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

26 March 1993. Thought for the Week: "The policy of centralisation of power is the denial of the right of men and women to freedom; it is the denial of the sanctity of human personality. It is a denial of the omnipotence of God and the antithesis of the social policy inherent in Christ's teachings."
L.D. Byrne in Centralisation - The Policy of Satanism


by Eric D. Butler
Generally overlooked in the fever of debate about the leadership of the Liberal Party is the fact that the Liberal Party established by Sir Robert Menzies and colleagues now exists only in name. Menzies perceived that the Liberal Party was dying long before his own death. The well known Melbourne radio commentator, the late Norman Banks, told me of his last conversation with Menzies in which the former Liberal Prime Minister said that he was so dismayed by the direction in which the Liberal Party was moving that he had declined even to vote for it during his latter years.

While leadership is important, of itself it cannot overcome the rot which has progressively eroded the soul of the old Liberal Party. The very fact that following their defeat under the bland urban style leadership of Andrew Peacock, the Liberal Party so enthusiastically endorsed Dr. John Hewson, as leader was confirmation of how deep was the rot inside the party. I publicly expressed the view that John Hewson sent shivers up my spine. The man was clearly the new breed economic rationalist par excellence.

This new breed of Liberal sees life in terms of economic statistics. Even in defeat they insist that there was nothing wrong with the policies offered the Australian people; that all that is required is "better marketing". Typical of the new breed Liberals is former Liberal Premier of N.S.W., Mr. Nick Greiner. Given his background, it was not surprising that Greiner soon made it clear that he was no traditionalist. He has now openly revealed himself as having been a closet Republican. He has led the way with his argument that the Liberal Party should "embrace" the Republican debate. Already others are re-echoing the Greiner view, suggesting that the Liberal Party must be prepared to adopt an open-minded approach. It is already clear that the 1993 Liberal Party is not going to mount a full-blooded defence of the unique value of the system of constitution Monarchy.

In a revealing article in The Weekend Australian of March 20th-2lst, it is suggested that in 1996 the Liberal Party requires a Bill Clinton approach and that "Making the monarchy an article of Liberal faith rather than a subject for reasoned bipartisan discussion is not the way forward". Sir Robert Menzies must be turning in his grave.

A study of today's Liberal Party and its structure reveals why it has turned its back on the value system upon which it was elected. It has become the home of the new breed of lawyers and similar people, motivated not by a sense of service, but by a burning desire to use government for self-advancement. One of the most ironic comments on the 1993 Federal Election campaign came from the victorious Paul Keating, who said, "If the Liberal Party wanted to jettison Australian values, how negative is it to stop them?"
Keating has made it clear that he has turned his back on the traditional value system upon which Australia was created.
There is a degree of truth in his taunt that the Liberals have jettisoned "Australian" values, which are in fact rather different from those now being espoused by Paul Keating.

The only section of the Coalition where there still remains a glimmer of support for traditional Australia is the National Party, which however, has electorally paid the price of having for so many years betrayed its rural base. But so long as the National Party clings to the view that it must, at all costs, maintain "unity" with the Liberal Party, it must progressively be sucked down with a Liberal Party long divorced from its traditional roots. There was a period when some farsighted members of the old Country Party suggested that it could not only best serve its rural supporters, but the traditional value system undergirding Australia, by moving to the cross benches and being completely independent of the Liberals.

The regeneration of a sick Australia must come from those communities relatively least affected by the philosophical rot eroding the health of the nation; the rural communities. Hopefully the recently formed Union of Farmers might generate a grassroots movement which could result in at least a few of the National Party Federal Members providing the type of national leadership now so urgently required. That leadership cannot come from within the Liberal Party, which should at least do the honest thing and openly admit that it is no longer the Liberal Party of its founders, and perhaps even change its name.

Needless to say, the Labor Party of the Whitlams, Hawkes and Keatings is no longer the party of its founders. Both the Liberal Party and the Labor Party are virtually now the same party with the same internationalist programme. The only hope now for Australia is a grassroots movement, which will be reflected, in a type of genuinely representative government. Such a grassroots movement can only grow under the influence of a service movement like the League of Rights, which now finds itself in the position of being in the forefront of the defence of traditional Australia. The League influence is going to prove decisive in the battle to preserve and expand an independent Australia.


It is becoming increasingly clear that the attempted ban on British historian David Irving from entering Australia and Canada is part of an international campaign to attempt to destroy Irving. Americans fear that the strongly pro-Zionist administration of Bill Clinton will fall into line if the Canadian and Australian bans cannot be overturned and have launched a defence fund to assist Irving in expensive legal actions.

Unlike most historians, David Irving operates on a free enterprise basis, financing his activities, including expensive research, out of the profits from his books and lecturing activities. The canceling of his Canadian lecture tour, and the expensive litigation, has proved a major financial setback. Acting as his agents, Veritas Publishing Co. Pty. Ltd. launched an appeal in the Federal Court, Perth, on Thursday of last week and, after a brief hearing the case was set down for April 29th. There was widespread media coverage of the Irving legal challenge, indicating the growing interest in the David Irving case.

