Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label, Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Home Blog Freedom Potentials The Cross Roads Veritas Books
OnTarget Archives Newtimes Survey Podcast Library Video Library PDF Library
Actionist Corner YouTube Video Channel BitChute Video Channel Brighteon Video Channel Social Credit Library

On Target

16 April 2010 Thought for the Week:

Israel bars Gandhi's grandson from entering Gaza: The Israeli occupation forces (IOF) on Tuesday barred Rajmohan Gandhi, the grandson of Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi, from entering Gaza Strip. Gandhi expressed absolute sorrow for not being able to visit Gaza, adding that he was deeply depressed over the scenes of repression he witnessed in the Palestinian lands. He said that the Israeli talk about a Palestinian state in light of those de facto conditions was "meaningless", adding that the separation wall, settlements and bypass roads were more horrific than what he imagined before visiting Palestine.
Gandhi said that the Israeli government was treating Palestinians as second class citizens and was robbing their land. He said he was deeply touched over the story of prisoner Fakhri Al-Barghouthi who had been held in jail for 33 years and could not meet his two sons, whom he left as little children, until they were detained by the IOF soldiers. Gandhi said that he would publicize the Palestinian suffering in India, the USA and any place he visits, adding that he would also exert efforts for the release of Palestinian prisoners.

- - Source: aletho , April 7, 2010

TRUTH… FAREWELL by +Richard N. Williamson

Bishop Williamson on the *Eleison Comments CXLII website:
“Another voice of truth risks falling silent in the United States. It is not, at least overtly, a voice of Catholic truth, but are not the great problems for truth today not problems specific to Catholics, but problems so basic that they are common to all men? Therefore when a columnist and writer of the stature of Paul Craig Roberts, who has outstanding Establishment credentials and who was an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, announces that, apparently out of discouragement, he is laying aside his pen, it is a sad day for all of us.

His farewell article of about ten days ago deals precisely with the universal loss of truth.
Its opening section deserves to be quoted at length: "There was a time when the pen was mightier than the sword...when people believed in truth and regarded truth as an independent power and not as an auxiliary for government, class, race, ideological, personal or financial interest. Today Americans are ruled by propaganda. They have little regard for truth, little access to it, and little ability to recognize it. Truth is an unwelcome entity. It is disturbing. It is off-limits. Those who speak it run the risk of being branded "anti-American", "anti-semite" or "conspiracy theorist". Truth is an inconvenience for government... and for ideologues."

He goes on, "Today many whose goal once was the discovery of truth are now paid handsomely to hide it." Examples from many domains prove that "wherever one looks, truth has fallen to money. Wherever money is insufficient to bury the truth, ignorance, propaganda and short memories finish the job."

Further examples confirm that "Intelligence and integrity have been purchased by money... Americans, or most of them, have proved to be putty in the hands of the police state." They have been brainwashed by the mainstream media which "do not serve the truth. They serve the government and the interest groups that empower the government".

Fascinatingly, Roberts argues that "America's fate was sealed when the public and the anti-war movement bought the government's 9/11 conspiracy theory. The government's account of 9/11 is contradicted by much evidence. Nevertheless, that defining event of our time, which has launched the USA on interminable wars of aggression and a domestic police state, is a taboo topic for investigation in the media. It is pointless to complain of war and a police state when one accepts the premise on which they are based."

I would only add the religious dimension: how can souls grasp the one true religion of God when they accept the premises on which their whole godless environment is based?
In the early 2000's many Catholics in the USA did not want to hear sermons emphasizing the fraud of 9/11, but how can souls that are unconcerned to get to the truth, get anywhere near to the true God? How can souls losing their taste for reality keep any taste for the supreme realities of the soul and the after-life? Roberts concludes sadly, "As the pen is censored and its might extinguished, I am signing off."

No, dear Dr. Roberts. The pen is still, despite all appearances, mightier than the sword, only not if it is dropped. Keep writing, however few be the souls that will still read you for the sake of the truth, because such souls, like the Truth, "are mighty and will prevail".”
Bishop Richard Williamson is the traditional Catholic Bishop Germany wants to prosecute for daring to publicly question ‘accepted holocaust’ history.

