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

22 April 1994. Thought for the Week: "I have seen the results of agricultural industrialism all over the world, often encouraged by such agencies as the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation, and it makes you weep. It is such a waste of human potential and, whatever the official line is, it invariably results in ever greater numbers of the urban dispossessed, the rootless, the unemployed and those without a stake in anything."
H.R.H. The Prince of Wales: "Highgrove: Portrait of an Estate"


by David Thompson
Having achieved remarkable success in a number of by-elections in recent months, the group, Australians Against Further Immigration (A.A.F.I.), have obviously alarmed the political "thought police". The grassroots resentment against an imposed policy of multiculturalism is now beginning to find expression through the ballot box, and senior political figures (like Mr. Tim Fischer) have confirmed that this cannot be ignored.
As a consequence of this success, A.A.F.I. is now receiving increasing attention from those who wish to continue to suppress any suggestion that multiculturalism and a 'bi-partisan' immigration policy must be challenged.

Last week the strongest attack yet upon A.A.F.I. was made by a reporter for the Australia Israel Review, Andrew Silverberg, which was published simultaneously in The Sydney Morning Herald, The Canberra Times and The Herald Sun (15/4/94). Mr. Silverberg drew upon all the standard techniques to denigrate A.A.F.I. in an attempt to smear and marginalise this group, and destroy future electoral prospects. Strenuous efforts were made to link the A.A.F.I. with the League of Rights, which was described (yet again) as "undoubtedly the most influential and effective... racist organisation in Australia" by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.

Every effort is being made to imply that the "real agenda" of A.A.F.I. is that of racism, anti-Semitism and 'extremism.' Much is made of the fact that a spokesman for A.A.F.I., Mr. Dennis McCormack, addressed the League's Conservative Speakers' Club in Melbourne. The truth is that McCormack and other A.A.F.I. leaders appear willing to speak to anyone. Dennis McCormack's Melbourne C.S.C. address was, in fact, the same address that was later delivered to the Bureau of Immigration Research Conference in Sydney a few weeks later.

A.A.F.I. leaders are accused of attending the League's 1993 National Seminar, addressed by Mr. Graeme Campbell, A.L.P. Member for Kalgoorlie. Any objective observer would have noted that even a few of the League's most trenchant critics attended to hear what Mr. Campbell had to say, but would hardly describe themselves as League supporters.

The League's position on immigration is that we continue to call for a national referendum as the basis for future immigration policy in respect to both migrant numbers, and countries of origin. We do not support any political party, but propose support for issues and ideas that offer constructive alternatives to the multicultural friction now emerging.

Mr. Silverberg's attempt to smear a legitimate political group like A.A.F.I. provokes exactly the type of reaction, which he condemns. At a time when Israel has closed its borders to the Palestinians, friends of Israel are hardly in a position to extol the virtues of multiculturalism. We shall observe with interest whether any response to the Silverberg smear will appear in Australia's "free press".


The eyes of the world (or at least the T.V. cameras) turn to South Africa next week as the first multiracial elections are held on April 27th. This is the direct culmination of events in 1985, when Western - particularly American - international banks refused to refinance the South African debt unless "majority rule" was agreed upon. The U.S. imposed sanctions upon South Africa needlessly; (the debt 'lever' was always sufficient) until the Afrikaner administration buckled under pressure of "the international community". Since then, the negotiating period concerning the shape of "majority rule" has been torn by low-level civil war between dominant black tribes.

With blacks outnumbering whites by about 5 to 1, a black dominated Government of National Unity is certain. It is also certain that no "unity" will result. Africa is Africa, and tribal divisions between blacks are as deep as those between blacks and whites. The 'New South Africa' has no common language, no genuine common religion, and certainly no shared vision for the future.

The violence between the A.N.C. (Xhosa tribe) and the Inkatha (Zulu) group ensures that any prospect of open voting is impossible, with thousands of dead already. Chief Buthelezi, faced with the prospect of the Zulus (also divided among themselves) being submerged by the numerically greater Xhosa, refuses to submit Inkatha to the electoral process.

