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

4 March 2005. Thought for the Week: "If any would be greatest among you let him be your servant," was not sentimentalism, but a brilliant maxim of social and political organisation."
C.H. Douglas in "The Fig Tree," June, 1938.


by Betty Luks
The joke goes like this: "How do you know when a politician is lying?" The answer being: "When you see his lips moving." And so John Winston Howard has broken his word yet again. He insisted he would not send more Australian servicemen to Iraq; in fact Senator Hill was previously 'making noises' about bringing the troops home in 'eighteen months or thereabouts'.

Decision to commit our troops to war
When did the parliamentary responsibility to commit our troops to war shift to 'cabinet'? Did this shift originate as another party-political convention, just as did the promotion of the status of 'prime minister'? There is no constitutional provision for a prime minister. It is purely a party-political construct. The so-called position of 'prime minister' is decided by a political party back-room vote. The people of Australia choose their own political representatives. Just as did the electorate of Bennelong choose John Howard to represent them.
Should a party-political appointed 'prime minister' be able to commit Australian troops to an overseas war without a full debate and vote in Parliament?

It is not only Australians who have grave misgivings about the war of aggression in Iraq and where Howard's deceitful 'all the way with Dubya-s' policies are leading us. United Kingdom elections are looming and the Blair Labour government is more than anxious to 'move on' from the divisions of the war in Iraq, reports The Guardian 23rd February, 2005.
"Yet, try as it may, the Blair government cannot get the arguments about Iraq to disappear. A new book by the international lawyer Philippe Sands QC,…shows some reasons why. Mr Sands makes fresh claims and poses new questions about one of the most controversial aspects of the decision to go to war - the attorney general's advice to ministers and service chiefs that the attack on Iraq was legal."

If Mr Sands is right, the advice was even more finely balanced than has previously been acknowledged and the use to which it was put more dubious.

The attorney's legal advice was pivotal in the decision to make war
Its key assertion was that Iraq had failed to comply fully with UN resolution 1441 and was thus in material breach of its international obligations following the Gulf war. In Lord Goldsmith's opinion, Iraq's continuing failure to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction created the legal basis for war. A summary of his views was put before the cabinet on two sides of A4 and was then published as a parliamentary written answer.
The following day, its claim that Iraq's material breach had "revived" the authority to use force was a crucial link in the formal war resolution on which MPs voted. (Notice the U.K. politicians at least had a vote!…ed)

During his speech, the prime minister could not have been clearer
"I have never put the justification for action as regime change," he said. "We have to act within the terms set out in resolution 1441 - that is our legal base." In other words, if the attorney general had said that the use of force was legally dubious, Britain could not have attacked Iraq.
But, according to Mr Sands, this is precisely what the attorney general did say.

In his full 13-page advice to the prime minister, dated March 7 - a document that has never been published and which was not shown to the cabinet either - Lord Goldsmith apparently said that the use of force on the basis of resolution 1441 "could be found to be illegal".
It would therefore be much safer to get a second UN resolution to authorise force, he advised. So concerned was the government that it put together a legal team to defend itself against international litigation. So concerned were the service chiefs that they demanded a less ambiguous statement, so that soldiers would not risk being "put through the mill", as the chief of the defence staff Lord Boyce put it.

"I spent a good deal of time recently in the Balkans making sure that Milosevic was put behind bars," the head of the army Sir Michael Jackson is alleged to have said. "I have no intention of ending up in the next cell to him in the Hague." The service chiefs got what they wanted - a summary that was also given to ministers and MPs. But this summary, though issued in Lord Goldsmith's name, was the work of other hands - names in the frame include Lord Falconer, then a home office minister, and Baroness Morgan, Mr Blair's senior political adviser.

These are very serious claims about a piece of advice which caused the foreign office's deputy legal adviser to resign on the grounds that it sanctioned an unlawful use of force amounting to a "crime of aggression". They cannot be allowed to go unanswered.

Three things should therefore be done
· First, the government should end the speculation by publishing all drafts of Lord Goldsmith's advice.
· Second, the public administration select committee should call an inquiry into the advice and the use to which its various forms were put.
· Third, all those involved should answer for their roles in the story.

