April 2006 Thought for the Week:
Blessings of Easter To All
Through the strength of Christ's birth with his baptism,
the strength of his crucifixion with his burial,
Through the strength of his
resurrection with his ascension,
Through the strength of his descent for the
judgement of Doom
- St. Patrick, approx. 390- 461AD.
SAINT PATRICK - A MAN AFTER MY OWN HEART
This season of Lent is one of those special occasions when Christians
take time out from a busy life for contemplation and reflection. Writer Thomas
Cahill in introducing me to Saint Patrick, the apostle to the Irish people ("How
the Irish Saved Civilisation," Hodder and Stoughton, 1995) gave me much to contemplate
and reflect upon.
Kidnapped by Irish cattle raiders from Roman Britain when
just 16 years old, he spent 6 years as a shepherd-slave boy with two constant
companions, hunger and nakedness. The gnawing in his belly and the chill on his
exposed skin were his acutely painful presences that could not be shaken off.
In this dreadful situation, he found there was no one to turn but the God of his
Enduring those six years of harsh isolation, he grew from
a careless boy to something he would surely never otherwise have become - a holy
man, indeed a visionary for whom there was no longer any rigid separation between
this world and the next. We might say, he came to see that Reality 'is all one
piece' and the 'sifting process' which he had been put through was all part of
the learning process.
("And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold Satan has
desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat; but I have prayed for you,
that your faith fails not. And when you are converted, strengthen your brethren."
escaped his enslavement, he fled to the continent, where he and his companions
found much devastation caused by the marauding Germans. It was a few more years
before he reached home once more. But called back to Ireland, he Patricius, the
escaped slave, returned as Saint Patrick the apostle to the Irish nation.
did C.H. Douglas have to say about "the sifting process"? (On Target
"And," he said, "we have just experienced something of that kind,
and, while having taken very little part in it, I have watched with the greatest
attention the sifting process going on. It has been, to a great extent a sifting
of character. If this sounds like rudeness it is really far from it - but it has
been a sifting of character far more than of brilliance or superficial ability.
I discount brilliance and superficial ability for very much the same reasons that,
even a salesman discounts "flashy" brilliance.
There is a process by which
to use the jargon of modern psychology, things become driven down into the subconscious,
and it is by a steady process of that kind that the composite parts and tendencies
of individuals become character, which is something very important. Dr. Tudor
Jones has very properly defined character as 'the policy of the individual.'"
Taken from The New Era 10 March, 1939.
to Saint Patrick:
Cahill notes that for all his qualities and virtues,
Saint Patrick would not necessarily have won converts - at least, not among a
people as stubborn as the Irish. So how did Patrick do it? It is said he reached
down deep into their psyche and making the connection between the Gospel story
and Irish life he transmuted their pagan virtues of loyalty, courage, and generosity
into the Christian equivalents of faith, hope and charity.
seek to bend the Irish to his will, as the present dark lords of this temporal
world are attempting to do to us, Cahill writes that "he opened their minds and
their spirits to a world where all beings and events come from the hand of a good
God, who loves human beings and wishes them success. And though that success is
of an ultimate kind - and therefore does not preclude suffering - all nature,
indeed the whole of the created universe, conspires to mankind's good, teaching
and succouring and saving."
Now that, to me, is a social credit view of God's
creation. Yes indeed, Saint Patrick is a man after my own heart.
WORK UNTIL YOU DROP
According to New Scientist ("Get Up and Go," 18 February,
2006) scientists are perfecting a new range of drugs that will enable people to
go for days without sleep - or give a good night's rest in merely 2 hours. Already
one drug, the stimulant Modafinil, allows one to be "wired awake" without the
problems caused by amphetamines. Or so they say. Watch out for its future effects.
The end result of this work will be the elimination of human sleep. That time
will not be devoted to increased leisure. It will merely extend the work day.
enterprise bargaining, people preferring normal sleep will be at a distinct disadvantage
in obtaining work, by contrast to drug takers willing to work until they drop.
The scientists developing technology seldom
get the criticism which they richly deserve for their monstrous assaults on life.
The myth of value-free research and the free enterprise of research protects them:
we are only seeking the truth. But it is a myth: most scientific research is industry-directed
and geared towards seeking profits, not "the truth".
have no care about the social consequences of their evil creations. The real proof
of this allegation is that the vast majority of the world's scientists busily
work away for the military. They have no conscience or ethics and can never say
no to a field of research which promises money from the military industrial complex.
They are the true evil magicians of our times, creatures of arrogance and deceit.
Unlike though, the evil magicians of a past age, their form of black technological
magic is destroying human life as we know it at its most basic level.
time for scientists to be made accountable for their actions.
