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

25 April 2003. Thought for the Week: "As a result of …the control over the money system acquired by the banking institutions, it is probably true to say that in Great Britain, 90 per cent of trade and business has in ten years come into the possession or control of banking interests. Such a tremendous transfer of ownership has probably never occurred in recorded history."
C.H. Douglas in "Monopoly of Credit", 1931.


After seething and bubbling beneath the surface for a long time, the issue of property rights has burst into the open in Queensland, and looks like becoming a major issue in the next State election. Farmers are emphatic that a multitude of regulations concerning environmentalism and water conservation are so rigid and draconian as to affect their ability to run viable farming operations on the land in which they’ve invested.
A major conference on property rights has just concluded in Cairns, at which opposing views erupted.

Labor’s Natural Resources Minister Stephen Robertson set the tone when he told farmers assembled from all over the State: “You can’t on the one hand argue from the point of demanding economic freedom by asserting that ownership of property confers an open-ended bundle of rights, such as unlimited capture of the rain that falls on your land: while, on the other, you accept taxpayer-funded assistance to achieve both ecological sustainability and maximum private benefit from the use of your property …” (Rural Weekly, 11/4/03)
One wonders whether he applies the same argument in urban areas?
Does government expenditure in towns and cities come at the expense of property rights?

Mr Jeff Seeney, speaking for the Nationals, was quoted by The Queensland Country Life (10/4/03 as follows:
“….Mr Seeney said the big concern was that recent legislation have deprived landholders from enjoying the benefits of their land ownership, whether it be the right to use water on the land or the right to develop and improve potentially productive areas of the property. “Essentially the landholders have been dispossessed from a part of their land or their property asset by the removal of the rights to develop or use it,” Mr Seeney said. “That dispossession has been justified by demonizing landholders as environmental vandals who are wrecking the land, pumping the rivers dry and killing the Great Barrier Reef. Nothing could be further from the truth yet this approach of demonizing landholders to justify dispossessing them of their rights has been used repeatedly …. in the implementation of a series of natural resource based legislation and regulatory changes ….”

One result of this confrontation has been a demand by land-owners of a “Charter of Property Rights” which must include financial compensation by government for any legislated restriction on farming activities and land usage. Surprisingly, even the Greens are supporting such a proposal.
Insane government is forcing us to turn full circle, back to the original establishment of individual rights on which our system was founded. By what right, for instance, can ‘Caesar” claim ownership or control of rainfall that falls on a farmer’s land? That, surely, is a gift from God!


Believe it or not, land prices have fallen every year in Japan since 1992 – and are still falling. Land has lost about two-thirds of its value over that period. The Australian Financial Review (28/3/03) reported:
“That’s made it harder for companies to pay debt, since land was used as collateral for loans …” The result? The report said: “Japan’s land prices fell in 2002 at their fastest pace in a decade, forcing the country’s biggest banks to post losses as they begin to write off more than Y52 trillion of bad ($722 billion) loans ….”

Banks writing off three-quarters-of-a-trillion dollars in debts seems a pretty good idea! But will the benefits reach the poor benighted land owners? Or simply move into another monopoly?


All reports about specific activities of Australian troops in Iraq have been expressly vague; few photos or details. However, a small report in The Australian Financial Review (14/4/03) gave a few more details:
“The highly praised Australian Special Forces played a major role in blocking attacks by Iraqi Scud missiles which could have drawn Israel into the war. The mission was a success, but Australia’s politicians have been strangely coy about it ….The cat was let out of the bag only by Brigadier Mike Hannan at an ADF briefing last Monday.
Australian Special Forces, he said, had been operating primarily in western Iraq securing Scud missile launching pads to prevent their use against coalition targets or Israel.
So why the reluctance to come clean earlier?
Perhaps partly because, contrary to repeated denials, the Special Forces went into Iraq before the main invasion, to locate the Scud sites ahead of hostilities. And almost certainly because it was accepted that Australia’s defence of Israel in the Iraq war would make Australians more likely targets for Islamic extremists in the Middle East ….”
Well, well, well! Apparently, Israeli spokesmen have already praised and thanked Australia.

