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
28 September 2001. Thought for the Week: "Orthodox historians are soaked in the Myth of State. They believe that people, and especially congeries of people always act by reason of political theories or other Pseudo-principles. The money system they have certainly heard of, but to them it is accepted, like the configuration of the continents. There it stands as a part of nature, forming a framework upon which the historians may build, but which it would be futile to question. It is transcendental, historically supramundane (above the world), sacrosanct. It exists, but only within the dim penumbra of events. Posterity will not fail to regard this attitude with stupefaction.
When the final assessment comes to be made on the events of the past twenty-five centuries, the purveyors of 'myth' history will stand arraigned... Credit is the lifeblood of every State, and history which omits to deal with this factor is invalidated. It is a collection of dead men's bones, a whited sepulchre of useless facts."
"Human Ecology: The Science of Social Adjustment" by Thomas Robertson, 1948


by Jeremy Lee
Events over the last two weeks have tumbled over each other in a welter of speed and confusion. The human tragedy in the US has overshadowed much else. It may therefore be of value to re-cap on events. Whatever else is said, it is certain that the truth is yet to emerge. Who was behind the attack? Who benefits? What is the long-term goal?

Prime Minister John Howard travelled to America to finalise a free-trade deal. The idea had been initiated by 60 US and Australian corporations who had formed "The America-Australia Free Trade Agreement Coalition." Eighteen of these US corporations are among the top 200 global corporations, with annual sales of $1.3 TRILLION - more than four times the annual output of the whole Australian economy (about $US300 billion). The two biggest (General Motors and Exxon Mobil) are each bigger than the Australian economy. The top 18 of these corporations look like this:

Name Employees Ranking World 1999Sales
($US billions)

1999 Profits
($US billions)

General Motors 388,900 1 $76.3 6.0
Exxon Mobil 106,000 3 163.9 7.9
Ford Motor Co. 365,000 4 62.6 7.2
Daimler-Chrysler 467,000 5 100.0 6.1
General Electric 340,000 9 111.6 10.7
BP Amoco 80,000 17 83.6 5.0
Citigroup 177,000 18 82.0 9.9
Phillip Morris Com 137,000 28 61.7 7.7
Baring 197,000 31 58.0 2.3
Compaq Computer 76,000 68 38.5 0.6
Proctor & Gamble 110,000 73 38.1 3.8
Chase Manhattan 75,000 89 33.7 5.4
Chevron 36,000 92 32.7 2.1
Motorola 121,000 104 30.9 0.4
Lockheed Martin 147,000 143 25.5 0.4
ARB 161,000 153 24.7 1.6
Duke Energy 21,000 180 21.7 1.5
New York Life int. 7,000 181 21.7 0.6
TOTAL 3,814,000   $1,327.4 $79.6

Putting the kindest interpretation on it, these 18 companies, with combined sales in 1999 of $2,000 for every living man, woman and child on earth, are not really concerned about the freedom and prosperity of the Australian people! They simply want to clear the decks for their own continued expansion.

Colin Teese, a former official with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, has warned: "....International trade is about power politics, where the strong do as they please and the weak extract what benefits they can. For example, when Australia announced it was planning to take Japan to the World Trade Organisation disputes panel over a 390% tariff on imported rice, the Japanese simply announced they were postponing future talks over wheat imports. The message was clear: back off on rice or the Japanese would retaliate by looking elsewhere for wheat imports. Australia had no choice but to back down indefinitely ....A free trade agreement with the US is likely to see Australia concede more than the US, thereby worsening a bad trade imbalance ...."

With all eyes on America, little coverage was given to the just-concluded ASEAN meeting in Hanoi, where 12 nations - Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Brunei, Indonesia, Cambodia, Myanmar (formerly Burma) Laos and Vietnam - agreed to form a Closer Economic Partnership initiative " .... in the face of global economic slowdown and uncertainty after the attacks on the United States .... " (The Press, Christchurch, NZ, 19/9/01).

