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

14 December 2012 Thought for the Week:

Joy to the world, The Christ has come!
Let Earth Receive her King!

Peace on Earth To Men of Good Will

Wishing our readers the Compliments of the Christmas/New Year Season

 


WILL WE SEE A REPEAT OF THE ACT - THIS TIME IN ICELAND?

by Betty Luks
It is recorded in the New Testament that our Lord whipped the money changers out of the temple and accused them of making His Father’s house “a den of thieves”. Without an understanding of the background to the story, what can we draw from it that would help us make sense of the present financial turmoil? Yes, we were told the money changers exchanged foreign currency for coins acceptable for an offering in the Temple, but, what other functions did they perform, and were those functions important for us to understand and could we relate them to today’s world? Did we miss the whole truth because of the term itself - ‘Money Changers’?

According to the online ‘Jewish Virtual Library’
“Money changing was very common in the Roman Near East, where there was a proliferation of currency systems and standards. In Palestine, as in Egypt, each district had its basilikai trapezai ("royal bank") retained from Hellenistic times (Jos., Life 38), and probably each village had its own money changer (cf. Sif. Deut., 306).

In the period of the Second Temple vast numbers of Jews streamed to Palestine and Jerusalem "out of every nation under heaven" (Acts 2:5), taking with them considerable sums of money in foreign currencies. This is referred to in the famous instance of Jesus' driving the money changers out of the Temple (Matt. 21:12). Not only did these foreign coins have to be changed but also ordinary deposits were often handed over to the Temple authorities for safe deposit in the Temple treasury (Jos., Wars 6:281–2).

Thus Jerusalem became a sort of central bourse and exchange mart, and the Temple vaults served as "safe deposits" in which every type of coin was represented (TJ, Ma'as. Sh. 1:2, 52d, and parallels). The business of money exchange was carried out by the shulhani ("exchange banker"), who would change foreign coins into local currency and vice versa (Tosef., Shek. 2:13; Matt. 21:12).

People coming from distant countries would bring their money in large denominations rather than in cumbersome small coins. The provision of small change was a further function of the shulhani (cf. Sif. Deut., 306; Ma'as Sh., 2:9). For both of these kinds of transactions the shulhani charged a small fee (agio), called in rabbinic literature a kolbon (a word of doubtful etymology but perhaps from the Greek word for "small coin"; TJ, Shek. 1:6, 46b). This premium seems to have varied from 4 percent to 8 percent (Shek. 1:6, et al.).
The shulhani served also as a banker, and would receive money on deposit for investment and pay out an interest at a fixed rate (Matt. 25:27), although this was contrary to Jewish law…”

“Thus the shulhani fulfilled three major functions: (a) foreign exchange, (b) the changing of large denominations into small ones, and vice versa, and (c) banking.

Three terms for "money-changer" are found in the New Testament
(a) kermatistēs (John 2:14), (b) kollybistēs (Matt. 21:12), and (c) trapezitēs (literally, shulhani; Matt. 25:27, et al.) It seems probable that these three terms correspond to the three functions of the shulhani outlined above.
Thus kermatistēs, from kermatizō. "to cut small," is one who gives small change; kollybistēs, from kollybos, changed foreign currency; while the trapezitēs was a banker (from trapeza, "table").

The shulhanim in Jerusalem used to set up their "tables" in the outer court of the Temple for the convenience of the numerous worshipers, especially those from foreign countries (Matt. 21:12–13). Excavations around the Temple walls have uncovered stores or kiosks, some of which, it has been surmised, were occupied by money changers.
The Mishnah states that on the 15th of Adar, every year, "tables" were set up in the provinces (or in Jerusalem) for the collection of the statutory annual half-shekel, and on the 25th of Adar they were set up in the Temple itself (Shek. 1:3).

The activity of the Jewish banker, shulhani, was of a closely defined nature, as his transactions had to be in accordance with the biblical prohibition against taking interest (ribit).
The Talmud records much information relating to his activities. An additional and interesting feature of his business was the payment on request of sums deposited with him for that purpose (BM 9:12)…”

So, to all intents and purposes, the Money Changers of Jerusalem were the equivalent of today’s Financiers/Bankers and the system they operated. And it is to the modern system our attention is now drawn.  


