Defend Alan Jones from the censors... Andrew Bolt

– Wednesday, November 23, 11 (05:32 pm)
This is extremely troubling: Alan Jones has breached the commercial radio codes of practice by getting his facts wrong, the regulator found today. The presenter and Radio 2GB also breached the code because they did not present significant viewpoints, the Australian Comunications and Media Authority ruled.

The breaches occured during The Alan Jones Breakfast Show broadcast in February last year. The broadcasts attacked the native vegetation laws and their administration by the New South Wales government. ACMA found that 2GB did not present nor take steps to present more than one significant viewpoint about the operation and administration of native vegetation laws in NSW.

Should government-appointment officials really rule on which points of view a broadcaster should air for “balance”? In effect this skews the debate, since government-appointed regulators tend fo come from a social class with its own notions of what needs to be balanced and what views don’t need countering.

Some examples. Why has ACMA never insisted the ABC air the sceptical arguments against dangerous man-made warming, an orthodoxy now crumbling? Where is the ACMA ruling demanding a balance on the ABC to its relentless promotion of the “stolen generations” myth?
You know that would never happen, and not because the facts all fall on one side. No, it won’t happen because that would make such regulators feel uncomfortably “political” - and because conservatives, unlike the Left, are less likely to demand officials silence and skew a debate.

The ruling can only be the start of a deeper intrusion of the political class into free speech, already so under threat on so many fronts.

DYNAMICS AND TECHNIQUES OF CENTRALISING POWER

by John Brett
The latest globalisation headlines reminded me of the letter I wrote to the local paper, about our Roman Catholic Bishop here in Toowoomba, who has been dismissed from Rome! The RC furore here has gone on for weeks, with not one person approaching the underlying position. The surprise was the number of phone calls I had, asking what I meant!! But the turmoil was put to rest by one writer to the paper, who pointed out that the whole dynamic and history of world power was encapsulated in my letter! Well it was meant to be!

My letter to the Editor, The Chronicle, Toowoomba, 7/5/2011, reads:
“Bishop Morris's unfortunate plight does serve to illustrate what all clerics avoid, even when they are victims of the unspoken truth. Local, national, global or church politics is the science of a minority of people controlling for better or worse, a majority of people. Whether it was Alexander the Great, the Pharaoh's, Julius Caesar, Constantine, the Pope or the Archbishop of Canterbury in earlier times, today it is Presidents, Prime Ministers and Premiers and the Pope who apply the dynamics of power.

Not one of these minorities could identify the only three dynamics available to them for controlling others, as they are not the authors of the dynamic. They have the will to exercise the power extended to them by that even smaller silent minority who do understand the technique.
It is puzzling to the whole world at large, that there are only three dynamics that exist, financial force, the lie and physical force. It is even more puzzling that this simple trinity of power was brought to the world’s attention by the founder of the good Bishop’s Church, Jesus Christ. He was disposed of because of his discovery, but left us with the vital clue "Know the truth and the truth will set you free".”

A MUST further reading: * “The Cultivation of History” by Hewlett Edwards. There is nothing new in this push for world control.
* “The Pyramid of Power” by C.H. Douglas. Read just how the pyramid is organised so that those who ‘sell their souls’ form part of the problem – not the solution. * And …

BLAINEY AND CHRISTIAN HISTORY from Pat Kennedy, Queensland

I was amazed at what I heard recently when on Andrew Bolt’s TV programme, notable Australian historian Professor Blainey could not give the reason why Christianity ‘hated’ Communism and Fascism. The reason being, both belief systems claim the individual is subservient to the State. The State comes first; any means are legitimate to further the cause of the State’s power and control over the Individual. In other words, both philosophies are completely amoral, the difference being that one, Communism, is international, and Fascism/Nazism is national. Forget the "Left" and "Right" dialectics, that's simply a smokescreen.