In America the "free trade" idea was put on hold as a result of the catastrophe in New York and Washington. The biggest trade and financial centre in the world was knocked out for a while, and corporations affected - airlines and insurance companies - began to knock each other over round the world. The collapse of Ansett in Australia, plus the many suppliers dependent on the airline who are keeling over, are mere minnows compared to British, American and European Airlines who, between them, will be laying off over 100,000 people. Even Animal Farm's Squealer (i.e.Treasurer Peter Costello) is now conceding that Australia is in for a torrid time, and won't escape the consequences of the world recession.
The drop in the Australian dollar to just over 46 cents US briefly this week is mute testimony to the truth. It has further to fall. Never mind!

The latest figures show a surge in popularity for the Coalition. The Morgan Poll, generally the most conservative and accurate of Australia's professional pollsters, shows a 20-point lead for the LibNats over the ALP. Whereas Howard has been trailing all year, he looks set for victory at the coming election, now tipped for mid-November. Howard once said his chances of becoming Prime Minister were "less than Lazarus with a triple by-pass". If he survives the GST and the disaster in many areas of the Australian economy to win the next election it will be an even greater comeback. Neither he nor his henchmen deserve it. But events have played into his hands. But a week is a long time in politics.


It now appears that, shortly before the disasters in New York and Washington there was heavy discounting in certain stocks in America. The Australian (20/9/01) reported: ".... The US Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating whether some investors knew in advance of the hijackings and made investments calculated to profit from the attacks. "Traders on the stock-options markets in Philadelphia and Chicago told regulators last week that, in the days before the attacks, there was an increase in purchases of stock-options contracts designed to gain in value if jetmaker Boeing, United Airlines and others lost value on the market. "Options-trading activity increased as much as 10 times over normal in some of those stocks. Exchanges routinely investigate heavy trading when it is followed by events that provoke a big change in security prices. Those stocks, which had already been sliding before the attack, dropped sharply on Monday when trading resumed - enabling the options investors to realize millions of dollars in potential profits ...."


An article by Kirill Nourzhanov, The Australian (20/9/01), pointed to Western indifference when Russia suffered bomb attacks:
"The World Trade Centre tragedy came two years after Russia was rocked by a series of co-ordinated terrorist attacks. In September 1999, four huge explosions in the cities of Moscow, Volgodonsk and Buinaksk claimed the lives of 305 people and left more that 500 injured. Thirteen more bombs were discovered before they detonated. In Moscow alone, 2 tonnes of high-powered explosives were detected .... "As the investigation unfolded,.... Evidence was produced that the terrorists had received training, equipment and orders in camps controlled by militants whose loyalty is not to the Chechen President Aslan Maskhadov, but to radical Islamist organizations abroad, and Osma bin Laden in particular.... "Russia quickly realized the impossibility of combating the export of holy terror alone, and called for a united front against terrorism. During an APEC summit in September 1999, Putin said Russia and the US had a common foe in bin Laden. Neither the US nor its NATO partners showed great enthusiasm towards Moscow's initiatives. On the contrary, anti-terrorist operations in Chechnya were condemned on humanitarian grounds, and the spectre of sanctions against Moscow was raised. "When Russia remonstrated with Pakistan against the presence on its territory of camps churning out combatants for various hotbeds, including Chechnya and Central Asia, Washington refused to lend diplomatic support ...."
Funny how other peoples' suffering is different from your own!


Writing in The Australian Financial Review (20/9/01) Stephen Koukoulas asked: "Just when is the Treasurer, Peter Costello, going to accept some of the responsibility for the Australian currency?.... The $A's fall is extraordinary to the point where the only weaker currencies since the terrorist actions in the US last week are the Indonesian rupiah and the Afghanistan afghani, the latter dropping by around 12 percent since news of the terrorist attack filtered back to currency markets in Kabul.... "Then there is the issue of corporate collapses, which have happened at an alarming rate in the last year or so. The Ansett debacle and the effects on suppliers to that industry follow the fall of One.Tel, Harris Scarfe, HIH Insurance, Centaur Mining, LibertyOne, Bradmill and eisa....." (And the latest, Pasminco).
To which we can only echo, "Where indeed?"