Students of psychopolitical warfare have been struck by the wave of acts of violence in Perth immediately following the opening of the Irving legal challenge. Although it is highly probable, as stated by one Asian, that the acts of violence against Asian premises in Perth were the work of the secret Asian society, known as the Triads, and was not a manifestation of "racism", as claimed immediately by media.

Irrespective of the truth about this affair, sections of the media have lost no time in attempting to exploit the situation with an orchestrated campaign against the League of Rights. The West Australian of March 22nd carried the headline, RACIST BODY LINKED TO VISA BAN FIGHT, with the story claiming links between Veritas and the League of Rights. There is no secret about the fact that the present manager of Veritas Publishing Co. Pty. Ltd. is a member of the Australian League of Rights. No doubt he is a member of a number of other organisations.
League supporters are part of the Australian community, some of them prominent public figures such as municipal councillors, and attempts to smear them are merely typical for the type of campaign being conducted by un-Australian interests.

As we have said before, the League of Rights is neither sponsoring nor promoting the proposed Australian lecture tour by David Irving. The League is not financially involved. But the League sells Irving's books, along with hundreds of other books, as a service to those Australians who want to know the realities of the world situation. We will inform all readers of League journals where Irving is speaking. And we will continue to report on the unfolding Irving drama because of its widespread implications.

Judging by his reported statements, Zionist leader Isi Leibler is being very careless with facts when he now claims that as Irving's works on the Holocaust are readily available, there is no question of freedom of speech being an issue. We are not aware that Irving has written any works on the Holocaust. And Irving challenges Leibler to produce any evidence to support his claim that Irving is some type of leader of an international Neo-Nazi movement. We will continue to report on the Irving affair.


from "The Canadian Intelligence Service" (March '93)
The Calgary Herald, Feb. 16, published a column by Eric Beauchesne of Southam News captioned 'Debt Load Invites Crisis'. "OTTAWA

Canada is on the threshold of a debt crisis that might lead to a sudden refusal by foreign investors to lend the country any more money, some business economists fear. "If that happens, deficit reduction by governments will be extremely painful, possibly including cuts in old-age pensions and other social programs, those analysts warn. "That's the grim warning contained in a report being released this week by the C.D. Howe Institute…"

"The report goes on to suggest that it would be preferable to endure some harsh but disciplined debt cutting measures now, than to suffer the disastrous consequences down the road of a refusal by international finance to 'buy our debt' - that is, to loan us our own financial credit... "In other words, what these 'experts' and economists are telling Canadians is that unless we accept even higher taxes and drastic cuts in pensions, social support programs such as Medicare, etc., and in living standards, then the consequences we'll soon face will be even more painful, distressing, and perhaps disastrous, when the international money power turns off our 'credit' tap.

"This is precisely what Finance Minister Mazankowski warned a year ago: that Ottawa's financially broke (except for profligate political foreign junkets and give away programs! - Ed.) and can't even afford to fix roads or initiate public work programs to alleviate unemployment, without the displeasure of the World Bankers and their International Monetary Fund which, he warned, would be stepping in to run our Finances, if we continue to sink into more debt. Since he issued this warning Ottawa alone has sunk a further $35 billion down the sink hole of debt…."

The Real Facts

"Let us try to sort out and examine the cold facts and realities pertaining to our present almost universal debt/tax/inflation problem. And let us try to do this from an entirely detached, non-partisan and non-doctrinaire vantage point. Perhaps we could do this by asking a few of the right questions pertinent to our problem. For instance:

"Q.. While there is disagreement amongst economists and financial 'experts' there seems to be a feeling amongst many that we'd be well advised to have our already oppressive tax load sharply increased in order to eliminate government deficits and pay off our public debts. A little pain, now, we're told, would save us severe pain in the future. Would this not be the best approach to our public debt problem?
"A.. It might be the best approach if it presented a reasonable prospect of success. But it doesn't. And for this reason: "Former Bank of Canada governor Graham Towers agreed before a Parliamentary Committee in 1939 that the 'issuing of currency and money is the high prerogative of government' but that 'prerogative has been transferred to the private banking system'.
He also stated that 'under the present system all money is debt'. In other words, banks create and issue financial credit to borrowers 'as a debt', against their collateral or assets. What the banks do is merely monetise and loan the borrower his own real credit, as a debt and at interest. And the banking system creates and loans financial credit to governments on the same basis, the collateral of 'security' being the wealth of the borrowing government and its taxing power.

"The important point to note is that money/financial credit comes into existence as a debt and bearing interest, and that only the banking system creates and issues money (as loans), and only the banking system itself is empowered to create the interest. Therefore, society as a whole (individuals, business, government, etc.) can never completely pay off its total indebtedness, which includes compounding interest, without incurring further loans and more debt. In short: we cannot borrow ourselves out of debt'...."

© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159