RESOLUTION FROM ICELAND: SEPARATE BANKS’ PRESENT FUNCTIONS

Translating into English for us, one of our correspondents has spelled out what is to come before the Parliament (Althing) in Iceland.
The following is the proposal:

“Proposal for a parliamentary resolution, the separation of cash-lending and banking system”

Althing concludes that the minister of finance will form a committee of specialists to research how the separation of money creation and loan function of the banking system can be achieved by removing banks' ability to create new deposits through lending. The committee shall complete its work by January 1st 2013 and the minister deliver a report to Althingi about the conclusions of the committee no later than one month after the committee completes its work.

Report: It is the opinion of the person introducing the proposal that adequate steps have not been taken to prevent another banking crisis in Iceland. It is important to take action to promote financial stability, in order to prevent further financial catastrophe such as the banking crisis in 2008.

The current monetary system's deposit may create the equivalent of money by lending of excess deposits. In fact, most of the money used in general transactions are electronic deposits which private banks have created with excess deposits. Money creation and bank lending must be separated by changing laws and only allow the Icelandic Central Bank to create money, whether the money is made of paper, metal or electronic form.

With this amendment net interest income (interest income on loans in excess of interest expenditure on deposits) will be transferred by a large extent to the Central Bank, but banks have until now profited received this profit. The separation will give the Central Bank more control over the money supply and prevent banks from creating asset bubbles with their lending activity.

It is important to see the pros and cons of such an arrangement in this country to prevent another crisis. Recent research of specialists working with the International Monetary Fund confirms that such separation delivers the benefits which Irving Fisher (1936) stated that they would do, i.e., to:

• improve control of the main causes of business cycles which is a sudden
• increase and decrease in lending and the supply of money that banks create,
• prevent bank runs,
• reduce public debt and
• reduce the indebtedness of individuals, where money creation would no longer need to be based upon borrowings.

If those statements are true it is the assessment of the person introducing the proposal that this is an opportunity for authorities to create great benefits for people with low cost. Therefore, it is important to take action soon and a committee of experts will be formed that review the IMF report, apply the assumptions implied on Icelandic society and assess whether such a path is possible, how best would be to implement this plan and any amendments are necessary in this purpose.

It is proposed that the committee delivers its findings no later than the first January 2013 and the Minister returns a report on the findings no later than one month after the committee finishes its work.  


IMPORTANT LETTER IN SUPPORT OF MONETARY REFORM IN ICELAND

To: Nefndarsvid Althingis, Austurstraeti 8-10 150 Reykjavik Iceland
From: Prof Dr Joseph Huber, Chair of Economic Sociology, Em. Martin-Luther-University D 06099 Halle an der Saale +49 (0)345 552 42 41 huber@soziologie.uni-halle.de

Dear Madams, dear Sirs,
It is my understanding that a proposal for a parliamentary resolution has been submitted to the Icelandic parliament, sponsored by Lilja Mósesdóttir, for setting up a committee to report on the opportunities and risks of monetary reform. I take the liberty of sending in this letter in support of the proposal.

In my capacity as a university professor of economic sociology I have continually been researching and publishing on the subject since 1996[1]. I strongly recommend setting up a committee on monetary reform along the lines proposed, investigating ways of

- how to restore the nation's monetary sovereignty, i.e. the monetary prerogative to determine the national currency as unit of account, to issue the general and regular means of payment as legal tender denominated in that currency, and to take in the full amount of seigniorage which accrues from creating money to the benefit of the public purse.
- how to regain full control of the quantity of the money supply
- setting forth basic monetary and financial goals, principles, and, as far as necessary, operational details, or alternative operational options respectively.

There is a specific piece of legislation missing in all European countries I know about:
Whereas the issuance of coin and banknotes is conclusively regulated in the form of a sovereign monopoly of coin (normally held by the Treasury) and a sovereign monopoly on banknotes (held by the national central banks), the right to create non-cash money on account has not explicitly been regulated yet. As a result, within today's monetary regime of fractional reserve banking, the banking sector has usurped the power of creating money on account in the form of demand deposits. Banks create demand deposits uno actu when they make out new loans, or purchase securities, or purchase material assets and other tangibles.

In the EU-17 today, little more than 1% of the real money supply M1 is coin. Another 19% consist of banknotes. The remaining 80% is money on account, or on mobile storage devices, issued by the banks in the form of credits written into current accounts. So only 20% of today's money supply is sovereign money, whereas 80% consist of bank money.