*Kyrie eleison [i.e. ‘Lord have mercy’ - comes via Late Latin from Late Greek kurie, eleēson]. It is a formal invocation used in the liturgies of the Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Anglican churches.  


by James Reed
The passage of “Obamacare”, a $US940 billion universal health bill, is drawing the battlelines between the left and traditional America. Obama, keen to push through a reform championed by leftists such as Teddy Kennedy, is being portrayed as some sort of saint by the Establishment media: his place in history is assured and all that. But the reality is that 32 million Americans, now without cover, may get it.
However, the poorest Americans – and that includes southern blacks – will miss out in the short-term and maybe forever. At best 95% of legal American residents would have insurance by 2019. But how many will still have it by 2029?

Employers will have to provide affordable insurance or face stiff penalties. Tax increases will be necessary to finance the Obama dream - $US108 billion in new fees will face insurers and the medical industry. The US has the biggest fiscal deficit in its history and is floating on a sea of disaster. Obamacare is likely to be the log that breaks the camel’s back.
View from the Right website quotes a Free Republic post “A Doctor’s Perspective of Obamacare – Healthcare Delivery Bankruptcy”, that makes the case that the health care industry will go bankrupt within months:
“Higher premiums = higher recidivism to government plans = higher premiums etc. Within months, every single hospital, every single doctor’s office,…every delivery system reliant on private insurers will no longer be profitable, i.e. they will go bankrupt.” That will be Obama’s principle contribution to America: its funeral.  


by Brian Simpson
In recent times a number of respected intellectuals, journalists and writers have come to see that Islam and Western liberal democracy are incompatible. Somali migrant and former Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali has said: “the basic tenets of Islam and the basic tenets of Western liberal democracies are incompatible.” Some Muslims, said to be moderates, claim to have no problem practicing their faith and living in a liberal democracy. On this Ali has said:
“Islam as a doctrine, as a body of ideas, as a belief means submission to the will of Allah…You will find that some accept democracy and appreciate it, some who do not, and you will find others who are out to destroy it. I think we should not underestimate those.” The Australian, 29/01/07, p.9) Ayaan Hirsi Ali has published an interesting book on this theme Infidel (Free Press) which develops in detail her idea, tragically expressed in her film Submission with murdered co-worker Theo Van Gogh, that Islam commits and justifies violence against women.

Melanie Phillips, a columnist with London’s Daily Mail and author of Londonistan (Encounter Books, 2006) said that at the Quadrant dinner in Sydney on 1 March 2007:
“There is a persistent refusal to accept that we are in the throes of a holy war waged on the Western world for more than 25 years without our even recognising it because it doesn’t fir our definition of war. It is a world war being fought in many disparate theatres with many proximate causes, but all with one single aim: to defeat Western civilisation, establish Islam as the dominant power in the world and restore the medieval caliphate”.

She went on to say: “opinion polls suggest that 40% to 60% of British Muslims would like to live under Sharia law in Britain” (The Australian, 2/3/07, p.16). Nick Cohen, a champion of leftism in his book, "What’s Left? How Liberals Lost Their Way", has taken the British left to task for their selective morality and failure to deal with the sorts of problems raised above and for screaming “racism” at the few brave souls who do tackle the tough issues.

Oriana Fallaci, the famous Italian journalist who died of cancer last year, was threatened with death by Islamists for publishing a series of books on the Islam problem, that probably could not be published in Australia - "The Force of Reason" (Rizzoli International, 2004). Along with "The Rage and the Pride" (2002), "The Apocalypse" and "Oriana Fallaci Interviews Herself", she has given a very powerful and frightening vision of the Islamic attempt to internally undermine the West and make the West a “colony” of Islam ("The Force of Reason", p.35).

She details that Europe has been at “war” in one form or other with Islam for centuries (p.42) “What I say is that today’s Islamic invasion of Europe is nothing else than a revival of its centuries old expansionism, of its centuries old imperialism, of its centuries old colonialism” (p.51).
A French Catholic farmer was ordered to remove a cross he kept in his own cornfield because it offended Muslims (P.66). French Muslims hope to ban the teaching of biology because it is considered immoral, dealing with the human body and sex (p.67).
Fallaci believes western organisations, especially the Catholic Church, actively participate in this “colonisation” process: “This Catholic Church, which behind the screen of “Love-your-enemy as you love-yourself”, does not confine itself to running the charitable institutions which welcome Muslim immigrants, which hide them in their hostels, which get them political asylum and welfare benefits, which block or obstruct their expulsions and in France even sell them convents or churches to transform [into] mosques” (p.194).

