Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
 
 
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
 
 
Home blog.alor.org Newtimes Survey The Cross-Roads Library
OnTarget Archives The Social Crediter Archives NewTimes Survey Archives Brighteon Video Channel Veritas Books

On Target

30 January 1987. Thought for the Week: "No matter whose the lips that would speak, they must be free and ungagged. The Community which dares not protect its humblest and most hated member in the free utterance of his opinions, no matter how false or hateful, is only a gang of slaves."
Wendell Phillips

SOVIET-ZIONIST DIALECTICS

In spite of the fact that the Bolshevik Revolution was financed by Jewish Wall Street bankers, and that the Soviet has had the continued support of the same type of international bankers, Zionist propaganda constantly seeks to project the Soviet as being "anti Semitic". Holocaust mythology, a major feature of Zionist psycho-political warfare against the Christian West, relies heavily on the cooperation of the Communists, who took over Auschwitz the main concentration camp where the biggest number of Jews were allegedly gassed by the Germans, late in the Second World War. The Communists have been mainly responsible for the fiction concerning camps in Poland. But the Zionists also make their contribution to the Communist cause by their non-stop programme to depict Hitler as the greatest incarnation of Evil in the history of mankind, a type of super genius.

Hitler was, of course, evil, as are all men exercising the type of power he did. But the diabolisation of Hitler helps ensure that an even more vile man, Stalin, and his successors, are regarded differently. Hitler has been dead for over 40 years, and there is not even one Nazi party in the whole world. But the threat of Communism is a deadly and growing threat to the Free World. The Zionist campaign to continue publicising Hitler is a tremendous asset to the Soviet strategists. Prominent amongst those influential Jews who have continued to help sustain the Soviet, is Armand Hammer, the internationalist who flies into Moscow, as he likes, who clearly treats with disdain the view that the Soviet is "anti-Semitic". Hammer now openly demonstrates that he is prepared to serve both the Soviet and International Zionism.

Zionist Israel is about to stage another show "trial" of the unfortunate Ukrainian born Demjanjuk, extradited from the U.S.A. where he has been citizen for many years. The Israelis have found, however, that they have a problem about the identification of Demjanjuk, allegedly a butcher responsible for the deaths of thousands of Jews in a concentration camp in what today is Communist Poland. Demjanjuk is not even the "Ivan The Terrible" who was responsible for the alleged killings.

The Israelis turned to the Soviet for help in identifying Demjanjuk. But how could this be done in the absence of diplomatic relations between Moscow and Tel Aviv? The Australian Jewish News of January 16th reveals that Armand Hammer agreed to be the middleman, and that Hammer "persuaded Moscow to send Israel a document prosecutors contend proves that a retired U.S. auto worker was the feared Nazi death camp guard 'Ivan the Terrible'.

The Australian Jewish News report goes on to say that it was "the personal intervention of Hammer which moved Moscow to hand over the required document on the understanding that the document was handed back to the Soviet after the Israeli prosecutors have used it."

And so the Zionist Soviet collaboration continues while large numbers of gullible people believe that Israel is a bastion for the Western world in the Middle East, blocking any Soviet advances. Conveniently not mentioned is the fact that the Soviet played a major role in the creation of the Zionist State in 1948.


ON WITH THE SOCIALIST POWER CONCENTRATIONS

Listening to the A.B.C. programme a day or so ago dealing with the spate of massive business takeovers, in Australia, in the 80s, we heard an economist for a very large Merchant Bank state words to the effect that these takeovers would have been virtually impossible without the deregulation of Australian banking. He was talking about the entry of the huge overseas banking machines into the Australian economy.

Our thoughts immediately went back to Socialist Brother Keating, who was raging against the entry of overseas banks into the Australian "market" only a few days before the March, 1983 Elections which dropped the Hawke administration onto the Treasury benches. Almost immediately after that, Brother (should we say "General"?) Keating was taken up into the High Mountain in the U.S.A. and shown the International financial facts of life. He came back to Oz a changed man. He was feverishly in favour, now, on the deregulation of banking in Oz such would be "competitive" and make for greater "efficiency" in the financial market place. Why; ordinary borrowers must benefit from this greater competitiveness and efficiency by way of lowered interest rates. Hooray.

As we all know, the General didn't make this happen; something went wrong. The Aussie dollar devalued sharply, and the interest rages jumped. Nevertheless, General Keating got the message in the good all U.S. of A. socialism, after all, is not a movement for the general betterment of the individual working man and woman; for a fairer and more just society. No, General; it is an international power movement for the sheer concentration of political and financial power. This is why Mr. Montagu Norman, former Director of the Bank of "England" said -"Nationalisation, we welcome it!"

Well, well; the wooly minded Socialists of Oz have been sold a pup, along with armies of fellow Socialists abroad. How would the Bonds, the Elliotts, the Holmes a Courts, the Murdochs, be getting along without the backing of the giant Megabanks? Answer: they wouldn't! Where do the Megabanks stand in relation to the onward programme of the New International Economic Order? Right in the middle.


LAND RIGHTS RACKET

"The (Vic.) Opposition Leader, Mr. Kennett, said he would start campaigning next week against Federal Government adoption of Bills giving land to Aboriginals in the Western-District. - The Sun (Melbourne) January 23rd.

The Attorney General in the Cain Socialist/Communist (Vic.) Government, Mr. Jim Kennan, claims there is no ground for a States' rights campaign since all States had voted in 1967 to hand powers affecting Aboriginals to the Commonwealth. Hold on! In 1967 Land Rights were not even mentioned, even though they were being definitely thought about (behind the scenes).

