November 2006 Thought for the Week:
"The shifting of emphasis
from the individual to the group, which is involved in collectivism, logically
involves a shifting of responsibility for action. This can be made, it would appear,
an interesting test of the validity of the theory. For instance, the individual
killing of one man by another we term murder. But collective and wholesale killing,
we dignify by the name of war, and we especially absolve the individual from the
consequences of any acts which are committed under the orders of a superior officer.
This appears to work admirably so long as the results of the action take place
on a plane on which they can be observed; but immediately they do, the theory
obviously breaks down. There may be, ex-hypothesi, no moral guilt attributable
to the individual who goes to war; but the effect of intercepting the line of
flight of a high-speed bullet will be found to be exactly the same whether it
is fired by a national or private opponent.
'Nations' are alleged to have
waged the first world war, but the casualties both of life and property fell upon
individuals. There is no such thing as an effective national responsibility -
it is pure abstraction, under cover of which, oppression and tyranny to individuals,
which would not be tolerated if inflicted by a personal ruler, escape effective
- Clifford Hugh Douglas in "Social Credit"
First edition 1924.
When this book is released I will go without a bottle of red, buy
it and write a long review for you: Bob Woodward, "State of Denial," (Simon and
Schuster, New York, 2006) to be released just before the US mid term elections.
Bob Woodward was the journalist who in the early 1970s, along with Carl Bernstein,
both of the Washington Post exposed the Watergate scandal. Woodward in his previous
writings has been generally sympathetic to the Bush administration, but now he
is exposing how the administration's war in Iraq is imploding.
to pre-publication reviews the book is full of gems: such as that two months before
September 11, 2001 Condoleeza Rice dismissed CIA warnings that al-Qa'ida was preparing
for an attack on US soil. The book will come out at a time when the Democrats
could take control of Congress. Many want to impeach President Bush, most want
a full investigation into reasons for the Iraq war.
the neo-cons will ultimately go, to be replaced by another group of con-men and
con-women, who all work for the same masters, who all bow to the warlocks of international
financial capital, who will all do all that they can, to sink the American people.
Instead of a book "State of Denial" I would prefer to see a book along the lines
of "Servants of Satan: How Our Elected Leaders Betray Us, Deceived Us and Sell
Us Out - And WHAT YOU CAN DO TO STOP THEM!"
FORWARD BASE "FALCON" DISASTER?
at On Target take no pleasure in reporting on what appears to be a tragic
loss of American and Iraqi lives. If the report is factual, and we have not been
able to confirm it as yet, the old men in Washington, London and Canberra -who
send our sons and daughters off to war, not in defence of our own lands, but to
fulfil their evil agenda for world domination - will have their 'spin doctors'
furiously working on their 'double speak' to present the tragedy in a far better
light than is the reality.
Brian Harring issued
the following edited report:
"Late on the evening of October 10, 2006, Iraqi
resistance groups lobbed mortar and rocket rounds into the immense 'Forward Base
Falcon,' the largest American military base in Iraq, located 13 km south of the
Green Zone in Baghdad. In addition to accurate mortar fire, Grad and Katyusha
rockets were also used. Falcon base was designed to house a large contingent of
American troops, mostly drawn from the 4th Infantry Division, stationed at Fr.
Bliss, Texas. At the time of the attack, there were approximately 3000 men inside
the camp, which also was filled with ammunition supplies, fuel, tanks and vehicles.
After the initial shelling, fuel and ammunition
stores began to erupt with massive explosions that could be heard, and seen, miles
away inside the Green Zone where U.S. military and diplomatic units were heavily
guarded. The explosions, all of them termed "immense" by BBC reporters, continued
throughout the night.
An after action report,
issued by the Department of Defense, stated that: "On October 10, 2006, at approximately
10:40 p.m., a 82mm mortar round, fired by militia forces from a residential area
in Abu T-Shir, caused a fire at an Ammunition Supply Point (ASP) at FOB Falcon.
