Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
Home blog.alor.org Newtimes Survey The Cross-Roads Library
OnTarget Archives The Social Crediter Archives NewTimes Survey Archives Brighteon Video Channel Veritas Books

On Target

30 April 2004. Thought for the Week: "So we find that provision in the Preamble which summarises briefly and succinctly the pith and substance of that great act of unity, that the people of each of the State(s)… "humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown… and under the Constitution hereby established."
Professor David Flint in "The Twilight of the Elites," 2003.


by Kevin MacDonald continued…..
Kevin MacDonald is Professor of Psychology at California State University-Long Beach.

Last week the article finished with…"The most common rhetoric used by Jewish intellectual and political movements has been the language of moral universalism and the language of science -- languages that appeal to the educated elites of the modern Western world. But beneath the rhetoric it is easy to find statements expressing the Jewish agendas of the principal actors…
"For example, anthropologists under the leadership of Boas viewed their crusade against the concept of "race" as, in turn, combating anti-Semitism. They also saw their theories as promoting the ideology of cultural pluralism, which served perceived Jewish interests because the U.S. would be seen as consisting of many co-equal cultures rather than as a European Christian society.
Similarly, psychoanalysts commonly used their theories to portray anti-Jewish attitudes as symptoms of psychiatric disorder.
Conversely, the earlier generation of American Jewish Trotskyites ignored the horrors of the Soviet Union until the emergence there of state-sponsored anti-Semitism.
Neoconservatives have certainly appealed to American patriotic platitudes in advocating war throughout the Middle East -- gushing about spreading American democracy and freedom to the area, while leaving unmentioned their own strong ethnic ties and family links to Israel.
Michael Lind has called attention to the neoconservatives' "odd bursts of ideological enthusiasm for 'democracy'" -- odd because these calls for democracy and freedom throughout the Middle East are also coupled with support for the Likud Party and other like-minded groups in Israel that are driven by a vision of an ethnocentric, expansionist Israel that, to outside observers at least, bears an unmistakable (albeit unmentionable) resemblance to apartheid South Africa.
War for 'democracy' and 'freedom' sells better
These inconsistencies of the neoconservatives are not odd or surprising. The Straussian idea is to achieve the aims of the elite ingroup by using language designed for mass appeal. War for "democracy and freedom" sells much better than a war explicitly aimed at achieving the foreign policy goals of Israel.
Neoconservatives have responded to charges that their foreign policy has a Jewish agenda by labeling any such analysis as "anti-Semitic." Similar charges have been echoed by powerful activist Jewish organizations like the ADL and the Simon Wiesenthal Centre.
But at the very least, Jewish neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz, who were deeply involved in pushing for the war in Iraq, should frankly discuss how their close family and personal ties to Israel have affected their attitudes on US foreign policy in the Middle East.
Wolfowitz, however, has refused to discuss this issue beyond terming such suggestions "disgraceful."
A common argument is that neoconservatism is not Jewish because of the presence of various non-Jews amongst their ranks.
But in fact, the ability to recruit prominent non-Jews, while nevertheless maintaining a Jewish core and a commitment to Jewish interests, has been a hallmark -- perhaps the key hallmark -- of influential Jewish intellectual and political movements throughout the 20th century.
Freud commented famously on the need for a non-Jew to represent psychoanalysis, a role played by Ernest Jones and C. G. Jung.
Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict were the public face of Boasian anthropology. And, although Jews represented over half the membership of both the Socialist Party and the Communist Party USA at various times, neither party ever had Jews as presidential candidates and no Jew held the top position in the Communist Party USA after 1929.
In all the Jewish intellectual and political movements I reviewed, non-Jews have been accepted and given highly-visible roles. Today, those roles are played most prominently by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld whose ties with neoconservatives go back many years. It makes excellent psychological sense to have the spokespeople for any movement resemble the people they are trying to convince.
In fact, neoconservatism is rather unusual in the degree to which policy formulation -- as opposed to implementation -- is so predominantly Jewish. Perhaps this reflects U.S. conditions in the late 20th century.
All the Jewish intellectual and political movements I studied were typified by a deep sense of orthodoxy -- a sense of "us versus them." Dissenters are expelled, usually amid character assassination and other recriminations.
This has certainly been a feature of the neocon movement. The classic recent example of this "We vs. They" world is David Frum's attack on "unpatriotic conservatives" as anti-Semites. Any conservative who opposes the Iraq war as contrary to U.S. interests and who notes the pro-Israeli motivation of many of the important players, is not to be argued with, but eradicated. "We turn our backs on them."
This is not the spirit out of which the Anglo-American parliamentary tradition was developed, and in fact was not endorsed by other non-Jewish pro-war conservatives.
Jewish intellectual and political movements have typically had ready access to prestigious mainstream media channels, and this is certainly true for the neocons. The anchoring by the Washington Post of the columns of Charles Krauthammer and Robert Kagan and by the New York Times of William Safire's illustrates this. But probably more important recently has been the invariable summoning of neoconservatives to represent the "conservative" line on the TV Networks. Is it unreasonable to suppose that this may be somewhat influenced by the famously heavy Jewish role in these operations?
Immigration policy provides a valuable acid test for the proposition that neoconservatism is actually a vehicle for perceived Jewish ethnic interests. I believe I have been able to demonstrate that pro-immigration elements in American public life have, for over a century, been largely led, funded, energized and organized by the Jewish community. American Jews have taken this line, with a few isolated exceptions, because they have believed, as Leonard S. Glickman, president and CEO of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, has bluntly stated, "The more diverse American society is the safer [Jews] are."
Having run out of Russian Jews, the HIAS is now deeply involved in recruiting refugees from Africa.
When, in the middle 1990s an immigration reform movement arose amongst American conservatives, the reaction of the neoconservatives ranged from cold to hostile. No positive voice was permitted on the Op-Ed page of the Wall Street Journal, by then a neoconservative domain.
(Perhaps significantly, a more recent exception has been a relatively favorable review of the anti-illegal immigration book Mexifornia -- whose author, the military historian Victor Davis Hanson, has distinguished himself by the extreme hawkishness of his views on the Middle East.) The main vehicle of immigration reform sentiment, National Review, once a bastion of traditional conservative thought, was quite quickly captured by neoconservatives and its opposition to immigration reduced to nominal.
Prior to the post-9/11 U.S. invasion of the Middle East, this suppression of the immigration reform impulse among conservatives was probably the single most important contribution of the neoconservatives to the course of U.S. history. It may yet prove to be the most disastrous."