Fallaci continues: “This Catholic Church that gets on so well with Islam because not a few of its priests and prelates are the first collaborators of Islam, the first traitors. This Catholic Church, without whose imprimatur the Euro-Arab Dialogue could neither have begun nor gone ahead for thirty years. This Catholic Church, without which the Islamisation of Europe, the degeneration of Europe into Eurabia, could never have developed” (p.195).

Fallaci did not fear controversy. In chapter 11 of her book, for example, she discusses fundamentalist Islamic sexual morality. Here in Australia, this material is too controversial to discuss even in a critical review, so we must pass over it. Perhaps like other critics it was a discussion of this topic which got her, her death sentence.
According to Fallaci, there is no such thing as “moderate Islam”, only Islam and the Koran (p.305). Moderate Islam is an invention of Western liberalism and leftism (p.304).

If the author reviewed in this essay is right, then it is important to understand what the Koran actually says. There is no better book available for this than Robert Spencer’s, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)", (Regnery, 2005).
The present political climate and Australia’s race hate legislation make a detailed review of books such as this impossible. Essentially, Spencer gives a scholarly and referenced defence of a position which, expressed in a simpler form, got ‘Catch the Fire Ministries’ in trouble with the authorities in Australia.
So we can’t go into details about what the Koran says: that is a thought crime, even if we were to quote overseas scholars.
But Spencer, writing on the freedom side of the fence, can still investigate the truth while we in Australia cannot. Thus he argues that Muslim persecution of Christians has happened for 13 centuries and still goes on today. For Spencer, Islam is a religion of “intolerance” and “war”. The Crusades were wars to recapture Christian lands and defend Christians.
Truth or bigotry? Buy this book and make up your own mind – but read it while there still remains a few grains of freedom of thought in Australia – for it is fast passing away.  


by John Steele
Those who want to ban the private ownership of firearms should think about the plight of women in Haiti. A recent story in The Australian (18/3/2010, p.9) says it all: “Quake Leaves Haitian Women as Prey for Rapists”. The story has a picture of a dead rapist (presumably) with three policemen in casual clothes walking to him, all with handguns. In Haiti in the wake of the quake, women are being systematically raped by roaming gangs.
Women usually do not report the rapes because of fear of reprisals. And Haiti has the highest infection rate for HIV in the Western hemisphere. Rape is a death sentence.

That is a place where a girl needs a gun, preferably a semi-automatic pistol in .45 calibre or a .357 Magnum handgun. Then a girl can say with confidence while holding her equaliser: “rape this!” Western feminists have been awfully quiet about the rape in Haiti issue: what’s wrong girls, not enough white racists there to sink your fangs into?  


by Brian Simpson
The media elites have been using the example of “Jihad Jane” against ethnic profiling in the battle against terrorism. “Jihad Jane” is the blonde American woman charged with using the internet to recruit Jihad fighters. See, the left-liberals say, she can travel without suspicion.
Indeed, but it does not follow from this fact that ethnic profiling is mistaken, since the vast majority of jihad fighters are of a particular ethnic group. In fact, the blonde woman with the ethnic man combination is probably a more accurate profile since a segment of Nordic women seem to get off on all activities that are contrary to the survival interests of their race.  


by James Reed
How low can universities sink? Back in the 1970’s, over a lunch time beer with a mate, I predicted that the universities would be continuous with high schools in 30 years. Seems, alas, my prediction is coming true: “Place at University for High School Teachers”, The Australian, 17/3/2010, p.3). A Victorian government report on education recommends that high school teachers be regarded as “expert teachers” and teach at university because of a “looming shortage of academics.”

If only there was a “looming shortage of academics”. In any case, all of this supports my “death of the university” thesis, for it is part of the nature of a university that academics have a research background. But now that Australian universities are just degree machines, churning out Asian students, what does it matter? Break down the divide between high schools and universities. Maybe even let high school students teach at university – that would be the ultimate move in egalitarianism and political correctness. Perhaps animals such as chimps could be trained to teach in some courses such as cultural studies, sociology and the like.  


