DAVID IRVING VERSUS THE SMEARERS

It is clear that the liberals of the media do not know how to handle British historian David Irving. Aided by John Jost of the Melbourne ABC 7.30 Report, Mr. Max Teichman, lecturer in politics at Monash University, attempted last Friday to smear David Irving by linking him with the "notorious" and "anti-Semitic" League of Rights. Over its long history, the League of Rights has invited a large number of prominent Australians to participate in Seminars. It will continue to do so irrespective of the cracked record smearing by its critics. What the anti-Irving critics find hard to counter is Irving's passionate pro-British Empire stand. When Max Teichman made the sneering remark that David Irving was a supporter of 19th century British Imperialism, he was unconsciously paying Irving a compliment.

Irving was born on the eve of the Second World War, which ended with the destruction of the British Empire and the expansion of the Empire of the Soviet Union. Proud of his British heritage, Irving has protested in robust language that he has been robbed of his heritage. He lists Winston Churchill as one of the principal architects of the policies, which have reduced the British world to its present sorry state. Even a cursory look at Churchill's War reveals that Irving provides massive first hand documentation to support his criticism of Churchill.

A younger generation, starved of any knowledge of history, or the victims of a distorted version, may well ask why is a debate about events of nearly half a century ago of any importance today. History is of the greatest importance. People who know nothing of the past have little upon which to plan for the future. And those who will not learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to keep repeating those mistakes. The great Roman Civilisation collapsed primarily because of financial policies of debt, crushing taxation, inflation, and the attempt to deal with the disastrous results of these policies by progressive centralisation of power in the Roman bureaucracy. If the peoples of the old British world are to regenerate their societies, it is essential that they understand the significance of the development of the British Empire and why it was marked down for destruction.

That Empire was not without many serious faults. But its development was a barrier to the age-old drive towards the establishment of a World State. It was the first Empire in history to demonstrate that true unity is developed through diversity and decentralisation. Early in the Second World War, C.H. Douglas made one of his many perceptive predictions: one of the real objectives of the Second World War was the break up of the British Empire and the destruction of British culture. Irving the historian seeks to discover how the British world was destroyed.

Irving argues, as, of course, have others, that having kept their pledge to defend Poland, the British were freed from that pledge when Poland was carved up in 1939 between Hitler's Germany and the Soviet Union. The British Government should have put British interests ahead of all other considerations, accepted Hitler's proposal to negotiate a peace settlement and allowed Hitler and Stalin to exhaust themselves while seizing the opportunity to strengthen the British Empire.

The prospect of the British world increasing its dominant influence following a German-Soviet conflict is one, which even today makes the victims of the collectivist disease wince. Judged by any standards, David Irving is a remarkable phenomenon. He has set the alarm bells ringing in the citadels of international power. Churchill's War could play a major role in helping the peoples of the British world everywhere to re-discover their soul.

BUDGET REALITIES

There is an old political adage, which says, "rooster today, feather duster tomorrow." Treasurer Paul Keating is at present basking in the warm glow of praise from the International Money power and its hirelings. Keating is being presented as some type of a miracle man. In one sense, this is true, as witnessed by Keating's grim warning of last year that Australia was threatened with becoming a banana republic, while today he is suggesting that Australia is some type of a lotus land. Paul Keating's "balanced budget" is the product of what is now known as "creative accountancy".

While Keating's juggling with astronomical figures has brought a warm response from Wall Street, with the international speculators being encouraged to acquire more of Australia's assets, what about the Australian people? The truth is that slowly but surely the standard of living of large numbers of the Australian people, including trade unionists, has been screwed down. The nation's external debt remains in excess of $100 billion. Taxation remains at record levels. Family life is under growing pressure. Total internal debt continues to grow, as it must under present financial policies.

Big Business generally is pleased with Paul Keating's policies, while small and medium sized businesses struggle to keep afloat. Inflation continues, as it must under debt finance. While the political scribes continue to heap praise on the Treasurer, predicting that his Budget has already ensured that Labor will win the next Federal Election, Paul Keating's Ministerial colleague Senator Walsh warns that Australia may be travelling the same road which led Argentina to its present parlous plight.

BRIEF COMMENTS

Pope John Paul met with Zionist leaders in the U.S.A., who insisted that Zionist Israel was essential to provide a home for the Jews. The Pope made the comment that the Palestinian people were also entitled to a homeland. His Holiness might have commented, as has Dr. Alfred Lilienthal, that while many Christians have uncritically accepted the myth about the Return of The Chosen People, Zionist Israel is a secular State with most of its leaders atheists. Police recently dealt harshly with Orthodox Jewish Rabbis and supporters protesting against the showing of films on the Jewish Sabbath.