The ASP, containing tank and artillery rounds, in addition to smaller calibre
ammunition, set off a series of large explosions. About 100 troops from the 4th
Infantry Division were reported to be stationed at the base at the time, but no
injuries were reported."
When the flames had
been brought under control on the morning of the 11th of October, primarily because
the entire camp had been gutted, nine large American military transports with
prominent Red Cross markings were observed by members of the foreign media taking
off, laden with the dead and the wounded.
sources have reported - but at this stage we cannot confirm:
American troops, including U.S. Army and Marines, CIA agents and U.S. translators
were casualties and there also were 165 seriously injured requiring major medical
attention and 39 suffering lesser injuries. 122 members of the Iraqi armed forces
were killed and 90 seriously injured members of same, were also evacuated to the
U.S. military hospital at al-Habbaniyah located some 70km west of Baghdad.
Official U.S. Department of Defense statements indicating that there were no deaths;
that only a hundred men were inside the base guarding billions of dollars of vital
military equipment and that there were "only two minor injuries to personnel,"
passes belief and certainly reality is more painful than propaganda."
SCHOOLS AND THE
by Brian Simpson
contact with our schools will know that ideologues of the worst Leftist species
'rule the roost'. Education Minister Julie Bishop summed up the situation in a
speech to the History Teachers Association of Australia on 6 October 2006. She
said: "Some of the themes emerging in school curriculum are straight from Chairman
Mao. We are talking serious ideology here. Ideologues
have hijacked school curriculum
and are experimenting with the education of our young people from a comfortable
position of unaccountability. We need to take school curriculum out of the hands
of ideologues in the state and territory education bureaucracies and give it to
a national board of studies, comprising the sensible centre of educators." (The
Australian 6/10/06 p.1)
Bloom, a leading Shakespeare authority said in April that a question in a leading
Sydney girls' high school requiring the application of Marxist, feminist and racial
analysis to Shakespeare's Othello, he found the question "sublimely stupid". Along
the same lines, subjects such as geography have merged into "studies of society
and environment" where the ideology of naïve left-wing environmentalism rules
(The Australian 28/9/06 p.11). A national board of studies may end such
Nevertheless the rot will still
continue, especially for our boys because most teachers are female, feminist and
Leftist. It is better for people resisting such indoctrination to go down the
home schooling road to ensure that the mind controllers don't get your children.
If ideological warfare is not enough, consider the threats of drugs, bullying
and violence in the modern Australian school.
TERRORISTS MAKE THE BEST IMMIGRANTS?
Here is one for the theatre of the absurd file: asylum has been
granted to five men in Australia because their membership in the Muslim Brotherhood,
an organisation with links to the terrorist group al-Qa'ida would expose them
to persecution in their home countries of Syria, Egypt and India!
in April The Australian uncovered that "one of the five asylum-seekers,
Ahmad Al-Hamwi, who arrived in Australia 10 years ago, was a senior Qa'ida bagman
linked to the 1993 World Trade centre bomber Ramzi Yousef." (The Weekend Australian
Steven Emerson, a US terrorist expert, is quoted by The
Australian as saying that Britain by allowing in Muslim Brotherhood members,
allowed a "high concentration of [Islamic] radicals to occur, which grew into
Federal Attorney General
Philip Ruddock defended the decision to allow the Muslim brotherhood men in, saying
that the Muslim Brotherhood itself was not a banned terrorist organisation in
Australia. That is an argument which only a lawyer would make.
WE HAVE BEEN TOLD
The internet is full of conspiracy theories about the origin of
Asian Bird Flu. A popular theory is that it is a bug that escaped from an Asiatic
germ warfare lab. Whether this is true or not it is clear that the disease is
coming our way and that outbreaks of the disease, just like the outbreaks of terrorism,
will be used to whittle away at our basic freedoms.
US President George W.
Bush plans to call out the US military to control the coming American outbreak.
