|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
2 October 1992. Thought for the Week: " every action is negative in RELATION to one thing, and positive in regard to something else. The important question is not whether it is 'negative' or 'positive' but whether it is EFFECTIVE IN THE DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO . if you are in a vehicle which is heading straight for a chasm, and is driven by megalomaniacs, you are most unlikely to change direction by admiring the driving."
FROM THE GULF WAR TO BOSNIA
by Eric D. Butler
During the period leading up to the Gulf War, little or no reference was made in the mass media that Saddam Hussein has been the recipient of massive military aid from the West. The media generally attempted to create the impression that Iraq was little more than a client Soviet-State. But while the Soviet did supply considerable military equipment, subsequently proved to have been of poor quality, it was Western support which enabled Iraq eventually to have forced Iran to end its bloody conflict with Iraq. Western military intelligence was of tremendous assistance to Saddam Hussein.
Why did the West build Saddam Hussein up militarily and support him in the long conflict with Iran, a conflict, which cost an estimated one million lives? Saddam Hussein was seen as a barrier to the threat of Islamic fundamentalism, which had brought the Ayatollah Khomeiny to power in Iran. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Kuwait all feared the possible spread of Islamic fundamentalism westward. Iraq under Saddam Hussein was perceived to be a barrier to the perceived threat. This important historical fact is ignored by those who now feel it is safe to publicise how Saddam Hussein was built up by the West.
The latest contribution to the truth about Western
arming of Saddam Hussein provided in an Allen and Unwin publication,
The Death Lobby, is by Kenneth F. Timmeran, which documents in
some detail the massive Western military aid to Saddam Hussein. While
it is undoubtedly true that Western manufacturers were delighted with
having a lucrative market for their weapons of death, helping them to
obtain what all certified economists recommend, a "favourable balance
of trade", they were merely taking advantage of the high policies of
those advising their governments.
Only four months before Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, encouraged by what he believed to be encouraging signals from Washington, U.S.A. Assistant Secretary of State John Kelly was describing Saddam Hussein as "a force for moderation in the region." Having been armed by the Western powers, and encouraged to believe that he could safely take over Kuwait, Saddam Hussein suddenly discovered that he was but a pawn in a much bigger game. President Bush and his advisers were ready to take action, not only to restore democracy in Kuwait, which has never had democracy but to create a "New World Order".
Saddam Hussein's military capacity was grossly exaggerated in order to convince Western peoples that the defeat of Hussein required a massed international force. The reality was completely different with Iraq suffering massive casualties and enormous damage to Baghdad. And there was the astonishing sequel of Saddam Hussein's government being permitted to survive. Clearly Hussein was still required to prevent the development of a vacuum threatened to be filled by Islamic fundamentalism.
Behind the tragic developments in what was formerly known as Yugoslavia can be seen the hand of the long-term planners who created and then exploited Saddam Hussein. Communist dominated Serbia, aided by the West, directly and indirectly, has proceeded with a policy of "ethnic cleansing" which threatens the very existence of the Islamic population of Bosnia. The so-called "peacekeeping" operations of the West have been almost completely futile. The activities of the Serbian Government are, at least for the time being, supported by the West. The short-term policy is to minimise the Islamic influence in the Balkan, and, if possible, to condition the Western people to participate in another U.N. "peacekeeping" operation.
The planners behind the Grand Design of creating The New World Order are being thwarted by unrehearsed events and resistance everywhere. But they rush on with their insane programme, one that crumbles with every day that passes. Consider the state of "United" Europe: As students of history have predicted, every programme for centralising power is doomed from the beginning. The lessons behind the Gulf War and the break up of the former Yugoslavia are clear to all those not blinded by shallow propaganda.
KEATING SEEKS JAPANESE IMPERIAL PATRONAGE
by David Thompson
In the drive to "Asianise" Australia, Mr. Keating's reported statements in Japan are of the greatest significance. He is trying to tell the world that our most important international relationship is not with North America (much less Britain), but with East Asia - specifically Japan. This marks another step in the process of locking Australia into the developing Asia-Pacific economic community, to be followed eventually by political union.