As a consequence, central banks, in contrast to what is widely believed, have lost control of the money supply – to the detriment of the public purse and with far-reaching destabilising effects on the financial markets, public and private finances, on banking itself, and ultimately on the entire economy. A major factor in the run-up to the present crisis was a wildly overshooting money supply, the most part of it for the purpose of creating leverage for investment-banking activities in financial markets, and for funding ever higher, ultimately unsustainable levels of public debt.

There is a number of restrictions to the creation of bank money, but these are always short-term and do not pose a hindrance in the long run. For creating 100 units of money on account, the banking sector needs to refinance just a fraction of 2.5% in sovereign money (cash and central-bank reserves).[2]

The amount of newly created money which adds to the stock of money in circulation, as much as the refinancing costs avoided, represent private seigniorage to the benefit of the banks, particularly the big banking corporations. This corresponds to seigniorage foregone to the public purse where it rightly belongs, seen from a constitutional point of view.

The monetary prerogative is a sovereign right ranking among other such rights of constitutional importance, such as e.g. the exclusive legal prerogatives of legislation, public and territorial administration, of jurisdiction, the monopoly of force, or the monopoly of taxation. In the United States, Sec. 8 of the Constitution, Powers of Congress, states: 'The Congress shall have power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin'. Congress and governments, however, have subsequently missed extending that sovereign right of 'coining' explicitly not only to banknotes, but also, and much more important today, to money on account and on mobile devices.

A sovereign nation-state, or community of nation-states, needs to have monetary sovereignty, hence create plain sovereign money of its own, under full control of a monetary authority, e.g. an independent central bank that is in charge of the money. This involves a separation of powers among state authorities as well as between the public-law central bank and the private-law commercial banking sector: The central bank's business is providing the money and controlling the quantity thereof, whereas the bank's business is financing economic activities of all sorts without, however, creating for themselves the money they need for doing so.

This would result in regaining effective control of the money supply, thus stabilizing business cycles and financial-market cycles, avoiding overstretched levels of financial investment and debt, as well as harmful levels of consumer inflation, asset bubbles and asset price inflation, e.g. in real estate, equity, and other asset classes.

As to the operational details of monetary reform, the committee should not too narrowly be focusing on the now historical approaches of the Chicago plan (Simons, Knight, Friedman) or 100%-money (Fisher) and similar approaches to full reserve banking. The committee should equally consider today's operationally more advanced approaches of plain sovereign money such as campaigned by the Swiss popular initiative for monetary reform [3] Monetative in Germany[4], Positive Money in the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Ireland[5], as well as by the American Monetary Institute.[6] - -

Sincerely, Joseph Huber

Footnotes:
[1] Among these: Joseph Huber and James Robertson, Creating New Money. A Monetary Reform for the Information Age, on behalf of New Economics Foundation, London 2000. Available at https://www.monetative.de/ wp-content/uploads/creating-new-money-original-version-2000.pdf JH, Vollgeld, Berlin: Duncker & Humblodt 1998. – JH, Monetäre Modernisierung. Zur Zukunft der Geldordnung, Marburg: Metropolis, 3rd revised edition Nov 2012. – And others more.
[2] That figure refers to the eurozone, but is certainly similar in all OECD countries.
[3] http://vollgeld.ch/category/momo-verein-monetare-modernisierung
[4] https://www.monetative.de/?page_id=71
[5] https://www.positivemoney.org/ [6] https://www.monetary.org/  


GOD AND/OR MAMMON – ‘WE THE PEOPLE’ MUST CHOOSE

After many years of following the thread of the money question, C.H. Douglas insisted: “The monetary system is the PIVOT of the economic structure”. It is the crucial point on which the economic structure turns. It is not wealth, it is the means by which we deal with the wealth. The control of a nation’s monetary policy is a Sovereign Power. It determines the extent to which the community as a whole, and its members individually, can get what they want in the economic field.

The Sovereignty of a Democracy, that is the Sovereignty of a Free People, demands effective control of monetary policy. Monetary policy affects the rights of individuals, and their relations with each other - more than any other factor of social life.

We were told in Scripture: Matthew 6:24-34 (Luke 12:24-27) “Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin (economic system); yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his (man-made) glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O men of little faith?” Solomon was of course the Money Power of that day.

“The field exists for the lily… not the lily for the field”: The Group exists, the nation exists, the community exists, even the family exists… for the growth, the development, the flowering of the Individual. But as Douglas pointed out all those years ago…. Until we strive for the right MECHANISM to Incarnate the Christian Ethic and the Golden Rule - all is just nice words. And ‘nice’ words are not enough!.

