Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Flag of the Commonwealth of Australia
Home blog.alor.org Newtimes Survey The Cross-Roads Library
OnTarget Archives The Social Crediter Archives NewTimes Survey Archives Brighteon Video Channel Veritas Books

On Target

27 June 2012 Thought for the Week:

"Democracies will seek to establish a Federal system of Government. You (the Communists) must fight against this because only by complete concentration of power in a unitary system can you hope to achieve control of Germany."
- - Karl Marx addressing the German Communists in the 1840s"

No method of procedure has ever been devised by which liberty could be divorced from self-government. No plan of centralisation has ever been adopted which did not result in bureaucracy, tyranny, inflexibility, reaction and decline. Unless bureaucracy is constantly resisted it breaks down representative government, and overwhelms democracy. It is the one element in our institutions that sets up the pretence of having authority over everybody, and being responsible to nobody."
- - President Calvin Coolidge of the United States in 1926

"Regional Councils Will Supersede State Governments"- - "The Leader", Longreach, (Queensland) July 6, 1973  


One wonders just how much stench will arise from the foul deeds of these politicians. How many workers have grasped just how far these Labor politicians have sold them out? When Simon Crean talks to ordinary working men and women, does he still look them in the eye? While Senator Barnaby Joyce has posed the following questions to Simon Crean, why did he not ask what was really behind the push for ‘regionalisation’? Why hasn’t he been speaking out about the real agenda?

What Barnaby didn’t ask Crean was why the Regional Australia Institute was set up in the first place - if not to continue the process of centralisation and control along Marxist lines! But we’ll publish his media release in order to show who gets on the gravy train – and who doesn’t.  


Questions for Minister Crean on Regional Australia Institute, from Barnaby Joyce:
Any person dealing with another person’s money, especially taxpayers’ money has to be extremely careful that there is not the perception that there is any direct personal benefit of the appropriation of those funds.
When Mr Crean started the process of setting up a Regional Development Policy Centre, at the behest of Mr Windsor and Mr Oakeshott, Mr Crean appointed a Reference Group to appoint the Board of the Regional Australia Institute.
It is not clear how this Reference Group appointed the Board, but no positions seem to have been advertised for. In any case, it was a lucky coincidence that the Reference Group picked two of their own, Mr Mal Peters and former Labor MP Mr Christian Zahra, to be members of this Board as confirmed by Deputy Secretary of the Department of Regional Australia, Stephanie Foster:

Senator Joyce: Did the reference group appoint the Board?
Stephanie Foster: That's correct Senator.

Senator Joyce: Correct me if I am wrong, wasn't Mal Peters and Ian Sinclair on the reference group?*
Stephanie Foster: That's correct Senator.

Senator Joyce: So they appointed themselves.
Stephanie Foster: That's correct.
The Regional Australia Institute was then lucky enough to be given $8 million for the establishment of the promised Regional Development Policy Centre. The Regional Australia Institute is a registered company with ASIC, not a government agency, so it can’t be scrutinised by Parliament. The Department can’t tell us how much the Board will be paid, that is a matter for them, or even what in detail they are doing with the money.
Even so, the government has given $8 million, up front, to a new body, established by people who were appointed by the Minister. The government has not linked payments to performance despite this new organisation having no record or history.
There are a number of serious questions that Mr Crean must answer about these appointments:
- How did the Minister select people to the Reference Group to appoint members of the Board of the Regional Institute of Australia?
- Was the Minister aware that people of this Reference Group had the power to appoint themselves?
- What selection process did the Minister require the Reference Group to go through in selecting the Board? - What assurances has the Minister received that the Board will set their remuneration at appropriate levels?
- Why has the government decided to grant $8 million to a new body rather than tie payments to their performance?
*Stephanie Foster later corrected the record to say that it was Christian Zahra who was on the reference group and was subsequently appointed to the board of Regional Australia. 24 May 2012.

Readers are encouraged to study the history behind ‘regionalisation’ on the League’s website:

Andrew Bolt in his column wrote: “Listen to Regions Minister Simon Crean’s definitional difficulties on the set of Insiders, I whispered to my fellow panelists: “Birthday cake” :
CASSIDY: How do you define a region? What is a region? |
Crean: Every part of this country is constituted within their own region.

Cassidy: So when you talk about regions, you mean non-urban?
Crean: When I talk about regionalism and local empowerment, it is saying all regions in the

Cassidy: Hobart, for example: a capital city, a state capital. Is Hobart a region?
Crean: Hobart—well, the region around Hobart is a region. In the case of Tasmania, if you’re talking about it, the regional development body covers the whole of Tasmania. Hobart is a component of it, and Hobart, while we call it a capital city, for the purposes of the Australian Bureau of Statistics that talks about the remoteness factor, Hobart is not a capital city in that sense, it fits into a definition that will be picked up in the regional application of funds.