Adelaide Advertiser 23/4/04
· Since March 2003 the American Congress has approved US$220 Billion for the continuing war of aggression against the people of Iraq; the figure includes $120 billion for this year and it has been estimated that figure will blow out by US$69-103 Billion.
· Jane Errey, whose job in the Defence Department involved preparing briefings for Australia's Minister for Defence, Robert Hill, is contesting her dismissal claiming she was sacked for refusing to exaggerate briefings on Iraq. She has lodged an unfair dismissal claim against the Federal Government.


We have received notice of the initiative by the Constitution Education Fund - Australia (CEF-A) to establish a Constitutional Prize Programme with the principal aim of encouraging young Australians to think and learn about the history and operation of the Australian Constitution and the Australian system of government. His Excellency, Major-General Michael Jeffery AC CVO MC, the Governor-General of Australia has agreed to be Patron-in-Chief of the prize programme.
The competitions will target different age groups and will be judged by eminent Australians who have expertise in areas related to the prize competitions. Judges and advisers will be drawn from the highest echelons of the academic, legal and business community and from the public sector. Prizes will include significant cash sums, overseas trips and travelling scholarships.
We have received a request to inform our readers:
If you would like further information go to website https://www.cefa.org.au 'Our Constitution - The foundation of a free, united and democratic nation where you will find further details.
The postal address is: GPO Box 64, Sydney NSW 2001.
The founding benefactor (now deceased): Father Jeremy Flynn and trustees include Professor David Flint AM and Mrs Kerry Jones as Executive Director.


Such is the heading of an article by Sam Kiley in the U.K's The Spectator, 17/4/04. It deals with the estimated 14,000 mercenaries engaged by private companies who have won 'outsourced' security contracts in the war of aggression against the Iraqi people. After the Americans and the British these mercenaries form the third largest foreign military force in the country.
"They bustle through the Palestine Hotel lobby in central Baghdad," writes Sam Kiley, "clanking with military hardware." They stand out with their crew-cut hair style and wraparound sunglasses. "A Heckler and Koch 9mm submachine gun is de rigueur -- strapped across a black Kevlar bullet-proof vest, barely hidden by a photographer's jacket. Pockets are stuffed with radios, a hand-held global positioning system, medical trauma packs."
He continues, "From the webbing belt holding up 'rip-proof' combat trousers, a Gerber multi-tool dangles beside a Leatherman knife. Another gun, usually a Glock 9mm, is held in a black nylon holster halfway down one thigh. Spare clips of 'ammo' and a commando dagger are sheathed on the other leg. The knees are reinforced with strap-on rubber pads.
Asked about their backgrounds, the Brits among them smile enigmatically and 'let slip' they've spent some time 'in Hereford' -- a weak code for service with 22 Special Air Service. The
Yanks favour a 1,000-mile stare and 'I've been around a bit since Mogadishu'. They sneak looks at each other's hardware and exchange knowing nods. It's all a bit Village People…"

