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

2 February 1996. Thought for the Week: "Hawke wanted power to be loved, while Keating wanted power to use it - therefore Keating is much more dangerous."
Graeme Campbell, Sydney, January 25th, 1996


Did Graeme Campbell's Australia Day Rally on January 26th trigger Prime Minister Paul Keating's calling of an early Federal Election on March 2nd? We report that we received a report from our Canberra observer that the Labor Party was "terrified" of the Graeme Campbell factor in the Federal elections. The report also said that the Coalition was also concerned, describing Campbell as the "wildcard" in the election. There was no certainty where the Campbell card might finish.

We were not surprised to learn that those hosting the Campbell Rally, the Australians Against Further Immigration, were apprehensive about how the Campbell Rally would be attended. They certainly received support in publicising the rally from the mass media. As we understand, the A.A.F.I. do not have a big membership list in Victoria. Along with all other political observers, we were interested in what type of a political rally would be staged on Australia Day. The Heidelberg City Hall being used is a big hall capable of seating well over 499 people. Although some of the media attempted to "play down" the number attending the rally, the reality is that the hall was packed, extra seating had to be brought in while a large number had to stand.

In terms of numbers, the Campbell Rally can only be assessed as a remarkable success. One of the numerous reporters present was heard to say, "This rally can only cause widespread apprehension in the ranks of both the Government and the Coalition Parties. A Graeme Campbell factor is clearly emerging." But even more significant was the reception, which Graeme Campbell received. The organisers of the rally made a number of elementary organisational mistakes, starting with the Chairman making what could only be described as a long policy speech. First speaker, Mrs. Robyn Spencer, gave an excellent address on the cultural aspects of immigration and multiculturalism. But it was far too long, taking well over 30 minutes. By the time the A.A.F.I. panel of candidates had been paraded, with fortunately only short comments from each candidate, guest speaker Graeme Campbell had been sitting on the platform for nearly an hour and a half.

A.A.F.I. number one candidate, Denis McCormack, correctly sized up the situation, cut short his own address and introduced Graeme Campbell. The warmth of the reception for Graeme Campbell, after the long wait, was inspirational. Graeme Campbell's greatest admirer would not claim him as a great orator, and he obviously dislikes reading his speeches, but the continuous applause as his address was delivered strikingly confirmed the fact that here was a Federal politician talking about the basic issues, which worried a great majority of the Australian people.

The great majority of Australians do not support present immigration and multicultural policies. They are concerned about a foreign investment policy, which sees a growing number of foreign takeovers of Australian industries. Graeme Campbell did not make the mistake of becoming involved in technical details concerning the broad programme he outlined.

The correct role of the political representative was to reflect the type of policies required by electors once there was agreement on the type of policy shifts required, ways and means could be worked out as to how to give effect to these policies. Campbell insisted that ways and means had to be found to ensure that there was no further erosion of the traditional family. "Unlike John Howard, I have no difficulty in defending the traditional Australian family. It is Mum, Dad and the kids."

There was a burst of warm applause when Graeme Campbell stressed that if trust were to be returned in Australian politics, the politicians had to make a start by telling the electors that they trust them to the point where with a Citizens' Initiative mechanism, the electors would have the opportunity of controlling the politicians.

The basic commonsense of Graeme Campbell was so obvious. Who could argue with this observation that Australian manufacturing industries should be rejuvenated, making it possible to find constructive economic activities for Australia's large numbers of young unemployed? He warned that unless this was done a large and growing underclass would grow in Australia, as it had in the U.S.A., with eventually the emergence of violence and social disintegration. In a broad outline of his political strategy, Graeme Campbell said that he was contesting his own seat of Kalgoorlie as an Independent. He was confident that he could achieve this.

From his West Australian base he would promote a national team of Senate candidates pledged to support his programme. He expressed his warm admiration of the work being done in Victoria by the A.A.F.I. and they had his firm support. He looked forward to working with Senate Candidate Denis McCormack in the next Parliament. The essence of the Graeme Campbell programme is "to put Australia first".

Equally important with the standing ovation he received for his address was the reception he received afterwards as people lined up to obtain an autographed copy of his book, Australia Betrayed, and to shake his hand and to wish him well. As a number said to him, "You have restored our faith in Australia's future." Clearly this was more than yet another political meeting; it was a manifestation of a deep undercurrent in Australian society, one for which Graeme Campbell is emerging as a catalyst.

We predict that the Campbell factor is going to rapidly gain momentum. It is that momentum which must concern Paul Keating and his minders. With an early, short election, Paul Keating may head off the momentum of the Campbell factor, but we are convinced that it will continue after the elections and into the future. Australian politics will never be the same after the Heidelberg Rally on January 26th. It marks the start of a new beginning.

Note: The tape cassette recording of Graeme Campbell's (already famous!) Heidelberg Address is now available from M.E.A. Tapes, Box 184, THE BASIN, Victoria, 3154. Price: $6.00.