Henry Kissinger and Lord Carrington, both the creatures of international banking interests were unable to "negotiate" the Zulu leader into electoral participation. No doubt Buthelezi remembers both Kissinger's and Carrington's role in the betrayal of Rhodesia, and is fully aware of the sorry state of Zimbabwe today.


Any suggestion that old resentments and injustices will be forgotten after the election, with a rickety form of national unity paving the way for a workable form of majority rule is simply nonsense. Militant blacks have been whipped into a frenzy of violent pre-election action, and clearly are in no mood to forgive the last half-century of Afrikaner inflexibility. "One Settler, One Bullet" is still the commonest of slogans.

The electoral system adopted for the coming election is that of proportional representation. That is, voters cast their votes for the party of their choice, not an individual. On the A.N.C. party list are at least 30 known, committed Marxist-Leninists, and a liberal assortment of other thugs and warlords. Winnie Mandela herself appears at number 31 on the A.N.C. list, which may even assure her of a junior Cabinet post!

No change of government can transform the lives of approximately 8 million black squatters living in desperate poverty in the townships. Votes cannot be eaten or worn, nor even spent, and expectations in the townships are extraordinary. Many have been encouraged to believe that they will be taking over the white man's land, houses, cars, etc., on April the 28th. They can only be expected to seize at gunpoint what the electoral process cannot deliver.


Almost all minority groups in South Africa are demanding some form of self-rule. Rural Afrikaners have been calling for their own white homeland. Chief Buthelezi has been demanding self-rule for the Zulus, under their own king, who is as legitimate a monarch in Africa as Queen Elizabeth is in Britain. Even Mandela has been prepared to concede some form of self-rule for the Zulus if they compromise, and take part in the electoral process.
But "separate development" is merely the English translation of the Afrikaner "apartheid", which is politically impossible, and unacceptable to the "international community" and the banking groups.
Although no other part of Africa has successfully grafted the European concept of "democracy" onto the most ancient form of tribalism, we insist that the South Africans try.

So widespread is the post election expectation of violence, that for months now the British Government has been quietly cooperating in planning for a massive airlift of about 500,000 white South Africans to Britain. But those with British residency entitlements number well over a million, and preparations are now being made to double the airlift.

If any reminder of the strength of tribalism in Africa is required, reference to Rwanda is sufficient. More than 20,000 people have died in a tribal civil war between the Hutu and the minority Tutsi, who are attempting to seize power. The whites and the U.N. have simply been swept aside (or killed), and the streets of Kigali awash with blood. Only the most unrealistic idealist, or hardened power maniac would wish such a result upon the unfortunate South Africans, white or black. But Africa is Africa, and as one South African writer predicted, "The election will largely be a racial census, with the vast majority of whites and Africans voting according to their genes..."


As opposition to the Kennett amalgamation proposals mounts, the Victorian Government's response seems to simply further entrench itself into a fixed, centralist position. Not one member of the Coalition Government so far has been prepared to comment upon the difference between the Government's present position, and Premier Kennett's rook-like rejection of amalgamation when in Opposition in 1986, except to weakly murmur "times change". This is obviously true. Instead of having M.P's. prepared to stand upon principle, we now have either weak apologists, or barefaced opportunists of such invincible stupidity that they are unable to concede that councils belong to ratepayers.

Mayor of St. Kilda, Mr. Tim Costello, makes some telling points concerning the alleged "savings" of $75-$100 million once Councils are amalgamated. Challenging the Chairman of the Local Government Board recommending the changes, Ms. Leonie Burke, to show how anything like such savings can be made by larger, less efficient councils, Costello believes that savings would only be made as services were cut back.

When challenged at their Annual Conference, Victorian National Party leaders affirmed their support for the Kennett Fabian approach. The Deputy Premier, McNamara, and Local Government Minister, Hallam, have refused to acknowledge their 1986 position, or retreat from the destructive Kennett model. In fact, former National Party leader, Mr. Peter Ross-Edwards, has now accepted a position as a Commissioner for Bendigo, following the elimination of local councils. In a July 1985 press release, Mr. Ross-Edwards warned against centralising councils saying that "big is not necessarily beautiful".