It seems Australia's troubles are only reaching the point at which they can be denied no longer. The government can sweep the collapse of small farms and businesses under the carpet. But when the very multinational giants which own and run much of the economy start falling over, the truth can be hidden no longer. 2002 looks like being painful indeed.


by Antonia Feitz
Back in January, 1999, American Pat Buchanan eerily prophesied that "with the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, America will inevitably be targeted. And the cataclysmic terror weapon is more likely to come by Ryder truck or container ship than by ICBM. And no SDI will stop it." (Patrick J. Buchanan, "Is Cataclysmic Terrorism Ahead?".

It wasn't a truck that exposed the vulnerability of the West. It was a commercial plane. Four commercial planes to be precise. There was another warning. Shortly after the US/British bombing raids on Iraq in February this year, Patriarch Raphael I Bidawid, the head of the Chaldean Catholic Church in Iraq, also prophesied that the sanctions on Iraq would provoke an outbreak of violence on US soil. He said, " ... if the USA and Britain continue this way, the whole of the Middle East will be set on fire. ... The whole of the Arab world is now against the Americans and the British, and ready to commit violence against the USA and Britain in their own countries." (Catholic World News, 2/3/01,

The patriarch advocated dialogue because "blood and violence lead only to more blood and violence". He implored the leaders of the US and Britain to think of the common good and warned that if they spurned dialogue, "the ghost of a war is not improbable and we risk new chaos". Sadly, the leaders of the US and Britain didn't listen and he's been proven right: we now face "new chaos". And some 5,000 innocent people have paid the price. How many deaths in the West will it take for the US Government and its allies to take the patriarch's advice and begin a genuine dialogue?


from Phillip Benwell - National Chairman, Australian Monarchist League

In a few weeks time The Queen and HRH The Duke of Edinburgh will be in Australia on Her Majesty's 14th visit. Her Majesty will arrive in Canberra on the October 3rd and will travel to Brisbane on October 5th. Whilst The Queen will open the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Brisbane on Saturday, October 6th, 2001, The Duke of Edinburgh will be taking the Centenary Naval Review on Sydney Harbour.
Her Majesty and His Royal Highness will travel to South Australia on the October 9th and will depart from Adelaide for New Zealand on October 12th.

The Royal "Walkabout"
For many years The Queen and Palace officials had wanted to create more opportunities for Her Majesty to meet as many people as possible during Royal Tours rather than being encircled only by officials of one kind or another. However, it was not until 18 years into the reign of The Queen, that security and prudence was overridden during a visit to Wellington in New Zealand in 1970 to celebrate the 200th Anniversary of Captain Cook's voyage. To everyone's surprise the Royal motorcade stopped some 400 metres from Wellington City Town Hall and Her Majesty and the Duke of Edinburgh got out of their vehicle and walked to the City Hall, one on each side of the road, greeting the several thousand people who had gathered expecting only a glimpse of The Royal Couple through their car window. The Daily Mail called this the 'Royal Walkabout', a term which has stuck to this day, as has the practice.
Thus, over the past 31 years since the first 'walkabout', The Queen and members of the Royal Family have met and spoken with hundreds of thousands of people.

During the nine day Royal Tour in Australia this coming October, and despite the onerous obligations of Her Majesty's duties during the Commonwealth Heads of Government Conference, there has been incorporated into the Programme no fewer than 16 occasions where the public are invited to attend and on most of which The Queen, now 75 years old, and the Duke of Edinburgh, 80 years of age, will once again put aside caution and go out into the crowds. There will be no special armoured glass protection, no sealing of manhole covers, nor the excessively protective security that accompany some Presidents. Just Her Majesty and His Royal Highness genuinely intent on meeting as many people as possible.

