GORBACHEV "CONS" PRIME MINISTER HAWKE

Prime Minister Bob Hawke has always been so egotistical that he really believes that his personal magnetism enables him to change the fundamental policies of other nations by what he described as "personal diplomacy". As long-term observers of Marxism-Leninism and the Soviet Union, we predict that events will prove that Bob Hawke has been the victim of his own delusions of grandeur in his dealings with Soviet leader Gorbachev.

In spite of all the talk about "glasnost", Gorbachev insists that he is a dedicated Marxist-Leninist. Most starry-eyed commentators appear to have forgotten the wave of wishful thinking, which swept the West when Khruschev attacked Stalinism, and said that he wished to introduce an era of "peaceful co-existence". Few bothered to discover that "peaceful co-existence" had been devised by Lenin as a tactic of Marxist-Leninist warfare. Two major developments took place as a result of "peaceful coexistence": large numbers of Jews - but not Soviet Christians - were helped to leave the Soviet Union; and massive credits were extended to the Soviet Union with the result that there was a big increase in Western exports, including technology, to the Soviet Union.

Along with Chinese Communist leaders, Gorbachev and his advisers are now preaching closer economic ties between the Communist nations and the West. This is soothing news to the ears of Mr. Bob Hawke, a strong supporter of the New International Economic Order, a concept for a global economy also supported by both Moscow and Peking. When Mr. Hawke visited Communist China, following his first election in 1983, he came back to Australia glowing with the news of how his special type of personal diplomacy had resulted in the Chinese Communists accepting the concept of a joint Australia-China development project in the field of steel manufacturing, Australia's main contribution being to provide the coal.

The development of a "global economy" has always been a major Marxist-Leninist objective, one also supported by Western-based International Finance. In assessing Mr. Hawke's visit to Moscow, it is important to remember that the Australian Prime Minister requested to go. Gorbachev welcomed this request at a time when Moscow strategists were openly seeking to exert greater influence in the Asia-Pacific region. Gorbachev also knew that one of Mr. Hawke's primary concerns was "trade". Like South Africa, Australia is a rich mineral nation and figures largely in the plans of the various advocates of the necessity to create the "global economy".

Well aware of Mr. Hawke's long love affair with Zionist Israel, and how Hawke was distraught following his last visit to the Soviet, during which Soviet officials led him to believe that they were agreeing to release a number of Jews, only to find he had been hoodwinked, Gorbachev skillfully waited until Mr. Hawke was about to leave Moscow when he told the Prime Minister that five of the Jews on his special list for whom he sought release, were to be permitted to leave. This cynical gesture by the Soviet: is once again a revealing comment on the special relationship between International Zionism and the Soviet Union. It is instructive to note that most, if not all, the prominent Soviet Jews wishing to leave the Soviet Union, have held important posts in Soviet society, confirming what all students of the Soviet know: that in relationship to their numbers, Jews have not been specially discriminated against in the Soviet system.

With the release of a relatively few Jews, Gorbachev has increased the status of Prime Minister Hawke, ensuring that he has the enthusiastic support of Zionists everywhere. Mr. Hawke is clearly emerging as one of the key figures in the international programme to establish the New International Economic Order. Mr. Hawke is able to bask with self-assurance in the glow of what, superficially, appears to be a major diplomatic triumph, only because the Opposition endorses basically the same globalisation programme being advocated by Mr. Hawke.

LET'S KEEP OUR BALANCE

The late Douglas Reed, one of the true prophets of this violent century, said that on one occasion he was so involved in a study of evil in the world that he became concerned for his own sanity. The South African lyric poet, Roy Campbell warned that one can tend to become that which one fights. There is a great need for a balanced approach to affairs when, during a period of a disintegrating Civilisation, despair can result in people falling victim to exaggerated claims concerning events. We are, reluctantly, prompted to deal with this subject because some of our readers have been asking us why we are not publicising the views of the former official of the Social Security Department, Peter Sawyer.

While we are satisfied that there is much truth in what Mr. Sawyer says about the dangers of centralised computer systems, and the threat to individual privacy, we fear that Mr. Sawyer has badly undermined his credibility with some extremely rash predictions, some of them already proved wrong. In his September newsletter, "Inside News", Mr. Sawyer spoils his account of the establishment of a national surveillance system, by entering the dangerous world of specific predictions. We are told that the Australian dollar would "plummet through the floor", and "Expect a devaluation of 30 percent or more in November". Interest rates would increase to 30 percent by Christmas. The truth is that interest rates have been falling as a result of Reserve Bank policy.

With over half a century of expertise in the field of finance economics, we are not prepared to make these types of predictions. The manipulation of interest rates is a matter of deliberate policy, as witnessed last week when the Reserve Bank cut its re-discount rate paving the way for still lower interest rates. When a press report states that "These interest rate falls follow the Reserve Bank's efforts to ensure adequate liquidity in the banking system, following the October stock market crash", this means, in simple English, that sufficient new credit money is to be made available to prevent a major depression.

We observed at the time of the October 29th stock market crash that the answer to the question of whether this crash signaled another 1929, would be indicated by the policy of the Federal Reserve Board. The news that the Reserve Board was increasing the "liquidity" of the American banking system, confirmed our view that the world was not threatened with another Great Depression. The immediate result of such a depression would be bloodshed and anarchy, the last thing the international planners want. The overall strategy is to exploit crisis conditions to convince people that there are no alternatives to still more centralisation of power. The policy of destruction is sought through Fabianisation - gradualness.

