RHODESIA AND THE ECONOMIC BARBARISM OF THE U.N.

"The Security Council last night voted unanimously to impose a total trade ban on Rhodesia." - The Australian, May 31.

The British Socialist Government having acted as a part of the international socialist conspiracy in taking the issue of Rhodesia to the U.N. originally. And in so doing, forfeited any claim to the fiction that Rhodesia's affairs were legally under the control of the British parliament; now seeks to tighten the screws on the 225,000 whites and 41/4 million blacks who constitute a "threat to world peace".
The intended viciousness of the latest sanctions can be measured in their objectives.

Total trade ban, an immigration ban, the closure of all consulates in Rhodesia, and a travel ban on all holders of a Rhodesian passport. If such is successful it would be true to say that freedom had been banished from the earth, and that all those who took part in such an act of barbarism would be guilty and damned beyond hope of redemption.
Such measures, however, will not break Rhodesia. A fact that has lead to such futile posturing.

The perpetrators of this infamous act, Wilson, Caradon, Goldberg and their ilk are frustrated in their spleen by the knowledge that only the physical force, unleashed through the U.N. against the hapless Katagans will move the Rhodesians. And the Rhodesians along with the Portuguese and South Africans will be a much harder nut to crack. In fact, the inevitable show down, which must come, may well see the demise of the U.N., and some form of sanity return to the world.
In the meantime Australians must concern themselves with their own moral position.

Will our Government succumb to the enormous pressure that is being exerted? Or will truth and honesty prevail, and an end put to the compromise and prevarication, which has marked our policy towards Rhodesia hitherto.

MR. DEAN ACHESON SHOWS THE WAY ON RHODESIA

The following statement published on the front page of the London Times on May 25 shows the way to our Australian Government as clearly as it indicts the American and British Governments. Mr. Dean Acheson, former Secretary of State accused Britain and United States of barefaced aggression in calling for economic sanctions against the Rhodesian Government.

"The U.S. is engaged in an international conspiracy, instigated by Britain and blessed by the U.N., to overthrow the Government of a country that has done no harm and threatened no one. This is barefaced aggression unprovoked and unjustified by a single legal or moral principle, "Both Britain and the U.S" he argues, "have departed from basic concepts of international law through a misunderstanding of the U.N Charter in supporting the Security Council over Rhodesia and S.W. Africa".

Mr. Acheson maintains Britain and France had sought to impose upon States in the name of law, their own subjective concepts of justice. The facts that the Rhodesian Government did not wish to adhere to majority rule was not everyone's cup of tea, and neither was it everyone's business, nor was it apartheid or anything like it. It was a matter of relating solely to the internal affairs of Rhodesia in which the U.N. was forbidden by its charter to meddle, and to political relations between Rhodesia and the United Kingdom.
Mr. Acheson emphasised that Britain had never administered government in Rhodesia, or provided funds or forces for its defence.

The action against Rhodesia was not taken because independence would destroy peace but because someone wished to terminate this independence. The threat to world stability was not posed by Rhodesia, but against her. The U.N. condemned Rhodesia because it did not like that country's elective system. He said, "what we have here is the idea that law is only a mirror of the beholders emotional condition at the moment. One of the troubles of this troubled age is that too many people are trying to achieve harmony by forcing everyone to harmonise with them. (End of quote)

The above statement was read to a public meeting held in Melbourne last Friday, 31st May, and a resolution endorsing the statement and calling upon our Government to disassociate Australia from such an immoral policy, was overwhelmingly passed.

WILL SOCIALIST TRUDEAU WIN CANADIAN ELECTIONS?

Mr. Eric Butler, at present on the North American continent, provides the following report on the current Canadian Federal Elections:

If the mass media in Canada has its way, there is no doubt that Pierre Elliott Trudeau will win the Canadian Federal Elections on June 25 with a big majority. Prime Minister Trudeau still has the same type of mass media support he had when he was elected as leader of the Liberal Party.
The Conservatives have little chance of winning unless their leaders are prepared to bring Mr. Trudeau's Socialist background into the election battle.

At the moment of writing they have not done this - probably because they are afraid that they may be smeared with cries of "McCarthyism". This leaves Mr. Trudeau in the position where he can project an image of a man with a new policy for a new nation like Canada. However, I understand that there is a flood of literature on Mr. Trudeau appearing across Canada. This must be having some effect, as Mr. Trudeau has said that some people attempt to pin the Socialist and Communist label on him. He brushed the Socialist label aside by inferring that it was fantastic that he, a millionaire, could be a Socialist. But in doing so Mr. Trudeau touched on a very important point: So far from Socialism being a genuine working man's movement, it has increasingly become a movement financed and controlled by wealthy and influential men.
It is difficult to believe that Mr. Trudeau is not aware of this fact of political life.

He has had close association with fellow wealthy Socialists. One of these was Dr. Raymond Boyer, found guilty of being a traitor to his own country as a result of the Canadian spy trials at the end of the Second World War. Dr. Boyer is one of the wealthiest men in Canada. Recently in Cuba millionaire Cyrus Eaton was drinking toasts with his friend Castro and lauding him, as he has lauded other Communists. A long list could be prepared of millionaires who have helped to finance Socialism. Mr. Harold Wilson has some of them in Britain. There is, for example, his "financial adviser", Sir Sigmund Warburg, the international financier.