Jewish militants, Lahava, have warned model Bar Refaeli not to marry American actor Leonardo Di Caprio. The group fears she will dilute her race if she wed him. The group wrote thus to the supermodel:
“It is not by chance you were born Jewish. Your grandmother and her grandmother did not dream one of their descendants would remove future generations from the Jewish people. Come to your senses.” Imagine if Nordics, thought, acted and wrote like that! 


by Brian Simpson
Rudd, the Mad Monk (Abbott) and the even madder media, have had another one of their little debates: this time about the tokenistic “acknowledgement of traditional owners” speech that the new class elite chatterers chatter about at their talk fests. The absurdity and hypocrisy of these acknowledgements is striking. Traditional owners are “acknowledged”, but what does this mean? Where are these people? Not in the sandstone university buildings where bleeding heart whites feel oh-so-moral on their politically correct high-ground. No, these people were dispossessed. They lost the zero-sum game of history. And now, our own race traitors are doing the same to the Anglo Saxon people who fought for and built this country. Our elites are setting us up for demographic swamping by Asia and the ultimate takeover by China. You can be sure that if this vision of Australia is realised, there will be no acknowledgement of “traditional” owners, let alone the Anglo-Saxon founders of Australia.  


by Betty Luks
Gerard Henderson, in writing on Senator Barnaby Joyce, brought in the Australian League of Rights to ensure a knee-jerk reaction from his readers against the League. This in itself wouldn’t concern me, the mainline media has a long history of using the League of Rights as a ‘whipping boy’ for its own propaganda purposes. But he did make some claims to which I would like to respond. His article “Laugh at your peril: Joyce is not a joke” appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald April 6, 2010. Among other things, he wrote:
“In The Weekend Australian in December, the journalist Andrew Fraser attempted to link Joyce to the extreme-right Citizens Electoral Council… a lunar-right group in the US which believes the Queen and her family are drug runners and the West is under threat from an international conspiracy involving Jewish interests…”

The League would find much to disagree with in the policies of the Citizen’s Electoral Council . We don’t share their socialist philosophy. But I do wonder, is Mr. Henderson saying he can see no evidence that the “West is under threat from an international conspiracy involving Jewish interests?”

Has Mr. Henderson never once sat down and listed ‘the Jewish interests’ involved in international finance and banking? As to an ‘international conspiracy’ – is he saying he has never inquired into the most recent financial ‘meltdown’ (sending hundreds of smaller banks to the wall) and the involvement of the international – including Jewish - bankers? Has he not looked into the Derivatives Ponzi schemes, as just one example of Jewish involvement? The evidence is overwhelming.
The international financiers were up to their necks in this fraudulent scheme thus robbing millions of people of their life savings, etc. The financial system is set up in such a way – thanks to the collusion of governments the world over - the people are becoming paupers, while the financial elite ever more richer. But cleverly, because of constant ‘media-conditioning’ of the word itself, to dismiss any ‘taboo’ thoughts of ‘anti-semitism’, he links the ‘threats from an international conspiracy’ to ‘anti-semitism’ so that the reader will switch off from both issues. Throw in a reference to the Australian League of Rights and the psychologically-conditioned-public soon ‘switch off’ on both important matters.

Quinuchue Vult = Whoever wills. The Creed of Saint Athanasius which commences with these words: “Whosoever will be saved : before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith…”
But what I really want to hone in on is his following claim; in referring to a Radio National broadcast which Geraldine Doogue hosted, he wrote:
“When Doogue pointed out that Joyce had rejected the League of Rights, Rundle ploughed on. Then MacCallum asserted that Joyce believes "the world is run by an international conspiracy of Jewish bankers, or possibly Masonic bankers, or possibly Martian bankers". At least Rundle rejected the assertion that Barnaby Joyce is anti-Semitic. All this is nonsense. Joyce's background is Catholic and … There is no tradition of anti-Semitism within Australian Catholicism. Moreover, the League of Rights was (?) essentially Protestant.”

I’m sure Mr. Joyce is his own man and will and must answer for his own actions and statements, and is not answerable for what the League of Rights does or says. But I want to clear up a couple of points. The key words ‘Catholic’ and ‘Protestant’.

Having been associated with the League of Rights since the early 1960s, I would say - for our modern readers - the League of Rights is essentially catholic (universal) Christian. That is to say the League’s policies stem from the philosophy, which in turn stems from the Catholic Faith which grew out of the Church IN England– long before the Reformation. The term ‘Protestant’ came into fashion only after Henry VIII set up his State-controlled Church OF England.