Melbourne and environs supporters also please note that copies of Graeme Campbell's Heidelberg Address will be on sale at the next meeting (Wednesday, February 7th) of the Melbourne Conservative Speakers' Club.


by David Thompson
Prime Minister Keating is appealing to Australians to re-elect him and the Labor Party in order to "finish the job" which was started by Bob Hawke in 1983.

Which job? Mr. Keating was rather vague. "The policies and programmes which are working for us now," he said. This simply means that Keating is asking for mandate to complete the internationalisation of the Australian economy to fit the globalist pattern. Australia must become a member of a regional economic unity - A.P.E.C. - that eventually becomes a regional political union. As a consequence Australian industry suffers, perhaps terminally. Mr. Keating derides any 'populist' concerns about debt and foreign investment. "These things are good for the economy," he said on the day after announcing the election!

Mr. Keating wants to increase immigration; applauds multiculturalism. In announcing his multicultural policy, he proposed to strengthen the Racial Hatred Act. He clearly proposes to complete the Asianisation of Australia, and cement the nation into a new world order. Does Mr. Keating propose to consult the Australian people about what they want? No. He proposes to spend the next four weeks telling them what they will get.


Thus far Mr. Howard is yet to offer any alternative to the A.L.P. although a 'clear, sharp, alternative' is promised. So far, only the Coalition trade policy has been announced, which is remarkably similar to that of the A.L.P.

The Global Market
Mr. Howard also proposes to 'keep families together'. How? By reducing economic pressure on them. How? Does Mr. Howard have a definition of what a family is? The Coalition proposal to reduce the bureaucratic paperwork for small business would be a great relief, if honoured. Howard also proposes to 'restore voter trust in politicians'. Does this mean that he will consult the Australian people on what they want? Will he introduce Initiative and Referendum to give us that trust back? No, he will not.

No politician is entitled to be trusted unless he first entrusted voters with Initiative and Referendum. Mr. Howard is offering to govern more efficiently than the A.L.P. If this means that a Coalition Government would 'finish the job' more efficiently than the A.L.P., then without a genuine change of policy the Coalition Government would be more dangerous than even the A.L.P. under Mr. Keating.


Anti-gun campaigners have been noticeably silent about the case of the man who shot his three children, his wife and her parents before turning the weapon on himself, in a southern Brisbane suburb. The killer had been forced to surrender his firearms under a court order. It is almost certain that former Senator Lionel Murphy's Family Law Act, with no-fault divorce provisions, generates tremendous resentment -particularly among men deprived of their families.


It is not insignificant that the Federal Election was called by Mr. Keating the morning after Graeme Campbell addressed the Australians Against Further Immigration (A.A.F.I.) rally in the Heidelberg Town Hall on Australia Day. Press cover of the meeting was generally positive, with some hardened media observers obviously shaken by the packed hall and the strong performances of candidates like Mr. Denis McCormack. Campbell's role as a political catalyst was demonstrated to dramatic effect. However, now that writs have been issued for the dissolution of the Parliament, Campbell's application for registration of his own political party is halted. If his Senate candidates are to be grouped 'above the line' on the Senate ballot paper, he must find an exciting, registered party that can be used. This appears to be likely.

Although the League does not support political parties, as a matter of principle, we do, however, support individual candidates who stand on constructive issues. It is clear that the limited objectives on which Campbell is campaigning are worthy of full support as a first step in the right direction. We would recommend support for any candidate committed to representing the issues that Campbell has outlined. It is also clear that the composition of the Senate is the key to the next Parliament. We wait news of Campbell's candidates in other States with interest. The League will have a role to play in their success.


The following article we reprint from The Social Crediter, January/ February 1996, which itself was taken from the (U.S.) New Federalist Journal, May 15, 1995

"Seventy-five bishops from Latin-America are now attacking the policy of the international financial institutions. "Seventy-five Latin-American Roman Catholic Bishops, meeting in Mexico May 1-7, called upon Roman Catholics, both clergy and laity, to mobilise to change International Monetary Fund policies which have brought only destruction, and to replace them through a new regional economic unity premised on development.
"Leading the public presentation of this campaign was Honduran Bishop Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, elected at the meeting to a four-year term as president of the Latin American Bishops Council (CELAM)....In a press conference, as the meeting opened, he charged: "'International bodies are applying economic adjustment policies which are asphyxiating our people.... Despite the clear failure of these adjustments, the international financial institutions insist on forcing governments to adopt them'....The nations of Latin America 'blindly obey the international financial institutions', he noted, even though their policies 'have produced extreme poverty' and 'carry inequity in their genetic code'.
"These institutions and the owners of money 'don't plan for the long term; they live in the here and now, and are not interested in the future, they only act in favor of their own interests, and in the final analysis, they think that if Latin America rebels, it will die of hunger'. The Latin-American nations can only fully develop through actual not poetic integration, he added, calling on the bishops and the laity to work to bring about this unity, as one of the great challenges which CELAM must take up, as it seeks to infuse the Gospel into politics and economics.
"It is not difficult to find common ground, because our entire continent is overwhelmed.... not merely (by) the foreign debt, but also by the structural adjustments to the economy imposed by the international credit institutions,' he reiterated…"