We now refer to the book: Land Rights - Birth Rights, by Peter B. English ($16.00 posted from all League bookshops); and on page 50 we read: "From the advent of the Whitlam Labor Government in 1973, the 1967 Referendum result has been cited frequently as the rock upon which the whole Land Rights movement in Australia is based. "What, then, were the wishes of the people as expressed through the ballot box in response to the Government's proposed amendments to the Commonwealth Constitution? "In a nutshell, nothing more than giving consent to the alteration of Part V, Section 51 (xxvi) to read: "The people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws, and deleting Section 127 completely (Section 127 referred to 'Aboriginal Natives' ... O.T.) "Certainly the people did not (emphasis in original) give the Federal Government 'the power to grant Land Rights to Aboriginals', as claimed some seventeen and half years later by the present Prime Minister, Mr. R.J.Hawke (details given ... O.T.) Politicians in Australia should be constantly reminded that the 1967 Referendum did make way for the counting of Aboriginals and other races in Commonwealth statistics, and for some special legislation, if necessary, for "other races", BUT there was no mention whatsoever, of Land Rights."


BRIEF COMMENTS

Historian Barton Bernstein of Stanford University, U.S.A., has recently revealed that a deadly anthrax bomb was developed by Britain during the Second World War and manufactured in the U.S.A. Anthrax was released experimentally on the tiny island of Gruibard, of Scotland, and the island remains uninhabitable today. The manufacturing of the deadly bombs and their proposed use violated a 1925 Geneva convention. Bernstein says he found no evidence that moral concerns would have deterred Churchill from using them. But British historian David Irving has pointed out, Churchill even considered using poison gas in contravention of Geneva conventions. The Bernstein revelation suggests that it is possible that more information about the real Churchill may be released in order to soften the pact of Irving's devastating biography of Churchill - if and when published.

The phony tax debate continues. In recent talks with businessmen, shadow treasurer Carlton has told them that a Coalition government would immediately introduce a broad based consumption tax of 7.5 percent, and that this would be used to finance the abolition of the fringe benefits tax and the capital gains tax. It will be recalled Treasurer Paul Keating attempted to introduce a consumption tax... Opposition leader Howard says that tax will be the main electoral battleground throughout 1987. But neither he nor his colleagues have committed themselves to lower TOTAL taxation. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is a policy, which electors must challenge.

Last year (1986) in the U.S.A., no less than 138 banks collapsed - a post Depression record. Most of these banks were in the oil and farming regions of the U.S.A. We still have a way to go to match the year, 1933. There were some 4,000 (four thousand) bank failures in 1933. The U.S.A. does not have the Branch Banking system of the British world.

A large U.S. bank has been given its marching orders from Brazil by the Central Bank of Brazil. The reason? For failing to cooperate in the rescheduling of Brazil's enormous foreign debt ($103 billion, American) Brazil has been able to pay only the interest on its debt since 1983.

There appears to be a number of other organisations, which have been formed to combat the threatened I.D. Card legislation. A body called "F.A.R.M. (Freedom and Rights Movement) P0 Box 90, NORWOOD, S.A., 5067 has put out a very good brochure, combined with a Petition to the Senate. We commend this brochure.


SENATOR DON JESSOP'S PRESS RELEASE ON TUTU

Press Release from Senator Jessop, January 8th, 1987:
"Liberal Senator Don Jessop questions the attitudes and activities of Archbishop Tutu, now visiting Australia, and of the President of the African National Congress, Oliver Tambo, who has been invited to do so. "I want to know whether Archbishop Tutu and Oliver Tambo support the burning alive of more than 600 black South Africans up to June 1986, by ANC sponsored revolutionaries?' said the Senator. "I believe the Archbishop should explain to the Australian people how he justifies the ANC using youths of 15-17 years of age to murder by 'necklacing' other black people, whose only crime is their willingness to work for a peaceful transition to a post-apartheid society.
The Archbishop should prove that he has a constituency in South Africa for whom he can speak with authority, otherwise he can only be regarded as a creation of the international media. "He should explain for whom he speaks, when he urges Western nations to impose economic sanctions, knowing that his fellow South Africans will suffer.
"The archbishop should explain what sacrifices he and his family are making as sanctions bite into the South African economy. In particular, he should state where his children are being educated, while he encourages black children in South Africa to boycott school. "The Archbishop obviously agrees with the philosophy espoused in the anti-Christian Kairos Document, 'Challenge to the Church'. Does he reject, as do the authors of that document, 'conciliation between white and black, or between all South Africans?'
"Accepting that Oliver Tambo is no longer a Communist, one is bound to wonder how he is going to control the military wing of the ANC which is unashamedly communist. No other non-communist leader of a so-called broad front organisation has ever survived victory; does Tambo believe he will be any different in the unlikely event of an ANC victory?
"The Hawke Government has permitted these two to visit Australia to preach hatred of the South African Government, and at the same time it is preventing representatives of that Government, or ordinary citizens from that country to counter this vicious one sided propaganda.
"All I can do', concluded Senator Jessop, 'is to urge all Australians to be critically aware that neither of these visitors should be accepted at face value."

For further press release (undated) most probably on the same day, Senator Bishop challenges the Hawke Government to invite moderate South African leaders to present their views in Australia: "If the Hawke Government believes in freedom of speech, it should invite other South Africans to come and speak to the people of Australia about their aspirations. Neither the ANC nor Archbishop Tutu are representative of the majority of non-white South Africans', said Senator Jessup. "I believe the U.S. Congress was wrong in imposing sanctions on South Africa, but at least the U.S.A. still believes in free speech, and permits people such as Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi to visit the U.S.A. and to put his views to the President, and to address the National Press Club…"

© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159