It is one thing to move on. It is quite another to do so without a full public accounting for one of the murkiest and most dubious decisions ever taken by a modern British government." (emphasis added… ed)


by James Reed
There is a nasty rumour going around some circles in America that George Bush "stole the election". Audit the Vote and Help America Recount (see www.auditthevote.org) has documented evidence of statistical anomalies, voting machine malfunction and outright fraud in the 2004 Presidential election.
Eighty per cent of all votes cast nationally were counted by two corporations, Diebald and ES&S. The head of Diebald said in a 2003 fundraising letter: "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President." Machine malfunctions occurred in many states. In New Mexico official canvass reports show 2,087 "phantom votes" - the number of votes recorded exceeding the number of cast ballots. Bush won New Mexico by less than 6,000 votes.

The monitoring agency Election Protection Coalition received over 200,000 phone calls reporting electoral irregularities on 2nd November 2004 and an additional 200,000 calls were made to a hotline run by Common Cause. Machine malfunctions were common and the optical scanning machines were subject to computer errors. Some of the errors were detected but civil libertarians have doubts that all were.
And so it goes on. One wonders, after pondering upon such material what the situation in Australia is really like? What is the extent of electoral corruption in our land?

It is well known that 'Australia' is bending over backwards to increase the number of Asians in this country. This is done, not only by a racially discriminatory immigration policy - which, under Australia's greatest Asianising Prime Minister, John Howard - but also increasingly through the guest worker/'temporary' migrant scheme. Students and guest workers become permanent stayers.
It is therefore interesting to observe the front-page story of the Indian doctor, Dr. Gursharan Sing in the Adelaide Advertiser, 19/2/05. Dr. Singh laments, from the luxury of India where he has returned, that the workload from being on-call at Wudinna on the Eyre Peninsula of South Australia was "exploitation", and indeed, a human rights violation.

Dr. Singh stayed at Wudinna only six days and 23 hours before returning to India. He was to be paid $100,000 a year, but said that on an hourly basis this was less than a waiter would get. A public sector job in India would pay better.

Dr. Singh has returned to India. With that attitude India is welcome to him. It is time to solve our economic problems without the use of the cargo cult ideology of importing migrants. Let us train more local doctors who have agreed and contracted to do country service.

Editor's comment
We do hope the farmers on the west coast of S.A. are taking note of Dr. Singh's protest of the "exploitation of his human rights" as they continue to struggle to survive on a daily basis, let alone get ahead, amidst all the financial burdens, red tape and restrictions imposed upon them by the three-tiers of government - never mind the soulless financial system. And what about the last four years of drought many have suffered, and bush fires, and loss of life and homes, etc., etc., and whatever else mother nature chooses to throw at them?

We know it is time to solve our economic problems without the use of the cargo cult ideology of importing migrants - but the question is HOW?
Clifford Hugh Douglas warned the western world eighty years ago. There is a double problem to solve.
· The industrialised world had to find an effective means of distributing the products, the results, of the machine. Machines have taken the place of human labour and therefore less wages, salaries and dividends are distributed - as purchasing power - through the production system.
· And at the same time there is the need to restore personal initiative, (to the individual) as well as retain the benefits of mechanisation for productive purposes.

Douglas' warning was: A faulty philosophy lies at the core of the problem confronting Western civilisation.

Douglas grasped that with the advent of the machine, industry became essentially co-operative, and policy became a matter of public concern.
That is why we seek to encourage our readers to grasp the importance of their potential social dynamic, which could be used constructively and for the good of us all. Instead of which, our financial and political masters continually seek to divide us and thereby rule over us. AND NO ONE IS SATISFIED WITH THE PRESENT SYSTEM!


by Ken Grundy
One of our readers sent the following letter in response to James Reed's article on the Liberals' proposal to issue food vouchers in place of welfare payments in money.

"The suggestion by some elements within the Liberal party, that welfare recipients be given vouchers or stamps to access basic living requirements, has received a mixed reaction. Some publicity suggests the level of welfare will be reduced and the stay-at-home-mums will be thrust back into the workforce. But need that occur if the level of welfare is maintained? In any case, society is prepared to acknowledge the contribution of mothers who stay at home and is willing to support them. Similarly with the aged and disabled, whose welfare is not questioned.

