THE UNITED STATES OF EUROPE (EU) PLANNED AND PLOTTED LONG AGO

It was in January 1958 that the League published an article by Mary H. Gray in The New Times; that’s over 50 years ago.
At the time, Mary Gray wrote:
“As the Grand Plan for a United States of Europe nears fulfilment there is much activity of conferences in London, Paris, Rome and elsewhere and hurrying to and fro. There is also less humbug; the real objectives of the network of organisations that have sprung up since the war are no longer camouflaged. The cat had to come out of the bag sometime, but not before Britain, the main catch, was secured. Great Britain, always elusive, is now all but committed to the European Free Trade Area by her Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary; once inside the gates of a "United Europe" there will be no returning.

The Free Trade Area is the lure; it is the honey on the flypaper from which we shall find it impossible to extricate ourselves. A nation can withdraw from an agreement; a treaty can be annulled; but once a people have discarded their nationhood and merged their identity in a cosmopolitan crowd, they are no longer a nation. And that is just what is planned for the British people…”
Continue reading of the plans that were set in place many years ago:

It all came to pass as was planned: The political parties fed the people just what they thought they could get away with, continually putting in place policies that took away genuine freedoms and rights. Having watched what was happening for many a long year you could say I have become very cynical – and you would be right! I liken the two main political parties to two prongs on the one fork – a fork that has continually stabbed the Australian people in the back whilst the reflection from the glint of metal appears as a false shining light of honesty and truth and integrity.

And that is how I see the public spat between Wayne Swan (Labor) and the Queensland billionaire Clive Palmer (LNP donor), “The rising influence of vested interests is threatening Australia’s egalitarian social contract”, claims Wayne Swan. (https://www.themonthly.com.au) “Wayne Swan knows nothing about me, or our democracy” counters Clive Palmer (March 5, 2012). “All Australians have an inherent right to be treated equally under the law regardless of our race or means or where we live. We are one nation, with a diverse and rich background. The heritage of all Australians, rich or poor, and that of our leaders, elected or not, is something we all must respect.”

Comment: This ‘leadership’ nonsense simply won’t wash Mr. Palmer. It is rather like saying the German people should have respected the heritage of Adolf Hitler, or the Russian people the heritage of Joseph Stalin. What nonsense. People respect those who prove their integrity, their loyalty and in the case of politicians, their genuine representation and service to their fellow countrymen, etc.

Let me remind you of what you had to say in 2009: “Mining Magnate Defends China from ‘Racists’”. According to Australia’s fifth richest man, Clive Palmer, the Rudd government’s foreign investment rules are “racist” discriminating against Chinese companies seeking to buy Australian resource projects. Chinese investors would not tolerate “the idea of being discriminated against because of the colour of their skin” (The Australian 30/9/09, p.1).

OT continues: “Recall also that China is a communist society that, under Mao, murdered millions of its own people. Beijing has celebrated the 60th anniversary of communist power, when it should be lamenting 60 years of tyranny and oppression…” On Target, 6/11/2009

Palmer continues: “To classify people by their means, race, class or gender is not a substitute for robust discussion about ideas or solutions to pressing national problems. John F. Kennedy once said words to the effect that ''governments may come and go but ideas go on for ever''. (emphasis added…ed) Read further:..

IDEAS sure as hell do ‘go on forever’ Mr. Palmer! The Greek people, the Irish people, the Italian people and the Australian people are now aware of that as they struggle to survive the latest attacks on their freedoms, their livelihoods and their national sovereignties.

Let’s have a good look at what a free and responsible Society really looks like:
By a Society I mean a large, complex, permanent and recognisable association of human beings who live in communities for their mutual benefit. I do not mean any sort of collective multicultural, multiracial ‘abstraction’ which is used to oppose the interests of the individuals who comprise the Society. This definition applies to communities of all races and ethnic groups. It is the genuine right of all peoples to determine their own destiny, their own future.
By a Free Society I mean a society which is characterised by the freedom of the people who compose it - freedom being defined as power to choose between real, not artificial, alternatives as they arise; i.e., to choose one thing at a time and not between "package deals", and to "contract out" of undesired alternatives. This negative aspect of freedom, the power to contract out, is of immense importance in any thinking about democracy. It constitutes, for instance, the sole difference between employment and slavery…” Read further:

The Courier Mail (3/3/2012) asks about Clive Palmer: “So what is Palmer's motivation with this flurry of very public battles on multiple fronts? Has he lost the plot, or is he a master tactician who is all too often underestimated by his opponents? Or is he perhaps just a frustrated barrister who dropped out of a law degree at the University of Queensland in the '80s, to later end up as media spokesman for the Bjelke-Petersen-era National Party during the 1986 election campaign, and is today one of the LNP's biggest donors?”

