|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
9 September 2011 Thought for the Week:
The Trinitarian Function of Political, Economic and Financial Power: Political, economic and financial power are three areas which should have one objective: service to mankind. In trinitarian terms, the three should overlap into one, and the one into three if the pattern of reality established by the Holy Trinity is to be observed. When finance is elevated above the other two, there is no affinity with Christ's teaching, and balanced harmony is fractured.
A Christian gospel which ignores the power of finance over politics and economics is a filleted gospel, robbed of Christ's power and authority. It fears confrontation with the one power on earth Christ said was opposed to God; the power of materialism, money or as Christ named it, Mammon. Christ said no person could worship God and Mammon. Mankind will only serve God when the power of Mammon has been subjugated to God…
A Christian economy would function by eliminating any form of coercion against producer or consumer - the underlying weapons of a centrally-controlled economy. The objective of a Christian economy is to fulfil a trinitarian function, delivering goods and services to each individual As, When and Where required, the essence of decentralised service. The individual consumer is master, the economy the servant. Money becomes a ticket, not a truncheon. The whole tenor of Matthew 6:24, 34 sets down from the first verse the principle from which all else flows…”
- - “Trinitarianism: The Threefold Substance of Reality” by Edward Rock, March 2000
PROFESSOR FLINT – WE AREN’T TRULY 'INDEPENDENT’
by Betty Luks
- - “The Story of the Commonwealth Bank” by Institute of Economic Democracy
Professor David Flint of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy recently took to task the new Tasmanian Senator Lisa Singh (Lab) for claiming Australia is not truly independent.
“New Senator affirms allegiance, declares Australia not truly independent”: "...we still, in my view, have a way to go in fully declaring ourselves as the architect of our own destiny. As a former state convenor of the Australian Republican Movement, I hope that in my time in this place Australia becomes a truly independent nation with our own head of state."
For me the key words are: “architect of our own destiny”. How can either Labor’s Senator Lisa Singh or ACM’s Professor David Flint claim we Australians are not/are ‘architects of our own destiny’ whilst our financial system is controlled by international financiers and bankers? Surely a nation’s financial system should be based on the belief it is a social institution and not the plaything of private financiers and bankers? Professor Flint posted “a photo of the Federal Labour Party MPs elected to the Australian House of Representatives and Australian Senate at the inaugural 1901 election” which included that colourful character King O'Malley.
King O’Malley’s background and the battles he fought on behalf of the Australian people should be closely studied and taken to heart. King O’Malley fought to wrest the dominance of the creation of credit out of the hands of the banks and financiers by the setting up the original Commonwealth Bank.
When the Commonwealth Constitution was drafted and accepted by the Australian people, the power of financial credit was left in the hands of the banks, which was operated between themselves largely through the chequeing system (another form of IOUs). By 1934 L.C. Jauncey Ph.D. referred to the Commonwealth Bank as “Australia’s Government Bank” in his book of the same name. But, sadly, as King O’Malley warned against it, the Australian people did vote for “Parliamentary candidates whose secret mission [was] to destroy the Commonwealth Bank ... and whose brains, if extracted, dried and placed in the quill of a cocksparrow and blown into the eye of a bee, would not even make him blink” with the result we are caught up in a financial-debt straight-jacket which is slowly strangling all community and family life to death in this nation.
*Purchase a hard copy of “The Story of the Commonwealth Bank” by D.J. Amos from Heritage Book Services $10.00 + postage.
TOTSCHED: DEATH BY SILENCE
by James Reed
Works are allowed to go down the memory hole. But this is also done to people, so effectively, that the ranks of academia in Australia have been largely pruned of critics of immigration and multiculturalism. This is statistically significant with the complete absence of critics that it can only be because of a program of “intellectual genocide”.
THE LEFT PLAYS THE “POLITICS OF FEAR”
by Peter Ewer
Reading further in the editorial we find: “This newspaper has always supported Australia’s open-migration policies.” In other words, there will be no debate. But really “debate” is just talk while the policy of open-migration ever continues. The fact of the matter is that people in the West are not and have never been, given a say about immigration.
KEVIN RUDD & DEATH OF WEST: NEED MORE THAN A NEW HEART-VALVE
by James Reed
Nevertheless the heritage of the West is being threatened because the people who created that heritage are being displaced. For the likes of Rudd, cultures are independent of races: Australia would still be “Australia’ if 100% Chinese. This is a fallacy, a fateful fallacy. It is races or peoples who create cultures. Cultures die with racial death. The West dies when White people die as a race. Mass immigration and multicultural diversity is hastening these death throes.
Further reading: The Cultivation of History by Hewlett Edwards...
THE ABUSE OF CHILDREN IN THE NAME OF “BEAUTY”
by James Reed
And there is something wrong here. It is qualitatively different from forcing one’s child to do extra study on maths or take tennis lessons. The tragedy of JonBenet Ramsey, a child beauty queen found strangled in her home, with a paedophile a likely suspect, is a chilling image of where all this can lead.
BLACK SUPERMAN SAVES TRUTH, DEBT AND THE AMERICAN WAY
by Peter Ewer
In Australia the capitalists have experienced the weakest retail growth since 1962. During early August, 2011, Australian stocks slumped, washing away $30 billion in value, just like that. One has to laugh if this is what life is supposed to be about. It is only cosmically fitting for a system as absurd as this one to flop over with its belly split open.
WE ARE BEING FORCED FED A LIE!