Deputy Prime Minister, and Federal Attorney-General Bowen claimed in Perth last weekend that a series of referendums will be put to the Australian people late next year. The referendums will be based on the recommendations of the Constitutional Commission. Mr. Bowen claims that the Constitutional Commission is a "bi-partisan and apolitical group of eminent Australians." The truth is, as documented in Howard Carter's excellent book, 1988: Bi Centenary Celebration or Constitutional Crisis? ($4.00 posted) the Constitutional Commission is stacked with Fabian Socialists like Mr. Gough Whitlam and others of similar philosophical background.

While President Reagan is being praised by Democrats like Edward Kennedy, for his proposed arms control pact with the Soviet, conservative Republicans are being extremely critical. The desperate Reagan is relieved to accept an offer from what was previously "the evil Empire". What is being enthusiastically claimed to be "a very significant breakthrough" in US-Soviet relations, is merely further confirmation of the emerging global programme to merge the American and Soviet economies as part of the New International Economic Order.

In his column, "Opinion", in The Advertiser (Adelaide, Sept. 12th) columnist Matthew Abraham sounds off quite well about the Australia Card. He writes:
"..... Suddenly the I.D. Card is news. Suddenly the I.D. Card is worth organising rallies about. Suddenly, the non-government parties realise there may be a little mileage in the proposed hit of plastic, after all."
This is what the League of Rights has been saying since the July 11th election. Matthew Abraham states, as we have stated; that the Coalition decided not to campaign on the issue: it was a "loser". This based on campaign "research". Well, their "research" was deplorable. Messrs. Howard, Sinclair, Peacock, and many others well know that the principle of the I.D. Card is totalitarian - but they kept silent. John Howard has admitted on TV (Sept. l0th) that "party" research showed the public opinion on the Card was even, at best. Very few, if any, media "personalities" are asking the one basic question with respect to the Australia Card, viz. Do we (the people) own the Government, or does the Government own us? They are using "our" money, after all, and should "the man who pays the piper, call the tune?" Well, should he?!

Our "Aboriginal" activist, Michael Mansell, is sounding off, yet again. Now an "Aboriginal" nation must be set up from Australia Day next year (1988). There's much more. Mansell wants Aborigines to "take control" of all government owned land in Australia, and to declare such a "sovereign nation". We do admit to having most suspicious thoughts, from time to time. Has anyone ever pondered the question of the possibility of the so called "Heritage" land now being claimed by the Fabians (such as Franklin River and Daintree) eventually being handed over to the "Aborigine" (as was Ayers Rock) in order to make up an Aboriginal "nation". Our friendly Mansell will also repel "invaders" from the First Fleet re-enactment when it hits Sydney. "We will drive them back into the sea", he says.

BENDIGO STOP THE I.D. CARD

This letter was published in the Bendigo Advertiser (Sept. 10th) over the name of "David Jones", of Kangaroo Flat, (Bendigo suburb) Vic., 3555:
"As the President of the South Bendigo branch of the A.L.P. (whose membership includes John Brumby and David Kennedy) I feel that I can no longer remain silent about the direction which the party is taking. "The proposal to introduce a compulsory, national identity system goes against the very core of my beliefs as an individual within a democratic society. "The problems which I see are many, the more significant now are:
a) It is compulsory and therefore does not allow for the individual to choose whether or not to participate in such a scheme.
b). No system is foolproof and the interconnection of the various departments allows for the possible leakage of information into the hands of corrupt officials and ultimately, organised crime.
c). The bodies and departments, which are included on the agencies to be allowed access to the files, have already demonstrated security problems.
d). In proposing such a system the Government is making the assumption that as we are all possibly guilty, we should all be investigated. This goes against the very core of our system of justice.
e). The possibilities of future use, and abuse, of the card is frightening, and it is dangerous to consider that it can't happen to us.
f). The decision making process of the A.L.P. has been hijacked by factional leaders and a parliamentary elite of the inner cabinet. These people have scant regard for the rank and file of the Party.

Further, the direction, which the party has taken in moving towards a 'corporist' structure, which excludes many groups from the decision-making process structure, is of grave concern.

"Economic decisions which put profit, budgets, and efficiency above people, egalitarianism, and justness, are further evidence of the betrayal of the Labor Party's proud tradition.

"Finally, we are out to lose our individuality, our freedom to move and associate with whom we like. "It is my belief that the issue of the Australia Card is of such importance that the people of Bendigo should be heard. The silent majority of people should mobilise against this threat.

"For further information; Interim Conveners of the 'Bendigo Region Citizens Against the Australia Card"' Ian Tulloch (054) 391222, David Jones (054) Bus. 423232, A.H. (054) 748242."

REMEMBER G-G