So all of that, plus the fact that most who adhere to those philosophies don't (they couldn't – could they?) believe in a loving God who wants to set us free. Surely their belief systems cannot be reconciled to the Christian religion?
If Professor Blainey, a prominent historian, couldn't answer that philosophical question, what hope is there for genuine Christian history?

OUR DISGRACEFUL UNIVERSITIES

by James Reed
“Overseas Students ‘Get Soft Pass Marks’”, The Australian, November 2, 2011, p.23 – are you surprised to hear about our disgraceful and corrupt money grubbing universities? Victoria’s Ombudsman has “reignited concerns over alleged “soft marking” of international students with poor English, citing complaints that academics are under pressure to drop standards to pass fee-paying students.”
This is well known to be true, for Asianisation has meant that Australian universities have become degree machines for “dollar degrees”.

I wonder why university administrators waste everybody’s time and don’t cut to the chase and simply print off degrees for rich Asians for a big fee? Our disgraceful universities are so foul that they may as well go all the way and be like pigs, frolicking in their own intellectual filth! 

WHY AUSTRALIA SHOULD NOT ADOPT ASIAN TEACHING MODELS

by James Reed
Michael Wesley, executive director of the Lowy institute (“We Must Look to Asia to Change our Teaching Models,” The Australian, October 26, 2011, p.29) wishes to take Asianisation to a whole new level:
“The real urgency is to match the Asianisation of the student demand in our lecture halls and classrooms with an Asianisation of the knowledge we pass on and the techniques we use.” The same teaching techniques are used even during “those years of the growing pressure of students from Asian societies.”
Teaching models have not changed because of “the arrogant belief that in the Western school, college or university rests the pinnacle of knowledge and teaching achieved by humanity.”

Wesley takes the example of the political concept of power. In the West it is assumed that power can be observed and measured. But the infinitely smarter Asian cultures have a different understanding (“this is not the way different cultural traditions in Asia view and understand power and influence”) A crucial point in his argument, but no other explanation is given. Presumably, some sort of cultural view which views power as not observable, empirical or measurable is advocated. That might fill in with multicultural relativism but it makes no scientific sense. On the contrary, Asia’s success has been hard work and discipline in the classroom at core knowledge topics such as mathematics, rather than wasting time on political correctness. Asian countries, even when colonies of the West, never wasted time on “Westernisation” and nor should we now on “Asianisation.”

A little way back in the same edition of Murdoch’s mighty mag sits “Students, Teachers Know to Toe Censorship ‘Red Line’ (The Australian, October 26, 2011, p.23). There we hear a different story about Asian education where Chinese students report back to the Communist Party what other students say in the classroom in China. Students who say the wrong thing are hounded by the Chinese authorities. This has created a culture of fear and self-censorship.

Chinese students are subjected to compulsory “political ideology education” and a certain level must be reached before graduation. I would be interested in knowing whether Michael Wesley would like this sort of system and if not how his “abandon the West” approach would not logically lead to it. Please explain.  

‘GOLD-BACKED’ MONEY: DETACHED FROM MODERN REALITIES

by Wallace Klinck
All this talk about Gold and “fiat” money is completely detached from the realities of real production and consumption in a modern economy. It sounds more like Black Magic than objective science. Money or credit that is issued and accounted against real productive capacity and finalized consumer goods is “real money” and derives its value from real wealth, potential and actual. The problem today is that all money is issued as debt for production which means that it all creates new financial costs.

Because of the conventions of existing cost accountancy prices are created in excess of the incomes distributed through industry and the Herculean task of cost liquidation is rendered increasingly impossible. Debt incurred to liquidate said financial costs is not liquidation at all because it merely transfers these costs as a charge to be incorporated in the financial costs and prices of future production. The whole process is quite mad. Unfortunately, at higher policy levels, the madness is not without method or conscious intent. The resulting concentration of financial-economic and political power continues unabated.

The evil is not in the ability of money to be created by private institutions in order to actualize production capacity. The problem lies in such institutions holding a monopoly of credit creation. We do not want to transfer that monopoly to the State, but the State should use its power to break the private Monopoly of Credit so that money serves the interests of humanity and not those of the Credit Monopoly.

