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 September 2005 Thought for the Week: "The essential soul of a nation is in its character, its culture and tradition. The King is the natural embodiment of Honours and Sanctions - of Culture and Tradition and, as such, is naturally Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces…
Our present situation is not adventitious - it is the outcome of a venomous hatred and envy of our indigenous qualities. If anyone is foolish enough to suppose that the prestige of this country and the Empire, and with them, the welfare of the population, can be restored by an appeal to an anonymous, irresponsible, and misinstructed ballot-box democracy, I can assure them that, if their opinion should prevail and our destinies be submitted to decision by that process, the outcome is a mathematical certainty - our final eclipse."
Clifford Hugh Douglas in "Realistic Constitutionalism," 1947.


Following the decision by Deakin University not to publish Professor Andrew Fraser's article the following letter was sent to the Editor of The Australian by Nigel Jackson of Belgrave, Victoria.

"The decision by Deakin University to forbid the Deakin Law Review to publish Professor Andrew Fraser's essay "Rethinking the White Australia Policy" ('Uni backs off "racist" article', 20/9) is another major indicator of the serious loss of intellectual freedom that characterises contemporary Australia.
In simple terms, the essay and its author are the victims of the political obscurantism which is nakedly exposed by the essay's rigorous analysis. Fraser correctly points out that globalist ideology, based on 'the interwoven myths of equality and universal human rights', is enshrined in the fashionable assertion (expressed in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Racial Discrimination Act of 1975) that 'any doctrine of superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous'.

Neither the UNO nor the Australian Parliament has any just grounds for prohibiting publication of objections to that political opinion (for that is all it is); and Deakin University ought to have had the intellectual spine to resist the pressure placed upon it. Vice-chancellor Sally Walker's excuse that 'universities are not exempt from the law, nor should they be' neglects the fact that universities, if they really acknowledge 'responsibility to encourage open public debate and scrutiny', must be willing to publicly challenge unjust laws or laws perceived as such. As it is, the University has provided further evidence to support Professor Fraser's observation that 'defenders of the ruling orthodoxy', unable to counter the growing body of scientific research unfavourable to their beliefs, 'are resorting to social ostracism, legal repression and physical coercion'.

Why is a scientific treatise met with 'hysterical reaction' and why are dissident views on race regarded 'as embarrassing social diseases'? The answer given by Professor Fraser is that such obscurantism undermines our traditional British culture and institutions which 'remain the principal constraints on managerial reach and power' of current transnational political elites. These elites use multiculturalism as a weapon to divide subject populations, 'the better to dominate them'.
It is thus in the interest of most Australians to support Professor Fraser and ensure that his views are heard and studied, rather than defamed and neglected."


by James Reed

An interesting article by Zuleyka Zevallos appeared in the academic journal People and Place (vol.13, no2 2005), entitled "It's Like We're Their Culture": Second Generation Discuss Australian Culture". Zevallos considered the views on Australian culture of 50 second-generation migrant women aged 17 to 28 years. The women were from "Latin" and Turkish backgrounds. These women "find it hard to see any Australian culture".

Some see a vacuum; others see a bland milieu populated with 'average looking people'. In contrast, they feel that their own migrant cultures are strong. If ever there was a reason for questioning the wisdom of the Fabian socialists who began Australia's post WWII immigration mess, this is it. This is what it has led to. We have duplicated the folly of the ancient Romans and unless we change our policies, we reap the same fate.

In the same edition of People and Place by Katharine Betts, "Cosmopolitans and Patriots: Australia's Cultural Divide and Attitudes to Immigration," Betts points out that during the 1970s and 1980s there was strong opposition to immigration.
In 1991 polls showed that 73 per cent of people thought that Australia's immigration intake was too high. That opposition began to decline in 1996 when the Coalition government under John Howard took control. Minor cuts were made to the intake for a short time, but by 2000-2001 the figures were higher than under Keating. The Asian intake topped (officially) 70 per cent.

