NATIONAL OUTPOURING OVER BOAT PEOPLE

by Jeremy Lee
Whatever else is said, the tightly-held 'politically-correct' lid on illegal immigration and racial issues has blown off. Backbenchers round the nation have received unprecedented messages in the form of letters, phone calls and E-mails. The huge majority have backed Howard's position, as have radio talk-back programmes and national polls.
Douglas observed that every action creates an equal and opposite reaction.

The multicultural and immigration agenda has been created by a small coterie who knowingly designed a programme against the wishes of the great majority of Australians. As far back as May 25th, 1993, the former Prime Minister Bob Hawke revealed there had been an implicit pact between the major parties to "implement broad policies on immigration they know are not generally endorsed by the electorate. This has been achieved .... By keeping the subject off the political agenda. Mr. Hawke said .... The pact between the parties has been 'quite unique in Australian political experience.'...." (The Australian, 25/5/93)

What Hawke saw as an enlightened" pact was, in essence, a betrayal of the Australian people and an attack on the democratic ideal. It suggested that politicians were wiser and more humane than those they governed. This, more than anything else, was the reason for the intemperate attack from the major parties on Pauline Hanson. She dared reveal what they were bent on hiding.

While criticizing One Nation at every opportunity, Howard has seen the value in adopting its policies. As Geoffrey Barker noted wryly (The Australian Financial Review, Weekend, 1-2/9/01): "Pauline Hanson outlined the One Nation approach to boat people when she launched her campaign for the Queensland State election earlier this year. 'You go out and meet them, fill them with food and water and medical supplies and say Go that way', she told a rally on the Sunshine Coast in February.
John Howard has embraced her policy completely. Australian SAS troops have gone out and met the 460 people on board the Tampa, filled them with food and water and medical supplies (and Portaloos) and told them 'Go that way'.
No matter how the drama at sea and in international diplomacy and law plays out, the Coalition no longer has to worry about One Nation preferences in the coming federal election. They are in the bag ...."

But the saga is not over. The unique legal circumstances of the Norwegian ship are unlikely to occur again. What of the expected boats of the future that sail without sinking into Australian territory? The Government will now deploy an additional five naval vessels and four P3 Orion aircraft to the existing coast watch operation. This, as Australian Defence Studies Centre director Anthony Bergin has pointed out, is a deployment of one-third of the Australian Navy. Obviously, more is anticipated than mere surveillance. Already, more than 95 percent of boat traffic is detected before proximity with Australian waters. Legally, Australian jurisdiction extends 24 nautical miles from the high water mark of Australian territory. Any action beyond this point, except in the case of illegal fishing, can be interpreted as an act of piracy in international waters.

Up until now intercepted boats have been escorted into Australian ports, where the boat people, whether illegal or genuine refugees, have been disembarked. Will added naval power alter this situation? If not, what is the point of the heavy additional costs involved? In other words, is the Howard Government prepared to intercept boats in international waters and forcibly return them to their point of embarkation? The test, in the debatable possibility that the Coalition is re-elected before the end of the year, is whether it will continue with a resolute stand against illegal immigration, or whether it will return to "back to normal" once the votes are in the bag. If the second occurs, it will have been the most cynical vote-grabbing exercise in Australia's history.

Figures produced in Queensland's Sunday Mail (2/9/01) show Australia's intake of refugees, per head of population, as second only to Canada, with 41 per 100,000 of the population (Canada, 45 per 100,000). Humanitarianism is obviously a factor; but each nation must be allowed to decide the point at which the refugee intake threatens the stability of local communities. The "take-every-one" brigade seldom have to suffer the consequences on a personal level. It is those who live in such communities as Cabramatta, without any say, who find themselves jostled and discriminated against, bearing the brunt of policies which don't work.

THE ETHNIC CRIME WAVE

Our report last week of the pack-rape of Caucasian girls by gangs of "Middle Eastern origin" in some Sydney suburbs has produced the expected and hysterical denial by the multicultural lobby, which insists that 'ethnic stereotyping" must not be allowed. They have been answered courageously by two teenage girls, who said publicly they felt betrayed by the fact that the evidence they gave was doctored before being read in court to censor out any references to ethnic factors. In the trial the Judge, who handed out the mildest of sentences, said that no evidence of ethnic involvement had been placed before her. The fact that such evidence had been removed before presentation could be called a miscarriage of justice.

