|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 June 1996. Thought for the Week: "In the final analysis it is the Constitution and Laws of the Commonwealth and the States, and the High Court interpretations that determines what we can or cannot do in our daily lives. It is therefore to those constitutions, Laws and Court interpretations that we must continuously look for guidance and succour in our living, work and play, and not to the dissembling party politicians."
A.A. Chresby in Our Australian Constitutional Monarchy Under Attack
GRAEME CAMPBELL, M.P. DROPS POLITICAL BOMBSHELL
Last weekend Western Australian Independent M.P. Graeme Campbell dropped a major political bombshell, one, which is dramatically going to affect the course of Australian politics. Although it has been known for some time that ever since the last Federal Election, when he was re-elected with an increased majority following his expulsion from the Labor Party, Graeme Campbell had been working towards the establishment of a new type of political party, the announcement of the formation of the Party came at the time of last weekend's mass Melbourne rally of those opposing the Howard Government's proposed draconian gun laws. Various estimates have been given of the size of the Melbourne rally, but it was certainly the largest seen in Melbourne since the days of the anti-Vietnam rallies.
But irrespective of whether 70,000 or 100,000 attended, the rally, along with numerous other rallies which have been taking place across Australia, provided striking evidence of the deep and growing concerns of large numbers of law abiding Australians. Graeme Campbell told the Melbourne rally that the Howard Government's proposed gun legislation "threatens the very fabric of our society". Graeme Campbell pointed out that the proposed Howard legislation was extremely bad law, which could only have the effect of furthering a bitterness already fracturing Australian society.
His new political Party, to be known as the Australia First Party, would fill a political vacuum "that could otherwise be occupied by some disparate groups, some of which are quite irrational". We have constantly warned about the danger of violent extremism emerging unless basic problems undermining stability in society were dealt with constructively.
Mr. Ted Drane and other responsible leaders of the anti-gun proposals of the Howard Government are to be commended on the commonsense manner m which they have handled the growing national debate. He warmly welcomed Graeme Campbell at the Melbourne rally, and, according to the front page story feature in the Sunday Herald-Sun of June 2nd, has left no doubt that the considerable financial resources, estimated at nearly $1 million and rapidly growing, of his organisation would be used to help Graeme Campbell and his new Party. Drane says that he expects Campbell's new Party to have a membership of between 50,000 and 100,000 "within months". Graeme Campbell is confident that there will be defections to his Party from both the National and Liberal Parties.
Phil Maguire and Gerard McManus in their Herald-Sun story concerning Graeme Campbell state that "Political sources said yesterday that a group of five Nationals and at least one Liberal Party member have been discussing defections from their parties. Several Queensland and N.S.W Members and Senators contacted this week expressed frustration over Coalition decisions on tightening gun laws and refusal to legislate against Native Title Claims on pastoral leases".
The gun control issue is the catalyst, which resulted in bringing growing concerns inside the Government Parties to a head. One National Party member in the Herald-Sun report is quoted as saying, "We've got the biggest majority in history, and yet we just seem to be legislating all the Labor Party's policies.
It is these policies, which Graeme Campbell
is challenging. Last weekend he spelt out his five-point programme
for re-generating Australia:
Graeme Campbell has previously urged that the Commonwealth Development Bank be used to finance necessary Australian economic activity. He is opposed to the selling off of publicly owned assets like Telstra.
It may not be without significance that Prime Minister John Howard was addressing a Zionist meeting in Melbourne last Saturday evening, after the massive protest rally addressed by Graeme Campbell, and stated that he was determined to push ahead with the gun control legislation. Zionist-Jewish leaders are campaigning in favour of the legislation.
While all the Party leaders are united in their support of Howard's blatant proposed violation of the Federal Constitution, the emergence of the new Graeme Campbell Party has made it almost certain that John Howard will not risk a double dissolution, which would almost certainly result in Campbell establishing a political base in the Senate.
The "Campbell factor" has now openly emerged as a potentially decisive factor in Australian politics. If enough Australians can now seize the opportunity presented to them, they can shift Australia off the disaster course on which it has been travelling for the last 20 years.
AID TO THE COMMUNIST CHINESE AT OUR EXPENSE
by David Thompson
What is the explanation for this? Is Australia accepting Chinese chickens as a form of foreign aid to Communist China? Or is Australia grateful to the Communist Chinese for supplying us with chickens that Australians will depend upon to avert starvation in some Sydney suburbs? Can Australians no longer raise chickens? Or are Communist Chinese chickens superior in quality to those raised in Australia?
The madness of "economic rationalism" has not receded with the change of government in Canberra. If anything, it will be exacerbated. The Coalition has been just as badly infected with the disease as the A.L.P. ever were.
After the news of importing Communist chickens, comes a much more serious revelation concerning the Australian wool industry. According to the International Wool Secretariat (I.W.S.), which is financed mainly by Australian woolgrowers, China is now Australia's biggest market for wool, consuming around 24% of total wool exports. But it appears that the I.W.S. remains unconcerned about the use of Australian wool processing technology to improve the Chinese wool industry. According to an article in Farming Ahead (May 1996) by Nick Truelove, from the University of Western Sydney, woolgrowers are being asked to contribute to upgrading China's wool textile processing industry through the I.W.S. involvement in a new round of aid programmes. "The move has had little coverage in the media and many farmers are probably unaware of it, "he writes.