LIVING HIGH WHILE AFRICA SINKS by
The Sunday Times reports that the President of the Republic
of Congo, Denis Sassou-Nguesso paid over $US175,000 (AUS$231,000) in cash towards
a $US295,000 hotel bill that he and his cronies ran up at a 2005 UN Summit. He
was negotiating with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to cancel
most of the Congo's debts on the grounds that the country could not afford to
President Sassou-Nguesso has learnt the ways of Western politicians:
live high while your country sinks into the quick sands of poverty and degeneration.
ALBERT EINSTEIN: THE
INCORRIGIBLE PLAGIARISTby Andrew Ryan
science has it that Albert Einstein is a super genius - the greatest scientist
who has ever lived. Einstein has often been taken as an example of Jewish intellectual
supremacism, the super Jewish brain. But was he?
Certainly if Einstein plagiarised
this special and general theories of relativity he cannot be regarded as a scientific
genius. Rather, he belongs in the camp of Martin Luther king, who plagiarised
his Ph.D. thesis and many of his major speeches.
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
in his book "Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist" (XTX Inc., 2002) has
set out in scholarly detail, with comprehensive references, the case that Einstein
was a plagiarist. The front cover of the book has a quote from Einstein saying:
"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources."
shows that the special theory of relativity was developed before Einstein by scientists
such as L.G. Lange, W. Voigt, G.F. FitzGerald, J. Larmor, H.A. Lortentz, J.H.
Poincare, P. Drude and P. Langevin. The general theory of relativity was also
anticipated by Silberstein, Harry Bateman, W.K. Clifford, Ernst Brücke and others.Einstein's
original 1905 paper contained no footnotes or references to the work of other
scientists - which is quite contrary to scientific conventions of honesty.
Bjerknes established beyond doubt that Einstein was a plagiarist. This insightful
book contains a brief chapter on the hero worship of Einstein. It is a pity that
the author did not explore Einstein's Zionist background in more detail and the
part he played in the controversies of the Twentieth Century.
PRO-ISRAEL LOBBY IN U.S. UNDER PUBLIC
SCRUTINY - AT LAST!
Two of America's top scholars
have published a searing attack on the role and power of Washington's pro-Israel
lobby in a British journal, warning that its "decisive" role in fomenting the
Iraq war is now being repeated with the threat of action against Iran. And they
say that the Lobby is so strong that they doubt their article would be accepted
in any U.S.-based publication.
Professor John Mearsheimer of the University
of Chicago, author of "The Tragedy of Great Power Politics," and Professor
Stephen Walt of Harvard's Kennedy School, and author of "Taming American
Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy," are leading figures in American
They claim that the Israel lobby has distorted American policy
and operates against American interests, that it has organised the funnelling
of more than $140 billion dollars to Israel and "has a stranglehold" on the U.S.
Congress, and its ability to raise large campaign funds gives its vast influence
over Republican and Democratic administrations, while its role in Washington think
tanks on the Middle East dominates the policy debate.
And they say that the Lobby works ruthlessly to suppress questioning of its
role, to blacken its critics and to crush serious debate about the wisdom of supporting
Israel in U.S. public life. "Silencing skeptics by organizing blacklists and boycotts
- or by suggesting that critics are anti-Semites - violates the principle of open
debate on which democracy depends," Walt and Mearsheimer write. "The inability
of Congress to conduct a genuine debate on these important issues paralyses the
entire process of democratic deliberation. Israel's backers should be free to
make their case and to challenge those who disagree with them, but efforts to
stifle debate by intimidation must be roundly condemned," they add, in the 12,800-word
article published in the latest issue of The London Review of Books.
article focuses strongly on the role of the "neo-conservatives" within the Bush
administration in driving the decision to launch the war on Iraq. "The main driving
force behind the war was a small band of neo-conservatives, many with ties to
the Likud," Mearsheimer and Walt argue." Given the neo-conservatives' devotion
to Israel, their obsession with Iraq, and their influence in the Bush administration,
it isn't surprising that many Americans suspected that the war was designed to
further Israeli interests."
"The neo-conservatives had been determined to topple Saddam even
before Bush became president. They caused a stir early in 1998 by publishing two
open letters to Clinton, calling for Saddam's removal from power. The signatories,
many of whom had close ties to pro-Israel groups like JINSA (Jewish Institute
for National Security Affairs) or WINEP (Washington Institute for Near Eastern
Policy), and who included Elliot Abrams, John Bolton, Douglas Feith, William Kristol,
Bernard Lewis, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, had little trouble
persuading the Clinton administration to adopt the general goal of ousting Saddam.
