|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
26 April 1991. Thought for the Week: "Education, both in the sense of the natural process of learning from the environment, or in the more formal sense of schooling, is simply the process of acquiring more accurate, more penetrating, more subtle discrimination. Without discrimination there is no knowledge, and no sound judgment. We must all discriminate between the things we meet in our daily lives, but the 'educated' man or woman used to be expected to have more knowledge, and a better judgment, than the 'uneducated'. This is now ceasing to be true, because education also is infected with the prevailing hatred of discrimination, and is thus destroying its own foundations."
Dr. Geoffrey Dobbs, in Discrimination & Equality
HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT ON LEAGUE OF RIGHTS
The long awaited report on "racist violence" by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission was tabled in the Federal Parliament on Thursday of last week, April 18th. If the allegations made against police "exploiting" young blacks are on a par with the charges against the League of Rights, the Commission's report is a national disgrace, and a blatant waste of the taxpayers' money.
League of Rights supporters will be amazed to learn that the League is the "richest" "racist organisation" in Australia, with its founding sources "unknown". The League has not long concluded its annual Basic Fund appeal, with dedicated Australians contributing $77,000. Many of the contributions were made by pensioners. This fund and its progress has been publicised in League journals. Unlike the major political parties, representatives of the League have never received massive contributions from those high flyers who have sought to gain benefits from the parties. The National Director is still waiting to hear from Queensland Labor M.P., Mr. Keith Wright, about when he can meet at Canberra, or elsewhere, with Mr. Wright and his security committee, to discuss League funding, which he claimed in Parliament was enormous and secret.
When Ms. Moss and her committee was established to investigate "racist violence" in Australia, with the League of Rights being mentioned as an organisation responsible for such violence, the League lodged a formal submission, which for a long period was not even acknowledged by Ms. Moss, nor has there been any response to the League's offer to appear before Ms. Moss and her colleagues to give oral evidence and to answer any questions. But the report tabled last week said that the League was the "most influential racist organisation in Australia".
Unable to advance any evidence that the
League was involved in or encouraging acts of violence, Ms.
Moss and her associates snidely claimed that "In many respects
the influence of the League may be more profound and dangerous
than other extremist groups because it has assumed the mantle
of respectability by espousing family values, patriotism and
nationalism". These views either reflect the shallow, rootless
philosophy of Ms. Moss and her colleagues, or they are an
example of the unscrupulous tactics used by those who fear
the constructive programme being advanced by the League in
defence of a sovereign, independent Australia.
FERMENT IN THE WEST
National Director Eric Butler has returned to Melbourne after a highly successful campaign of two weeks in Western Australia. The campaign covered both northern and southern areas of a State, which graphically reflects the deepening national crisis. Desperate wheat growers from the north have felt that they had no other alternative to drawing attention to their plight but by blocking Perth freeways during a morning peak hour and then invading American intelligence bases. Eric Butler reports that in the absence of constructive action and programmes similar to those being advanced by the League, there could ultimately be dangerous violence and social disorder.
The militant young farmers are fine types of young Australians who are starting to welcome constructive suggestions. Eric Butler's message was warmly received at a series of country meetings and two well-attended Perth meetings. The Horsham Declaration has been taken up right across the State. During his fast moving tour, Eric Butler met with the media in several centres, being interviewed by both the print and the electronic media. During a radio programme in Albany he was able to outline how the current Australian crisis was the result of an on going programme to fit Australia into the New International Economic Order.
Those attending meetings were urged to write to their Members of Parliament asking for copies of the Lima Declaration of 1973. Book sales were massive and large supplies of League literature were taken for general distribution. A feature of the West Australian meetings was the number of young people and women attending. The W.A. programme concluded with a well-attended Social Dynamics School in Perth last Sunday afternoon and evening. State Director Robert Nixon, who had accompanied the National Director on part of his tour, has expressed his pleasure with the tour, seeing it as laying the groundwork for further League expansion in Western Australia.
There will be a follow up of this tour with another visit by Eric Butler in August, who will also be present at the Annual State Dinner and Seminar on Saturday, August 10th. The theme of the Seminar will be the threat of the New International Economic Order to Australia's future. A feature of the expansion of the League in Western Australia has been the expansion of the Heritage Book mailing Service. All W.A. supporters are urged to support this Service, operating from P.O. Box 1035, Midland, W.A., 6055. Phone: (09) 574 6269. This Service is now carrying a wide range of books.
GOVERNMENT PAINTING ITSELF INTO A CORNER
from On Target, New Zealand, by Bill
Daly, National Director, New Zealand League of Rights.
During his last speaking tour of New Zealand (October 1990) Mr. Eric Butler, National Director of the Australian League of Rights, predicted that six months would be sufficient to show that a new Bolger-National Government, confining itself to orthodox financial rules, would be unable to halt the declining economic state of the nation. "While reports such as the Porter Report may reasonably accurately assess the state of the nation in orthodox financial terms, they do not solve the problem, and are incapable of doing so, or giving any sensible lead, because they ignore reality.
A realistic report, using ordinary commonsense, rather than endless compilations of statistics and figures, would be vastly different. Such a report could list the country's assets, our manufacturing and food production capacity, skills and technological knowledge, transport systems, construction, available building materials, hydro power stations, etc. From this we would learn that New Zealand was an extremely wealthy nation, easily able to supply a good standard of security for all.