Australia has a vast pool of unemployed people, many of whom are young and fit. Australia also has many manual labour jobs, for which few people apply. Many of these are in the primary industry scene with fruit picking being the most noteworthy. Is it more desirable to get "fly-in fly-out" workers from overseas to pick the fruit or to get Aussies to do the work? The question does not deserve an answer.

But how will we motivate our own people to work? Is the dole too generous? Would vouchers or stamps rather than cash, assist?
For those of us who cherish freedom, the vouchers would deny the recipient some freedom of choice. The welfare could only be spent as directed (e.g. food) rather than luxuries. Does this clash with our philosophy?

Does anyone have total freedom of choice?
The employed have to abide by the firm's rules; the soldier has to accept orders; the prisoner has even fewer choices. Is it too much to ask the unemployed to accept welfare with restrictions? Welfare is different from a social dividend which would be applicable to every citizen. The dividend is a reward which the dole should never be.

Imagine how welfare would be distributed if we did not have a money system. It would be similar to circumstances after a bushfire - the needy would be given clothes, food and shelter, not cash. In our modern society we have found it more convenient to pay cash. The system has been abused by some and many would claim it has destroyed for many, the incentive to work. How will we get the fruit picked?"

We know there are graziers at their wits end looking for shearers during the shearing season and fruit and grape growers desperate for workers during the harvest. What is at least one answer to this problem if we are to avoid that 'cargo-cult' mentality? The young unemployed have yet to make their contribution to the overall wealth of the community and the nation, and these occupations need the fit and healthy for the work. Maybe the short-term answer is, the dole should be taken away from the younger long-term unemployed?
We must be careful in tarring all the young with the same brush, and there are other factors which must be taken into account, but as a broad policy, it is important the younger generation learn to take up their responsibilities and make their contributions where needed.

'Welfare' has been practised in one form or another, for thousands of years. In ancient communities a 'tithe' of production was paid IN KIND for the upkeep of the church/state and from this 'tithe' a portion was 'doled out' to the poor and needy. St. James reminds us this was so in his letter to the twelve tribes: "… to go to the help of orphans and widows in their distress…"
The principle underlying it is that the 'goods', the 'fruits of the earth' are for all the community. (God sends the rain on the just and the unjust). But we now live in an industrialised, technological automated economy and - generally - not all the available human labour is needed in the production system.

In many cases, machines, mechanical helps, have taken the place of the primary producers' workers - and the workers are only required when the shearing is to be done or the harvest gathered. That is, when the workload is too great for the small amount of human labour now regularly used on most farms. Another problem could be that with the diminished population, there are not enough neighbours to 'help one another' - to call on for assistance!

It was C.H. Douglas who recognised what was happening eighty years ago and he said we must study "the new economics", the changed circumstances, and adjust our social policies accordingly.
· How was this going to be done?
· Who was going to do it?
· Who had the (legitimate) power to make the changes?
· Whose social responsibility was it to insist the changes were made?

His analyses and proposals are now known as that body of knowledge called Social Credit. It was, he insisted, the responsibility of the political representatives to make the changes for the common good. It was a matter of social policy. But, he wrote: "The first strategy has many times been emphasized - it is to insist that Members of Parliament are representatives not delegates… the same principle can be carried into every official quarter… get the mental attitude well established in oneself that institutions exist only legitimately to serve individuals…
"Every prohibition of individual initiative is a victory for the enemy to exactly the extent that it is effective… Not only does it, in itself, represent one more step towards the Slave World, but, except under certain conditions, it sets up a habit of apathetic acquiescence which is exactly what is desired… Against this hypnotic obsession, argument is useless - dehypnotisation is essential." ("The Big Idea" 1942)

As for the problem of doctors not wanting to work in country practices, their situation could provide, in miniature, a picture of some of the problems facing us all.
To name some: Too many country towns have died or are dying. Farmers, for financial reasons, forced to 'get big or get out' have gobbled up surrounding properties. The support services and industries couldn't survive on such a small clientele and they in turn went out of business or moved on to a regional base. The young offspring fled to the cities for work and the average age of the still-struggling farmer is in the middle sixties. In many, many cases there is not a bank within 2 hours travelling time to conduct everyday financial matters. With the dwindling population it is nigh on impossible for the remnant to carry on the social activities such as the football teams and clubs, the social infrastructures.

