18 January 2008 Thought for the Week:
Douglas wrote in "Whose Service is Perfect Freedom": 'the
only rational meaning which can be attached to the phrase 'moral progress'
is firstly a continuous approach to Reality
and, secondly, the
ordering of our actions, in the light of such an approach, so that
they tend towards our own and the general good. And if, as it may
be held, Reality and Good, or God, are synonymous, these too come
to much the same thing."
- - Eric D. Butler in "Releasing Reality," 1979
A Happy New Year for 2008 to
all our Readers
NEWTON'S BY-LAWS OF EXPERTS
Source: Online Opinion by William York:
The claim that the science debate over climate change is settled violates
the most important of Newton's Laws. This violation is not of the
famous Laws of Motion but of a little known set of derived bylaws,
Newton's Laws of Experts, a major contribution to understanding social
Newton's Laws of Motion may be simply stated
First Law: every object persists in its state of rest or uniform motion
unless acted upon by an external force; Second Law: the rate of change
of momentum is directly proportional to the applied force; and Third
Law: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Newton's Laws of Experts, the bylaws, are
First Law: every expert persists in his state of rest or opinion unless
acted upon by an external grant; Second Law: the rate of change of
opinion is directly proportional to the applied grant; and Third Law:
for every expert there is an equal and opposite expert.
The First Law of Experts is well known:
The First Law of Experts is well known
and can be demonstrated in countless universities, institutes and
research bodies. There are two major influences. First, the need to
appear relevant to the wants of society means engagement in the great
issues of the day. This has been brought on by well intentioned but
misguided policy that assumes innovations, financial, technical or
other, spring fully developed from academic research and national
needs should determine the areas of research interest.
The Second Law of Coupling Science and Politics:
The second and much more worrying influence comes from the coupling
of politics to science. The academy has a natural bias towards the
Left as its business is overthrowing old ideas and generating new
interpretations and understanding. If this is coupled to saving the
planet and giving rise to a better world then there is a resonance
between politics and academia. At the present time there are three
issues that resonate with at least parts of the academy: climate change,
genetically modified organisms and nuclear power. In each case, it
is arguable that the scientific understanding on the political side
is selective, frequently ignorant and often presented in terms that
startle the public. As a result governments, often subject to marginal
politics, have created opportunities for endless grant applications
for any research perceived as relevant to these issues. As a further
result, academia has responded by setting up special institutes or
university departments and, with knowledge of the availability of
large research grants, has applied for and received funding. It is
often the case that the envisaged research was not aimed at the target
set by the government, but simply represents the dressing-up of a
proposal in a way which would attract the grant.
This discussion leads to the Second Law
There is no doubt that large grants, leading to the establishment
of new institutes, departments or divisions, have the effect of moving
experts into positions where they will represent these new initiatives.
The lifetime of these organisations is subject to the continuous feeding
from grants, so there is every incentive to emphasise the importance
and relevance of the research, thus providing strong and positive
The Third Law of Experts is one that is
most commonly encountered in the Law:
Expert witnesses are frequently called by both sides for explanations.
So, rather than experts advising the bench, each side presents the
most favourable explanation that helps its own case. The present major
concern of society is climate change. Why this is so is best understood
in the words of H.L. Mencken, the Sage of Baltimore:
§ The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless
series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
The effect of the political interest in climate change has been the
violation of Newton's Third Law. Where are the experts speaking against
the position that climate change is caused by human activity? They
are scarcely to be seen or heard at this time. Within the academy,
one expert will not willingly place himself between another expert
and a grant-giving body, unless he has immunity from subsequent retribution.
There are examples of those who have taken the contrary view being
hounded by colleagues, being unable to secure research grants and
even calls for them to be removed from their positions.
However Newton's Laws are eternal and immutable:
The violation of the Third Law will be only temporary as slowly scientific
observation and understanding will get the better of the present situation.
From the above analysis, it is a firm conclusion that the climate
change debate is distorted in its presentation and that its alleged
scientific conclusions are unsound. Only when the Third Law is satisfied
will we finally understand.
This writer would not like to estimate how long this will take. Rather
he would suggest that we all heed the advice of another sage, this
time from Hollywood, where Sam Goldwyn is supposed to have said that
he never liked making predictions, particularly about the future.