But they were unable to sell a war to achieve that objective. They were no more
able to generate enthusiasm for invading Iraq in the early months of the Bush
administration. They needed help to achieve their aim. That help arrived with
9/11. Specifically, the events of that day led Bush and Cheney to reverse course
and become strong proponents of a preventive war," Walt and Mearsheimer write.
article, which is already stirring furious debate in U.S. academic and intellectual
circles, also explores the historical role of the Lobby.
of another state'
"For the past several decades, and especially since
the Six-Day War in 1967, the centrepiece of U.S. Middle Eastern policy has been
its relationship with Israel," the article says.
"The combination of unwavering
support for Israel and the related effort to spread 'democracy' throughout the
region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized not only U.S. security
but that of much of the rest of the world. This situation has no equal in American
political history. "Why has the U.S. been willing to set aside its own security
and that of many of its allies in order to advance the interests of another state?"
Professors Walt and Mearsheimer add.
"The thrust of U.S. policy in the region derives almost entirely from domestic
politics, and especially the activities of the 'Israel Lobby'. Other special-interest
groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert
it as far from what the national interest would suggest, while simultaneously
convincing Americans that U.S. interests and those of the other country - in this
case, Israel - are essentially identical," they add.
They argue that far from
being a strategic asset to the United States, Israel "is becoming a strategic
burden" and "does not behave like a loyal ally." They also suggest that Israel
is also now "a liability in the war on terror and the broader effort to deal with
rogue states. "Saying that Israel and the U.S. are united by a shared terrorist
threat has the causal relationship backwards: the U.S. has a terrorism problem
in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way around,"
Question Israel's democratic
"Support for Israel is not the only source of anti-American terrorism,
but it is an important one, and it makes winning the war on terror more difficult.
There is no question that many al-Qaida leaders, including Osama bin Laden, are
motivated by Israel's presence in Jerusalem and the plight of the Palestinians.
Unconditional support for Israel makes it easier for extremists to rally popular
support and to attract recruits."
They question the argument that Israel deserves
support as the only democracy in the Middle East, claiming that "some aspects
of Israeli democracy are at odds with core American values. Unlike the U.S., where
people are supposed to enjoy equal rights irrespective of race, religion or ethnicity,
Israel was explicitly founded as a Jewish state and citizenship is based on the
principle of blood kinship. Given this, it is not surprising that its 1.3 million
Arabs are treated as second-class citizens."
The most powerful force in the
Lobby is AIPAC, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, which Walt and Mearsheimer
call "a de facto agent for a foreign government," and which they say has now forged
an important alliance with evangelical Christian groups. The bulk of the article
is a detailed analysis of the way they claim the Lobby managed to change the Bush
administration's policy from "halting Israel's expansionist policies in the Occupied
Territories and advocating the creation of a Palestinian state" and divert it
to the war on Iraq instead.
"Pressure from Israel and the Lobby was not the only factor behind the decision
to attack Iraq in March 2003, but it was critical." "Thanks to the lobby, the
United States has become the de facto enabler of Israeli expansion in the Occupied
Territories, making it complicit in the crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians,"
and conclude that "Israel itself would probably be better off if the Lobby were
less powerful and U.S. policy more even-handed." Source: UPI Monday, 20 March
MABO THERE IS A MASON
by Ian Wilson LL.B.
The former Chief Justice of the High Court, Sir Anthony Mason, who along with
six other judges decided the Mabo case which overturned Australia's property laws,
has come out from the silence of judicial retirement, to respond to the attack
on this judgement by Michael Conner in his book "The Invention of Terra Nullius".
In 1994, in the UN Year of Indigenous People, the Mason-led Court decided
that the British Crown on establishing sovereignty did not acquire a universal
right to land which excluded native title as Australia was not terra nullius,
or unowned by none (sovereign). Conner has won the intellectual battle on the
terra nullius issue. Mason has responded saying that the decision was based
on "common law". What this means is "court decisions".
If one looks at the
judgement, then we again find that the concept of terra nullius was central
to the arguments about "tenure" and "ownership". Even if there was Aboriginal
title pre-1788 it was extinguished by the establishment of British sovereignty:
otherwise there would not be full sovereignty. The High Court tried many slippery
arguments to get over these basic points, but their judgement is unconvincing.
It was an ideological decision.
lamented about supposed injustices as if he was a member of the Aboriginal lobby.