Financial “liquidation” is merely a euphemism for “foreclosure” and our present false system of financial “accountancy” is simply a mechanism for the continuing unjustifiable and evil progressive confiscation of the real assets of the community which confiscation has no justification and would not exist under realistic financial accountancy. The simplistic claim that financial “liquidation” is the “natural consequence of government interference in the market” is a misconception. It is the consequence of adherence to a faulty system of national financial cost-accountancy…

“Mammon and Leviathan conspire, combined with the natural frailties of humanity, to work against Faith (as in confidence) Hope, Love and Grace. But if we'd incorporate Grace into the policies of the financial and economic systems... we'd have abundance instead of scarcity, confidence instead of insecurity, hope instead of hopelessness and a whole lot more time and so the freedom to express and experience love for others, ourselves and the rest of the planet's inhabitants.  

A CO-OPERATIVE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

Australians needs their own “Arab Spring’ and surely the first step is to take back the right and power to issue our own national currency – from the banks. Taken from Victor Bridger’s “Social Credit and National Accounting”:

A National Credit Authority: The Government should institute a separate statutory organisation named the National Credit Authority. Its responsibility and function would be to compile the National Balance Sheet based on information supplied by other authorities such as the Reserve Bank, the Bureaus of Statistics and the Taxation Office.

The Financial Authority: A National Credit Authority would not determine policy but be responsible for producing a proper and correct set of accounts on which policy could be based. A Balance Sheet produced by the Authority would form the basis for financial policy on which the government of the day would determine its financial policy. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Chapter 1. Part V. Section 51) gives full power to the Federal and States Government to control the source and creation of currency, coinage and the issue of paper money as legal tender. A vital constitutional aspect to be observed is – that in respect of the whole question of money, the Commonwealth has no exclusive power, but power in conjunction with the states. It has powers with respect to all banks except State Banks.

A National Balance Sheet: A National Balance Sheet would differ from an ordinary balance sheet in two ways. Firstly, no money would appear as an asset and secondly the assets and liabilities would not balance, because the resources, accumulated capital and wealth of the community would far exceed the total of all liabilities. This difference is the accumulated resources of society, and the embodiment of the Real Credit, which give value to all credit by whomsoever created and issued.

At present, this Real Credit cannot be used by the Community who are its rightful beneficiaries because it is not monetised. As soon as we have a balance sheet however, it will be seen that this surplus of assets over liabilities can be monetised and distributed to the community in whatever way deemed desirable so that consumption may keep pace with production, and so enable a continuous expansion of production. (Expansion of production if needed. Gone are the days when we can exploit the soils and squander our resources merely for ‘export’…ed)

TAMIL TIGERS AND REFUGEES

by Peter West
The Tamil Tigers have recently been described by Asianist Greg Sheridan as “the bloodiest and most murderous terror group the world has seen”. (The Australian, 5-6 November, 2011, p.18) The Tigers killed tens of thousands of people in their 25-year campaign as well as suicide bombing attacks, including killing India’s prime minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1991. The Tigers received money from across the world, especially Australia. Today the Tigers still have influence overseas and have been involved in people smuggling to get their members out of Sri Lanka to soft touch liberal death wish countries such as Australia.

Since the Labor government changed border protection policy in 2008, over 1400 illegal aliens from Sri Lanka have arrived by boat. Recently at least 40 of 44 boat people have been declared security threats by ASIO having Tamil Tiger links. An article says “The growing number of asylum-seekers in Australian detention centres who are both refugees and security threats represents a serious long-term challenge for the government.” (The Australian, November 5-6, 2011, p.5) We are now reaping the bitter fruits of signing the 1951 UN refugee convention and the abandonment of the White Australia Policy.  