ANSWERING THE ADVERTISEMENT
by James Reed
'Hey buddy can you spare me a dime?' Maybe you need a real job. Try
this: "A Senior Research Officer is sought to work with the Hon. Kim
Beazley, Professorial Fellow in Political Science and International
Relations, on research and writing projects related especially to
the history of Australian defence and foreign policy, including the
Australian-American alliance." (The Australian 28/11/07 p.24)
The position is through the Faculty of Arts,
Humanities and Social Sciences, The University of Western Australia.
The universities are always a refuge for failed politicians. I wonder
which Asian studies department will be taking John Howard on board!
SCIENTISTS PROTEST AND EXPOSE FRAUD AT BALI
It has been reported that approximately one
hundred prominent scientists signed an open letter to UN Secretary-General,
Ban Ki-Moon, clearly slamming the current IPCC process as a fraud.
They note that it is "not possible to stop climate change, a natural
phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages."
"The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0.2
degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late
20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling
over the last 10,000 years."
"The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the
most widely read IPCC reports amongst politicians and non-scientists
and are the basis for most climate change policy formulation
The great majority of IPCC contributors and reviewers, and the tens
of thousands of other scientists who are qualified to comment on these
matters, are not involved in the preparation of these documents."
A team of scientists attending the Bali conference
to dispute the man-made global warming theory, experienced heavy handed
bully tactics and a mainstream media blackout. Dr. David Evans, a
former carbon accounting modeller working for the Australian Greenhouse
Office, slammed the conference as a "circus". Following a press conference
in Bali debunking the global warming hoax, British Lord Christopher
Monckton issued a statement describing the hoax as UN-backed slaughter
of the world's poorest people. This charge of genocide, most accurately
reflects the actual intention of the British financial oligarchy pushing
Source for scientists' UN letter: <https://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=164004>
MULTIRACIAL SOCIETIES: JOYFUL, PRECIOUS TO
by James Reed
"Police clashed violently with up to 100 residents in Melbourne's
inner north amid fears of a dramatic breakdown of law and order among
mostly African migrants." (The Australian 30/11/07 p.2) Multiculturalism
is indeed a wondrous policy. The joys of ethnic diversity, cooking,
food and culture given to us by Gough Whitlam, Mal Fraser, Bob Hawke,
Paul Keating, and John Howard will be continued by our now, 'greatly
loved' Prime Minister Big Kev Rudd.
And a little way down the track we look forward to all the good things
that will come down to us, when Senator Penny Wong becomes Prime Minister.
The international community will take each and every one of our ethnically
enriched fingers and kiss them. As they should.
"Victoria Police this week set up a special
taskforce, Operation Square, to deal with flare-ups and forge ties
with African community leaders." What's this? Aaaagh! Racism! White
Australia Policy! Surely this problem should be dealt with by increased
African migration, say 1,000,000 per year, supported by taxing the
intellectual classes - academics, journalists, teachers, lawyers,
etc. - at 99 per cent of their salaries.
I am confident that all of the "chatterers" out there, bored with
the riches scooped from the public purse, would be only too happy
to make a meaningful contribution to dealing with such an important
THE UNSINKABLE DR. TOBEN
by Betty Luks
Dr. Fredrick Toben, whose Adelaide Institute website questions the
standard Holocaust story was facing action in the Federal Court by
Jeremy Jones, former president of the Executive Council of Australian
Jewry, requesting the gaoling of Toben for allegedly breaching a 2002
order by judge Catherine Branson. The order by Judge Branson was that
Dr. Toben had breached the Racial Discrimination Act on various grounds,
including publishing material implying that the Holocaust did not
occur, doubting the existence of the Auschwitz gas chambers, among
other propositions. The matter was settled by Dr. Toben apologising
to a judge on 27 November 2007 and removing the offensive material
and not republishing it. Dr. Toben outside the court said that he
was going to continue running his site and questioning the Holocaust.