Surely the doctor will ask some of the following questions before making any moves?
· Will the children have a local school to attend and what about local friends?
· What about secondary education for the older ones?
· Will the children have to join the daily drudge of the remaining country children as they 'commute' early mornings and late afternoons to and from a regional education centre?
· What about my wife? With whom will she strike up friendships - the patients in the local nursing homes? Most country centres have lost their hospitals, the local 'hospital' being downgraded to a nursing home for the elderly.
· Even a dedicated doctor needs to have some social life, let alone home life - if he is to survive a grindingly long-houred country medical practice.
· Who in the community would he share his interests with? And so on, and so on.

We know of one South Australian country town which has had a steady stream of imported foreign doctors coming and going - but none staying, not in their town anyhow. The 'rot set in' some time back. Over a lifetime Eric Butler warned his fellow Australians:
"The whole world is on a disastrous treadmill, and all attempts to run harder to keep pace, can only intensify the growing convulsions right around the world. What is left of Civilisation is going to be saved only by one nation, for a start, deciding to get off the… treadmill."

** The League has an "Introductory Course on Social Dynamics" for those willing to become part of the answer rather than being part of the problem. It is conducted by correspondence and is done at the individual's own pace. The Introductory Course was originally compiled by Eric D. Butler. The charge is $30.00 to cover the cost of postage and handling. Send for more details to P.O. Box 27, Happy Valley 5159


by Betty Luks
I well remember Mr. Danny Johnson during a 1990s "Bankwatch Rally" in South Australia. He warned his fellow Australian farmers that unless they faced what the governments and the banks of the day were doing to them, and helped their neighbour as well as helping themselves, the day would come when there would be no social infrastructure left around them. And that is just what has happened!

The grim lesson Australians are learning is that all our decisions and actions, our indecisions and inactions, individually and nationally, have a 'ripple on' effect. We are now reaping the fruits, or experiencing the long-term effects, of decisions taken many, many, years ago.

The "Danny Johnson Protest March"
On Target reported on the grassroots protest march triggered by Danny Johnson, the small businessman from Warracknabeal, Victoria back in 1992. His letter, to The Wimmera Mail-Times, "from the heart" of a typically decent Australian fearful of what was happening to traditional Australia and its value systems struck a deep chord among the hundreds of thousands of 'Danny Johnsons' across the nation.

On 4th, January 1992 over 50,000 Australians converged on the city of Melbourne to peacefully protest what was happening. At the time, the League commended Danny for his initiative but stressed "unless the movement gave rise to some type of a cohesive structure with a constructive programme of action, it would be but one more example of what C.H. Douglas described as "the tragedy of human effort".
There have been many political protest rallies, street marches, many ingenious ways used for people to 'let off some of the steam' of the frustration and anger they felt at what was happening to them. But, the reality is, as Clifford Hugh Douglas pointed out to us all those years ago.

"The first strategy has many times been emphasized - it is to insist that Members of Parliament are representatives not delegates… But the same principle can be carried into every official quarter. Once get the mental attitude well established in oneself that institutions exist only legitimately to serve individuals." ("The Big Idea", 1942).


Constitutional Property Rights Committee
Many farmers and graziers are extremely concerned by the push to deprive them of their water rights and supplies. The following letter published in The Argus (Goondiwindi) 5/1/05 shows there is a responsible group of Australians who have come together on that important issue.

"All local councils in New South Wales have been asked to lodge submissions by February 14, 2005 with suggestions of how a new rating structure could be implemented now that "water" has been supposedly separated from "land". Separating water from land could reduce our Narrabri rate revenue by at least $1 million. Mr Gary Payne the director of Local Government has asked all local councils for help. Help to get the State off the hook and out of a deep black hole.
The reason that the State is in confusion is that the Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources (D.I.P.N.R.) is at odds with Section six of the 86 year-old Land and Valuation Act which clearly says "water and land are one unit and will remain so forever."

I suppose DIPNR thought they had a win when no one checked them when they tried and are still trying to separate "vegetation from land via the 1997 Vegetation Act. They are wrong with separating vegetation from the land via the Vegetation act, as they are wrong in attempting to separate Water from land via the new Water Act. Local Government recognises through its Planning and Assessment Act that the make up of "land" as a unit is made up of soil and air as well as water and vegetation.