The term itself means just that:
Catholic means universal and the religion that takes that epithet is called ‘catholic’ or ‘universal’ because Christian peoples of every nation accept the core doctrines of the Christian Faith.
In this day and age, within both the Roman Catholic and ‘Protestant’ traditions there are sincere and faithful Christians who loyally support the work of the Australian League of Rights.
Come on Gerard Henderson, it’s time you came to grips with what the League means by its first stated policy: “To promote service to the Christian revelation of God and loyalty to the Australian Constitutional Monarchy…”

Further reading: The “Australian Heritage Series”. This little gem contains three essays on the importance of understanding the development of our constitutional history. “Australia’s Constitutional Heritage” by Dr. David Mitchell; “The Christian Roots of Representative Government” by The Rev. Arthur G. Fellows and “The Church and The Trinity” by Dr. Geoffrey Dobbs. Price: $6.00 plus postage  


by Betty Luks
“Barnaby’s Rubble” was the headlines for Sean Leahy’s Cartoon Blog: 27/3/2010:
“Outspoken but gaffe-prone Queensland Senator Barnaby Joyce maintained it was his decision to leave finance for regional development, infrastructure and water after incessant criticism. He said he had fallen on his sword to improve the Coalition’s election chances. But the move has left a bitter taste in his mouth.
As Coalition finance spokesman, Senator Joyce sent jitters through the Liberals when he mixed up billions and millions, and warned Australia could default on its sovereign debt. His senior colleagues reportedly apologised to the business community over his performance and privately urged Mr Abbott to axe him.

“I think he had done a really excellent job in highlighting the issue of debt and deficit,” Mr Abbott said. “But the important thing is what is the best team for us going forward.”…”

What an appalling response from Tony Abbott: “I think he had done a really excellent job in highlighting the issue of debt and deficit,” Mr Abbott said. “But the important thing is what is the best team for us going forward.”…”
The fact that the Australian people are groaning under the weight of financial debt SHOULD be of more concern to Tony Abbott than ‘the party going forward’. Going forward to where Tony?

Your first loyalties belong to the people of your electorate:
The important thing is whether Barnaby Joyce’s warnings are true or not. As a political representative of your own electorate, you should be seriously seeking answers, that is, policies, that will lift the terrible burdens this debt-based money system places on the shoulders of your people.
What is lacking in the modern politician is the spiritual courage to face the jeers and penalties of this Money-and-Media dominated world. But, just like their counterparts in the UK (article below) they are petrified the people are going to wake up to the fact that we are in big debt-trouble – both nationally and individually – and that politicians of all persuasions have sold their people out to the money-changers for thirty pieces of silver.

Further essential reading:
“The Just Tax” by Dr. Geoffrey Dobbs. $4.00 plus postage.
"O'Malley MHR" by Larry Noye...
In a brisk conversational style Larry Noye describes the experiences of King O’Malley on his arrival in Australia around 1888. He immediately made an impression with his colourful oratory. He served three years in the South Australian Parliament, and 16 years in the fledgling Federal Parliament.
As Minister for Home Affairs he promoted the trans-continental railway and saw to it that it was constructed without incurring a debt burden requiring years of payments. The selection of the site of the ACT was another of his responsibilities.
Having been trained in banking in America, O’Malley campaigned tirelessly for a “people’s bank” in Australia. This eventually came about in 1911. O’Malley lived until 1953 – commenting on social and political issues up to his death. This book gives an insight into Australian history and life over an eventful 65 years. It is worthy of a place in anyone’s library. Price: 34.95 plus postage.  


So wrote Charles Moore of the Telegraph on the 26 Mar 2010: We are in danger of ignoring Britain’s real debt disaster. “ Voters owe too much money for politicians to dare to tell the truth about it” says Charles Moore.
“Individuals owe 9 per cent more than what the country produces in a year. Every day, especially in this Budget week, you can read articles to your heart's discontent about government debt. I am not objecting to that: government debt is just as big a problem as people say it is.
But you read very little just now about the personal debt which threatened to destroy us 18 months ago. Yet it explains our unhappiness, and our poor future, just as clearly as does Gordon Brown's borrowing. You have to put the two forms of debt together to see why we, as a country, as individuals, and as a political system with an election coming, do not know what to do next.

In 2003, which is now generally accepted as the year when policy in the Western world decisively took the path of profligacy, the mortgage debt of the British people amounted to £775 billion, or 68 per cent of Gross Domestic Product. This year, it is reckoned to be £1,253 billion, which is 86 per cent of GDP and works out at £49,000 per household. On top of that is another £340 billion of other forms of household debt, which pushes what we, as individuals, owe, to 9 per cent more than what the country produces in a year. All this debt is still growing.

Source: ignoring-Britains-real-debt-disaster.html  

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