|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
7 May 1993. Thought for the Week: "Every advance made by primitive man was due to the inventiveness of some individual who had sufficient freedom from the eternal slavery of bees and ants to work his own idea."
Ramsay Muir in Civilisation and Liberty
WHY DEBATE OUR FUNERAL ARRANGEMENTS?
by Eric D. Butler
Aided by sections of the media and the deep rot
inside the Liberal Party, Paul Keating is skillfully advancing the view
that an Australian Republic is "historically inevitable" (shades of
Marxist-Leninism). The sensible thing to do now is to have a friendly
discussion about how best to start implementing his policy: so runs
the Keating "line"!
Whoever controls the writing of history controls the future, commented George Orwell. But in attempting to re-write history, Keating has activated a growing number of Australians who dispute his version of history, one of these being Australia's most eminent and respected historian, Professor Geoffrey Blainey. Blainey has bluntly attacked the Keating view that Australia has an Asian destiny. Not surprisingly, there was a shocked reaction from the Republican ranks last weekend when it was suggested that Victorian Liberal Premier Jeff Kennett was proposing to nominate Geoffrey Blainey to join the group of "eminent" people he has invited to discuss the best ways to start implementing a Republic.
Paul Keating has set in motion developments, which are going to change the nature of Australian politics. Traditional Australians have been shocked to realise how deep the rot is inside the Liberal Party. With former Liberal Premiers along with existing present Liberal leaders openly claiming that they support the Republican cause, and with Dr. John Hewson demonstrating with every day that passes that he has no stomach for the real fight ahead, and is prepared to surrender to the Republican assault, a major split in the Liberal ranks is now certain.
John Howard and those who support him are the only senior Federal Liberals taking a stand. But we should not be surprised if out of the ranks of the remaining traditional Liberals a new leadership does not emerge. To his credit National Party leader Tim Fischer is standing firm, making it impossible for any realistic alliance between the Nationals and a Hewson-led Liberal Party.
I am of the opinion that Australians are on
the eve of some most unexpected and unrehearsed political developments.
Generally overlooked is the role, which West Australian Labor Parliamentarian
Graeme Campbell might play. Campbell openly defied Hawke on the immigration
issue and in radio and television interviews has openly challenged Keating's
Australia is now entering the most decisive period in its history and the future will be decided by relatively few people who know what to do and how to do it. Only in the ranks of the League of Rights will that minority be found, who have had the long training necessary to equip them to provide the answer to an enemy marching behind the banner of Republicanism.
DAVID IRVING DECISION MAY 11th
Documents presented in the Federal Court in Perth last Friday, concerning the Government's banning of British historian David Irving from visiting Australia on a lecture tour promoting his books, revealed that the nation's security agency, ASIO, had no objection to the issuing of a visa. Reports also revealed that former Immigration Minister Gerry Hand's own Department had recommended that the proposed visit go ahead.
In spite of the view of ASIO and the Immigration Department that there was no reason why David Irving should not visit, it was Prime Minister Keating's Department and the Cabinet, which wanted Irving banned. This is most revealing, indicating that a Prime Minister desperate about his electoral prospects was willing to do the bidding of the Zionist lobby, as were members of his Cabinet.
Mr. Justice French, who heard the Irivng appeal last Friday, has reserved his decision on the matter until May 11th, although the judge indicated that because of his heavy workload, the finding might be a little later than the 11th. Irrespective of the Federal Court's decision, it is certain that the Irving affair is not going to go away. With ASIO's assessment, along with that of the Department of Immigration, favouring the visa being issued, where does this leave the Opposition and the Democrats, who supported the ban? Who briefed them? If just one Opposition Federal Member of courage can be found, some explosive questions can be asked in the next Federal Parliament.
BRIEF COMMENTSRegular readers of League journals will recall the role of Federal Labor Member Alan Griffiths, a lawyer, in calling for the infamous all-Party investigation into the Australian League of Rights. Mr. Griffiths has been elevated to the position of Minister for Industry, Technology and Regional Development, in the first Keating Government. The Australian Jewish News of April 30th provides the interesting news that top Zionist activist, Mr. Michael Danby, editor of Australia-Israel Publications, has taken up the post as coordinator of Mr. Griffiths' Melbourne ministerial office. Mr. Danby is reported as saying that despite his new post, he would remain active in the Jewish community and continue his association with Australia-Israel Publications. He was confident that it would continue under the leadership of Dr. Colin Rubenstein in Melbourne and Jeremy Jones in Sydney. Jeremy Jones is one of those pressing to make any criticism of the "holocaust" a crime.
ON THE EDGE OF CONSTITUTIONAL REVOLUTION
by D. Thompson
If a referendum for massive constitutional change is proposed, some legal authorities argue that simply a majority of Australians in a majority of states is insufficient to effectively dissolve this partnership of Crown and colonies (States). It is argued that for such serious changes, a majority of people in every State should be required. Victorian Premier Kennett obviously has constitutional advice to this effect.
Further constitutional changes are being urged by the more revolutionary "Aboriginal" spokesmen, in order to acknowledge, and attempt to redress past injustices. Even Mr. Keating proposes that Constitutional changes should include Aboriginal 'reconciliation', and appointed Ms. Lois O'Donoghue to his Republican Advisory Committee. But what "Aboriginal rights" will be recognised? Prior "ownership" of Australia? Will it take the form of a Treaty? Is the Mabo case a forerunner of what is to come, with potential native title to be extended throughout Australia, including private property?