Palmer is an Assets Trader: “Palmer's billions do not come from creating assets of value. There are no major mines, resorts or factories that Palmer has built himself. He is an asset trader, who started in property and moved to mineral tenements in hot sectors such as iron ore and coal, and sources his cash flow from the Yabulu refinery he (in very savvy fashion) bought from BHP Billiton towards the bottom of the cycle. Ironically, the one thing he appears to have been stripped of - the Gold Coast soccer licence - is possibly the only recognisable entity he has helped build from scratch. And it is highly doubtful today whether the licence is worth anything like $18 million. Assets can be bought and sold, though. Or litigated. And Palmer appears very adroit at both.”

As for Wayne Swan: Playing the ‘class war’ card has worn very thin indeed Wayne. The Labor movement and party have been around for a hundred or more years and in that time many ambitious men and women have climbed to political power and perks on the backs of hard working Australians – and still the working classes are struggling to hold their heads above water! Dear God, please spare us from all such people!  Labour has known of the answer to the 'class war' for more than eighty years. Read... "Socialism and Social Credit 1935" for the historical evidence.

PLAY THE RACE CARD AGAIN, SAM!

by Peter West
We need more media articles like this one! Michael Thomson, “Progressives Play Race Card”, The Australian, February 21, 2012, p.14, says it bluntly: “Inner-city elites like to presume they are morally superior to ordinary Australians.” This is especially so on issues of race, ethnicity and immigration. Michael Thomson asks why ordinary Australians should be viewed as “racists”,
“After all, did not the Anglo-Celtic working class – with remarkably little tension – share their suburbs, schools, jobs and inter-marry with migrants?”
And I ask, if it had been Anglos going to the Mediterranean, the Middle East, Asia and Africa and changing the demographic/ethnic profile of those lands, would the demographic dilution be as peaceful?

Thomson himself says that the new class progressives’ false sense of moral superiority has effectively censored debate on the population pressures faced by people in Sydney’s west which is the area that receives most of Sydney’s refugee intake. While the inner-city elites champion onshore processing of asylum-seekers they do not offer up their suburbs as sites for processing. Thomson asks whether “Balmain be an ideal suburb for those who eventually meet the requirements for permanent settlement to establish new communities, possibly with the building of a Mosque for their religious observances.” Melbourne too would be excellent! Canberra would be best of all!

Thomson says that the high moral standard mentality is found in the new class elites’ attitudes to the “stolen generation” and in the history of the White Australia policy. The taxpayer funded Immigrant Nation sees the White Australia Policy as “racist” and dismisses concerns of the working class for protection of their jobs.

Thomson concludes by observing that the progressives still hold to exclusive divisions, being elitists and as such they have a prejudice against the working class, born from their university education. Overall a good article on themes dear to my heart. This is about the best article on this issue which I have seen in the orthodox media so it is worth noting its existence for the record.  

LET’S HAVE SOME PLURALISM AND DIVERSITY IN FINANCE

by James Reed
The chattering class are always chattering on about the virtues of diversity, so why not have some diversity and pluralism in finance, especially alternative ways of financing production? Frances Hutchinson and Brian Burkitt, writing in The European Legacy, vol. 5, 2000, say that C.H. Douglas’ social credit constituted an alternative approach to finance that would allow the achievement of “a socially and ecologically sustainable economics of sufficiency.”

Hutchinson and Burkitt draw parallels between Douglas’ position and that of economic institutional analysis, Thorstein Veblen, who coined the term in 1900 in his book The Place of Science in Modern Civilization. In particular, Veblen criticises orthodox economics for its reductionistic treatment of the machinery of credit as a mere “refined system of barter”.
The causal effects of financial capital are thus ignored, for production itself cannot occur unless financial capital is available, for the hiring of labour, the purchase of machines and the renting or purchase of land. Financial capital has an “immaterial character” that the neo-classical position has not recognised. A similar critique of economic orthodoxy has been developed by Australian economist Steve Keen.

According to Hutchinson and Burkitt, “Douglas’ rejection by orthodoxy was due in no small measure to the impracticality of tailoring his theoretical observations within the constraints of neo-classical general free market equilibrium theory.” However since the time of Douglas the most able of critics have pounded away at the philosophical foundations of this orthodoxy and found it wanting. That is good news for social crediters who have been granted a window of theoretical opportunity.  

CONSTITUTIONAL BETRAYAL: TIME TO PUT REAL PRESSURE ON ABBOTT

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
At the time of the decision against Andrew Bolt I commented on a number of articles which appeared in The Australian which suggested that the Liberals in power would repeal the race hate legislation appearing in the Racial Discrimination Act. Dream on I said, this party is as politically correct as Labor, but are deceptive in their political correctness. Thus John Howard posed as critical of multiculturalism, but more rapidly Asianised Australia than Keating.