The article concluded: “What was a good and successful war initiative, however, may yet return to haunt Australia in the form of terrorist reprisals.” Still, it’s Brownie points for Prime Minister Howard; and more finds for the Liberal Party!


Latest news shows Australia’s last remaining independent Stockbroker, J.B. Were, has been taken over by Goldman Sachs. The result will be a new merged company, Goldman Sachs JB Were, becoming one of the biggest giants in the domestic stock-broking scene.

Mount Isa Mines, which controls legendary deposits of copper, lead and silver, and has been around almost as long as Australia, has also been taken over; all part of the Howard Government’s appetite for foreign investment.


It’s not only computer and telephone services that are being out-sourced by companies in Australia to countries such as India. The latest news tells of law firm Baker and Mckenzie offering its officers digital Dictaphones, which they can use to dictate letters and legal documents. These are instantly transmitted to the Philippines, where girls at their machines start word-processing, before transmitting them back to Australia. So far, about 300 digital Dictaphones, costing $500 each, have been issued by the firm.
The Australian Financial Review, (10/4/03) said:
“David Nathan, managing partner in Sydney, said using the technology ‘obviously has a significant cost advantage for us’.

The girls at the Document Service Centre in Manila receive about $5,000 a year, or less than $100 a week.
It looks as though the Australian secretary and typist will become a thing of the past – replaced by slave labour. But think of the cost advantages!


The scenes of looting in Baghdad, while US troops look on, beggar belief. But one area of the former Iraqi economy is off-limits – oil facilities and administration. The scramble to start the oil wells pumping and the pipelines flowing has already started. Among contenders is the biggest Russian oil company, OAO Lukoil, who had signed a major oil contract with Saddam Hussein before the war commenced. Hussein awarded the contract for the West Qurna field in 1997, with majority control to Lukoil – obviously in the hope of wooing Moscow’s support for the ending of sanctions. Russia is determined to maintain the contract, saying it will take action to impound oil tankers and seek international arbitration for its cause. Unless, of course, such giants as BP and Exxon can come to a cosy, satisfactory agreement to “co-operate” in the oil venture.

The wheeling and dealing that must be going on behind the scenes can only be imagined.


Considerable numbers of the Iraqi’s former top leadership have simply disappeared. Speculation as to their whereabouts is rife. One lengthy report we have received via the Internet is emphatic that arrangements were made prior to hostilities for the transfer of large numbers of personnel across the border into Syria, where a luxury hotel facility on the Mediterranean coast was made available, in return for some of the $billions Hussein has stashed away over the years. Many of the Iraqi troops, the report said, had been ‘integrated’ into the Syrian forces.

Although considerable detail was provided, the report can only be described as unconfirmed, but possible, speculation. Whether right or wrong, there is no doubt that the Bush war-hawks would like to tackle Syria as soon as possible. However, there are signs that Tony Blair would baulk at this next step, and could not maintain his government if he went further. The same reluctance is beginning to appear in Australia.
In which case, if the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz programme is to be extended, the US will be all on its own. Unless, of course, Israel finally commits some troops to what is, after all, its own war.

“The mills of God grind slowly; but they grind exceeding small”, says the proverb. More and more unsavoury details are emerging about this contrived, unnecessary conflict. And much more can be expected to surface in the immediate future. Why, for instance, is the Bush administration not prepared to allow Hans Blix and his UN team of weapons inspectors return to Iraq?
Is it because they might finally confirm that there were never any “weapons of mass destruction”?


The following letter was received from one of our website readers. It has been edited for want of space:

"Since my eyes were opened to the potential of social credit ideas, I now find even excellent articles, such as that of Naomi Klein's (attached) unsatisfactory and incomplete. As an example, within the otherwise comprehensive list of things to be privatized, anything about the way banking will be organised is completely missing. That of course is a major omission.
Then again, it may just show again how little is generally understood about the fundamental importance of the way finance is organised and the pivotal power point it represents.
Anyhow, leaving the specifics of banking/finance aside, I also feel the need to have the social credit perspective explained about other aspects of privatization. Without that explanation, I, like many others, just have to fall back on the seemingly only radical alternative system of nationalised industries… Would you explain the difference between genuine 'free enterprise' and Thatcherite/Reaganite 'privatization'."
Regards, E.I., Canada.