Australia Foreign minister Alexander Downer said that Australian troops would
also be employed to protect public order. It makes one wonder what the chiefs
of the new world order are planning in their genocidal agenda to finish us off.
WATCH OUT FOR YOUR
by John Steele
Desmond Tutu, awarded the Nobel peace prize in 1984 for his role in "opposing
apartheid in South Africa" had an article in The Advertiser 30/9/06 p.3
entitled "This deadly business".
The main photograph had featured a pile of
small arms, reminiscent of the photographs from 1996 when John Howard immorally
disarmed the Australian people. Tutu says that the modern arms trade is like the
"slave trade". How, we are not told, but I suppose that we are to go glazed-eyed
Tutu goes on to smack the West
for making and selling arms. He makes no mention of China's role in this "slave
trade". Amnesty International begins its paper "People's Republic of China: Sustaining
Conflict and Human Rights Abuses" with the words: "China is emerging as one of
the world's major arm exporters."
This is so even though the endnote presumably
links Tutu to "Control Arms" which is run by Amnesty International and others.
Apparently only Western countries are at fault.
song remains the same. In November the UN General Assembly will vote on an Arms
Trade Treaty. Under the disguise of ending weapons for violations of international
law, nations will move to disarm private citizens under the external powers clause.
The arms trade is too profitable to stop but this will be used as an excuse to
disarm us. 'Australia' is one government putting forward this ban. Get active
now or kiss the rest of your guns goodbye.
RIGHT ON ABOUT FREE SPEECH
Ian Wilson LL.B
I never thought I would see the day when I would cheer an
article by Ross Fitzgerald, but that day has come. "The Free Speech lobby was
Silent When it was Really Needed," The Australian 25/9/06 p.8. He says:
"Rather than demanding migrants speak the Queen's English, John Howard would
be better off mandating the old playground mantra "Sticks and stones will break
my bones but names will never hurt me", as an integral part of being an Australian.
This is because even though free speech is the linchpin of democracy, these
days in particular, few people in our country, or the West in general, actually
believe in freedom of speech."
"They tend to believe
in free speech for themselves, but not for other people who might offend their
deeply held beliefs, values and prejudices, be they religious or secular.Why
else is it that virtually all the law reformers squealing under Phillip Ruddock's
anti-terror and anti-hate laws did not speak up for free speech a decade or two
ago when governments really started to muzzle people for reasons of political
correctness?" "We have anti-vilification laws put in place by worthy do-gooders
and minority groups that may well live to see the day when such legislation will
be used against them."
All I wish to add to
the above is that it is not too late to begin the battle to restore freedom of
speech in Australia.
ARE NOT RUNNING OUT OF WATER
by Patrick O'Shea
Mr. O'Shea our latest contributing writer to On Target will write from an experienced
rural background. Welcome aboard!
While Australia is experiencing critical
shortages of water, the result of total Government mismanagement and neglect at
both Federal and State levels - the water is running out to sea! Specious arguments
are raised immediately any practical solutions are suggested to solve our water
There are answers that could go a long
way to help Australia's water problem such as dams and more pipelines along with
better use of water. Especially in primary production and cities and charging
appropriately for it. Many suggestions put forth are simply met with derision.
Gabfests go on and on, e.g., how such a scheme should not be pursued or even seriously
Ernie Bridges a great visionary
or merely a crank?
Environmentalists self elect themselves and shout loudest
to raise endless concerns. Take for example the opposition Ernie Bridges a former
Minister in a WA State Government met when he presented a highly researched and
practical plan to pipe water south from the top of WA, 20 years ago.
valiantly but was a lone voice in promoting such a scheme, then later to look
to other parts of Northern Australia to duplicate this idea. Huge flows of water
in Queensland North East drain into the Gulf of Carpentaria each year, so why
are such practical answers ignored. The tag of being the driest continent is promoted
as a cliché. Just to frighten us until the Government decides what is best for
us. It has been said that the tremendously valuable and vital Snowy River scheme
would face great difficulties with environment 'hurdles' and financing 'hoo-hah'
if it was to be built today. Undeniably, one day our water problems will be solved,
but it could be at a significant cost to ordinary Australians.
is the formula of what will happen.