Howard, an alleged monarchist, gave us a Constitutional referendum about the republic. Noel Pearson, a champion of proposed Constitutional changes believes that he can convince Tony Abbott to back the full packet of changes, including a clause outlawing racial discrimination. (The Australian, February 10, 2012, p.2)

Abbott has said that the expert panel has “overreached” and wants a referendum to be held separate from the federal election. The standard weak Abbott response. He needs to have political pressure put on him through you good people out there in Liberal voting land, and maybe he needs to be replaced by someone less hopeless. Somehow whenever I see Gillard and Abbott together I think of the movie Twins.  

THE HUMAN RIGHTS TO THE LOOT

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Bret Stephens, “Rights Court Corrodes Democracy”, The Australian, February 7, 2012, p.9, gives an argument highly relevant to our current Constitutional race rights debate. Europe, which with its European Court of Human Rights, is big on rights, and alleged human rights abuses have become a virtual industry. Cases have been heard about the alleged human rights abuse of reclining seats!

In the UK about 200 foreign criminals escaped deportation in 2010 using Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights which guarantees the right to “family and private life”.

This is an example of how a piece of law, which in a normal society would function well, but in our corrupted society behaves abnormally. That is why our Constitution should not be touched. For any change, however small, will give miles of power to our politically correct legal establishment.  

JEWS ON: IS RACE WAR IN AMERICA INEVITABLE ?

by Peter Ewer and John Steele
If you are a White nationalist google-clicking on this expecting to see another diatribe about “the Jews” you will be disappointed. One of the few good things about America’s diversity is that there is a wide range of diversity of opinion and people can say things and be intelligently debated without the same level of fear and vilification as seen in Australia. Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership is an organisation which we found from researching, shares and defends many of the values which we too personally have. Certainly they are pro-gun, but recently they had an article “Is Race War in America Inevitable?” In general, on the race issue, Jews have tended to the liberal-Left position. Some though, are thinking outside of the square.

“Is Race War in America Inevitable?” by Kirby Ferris, currently the Research Director of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, cites approvingly a review of the same title by Ferris of Thomas Chittum’s Civil War Two: "The Coming Breakup of America" (1998). Chittum argued for the common sense position that “multi-cultural, multi-racial and multi-ethnic democracies don’t last very long, if they even get started in the first place. The minute a single race, religion or ethnic group loses a large majority in a nation, that nation begins to undergo internal fracture.”

Ferris, summarising Chittum, says that this is already occurring in the American Southwest. Not only will Hispanic migration, most of it illegal, result in conflicts with Whites, but American blacks are returning to the Old South, so a three way contest is going to occur. Southern conflict will ignite northern conflict in cities between Black and Hispanic Street gangs, perhaps now close to one million armed and aggressive young men, and the city’s “White population.”

Ferris concludes: “Don’t get mad at Thomas Chittum for his pragmatic insight. His book is controversial and opinionated but it is not a racist screed. You just might as well get mad at the weatherman who tells you a hurricane is coming.” And indeed, such a hurricane is coming to assault the quiet lives of the West.

THE GREAT LIBERAL SELF DECEPTION

by James Reed
Daniel W. Drezner, “It’s Time to Arm the Syrian Opposition”, The Australian, February 13, 2012, p.8, (originally published in The New Republic) puts the usual liberal case for US intervention to end a tyrant’s rule. President Bashar al-Assad has created a “humanitarian catastrophe” with a massacre in the city of Homs, as reported recently. Yet John R. Bradley, “Warning: Be Careful Who You Depose”, The Australian, February 13, 2012, p.8, thinks that such an attack would have been an act of madness and “Assad is no madman”. Bradley, author of "After the Arab Spring: How Islamists Hijacked the Middle East Revolts", argues that the liberal idea of pro-democracy good guys fighting a tyrant is an idealisation.

He claims that even opposition groups put the number of Hom rebels killed in recent conflict as 55. Bradley sees a repeat of the “Libyan debacle” occurring. Of course behind all of these conflicts are the murky ideologies of economics and power which human rights talk merely covers. Bradley points out that the Western elites basically know that Islamists will take over Syria as in Libya and make the life of ordinary Syrians, worse. But the new Islamist despots are likely to be hostile to Iran and this suits the West which fears a nuclear-armed Iran. Bradley concludes that for the West the ordinary Syrians “can suffer in silence, it seems. US and Israeli “Security interests” must come first, and are best served by a pact with the devil.” So much for the rhetoric of “human rights”.  