One of the worst legacies of the Cain/Kirner Governments is that they generated such a backlash that gave Kennett huge majorities in both Legislative Assembly and Council, effectively destroying all checks upon the abuse of power. Victorians face the worst form of elected dictatorship, with no M.P's. being in a position to challenge the abuse of power by the Executive.


from Herald-Sun (Melbourne), 12/4
'Democracy must not be put on ice on the pretext of saving money' (Herald-Sun, Editorial, April 8), expresses the belief of my group about enforced council amalgamations. "In 1986, we played a major role, under our former name of The Swanpoo1 and District Ratepayers' Group, in defeating the Cain Governments plan to force amalgamation of councils. "The democratic right of residents to decide on boundary changes then became law.

The Kennett Government not only revoked that right, but allows a highly populated municipality to outvote a less populated one and legitimise the takeover of its unwilling neighbour. "The undemocratic elimination of one government (councils) by a more powerful government is a tactic repugnant to most Aussies, and I am surprised that R.S.L. spokesman, Bruce Ruxton, has remained silent on this issue. "But even more repugnant is abolition of our national birthright of access to the Supreme Court when we claim denial of natural justice. Where are the civil libertarians on this issue?

"If ratepayers could save the stated many millions of dollars through council amalgamations then undoubtedly most amalgamations would be approved by referendums, in which each city or shire's residents decide their own municipal future. "Obviously, the State Government doesn't trust residents to 'do the right thing', so on the pretext of saving money, put democracy on ice. "What next? Censure of the media and free speech for those who oppose the Government?" (Brian Lumsden, President, Benalla Shire Residents Group)


from The Age (Melbourne), April 11th
The letter (30/3) from eight academics was typical of the thinking of people from our universities, who seem more and more to be separated from the real world. "There is no doubt that Australia has become a multicultural society and the R.S.L's. views on this point are well known. However, multiculturalism, far from uniting all the diverse groups, is dividing this country as it has never been divided before.

"I fail to see why Australians have to bend over backwards to accommodate the views of new arrivals at the expense of our own values and traditions. "What the academics and the multiculturalists seem to miss out on is that what we should be doing to Australia's newcomers is teaching them something about this country and its traditions, not encouraging them to carry on with their former country' s traditions, ways and animosities.

"The R.S.L. would like to see the Government embark on a program to teach new arrivals the backbone traditions of Australia: the constitutional monarchy, the Westminster system of Parliament, the flag, the national anthem - in all, what has made this country great and what will continue to make it even greater." (Bruce Ruxton, State President [Vic.] Returned Services League of Australia)


from The Armidale Express (N.S.W.), March 31st
Is it time to start speaking about the unspeakable? "The recent controversy surrounding the Federal National Party leader Mr. Tim Fischer's statement 'that it was ironic that on a day Schindler's List dominated the Oscars, the Israeli military mounted an attack on Southern Lebanon.... says much about the furore that meets any Australian who dares to publicly criticise the actions of the State of Israel.'

"Does a strange 'political correctness' dictate that censure of Israel, or comparison of her crimes with those of the past, is 'unspeakable'. "Indeed it is most fortunate that whenever there is even the slightest rebuke of Israel's brutal aggression against her Arab neighbours (e.g. Lebanon), of the Israeli Defence Force's actions in the occupied Arab lands of the West Bank and Gaza strip, there is an immediate bitter cry from the Israeli lobby. "These vocal supporters of Israel must realise that the Jewish State's murder of innocent Arab civilians is unjustifiable, and that Israel is not exempt from the normal obligations of a responsible member of the world community.

"Certainly, Mr. Tim Fischer's comments were timely and valid. "Also he has expressed an independent and forthright opinion that can only help Australia's vital commercial relations with the Arab countries. "For far too long, Australia has been seen by the Arabs as maintaining a staunchly partisan pro-Israel position to the detriment of relations with other Middle East states." (David Jones, Secretary, Australian Arab Information Office)

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