EUROPEANS AGAINST FURTHER IMMIGRATION

by Peter Ewer
Good news – an international survey of 23 countries found overwhelming opposition to immigration with people considering its effects to be negative. (www.euractive.com, 23 August, 2011) This was true for the United States, Germany, South Africa and Russia. In Europe over 65% of people polled in Britain, Italy and Spain, agreed that “there are too many immigrants in our country.”
Sweden and Poland were the only European countries surveyed that did not yield a majority seeing immigration’s overall effects as negative. But these countries did not have a majority seeing immigration as beneficial. Immigration was seen to increase unemployment and put pressure on health care and education.

The International Organisation for Migration has said that the number of migrants in the world has increased from 150 million in 2000 to 214 million in 2011. If Australia’s elites had their way all 214 million would be in this country, every year, until ecological collapse, and maybe even after that. Immigration is a symptom of the madness of the age.

TAKE YOUR HANDS OFF OUR CONSTITUTION!

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Always beware when politicians and other members of the politically correct chattering class want to change the Constitution. The Coalition is to support a referendum on the removal of section 25 to the Constitution which gives the States the power to disqualify a race from voting at elections for the States’ Lower House. (“Coalition to Act on Race Edict” The Weekend Australian, 12-13 November 2011, p.8).

Liberal MP Ken Wyatt, the first Aboriginal member of the House of Representatives, has been lobbying the Opposition “to substantially remove discrimination from the Constitution”. This is to “set the racism agenda aside”.

According to Wyatt there is “racism” in two sections of the Constitution (sections 25 and 51, the race powers section). Against this, there were good reasons for the Founding Fathers to include racial control powers. There are good reasons, for the survival of our people to have race powers and to, in the worst case, control a race from voting.
Demographic swamping could necessitate such defensive measures. That the Coalition would go along with the politically correct establishment clearly shows their bankruptcy on the race and immigration issues.  

Task for readers/actionists: Next year the Queen will have reigned for 60 years. Surely such service to her people deserves some recognition by each level of government, as our representatives, for reaching such a milestone. During that period, we have enjoyed more peace and security than many other nations, due in no small way to our system of government.

Is YOUR Local Council participating in that recognition? ASK THEM! 

ASYLUM SEEKER THREAT TO JOYFUL MULTICULTURAL HARMONY

by Brian Simpson
You have heard the line before about our joyful multicultural society. The more colour the better, presumably because White is oh so bland. Colour! Richness! Diversity! Say it, oh chattering class whilst sipping on your fine wine, diluting the rich and fatty food in your animal organs. So – it would seem that bringing in even more diversity would be a good thing, a tremendous thing.
Shame then on “advice” provided to Julia Gillard that onshore processing of asylum seekers will pose a risk to Australia’s social cohesion leading to the sorts of problems recently seen in London. (The Australian, 8 September, 2011, p.1)
What problems could that be? A few poor people lighting fires to keep warm in the winter (actually, summer) chill! A few poor people taking TV sets, obviously to eat to ease their hunger!

Who is providing this “advice”? I read the article in The Australian a number of times but could find no reference, no entity to send a hastily written letter. How dare these dark secret people raise doubts about “diversity”. All self-respecting politically correct members of the chattering/gluttonary class know that onshore processing increases our d-i-v-e-r-s-i-t-y (echo). And in this regime that, by definition, is g-o-o-d (more echo).

I sincerely hope that that dreaded League of Rights (gasp, shock, horror, gentle ladies faint) is not influencing public debate again!  

THE RADIOACTIVE HIGH COURT

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Radioactive? A Freudian slip – I meant “politically active”, but let it stand. Our High Court has come in for a spot of criticism with the Malaysian decision. But James Allan, “Worrying Activist Trend in High Court”, The Australian, 9 September, 2011, p.29, said that insofar as judicial activism goes, we are looking in the wrong place. He refers us to two voting or franchise cases Roach (2007) and Rowe (2010).

