ERIC BUTLER'S LUNCH WITH MALCOLM FRASER

In his address to the 1994 Annual Dinner of The New Times, held in Melbourne last Friday, Mr. Eric Butler revealed for the first time that prior to Mr. Malcolm Fraser taking control of the Liberal Party Opposition from the late Sir Billy Snedden, he had met with Mr. Eric Butler at a mutual friend's property in the Western District, not far from Nareen. Mr. Fraser was accompanied by his wife. Also present was Eric Butler's wife, Elma. Malcolm Fraser arrived some time before lunch and discussions about the political situation spread over several hours.

Eric Butler said he was revealing his luncheon meeting with Malcolm Fraser because Mr. David Greason, now hailed by the Zionist Jewish press as a successor to the late G.K. Gott as the nation's most outstanding authority on Eric Butler and the League of Rights, had produced what he claimed was a letter from Malcolm Fraser stating that Sir Robert Menzies had warned him about the League of Rights. As yet no information is available of what Sir Robert allegedly said.

Any concern that Sir Robert Menzies had about the League of Rights obviously was not shared by several of his senior Cabinet Ministers, men like Minister for Defence Townley, from Tasmania, who had been a long-time subscriber to League publications and met with Eric Butler on several occasions at Canberra. Deputy Prime Minister and leader of the Country Party, Arthur Fadden, clearly had no concerns about Eric Butler as he had met with him on a number of occasions and, after retiring from Parliament, had moved the vote of thanks to Eric Butler at a Brisbane public meeting at which Eric Butler had dealt with the International Communist conspiracy and what was behind it. Sir Arthur Fadden said that he had learned more from Eric Butler in two hours than he had learned in all the time he had spent at Canberra. Sir Billy Snedden met with Eric Butler and several League supporters on a number of occasions.

As is now emerging in an in-depth study of the League of Rights' association with the Country Party, prominent members of that Party had no problems in associating with Eric Butler. Eric Butler revealed for the first time his close involvement with the drama, which eventually destroyed Rhodesia and brought Communist Robert Mugabe to power in Zimbabwe. Eric Butler had worked closely with Security in South Africa, was progressively concerned about the direction in which South Africa was moving, and provided this assessment for the Minister for External Affairs in the Rhodesian Government, Air Vice Marshal Harold Hawkins, an Australian who had stayed on in Rhodesia after the Second World War.

As Attorney General, Snedden, using material provided by ASIO, had stated that there was no reason to believe that the League of Rights was other than a loyal and reputable organisation. It was the Zionist Jewish lobby, with Isi Leibler playing a major role, which sought to offset this assessment of the League.

When Sir Charles Spry had been in charge of ASIO, he had met with Eric Butler on a number of occasions, on several occasions at the Church of England vicarage in Fitzroy, when the late Rev. Norman Hill was playing a major role in the anti-Communist movement. Mr. Leibler and his Zionist associates have yet to explain why they have over many years spearheaded a vicious campaign against Eric Butler and the League of Rights. They have yet to explain how they pressured the Opposition parties into reluctantly voting for the obscene War Crimes legislation, which resulted in ridiculous charges being leveled against several elderly Australians of ethnic background. No one was found guilty and the whole farce cost the Australian taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.

In a brief reference to David Greason, Eric Butler said that there was a number as yet unexplained aspects of his career. Eric Butler said that he had felt rather sorry for a young teenager with an apparent passion for politics and had invited him home for a weekend. "But my wife never trusted him and saw through Greason," he said. "But she has also seen through me for a long time." There was plenty of good-natured humour about Eric Butler's address. The media, which sought to crucify Downer because of his association with the League, might perhaps now turn their attention to Malcolm Fraser. After all, Downer is a Fraser protégé.

LIBERALS DITHER ON THE FIRING LINE

Freed from the immediate intensity of Parliamentary brutalising at the hands of the Prime Minister, Mr. Downer and his Opposition colleagues continue to search for the elusive 'formula' that can help to recover lost political ground over the last disastrous three months. Having been completely outmaneuvered by the A.L.P. strategists on such issues as the Tasmanian homosexual legislation, the Opposition is desperate to re-establish some shreds of electoral credibility just in case Mr. Keating finds the opportunity and the issue upon which to call a snap election. The temporary respite for the Coalition offers perhaps the last chance for the Liberal Party to return to its traditional roots, in a period that is likely to be only a lull before the storm.