To counter Hanson, Howard cunningly set out a series of false anti-immigration acts to give the illusion that something was being done about the immigration problem, such as the seemingly harsh stand on asylum-seekers. This took the high Asian intake issue off the political agenda.
There was also the "brain dead" factor that many people close to the immigration opposition movement believed that John Howard was "on side" and doing "something" about immigration and multiculturalism.
In fact, Howard flirted with opposing immigration numbers in 1988 before making a complete 180 degree turn. Since that time he has repeatedly said that he supports an Asian Australia: if Australia is racially Asian in 100 years time he sees nothing wrong with that - in fact it would be good for trade. This very question was put to Ruddock as Immigration Minister by a colleague and he gave that very reply.

Immigration opposition needs to be revived in Australia. The old timers from the 1980s and 1990s seem to be all burnt out. It is time for some new blood to arise and take on this issue which of all the issues which concerns us is the most fundamental. If we as a racial entity disappear, then our culture and traditions go as well.
An "Australia" which is predominately Chinese will be a part of Asia. "Australia" as we know it is ceasing to exist.

These racially suicidal policies are largely supported by what has been called "the new class", professionals and "knowledge/administrative workers. Organised environmentalism is strongly pro-immigration, Betts shows from statistics in her paper. Such environmentalists are essentially "red" rather than "green" having an over-riding concern for "Social Justice" (whatever that means).
Managers, administrators and other parasites of the bureaucratic welfare state support a high immigration intake as migrants are often their business, and even if not, the cosmopolitan values of "open borders" is part of their new class philosophy. Pro-immigration characterises professions such as social work, teaching, the media and religion. University graduates support high immigration, themselves a product of the standard ideological brainwashing that occurs at our so-called institutions of higher education. Blue-collar workers are more likely to think that the intakes are too high.

The social system is thus geared towards "open borders" and the ultimate doom of the White people in Australia. To fight this requires a new anti-immigration movement. And, I'm sorry to say, there is nobody out there to do it for us - no Pauline sitting in the wings ready to save us. We have to start from the ground up and we need to start now.


From Len the Cleaner

Editor, you did invite me to write again and I have taken you up on the invitation.
The Advertiser 20 August 2005 reported that the South Australian government was sending a delegation to India during the month of September to encourage Indians to come to this State. Apparently we are short of IT, software and systems integration workers. The Rann government is as racially suicidal as the rest of the regimes that rule Australia, apparently can't see fit to train our own young people. With such a cargo-cult mentality it turns to Asia for "the quick fix".

The other day after finishing my cleaning job at one particular university (no names, no pack drill, ed) I happened to look into a lecture room. You know, I couldn't see any White faces at all. It was a sea of Asian faces. Please don't get me wrong, I have found many individual Asians pleasant and well mannered to me, a lowly cleaner, but I don't want Adelaide swamped with them.

The Advertiser 23 August 2005 told us that the State government is on another mission - to double this city's share of international students by 2013. No doubt this madness will continue until the desired goal is reached - which means no places at all for our local students.

By the "logic" employed by the Government of SA, there is really no reason at all why locals should have an education or jobs. Locals = bad; international = good. Even a lowly cleaner can see that is the deadly equation our local mandarins have adopted.


Dear Sri Ramon Jun QUITALES II,
Thank you very much for offering to keep me posted on your activities in the Solomon's.
Thank you too for your efforts in this cause.
Your peoples' bank project looks very, very interesting and exciting.
Bill Daly, New Zealand.

From: Solomon SocialCredit Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005
Regarding Social Credit

Dear Bill,
I understand your sentiment and reason for failures of Social Credit political parties in western countries when individuals can easily get credit cards/personal loans from the banks without any securities at all.
In contrary, here in the Solomon Islands the only 3 banks operating [ANZ, Westpac and NBSI] never, repeat never, provide any credit card facilities nor extend any loans to indigenous Solomon Islanders.
(This is the) Reason why when the voters found out that we are going to introduce a drastic radical monetary reform in the country where every one who have a viable project and good character can receive a loan/credit from the People's Bank that we are going to establish, our memberships jumps from mere 100 to over 10,000 now.
We launched our Election Manifesto and Strategic Policies last Sunday which was broadcasted live over the radio throughout the country, and response from the people are (was) quite alarming that our phone since yesterday is quite busy. We will keep you update(d) from here in Solomon Islands.
Your servant in Social Credit,
Sri Ramon Jun Quitales II,
Secretary-General SoCred Party,
SoCred House, Hibiscus Avenue, P.O. Box 1349 HONIARA CITY, Solomon Islands.