The Sun Herald which, to its credit, has reported the facts without fear or favour, said in its Editorial of 26/8/01: "While our story has sparked considerable debate, not much has happened to give us – and the people most affected – hope.
Instead of constructive discussion, many have wasted time and opportunity in an emotion-charged slanging match. Instead of communities being encouraged to come together to adopt a joint approach, they have expended their energies on tired tirades against anyone daring to link ethnicity with crime.
The problem here, however, is that the two are indivisible. It appears gang rape has become a macho fad among one small but definable group of young men. Unless this is acknowledged, the problem can only get worse. It was important, then, that it was clearly understood who were the alleged perpetrators: Muslim youths of Middle Eastern extraction. ....."
Thank goodness, a few writers are speaking up.

Janet Albrechtson, a lawyer and writer, in an article headed IGNORING THE RACE FACTOR DOESN'T HELP (The Australian, 3/9/01) was blunt in pointing out the same problem had occurred in other countries:
" .... Acknowledging the ethnic issue without hyperbole or overreaction allows police to do their job and allows the ethnic community to tackle a problem that Australia is not alone in facing.
Overseas, racially motivated gang rape has been flashing on the radar screen for some time. The approach taken in countries such as France and Denmark to this issue may serve to guide us in Australia. In France, public recognition of racially motivated gang rape by the police, the judiciary and crime experts has grown exponentially since the trial in Paris earlier this year of 11 young Muslim men accused of raping a 14-year-old girl in the cellar of a high rise apartment block in northern Paris. This case revealed what has become a disturbing phenomenon most prevalent in France's poor, migrant suburbs. Gang rape has become known as 'tournante' or 'take your turn' where a young girl is literally handed from one friend to the next for sexual gratification .... In Denmark last year the trial of seven immigrant youths for gang-raping a 14 year old girl highlighted what The Copenhagen Post called the 'growing social divide between young immigrant men and native-born Danish girls'...."

What we are seeing is more than racial antagonism. It is the complete fragmentation of cultural standards everywhere. Rape is no more condoned amongst those of Islam than in any other religious or cultural society. But the economic and political onslaught against people in communities throughout the world is producing a new wave of young people who have been severed from their cultural and religious roots. Often, through no fault of their own, they are shiftless barbarians whose religion is survival and self-gratification. We have had rock music extolling the virtues of drugs, suicide, murder and free sex. How long until a new wave of rock extols pack-rape?

Many have concluded that the social order is past regeneration; that it must eventually collapse completely in the face of such despairing hedonism. Some communities may shield themselves by increasingly breaking from the mainstream, seeking both material and spiritual self-sufficiency. It is striking that C.H. Douglas, long before the thinking minority had discerned the truth of the situation, had concluded that only collapse could be the prelude to the breakthrough a despairing humanity desperately needs.

CHRISTIANITY?

To reinforce the above, The Chronicle (Toowoomba 7/9/01) under the headline CHRISTIANITY IS NEARLY FINISHED: UK CARDINAL, carried the conclusion of Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor, the Archbishop of Westminster, echoing the view of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. George Carey, that "tacit atheism prevails" in Britain.

The Cardinal said, "Christianity no longer influenced the Government or peoples' lives, and revolutionary thinking was needed in order to reach lapsed Catholics, non-believers and young people .... He said that Christ was being replaced by music, new age movements, occult practices and green issues as the source of peoples' 'glimpses of the transcendent'."
The same is true of Australia.

As we celebrate the Centenary of Federation, any vestiges of Christian principle have been erased from our governmental system. Yet at the 1897 Convention which helped design our Constitution, belief in God was paramount. South Australian delegate John Glynn, moving for the inclusion in the Constitution of a humble reliance on Almighty God, said: "Right through the ages we find this universal sense of Divine inspiration – this feeling that a wisdom beyond that of man shapes the destiny of States; that the institutions of men are but the imperfect instruments of a divine and beneficent energy, helping their higher aims.
Should not we, sir, grant the prayer of the many petitions that have been presented to us, by recognizing at the opening of our great future our dependence upon God?"

To which the great-grandfather of our present Foreign Minister, Sir John Downer, made reply: "I don't know whether it has occurred to Honourable Members that the Christian religion is a portion of the English Constitution .... It is part of the Law of England which I think we undoubtedly brought with us when we settled these colonies ...."

Christianity as the Law of Australia? Now that would be a novel idea at this time of self-destruction!
All we need is a church movement with some idea of how it could happen, and the faith to start.

HOW'S THIS FOR A TANGLED WEB?