According to Jeremy Jones, former president
of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry : "All we sought was
for a person who was causing upset and offence to other people within
the Australian community in principle to stop doing it. There's a
huge difference between scholarship and behaviour that is outlawed
under Australian law." (The Australian 28/11/07 p.10)
This raises the interesting question as to
whether or not a scholarly, non-insulting, investigation and critique
of the Holocaust is permitted under Australian law. Is any such inquiry
"offensive" by definition? P.S. And, true to form, The Australian
placed a charming photograph of a posing, smiling new Melbourne
arts festival boss, along with a report on his appointment, on the
same page with an unposed photo of Dr. Toben taken at an odd angle
which made his face appear out of proportion. It reminded me of the
dreadful photos of three League folk an Adelaide newspaper published
in the 1980s; Frank Bawden, Jeremy Lee and Eric Butler. If the reader
didn't know any better he would think he was viewing mug-shots of
some of the worst known criminals in town.
ALL FRIENDS TOGETHER?
by Betty Luks
Historian David Irving and British National Party Leader, Nick Griffin,
had been invited to Oxford University's debating society to debate
on the question of free speech. Protesters from the Left did what
they are expected to do and tried to disrupt the event, including
staging a sit-in protest.
Protesters had been chanting "kill",
"kill", which brought forth Mr. Griffin's description of them as a
"mob which would kill." Oxford University's Jewish Society and the
Islamic Society worked together to stage the strong protest.
One wonders that if conservative critics who fear a future "Eurabia,"
an Islamic Europe, are correct, whether such future collaborations
LET US ALL REJOICE!
From David Flint's Opinion Column:
Australians still benefit from one of the best constitutions in the
world, and the Australian flag still flies over our land because a
sufficient number of Australians were willing to fight to preserve,
to protect and to defend our heritage. In 1999, the people agreed,
overwhelmingly. Yet republicans are still trying to undermine what
was a very clear decision.
Fortunately there are Australians who remain vigilant in the defence
of our heritage. Armed with modern technology, they can inform and
motivate other Australians who are not prepared to see our heritage
This can even happen, it seems, on Christmas
Day. On 25 December, 2007, The Age reported that Royal Melbourne
Women's Hospital was now to be known as "The Women's." New signage
was installed on Friday after "consultants" said the former name was
"ineffective." A spokeswoman said the change was "just for branding
purposes." She said the hospital was advised by a "professional signage
company who developed the signage package."
A Victorian Greens MP, Greg Barber welcomed
the change. The Nationals leader, Peter Ryan, asked why Victorians
were not consulted, slamming it as "another example of apparently
contemporary political correctness on the part of the thought police,"
he said. A Government spokesman denied any involvement or that there
were plans to remove the word "royal" from other institutions.
The ever-vigilant George Bougias, who played
a leading role in encouraging those attending the Commonwealth Games
to sing "God Save The Queen," and who among other positions, is ACM's
International Convener, acted. He protested to the Hospital, and wrote
to The Age. Then he circulated all this information to members of
the Monarchist Alliance, warning that "the barbarians are at the gate
He told the Royal Melbourne Women's Hospital
of his "profound disappointment" with the hospital management following
their decision. "Having been born at the hospital myself I am especially
saddened that the my birth place has chosen to downgrade its role
in the community.
The title "Royal" proclaimed to the entire
world the status and critical role of the hospital in providing maternity
and other care for Victorian women. The title also proclaimed the
high regard that all Victorians have for the hospital while also reminding
us of our system of Government (a Constitutional Monarchy and the
envy of the world), our history and culture.
"Importantly, the title also reminded us that we are in the Commonwealth
family of nations - a group that is led superbly by Her Majesty The
Queen of Australia. Moreover, having been conferred the title by Her
Majesty the Queen of Australia, I find it incredibly rude and ungrateful
that a few would choose to remove it."
The fact that the decision was announced so
close to the Christmas period (with The Age reporting it on Christmas
day!) had not escaped his notice. He said that this "suggests secrecy
and an unwillingness to engage with the broader community." Asking
that the title be reinstated, he also asked to see the consultant's
report. He warned that he would be pursuing the issue with a range
of people, including State and Local Government authorities. George
Bougias' letter to The Age, which he signed as one born at
the Royal Melbourne Women's Hospital, pulled no punches: "So let's
get this straight. Management at a Melbourne icon (The Royal Women's
Hospital) decides to drop the "Royal" to increase marketing and "other"
"efficiency" on the advice of a sign company? And does so around Christmas
time so no-one notices?"