There are some excellent articles coming out about the truth of Carbon and Carbon Dioxide (or CO2). The following taken from http://galileomovement.com.au/blog/ is one such article:
Ok. So if we tax carbon we are taxing life itself. Sounds inhumane doesn’t it? So do those that invented this notion and those that vehemently support this sound like folk you would like to invite for dinner… or perhaps try your luck dining at theirs?
Your place or theirs I’d say the odds would be they’d take umbrage to you having the temerity and audacity to live, to cook the food that was grown by the farmers that was prepared and cooked and served for a pleasant evening all because you are a Carbon Carrier.
Ok. Now if it is all about emissions; don’t worry I’ll keep it clean. I shall not delve into being a carbon copy of the dishonourables emitting toxicity in OUR parliaments as they spew their hostile and poisonous unintelligible gases into the atmosphere; our atmosphere. They are the real polluters. I’d class myself as a Carbon Carrier and a long term friend of CO2. I actually know lots of folk who are friends with CO2. The trees out the front of my house have indicated they NEED CO2. I’d say they are perfect candidates as friends of CO2. Perhaps this could be the catalyst for a new political party, “Friends Of CO2”
Next thing: So if we Carbon Carriers exhale, that is an emission so the logical conclusion is the plan to tax us. Sounds inhumane don’t you think? Anything else that contains carbon that is emitting it into the atmosphere shall also be taxed. Your pets, livestock, the oceans, yes the BIG POLLUTERS the oceans as they have in dissolved form 50 times the CO2 in the earth’s ENTIRE atmosphere! Wow, they sure do have a head start on us! And that is BEFORE it hits the atmosphere. So the oceans are not only Carbon Carriers, they are Carbon Dioxide Hoarders as well. The plants don’t even get a look in because they NEED CO2.
They will be classified as Carbon Thieves. Ah, then this is where the Carbon Cops enter the world stage. They will redistribute the wealth so the Carbon Hoarders ‘n’ Carriers don’t give away the CO2 to those that really need it! The Carbon Cops will decide it is better at a price that they see fit, an undefined price at that. All friends of CO2 will be pursued whether they produced, stored or used this “pollutant”. Doesn’t it sound similar to a philosophy of control of market forces? Will the creators of this madness be able to measure each person’s boundary line of carbon dioxide “trafficking”? Sounds to me more like guilty by association.
So what is this Carbon Dioxide Tax all about? No matter how unjust, they are after their unjust share. Sounds like the flourishing bureaucracies of the past that continue to spawn and feed off citizens in the guise of helping yet at the same time not delivering to those in real need. They aim to create an interdependent market on their unjust terms.
So, what is this Carbon Dioxide Tax all about? Carbon Carriers, Carbon Hoarders, Carbon Thieves and Carbon Cops. Sounds like an upcoming Hollywood movie. There would be a sequel or two in that. The possibilities are limitless. It would be hilarious if it were not true.
We Are Being Forced-Fed a LIE! More to the point have we been led to this situation or pushed? That is a discussion for another time. The truth is we are being forced fed a lie. The weather patterns are NOT controlled by humans. Carbon and carbon dioxide are NOT pollutants. That is the truth and nothing but the truth. Our dishonourable politicians have been relying on the lies to scare people who would ask to be taxed to “save the planet”. Liar, upon liar upon liar. These are our present three tiers of government.
So, what is this Carbon Dioxide Tax all about? It’s about money. It’s about a new currency. It’s about control. It’s about depriving people a modern way of life.
To be dragged into Post modernism – a philosophy that tears down everything that’s modern. It is the age we are living in NOW. Sounds like a brutal world to me.
Listen to Jeremy Lee explain the way global finance binds us all in a web of debt here...
CANADA’S BATTLING BARRISTER REPLIES
In a recent OT edition (https://alor.org/Volume47/Vol47No30.htm) we reported on Canadian barrister Douglas Christie, who is battling prostrate cancer and asked those who wished to do so, to send their best wishes and hopes for a speedy recovery.
- - With sincere thanks, Douglas Christie. August 10/2011
THE SAGA OF THE AGEING PMs: THE LEFT AND NATIVE TITLE
by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Exhibit B: Paul Keating delivered the annual Lowitja O’Donoghue Oration at the University of Adelaide on May 31, 2011. What could Keating do to win the on-going battle of political correctness of the ageing PM set? Lamenting that only 121 native title determinations had concluded from 1,300 lodged claims in 15 years the Native Title Act has operated.
Before we jump up and down at Keating, in an extract of his speech (The Australian, June 1, 2011, p.16) Keating quotes the Chief Justice Robert French as coming up with this idea. Keating says: “Chief Justice Robert French had some helpful things to say in Adelaide in July 2008. He highlighted the beneficial purpose that the act seeks to confer on Aboriginal and Islander people. He suggested that some change in the act as it relates to onus of proof could facilitate a presumption of continuity of connection by claimants and continuity since sovereignty.
Reversing the onus of proof will of course make it extremely difficult to defeat any native title claim. An explosion of claims will occur, including claims for entire cities. I suggest that the very first claim be made against Keating’s house.
SAYING NO TO SHARIA LAW
by Ian Wilson LL.B.
THE LAW AND ETHICS OF FACE COVERING
by Ian Wilson LL.B.
France has a total ban on the burka, hijab and niqab in public places because these are symbols of the oppression of women. Yes, from a liberal perspective. But I do not agree on such a banning because it arbitrarily ceases on only one aspect of a cultural phenomenon. If multicultural societies are to be created, then why single just that out? The need for removing face coverings for police identification though is a different question. On public policy grounds, not feminist political correctness grounds, this is justified. If necessary a female police officer can do the examination. As far as I have been able to ascertain, there is nothing in the Koran that recludes the removal of facial coverings for police identification.
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|