THE ABSURDITY OF NATIVE TITLE

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
The Noongar Aboriginal people are about to settle their native title claim over Perth and the southwest of Western Australia. (The Weekend Australian, February 4 – 5, 2012, p.9) The Western Australian government is offering 600 million plus up to 200,000 ha of land for the 35,000 people. They will receive parcels of land in Perth and other towns. The land is valued at about $400 million. The government will also introduce legislation acknowledging the Noongars as the indigenous people of the southwest. There will also be joint management of national parks.

Think deeply about all of this when contemplating the proposed Constitutional changes. If these changes are in place there will be a Constitutional duty for eternal Aboriginal advancement. I take it that the present legal regime which delivered the above goodies is “racist” and inadequate for why then bother changing the Constitution. If this is so then what does the future hold? How about giving 100% of Australia’s mineral resources to Aborigines as these resources are out of the “red land”? And what would communist China think then??

The absurdity of native title? What I find problematic is that the legislation pushes the pre-modernity ideal of connection to the land, but as in this case, the settlement is for the very modernist ideal of money and lots of it. If “money can’t buy love”, then how can it buy unity and fellowship with “the land”?  

SAVED FROM AN ICE AGE ! GOD BLESS GLOBAL WARMING !

by James Reed
Lying on a desk at my old uni library was a copy of Curt Stager's, "Deep Future: The Next 100,000 Years of Life on Earth", (Scribe, Melbourne, 2011). Stager is a scientist with a biological and geological perspective on the planet. He discusses the long-term, that is, 100,000 year effects of global warming and admits that it is a problem. So far, that’s the orthodox position. But he says that climate change will not kill us all off and human caused carbon dioxide emissions have put off the next ice age, which really would have threatened modern civilisation:
“We have prevented the next ice age. The ebb and flow of natural climatic cycles suggests that we should be due for another glaciation in about 50,000 years. Or rather, we used to be. Thanks to the longevity of our greenhouse gas pollution, the next major freeze-up wont arrive until our lingering carbon vapours thin out enough, perhaps 130,000 years from now and possibly much later.
The sustained influence of our actions today on the immensely distant future adds an important new component to the ethics of carbon pollution. If we consider only the next few centuries in isolation, then human-driven climate change may be mostly negative. But what if we look ahead to the rest of the story? On the scales of environmental justice, how do several centuries of imminent and decidedly unwelcome change stack up against many future millennia that could be resolved from ice age devastation?” (p.11)

I conclude, that Global warming, if (and that’s a big IF) occurring, is overall good for humanity in the long run. Carbon “pollution” is our ice age solution.  

IRELAND TO HOLD REFERENDUM ON ‘EURO PACT’

Irish voters will have their say on the European Union fiscal treaty after the Dublin authorities reluctantly announced a referendum yesterday. The Irish coalition government had hoped to avoid a vote, but advice from its Attorney-General said that one should be held. Ministers will now be campaigning strongly for an endorsement of the treaty and crossing their fingers that things go to plan, acutely aware that previous referendums have produced results which the authorities did not hope for or expect. Voters rejected the Lisbon Treaty in 2008 before passing it at the second time of asking a year later.

A distinct strain of anti-European sentiment is obvious in the Irish Republic where the bailout from the EU and other institutions has produced resentment about the strict austerity measures which accompanied it. Irish ministers maintain they are confident of winning the vote, which could take place in May. But European sources have openly said that Dublin lobbied for treaty wording that would make a referendum unnecessary.

Although the government has a solid majority the Irish Labour party, who are the junior partners in the ruling coalition, slipped in a recent opinion poll. Support meanwhile rose significantly for Sinn Fein, whose anti-Europe stance means it will be campaigning for a No vote.

The referendum was announced in the Irish parliament by the Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, who said the Attorney-General, Maire Whelan, had advised the cabinet that one should be held. Ms Whelan's belief was that the treaty was a unique instrument outside the EU treaty architecture and that on balance a vote was needed to ratify it.  (The Independent, UK)

SPECIAL NOTICES

Victorian State Lunch and Seminar: Saturday 17th March 2012, commencing 11.00am.
Ring Melbourne Bookshop for further details: 03 9650 9749
Speakers are: Mr. Don Auchterlonie and National Director Louis Cook. To "Celebrate the Diamond Jubilee of Her Majesy Queen Elizabeth II".
RSVP to Australian League of Rights, Box 1052, GPO, Melbourne 3001, by 10/3/12. Cost $32.00 per person

Change of Phone and Fax numbers:
Doug and Jean Holmes’ (South Australian Heritage Bookshop Services) phone and fax number has been changed TO: 08 8396 1245. Please note the new number in your teledex.