"This is either an April fool's joke (at the
wrong time of year) or a poorly-thought out ploy by people who should
know better. If the Royal Women's management team and their 'consultants'
can't leverage the term "Royal" (a title thousands of other organisations
would jump at the chance to have) the best thing they could do for
the hospital's efficiency would be to sack themselves. What a joke!"
Brett Hogan, ACM's Victorian Convener, sent
this powerful protest to the Hospital:
"I have just read of your very disappointing decision to put short
term marketing before long term credibility by gradually removing
the "Royal" from the name of your hospital, just like the Royal Melbourne
Zoological Gardens (now known as just one of three Melbourne zoos)
and the Royal Victorian Institute for the Blind (now Vision Australia
which sounds like a political party) etc...
"You have chosen to dispense with your Royal Charter, which in one
word, gives your hospital respect, credibility and status and replace
it with yet another boring and bland marketing term which will merge
you into the rest of the pack and presumably need to be changed again
in a couple of years by new consultants.
"I don't like to be rude, but as well as being a highly political
act, to be honest with you, "The Women's" sounds like a toilet. "It
sounds to me like Victoria's pre-eminent hospital for women, with
the highest standards of governance, integrity and healthcare is really
only "just another hospital" after all."
Harold Schmauze., the moderator of the Monarchist Alliance web pages,
then posted the news that the hospital was backtracking. Chris Evans
in The Age reported that the hospital was "staying 'royal'".
It "vehemently denied" reports that it is about to discard its 53-year-old
royal warrant, despite a large illuminated sign on Friday appearing
high up on the side of the hospital's new $250 million building in
"Of course we are proud to be The Royal Women's Hospital, but people
also know us as just The Women's and that was a consideration in pointing
people to our building as opposed to the Royal Melbourne Hospital
next door," spokeswoman Ms Frostick said. The hospital would continue
to display its full name at street level, on its flag and throughout
George Bougias was not impressed, saying that
the backtrack was to an extent "smoke and mirrors," but pointing out
the RMH response "shows however what a few can do... .keep the fight
He referred to a report in the Herald Sun also on Christmas
Day that the hospital said it had been inundated with callers upset
by a report in the Herald Sun that the hospital was dropping the "Royal"
from the name.
"We're getting lots of phone calls this morning
from people upset and asking why we are changing the hospital's name,"
Ms Frostick said. "We haven't - we've always been known as The Women's
but we are still registered as The Royal Women's Hospital."
This story demonstrates the effect vigilant
defenders of our system can have. It also shows the length to which
republicans will go to circumvent the people's wishes." Bravo folk!
ON MEETING THE ALIENS
by James Reed
It was a shock, at first, for humanity to meet intelligent life from
another star constellation: Alpha Centauri, 43 light-years from earth.
The Googleplexes came from the planet Alphonsus. Civil war had wrecked
their planet and job opportunities were poor. Earth looked a better
place to be; nice and blue and watery. So they came in their billions.
After all, the Googleplex people had studied earth culture, at least
what electromagnetic radiation could tell about early 1960s Earth.
They particularly liked TV shows such as The
Rifleman (1958-1962) starring Chuck Connors as Lucas McCain and how
he used this large loop Winchester 1892, during the 1880s (proof they
concluded, that humans could time travel), to fight racial bigotry.
Earth was the place to go. And of course, they were right.
All eight of their green arms were welcomed by globalists and cosmopolitans,
who, instead of speaking now of "one world", spoke instead of "one
Further, although the Googleplexes had a radically
different DNA to humans, geneticists began to work frantically, to
allow interracial matings and conceptions between humans and Googleplexes.
After all, they publicly and proudly proclaimed, there cannot effectively
be "one universe" as long as racial differences existed.
THIRD WORLD POVERTY
As we read of the terrible atrocities now taking
place in Kenya it would be well to ponder once more on the words of
Ivor Benson who, many years ago, warned the world about what the One-Worlders
were doing to the continent of Africa and its peoples:
Those who investigate the problems of Third
World poverty concentrate their attention on possible ways of relieving
the poverty, of narrowing the gap between the world's 'haves' and
'have-nots' of eliminating or reducing the present 'inequality' in
the enjoyment of the fruits of the earth. And it is always through
But the question is never asked:
"What is the cause of all this Third World poverty?" Or, to put the
question another way: why is it that countries, once colonies of western
powers, could feed themselves; but now that they 'rule' themselves
"live on the edge of existence in absolute poverty?"