Only when Governments and Water Ministers
throw up their hands in collective despair and say 'what can we do?' will things
start moving and the water flowing. This will be heard by the old style financial
cavalry galloping over the hill now called corporate consortiums or management
funds and other banking controlled investments coming together under a monopoly
However conditions will apply when
the big partnerships finally come on line.
§ Absolute control over all
water in Australia, once sovereign States hand over their rights.
charges ongoing for 50 years.
§ Further trading of those rights the prerogative
of the funds management only if they want to.
is a feasible answer:
Let's build dams where the water is. Fabricate pipes
on site and wrap them to protect them and bury them 2 metres underground. Build
a few pumping stations and let the water flow. We could raise our own money and
let the profits stay in Australia.
what is happening to other countries as an advanced warning:
Bank Lands $20bn Thames Water Deal", The Australian, 18/10/06, p31: "A consortium
led by Macquarie Bank has won a hard fought battle to buy the massive British
utility, Thames Water, for almost $20bn from Germany's RWE." There is big
money in water.
by Betty Luks
We are hearing
the mantra once more from the economic and financial gurus, the economy is in
danger of 'overheating' therefore interest rates will have to be raised in order
to deal with this 'overheating'. The raising of interest rate charges means, in
effect, there will be less purchasing power available to the community - thus
causing a lowering of prices by less money chasing the goods available in the
The effect of this money deflation will mean sellers will have
to lower the prices for their goods no matter what were the financial costs of
Douglas explained the situation in "Social Credit":
"The financial mechanism, has acquired a considerable control over the rate
and the manner of issue of money and purchasing power
but it has to a lesser
extent only, achieved control of the other aspect of finance which is exhibited
in the form of prices. [Banks] control general price levels by increasing or decreasing
the amount of money available in the pockets of the public
if bankers see these efforts as simply safeguarding against price rises, they
have failed or fallen far short of expectations. The reasons are not far to seek.
Financial mechanism has positive and negative aspects:
financial mechanism has a positive and negative aspect - the positive is the issue
of money and the negative is represented by the exchange of the money thus issued
for goods and services through the medium of prices. The less money there is available,
the more goods and services each unit of this money will command, if there is
a willing seller! If there were no other factors involved a contraction in the
amount of available money would result in a fall of prices, since each unit would
buy more goods and services. And it is on this simple principle that, since 1920,
the banks have endeavoured to control the general price levels.
there is one big problem in this process and that is the reduction of general
price levels to approximately the equivalent of financial costs. This 'deflationary'
process finds the willing sellers have gone broke - 'gone bust', 'out of business',
kaput! They have been bankrupted! The bankers' moderate success of dealing with
'an overheated' economy by such deflationary methods has been achieved at the
cost of widespread distress arising out of unemployment and bankruptcy, the inevitable
results - or fruits - of such policies.
on Mammon's altar:
Not only does Mammon sacrifice the well-being (common
wealth or well being) of the nation's people/consumers on its evil altar but also
the nation's producers and their entitlement to a Just Price for their goods and
That is why the news the Reserve Bank's new governor, Glenn Stevens,
is warning that the next interest rate adjustment is more likely to be up than
down is alarming the nation's producers. Well might Mark Vaille, leader of the
Nationals, see "A rate rise at this stage would be a severe blow to many farmers
and businesses" as Ron Fischer wrote in his letter below.
Pity Mr. Vaile
couldn't do some further homework and come to grips with Douglas' analysis of
the financial system and suggestions for modifying it so that it worked for all
Australians - not just the chosen few!