Cassidy: And they have an independent representing them as well and they’re looking for regional funding. The problem, of course, is that everyone wants to be disadvantaged today, and in the queue for a handout.”

The problem for Simon Crean, Mr. Bolt, is the evidence is there for all to see that when in power Labor set about dividing Australia into regions completely over-riding the States’ authority and boundaries. There is nothing new in the idea, it is all part of economically and politically ‘regionalising’ the nations into the New World Order.
This part was set out in the World-wide Declaration on Local Self-Government, promoted by The International Union of Local Authorities (IULA) at its 27th World Congress in Rio de Janeiro on 23-26 September 1985. That new treaty gives formal recognition to the ‘regional’ levels of local government, then specifically confines Local Government to only those powers and functions that have not been “given’ to some other authority. Who decides what powers, rights and responsibilities elected Local Governments may have?

You’ve guessed it - the unelected regional Authorities, the bureaucrats! Of course!
How many Australians realised at the time, that had they voted ‘Yes’ on the 1988 Referendum questions incorporating Local Government into the Federal Constitution they would have allowed the total elimination of Local Government.

Jeremy Lee compiled selected newspaper articles from 1974-1995 showing Australians what was intended for them (“Local Government, Amalgamation, Regionalism and the Hilmer Report”). And Crean is still working on the subversion of the sovereignty of this nation!  


by James Reed
With the cold of winter almost upon us it is time to increase our ‘ecological foot print’, burn some carbon credits and take up a good book. Sick to the stomach with the present camp of “hollow men” and women of the Australian Parliament, I turned to read the story of the colourful King O’Malley (1858-1953), a Labor man when Labor stood for the workers and the well being of the nation, rather than for the cosmopolitan ideals of new class intellectuals.

The life and times of this colourful politician is described in Larry Noye’s wonderful book “O’Malley MHR” (Sid Harta, 2009). Cutting to the chase, O’Malley, born in Canada (controversy chased him during his career that he was born in America) came to Australia and was elected to the South Australian Parliament in 1895. He immediately raged against the State debt and poor railways. He supported liberal causes such as the vote for women, which the South Australian daily paper of the time, The Register, said got him elected. Seeing financial crises as due to the money problem, later when serving in Federal parliament he campaigned rigorously for a national bank of “deposit, issue, exchange and reserve,” a bank with the combined properties of a trading bank and a reserve bank.

Fisher’s Commonwealth bank, introduced in July 1910, issued bank notes but was not a government bank controlling the note issue. Fisher had met with leading bankers at the time and was “convinced” by them that the time was not yet ripe for O’Malley’s bank. The time with the bankers with a monopoly on credit, would never be ripe. No doubt Fisher, in private, was threatened by them, but no record was made by him and he took it to the grave. O’Malley was instrumental in the formation of Canberra and the beginnings of the transcontinental railway. None of this is a ‘dry’ read. Noye is a good writer and puts the human personal dimensions of O’Malley at the forefront of his writing.

This was a time of old style romance and courtship. His first wife Rosy died of tuberculosis after three years of marriage. Years later O’Malley said: “I see her in every flower, and in all the music I hear. The sweet fragrance in the gardens brings her back to me.”

* Larry Noye’s “O’Malley MHR” is available from Heritage Bookshop Services.  


The Brisbane Times headlines read: “It's the constitution, no bullion” 10 May 2012. The constitution says: "The state shall not coin money nor make anything but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts."

A Queensland driver has tried in vain to argue it is "impossible" for him to pay a speeding fine because the Australian constitution states the government can accept only coins made of gold or silver as payment for debts.

Indeed, section 115 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act states: "The state shall not coin money nor make anything but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts."

Leonard William Clampett tested the weight of constitutional law in Brisbane Magistrates Court in September last year, after he was snapped by a speed camera driving at 73km/h in a 60km/h zone on Wardell Street, Enoggera. He argued he could not pay a $200 speeding fine, because "there is no gold and silver coins in common circulation".
"It's logical when you look at the paramount legislation in this country, that no matter what money they [the police] request or you award them, I can't pay," he told Magistrate Sheryl Cornack.
"I haven't been able to pay a lot of things over the years. Fifteen years, I haven't paid any income tax because it's not possible to pay it. I haven't paid for instance a couple of companies. I haven't paid Crown Law Queensland $12,500 they claimed from me, because of section 115 of the Commonwealth Constitution. It is paramount law in this country, but somehow or other, certain people don't seem to catch onto that ... A state, as opposed to the Commonwealth, cannot compel you to pay in other than gold and silver coin. Fairly simple."