The following came from the United Nations Conference on Racism, September 5th, 2001:
"The Palestinians, supported by the South Africans and Arab nations, insisted that their suffering be included in any declaration about discrimination. Israel, supported by the United States and European countries, insisted that it should not be the only country singled out for intolerance in a general document that condemns discrimination across the world. Today, the Belgian foreign minister, Louis Michel, and the South African foreign minister, Dr. Nkosazana Zuma, were actively involved in the negotiations to eliminate the wording that Western countries have found offensive, officials said. The United States, for instance, has objected to language in the conference declaration that describes slavery as "a crime against humanity," fearing that it might be faced with lawsuits by the descendants of slaves. Some European countries have objected to the suggestion that they offer an "apology" for colonialism. India has lobbied against any mention of its "untouchables," the underclass that is sometimes deprived of land ownership and required to drink and eat from separate utensils.

But no other topic has been as sensitive as the question of whether Israel should be singled out for condemnation. It has been a contentious issue since February when officials gathering for a United Nations meeting in Tehran proposed a declaration that assailed Israel's treatment of Palestinians as "a new kind of apartheid." The new negotiating team, which includes representatives from South Africa, Belgium, Norway, Namibia and the Arab League, plans to complete its deliberations tomorrow. Today, Mrs. Robinson said she believed that a chance still existed to salvage the conference by coming up with some consensus on language describing the Middle East conflict. She said she believed that the team would develop a declaration against racism that could be supported by all nations."
from Rachael L. Swarns, New York Times.

A TIME WARP?

by Antonia Feitz
Persevering types can have a bit of fun visiting the parliamentary website at www.aph.gov.au. I say 'persevering' because the site seems unnecessarily complicated. But you can come up with gems. Like maiden speeches. Who do Australian readers think said this?
"At the end of the day it is people: parents, children, students, employees, young people and the old – it is the unique individual – that are more important even than ideas. Much misery has been visited on individuals down through the years in the name of an idea or an ideology. We should not forget that people are the end which we serve. Politics is not an end in itself. We are not here to serve ideas."

Believe it or not that excerpt was from Peter Costello's maiden speech. So what happened to the young Peter Costello who rightly thought that individuals shouldn't suffer misery because of ideologies? He is now the national Treasurer and adhering to the National Competition Policy and other economic rationalist policies whatever the social cost. Economic ideology takes precedence for him over individuals' welfare and the survival of whole communities and even regions. What happened? Back then Costello was proud to belong to a government that "would help the unemployed by securing them real jobs in a productive economy". Now he's proud to be part of a cabinet that has continued the job-destroying policies of the Hawke-Keating governments. Back then he wanted to "limit the victims of family breakdown by doing what we can to strengthen the family unit". Now he advocates policies to increase job insecurity and reduce wages – labour market flexibility – with disastrous consequences for family formation.

WHAT HAPPENED PETER?
For a wry smile carefully read – savour – the following three paragraphs from Costello's maiden speech which demonstrate just how much power changes people.

In his maiden speech, and much to his credit, the young Peter Costello said: "It is tempting to stand here and talk about the economy as if it were just a statistic or a series of tables. It is tempting to stand in the luxurious and imposing surrounds of this House and to think that somehow this is the engine of the Australian nation; it is not. The engine room of the Australian nation is found in the shops, the factories, the farms and a whole host of workplaces scattered far and wide across this nation. Some are large but predominantly they are small.
It is the enterprise and the work of those millions that create the wealth of this nation. These are the people who sought no government commission to trade; they sought no government program to establish their business or job; they asked for no government assistance to maintain it. They do not ask the Government to be a nanny, to scold, to reprove and to smother them with advice.
What they ask of government is an unobtrusive administration so that they can continue to generate that wealth, continue to provide for their families and continue to pursue their aspirations. In going about their ordinary business, these millions of wealth generators contribute to the well-being of all. So, in the contest between the government and the citizen, I am for the citizen."

What happened, Peter?

THE TREASURER'S ROAD TO A GLOBALISED UTOPIA

by Betty Luks

"What gives the teaching of this unlettered young man its effect of blinding revelation, the quality of light first discovered, is the black background, of the Levitical Law and the Pharisaic tradition, against which he moved when he went to Judea. Even today the sudden fullness of enlightenment, in the Sermon on the Mount, dazzles the student who has emerged from a critical perusal of the Old Testament; it is as if high noon came at midnight.

"The Law, when Jesus came to 'fulfil' it, had grown into a huge mass of legislation, stifling and lethal in its immense complexity. The Torah was but the start; heaped on it were all the interpretations and commentaries and rabbinical rulings; the elders, like pious silkworms, spun the thread even further in the effort to catch up in it every conceivable act of man; generations of lawyers had laboured to reach the conclusion that an egg must not be eaten on the Sabbath day if the greater part of it had been laid before a second star was visible in the sky..."