Bill Daly responds
Dear Sri Ramon Jun QUITALES II,
Thank you for your efforts to advance Social Credit in the Solomon's. In New Zealand (and) Canada the attempts to advance SC via the political party system has constantly proved to be soul destroying, taking always a great deal of effort and to date after many decades, still nothing to show for it.
I encourage you in your wonderful endeavours but also encourage you to seriously consider how much more useful it will be to have a SC movement outside of the party system - a grass roots movement and possibly also experiments in local credit schemes to demonstrate the advantages of using debt-free money systems.
The Democrats for Social Credit stood many candidates at New Zealand general elections last Saturday and barely got even a few votes. Also the SC Party in NZ over the years has from time to time allowed itself to support objectives that are not in any way real social credit, such as they are now supporting a 1 percent turnover tax. True this might provide a more sensible tax system to what is presently operating but does not in any way acknowledge the need for a completely new, and true to nature money system, in which almost all taxes could be easily abolished.
I'm on friendly terms with many people in the party here but have seen so much wasted effort and compromises over the decades that it would be unfortunate if this tragedy were repeated in the Solomon's.
With kindest regards and very best wishes for the future,
Bill Daly, New Zealand


The following analysis of the US government response towards their people after Hurricane Katrina is sobering reading. The analysis is by American author and writer G. Edward Griffin.

"There has been widespread criticism of the response of US officials to Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans in 2005. The tone of these complaints is that the authorities failed to do their job quickly enough.
Some commentators have said this is a racial issue, claiming that the government would have acted more promptly if the majority of victims had been white instead of black.
Others have said it was an issue of the rich against the poor, the oil companies against the consumers, the land developers and contractors seeking to force people out of the city so they can rebuild without interference at taxpayers' expense.
Democrats have said the problem is that Republicans were in control, and Republicans are indifferent to the plight of the common man.
In news coverage of this tragedy, the most significant events often were buried beneath a blanket of heart-wrenching stories of personal survival, scenes of awesome destruction, reports of looting, and interviews with experts.
However, the key to understanding can be found in the following list of news headlines, most of which did not make it into mainstream coverage.

These reports make it clear that the government did not fail to respond in a timely fashion.
The problem was that it did respond - but in such a way as to actually hinder rescue operations. There were too many instances for this to be merely a mistake or a bureaucratic snafu. There is a clear pattern here that cannot be denied. Why this should be so will be discussed in a moment, but first, here is the amazing record.


FEMA tells first responders not to respond until told to do so.
FEMA News 2005 Aug 29
FEMA won't accept Amtrak's help in evacuations.
FEMA News 2005 Aug 29
Offer of helicopters for rescue work is rejected.
Narcosphere 2005 Sept 1
FEMA blocks 500 Florida airboat pilots from rescue work.
Sun Sentinel 2005 Sept 2
FEMA to Chicago: Send just one truck.
Chicago Tribune 2005 Sept 2
FEMA bars morticians from entering New Orleans.
Tri Valley Central 2005 Sept 2
FEMA blocks 500-boat citizen flotilla from delivering aid.
Daily Kos 2005 Sept 3
Homeland Security won't let Red Cross deliver food.
Post Gazette 2005 Sept 3
FEMA fails to utilize Navy ship with 600-bed hospital onboard.
Chicago Tribune 2005 Sept 4
FEMA cuts local emergency communications phone lines.
Meet the Press 2005 Sept 4
FEMA turns away experienced firefighters.
Daily Kos 2005 Sept 5
FEMA turns back Wal-Mart supply trucks.
NY Times 2005 Sept 5
FEMA prevents Coast Guard from delivering diesel fuel.
NY Times 2005 Sept 5
Navy pilots who rescued victims are reprimanded.
NY Times 2005 Sept 7
US government turns back German plane with 15 tons of aid.
Star Tribune 2005 Sept 10
FEMA declines volunteer firemen for rescue operations.
Uses them to distribute public relations pamphlets.

