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

7 July 1989. Thought for the Week: "A cross on a ballot can as readily express a diseased or a healthy mind and the appeal a government makes to electors may strike any note on the moral register from the loftiest demand for heroic self sacrifice to the lowest pandering to material self interest. The appeal to which an electorate responds may too often be designed to destroy any lingering sense that an elector's democratic role and duty is to act as a vigilant judge upon the actions of his governors. A democratic election, so far from providing assurances that a government will never become either tyrannical or corrupted, may provide the means whereby a government corrupts the people ... in a true democracy there are certain rules and standards of conduct which even the all powerful governors of the people are themselves obliged to observe."
John Farthing in Freedom Wears A Crown


A Field Labor minority Tasmanian Government, supported by five "Green" Independents, has taken office in an orderly manner as a result of the decision by the Queen's representative, State Governor General Sir Phillip Bennett. Clearly the Governor decided that stable government, even if for a short period, was preferable to another election.

The Independents had every reason to assure the Governor that they could guarantee stable government. Premier Field observes that "this agreement has to last", pointing out that in the present circumstances "no group provokes an election unless they are suicidal". What has happened in Tasmania is yet another example of the value of the Monarchical system of government, with the Monarch above the power struggle associated with politics. Just how long the Field Government will survive is a matter for conjecture.

The euphoria of Dr. Brown and his colleagues is understandable. The current wave of near hysteria concerning the "greenhouse" effect and the environment has created the impression that the vote for the Tasmanian Independents was primarily a "green vote". This is not true; a very big percentage of the vote for the Independents is not only a protest vote against the two main parties, but also an anti-Canberra vote. As the general economic situation deteriorates under the Hawke-Keating strategy, the Field Government faces a precarious future dependent upon a group of individuals who are going to come under searching scrutiny by their fellow Tasmanians.

As pointed out by League National Director at last Monday night's Melbourne Conservative Speakers' Club, the League has a long record of support for genuine conservation. It has promoted Seminars on the question, but always stressed that necessary growth and conservation could take place together, but that this required a major change in financial policies which force individuals to engage in shoddy production, which result in built-in obsolescence, and which make it difficult for farmers to husband their soils. The author of Social Credit, C.H. Douglas, warned about the problem 70 years ago.

Many of the early pioneers of the organic farming and gardening movement, men like Sir Albert Howard, drew attention to the destructive effect of debt finance. But the environmental movement has been captured by collectivists and centralists. Obviously the conservation policies of Dr. Brown do not extend beyond stopping rivers from being dammed and trees chopped down. He is delighted that the Hawke Government misused the External Powers of the Federal Constitution to prevent the Franklin River dam from being built. He is quoted as saying that he wants more of Tasmania placed under World Heritage listings. He is prepared to sacrifice Australia's most valuable heritage, its national sovereignty, in order to achieve his aims. He stands self-condemned as a saboteur, not a genuine conservationist.

Should Prime Minister Hawke find that he can at a time when he is preaching restraint, suddenly discover millions to assist the Field Government, the cynical will come to the conclusion that Hawke believes he may help to save himself at the next Federal Elections by "buying" the vote of radical conservationists throughout Australia. But nothing but a miracle can now save the Hawke Government, not even his old colleague, Governor-General Bill Hayden, who at the end of the day will also, like General Sir Phillip Bennett, have to grant the Queen's Commission to a new set of politicians.
The fact that they will almost certainly do no better - probably worse - than their predecessors, will confirm once again that voting as such does not necessarily change policies. But the permanency of the Crown and the traditional values it represents offers one of the real hopes for the future.


The Chronicle of Toowoomba, Queensland, is an excellent provincial daily. Its editorials generally reflect a conservative viewpoint, although often displaying a pro-National Party bias. Over the years it has reported League functions objectively. Many letters from League supporters have appeared in its columns. Following the annual Queensland State Dinner and Seminar of the League, held in Toowoomba, National Director Eric Butler addressed an excellent meeting in Toowoomba and did an interview with The Chronicle.
The local T.V. had done an objective interview with Mr. David Thompson, New South Wales League Director, at the League Seminar. It is therefore intriguing that The Chronicle, in its issue of June 26th, should have featured an article on the editorial page, purporting to be a "look" at the League of Rights. The author is Mr. Tony Levy of the Zionist Anti-Defamation League, whose photo appears with the article.

Mr. Levy provides a tired old re-hash of anti-League of Rights material, which has been circulated over many years. It was completely demolished by Eric Butler in a carefully documented work, The Truth About The Australian League of Rights, Price $8.00 posted from all League bookshops. Not one League critic has ever made any attempt to comment on this work of major historical interest. Judging from letters and material being forwarded to the media by the Anti-Defamation League, it appears that Mr. Tony Levy's organisation is now the main Zionist organisation engaged in psycho-political warfare against the League.

Levy recently dismissed prominent Australians who have supported the League, men like Sir Raphael Cilento, former senior U.N. official, Sir Stanton Hicks, Director of Australia's food supplies during the Second World War, and the Hon. Sir Reginald Sholl of the Victorian Supreme Court, as "nonentities". Mr. Levy is unhappy that the proposed parliamentary investigation into the League did not take place - as yet - concluding his Chronicle article, "The vehemence with which the League reacted against the possibility of an enquiry argues simply for its guilt. An enquiry would settle the matter finally one-way or the other".
Mr. Levy "neglects" to point out that the League openly welcomed the proposed enquiry. But he now has his chance to bring the evils of the League to the scrutiny of the public: Mr. Eric Butler has challenged him to a public debate in Toowoomba. We will report if Mr. Levy has the stomach for such an encounter.