REPLY TO WILSON
by James Reed and Brian Simpson
Ian Wilson is concerned about all limits of freedom of speech. In his paper dealing
with a Constitutional challenge to terrorism legislation he quotes with approval
the view that 9/11 was a scam to undermine our freedoms. (O.T. Vol. 42 No.42)
The real threat for Wilson comes from within, not from radical Islam. In many
papers we have separately tried to show that radical Islam is a threat, one
Yes, 9/11 could have been manipulated or it could have been
a job done by the US government, but in the scheme of racial demographics, it
matters little who blew up the Twin Towers and why because the towers of Western
civilisation are under threat. Islam is one challenge, and China is another.Numerous
books have documented this.
On the so-called
suppressed "academic research" Wilson should consult David Martin Jones and Carl
Ungerer ("Delusion Reigns in Terror Studies," The Australian 15/9/06 p.14)
where these distinguished academics say that research dollars are being spent
to blame the West for radical Islam.
They point out that the Australian Research
Council (ARC) has provided $4 million on all manner of Islam projects, but not
one dollar has been given to a project addressing Islamism's "threat to liberal
and secular institutions". Why?
"Because the nature of the ARC process, together
with the practice of journal refereeing in Australia, selectively polices social
science scholarship in order to maintain the fashionable line: that despite empirical
evidence to the contrary in the form of attacks on Western civilian targets, it
is all our fault."
Those in the Freedom Movement
with similar views to Ian Wilson, need to begin to look at the terrorism issue
(even if 9/11 was a 'cook up') from the wider perspective of the "clash of civilisations".
From this long-term view, even issues of Zionism and international finance and
all other concerns of the Freedom Movement, may melt into second or third place
in the significance stakes.
LATEST CITIZEN POLL
should stick: poll Warwick Free Times Independent 4/10/2006
is facing a controversial poll on fluoridation of the city water supply, following
a decision by Warwick Shire Council last week, with the potential for the result
to be decided either way by a single voter.
Council voted to allow a result
either way of 50% plus a single vote to decide the day, and while that vote is
unlikely to take place this year, Warwick shoppers have indicated that they believe
that which ever way the result goes, they believe council - and the state government
- should stand by the result.
In the latest
HASCO citizen's poll, using polling 'booths' around the city and face to-face
polls, a decisive 72% agreed that referendum results "should be binding" on government.
While the Warwick Shire poll will not constitute a referendum, the intent of the
question is clear, however.
Much less decisive was the result of a question
relating to a 'poll' of a different sort. Asked whether juries should be allowed
to decide sentences in court cases, a slight majority (considering the size of
the poll) of 48.3% to 39.8% agreed.
During the recent election campaign in
Queensland, the state Opposition argued for the state to adopt a system giving
jurors the powers to make sentencing recommendations to trial judges. The idea
has some backers high up, in the legal profession, with NSW Supreme Court Chief
Justice James Spigelman advocating juror influence as a way of restoring public
confidence in the legal system.
Also on the legal system, the Warwick
poll asked if locals felt that legal representation was "out of reach for most
people". A decisive 86.4% agreed. The poll-also found decisively against allowing
Australian troops to join UN peacekeepers, in Lebanon, but the results for the
other two questions were line ball. A slight majority claimed that recent interest
rate increases would influence their vote in the coming federal poll, and agreed
that Australia should cease recognising - dual citizenship - exactly 50% in both.
Will interest rate hike influence your vote?
- Yes 50.0% No 39.8% Unsure 10.2%
Should Australia join UN peacekeeping in
Lebanon? - Yes 26.3% No 61.9% Unsure 11.9%
Aussies be allowed dual nationality? - Yes 50.0% No 38.1% Unsure 11.9%
juries be allowed to decide sentences? - Yes 48.3% No 39.8% Unsure 11.9%
cost of legal representation out of reach of most? - Yes 86.4% No 9.3% Unsure
Do you believe referendum results should be binding? - Yes 72.0% No 12.7%