Salt Lake Tribune 2005 Sept 12


Were agents of the federal government trying to kill American citizens? Were they trying to obtain the maximum death toll and the highest level of human suffering?

It would seem that way at first, but I would like to suggest that this incredible behaviour stems from something else - something equally unsettling.

The primary job of the military, FEMA, and Homeland Security is not to protect the American people in times of emergency but to protect the government in times of emergency and keep it functioning.
Their primary assignment is, not to rescue people, but to control them. Their directive is to relocate families and businesses, confiscate property, commandeer goods, direct labour and services, and establish martial law.

The reason FEMA and Homeland security failed to carry out an effective rescue operation is that this was not their primary mission, and the reason they blocked others from doing so is that any operations not controlled by the central authority are contrary to their directives.
Their objective was to bring the entire area under the control of the federal government - and this they succeeded in doing very well. They did not fail in New Orleans. They were a huge success.

Once this simple fact is understood, everything that happened in the wake of Katrina becomes understandable and logical. If there are new terrorist attacks against the United States or Great Britain (or any other country), what we witnessed in New Orleans may have been a glimpse into the future of what was once a civilized world. https://www.freedomforceinternational.org/


by James Reed

The Murdoch Press continues to celebrate the seeming divine inevitability of Chine becoming "No.1".

A recent article by Paul Lloyd in The Advertiser review (27-28 August 2005) entitled "New World Order" begins:
"The Middle Kingdom is destined to fulfil the ancient Chinese belief that it is the centre of the universe." China will overtake the US by 2049. Australians are the frogs in the well that can't comprehend the vast ocean that is China outside the well. That ocean is fast developing into a military tsunami.

Japanese Economics, Trade and Industry Minister, Shoichi Nakagawa, expressed concerns about the joint military exercises between Russia and China on Shandong Peninsula, China. The exercises were a strategic initiative by which Russia would aid China in suppression of Taiwan's independence. The Japanese see the emergence of an alliance to challenge American influence in the Pacific. Old 'commos' die hard.


by Andrew Ryan

Thomas E. Woods Jr. has published "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History," (Regnery Publishing, 2004).
Woods is of the view that the states should have a prominent role as sovereign entities and that the federal government should be strictly limited. From this perspective Woods argues for a number of interesting theses.
The "American Revolution" was not a "revolution" but a conflict to preserve, for Americans, long-established rights which had been cast aside. The First Amendment prohibition against Congress enacting any law "respecting an establishment of religion" was to prevent federal interference with state religious establishments.

Woods argues that the civil war was not about slavery, but about the place of the States in the Union. Northerners, including Lincoln were not racial egalitarians but white supremacists. Lincoln himself supported repatriation of Negroes back to Africa.

Along with this Woods shows that the North abandoned established laws of war in its "total war" against the South that involved barbarism that had not been seen in civilised times. Civilians were targeted in such campaigns of terror that made the London bombings look like a Sunday school picnic. This is a provocative book. Australia needs its own version.


Here is a 'horror story' that I have received by email.

Nottingham police have been urged to wear the Islamic battle symbol in the form of "good faith" ribbons to show solidarity with the Muslim community. Green is the battle flag of Islam: Mohammed wore a green turban when he rode into battle and his followers carried green banners. That's multiculturalism for you, British style.

I no longer despair or get upset about these absurdities; with each new drop of madness the hope that the toxins of liberalism will be bled out of the body social endures.


The next meeting of the LCSC will be held on Wednesday, 28 September, 2005.

Guest speaker will be Mr Ray Escobar convener of the One Nation Party [Tas]. His subject will be "What's in store for Us?"
He will be focusing on "what the government has in store for farmers, pensioners, the unemployed, small business, unions and workers of Australia. Your very livelihood and assets are in peril."
Venue is: the Max Fry Hall, Trevallyn and the meeting commences at 7.30pm.