In response to E.I's letter:
A free enterprise society, (or human association) is characterised by the freedom of the people who compose it - freedom being defined as power to choose between real, not artificial alternatives as they arise. In a free society, the 'government' exists to carry out the policy agreed upon by the members of that society, who pay the running costs (taxes) and are entitled to share in the benefits arising from its operation.
In a free society, the coming together of human beings (society, nation) is not an association for any specialised purpose, but exists to serve the general innumerable and various purposes of all its members. This can only happen if the people are provided by government with those conditions of freedom and security which are necessary to live their own lives, to make their own choices, control their own destinies, and to ensure that they gain the full benefits of the association.

SOCIAL CREDIT IS: "The efficiency of human beings in free association (i.e., working, agreeing together) to produce the result intended, measured in terms of their mutual satisfaction." (From "Elements of Social Credit" 1946.)
Social Credit seeks to establish the 'right(ous)ness' of the relations of man with his fellow man in the field of politics, economics and the financial system.
For you to grasp the Social Credit proposals I.E., you will need to earnestly consider the social philosophy and the economic theory from which the proposals stem. If you do not agree with the social philosophy you would find it difficult, if not impossible, to accept the proposals.

In his introduction to "Social Credit and Catholicism" Eric Butler wrote:
"C.H. Douglas devoted a large amount of space in his first book, "Economic Democracy," to the subject of organisation in society, stressing the fact that the rights and liberties of the individual can only be preserved in decentralised political and economic organisations. The smaller the political and economic unit, the more chance the individual has of developing his own sovereignty…"

In "The Big Idea" Douglas wrote:
This curious adulation of bigness is indisputably a common attribute of Socialism (under all its names), Big Business, and what we call vulgarity…

What, then, is the characteristic of "bigness" which makes it a common objective in every country in which we can discern revolutionary propaganda at work?… It is not difficult to find the answer.
The attribute of size - so far as I am aware, the only attribute of size - which grows as size increases, is momentum. The larger the mass, the more difficult becomes a change of direction - the harder becomes the task of individual initiative.
That is another objective of The Big Idea, because as the Protocols of Zion remark, " Nothing is so dangerous as individual initiative...

A second identifiable common factor is the appearance of plans everywhere to make people forget their historic attachment (witness what has happened in Iraq…ed) …
And a third feature is the systematic destruction or perversion of significant history, and particularly that form of written history represented by hereditary experience."

Thatcherite/Reaganite 'privatization' (also known as -- another 'spin term' -- 'economic rationalism') is, in effect, a financially-controlled centralised State - in which the majority of the people spend their working lives fulfilling purposes determined by the 'managers' of Monopoly Capitalism. In Economic Democracy the relations between Finance, Centralisation and World Hegemony are closely analysed. What emerged from this examination was the fact that the operation of the financial system was itself inherently centralising, forcing on society a pyramidal organisation, with Finance, in the form of the banking system, at the apex of power.
[For further study and understanding read "Economic Democracy" by C.H. Douglas.]


What we have witnessed as a result of the terrifying war on Iraq is the wanton destruction of their historical, cultural, and financial records. How many noticed the burning of their libraries, how many noticed in the TV scenes of the looters breaking into the banks, the looters were destroying the banks' records? This, is effect, meant that the records of those who held funds in the banking system for safekeeping, were destroyed. How will the Iraqi people now prove they had funds in those banks? Their financial capital (in the form of bank 'credits', i.e., figures on computer records) was wiped out - the 'slate is now clean'. The looters expected the banks to have vast amounts of notes and coins in their vaults. But, just as many a bank robber has discovered, the looters now know banks deal more with abstract figures, (in the form of computer blips, rather than double-entries in book ledgers these days) than the paltry amount of notes and coins used for everyday transactions.