Footnote - Editor
The article which appeared in The Weekend Australian, October 11th-12th, 1986, informed the Queen's subjects that "Islam (is) seen as (the) Queen's best protection". Why is this so? Burke's Peerage publishing director, Harold Brooks-Baker, explained,
"No Arab religious fanatic would dream of raising a finger against her. She is protected by what Shakespeare called 'that divinity which doeth hedge a king'."
"Mr. Brooks-Baker said that not many" of Her Majesty's subjects, "realised what all Arabs knew - that like other European royals, the British royal family was descended from the Prophet (Mohammed) through the Arab kings of Seville who once ruled Spain. Their blood passed, by marriage, to the European kings of Portugal and Castille and, through them, to Edward IV, to join England's royal bloodline."


from "Facts Newsletter": NCC (SA), September, 2000

Australia's Attorney General, Mr. Darryl Williams, has spearheaded a dishonest campaign in favour of the proposed International Criminal Court. In a response received by many of our members, the Attorney General claims there has been scare mongering on the issue, and seeks to reassure people with an attached edited version of a speech he delivered to the WA Division Australian Red Cross International Humanitarian Law Committee, in Perth on April 21st this year. In summary the Attorney General makes five assertions:

1. That the ICC Statute is only complementary Law; that is, it will never override Australian Law;
2. That the ICC will only concern the most serious international crimes, such as genocide;
3. That it will have no effect on Australian Sovereignty, nor any impact on the Australian Constitution;
4. That it's absurd to suggest it can be used for social engineering; and
5. That it cannot be used for political aims or ends.

At best, one could be charitable and suggest that the Attorney General has not read the ICC Statute and/or the ICC Manual for Ratification and Implementation of the Law Statute. If he had, then it is not possible to hold any of the five assertions.

While Article I of the Statute sounds reassuring that the Court is designed to be complementary to national justifications, in fact the so-called complimentarily principle will operate not to shield domestic law from intrusion, but to ensure that the domestic law conforms to the International Law. Article 17 (1a) states: The ICC will take justification, any time a Nation is 'unwilling or unable to act'. Furthermore, the manual bluntly states: 'should there be a conflict between legislation and existing state (National) Legislation, the International Law established under the ICC, and decisions of the ICC, take precedence'. In fact, the section in the manual on complimentarily ends with the advice: 'It should be prudent for States to incorporate all acts defined as crimes into their own National Law'!!!

Only the most serious international crimes
However the language used in the ICC Statute and manual is sweeping. For example, genocide does not include just killing members of a group, but also 'causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of a group'. Just what does this mean? Will we have to wait until the ICC determines it and then modify our laws (as above) to accommodate it? Or under Article 7, 'crimes against humanity' the likes of murder, extermination, enslavement, forcible transfer of population, sexual slavery, torture and persecution. All of these sound terrible and in fact properly defined, they certainly are. But again the sting is in the detail. For example, 'persecution' is defined as: 'the intentional and severe deprivation of a fundamental right'! But what are fundamental rights and who will define them?

Australian Sovereignty and impact on our constitution
Some examples suffice to show the absurdity of Attorney General's assertion. Under the Constitution and under the Australia Act, the High Court of Australia is the final Court of Appeal and final Arbiter of Legislation. Under Article 49 of the Constitution, Parliamentary Privilege and Immunity are guaranteed to members of Parliament. And under Article 80, there is a guarantee of trial by jury. Yet under the ICC Statute, as explained in the manual, no one charged with a crime by the ICC can claim official immunity. No one charged and appearing before the ICC will have trial by jury. And the ICC - not the Australian High Court - will be the final arbiter as to whether a certain crime has been committed. Hence, at least 3 articles of our Constitution will need to be changed - and not by referendum, but by external imposition. Whom is the Attorney General kidding?