The journalist noted
"The mercenaries are unaccountable, often incompetent, and deeply unpopular. Come to think of it, so are the people in the Pentagon who hired them…Drawn to Mesopotamia by promises of daily salaries of £300-£500, the modern dogs of war have found the pickings rich. But how much use they are, or good they do, is another matter. These days the ubiquity of heavily armed foreigners partly explains why so many people are being kidnapped in Iraq."
The mercenaries are engaged to guard civilian workers and journalists and "to train Iraq's army and police. They are securing its national assets, like the oil pipelines. In fact, foreign soldiers are doing what the American occupiers should have asked the conquered Iraqi army to do. The difference is that the mercenaries are probably the most hated and humiliating aspect of the disastrous occupation of Iraq -- and they're not much good either…"

Big 'bikkies'
We know the Pentagon has 'splashed out' at least £150 million on private security contracts in Iraq and Mr. Kiley has pinpointed some of them:
Erinys -- The company was founded by Alastair Morrisson, a former officer in the SAS. "Erinys has a $100 million contract to hire 14,000 Iraqi and foreign soldiers to guard the country's oil fields. But no one knows what the rules of engagement of his men really are…"
Dyncorp International -- A mercenary blue-chip outfit. "It has a $50 million contract from the State Department to train Iraq's police forces.
"But it also needs extra firepower to protect its own employees. Dyncorp men have created their own fortresses in Baghdad, erecting barriers on residential streets. Like almost any of the foreign hired guns in Iraq, they stop and search Iraqis whenever they want, shove to the front of all traffic queues and lines at petrol stations, and are quickly recruiting their own private army. Most dangerously of all, Dyncorp has a militia of Kurds from the north of Iraq, working in the Arab dominated Iraqi capital. Dyncorp staffers can be spotted miles off because they love to race about at over 100mph in vast jeeps -- which no Iraqis can afford."

Blackwater Security Consulting. -- The four men "who were torn apart in Fallujah" were from the Blackwater Security Consulting 'guns-for-hire' company. It is alleged they were "escorting a food convoy. How dumb is that? Did no one tell them that Americans are hated in Fallujah, the scene of bloody clashes on a daily basis? If there was a need to guard food convoys, why didn't the army do it? If the men were actually working for the CIA, which has outsourced most of its combat-type operations, what the hell were two jeep-loads of armed men doing tooling around the front line? Either way it was stupid for the mercenaries to be where they were…"
Custer Battles -- "It is run by Mike Battles, who is no veteran of great experience -- he's apparently only 33." Custer Battles is a private company which has gained security contracts to the value of "close to £40 million"… from the US government and private firms.
It is reported Mike Bloss, a Brit who died bravely fighting off guerrillas and saved three engineers fixing power lines in Hit, not far from Fallujah, worked for Custer Battles.

Business booming for 'Guns for Hire' companies
"But this boom in mercenary work, or 'outsourcing' as the Pentagon would probably prefer to call it… will inevitably add to the chaos in Iraq. There is no legal system functioning in Iraq if foreign mercenaries end up killing people -- in fact they are officially beyond the law, according to the rules set by the U.S. viceroy in Iraq, Paul Bremer. (Perhaps because mercenaries are also in charge of protecting his skin.)"
We now call warfare an 'industry' -- governed by 'market forces':
The 'financial killings' are having a negative effect on regular military services. "British PMCs, who have the best reputation, are expected to earn about £1 billion from their Iraq operations this year, up from an industry average of £200 million over the last few years. This is a disaster for Britain's armed forces because the genuine SAS soldier commands a premium fee in the open market…"


