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

24 March 2000. Thought for the Week: "We have forgotten what the English Crown really is! The Crown could have equally been called the People's Wealth, the People's Power or the COMMON-Wealth. The Crown is the holder of the People's Wealth and the Governor General is the Trustee on the People's Behalf.
The Governor General of the nation has the job of ensuring the People's Wealth is held not just for present generations but for all future generations. (It is for this reason that the power of the Sovereign must be unlimited.)
Thus a parliament of political parties cannot transfer the People's Wealth on a permanent basis; it is why the Governor General is given real power not to pass all Acts of the Parliament-so the Governor General can protect the common-wealth of the people."
From "The Murphy Myth" by Kerry Spencer-Salt, March, 2000


by Jeremy Lee
A most interesting development is the decision by hoteliers in Australia to involve themselves in the growing anti-GST campaign. Approve or not, the traditional beer is to Australians what vino is to Italians, and vodka to the Russians. It is a brave backbencher who consciously ignores the pubs in his electorate.

Under the heading PUBS TO LAUNCH ANTI-GST CAMPAIGN, The Australian (7/3/00) reported: "The cost of a glass of beer will rise by 9 percent under the GST - not the 1.9 percent flagged by the Howard Government as an election commitment.
The Australian Hotels Association said it felt betrayed by the GST negotiation process and would launch a national bar-side campaign to have the additional increase overturned. The revised price, based on industry estimates, exceeds a 7 percent rise flagged last month by Treasury officials.
President of the Association's Western Australian branch Michael Monaghan said it had received a sympathetic hearing from some Liberal party backbenchers and Opposition and Democrat MPs and would now boost its lobbying efforts.
State and territory organisations are also developing material to be distributed via hotels to explain the reasons for the substantial rise in the price of draught beer. The new prices will raise an extra $500 million annually, according to Mr. Monaghan.

But never mind! Some backbenchers, while voting for it, are "sympathetic". They, in turn, will deserve "sympathy" when they lose votes in coming elections. It's only a matter of time before those collecting hundreds of thousands of names on petitions to Governors, the Governor General and to Parliament, take the obvious step of inviting Australia's hoteliers to collect extra signatures at every bar in the land! With apologies to a well-known Australian song, we couldn't resist the following: "The drinkers were sober, and flat on their backs, A cent for the grog and a dollar for tax! The pub was deserted, no sign of good cheer, And all of it due to the tax on the beer!"


Answering charges from Labor MP Jann McFarlane that the Immigration Department was discriminating against Pakistani tourists in favour of those from the UK, Minister Philip Ruddock gave some pertinent facts: ".... In the case of Pakistan, the past actions of their countrymen and women have resulted in the inclusion in the risk factor," he said.... Mr. Ruddock said 14 percent of successful Pakistani visa applicants overstayed their time, while only 1.9 percent of UK tourists did so. A spokesman for Mr. Ruddock said: "The statistics speak for themselves. We refuse entry to 52 percent of people from Pakistan and 14 percent of them still overstay ...."

Perhaps the Pakistanis would do better by joining Iraqis and Afghanistanis in a quest for a sea-voyage to Australia. At least that will guarantee a minimum three-year stay, all expenses paid.


We thought Indonesia had enough troubles. President Wahid seems temporarily to have the army under control. He has just been visited by the US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia, Mr. Stanley Roth, who urged him to accelerate banking and financial reforms. Malaysia's Dr. Mahathir would probably have sent Roth packing. Which makes the latest news, released in the Strait Times (Malaysia) on March 2nd, that Henry Kissinger will take up a position as "political adviser", surprising indeed.


by Alfred King
A wise doctor of geography has correctly pointed out that if a small number of Eskimos were to come to live in our country, Australian people would be delighted. We would be most interested in observing and learning how these people live in different ways to ourselves. We would enjoy learning about their culture, and eating at Eskimo restaurants. This number of immigrants would also profit from the experience, eventually taking on our culture and being absorbed into the population.

However, the reality of human nature which has been PROVED IN EVERY COUNTRY WHERE MULTICULTURALISM HAS BEEN TRIED is that if we took in 100,000 Eskimos tomorrow, they would want to live in the same area as each other, continue to practise their own language and culture, and they would want their children to marry other Eskimos and maintain Eskimo culture. They would always consider themselves to be Eskimo first and foremost, not Australian.

We now have a divided nation. A polyglot society with no single set of core values. As the definition of civilisation is those beliefs and values, which bind us together, this is the end of our civilisation. We enter a new Dark Age. I emphasise that we cannot blame Eskimos for living this way - they are acting according to their human nature. In any place where there are a large number of people of the same culture living together, they will want to maintain their own culture. This is an unchangeable fact of life, which the idealists will not come to grips with.