Police prosecutors called on an expert from Melbourne, who was required to travel to Brisbane and review the evidence, to confirm the roadside camera was working accurately when it photographed Mr Clampett speeding.
Despite his argument, Ms Cornack found Mr Clampett guilty and ordered he pay the $200 fine, as well as $76.90 in court costs. She also ordered Mr Clampett pay police prosecution's out of pocket expenses, totalling $3500, in obtaining the expert witness.

But, three weeks later, Mr Clampett fought to have Ms Cornack's ruling overturned by the Supreme Court. He applied for a judicial review on the grounds no court had previously defined the terms of the constitution.

"My claims, and the action sought based thereon, are as well for the Queen as for myself," Mr Clampett wrote in his application. However, Supreme Court Justice Martin Daubney said the basis of Mr Clampett's argument "has long been discredited".
"None of the reasons advanced by the applicant amount to any good reason for having instituted the present application," he stated in a written judgment, published this week.
He did not comment further on Mr Clampett's argument regarding constitutional law. Justice Daubney dismissed Mr Clampett's application. https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/its-the-constitution-no-bullion-20120509-1ycw9.html#ixzz1vlMvBr1l

Worth reading in relation to the above article: “A Social Credit Senator” by James Reed . “Senator Darcey noted that “The Banks can create as many millions of pounds as are required…”  


from Wallace Klinck, Canada
"A Bridge Built without Taxes" is a book on Social Credit by American author David E. Robinson and is discussed on Alex Jones' Infowars.com website.

David E. Robinson released a book on Social Credit in 2010 which is available at the mainepatriot.com website and sells for about US$15.95 plus shipping. The posting to Infowars has received good support in the comments section (https://www.infowars.com/a-bridge-built-without-taxes/).

This is important because, as is well known, Alex Jones’ site has millions of readers. I have not yet read this book but have ordered it. Judging by the quality of the article posted, I expect it to be a very interesting contemporary work on Social Credit and another confirmation of the manner in which Douglas's ideas are subject to wide dispersion and interest when allowed to break through the veil of censorship.

The posting reads: “If the financial system were in conformity with reality, most taxes would have no reason to exist. When the government has a road built, or a piece of road, does this hinder or reduce the production of eggs, bread, milk, butter, vegetables, clothing, shoes or other consumer goods? No. Does not this road building actively stimulate the production of these other consumer goods? Certainly.
The production of other consumer goods is stimulated because the wages distributed to the workers, working on the road, stimulate the sale of these other consumer goods.
Now, in the present system, the government imposes taxes on the taxpayer to pay the workers working on the road; it takes away money which would buy the consumer goods, to pay for the construction of the road. This system is not in keeping with reality. Whereas, God’s abundance is available for all !

“I have come that you might have life, and have it more abundantly.” (Jesus)

If the Maine free state is capable of producing, at the same time, both private and public goods, the financial system must supply the money to pay for both private and public goods. Under a Maine State Credit system, money would come automatically to finance all the production that is physically possible and requested by the population, whether it is private or public production.

Solution, A Public Money
Since new money belongs to society, simple justice requires it to be issued by the public, instead of by private banks.

This is precisely what is proposed by a “Public Money” system — a set of financial proposals expressed for the first time in 1918 by Scottish engineer Clifford Hugh Douglas.
Instead of having money created by the banks as a banking credit obligation, one would have money created by the public society as a social credit benefit, instead.

Whenever the words “social credit” are used in this report, we do not speak about political parties that may be labelled under this name, but about the financial proposals proposed by engineer C.H. Douglas in 1918, which could be applied by any state or nation today.

Accurate Bookkeeping: How would this “people’s credit” or “social credit” be issued? The State would appoint a Commission of accountants, as an independent organism, to be called the Maine State Credit Office which would be charged with setting up accurate bookkeeping, where money would be nothing but the exact financial reflection of economic realities.

Money would be issued as new goods are made, and be withdrawn from circulation as these goods are consumed. Thus there would be a constant balance between the capacity to produce and the capacity to pay, between prices and purchasing power.

This method of issuing money therefore involves no government control whatever: money would not be issued according to the whims of the accountants or the men in office, but according to the statistics of production and consumption according to what Mainers produce and consume — for a TRUE system of Capitalism here in America.

The Dividend: Because wages are not sufficient to purchase all of the existing production, the “Maine State Credit Office” would pay each citizen a basic monthly dividend, a sum of stimulus money, to fill the GAP in purchasing power and production, and to ensure to each person a share in the goods of the state.
This dividend would be based upon the two biggest factors of modern production:
(1) the inheritance of state owned resources and
(2) the ideas and inventions of past generations.
Both are free gifts from God and therefore belong to all Mainers. Those who would be employed in production would still receive a salary, but everyone (employed as well as unemployed) would receive a monthly dividend. In Maine this dividend could be at least $1,000 per adult person per month.