The following was sent to the Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mr. Mick Keelty by Port Lincoln's Mayor, Peter Davis. 18/3/2004
"Dear Mr. Keelty
With the controversy of recent days swirling round you I feel compelled to convey my support for your original remarks.
It is a sad truth that for many decades past we of the West [Christians and Zionist Jews,] have treated the people of Palestine and of the Middle East in an appalling manner.
Any unbiased investigation of the fate of the Palestinian people, [Muslim, Christian and Jewish] will reveal the trickery, deprivation of land, homes and general Western "terrorism" going back to the 1920's. Indeed, by watching one's T.V. on a nightly basis one can see who is equipped with the latest military hardware and who is throwing stones.
Similarly with the "Middle East." From the signing of the Syke-Piqot Agreement in 1916, and the 1920 agreement between Britain and the U.S.A. we have carved up and exploited their lands and resources.
It was the successful charge of the Australian Light Horse Brigade in 1916 that led to the capture of Beersheba and later Jerusalem that gave the Allies military control of Palestine. Our Australian 1916 military success was the catalyst for much of the Palestinian distress suffered today as a consequence of the Balfour Declaration signed in 1917. A visit to the Canberra War Memorial will confirm the magnificent ancient mosaic tiles removed from the Gaza Church and much of the military detail embodied above. The Palestinians have not forgotten. Nor have they forgotten the Balfour Declaration, and the secret Sykes-Piqot Agreement that split their ancient
lands and damaged their culture.
Similarly, the control by Western Christian and Jewish companies of Middle Eastern oil is behind much of the Islamic enmity we suffer today. The 1920 agreement between America and Britain resulted in American oil control of Saudi Arabia, the Al Saud family power and the huge Riyadh American defence base. British Petroleum's oil interests originated within Iraq. These old sores still rancour within Middle Eastern Muslim people . . .
We would do well to consider why Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden's forces were armed and trained by America's C.I.A. some years ago. Indeed the earlier roles of Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney's Haliburton Petroleum, will help us understand Islamic enmity today.
If one is militarily inferior yet mentally comparable there is only one way one can defend one's rights, beliefs and country.
When we were on the defensive in World War 2 our first attacks were carried out by "guerrillas". And, rightfully, we were proud of our men's courage. Similarly with the Roman Empire... Have we forgotten "the barbarians" and their military pin pricks, as conquered and threatened peoples defended their beliefs, despite the overwhelming military power confronting them?
We call attacks upon our civilization "terrorism." Yet, we would do well to view our past actions through the eyes of Middle Eastern people if we desire a more peaceful world. They see decades of Western "terrorism", injustice and inhumanity. In Christian terms, we need to remove the beam protruding from our own eyes before we remove the splinter from our enemy. Or, as Confucius said a few centuries ago, "if you wish to defeat your enemy, first you must know him."
Sadly, we have little, if any, comprehension of our fellow religion... let alone "enemy". Why have we not asked ourselves the reason that young men and women are prepared to blow themselves up whilst wrecking havoc and immense suffering upon us?
Our arrogance is supreme. One has only to listen to President Bush and Prime Ministers Blair and Howard. Confucius also said, "it is no use running faster if you are on the wrong road."
Witness our increasing security requirements and impediments: our huge, increasing military expenditure as we struggle to win the war against "Terrorism." Truly, we are "running faster".
I believe you endeavoured to point out some of the injustices Muslim people have suffered and the reality that extremists [of what ever belief] are difficult to predict let alone deter or apprehend. That you have a most difficult task is obvious. That you should not be subject to political pressure is equally obvious. You have my support.
Yours Sincerely, Peter Davis."

Copies of the letter were also forwarded to: Prime Minister John Howard; Barry Wakelin, Member for Grey, S.A.; Mal Hyde, Police Commissioner for South Australia and the Port Lincoln City Council.


Mayor Peter Davis sent the following submission to the Senate Committee Enquiry for an 'Australian Republic':
Dear Sir
I note your request for submissions relative to the Enquiry into an Australian Republic and submit the below.
I am aware of the 30 or so questions asked and for which the Committee seeks electors'
responses. I also note the assumption within the 30 questions that Australia will advance towards a republican system. The questions presume a majority of Australians desire a change from our present Monarchical system despite the evidence of the referendum held a few years ago. On this basis alone, the terms of reference of the Committee should be rejected.
I also note the structure of the Committee is not balanced, being biased towards republicanism.
I have been a member of this City Council spanning some 25 years or so. Over that period I have consistently and publicly supported our Monarchical system and have been re-elected consistently. I have no reason to believe that the Eyre Peninsula community desires a change from the present Monarchical system.
Furthermore, I would have expected Federal Parliament to have heeded the Australian peoples' response to retaining our Monarchical system of government following the referendum held some 5 years ago. Should it prove necessary, I shall again campaign against any suggestions of republican government to be put to the people of Australia as I have done in the past.
Peter Davis, Port Lincoln.