Mason (The Weekend Australian 25-26/2/06, p.7) says, revealingly that the
judgement showed that the view Aborigines were nomads "without any relationship
with the land" was "wrong". But the judgement concerned the Meriam people who
were not even racially Aboriginal at all. The judges then jumped to conclusions,
based on the flawed work of Henry Reynolds (as shown by Keith Windschuttle and
Michael Connor) about mainland Aborigines.
The Mabo judgement then was
not based on sound legal argument but upon politically correct ideology. In reading
this judgement I felt that the judges already had their conclusion and merely
worked backwards, looking for convincing legitimising reasons. Was it merely a
coincidence that this judgement came down in the UN Year of Indigenous People?
In any case, Justice Deane, of Mabo fame, later became Governor General of Australia
- and one of our most bleeding heart, politically correct preachers.
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
the Editor of The Australian, April 2006:
A disturbing trend in nations
of Western European culture is the growing governmental inhibition on free speech,
coupled with popular negligence of the long-term dangers involved. In Australia
justice does not seem to have been done by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
Commission (HREOC) to Professor Andrew Fraser ('No apology for linking Africans
to crime', 4/4/06).
Objection by the HREOC chairman
John von Doussa to terms used by Fraser in his contentious letter such as 'national
suicide' appears to be a peculiar and subjective judgment that flies in the face
of traditional standards of public discourse in our media. Von Doussa seems to
quite unreasonably imagine that a qualified academic, in writing a letter to the
editor of a newspaper, should couch his message in the same manner he would use
for an academic journal.
Copious and apparently convincing evidence supplied
to the HREOC by Fraser, establishing much worldwide scientific support for his
expressed views, appears simply to have been ignored. In this context it is regrettable
that your report ('Academic won't be muzzled', 5/4/06) uses prejudicial language
to disparage Fraser in its reference to 'prominent neo-Nazis and other right-wing
A second example of serious inhibition of free speech is the
treatment of lecturer Frank Ellis by Leeds University ('Lecturer ousted for racial
slur', HES 5/4), whose statements are in line with those of Fraser.
based upon truth does not need to proscribe the public expression of controversial
views on religion, science, race, politics and sex - and certainly not when they
are published by learned academics. Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic
LEUNIG: DRAW YOUR WAY OUT OF THIS ONEby
Michael Leunig, a somewhat weird cartoonist for The Age,
hit the headlines recently when freelance journalist Richard Cooke fraudulently
entered one of his cartoons in an Iranian newspaper competition for the world's
"best" (or "worst" depending on your Middle Eastern political perspective) Holocaust
cartoon. (The Age, 16/2/06, p.3)
The cartoon equated the Nazi camp
at Auschwitz in 1942 with Israel's treatment of the Palestinians in 2002. That
is a common enough comparison made by left wing critics of Zionism. The cartoon
naturally enough offended the Jewish community and still does. However Leunig
supported the decision not to publish the Danish cartoons on religious respect
grounds. When pressed about his cartoon critical of Israel he said that it was
primarily an 'anti-war" drawing but granted that it did comment on Israel's Palestinian
policy. (The Australian 15/2/06, p.6)
That is hardly a coherent defence:
if cartoonists should be free to comment as they see fit on matters of Israeli/Palestinian
conflict, then why draw a protective line around Islam? If there should be free
speech about the first matter, then there should be free speech about the second.
And, by the way, Leunig has not responded to the most obvious point in this
controversy: that the Iranian newspaper Hamshahri took the entry as a serious
entry. It might even have won the contest!
To make this situation even more
surreal - much like a Leunig cartoon - the Fairfax editorial director has written
to the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council, asking for an apology over
comments which they made about Leunig (The Weekend Australian, 18-19/2/06,
p.2). I can't wait for the TV soap opera about all of this.
SOME MORE LIGHT RELIEFBreaking
News: At New York's Kennedy Airport today, an individual, later discovered to
be a public school teacher was arrested trying to board a flight while in possession
of a ruler, a protractor, a setsquare, a slide rule, and a calculator.
a morning press conference, US Attorney General, John Ashcroft said he believes
the man is a member of the notorious al-Gebra movement. He is being charged by
the FBI with carrying weapons of maths instruction.
"Al-Gebra is a fearsome
cult," Ashcroft said. "They desire average solutions by means and extremes, and
sometimes go off on tangents in search of absolute value. They use secret code
names like 'x' and 'y' and refer to themselves as 'unknowns', but we have determined
they belong to a common denominator of the axis of medieval with coordinates in
every country. As the Greek philanderer Isosceles used to say, 'there are 3 sides
to every triangle''.
When asked to comment on the arrest, President Bush said,
"If God had wanted us to have better weapons of maths instruction, He would have
given us more fingers and toes".