The blame for our modern disastrous immigration policies rest with these idealists and subversives who ignore the lessons of multiculturalism in other countries, and insist that the Australian people will have this imposed on them whether they want it or not. The only 'debate' that is allowed to be carried on is at the very fringe, i.e. how quickly the end result of the darkening of our country is to take place. Once we have lost a distinctive national character and set of unchanging core beliefs and values, we can readily be absorbed into the grey, characterless, undistinguished and hopeless One World that the Establishment has planned for us.

Let us be clear on one important point. There is no such thing as an Italian Australian or a Chinese Australian. A person is either one nationality or the other. He cannot belong to two countries. An immigrant either wants to come to our country to take on our culture, because our culture has created the kind of place that he would like to live in, or he wants to maintain his own culture. In this case, the best place for him to achieve this is his own country.

Sadly, this most commonsense has to be restated here because the body of knowledge on this subject has become so corrupt that we have lost sight of even commonsense. We don't need a super-educated elite to tell us what we know in our bones to be right. The press is well aware of the revulsion of ordinary Australians for our present immigration policies. Every poll result shows that not only do we not want reduced Asian immigration, we do not want any immigration at all. It is hard enough just trying to make a living ourselves at the real family level, without having to take on the burdens of tens of thousands more legal migrants and countless other illegals. A large proportion of these people cannot even speak English, let alone bring desirable skills to Australia.
So, please, let us drop the pretence that we need these people for our economic development.

And even if they did bring money into the country, we have to get away from this black magic idea of measuring everything in terms of cash. For example, our family's grandmother is a fifth generation Australian. She was born here and has spent all her life here, working 11 hours a day on the family farm until she retired on a modest pension. It is precisely this sort of person who has made, and continues to make, the contribution that has produced such a wonderful country.
What Douglas describes as the social credit of the nation, i.e. our national wealth, is measured in terms far more sophisticated and important than money. Any printing press in any part of the world can produce money. But Australia is the best country in the world to live in.

The recent confusion displayed by the media about our national identity is completely absurd. It is this traditional type of person to whom Australia belongs. The ordinary man in the street accepts this as commonsense, but this reality just doesn't fit with the ideal of the elite.

The money system is a man-made system. Currently, anyone with enough money can come to live in Australia. Man has to fit the system. Social credit rejects this idea. "Systems were made for man, and not man for systems, and interests of man, which is self-development, is above all systems."


The latest investment poll, commissioned by US investment house Salomon Smith Barney, has revealed that, despite a most intensive media brainwashing campaign, only one in four Britons now favour replacing the pound with the euro, down from 29 percent in January. Even the business sector, which once led the charge in favour of the European single currency, has gone silent on the issue. A report by KPMG Consulting recently estimated that Europe's largest companies could face costs of $90m each in adopting the euro. It is estimated that 75 percent of British companies, large and small, would vote "no" on a referendum on the euro if it were held tomorrow.


Malcolm Turnbull must be encouraged by this week's overseas news. Former US Treasury Secretary, Mr. Robert Rubin, who stepped down last July to pursue a career in banking, received a compensation package worth more than $34.9mn in the four months he served as Chairman of Citigroup. And he will earn nearly $75mn over the next two years. However, beware Malcolm - Satan is a hard taskmaster. In fact, he is never satisfied.


by Betty Luks
As reported, not content with flogging off South Australia's electricity and water, Premier Olson is now keen to meet with overseas buyers interested in S.A. Ports Corporation, according to the Adelaide Advertiser, January 31st. It seems that a cashed-up Cyprus bank is keen to invest in Australia and may be interested in the last major State asset 'on the auction block'. But, 'The Corporation, which controls ports such as Port Adelaide, Thevenard, Port Pine, Whyalla, and those on Kangaroo Island, could attract interest from the same company which has taken over the lease (200 years) of ETSA - Cheung Kong. Owned by billionaire Li Ka-Shing, the company is the largest container port operator in the world..."

It could be that some rural Liberal politicians are finding they may have some allegiance to their people - but not too much - as it is reported they are saying privately "...they will not support the Ports Corporation sale if grain handling and both commercial and recreational fishing are adversely affected." Just imagine, access to the ports throughout the State could be denied to recreational fishermen, and who knows what conditions and charges would be imposed upon the commercial fishermen and the grain handlers in the future. It is reported, "The Government has given an indication that recreational fishermen will be protected under the sale process and will retain access to wharves and jetties." Is this promise of the same worth as Howard's 'never ever' GST?


by Betty Luks
Those involved in the battle for a strict labelling regime of genetically modified foods are discovering there are very strong powers at work behind the scenes influencing the decisions of government. Last October, health ministers decided to endorse a strict mandatory labelling regime, requiring all products with any amount of modified ingredients - even trace elements like flours and oils - to be clearly labelled. According to newspaper reports, manufacturers and farmers are among the groups opposed to the scheme claiming 'compliance costs' would be enormous. There is no doubt about it - money rules!