The establishment of an Asia-Pacific "region" which included Australia was originally an initiative of Bob Hawke's. It was Hawke who hosted regional leaders in Canberra, proposing the establishment of an Asia- Pacific Economic Cooperation (A.P.E.C.) group as a counter balance to Indonesian proposals to exclude Australia from the developing Asian trading bloc.
Keating's Japanese initiatives must be coloured with the understanding that in the rest of Asia, Japan is strongly distrusted as a result of World War II. Australia is obviously seen as a diplomatic doorway through which the Japanese can more successfully pursue long-term Asian alliances if the North American Free Trade Alliance excludes Japan, as it undoubtedly must.
LOCKING AUSTRALIAN FORTUNES WITH JAPAN
As the Japanese economy is showing further signs of weakness, it would seem extremely risky for Australian economic fortunes to be locked to those of Japan. The strengthening economic alliance with Japan must also have an impact on the Australian military alliances with the U.S.A. Unless Mr. Keating also proposes to retreat from the A.N.Z.U.S. alliance, and other security arrangements with the Americans, he faces an increasingly difficult balancing act between Asia and North America. This must become more difficult still if the U.S. moves further to protect its domestic industries, as Australia should also be doing.
JETTISONING EUROPEAN "BAGGAGE"
At the same time, however, Mr. and Mrs. Keating demonstrate either the hypocrisy of the double standard, or a deliberately servile attitude to Japan, by inviting the Japanese Emperor to visit Australia. This would be the first time a Japanese Emperor has visited Australia, and must provoke distinctly mixed emotions among returned servicemen who remember Japanese brutality 50 years ago.
How will Australia ex-servicemen regard Keating's
rejection of our own monarch, and a deliberate attempt to embrace the
Japanese monarch? Surely even Keating can see the hypocrisy of deriding
our "imperial" past, only to replace it with another much more malignant
imperialism! It is also significant that the Prime Minister's stronger
pro-Japanese position was strongly welcomed by the Japanese press. It
was noted that Keating supports a higher "international profile" for
Japan, and also supported Japan's territorial claim to the disputed
It is clear that Mr. Keating proposes to make good his boast to "Asianise" Australia, and in the process cast Australia in the role of a Japanese client who can help translate Japan's huge economic clout into political influence in building the Asia-Pacific Community into a long-term sovereign entity. The associated risks for Australia are enormous, but to Japan, very slight.
A.L.P ELECTION PROSPECTS IMPROVED
Recent polls indicate that an incredible transformation is taking place in the political fortunes of Mr. Keating and the A.L.P. When Bob Hawke was jettisoned, it was universally agreed that Keating's leadership offered only the slimmest hope of a Labor election victory. But The Bulletin's poll, published last week, indicated that if an election had been held in early September, the A.L.P. would have won on preferences! Even allowing for any major inaccuracies of opinion polling, this is an extremely ominous result for Dr. John Hewson. It can only reflect the hardening ideological position of the Opposition on tariffs - in particular their position on the motorcar industry.
Paul Keating was able to use his considerable
'debating' skills as a blunt instrument on Dr. Hewson and his colleagues,
exploiting the conflict with car industry leaders. But it should be
noted that the Government policy on tariffs, while it has softened,
has not changed and remains almost identical to the Opposition policy.
Irrespective of who becomes Prime Minister, general economic and financial
policy is the same.
ZIONISTS BACK CLINTON FOR U.S.A. PRESIDENCY
by Eric D. Butler
Although the Democratic Party generally has been pro-Israel, 1992 saw a much stronger support for Zionist Israel. According to The Jewish Post, there has been a major increase in Jewish involvement in the Democratic Party. According to the Post, the Democratic Party platform is now "more pro-Israel than any ever adopted by the Democratic Party". Clinton has strongly endorsed the Democratic Party's platform on Israel. According to the Post Clinton has a number of Zionist advisers.