"During the past two decades Australian taxpayers have shelled out millions of dollars on foreign aid programmes aimed at improving the Chinese wool industry. "But China is also a major wool producer in its own right, with production equivalent to 125,705 tonnes clean in 1994. (We) might question why Australia should help China increase their raw wool production. Given the heat that was generated a few years ago when the embargo on the export of Merino rams and genetic material was lifted, one could have expected strong opposition from woolgrowers to giving away our wool production technology and know how to a competitor..." (Emphasis added)
Australian woolgrowers who contribute the major part of the I.W.S. budget have the greatest difficulty in making the I.W.S. accountable for how the funds are spent. What is the benefit to the Australian wool industry in aiding a Communist competitor? Is there some devious twist in "economic rationalism" that actually provides Australian woolgrowers, presently going bankrupt after the crash in wool prices, with a benefit in all this?
We should note that the strongest opponent of the exporting of Australian Merino genetic materials was Mr. Graeme Campbell, who was attempting to raise support for reinstating the export embargo at the time he was expelled from the A.L.P. before the last election.
The wool industry is still a huge primary industry in Australia, with a near monopoly on the genetic material for the production of superior quality wool. Australia has also contributed the most to the development of wool processing technology. Together, these two factors helped to provide Australia with one of the most important commercial advantages that Australia enjoys anywhere in the world.
If Australia's salvation depended upon the exporting of wool (which in reality it does not) then the true role of the I.W.S. should be to promote the use of wool in the booming international textile markets. At the very least, Australian woolgrowers need to be able to withdraw their financial support from the I.W.S. if it does not serve their interests.
THE UNITING CHURCH LEADS THE REVOLUTION
A few weeks ago we reported on "the Death
Throes of the Uniting Church", after the church produced a
report recommending that suggested, in essence, that the Uniting
Church begin to distance itself from the Biblical teaching
concerning homosexual behaviour, same sex marriages, sex out
of wedlock and divorce.
Now why, we thought, does that statement
ring alarm bells? Where have we heard that statement before?
A study of the archives reveals a very similar statement.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilised
nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer,
our police more efficient, and the rest of the world will
follow our lead into the future!"
The Uniting Church press statement continues: "This is a time when silence is dangerous, when keeping quiet may keep change from happening. We know that the gun lobby is not going to be quiet. So we ask all Uniting Church people, all Christians, all people of goodwill throughout Australia to write, fax or phone Mr. Howard expressing support for the new gun laws."
Are we to assume that the hundred thousand or so shooters who blocked Melbourne last Saturday are not Christians, and not people of goodwill? Are we to assume that they are crazed sadists, to be condemned by the church? Apparently the Uniting Church would have us think so. Perhaps Christians should be asking a few questions of their church leaders. Does the church teach that it is immoral for a man to defend his family and property? With a firearm if necessary? What did Christ mean when he advised His disciples to arm themselves, selling their clothing if necessary, to buy a sword?
We note that the largest anti-gun rally so far held was in Sydney last Sunday. The press estimated the numbers at about 2,600. This would be a very generous estimate. But we also note that anti-gun speakers were not merely supporting Mr. Howard's demands. They were going much further. The speakers at this rally were calling for the complete banning of firearms in private hands. We assume that the anti-gun lobby has the so far elusive answer to the problem of how to convince the criminal to hand over his weapons? Or is the anti-gun lobby merely a front for a new form of pacifism, in which they no longer resist theft and murder?
* * * * * * *
The recent South Australian Budget has cut the State's funding for the Multifunction Polis by more than half. In addition to this, a Bureau of Industry Economics Report recommended the Federal Government scale down its involvement with the M.F.P., which would effectively destroy the M.F.P's. credibility as an initiative of international standards. Conceived as a "city of the future" in which working and living environments were to be integrated using leading edge technology, the M.F.P. was originally the brainchild of Japan's Ministry of International Trade and Industry. The development of the project was kept secret until the election campaign of 1990, when it was exposed by the League's monthly Intelligence Survey (March 1990). Then Liberal leader Andrew Peacock campaigned against the project in the election campaign. Copies of the relevant Intelligent Survey can still be obtained from the League ($5, G.P.O. Box 1052J, Melbourne, 3001).
* * * * * * *
The N.S.W. inquiry into police corruption has been dominated by revelations of how police failed to prosecute known pedophiles. As the inquiry proceeds, it has become more and more obvious that it is not so much pedophilia that is the basic problem here, but the homosexual lifestyle that breeds pedophilia. Many of the offences now coming to light took place when homosexuality was still illegal in N.S.W. But it appears that the "legalising" of sodomy has led to the abuse of small boys on a massive scale. The homosexual "community" does not want this discussed, and has mounted several attacks on the inquiry, demanding the suppression of "homophobia". The truth is that the immoral tolerance for sodomy has placed those children in a position to be abused almost openly.
PERSISTENT LETTER WRITER
Mr. Ron Fischer continues to set an inspiring example to all League actionists with his persistent flow of letters to the media all around Australia. The following is one of his recent, and most pertinent, efforts:
"Gun debate? What debate?
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|