Social Engineering
With undefined so-called 'fundamental rights', and the definition as above under 'crimes against humanity' how can anyone, especially the Attorney General, state with any confidence that it is absurd to suggest the possibility of social engineering? Last year, a UN Committee decreed that Australia had not done enough in the way of providing social justice benefits to the poor. The Australian Government ignored the decree - quite rightly. It was a domestic issue. However, it is one thing to ignore a U.N. Committee - it would be a different matter to ignore an ICC 'decision', if it declared this to be a 'fundamental right' and given the plethora of a so-called 'human rights' being enunciated by various lobby groups, UN High Commissioner for the Human Rights, there is no end to one's concerns as to what social policies will be foisted upon Australia.

Fifthly and finally
The use of the ICC for political aims or ends
Australia is fortunate in having, by and large, an impartial judiciary. However, even here we have seen on occasion judgments at the highest level, which can only be viewed as political, ie, the judgments didn't simply affirm or dismiss a piece of legislation, but rather amended or created a law. However, under the ICC Statute, there is little guarantee of impartiality, when one reads such mandates as the selection of judges, that they have 'legal expertise on specific issues, including but not limited to, violence against women and children'. It sounds great, but what does one mean?

Only one conclusion can be reached: surely the Attorney General has read the ICC statute and the manual for implementation and hence he is deliberately and dishonestly misleading the Australian public in his strong support for ratifying the statute, even before the recommendation of the Treaties Committee is tabled.


Write to the Prime Minister, The Honourable John Howard. Parliament House, Canberra, ACT, 2600, pointing out the outrageous deception being promulgated by his Attorney General on the issue of the ICC.

Specifically ask him for his personal reply and not to refer the letter to the Attorney General for response as he has done in previous letters on the ICC

Request that the Government ought not ratify the statute as currently drafted.

Write to the Attorney General, The Honourable Daryl Williams, rebutting the various assertions he claims are so reassuring.

Write to the Treaties Committee (Committee Secretary, Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, Department of House of representatives, Parliament House, Canberra, Act, 2600.

E-mail: Phone: (02) 6277 4002. Fax: (02) 6277 4827) even if you have done so previously, and express your outrage that the Attorney General is so blatantly misleading the public and doing so even before the Committee's recommendation is tabled.

Write to the daily press expressing your disgust.

Send to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties for your copy of the proposed Bill. Phone: (02) 6277 2135, Mr. Bob Morris, or e-mail:


October 30th - Guest speakers Wendy Scurr & Andrew McGregor - "The Massacre at Port Arthur". The meeting will be held as usual in the Estonian Hall, 141 Campbell Street, Sydney, commencing at 7.30pm. The cost of attendance is $4 which includes an excellent supper. Books from the Heritage Bookmailing Service will be on display and for sale

November 27th - The last meeting of the year will give you the rare opportunity to be a speaker. Open to all members of the audience with a time limit of five minutes. Be prepared to answer questions. A supper with some Christmas fare will conclude our evening.
The first meeting for 2002 will be Tuesday, January 29th, 2002.


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.


Wednesday, October 10th - Gawler Hall, Gawler, 7.30pm. Thursday, October 11th - Scottsdale RSL, 30 George Street, 7.30pm. Friday, October 12th - Official Dinner, Quigley's Restaurant, 96 Balfour Street, Launceston, 7.00pm for 7.30pm. Saturday, October 13th - Launceston RSL, 313 Wellington Street, parking at rear of RSL. Sunday, October 14th - Short Divine Service and Review, 39 Benvenue Road, St.Leonards.


The League has organized a special delivery for our readers of a small number of the explosive book Camp of the Saints. The UK-Aust. exchange rate makes the price of the book $35.00 posted. Order from: Heritage Book Mailing, Box 1052J, GPO, Melbourne, 3001.