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
Home Blog Freedom Potentials The Cross Roads Veritas Books
OnTarget Archives Newtimes Survey Podcast Library Video Library PDF Library
Actionist Corner YouTube Video Channel BitChute Video Channel Brighteon Video Channel Social Credit Library

On Target

30 September 1988. Thought for the Week: "It was the gradual production of centuries of cumulative works of love which created expanding islands of light in the great ocean of barbaric hatred, cruelty, and darkness that swept over Western Europe after the disintegration and collapse of imperial Rome. History and observation alike show that the natural state of human society, unless redeemed and ennobled by this principle of creative love, is one either of anarchy or despotism."
Sir Arthur Bryant in The Lion and The Unicorn


It is an old Fabian maxim that the best government is that which taxes the most and spends the most. The modern taxation system has little to do with raising revenue for legitimate government activities, such as, for example, military defence. Taxation has to do with controlling people; it is an instrument of social engineering. And the level and complexity of the taxation system is resulting in a major growth industry. Even the humblest taxpayer now requires expert advice in the preparation of his tax returns. Tens of thousands of advisers and accountants are required by those running business enterprises. Many controversies concerning taxation result in costly legal battles in the courts. And as the tax pressure becomes heavier, taxpayers naturally take every possible opportunity of minimising the amount of tax they pay.

It should be carefully noted that there is no suggestion that individuals or organisations are dishonest in their methods of obtaining money - most have to provide some type of required service or production before they obtain money. The allegations of "dishonesty" only relate to their reluctance to hand a big part of this money over to the tax collectors, One senior business leader has expressed the rather old fashioned view that he had a responsibility to his company's shareholders, and that it was his duty to take every legitimate step to minimise the amount of tax being paid.

Now tax chief Trevor Boucher does not approve of this attitude at all. Urged on by Treasurer Paul Keating, Mr. Boucher sounds more like a commissar than a public servant. His statements sound like those of a moralist who knows what is best for society. He first burst into public prominence in 1986 when he defended the government's totalitarian ID card proposal. Mr. Boucher says, "I am bound to apply the law as I see it." If this view is accepted, then the taxing bureaucrats are superior to parliament and the courts. The Commissioner of Taxation is reported to have said that he will launch prosecutions concerning taxation minimisation schemes, which in his opinion are not within the spirit of the law even if the schemes are within the letter of the law.

Leading lawyers have pointed out that Tax Commissioner Boucher is propounding a new theory of law, and that the threat to prosecute taxpayers, implying criminal behaviour, because it is felt that there has been a violation of the spirit of the law, is dangerous legal nonsense. What is happening was warned about over half a century ago, by a former Lord Chief Justice of England, Lord Hewart, in his classic work, The New Despotism. Taxation should be regarded as similar to the fees and levies paid by members of a club or similar organisations. The amount to be contributed should be determined by the members. And it should be collected in the simplest and most efficient manner. But the collection of taxation is made so complicated that very few have any idea of the total they are paying. This is quite deliberate; if people fully realised the total amount of taxation they are being forced to pay, there would be a national revolt.

With a constructive tax reform programme, total taxation in Australia could be reduced by at least 25 percent. Such a programme would enable the thousands engaged in the taxation industry to devote their energies to more constructive pursuits.


"Catholic bishops and their advisers condemned yesterday the 'stridently racist views' they said had emerged during the debate over Australia's immigration levels." - The Canberra Times, September 19th.

No, we are not now plunging further into what has come to be called "The Immigration Debate". As far as the Hawke Fabians, the Left wing ideologues of the mass media, and a significant section of the Howard Opposition (the 'Marshmallow wimps") are all concerned, there is no "debate" at all; rather a tirade of abuse against those not holding identical views to themselves on race and immigration. They don't want any debate there is nothing to debate!

All must now be aware that the term "racism" is a political swear word to tag on to those whose "blasphemy" is to believe and utter the view that it is legitimate for people to have a strong preference for their own kind. A law of nature is that - "birds of a feather, flock together." We prefer our own kind , and most certainly do the political "racial egalitarians" i.e. those with a political axe to grind, who vocalise their hypocrisy for imagined political advantage. Where do these people live? Where do their children attend school? Who are their friends? What are their interests? It would be of consummate interest to put these mouthers of the multicultural under the closest examination, to discover how truly their multicultural mouthings tally with their own lifestyles.

We don't doubt the sincerity of the prelates, and clergy in general who condemn what they believe is "racism". Common decency dictates that we treat others as we should prefer to be treated ourselves, ("Do unto others...") but does that mean that we are required to jettison our own preferred standards and values? How do the Catholic bishops, for example, interpret the pronouncement of Pope Pius XII in his Encyclical, "Summi Pontificatus" (1943) viz. ".... It is quite legitimate for nations to treat their differences as a sacred inheritance, and guard them at all costs".