Report from NSW Crowne Plaza meeting
"I attended the Enquiry at the huge Crowne Plaza Hotel in Parramatta… At no time were there more than about 60 people in the room… At times there was only about 30-40 in the room. The Monarchists very ably supported the status quo and were firmly against any further plebiscites. This really seemed to annoy the republican senators… They appeared quite upset at Mr. Heshe and in particular Prof. Flint who opposed any further referendum or plebiscite…
Senator Bolkus made clear to the republicans as they made their submissions, there is no unanimity or agreement among them about the model or how it would work.
It was clear the younger ones were sincere, but had no idea how to set up or replace a better or even different system to what we have.
It amazed the Monarchists to hear Sir Gerard Brennan refer favourably to China's Parliament. Someone else referred to Germany's and Portugal's. I clapped loudly in support of the Monarchists, which caused a few hostile comments at the end of the meeting… "
Ron Barnett, Sydney.


The next meeting of the SCSC will be held on Thursday 29th April, 2004. Guest speaker will be Mr. John Stafford, BA, MA, M.Ed. and his subject is: "A Report on the Inverell Forum 2004".
The venue is the Lithuanian Club which is situated approximately 600 metres from the Bankstown Railway Station. Proceed along South Terrace, past West Terrace to 16 East Terrace, Bankstown.
The meeting commences at 7.30pm and cost of attendance is $4 per person. Bring a friend for the first time and the $4 fee will be waived.
Books will be on display as usual by the Heritage Book Service. Should you want a certain book, you can order it through the Heritage Book Service, P.O. Box 6086, Lake Munmorah 2259 or Phone: 02 4358 3634.


The next gathering of the CSC will be held on Monday 3rd May, 2004 at the Public Schools' club, 207 East Terrace (cnr. Carrington) Adelaide. A two-course Dinner, $18 per person, will be served 6.30pm. We ask those who intend to partake of the Dinner to be there on time. The public address will commence at 7.30pm. Guest speaker will be Mr. John Spoehr, Executive Director of the Centre for Labour Research, University of Adelaide and his subject is: No Such thing as Free Trade".
Dinner Bookings to be in by Thursday 29th April by phoning: 8296 4704.
The message will be taped by the Mayo Tape Library as usual. Readers of On Target can obtain a copy of the address by ordering from Mayo Tapes, Box 6, Hahndorf, South Australia 5245.


"The Money Power Versus Democracy" by Eric D. Butler:
This is one of a number of 'gems' Eric Butler produced over the years; it was first published during World War 11. Professor Anthony Sutton had dis-uncovered and written of the nexus between International Finance and International Communism, listing the massive economic 'blood transfusions' from the West that had sustained the Communist economy. In later years, Rockefeller established the Chase Manhattan Bank of China to help sustain Communism under Chairman Mao.
The centralisation of the Money Power and its control of the politics of all nations are instrumental in furthering its objective of a World Government. As the author proves in this great little book, centralised power is contrary to reality and inevitably produces greater friction and chaos. $8.00 posted.

"One Land, Two Peoples" by Ilan Pappe: A history of modern Palestine.
Ilan Pappe's book is the story of Palestine, a land inhabited by two peoples, with two national identities. It begins with the Ottomans in the early 1800s, the reign of Muhammad Ali, and traces a path through the arrival of the early Zionists at the end of that century, through the British mandate at the beginning of the twentieth century, the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948, and the subsequent wars and conflicts which culminated in the intifadas of 1987 and 2000. While these events provide the background to the narrative and explain the construction of Zionist and Palestinian nationalism, at centre stage are those who lived through these times, men and women, children, peasants, workers, town-dwellers, Jews and Arabs. It is a story of coexistence and co-operation, as well as oppression, occupation, and exile.
Ilan Pappe is well known as a revisionist historian of Palestine and a political commentator on the Israel-Palestine conflict. His book is lucid and typically forthright. It is a unique contribution to the history of this troubled land which all those concerned with developments in the Middle East will have to read. Ilan Pappe teaches politics at Haifa University in Israel. He has written extensively on the politics of the Middle East, and is well known for his revisionist interpretation of Israel's history and is a critic of its policies towards the Palestinians.
Price: $45.00 Includes Postage & Handling: Order your copy today from your State bookshop.
Other Suggested Reading:
· Bitter Harvest -- Palestine 1914-79 by Sam Hadawi Price $17.00 posted.
· Facts Are Facts by Benjamin H. Friedman Price: $14.00 posted.
· Jewish History Jewish Religion by Israel Shahak Price: $33.00 posted
· The Thirteenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler Price: $20.00 posted
· The Zionist Factor by Ivor Benson Price: $18.00 Posted

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