What happens to the hundreds of billions of dollars in direct aid
and irredeemable loans, plus the mountains of free food which pour
into these countries?
The control of the people by coercive powers of government may be
effective for the plans of the One-Worlders, but such tactics have
never been of much use in encouraging people to produce!
A policy of population control over a
policy of basic requirements for production is a sure recipe for chaos
and disorder. But then, the power wielders of international finance
consider the trail of death and misery and destruction as not too
high a price for others to pay - for the objective - the herding of
individuals and societies into larger and larger groups for the New
The artificially created African States:
There is not one artificially created state in Africa whose boundaries
enclose a homogenous population speaking one language and sharing
one cultural heritage. No explanation of the disastrous poverty that
has been brought about in Third World states would be incomplete without
some reference to a generation of 'idealists' and 'do-gooders', generally
described as intellectuals without whose encouragement and active
assistance none of this would have been possible
These people can say, along with Shakespeare's
Hamlet: I am but mad north-north-west; when the wind blows southerly
I know a hawk from a handsaw. In the realm of public affairs they
could not be more thoroughly alienated from reality, therefore quite
mad, but in matters pertaining to their personal advancement and enrichment,
why, truly, they 'know a hawk from a handsaw.'
Theirs has been the task of generating a world
of lies as they confer on the ambitions of great power an ostentation
of benevolence and good intention. No percipient observer of the Third
World scene, honest with himself, could fail to see all these professional
humanitarians at work.
Professor Bauer wrote on the subject:
"The belief in Western responsibility
for the poverty of the undeveloped world might have proved much less
effective but for certain further, deep-seated factors. Many, perhaps
most, humanitarians and social reformers, and especially the most
vocal and influential of their number, seem primarily interested in
groups which can be declared or classified as helpless.
Humanitarians and Social reformers particularly
need people who can be classified as helpless victims of causes and
conditions beyond their control. And the classification of groups
as helpless then actually promotes their helplessness, thus serving
the psychological, political and financial aims of the classifiers."
Is it not possible that much of the missionary
activity of the last three-quarters of a century was itself a confession
of declining faith, a substitution of unlimited expansion geographically
and into other spheres, including politics, for a security in depth
which had somehow been lost?
Further reading: Ivor
Benson's important booklets
"The Moment of Truth," and "A Message from Southern Africa". The set
of two for $7.50 posted.
Another excellent League booklet by D. Watts
"The Dangerous Myth of Racial Equality: Genocide for the White Races?"
-- $5.00 posted from all Heritage Book Services and Veritas Publishing
ADELAIDE 1215 LUNCHEON CLUB
The first meeting of the new year for the Adelaide
1215 Luncheon Club takes place on Monday, 4th February and commences
at 12.15pm. The venue is The Public Schools' Club, 207 East Terrace
(Cnr. Carrington) Adelaide.
The speaker will be Mr. Doug Holmes who will talk on the state of the
Royal Australian Navy's Collins Class submarines and of announced future
plans. With over 20 years of sub-mariner's experience to draw upon Mr.
Holmes' address should prove of great interest.
To make your booking for the Luncheon please phone Doug and Jean Holmes
on 8258 7005.
LETTER IN THE PRESS
Your report ("Driven mad" Herald Sun December 21) focuses on
freeways. How many billions will it take to add another lane in each
direction on every choked freeway? Will that be enough? By the time
that work was completed another lane would be required. Put on more
trains to get people onto public transport?
The system is already choked with regular late running and cancelled
trains. How many billions to buy the extra trains? You can't just put
more trains on to tracks that are far from adequate for the existing
rolling stock. Country trains already are intolerably delayed getting
the last few kilometres into Southern Cross. The only answer is more
tracks and platforms. Where to put them? The only place is underground.
How many billions just to dig the tunnels?
We need to find a better way of financing than taxation of one form
or another. It will require a massive effort to rewrite the financial
rules so that what is physically possible is financially possible.
- - Yours truly, Ron Fischer http://ronfischer.blogspot.com/