I.E. of Canada, this is a subject you must research yourself, you will not grasp it without effort on your part. I suggest you thoroughly study, "Social Dynamics" by Eric D. Butler, available from all League Book Services. [Further reading: "The Big Idea" by C.H. Douglas]


Remember, Henry Makow Ph.D summed up the present situation the whole world now finds itself in. First, people with money machines tend to have a lot of friends. The bankers helped their friends establish monopolies in oil, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, transportation, media, etc., and took a healthy stake (themselves). As you can imagine these people are as thick as thieves…
The bankers need to eliminate nation states, freedom and democracy in order to streamline their business and consolidate their power. Rebuilding Iraq?

It's 'privatization' in disguise: Naomi Klein in The Nation, 13th April 2003, went straight to the core of the matter for the hapless Iraqi people:
"On April 6, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz spelled it out: There will be no role for the United Nations in setting up an interim government in Iraq. The US-run regime will last at least six months, "probably...longer than that." "And by the time the Iraqi people have a say in choosing a government, the key economic (and financial…ed) decisions about their country's future will have been made by their occupiers.

"There has got to be an effective administration from day one," Wolfowitz said. "People need water and food and medicine, and the sewers have to work, the electricity has to work. And that's a coalition responsibility."

Klein continued, "The process of getting all this infrastructure to work is usually called "reconstruction." But American plans for Iraq's future economy go well beyond that. Rather, the country is being treated as a blank slate on which the most ideological Washington neoliberals can design their dream economy: fully privatized, (read centralised…ed) foreign-owned and open for business."
Some highlights: "The $4.8 million management contract for the port in Umm Qasr has already gone to a US company, Stevedoring Services of America, and the airports are on the auction block.

The US Agency for International Development has invited US multinationals to bid on everything from rebuilding roads and bridges to printing textbooks. Most of these contracts are for about a year, but some have options that extend up to four. How long before they meld into long-term contracts for privatized water services, transit systems, roads, schools and phones? When does 'reconstruction' turn into 'privatization' in disguise?"

'Privatization' is: 'Privatization' is when the banks, having created money out of nothing, (they have not produced an equivalent bunch of carrots, or a field of wheat - nothing which is a corresponding physical 'good' to the money created) lend the newly created money to their 'buddies,' (taking a slice of the action for themselves of course) which in turn creates financial and economic conditions, which in turn, forces 'the little man out' leading to the centralisation and monopoly of all industrial, commercial and business activity. As Naomi Klein insists: "Who cares which multinationals get the best deals in Iraq's post-Saddam, pre-democracy liquidation sale? What does it matter if the privatizing is done unilaterally by Washington or multilaterally by the United States, Europe, Russia and China? Entirely absent from this debate are the Iraqi people, who might - who knows? - want to hold on to a few of their assets… what is being planned is not reparations, reconstruction or rehabilitation. It is robbery: mass theft disguised as charity; privatization without representation.

"A people, starved and sickened by sanctions, then pulverized by war, is going to emerge from this trauma to find that their country has been sold out from under them. They will also discover that their newfound "freedom" - for which so many of their loved ones perished - comes pre-shackled with irreversible economic (and financial…ed) decisions that were made in boardrooms while the bombs were still falling. They will then be told to vote for their new leaders, and welcomed to the wonderful world of democracy."

[Further reading: "Economic Democracy" by C.H. Douglas; "The Global Trap" by Hans-Peter Martin; "Natural Cost & the Ownership of Money" by J.D. Malan; "Free Enterprise Marketing" by Robert Nixon; "What is Money For? by Ezra Pound.]


"Jewish mini-state to give Washington instructions for Middle East."

If there was ever any question as to the actual client relationship of the United States to its Zionist masters, the following item in a leading Israeli newspaper today should leave little doubt. Read: "Israel to U.S.: Now deal with Syria and Iran" by Aluf Benn, Ha`aretz Monday, 14th April 2003.