Fifteen months ago a Constitutional Property Rights Committee of which I am a member asked the Narrabri Council to write to the L.G. Dept seeking information how our rates clerk will rate irrigation land which has water physically attached to it but no entitlement to water because someone in Macquarie Street transferred the water. The answer has come back twice, "we don't know".

Every council must resist the temptation to sort out the mess.
If a council even suggests a way out of this hole the Government has created, then that council does not understand we will be part of the "problem" and not part of the solution. All councils must write to our Director (of Local Government) Mr Gary Payne and point out the mistake made in violating the 1918 Land Valuation Act. Local Government has within its charts the necessary authority to clear up this water and vegetation fiasco. The Shires Association should call a special meeting and advise Macquarie Street of their monumental error.
Councillor Bevan O'Regan, Member of the Constitutional Property Rights Committee (CPRC).

* Those primary producers worried about the threats to their water rights should make contact with Councillor Bevan O'Regan by writing to him at Narrabri, NSW 2390.


It can easily be demonstrated Australians are most successful in so many ways, individually and in associations. There is an increment, a benefit, of and from that association. We can all draw on the 'social credit' of our communities when we come together on an issue or a task. What about you becoming involved at your own local level? There are many matters that need our attention, but they also need constructive policies.


The TELSTRA CAMPAIGN is an effective means of demonstrating the latent social dynamic of each and every Australian elector. Target those Senators in your own state who would put Australia before their party - if they had enough support from the Australian people! (There is more ammunition in the pipeline.)
Write to local business leaders and community groups seeking their involvement in the campaign.
Send for your supply of "Telstra" flyers. Addresses on back page of Bulletin.
Prices include postage & handling: 5 copies $3.00; 10 copies $5.00; 50 copies $15.00

Hasco's Peoples' Poll
Another initiative from the Queensland folk. The Poll is run by volunteer teams in a growing number of Queensland centres, as a service to voters, consumers, political representatives and the media. For further information: Hasco Inc., P.O. Box 642, Nanango, Qld. 4615. Ph: 07 4163 2160.
Constitutional Property Rights Committee:
Make contact with Councillor Bevan O'Regan by writing to him at Narrabri, NSW 2390.


To be held on Saturday, 19th March, 2005. Assembly is from 12.00noon. Guests for Lunch to be seated by 12.30pm through to 1.30pm. The Seminar will then commence at 1.35pm going through to 4.45pm. The venue will be The Central Hotel, No 1 Princes Highway, Beaconsfield Vic. The Hotel is on the old Princes Highway, just 5 minutes walk from the Beaconsfield Railway Station.
The speakers: Donald Auchterlonie, "Bridging the (purchasing power) Gap"; Kurt Bauer, "Party Politics in the EU". Mr. Bauer toured Europe in 2004. And Betty Luks will speak on "Aspects of Social Credit in the Gospels".
The charge will be $28.00 per person and RSVP's to be in by 10/3/05. Make cheques out to Australian League of Rights, indicate what they are for, then send to G.P.O Box 1052, Melbourne 3001. (Evening meals will be available in the bistro for anyone wishing to stay later.


"The Money Trick": Veritas Publishing Co. is to be commended for bringing out an updated version of this valuable Australian publication. This new edition needs to go out in its thousands to people who still believe banks only lend out other people's deposits!
Creating money 'from nothing' is the banking fraternity's greatest 'black magic' trick -- ever! Learn how your home-loan is created from nothing; learn how we, the people, produce all the wealth, all the goods and services, while the banks produce all the debts! Learn why Governments are on a 'debt roller-coaster' -- and why under such a fraudulent system, debt and tax increases are inevitable.
Learn about Paul Keating's betrayal of the Australian people when he opened our nation's doors to 13 foreign banks.
Learn why John Howard toadies to the American establishment! Price: $11.00 posted.

"How to Kill a Country" by Linda Weiss, Elizabeth Thurbon & John Mathews.
Australians have been sold out by their so-called political representatives for far too long. The Australia-US Free Trade Agreement with the United States of America must be the last straw. This book by three Australian academics discloses the devastating trade deal our so-called political representatives and bureaucrats have made with the Americans.
We want a national strategy which takes pride in Australia's achievements, has confidence in its people's abilities, and adopt a positive view of our future, one that will seek to secure the conditions necessary to safeguard what we have developed and to enhance its value in the future. Price: $29.95 posted.

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