|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
7 June 1968. Thought for the Week: "The trouble with socialism is that when people lean on one another they soon get too weak to stand alone"
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".
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|