Surely the basic question any health minister would ask is, "Does it promote the health of the people - or does it destroy the health of the people?" Prince Charles has taken up the issue of genetically modified foods and points to the fact that we have no way of knowing the long-term effects on our bodies. It was suggested that the executives and the staff of the companies that are producing and promoting GM foods should be the first group to test them on themselves for at least five years while we the public observe the results.

One of the key speakers at the recent Inverell Forum, Dr. Ziema McDonell Ph.D., predicted that GM foods would increase cancers in the population. The minister for health has a responsibility to insist on strict labelling guidelines for GM foods; the people must have the right to choose not to eat the GM foods. To be able to make this choice, they need to know whether the food has been modified or not.

Genetically modified foods, once commonly abbreviated as GM and now known as GMO for genetically modified organisms or GEOs for genetically engineered organisms, have been altered or 'enhanced' by the introduction of foreign genetic material. This procedure, which often involves bacteria, virus strains and DNA of different species, is a far cry from the old traditions of crossbreeding or grafting.

The Coles supermarket chain distributes a brochure at the checkout points, designed to allay our fears, by pointing out we already eat many GMO ingredients in our daily diets. Examples given are, soya, canola, rennet, corn, potatoes, sugar beet, and cotton-oil. The brochure claims there is no proof that we are being harmed. Director of the GeneEthics Network, Mr. Bob Phelps is reported to have said, "GEOs are the high-tech equivalent of cane toads and prickly pear."

The Montreal agreement by 130 nations that GMO foods can be barred will bring the WTO into confusion. But of course Seattle demonstrated to the WTO that they are viewed with great distrust by many movements and organisations around the world, and the people want to have a say about their own food and other choices. They clearly demonstrated that as far as they were concerned 'money did not rule' and was not the first priority.


Letters to the editor, Adelaide Advertiser, 17/2/2000, from Gene and Bruce Wenham Victor Harbour, SA:
"What has happened to this land of the fair go and what are we, the people doing about it? In the same day news, we have the obscenity of a wealthy American being paid out a fortune for 'blotting his copy-book' while loyal low-paid workers are denied their wages and redundancy payments to which they are legally and morally entitled."

The oft-quoted 'If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys' is surely laughable. We have known too many committed workers prepared to take low salaries to build up a business, too many clever volunteers who, without monetary reward, have built and maintained institutions for this to be even remotely true. The appalling situation of the board of AMP treating shareholders so shamefully warrants letters from all over Australia. Let's do it."


Compare the following letter from Mark Brindal, a Minister in the Olsen SA Liberal government and the news about Liberal Premier John Olson travelling overseas to 'flog off our assets' with the Kerry Spencer-Salt 'thought for the week' at beginning of On Target. I don't think Australians care two hoots how passionately he approaches his tasks at hand, what the Australian people are looking for is a person who will re-present their will and protect their rights. When Mr. Brindal writes 'the power of democracy lies not in any government but in the people it represents' he is repeating what is - to him - a cliché.
The Liberal Party once wrote in their "Statement of Beliefs" 1949, "Parliament drives its authority from the People". John Olson needs to be reminded of this as he flits around the world selling off the people's assets, not only without their knowledge of the details, but also without their consent.

"One of the many important legislative changes to the Local Government Act 1999 and the Local Government (Elections) Act 1999 is the removal of the requirement that a person seeking election for the office of mayor must first serve 12 months as a councillor. Behind this change was the recognition that in order to give electors a greater choice and selection of candidates, it was necessary to remove the entry restriction to the office of mayor. This would then allow more people with the suitable skill and talent an opportunity to run for mayor, without having to go through a term or more as a councillor in local government.
So often I hear the argument that there is no incentive for a high-profile, successful businessperson to serve his or her community because of barriers to entry. This decision removes one. To explain this further and put it in context, the Parliament and Government of South Australia have no pre-qualification for a person who wishes to stand for parliament. There is no pre-qualification for a person to serve the people of SA as a minister or premier.
This measure for local government further enhances the democratic process and is one that the wider community should welcome.
In reply to Mayor Dyer's letter, not only is it the role of any elected member to dutifully, as one should, open letters but to be proactive in one's local community, offering leadership and advocating for the needs of his or her constituents.
The level of application and dedication to the causes and concerns of others extends far beyond attending meetings and answering mail. It is being passionate about the community that they represent and being of the firm belief that there is always more that can be done to advance the cause.
The right to serve in public office is one that should be conferred upon all citizens. The only mechanism by which a candidate's success for a position should be determined is that where the candidate secures a majority of votes at an election. The power of democracy lies not in any government but in the people it represents."

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