A.L.P. forces are gathering to drive home an orchestrated campaign against "conservative" political forces. The next major eruption could be in Western Australia, as the result of the W.A. High Court challenge to the Mabo legislation if announced. Former Prime Minister Whitlam has attacked the Western Australians in advance of the decision, accusing Premier Court of "impertinence" in mounting the High Court challenge. Whitlam also accused W.A. of an electoral gerrymander, which disqualified the State from being a true democracy, and suggested that W.A. should not challenge the decisions of the national parliament.

RISING TIDE OF SECESSION

Whitlam continues to pursue the Fabian socialist approach to federation, insisting that international conventions were invaluable for the Commonwealth to be able to comply with new global standards, which must be imposed upon those States, which reject them. However, if the High Court does dismiss the W.A. Mabo challenge, the effect in Western Australia could be explosive.

It is common knowledge in W.A. that even the W.A. Cabinet has been forced by public opinion to consider the constitutional machinery of secession, should the High Court find against them. Such is the public support for secession, arising from a widespread understanding of the treacherous use of international treaties by the Commonwealth, that it could even become Liberal Party policy in W.A. This only increases the pressures upon the Federal Liberals and the Coalition.

The basic problem confronting the Liberal Party strategists is that there is no formula for Coalition victory, only an identity crisis that the Party refuses to confront. At the establishment of the Liberal Party 50 years ago, the Liberals, under the influence of Menzies and others, knew what they stood for. Their basic policy statement, "We Believe", was widely distributed, and dealt with fundamental issues of a philosophical nature. In addition, the Party also knew what it stood against, depicting itself as strongly anti-Communist. But now that the Liberals have abandoned what they once believed in, and no longer have the Communist menace to oppose, the Party is left dangling in the political breeze, to be blown this way and that by every changing political breeze.

The assault by the A.L.P. has extended to the attack upon the legend of Menzies, making it difficult for Downer and his colleagues to invoke the ghost of their founder in which to cloak themselves. For once the opinion polls reflecting the desperate Liberal standing are probably an accurate reflection. An election now could completely destroy the Liberals, and eliminate all pretence of any "Opposition" to the A.L.P.

THE DEPARTURE OF TED MACK

Mr. Ted Mack's announcement that he will be retiring from the Commonwealth Parliament at the next election deprives the Parliament of one of the depressingly few politicians with genuine integrity. His long campaign against outrageous political 'perks', pensions and even travel entitlements in retirement is more than mere political posturing. He resigns in order to ensure that he remains ineligible for a lifetime $35,000 per year parliamentary pension, saying "you have to put your money where your mouth is ..." The irony of the Mack position is that, as an independent M.P., he is one of the few politicians who probably really deserve such a benefit.

His representation of the interests of his North Sydney electorate was regarded as an "all-waking-hours" job, for which he felt well paid. He even refused to use Commonwealth cars, rarely used free air travel, preferring instead his ancient Citroen, in which he would commute from Sydney to Canberra. Ted Mack's determination to avoid retirement benefits, which he has always regarded as obscenely generous, is the reason that he found himself in the Commonwealth Parliament at all.

After serving for seven years at State Government level, Mack resigned when he discovered that after two days additional service, he qualified for a State pension, expecting this to be the end of his political career. However, North Sydney constituents persuaded him that a man of integrity should not be wasted in early retirement, but should be sent to serve them in the National Parliament. His election to the blue ribbon Liberal seat in 1990 was the major shock of that election to the political parties.

I.M.F. TIGHTENS THE SCREWS

ANTI-RACIST LAW AIMS TO CURB FREE SPEECH

from The Age (Melbourne), 27/9
The proposed federal 'racial vilification' legislation reminds me of Pascal's famous statement: 'Not being able to make justice strong, we have made strength just.' "Dr. Colin Rubenstein, however, contends (The Age, 21/9) that the legislation will not restrict free speech significantly. "The truth is that its main purpose is to do just that.

"'Virtually nothing that currently appears in the mainstream media would be affected', he tells us. However, the major media already engage in a great deal of 'unseen censorship', so that, for example, intelligent writers and thinkers of the 'far right' are almost never allowed adequate space to reply to the misleading attacks upon them regularly published. "Who is to define whether an act or an essay is 'racist' or 'an expression of hatred'? "And why is it that Dr. Rubenstein can praise 'tolerance' while, evidently, being unwilling to tolerate those who have different views than him about racial and ethnic topics?

"Finally - none of the proponents of this legislation have yet convincingly shown that the current situation of official free speech in this area of discourse really does lead to 'beatings up', 'harassment', and 'fear of violence in ethnic minorities' - or that present legislation cannot deal adequately with acts of violence." (Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic.)