And so Douglas Reed introduces us in his book The Controversy of Zion, to the irreconcilable differences between traditional Christianity and Pharisaism. I was reminded of this when reading in The Australian, 26/7/01 of Treasurer Peter Costello's acceptance and defence of 'the global view'. Like pious silkworms, the global elite are spinning their threads of financial, economic and legal control over us all, and all the time telling us it is done that 'they might do us good'. We are all heading down the globalist nightmare-road to their Utopia.

Douglas Reed continued, "The unschooled youth from Galilee reached out a finger and thrust aside the entire mass, revealing at once the truth and the heresy. He reduced 'all the Law and the Prophets' to the two commandments, Love God with all thy heart and thy neighbour as thyself."

FROM FREEDOM TO SERVITUDE

Hands up those who know the Sunday-school story of Joseph in Egypt? Briefly it goes like this: Sold into slavery by his brothers, Joseph ended up the prime minister of Egypt, second only in power to the Pharaoh. On the strength of 'interpreting' the Pharaoh's dream, which meant, in effect, that Egypt was to have seven good years of production followed by seven poor years, Joseph was put in charge of the economic and financial affairs of the nation. He had built huge granaries to store the surplus crops of the seven good years.
It is not explained how he purchased the production, but that wouldn't be difficult to imagine – the Pharaoh would have controlled the money system (in those days, the Temple was also the banking centre of the community). He had the power to issue his own 'money'; or to deflate prices by withdrawing money from circulation and buy when 'prices' were 'low'.

Then came the seven poor years. Who now controlled the food? Why Joseph of course, on behalf of the Pharaoh. The people were left hungry. They were forced to buy back the corn from Joseph at prices that took all their money – inflation reigned – and the Pharaoh 'gathered' all the money in circulation. The following year, the famine (not necessarily a drought) was worse and the people used all their cattle – their means of production – to obtain food. Finally, the people were forced to sell themselves to the Pharaoh in order to avoid starvation. The proletariat was now 'collectivised' into servitude to the Pharaoh. Their daily bread was tied to 'full employment'.

The story goes on to tell us the people were herded into cities. The proletariat had to choose between starving to death or go where the bureaucrats or the corporations directed them. Eventually the Egyptians were given seed-corn to sow, but their servitude by then was complete, they had to sow their seed in lands which now belonged to the Pharaoh. On top of that they had to pay him one-fifth of the crops every year.

Having been robbed of their money, cattle, lands and their freedom, the final insult was the 20% levy (income tax?) to be paid forever and a day, to a Pharaoh who didn't lift a finger to help in the production.

What a parasitic system! The corn in the storehouses had been produced by the people, the cattle raised by them, and the land cultivated by them. They were exploited because of their own ignorance; they didn't understand how the money system worked against them, and Joseph 'acquired' the money, cattle and fields and 'paid' for them with the corn the people themselves produced.
This is the 'black magic' of the financial system; the more a country is developed, the deeper into debt it goes. The regent is no longer Joseph (who obviously knew the 'arts' of banking) but the International Bankers.

Genesis 47
Go back and reread the Thought for the Week, you will there see the difference, in practice, between the two philosophies. There is no understanding of mutual-love and co-operation in Joseph's philosophy – nor in Peter Costello's. Like those Australian POWs of WWII, may we of this generation come to understand that "doing men to death by charging interest on something as basic to life as rice" goes against the grain of Aussie tribalism. That it will be seen as the blood-sucking system that it is: that it will be seen as wrong as murder, is our prayer. May we become known as a people who do not place our values in money, interest and trading in commodities futures, but in mutual love and co-operation. A people who can proudly say, "I am Australian you know."

I AM AUSTRALIAN YOU KNOW

Congratulations go to Andrew Bolt for his article "The Great Cringe" in the Herald Sun, 3/9/01. It was like a ray of pure sunshine in the dark and murky psycho-political propaganda through which Australians have to grope their way. He took on the lot of them.

The Indonesian President, Megawati Sukarnoputri, and the eagerness of the Indonesians to accept Australia's foreign aid but their reluctance to do anything about the end results of the 'human cargo' big-business trade. Greg Sheridan of The Australian who agreed it was humiliating for Howard when Megawati wouldn't come to the phone. Andrew Bolt struck back, "Humiliating? Wrong. It's an outrage, an insult, and a sign Megawati is unwilling to govern. Where the hell does the Indonesian President get off, refusing to take our Prime Minister's calls?"