Professor Henry Reynolds claims that recognition of Aborigines as Australia's indigenous people is the least that might be expected from a republican constitution. He argues that native title, based on prior occupation, should be constitutionally protected. Thus, the issue of 'land claims' is removed from the control of the States, and effectively nationalised.
THE FUTURE OF THE STATES
As with the Aboriginal issue, talk of radical Constitutional change brings every aggrieved opportunist out of the woodwork. The question of Western Australia even seceding from the Federation has also been raised, with Wilson Tuckey, MP, canvassing the option of WA remaining a Crown State, and separating from Australia. In a 1933 referendum, West Australians voted in favour of secession by a majority of more than two to one, and the issue is periodically revived. Any possible legislation for a referendum on a republic could also face challenges from the High Court.
The legal and constitutional argument could go on for years, without any suggestion that the republic could provide better government, or improved economic circumstances. Any suggestion that it will do so is simply deceitful. It is also deceitful for the issue of republican constitutional change to be debated in a vacuum. It will impact on every part of Australian national life, and supporters of the Australian flag must be aware that the flag is threatened by republicans.
MABO CASE MAY BE A SHAKY PRECEDENT
from Herald-Sun (Melbourne), 28/4
"Mr. Justice Moynihan sat for some 66 days.
On November 16, 1990, His Honour published 116 findings of fact together
with his reasons for so finding - these findings do not appear to have
been referred to in the public debate concerning Mabo's case. "After
the hearing before the Supreme Court of Queensland the case returned
to the High Court for determination of the questions of law. It should
be noted that the Supreme Court of Queensland
"Furthermore, Mr. Justice Moynihan described the limited nature of the hearing before him in the following terms: 'The proceedings are not, for example, a free ranging enquiry into Murray Island and its people. Much less were they such an enquiry with respect to the people of the Torres Strait and issues such as land rights in general.'
"Before the Full Court of the High Court judgment on May 31, 1991, Eddie Mabo died. "His estate did not pursue his claim while other parties continued with their claim. "It is clear that the factual basis for Mabo's case deserves close examination, especially given the conclusions of the Supreme Court of Queensland. (Jack D. Hammond, Owen Dixon Chambers West', Melbourne)
SACRED COW OF PRODUCTIVITY IS LOST
from The Australian, April 27
To simplify matters and expedite our discussion
to some logical conclusions, I offered up the Modern Parable of the
Wool Producer. "There was once a, Wool Producer growing fine and fashionable
wool for a seemingly satisfied market. Although his position was secure
and, most importantly, his Bank Manager happy - he remained a frustrated
man. His fences had the occasional sag and his buildings were in some
slight state of disrepair. Although aware of the small economic importance
of these matters - the occasional taunts of his neighbours and his own
frustrations finally wore him down. So he retrenched most of his shepherds
who had been primarily responsible for the quality of his flock and
the abundances of his wool clip - and replaced them with a host of handymen
and fencers. Oblivious to the mountains of dag and the invasions of
the pestilent fly and worm, he blazoned down the road of cosmetic perfection.
Eventually all was done and he stood and proudly surveyed his glistening
outbuildings and strong, sturdy fences.
"The moral of this story was so obvious at the time we felt confident that the then recently elected administration could not possibly fall into the same abyss. "Not so! Within one decade we now see the complete demise of the once proud primary producer, a proliferation of fencers with no fences left to fix, and the once Sacred Cow of Productivity so beleaguered by those at the back and reaching into the bucket, that there is physically no room for those anxiously waiting to feed her, to get to the front.
"What will future civilisations make of our time? In the millennia that follow, the fossilised remains of what was once 'Homo-Sapiens Antipodean Australis' (circa 2000) will be unearthed by some disbelieving culture. They then can wildly speculate on the pervasive madness within a society. "What epitaph will these disbelieving historians apply to this rediscovered age? Maybe, the words of the greatest manipulator of the 'Long Arm Syndrome' - 'Well may we say God save the Queen - but who will save Australia?'" (John Burbury, Antill Ponds, Tasmania)
AGE TURNING DICTATORIALfrom The Age (Melbourne), April 29
I wonder if your support of the republican movement has not become a little too dictatorial? To depict Mr. Howard as an extremist in your editorial (27/4) shows how much your newspaper's values have changed. "Like Mr. Howard, many people in Australia remain true to the values which they absorbed at home and in school. We used to call that loyal. Now, apparently, it's an 'extreme position'. "The very fact that a respected broadsheet like your newspaper can use such hyperbole as if it were an accepted truism makes me all the more frightened of what will happen to this nation if it gives up the freedoms it has enjoyed under the Crown.
"The Keatings of this world scent victory. With our old values labeled as 'extreme', who or what will protect us from the strident emotional tyranny which at present masquerades itself as Australian patriotism?" (Neville Clark, Headmaster, Mentone Grammar School, Mentone, Melbourne, Vic.)
THE REPORTING OF TOLERANCE
from The Age (Melbourne), May 1
"In the winter edition of 'Australian Jewish Democrat', editorial committee member Miriam Paine said: 'The strengthening of multiculturalism or diverse Australia is also our most effective insurance policy against anti-Semitism. The day Australia has a Chinese Australian Governor General, I would feel more confident of my freedom to live as a Jewish Australian'.
"Apart from unemployment, environmental concerns and the crippling billions for infrastructure costs, it is statements from 'ethnic leaders' and their press, such as the above, which contribute to the well founded majority Australian fears about continued mass immigration and multiculturalism." (Denis McCormack, Spokesman, Australians Against Further Immigration)
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|