At the League of Rights' annual "Frank Bawden Memorial Dinner", Dr. David Mitchell outlined the Constitutional responsibilities and duties of the Governor General.
Which leads us to ask:
Can the Australian people join together on this one important issue and convince the Governor-General to act on their behalf? Surely telecommunications is a vital national public utility and should not be in the hands of foreigners nor potential enemies - and what about our military defence?

Send to the Mayo Tape Library, Box 6 Hahndorf, SA 5245 for the Frank Bawden Memorial Dinner address by constitutional authority Dr. David Mitchell - $6.00 posted - and then ask yourself, can the Australian people forget their differences and come together on this one most important issue? Is there a constitutional power the people can insist the Governor General use to still block the sale of Telstra?


Seminar: "The Spirit of Australia's Constitution and History".

South Australians were treated to a veritable historical, legal and philosophical feast by Dr. David Mitchell at the "Spirit of Australia's Constitution and History" seminar recently held in Adelaide.
One person commended us for having the foresight to invite such a man of deep understanding, knowledge and wisdom and encouraged us to "bring him back again".

Dr. Mitchell deals with some of the wild claims circulating among some of Australia's "freedom movements".

Some examples:
· Claimed: The Commonwealth Constitution was originally a British Act of Parliament and it is not 'legal' in Australia.
· Documents used to appoint Australia's Governor-General are 'illegal', therefore he is not legally appointed.
· The 'half-truthful' claims of some secessionist movements and what those claims mean in law.
· The real facts about the ruling in the England and Wales High Court Chancery Division of a case brought before The Honourable Mr. Justice Lightman, largely designed by Mr. Ian Henke of Hastings, Victoria. Mr. Henke and a group of other Australians sought a decision invalidating the whole of Australia's Commonwealth Constitution Act. Dr. Mitchell dealt with the Appeal and what the Court's decision actually meant.
· It appears the editor of "It's Time" newspaper has fallen into the trap of believing some of the wild claims. In an article "Constitution in jeopardy - once again," Issue 110, which outlines the details of Mr. Henke's first appeal to the England and Wales High Court, the editor claims: "The case of course does expose the invalidity of all present Australian authority, but we always knew that."
· Can we respectfully suggest "It's Time" editor and readers purchase the tapes and listen to what Dr. Mitchell has to say on the matters raised.
· An appeal to 'freedom movements' not to seek to destabilise Australia's legal structure and to be more constructive in their actions.
· And much, much more.

Available in Audio Tape form from the Mayo Tape Library.
Mayo Tapes have packaged the set of six tapes for the price of $30.00 posted.
Order your copies now by sending a Cheque/Money Order to: Mayo Tapes, Box 6, Hahndorf, S.A.
Don't forget to include your return address.


"The Money Trick" Published by Veritas Publishing.
Abraham Lincoln once wrote: "The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity."
"The Money Trick" explains just how the manipulation of money and credit affects every country in the world in peace or conflict.

The subject is little understood by ordinary people - even though this "Money Power" governs their every action, every day, day in, day out and year in and year out.
Discover how a 'Credit Monopoly" creates our money and charges us for the privilege. It is essential the people of a nation understand this because the power to change things comes from the people! Price: $12.00 posted.


Pastor Danny Nalliah from Catch the Fire Ministries has accepted an invitation to present a paper "A Christian's Right to Free Speech," at the National Seminar on the Saturday (morning) 8th October.

Paul Fromm is a Freedom Activist from Canada.

Now is the time to make bookings for the National Weekend's "New Times Dinner", Seminar and Divine Service and Conference. Mr. Paul Fromm from Canada will also be one of the guest speakers.

Dates are: The "New Times Dinner", Friday, 7th October.
Seminar: Saturday, 8th October. Divine Service and Conference, Sunday, 9th October, 2005.
The venue is The Hume Inn, 406 Wodonga Place, Albury, NSW - just over the border from Victoria.

Prices are: "New Times" Dinner $30.00 per person. Seminar: $20.00 per person
Make out Money Orders/Cheques to Australian League of Rights and post to: Box 1052 GPO Melbourne 3001.

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