from The Australian, 24/1
"Nick Bolkus, Minister for Immigration, has a belief (Labor's Immigration About-Face, The Weekend Australian, 20-21/1) that Australia can support a much higher population. This is not the opinion of our scientific community, nor is it in line with the recommendations of the Standing Committee for Long-Term Strategies, an inquiry chaired by the former science minister Barry Jones.
"The Federal Government campaigned on a lower level of immigration during the last election, and even Bolkus was quoted in this paper (May '94) as applying a permanent brake on migration. He is now boasting that he has raised this from just under 63,000 to 96,000, an incredible action considering neither of the major parties has a population policy. Such a deceitful process was only made possible by the Prime Minister's support and the cowering of the Leader of the Opposition by segments of the ethnic communities." (Don Owers, Dudley, N.S.W)


from The Australian, 24/1
"Unlike Douglas Rome, who lives today near his old haunts and was given space in The Weekend Australian (20-21/1), Robert Burns learned from experience. "Rome tells us that 'royalty and Robert Burns do not mix' and that he was an 'ardent supporter of French anti-royalists'. But before his death Burns understood that Britain's constitutional monarchy was a better safeguard of individual liberty than a Jacobin Republic.

Let me quote the first and last stanzas of Does Haughty Gaul Invasion Threat?
"Does Haughty Gaul invasion threat?
Then let the loons beware, Sir!
There's wooden walls upon our seas
And volunteers on shore, Sir!
The Nith shall run to Corsincon,
And Criffel sink in Solway,
Ere we permit a foreign foe
On British ground to rally!

"The wretch that would a tyrant own}
And the wretch, his true-sworn brother.
Who would set the mob above the throne
May they be damned together!
Who will not sing God Save The King
Shall hang as high's the steeple;
But while we sing God Save The King,
We'll ne'er forget the People!

"Some in Australia combine Burns' two wretches: they genuflect to foreign tyrants, especially those of Beijing, but would set a mob, provided it were their own mob, above the throne here. I suspect Burns would wish on them, as well as on Douglas Rome, the fate he wished on the friends of the French invasion of Britain in 1795." (Dr. Geoffrey Partington, Malvern, S.A.)

An Eye For An Eye by John Sack
In the August 1994 edition of Intelligence Survey we told the story of The Book They Tried To Kill. It is an extraordinary story of atrocities committed in immediate post-war concentration camps for Nazis, run by Jews. This is the appalling account of Jewish revenge on Germans in Soviet occupied Poland and parts of Germany. The Jewish author, Sack, was incredulous when it proved almost impossible to get the book reviewed because of the politically incorrect content, even though his story was checked independently, and the facts authenticated by several sources, including 60 Minutes.
Antony Polonsky, Professor of East European History at Brandeis University, declares that he is satisfied that Sack's research is factual, and that he is a serious researcher.
"The book is a major contribution to our understanding," he writes. "I certainly recommend publication." At last we are able to provide limited stocks of this extraordinary book.

This is an extract from an article of the same name, in The Social Crediter, January-February, 1996. The Social Crediter enquiries should be addressed to: 3 Beresford Drive, Samford, Qld., 4520.
"….Money of course facilitates the ownership of property. I would certainly not dissent from the proposition that 'the legal right to property must approximate the moral right to property' and I suggest that Social Credit provides the means for that. Except for the relative few fortunate enough to inherit property, using the word in its broadest sense, the route to property ownership at present is only through profitable employment. While there is scope for full employment in the short term, e.g. to restore and improve the social infrastructure through debt-free funding, employment is progressively failing to fulfill the function of income distribution because of technological change. Enough for all is producible with ever fewer people employed in its production - hence unemployment and attendant poverty amid actual and potential plenty, and the forced export of unsaleable surpluses.
"The very success of technological innovation, as in the automation and information revolutions, means that for most people ownership of property through earnings is a fading dream, as with those with negative equity on their properties. In the EC (European Community .. O.T.) unemployment averages 11% of the workforce.
"What now has to be recognised and implemented is that the problem is no longer 'unemployment' but 'unempayment'. Since 'work' is failing as a means of providing incomes, other means are necessary. The pragmatic justification for it is that only by issuing purchasing power to consumers direct, without it first appearing in costs of production, can the chronic deficiency between aggregate prices and aggregate effective demand be made up.
Its philosophical justification is that the main factor in current productivity potential is neither capital nor labour but the accumulation of scientific and technological 'know-how' applied to the productive process. This is a common inheritance from generations of scientists, engineers and inventors in which we all share. Hence everyone has an equal claim to the fruits of this common cultural heritage.

Note: All Election comment authorised by David Thompson, 145 Russell Street, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000.

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