The cases involve the High Court adopting a “living constitution” version of constitutional interpretation, which is custom made for imposing present values on the past. Thus the cases establish “that legislation can be valid at the time of federation and right up to 1983 and beyond, but that that legislation is today no longer constitutionally valid.” And “if a parliament in the recent past happens to have legislated some progressive-seeming new rules, no parliament of even more recent vintage will be able, or allowed, to revert to the older rules,” “Social justice” in the politically correct sense is seen to ooze from the Constitution, at least as the judges see it.

As I see it, the end result of all of this will be an ultimate lack of faith in people in the rule of law. That is one part of the breakdown and collapse of civilisations. In a sense, a politically correct court is “radioactive”, ultimately helping destroy the society in which it is found.

HOME GROWN TERRORISM: NO WORRIES... SHE’LL BE RIGHT MATE!

by Peter West
ASIO has said that “foreign spy cells lie in wait.” (The Australian, 12 October, 2011, p.8) Foreign powers may have sleeper agents in Australia. Gee, could they be alluding to China? And where, among the hundreds of thousands of Chinese in Australia would they find such “sleepers”? I mean to say, as Australia moves towards a majority Asian population, probably within 20 years, “Australia” will be more China than “Australia”, so why bother?

Then we have “Extremists’ Eyes on Australia,” The Advertiser, 13 October, 2011, p.27 which quotes ASIO as telling us that “there are legitimate concerns that nationalist extremist outfits may one day generate an Anders Brevik-style attack on our shores.” Various “Far-Right” groups are listed including the Australia First Party, Patriotic Youth League, Church of Creativity South Australia, Blood and Honour, Australian Nationalist Movement and Ku Klux Klan Australian chapter.

I checked most of these groups on the net and found only some. The Patriotic Youth League appears to be defunct. I found no internet trace of the Church of Creativity, South Australia, or the KKK Aussie-style. It is not clear where the “legitimate concerns” that these groups will produce a Breivik comes from. Probably most of these groups have only a few members. Further, Breivik was a lone wolf not the product of any far-right group. I suppose that by focusing angst on extreme nationalist groups for a while, it takes the heat off of extreme Islamic groups, giving them time to relax and smell the roses!  

WILL VITAMINS KILL ME?

by Brian Simpson
The article’s title was certainly alarming: “Diet Pills Warning for Older Women,” The Australian, 12 October, 2011, p.3. Actually it was not “diet pills” but vitamins which were the target of concern. The article begins: “Experts have called for an end to the indiscriminate use of popular dietary supplements such as multivitamins after a huge study found that they might increase rather than decrease the death rate among older women.” The paper in question is J. Mursu (et.al.), “Dietary Supplements and Mortality Rate in Older Women,” Archives of Internal Medicine, vol. 171, pp.1625 – 1633.

The study involved 38,772 older women in the Iowa Women’s Health Study, Mean age 61.6 years. The use of vitamins was self-reported. The study’s baseline was 1986 through to 2008. It was found that a total of 15,594 deaths occurred. It is alleged that the use of multivitamins “were associated with increased risk of total mortality when compared with corresponding non use.” The authors concluded that they say “little justification for the general and widespread use of dietary supplements.”

Will supplements kill you? The study itself is applicable only to older women and logically cannot be generalised to older men, as one expert thought, let alone to say, younger people or athletes. But this paper’s conclusions are at variance with thousands of other papers which have supported supplement use. Further, the researchers did not consider the use of pharmaceutical drugs and whether supplements were used after ill-health has occurred, thus reversing cause and effect. There was no information about the type of diets that the participants had. Worse, lifestyle factors were not taken into account.
The type of research discussed here, although methodologically flawed, is used by Big Pharma which hates the thought that people can take control of their own health.  

NOTICE OF CHRIST-MASS AND NEW YEAR SEASON ARRANGEMENTS

The League headquarters in Melbourne and the Heritage BookShops (Melbourne and Adelaide) will be closed FROM Friday 19th December 2011 and will REOPEN on Monday 9th January 2012. Now is the time to purchase your holiday reading.  

Don't forget the Special Offer for New Times Survey and On Target subscribers!