at the above with less regard to academic qualifications, For example, traditionally, a doctorate (Ph.D.) in a dicipline has been a required qualification for a teaching position in tertiary institutions; but equal opportunity boffins would claim that, for a variety of reasons, there are far less Ph.Ds. among women than men. The universities and technical colleges will probably "get around" this silly obstruction in their own ways, but the issue will cause some bitterness and rancour amongst academics, generally not noted for plethoric commonsense.
Whilst on the subject, Deakin University
(Geelong, Victoria) has recently published "Girls, School
and Work", which laments the fact that, in spite of Women's
Lib., Gay Liberation, and all the rest of the liberations,
girls were still not entering "non-traditional" work areas,
and furthermore, they still make ill-advised subject choices.
We are not told just who considers these subjects "ill-advised",
of course. Certainly not the girls, themselves. The "Affirmative
action" Redfems are trying to turn women into men. Women have
the same intelligence and abilities as men, but they are biologically
different. Not as many of them are interested in being mechanical
experts or professionals. A woman is by nature interested
in clothes (fashion), children, the home, furniture. Most
of them don't want to be Ph.Ds in some stuffy university!
The madness rolls on. In New Zealand, where the madness appears to be worse than even in Australia, two Shakespearean plays have been banned from Victoria University's English Club Shakespeare film festival. "The Merchant of Venice" has been dubbed "anti-semitic", and "The Taming of the Shrew" has been dubbed "sexist". Fortunately, there have been several prominent people, e.g. the director of a New Zealand drama school; artistic director of Wellington theatre, who have protested at such idiocy.
There's nothing like having your hands on the levers of political power, and splashing around the contents of the public purse. The Federal Government has already spent $19 MILLION on the original Assets Test, which was scrapped! The Government trained 5,355 staff to implement the original Assets Test before it was abandoned. But wait for it, the new Assets Test has already cost $21 MILLION. So at least $40 MILLION has been spent before the assets Test even begins to operate, and will have nothing like that amount of revenue each year. Quite obviously, the Assets Test is intended to be extended as far as possible (squeeze, squeeze, squeeze) once it has been introduced and accepted. Very many citizens, with a few dollars put aside for a rainy day, in cash, property, land, are in for the shock of their lives when the Assets Test is turned "on".
DETRACTORS ARE ILL-INFORMED ON NUCLEAR POWERThe following letter was published in the "Burnside Messenger" (an Adelaide suburban newspaper) Feb. 20th over the name of "Donald Jessop, who is a Senator for South Australia:
"I would appreciate the opportunity to correct the ill informed statements of nuclear power detractors Messrs. Darley and Kavanagh, "I regret that Mr. Darley, the Coordinator of People for Peace, considers that the generation of jobs, money, and development at Roxby Downs is a project unworthy of my support. "Anti-uranium activists always refer to the spot market price of uranium oxide in desperation to support their cause. "Nuclear power station operators try to guarantee the source of fuel through long-term contracts at higher prices and only use surplus spot markets to supply shortages. "Energy Resources of Australia recently signed two contracts with American electricity companies to supply more than $550 Million of yellow cake for the 1990s. "Contrary to what your correspondent has implied, nuclear power is the fastest growing source of base load electricity in the world with 317 nuclear power stations in operation in 25 countries and an additional 209 reactors under construction. These reactors will need fuel under long-term contracts.
"Mr. Kavanagh has hit the crucial nail on the head when he says that countries have produced their bombs 'from reactors about the size of Australia's own at Lucas Heights'. "The use of small research reactors is exactly how weapons grade plutonium is produced. "It is quite uneconomic and unrealistic to shut down a high electricity power station every two weeks to withdraw the very expensive fuel rods for destruction and separation of plutonium isotopes, "No country would spend hundreds of millions of dollars just to antagonise electricity consumers with costly interruptions to their daily energy needs. "People are becoming very tired of these anti-development, anti-employment, anti-capitalist activists, who shelter behind such group names as People for Peace, Friends of the Earth, and People for Nuclear Disarmament.
"Dr. Joe Camilleri, convenor of People for Nuclear Disarmament has been guest speaker at meetings of the Communist Party of Australia and has written articles published in their journal, 'Tribune'. "It is obvious that the real political motives of these activists are unacceptable to the majority of the Australian public. "The so-called 'peace' organisations receive hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayers' money through job creation schemes, other government grants, and left-wing controlled unions. "I believe the public has the right to know how their organisations are funded just the same as every other major political party is forced to reveal its sources of funding."
VICTORIAN MLA SPEAKS OUT ON ABORIGINAL LAND RIGHTS"Gippsland Times" (Feb. 12th); Mr. Bruce Evans, National Party M.L.A. for East Gippsland, has released a document attacking government and church spokesmen for deceiving the community over Aboriginal Land Rights.
"On the one hand, Aborigines are encouraged to see land rights as a solution to all their social and economic disadvantages, and on the other, there are fears of the development of something approaching a separate Aboriginal state", he said. Mr. Evans argued that Aborigines have exactly the same right to own land as anyone else. He also argues against the payment of compensation for the dispossession and dispersal of Aborigines on the basis that it is impossible to redress alleged wrongs, which took place 200 years ago. He disputed the contention that Aborigines are worse off because of white settlement."Such an assertion is only valid if the conditions of aborigines today are compared with what they would have been without white settlement. It can only be a hypothetical comparison, but I contend it is hard to believe that, left alone, aborigines would have developed the housing, education, health and welfare standards that they enjoy today". Mr. Evans said much more that we regard as commonsense.
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|