A study of the Zionist press in the U.S.A. provides striking confirmation of the fact that, in spite of his past services to the Zionist cause, President George Bush was regarded as expendable some time back. While historically the Democrat Party has been regarded more favourably by the Zionists than have the Republicans, there has been growing influence inside the Republican Party. Every student of international affairs must take careful note of the open Zionist campaign to bring Clinton to the American Presidency.
CONFLICTING STATEMENTSfrom Herald-Sun (Melbourne), September 24th
One wonders whether political parties think through their policy statements to make sure they don't conflict with other parts of their platform. "A case in point is the Liberal leaflet, Caring for Victorians, recently placed in my letterbox. The leaflet says a coalition government will, if elected, create up to 40,000 jobs in the private sector by June 1994. So far, so good. "However, an incoming coalition government also has pledged to abolish compulsory retirement at 65 and raise the female retiring age from 60 to 65. "With around 170,000 people retiring each year and, say, a modest 25% continuing to work past age 65, 42,500 jobs would be lost to job seekers each year.
"If a coalition government goes ahead with its plans to cut the number of government departments, this can only mean further lost job chances. "On balance, the net effect of the coalition policies will be to substantially increase unemployment even if they can create 40,000 jobs as promised. "Why must such policies as raising the retirement age be introduced when unemployment rates are so high? There's no public pressure for this, so why compound an already difficult situation? "If the Coalition wants to reduce unemployment and give the younger generation a chance to save for the future, retiring ages should be reduced." (A. Barron, Grovedale, Vic.)
GREENHOUSE FACTS WILT IN STRONG LIGHT
from The Australian, 24/9
"My critique, which triggered this debate (The Weekend Australian, 25-26/7), was intended to focus A.B.S. minds on corrective measures. Therefore criticism was concentrated on the book's speculations about environmental effects of greenhouse, culled from published proceedings of a 1987 conference, Greenhouse '87. I suggested two, simple, non-judgmental facts that an untutored A.B.C. clerk could check.
"First, the 1992 book is both out of date and
internally inconsistent. For example, page 123 cites financial losses
calculated for a 140cm rise in global sea level, based on the 1987 C.S.I.R.O.
climate change scenario for the next 50 years. Two pages later, the
A.B.S. book quotes the 1991 C.S.I.R.O. expectation for 2030 of less
than one-fifth that rise 20cm, plus or minus 10cm.
"Second, detailed comparisons of the published
scientific papers with the A.B.S. versions show significant errors and
misquotes. Each error favours alarums. "In his widely circulated 15-page
letter to me, the Australian Statistician inferred that this critique
by comparisons was nitpicking (The Weekend Australian, 29-30/8).
For example, while he admits the misquote 'the wheat belt of the south-west
of Western Australia may cease to be cultivated' (page 119) was a 'drafting
slip', he claims 'The error is obvious ... clearly only part of the
wheat belt might be affected! "Five million tonnes of wheat is quite
"One example is treatment of costs and benefits or reducing greenhouse gas emissions. By quoting from only one report, to Minister Kelly's department, the book predicts massive benefits from carbon dioxide reductions. It does not quote from balancing views from the extensive inquiry by the Industrial Commission.
"In summary, the book's portrayal of the effects of greenhouse on the Australian environment is dominated by outdated speculations, inaccurately reported, internal inconsistency and a lack of balance on policy-related issues. "Unfortunately, but perhaps appropriately, the book is being promoted by A.B.S. via a 008 number named, 'The Greenline'.
"The A.B.S. is excusing errors because this first edition is only a 'prototype', The Acting Statistician wrote (Letters, 10/9). 'No doubt our next effort will be a considerable advance on the first.' It could scarcely be otherwise. "Yet, the A.B.S. is simultaneously promoting the book as 'over 350 pages of factual information, and potentially a textbook for tertiary institutions.
"The A.B.S. cannot have it both ways and wait
until 1994 for the next edition. These next years are critically important
action years now that Australia has signed the Rio Convention on climate
change ... People rely on the A.B.S. for hard, objective data. "Regrettably,
the continued reluctance of the A.B.S. to admit and correct greenhouse
errors can only further diminish its reputation and usefulness."
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|