Such a report might point out that although our farmers and manufacturers are easily capable of providing for the material needs of the population, even with large numbers classed as unemployed, there is a problem to obtain what is easily produced. "The result of such a report might be to suggest that the Government examine seriously the problem arising from the fact that consumers cannot obtain reasonable access to the fruits of the production system, or when they can this is often only by going into debt.
It is an easily provable fact that in
any given period of time less purchasing power is distributed
than the total costs attached to goods and services made available
during that time (Prices) If, for example, $20 million worth
of goods and services were made available in New Zealand each
week, it is commonsense that $20 million worth of purchasing
power should also be made available each week. But this does
not happen. "The problem is 'covered over' for a time by huge
creations of new money by the banking system, some of which
is borrowed by the State and spent into circulation, some
used for building new factories or expanding existing businesses.
If Mr. Bolger and his colleagues believe they can solve the country's economic plight by more 'belt tightening' measures, they only prove they are divorced from reality. They are telling us at a time when farmers and manufacturers are having trouble selling what they have already produced, New Zealanders cannot have access to this. If Mr. Bolger really believes 'belt tightening' measures are good, then presumably he also believes the 1930s Great Depression was good for the nation. This is like the theorists who claim that we must export to survive. Presumably they also believe that if we could no longer export we should all starve, or if we could expect everything we produced we would be well off!
"Orthodox economic nonsense teaches that if people are forced to 'tighten their belts' then more goods will be available for export, and there will be less imports. The driving force behind this is the astronomical foreign (money) debt. But for every dollar worth of goods exported that is a dollar taken from another economy suffering the same problems... The world is awash with (money) debt and it can never be repaid to the banks. The only sane solution is a political policy which ensures that the banking system operates as a servant to producers and consumers rather than an all powerful master."
THE BIG BACKDOWN: GUESS WHAT HAPPENED?
On Tuesday, February 26th, in a regular
column; viz "What's Your Problem?" a correspondent to The
Advertiser (Adelaide) asked the question: "Are you able
to explain (and print) the One World Order which President
Bush and Mr. Hawke appear to be ushering in lately?" The following
explanation appeared beneath this question:
Yes, we know. How on earth did THIS article get through the "security" mesh? We don't know: yet... But in the same column on Saturday, March 3rd, of The Advertiser appeared the abject contraction below: "An answer published in this column on February 26th was irrelevant to the question and incorrect. The answer was in response to a writer who asked: Are you able to explain (and print) the One World Order which President Bush and Mr. Hawke appear to be ushering in lately? The 'new world order', which Mr. Bush and Mr. Hawke have been espousing, is, in its simplest terms, a system whereby nations resolve their differences and disputes by diplomacy rather than by military conflict. Following the political change in Eastern Europe and the end of the Cold War, the United States wants to deter aggression in partnership with other countries. The Democratic leader in the U.S. House of Representatives spoke of a 'new world order where the strong will work together and stop aggression'. President Bush has said: 'We are now in sight of a United Nations that performs as envisioned by its founders'. The Advertiser attaches no credence to the explanation published on February 26th."
Our Comment: The Advertiser (Adelaide) has had to crawl down under the weight of pressure, or lose advertising revenue, at the very least. There would have been "political" pressure, too. And pressure from influential secret societies. At least we know that some individuals among the mass media are aware of the forces behind the scenes that move world events. We place great credence on the journalist's original explanation.
OUR CONSTITUTION MUST REIGN SUPREME
from The Australian, April 4th
"His reference to the Iraqi Constitution as alleged evidence of the tenuousness of the actual terms of Constitutions ignores one of the principal features of totalitarian societies and the Constitutions which underwrite them. "I have not read the Iraqi Constitution but I do know that in Hussein's totalitarian State there is a Constitutional ban on all political parties except the Ba'athist Party. Similar comments to Mr. Hyde's were once made about Stalin's Constitution, despite the notoriously totalitarian provisions such as those contained in Article 126. "The statement that 'I know of no Constitution that would have stopped that W.A. Inc. affair' is but a confession of ignorance. The simple fact is that 'W.A. Inc.' was made possible by the lack of proper checks and balances contained within Western Australia's Westminster derived Constitution. This weakness has been compounded by the passage of the Australia Acts (1986) and the attendant Letters Patent. "One requires little imagination or knowledge to comprehend that there are Constitutions which could have 'stopped the W.A. Inc. Affair', thus saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
The West Australian Constitution - and I suspect this applies to other States as well - provides for unlimited government. "This is a consequence of the application of the Westminster system at the colonial, and then, States level. In the post colonial era, the founding fathers of the Commonwealth Constitution attempted to redress this problem by providing for limited government. "It is time full attention was given to this vital aspect of Constitutionalism rather than the tawdry attempts to remove the existing but weak checks and balances restricting the exercise of executive power.
Sadly, the proponents of executive sovereignty
have collared the Constitutional 'market' in recent years.
"The fact is that in Australia the people are subjects and
not sovereigns. Sovereign authority belongs to, and is exercised
by, our governments. It is worth pointing out that in this
regard when the British withdrew from Uganda, for instance,
the sovereign powers of the British Crown descended upon the
new head of State. "The prevailing philosophy less and (utilitarian-based)
instrumentalist approach to Constitutionalism merely adds
to our sovereigns' powers at the expense of our legislatures
but most of all at the expense of the people.
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|