The Norwegian captain of the Tampa who told such blatant untruths about the 'humanitarian crisis' on board his ship as he sought to emotionally blackmail us into taking them off his hands. When that trick failed he steered his ship into our waters despite a clear order to keep out. The media deference given Norway's Foreign Minister and his country's refugee programme and policies and the criticisms aimed at Australia's record.
How dare Norway lecture us on being kinder to alleged refugees. Norway, which rejects 99 percent of all people claiming refugee status on its own shores.

The ABC Radio host who gloated over Indonesia's President refusal to come to the phone when John Howard rang. The ABCs Four Corners which falsely claimed we had traumatised children in detention by letting them see people set themselves on fire. Andrew Bolt declared, "the entire elite media should be held to account – and asked how much longer they can treat the public with such obvious contempt before they finally lose any influence to do good. Their first warning was the republic referendum, when the people refused to vote for something loudly promoted and no-worries endorsed by almost every newspaper, celebrity media-approved politician, artist and academic."

He continued, "Amazingly, more than 250,000 viewers rang Channel 9 and Channel 10 to support John Howard's stand on the Tampa, rebelling against the chatterati who presume to lecture them on the airwaves and in print, or from Oslo, Jakarta or Geneva..."

Yes Andrew, Australians are rebelling. They have had enough of the dominant cultural/media elite's tactics and their blatant propaganda techniques. They have had enough of the continual attack on their psyche, the laying on of the burden of 'guilt'. You are right when you say, "They are rebelling against people like the Sydney Morning Herald's Mike Charlton, the Australian Financial Review's Peter Robinson and the Australian Democrats Senator Andrew Bartlett, who liken our detention centres to Nazi 'concentration camps' in which millions of Jews were slaughtered... They are rebelling against commentators like Robert Manne of the Age..."
And so the list goes on.

Last, but not least, Andrew Bolt gives this jab, "The make-believe, the lies, the foul smears of this country, the wild exaggerations, the cringing and the giggles at any sign of patriotism have all taken their toll. Our cultural elite have taken another significant blow to their credibility. Now lined up with Norway against us, they no longer even seem on our side."

NATIONAL WEEKEND

OCTOBER 5th, 6th & 7th
Arrangements for the National Weekend are well in hand. Supporters are encouraged to make every effort to come to this special weekend. New South Welshmen now have no excuse – the event is being held in their home State! For those friends who have been wondering about Eric and Elma Butler – join in with them at the 55th "New Times Dinner".

Guest speakers at the Seminar Saturday, October 6th, include: Peter Davis of Port Lincoln, SA; Jan Pope of Cranbrook, WA; Jeremy Lee of Toowoomba, Qld.; and Bill Buckpitt of Wodonga; Vic., a member of Citizens Against Forced Amalgamation (of Local Councils .. Ed.). We have sought to keep costs down so as not to exclude anyone who would love to be with us.

55th "New Times" Dinner: Friday, October 5th, from 6.30pm to be seated by 7.00pm. $22.50 per person for a 3-course buffet style Dinner. Bar facilities will be available. Seminar: 1.30pm, Saturday, October 6th: Admission $12.50 per person. Theme: "The Celebration of Federation". Divine Service & Action Conference: Sunday, October 7th, 9.00am-12noon. Venue: The Hume Inn Motel, 406 Wodonga Place, Albury, NSW.

Bookings/payments for Dinner and Seminar go to Melbourne Office. Details of accommodation centres are in the flier now being circulated. A limited number of rooms are available at the Hume Inn – phone them now and make your booking.

SYDNEY CONSERVATIVE SPEAKERS' CLUB

THE LEAGUE'S BOOK SERVICES

As well as the publication of journals for the dissemination of information, the League publishes and distributes a wide range of educational books, videos and cassette tapes. These are available at meetings, at our Melbourne bookshop or by mail order from the following addresses:

Victoria & Tasmania: Heritage Bookshop, 2nd Floor, 145 Russell Street, Melbourne, 3000. (GPO Box 1052J, Melbourne, 3001). Phone: (03) 9650 9749; Fax: (03) 9650 9368.

New South Wales: Heritage Book Service, PO Box 6086, Lake Munmorah, 2259. Phone/Fax: (02) 4358 3634.

Queensland: Conservative Book Mailing Service, P.O. Box 7108, Toowoomba Mail Centre, 4352. Phone (07) 4635 7435.

Western Australia: Heritage Book Mailing Service, PO Box 163, Chidlow, 6556. Phone/Fax: (08) 9574 6042.

South Australia: Heritage Book-Mailing Service, PO Box 208, Ingle Farm, 5098. Phone: (08) 8395 9826; Fax: (08) 8395 9827