Financing Public Works: Whenever Mainers would want a new public project, the Maine legislature would not ask: “Do we have the money?” but “Do we have the materials and the workers available to do the job?” If they are available, the Maine State Credit Office would automatically create the required new money to finance this new public production.

Let us suppose that Mainers want a new bridge that costs $500 million dollars to build. The Maine State Credit Office would then create $500 million dollars to finance the construction of this bridge. And since all new money must be withdrawn from circulation as the new production is consumed, then the money created to build the bridge would just be withdrawn from circulation as this bridge is consumed. (emphasis added…ed) How can a bridge be consumed? Through wear and depreciation.

Let us assume that the engineers who build this bridge expect it to last 50 years. This bridge would therefore lose one-fiftieth of its value every year. Since it cost $500 million dollars to build, it would depreciate by $10 million dollars every year. It is therefore $10 million dollars that will have to be withdrawn from circulation every year, during the 50-year period of time.

The Adjusted Price: Would this withdrawal of money be done through taxation. No, this is not necessary at all, says Douglas, there is another way, which is much simpler, to withdraw money from circulation — the method of the “adjusted price” (also called the “compensated discount”).

Douglas said in London on January 19, 1928: “The immense, complex, irritating and time wasting taxation system, which keeps hundreds of people busily working, is a complete waste of time. The results which are supposed to be achieved by the system of taxation could be achieved without any bookkeeping at all; they could be achieved entirely through the price system.”

How would this adjusted price work? The Maine State Credit Office would be charged with keeping an accurate accounting of the state’s assets and liabilities, which requires only two bookkeeping columns: one to write down all that has been produced in the state during the given period (assets), and one for all that has been consumed (liabilities).
So in the example mentioned above, the bridge’s $10 million dollars annual depreciation would simply be written down in the “consumption” column and added to all the other kinds of consumption, or disappearance of wealth, in the state during the given year.

Let us consider the first column, the assets: A state becomes richer in goods when it develops its means of production: its machines, factories, means of transportation, etc. These are called “capital goods”. A state is richer in products when it produces items for consumption: potatoes, milk, meat, furniture, clothing, etc. These are called “consumer goods”. A state become richer in products when it gets wealth from other states and abroad. Thus Maine becomes richer in fruits when it gets oranges and pineapples from other states; This is called “importation”. All these factors will then be inscribed in the first column, the “assets” of the state.

Accordingly, the opposite column, the “liabilities”, will represent the opposite situation, the reduction of wealth in the state. A state’s goods are reduced when there is war or other destruction of the means of production: burnt factories, worn-out machines, storm damage, etc. This is called “depreciation”. (This is where the $10 million yearly depreciation of the bridge is to be inscribed.)

A state’s goods are reduced when they are consumed. Eaten food, worn out clothing, etc. are not available any more. This is reduction through “consumption”. A state’s goods are reduced when they leave the state: for example, there will be less apples, butter, bacon, potatoes, lumber, in Maine, if the state sends these products out of the state or abroad. This is called “exportation”.

Production/Consumption: (If in the) same year, (the state/community) was able to produce $1,200 billion worth of goods and services while consuming only $900 billion worth of goods and services, it actually cost 900 billion to produce what the price bookkeeping shows at $1,200 billion.
The real cost of the production that is priced to sell at $1,200 billion is therefore actually $900 billion. The population must therefore be allowed to reap the fruit of its labor — the $1,200 billion production — by paying only $900 billion for it.
Besides, we have seen before that money must be withdrawn from circulation as goods are consumed: if $900 billion worth of goods and services are consumed in the state during that year, it is $900 billion that must be withdrawn from circulation, no more no less.
How can Mainers get $1,200 billion worth of goods and services while paying only $900 billion? This is quite simple, the retail price of all goods and services only has to be reduced by 1/4 — a 25% discount.

The Maine State Credit Office therefore decrees a 25% discount on all retail prices during the following term. For example, if an article is priced at $40.00, I will pay only $30.00 for it. But if the retailer wants to stay in business, he must recover $40.00 for the sale of that product, because the price of $40.00 includes all the costs of the retailer, including his profit.

Compensated Discount: That is why Douglas speaks about a “compensated discount”. In the example mentioned above, the retailer will be compensated by the Maine State Credit Office, which will pay him the $10.00 that was discounted. For each of the retailer’s sales, the retailer will only have to present his sales vouchers to the Maine State Credit Office, which will reimburse the discount granted to the consumer, to him. Thus nobody is penalized – and NO Inflation: the consumer obtains the goods which (otherwise) would have remained unsold and the retailers recover all their costs…”

For further reading go to the Social Credit material on the League’s website Library Section
Start with: “A Policy of a Philosophy” by C.H. Douglas
Victor Bridger’s "Social Credit and National Accounting" is important reading.

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