Press reports are not presenting the significance of the great historic battle now being fought by British Prime Minister Thatcher against the programme of a European Community monetary union. Margaret Thatcher correctly says that if Britain accepts the union, it might as well close down the House of Commons. All the evidence suggests that a desperate Margaret Thatcher, now being openly attacked by the Edward Heaths of the Tory Party, is attempting to play for time, hoping there will be division among the French, Germans and Italians. If Margaret Thatcher can win this battle, she will have dealt the Global Manipulators of Power a major blow.

Last week Federal Liberal Leader Andrew Peacock made it clear that if elected Prime Minister, he will continue the "screwing down" programme of the Hawke-Keating Government. The press of June 29th reports that Mr. Peacock has challenged Mr. Hawke to an early election "so the winner would have a mandate to implement tough policies and avert an economic crisis. Aware that he is asking the Hawke Government not to run its full term, Mr. Peacock claims, "Under me, governments will run their full term". No sane person believes that that promise will be kept if it suits Mr. Peacock to call an early election, which he believes he can win. Australians do not want further "tough policies", but policies, which will enable them to gain ready access to the abundance, which their production system, freed from artificial financial restrictions, can easily produce.

Prince Charles may have, like many other genuine environmentalists, been "taken in" by the "greenhouse" hoax, but he does provide a refreshing example of a leader attempting to champion quality and excellence, as witnessed by his robust criticism of the ugliness of both "modern art" and "architectural monstrosities". Prince Charles has now turned his attention to education, claiming that he has to correct the written English of his staff because English was being taught "so bloody badly". He advances the old-fashioned view that language can only be learned within a basic framework and with a proper drilling system. Failure to comprehend written and oral English is a major obstacle confronting Australian police forces attempting to recruit suitable staff. "Modern education" has been a disastrous failure everywhere. Prince Charles should be congratulated for speaking out.


This letter, sent to the Editor of Weekend Times (Toowoomba, Qld.), by "Constant Reader", who is known to many supporters locally. We have not yet been informed if this letter has been published. We bring it to the attention of actionists because of the comments of Dr. Paul Fraser (quoted):
"How clever of Mr. Anderson to go to his Encyclopedia Britannica for information regarding the so-called Greenhouse Effect, and the Ozone Layer, both of which have been receiving so much media hype and hysteria of late. "It is all there in his comment in 'W.T.' of June 9th, and it gave me the incentive to check my Oxford Dictionary where I found a chart showing the many layers of the various gasses up to 250 kilometres above the earth, the first being the troposphere 2kms, and right at the top of Mt. Everest.
"A knowledgeable friend had explained to me that the spent fuel from jet aircraft, flying at 40,000 feet, could do a lot more harm to the ozone layer than household sprays could ever do. Imagine 100 tons of fuel from each of about 30 jet planes flying over this country, alone, each day in the ozone layer!
"Now Dr. Paul Fraser, C.S.I.R.O., Aspendale (Vic.), has stated the following: 'Holes in the Ozone Layer, with ozone losses at certain locations as high as 90% occur only in the upper atmosphere over Antarctica in Spring, when temperatures are sufficiently cold to facilitate very rapid ozone destruction by chlorine from the break-up of the ubiquitous C.F.C's. 'The Arctic stratosphere is not persistently cold enough to result in these well designed ozone minima, despite the C.F.C. concentrations being slightly higher than in the Antarctic. 'Because of the atmospheric circulation, the location of these 'holes' is independent of where the C.F.C's. are released. Total methane (not only livestock flatulence) plays a minor role in ozone destruction. 'There is no evidence that the atmospheric nuclear weapons tests of the early 1960s 'punched holes in the ozone layer', although they are believed to have caused general ozone depletion of about 3% in 1963, which later recovered. 'The underground tests in the Pacific, though unwelcome for other reasons, have had no effect upon upper atmosphere ozone.' "Fiona L. Cairns, in her letter in the same issue of 'W.T.', asks if all the T.V. coverage is anything more than good entertainment. Of course we must be concerned about the degradation of our rural land, and forests, which are so vital to our life on earth, but there is more behind all the hysteria of the ozone and greenhouse effect than meets the eyes and ears of viewers. "The only solution we have is global action, by whom? No problem was ever solved by making it bigger."


In The Herald (Melbourne), June 30th, appeared the regular columns from Mr. Robert Manne, who is Lecturer in Politics at Melbourne's LaTrobe University, and also Editor of Quadrant. We think Mr. Manne is "spot on" in this comment, drawn from his columns on June 30th. The last serious constitutional crisis in Australia occurred in 1975. Despite the fact that he was unable to get his Supply Bills through the Parliament, the Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam, refused to call a new election. "Eventually, the Governor General, Sir John Kerr, dismissed him. From the passions of 1975 incoherent constitutional prejudices emerged. "Many politicians, academics and even lawyers now argued that in all circumstances the Governor General or Governor was obliged to follow the advice of his Prime Minister or Premier. "The events which took place in Hobart yesterday have demonstrated the folly of this view.
"If, yesterday, Mr. Gray had advised Sir Phillip Bennett to call a fresh election, Sir Phillip would have had no choice but to ignore that advice. If Mr. Gray had refused to resign his commission, Sir Phillip would have had little choice but to sack him. "Little good has come from this tawdry constitutional crisis. Mr. Gray's extraordinary behaviour has harmed the fabric of democracy in Tasmania and the reputation of conservatism in Australia. "But at least this much has been achieved. Once and for all the constitutional prejudices of the Whitlamite generation have been discredited. "Anyone who has observed the politics of Tasmania over the past six weeks must now be able to see that there are circumstances where a Governor must reject the advice of his Premier. There are, indeed, even circumstances in which the interests of democracy may require a Governor to dismiss his Premier..."
© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159