In recent years a number of "insider" newsletters have appeared, mainly in the USA, which, on occasions provide valuable "intelligence" information. But most of these have developed an almost hypnotic theme, that sooner or later - and probably sooner - a major world recession is inevitable. Those fostering this view are helping to create the climate of opinion in which the steady programme of centralising power can be continued. Another Great Depression would not be the result of inevitability, but the result of a conscious decision by the Debt Merchants, or the result of their failure to adjust financial policy sufficiently to prevent a major collapse.

In appealing for a balanced approach in the face of the steady erosion of basic rights, we point out that over the years the League has provided platforms for many non-League speakers when it believes that the speakers have something of value to say, without necessarily agreeing with everything said. The League has played a major role in gaining a nation-wide audience for the authors of books only to notice later that they have become critical of the League. Human nature being what it is, this is only to be expected and we are familiar with the underlying cause. Although aware that the author of "Operation Peace Studies" was a well-known critic of the League, Mr. Andrew Campbell, we heavily promoted the book because we felt it dealt excellently with the subject it covered. The battle for the world is so serious that it is essential that a balanced view, based on demonstrable facts, is presented at all times.

With great respect to Mr. Peter Sawyer, when he suggests that legislation to introduce the ID Card was a "red herring" to mask the development of a computer system, and that we should treat as some type of joke former public servant Smith's discovery that the ID Card legislation could be blocked by Senate, we must say that he further helps to undermine his own credibility. Which is a pity, as this diverts attention of serious commentators away from what is important. We have long followed the predictions concerning "cashless societies", but not even the Soviet Union has been successful. We fear that Mr. Sawyer's horrendous predictions for next year will prove as baseless as his predictions for the pre-Christmas period.

The most disturbing aspects of Mr. Sawyer's second newsletter are his serious accusations against prominent Australians, some of these accusations being clearly libelous and inviting appropriate action by some of those named. Unless Mr. Sawyer has concrete evidence to support these allegations the kindest thing we can say is that he either is being badly advised, or lacks sound judgment.

BRIEF COMMENT

REWARD MPs ONLY FOR RESULTS

ACLU SUBMISSION TO IMMIGRATION INQUIRY

The Australian Civil Liberties Union submission to the Committee to Advise on Immigration (hereinafter called the Inquiry) is set out in three ACLU position papers entitled "Censorship of Immigration Debate: "Anti-White Racism", and "The Fitzgerald Inquiry', and an article by C. Steele -"behind Australia's Immigration Policy".

THE ACLU SUBMISSION "IN SUMMARY" IS THAT "The economic advantages to Australia of the current level of immigration or an increased level have been overstated - see "Populate or Perish" edited by R. Birrell, Dr. Hill, and J. Nevill, and articles by J. Collins from the Kuringai C.A.E.

"To the extent Australia needs an increase in population, this should be obtained by an increase in the birthrate. Greater support for Australian families would help to encourage a higher birthrate - see attached material indicating lack of family support programmes in Australia and steps taken in countries such as France to encourage a high birthrate.
"The views of the Australian people on immigration should be heeded. This could be achieved by a referendum under the existing Constitution or by a citizens' initiated referendum under a new constitution.

"The attempt to brainwash Australians into accepting the current immigration policies by various forms of propaganda and censorship should be condemned by the Inquiry. Censorship of aspects of the immigration debate should be condemned. There has been censorship of the figures for net Asian immigration, the failure of multi-racial societies overseas, the extent of black tribal racism and the extent of Asian racism. The views of people supporting a return to a predominantly European immigration policy have been censored - see "The Fitzgerald Inquiry" paper and "Censorship of Immigration."

"The terms of reference of the Inquiry which preclude investigating the arguments for a return to a predominantly European immigration policy are another example of censorship. "The Inquiry should make findings on the extent of net Asian immigration, as to why the Government claims the Asian component in our population is 2.6% when Dr. Price calculates it is 4%; the projected percentage of Asians in 1990 and 2050; the effect on projections of Chinese seeking to emigrate to Australia from Hong Kong, and the effect of Asians seeking to emigrate to Australia from failed multi-racial societies such as Fiji.

"The suggestions by Professor Blainey in "All for Australia" are moderate, are supported by most Australians, and should be followed at a time of high unemployment, economic recession, and the increasing evidence that multi-racial societies are not viable - see "All for Australia" section in "Censorship of Immigration" paper. "The Inquiry should examine why a multi-racial society could be viable in Australia when such societies overseas are in such disarray. "The Inquiry should examine why there is so much emphasis by the media, the Government and immigration advisory groups on there being more than 150 nationalities in Australia and so little emphasis on the fact that Australia is still 75% Anglo-Celtic, 84% Anglo-Celtic! Northern European, and 94% European (see research by Dr. Price and article by Professor Blainey).

"The Inquiry should note the difference between the type of racism involving a belief in superiority of one's own kind, and racism involving preference for ones own kind see "Anti-White Racism" paper "The inquiry should examine why the Minister for Immigration has actively solicited the views on immigration of tiny minority groups, but has ridiculed majority opinion and infers that moderate opponents of current policies such as Professor Blainey must merely be tolerated since they just "test the rest of us," (Bulletin, 20/10/87) while Mr. Bruce Ruxton "may get a say too" (The Age, 29/10/87).

"The Inquiry should look at the need for greater integration of minority ethnic groups into Australian society by emphasis or the teaching of English and ready availability of information on our Constitution, traditions and laws including information on the law in "Your Rights" (300,000 copies sold), and information in foreign, languages, including 15,000 copies of "Your Rights" in Vietnamese. "The above points are a summary of the ACLU submission contained in the ACLU position papers referred to above. The ACLU wishes to expand on its submissions by appearing before the inquiry. The ACLU has already offered to appear before the Inquiry for one hour on October 24th but did not receive a promised return phone call in relation to its offer."