The very institution at which Mr. Trudeau received a vital part of his education, The London School of Economics, was a Socialist institution established by the Fabians and financed by millionaires. At a recent private lecture I gave on international affairs, I was severely cross-examined by a local University professor who is writing a thesis on Vietnam. He had studied all the "generally recognised historians", but strangely enough was still very poorly informed.
Or he may have been extremely well informed: But he took grave exception to a statement I made when another University product sneeringly said, "You sound like a man who would call our Prime Minister a Communist".
I had to point out that that was a very wrong charge, that I had never yet filed a report on Canada in which I had described Mr. Trudeau other than a Socialist.
The Professor was very "jumpy" about this and said that Mr. Trudeau was now a pragmatist".
I said that I could only report on what Mr. Trudeau had written, but that if he had changed his mind on Socialism I would like to see the evidence and report it.
None was forthcoming, so it would appear that Mr. Trudeau is still a Fabian Socialist.
He has every right to be one, but I would think that the Canadian people have a right to know that too.
Unless they are told this, they may well vote for a man espousing policies they do not support.

Unfortunately this happens far too often today in modern political life. There is a serious lack of political integrity. This applies to all parties and most politicians.

DE-GAULLE HESITATES

"The two main political forces in France, President de Gaulle and the Communist Party, are now trying to extricate themselves from a dangerous game of double bluff which threatened the Country with civil war". "Robert Stephens and William Millinship in The Age, June 3.

The last week may have seen one of the unrehearsed events, which changes the course of history. In France, the spontaneous anti-Communist demonstrations have swept the revolutionaries from the barricades and the elite Communist trade union leaders, back into their party cells to re-plot their strategy. de Gaulle himself, manipulating both warring groups has been forced to ask himself whether France's destiny does really lie with the Communist revolution.
Some signs are encouraging.

The Government has been forced to give an assurance that the increases given in wage rises will not be swallowed up in inflation. This in itself gives the lie to the Communist claim, shared by de Gaulle, that the workers want a greater say in the running of industry. It is also apparent that such a turn of events is undermining the Common Market. The grant of higher wages itself has brought about a crisis in the market as is apparent in a report in The Australian, May 31.

But more important, it is obvious that more understanding is apparent, that most of France's problems are stemming from the economic base established by the Common Market which in the final analysis is a purely socialist concept carrying with it all the weaknesses of irresponsible, inefficient management; no matter how "scientific" it is supposed to be. Thus as The Australian reports, "the Common Market is now facing a dangerous phase of disintegration as a result of the French crisis..."

ALL-OUT EFFORT IN VIETNAM WAR URGED ON ALLIES

"Two petitions to Federal Parliament today urged intensification of the war against North Vietnam" - Daily Telegraph, May 29.

The petitions presented by two Government members, Mr. D.S. Jessop, (Lib S.A.) and Mr. R.S, King (CP Vic) contained the following points. Warned that Australia is being forced to surrender to the Communists.
Called for a blockade of the North Vietnam coastline and "disabling" of Haiphong.
Urged the Allies not to make any compromises at the peace talks in Paris.

These petitions indicate a deep-seated unrest in the Australian community about the course of events being charted in Vietnam. This was illustrated by the Gallup Poll published in The Herald Melbourne, May 23, when young people from the ages of 15 to 20 overwhelmingly declared Australia should fight on, 69 percent as against 25 percent, with 6 percent undecided. The percentage for bringing the war against the Communists to a successful conclusion would undoubtedly increase as the age group climbs. These facts need to be brought home to the Government, battling with its conscience and that mysterious force called "world opinion".

It is becoming clearer that so-called "world opinion" has reached the zenith of its ability to drive people into the corral of the Communist collective, and therefore, our Government should take its courage in both hands and declare itself solidly behind the movers of the above petition.

THE SMILE OF THE INDIAN TIGER

"Some countries may fear that the withdrawal of the military presence of the big powers may threaten their security" -Mrs. Gandhi, Indian Prime Minister, reported in The Australian, May 27, from a talk on the A.B.C.

It is well known that India welcomes the withdrawal of Britain as the dominant force south of Suez. The reason for India's pleasure becomes clearer when studying the Washington Report, published by the American Security Council. The report comments, "The all-out Russian drive to make India, like Algeria and Egypt a front for Communist expansionism, began five years ago when India drafted plans for a five-year defence program for the 1964-69 period. With the assistance of Soviet technicians and industrial planning experts, together with Russian equipment and funds, India has already established: A plant designed exclusively for the assembling of MIG-21 jet fighters, The Hindustan Aeronautics plant at Bangalore for production of HF-25 fighters. Industrial complexes at Nasik, Koraput and Hyderabad for manufacturing aircraft engines, frames and electronic equipment. An air-to-air missile production centre at Hyderabad. The Avadi tank producing plant in Madras State with a capacity of turning out 360 tanks per year. A shipbuilding complex near Bombay, which turns out frigates. Enough small-arms plants to provide India with an export capacity in this field.

It would appear that Mrs. Gandhi was trying to mislead as to whom was establishing a military presence in her area.