Every nation is entitled to do this, but how can it be possible for these differences to develop naturally (organically) when these are forcibly jumbled up together, and destroyed via a racial/cultural mix ("multiculturalism") and miscegenation? Ye Gods!


If the Victorian Cain government is re-elected tomorrow (October 1st) the Victorian Teachers' Federation will have made a valuable contribution to this result. The 47,000 strong Federation has been helping to finance Labor candidates in marginal electorates. Federation secretary Jim Grant has described the ALP platform as "positive and promising" while the Liberal Party platform is seen as "regressive and ill informed". To its credit, the Liberal Party has made some constructive suggestions about the necessity for a return to traditional values and some discipline. The pro-Labor stand of the Teachers' Federation is an indication of what is wrong with the Victorian education system. There are, of course, many excellent teachers in the State educational system, but unfortunately they appear to be in a minority.

We live in an age of not only instant coffee, but also instant myths. Consider the myth about the new national leader of the Returned Servicemen's' League, Brigadier Alf Garland, allegedly the advocate of the blood testing of people claiming to be of Aboriginal descent. The truth is that the RSL Congress passed a resolution calling on the Federal Government to eliminate the part whites who are costing the taxpayers an enormous amount of money by claiming to be Aborigines for welfare payments. Sir William Keys was still chairman when this motion was carried. Brigadier Garland is obliged to represent this RSL policy, observing that the government would have to come up with some criteria for assessing who should obtain Aboriginal welfare payments. The suggestion of blood tests was put forward by the media, not by Brigadier Garland. Sloppy, or malicious Journalists continue to repeat the claim that the suggestion came from Brigadier Garland. Letter writers have picked up the myth. And so it continues.

Some commentators found it a little surprising that the former President of the National Farmers' Federation, Mr. Ian McLachlan, has become an open admirer of the Hawke Government. When he addressed the National Rural Press Club in Canberra, Mr. McLachlan said he was "delighted" with the Government's management of the economy. We have no doubt that Ian McLachlan is a "good bloke", but ever since his famous statement that the family farm was not a "sacred cow", and that corporation farming was "inevitable", he has left no doubt that he reflects the philosophy of bigness. Any temporary relief being experienced by some of Australia's primary producers has nothing to do with the policies of the Hawke Government. Rising costs continue imposing a relentless pressure on all primary producers. The growing warm relationship between Big Business and Mr. Hawke's Fabian government is no surprise to students of economic realities.

Would you believe it? There are still those politicians (and others) who will not believe that the Masters of International Finance are now organising various areas of national real estate of various nations as the basis for vast international loans. Brazil has now an agreement with 230 creditor banks for loans of $106 Billion. Brazil's 19-month moratorium on debt repayments has ended? How? The agreement lowered the interest rates Brazil pays on foreign bank debt and also allows it to reduce its debt load by swapping foreign loans for equity investments.

Read "World Heritage & the International Banks" (Enterprise October '87) $1.00 posted from G.P.O. Box 1052J, Melbourne, Vic., 3001.


Mr. Don Cameron, (Lib.-Moreton, Qld.) gave this warning to Australians in his published letter in The Australian (21/9):
"I wish to inform your readers of the reasons for the controversy surrounding the Australian Bureau of Statistics' 1988-89 Household Expenditure Survey (H.E.S.) and why I am saying not to do it. "7,500 households have been earmarked by the A.B.S. to complete this intrusive survey containing a 22-page income expenditure questionaire, a two-week spending diary, plus a form authorising the bureau to extract loan details from your bank. Depending on one's circumstances, questions range from 300 to 1,100 in number.
"Section 6(3) of the A.B.S. Act states that any new proposal for the collection of information on a compulsory basis must be tabled in both Houses of Parliament before implementation. This survey was not tabled and is being implemented compulsorily. "The Opposition has five independent legal opinions which conclude the failure to table means the survey loses its compulsory status. The Government is relying on the Attorney General's Department's one opinion which says the H.E.S. is legally compulsory.
"After receiving several complaints the Commonwealth Ombudsman has investigated the survey's legality. In his report he could not resolve the question of its legality as a compulsory survey and recommended that the matter should be decided in the courts: "The Human Rights Commission is also conducting its own investigation into the survey. "People who are asked to do the survey should refuse to comply until the question of its legality is resolved. They should ask the interviewer to leave them a copy of the four documents contained in the survey. If this request is denied they should contact their nearest Opposition member of Senator who can provide them with a copy of the documents..."
© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159