Two of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior aides will go to Washington for separate talks this week. National Security Advisor Efraim Halevy will discuss the regional implications of the Iraq war and the fall of the Ba'ath regime, and the prime minister's bureau chief Dov Weisglass will bring the White House Israel's comments on the "road map" plan for a peace settlement. Israel will suggest that the United States also take care of Iran and Syria because of their support for terror and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Israel will point out the support of Syria and Iran for Hezbollah, which the U.S. considers an important target in the war against international terrorism.
American officials recently said in closed conversations that the U.S. will act against Syria and Iran, but not by military means.

The American administration is very angry with Syria for its support of Iraq during the war and its willingness to take in defectors from Saddam Hussein's regime.
As for Iran, the administration suggests working with the UN and Atomic Energy Commission to halt the Iranian nuclear program.

Weisglass is scheduled to meet National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice and present Israel's reservations on the road map. Senior government sources said Weisglass's goal is "to make sure things that disturb us won't happen." The administration has made it clear in advance that it is not ready to reopen the road map for discussion and will present it to both sides as is, after the new Palestinian government headed by Abu Mazen is sworn in.
Israeli sources assume Weisglass will try to reach "agreed principles to implement the plan" with the Americans that will take Israel's "red lines" into consideration. Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom spoke with his U.S. counterpart Colin Powell on Friday to prepare for the talks. Shalom said Israeli comments on the road map were meant "to facilitate its implementation," and explain the political pressures on Sharon's government. He said "our comments will help get the road map approved by the cabinet."


The Basic fund has now reached the figure of $26,850.50 thanks to the generosity of a number of supporters. Once again, thank you to those who donated to the fund! Please keep the momentum going, we have quite a way to go as yet.

Supporters will be pleased to know the League website numbers increase week by week and month by month. There is now a need for another site dealing exclusively with Finance, Economics and Social Credit proposals. It is in the planning stages.


National Director, Betty Luks will be attending a number of meetings in Victoria late April, early May. The following are public meetings.
Horsham, CWA Hall. Monday 28th April -- commences at 8PM.
Numurkah, Tuesday 29th April. Phone 03 58621582 for further details.


The president of the Launceston Conservative Speakers' Club announced the next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 30th April in the Max Fry Memorial Hall, Gorge Road, Trevallyn. The guest speaker will be Mrs. Wendy Scurr who will be presenting some more important facts in connection with the Port Arthur Massacre. Supporters will remember Mrs. Scurr was on tour-guide duty that terrible day, and was one of the first people to enter the café, after the orgy of killing.
Admission - Voluntary Donation. Supper will be provided.


The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 30th April, 2003 and the guest speaker is Mr. Don Brooke, and his subject is:
"NSW Gun Laws over the Past Thirty Years".
The venue is the Lithuanian Club, 16 East Terrace, Bankstown, where there is ample parking and situated only 600 metres from the Bankstown Railway Station. There are nearby facilities for a meal before the meeting.
The cost of attendance is $4.00 per person.

Date for your diary: Wednesday, 28th May, 2003. Mr. Neil Baird whose subject will be: "Globalisation & Its Economic Effect to Australia".


We have received notification that the Samuel Griffith Society's next conference will be held in Adelaide over the weekend of 23-25th May, 2003. The worthy list of speakers are Phillip Ayres, Ph.D.; Hon. Justice Ian Callinan, AC; Rt. Hon. Sir Harry Gibbs, GCMG, AC, KBE.; Hon. Trevor Griffin, Prof. Peter Howell; Hon Len King, AC; Julian Leser; Hon. Nick Minchin; Dr. Geoffrey Partington; Hon. Peter Reith; Prof. Geoffrey de Q. Walker and Keith Windschuttle.

Subjects include: The South Australian Constitutional Convention; Citizen Initiated Referendums; Retrospect; Judicial Activism and the Teoh case; The Republic; The Aboriginal Question.

For bookings and further details, contact The Samuel Griffith Society, 17 Fitzsimmons Avenue, Lane Cove 2066. Phone: 02 9428 1311 Fax: 02 9420 0063.

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