Douglas foresaw the immense conflicts resulting from the financial system’s policy of employment as the condition by which men and women could gain access to the means of life. What were the industrialised nations going to do with all the unsold products being churned out of their factories? He couldn’t see any conservative organised group capable of resisting the immense political forces being employed to keep Finance in the control of those who had it. It was the same Finance which now has such power over the lives and even the intelligence of the peoples of this world.

Within a modern community, where the production of goods and services is now a social function, surely we need to determine that the mechanism, whereby all shall feast on the abundant provisions already laid out on the table – are not just for those in privileged positions and/or those who have employment… but are for ALL?  

For the serious student: Just 'google' it.
ALOR - Social Credit and National Accounting

AN INTRODUCTION TO - Social Credit and National Accounting
ALOR - The A+B Theorem
ALOR - Whereas the People: A Threefold Common Wealth
A brief outline of Social Credit
Social Credit and Economics by Vic Bridger


WOULD-BE ONE-WORLD DICTATORS SHOWING THEIR HANDS?

A ‘Complete Economic Transformation of The World’:
Lord Monkton reports on UN central control from COP18. Source: CFACT (Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow): Ms. Christiana Figueres, chief secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, told a press conference in Doha today that the 18th Conference of the States Parties would bring about “a complete economic transformation of the world.” La Figurehead did not have in mind a free-market transformation. The intention of these 18 annual vacations – er, serious negotiations to Save The Planet – is what it always was: to create a treaty binding more than 190 nations to do as the Secretariat says. Democracy? What’s that?

Todd Stern, the U.S. lead negotiator, was similarly upbeat at his own press conference. With all the fervour of an evangelical preacher in an Alabama mega-church, he predicted that the “Doha Way Forward”, following the “Bali Road-Map”, the “Durban Platform”, etc., would achieve a second Kyoto Protocol – a treaty that all the nations of the world would ratify. On hearing this, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, the only climate-skeptical environmental group recognized by the U.N., decided to design some lapel buttons showing the figure “67” – the minimum number of U.S. Senators needed to ratify a treaty. In 1997, while Al Gore was president of the Senate, it voted by 95 to nil not to accept any treaty like the Kyoto Protocol.

Though the key bureaucratic global-warming profiteers here think “progress” is at last going to be achieved, there is a subdued air among everyone else. Very few came. Copenhagen in 2009, when almost 50,000 turned up, is a distant memory. Even the Communist-era slogans that are a wearisome feature of these conferences are less strident than usual. This year’s official catchphrase is “Count me in.”

The very slow, ancient, badly air-conditioned buses echoing tinnily with Arab music that ferry the plebs like us to and from the conference centre have “Share The Ride – Cut The Carbon” painted on their grimy flanks. Hardly a rallying-cry to man the barricades. The trouble is that there has not been anything like enough global warming to keep the usual suspects safe in their cushy, taxpayer-funded sinecures. My innocent amusement for today was to visit several of the side-shows organized by the usual kooks who are drawn to these conferences like quacks to coloured water.

At each event I asked the obvious question:
“After 16 years without global warming, how confident are you that the official predictions of doom have not been overblown?” A shrewish spokesman for the Gaia Foundation replied: “Why should we answer that? You’re a well-known climate denier”. Ma’am, 0 out of 10 for scientific rigour.
The reply from a spokesman for the Brahma Kumaris Spiritual World University Living In Harmony Environment Initiative Aligning Awareness With Action And Renewable Energy For the Future Plus Capacity Building: “Something like 80 or 90% of scientists accept that the world is warming ever faster.”

Another spokesman for the Guru-ji of Guru-jis, one “Dr. Doebbler”, said that the rate of global warming had accelerated in the past ten years. Actually, the trend since late 2001 shows a significant decline. Doebbler added, “Why should anyone take you seriously? You’re just a climate denier. About 100 million people in Africa will die because of global warming.” Read more…


WHAT HAPPY NEWS! DUCHESS OF CAMBRIDGE EXPECTING A BABY

We also extend our congratulations to the happy couple. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have announced that Her Royal Highness is expecting her first child. Mr. Philip Benwell of the Australian Monarchist League explains: “Whatever the sex, it is most likely that the baby will be third in line to the Throne and will eventually become king or queen of Australia.

Legislation is expected this year to remove the right of male primogeniture which would mean that the eldest child, whether male or female, would be become the monarch. However, that legislation has been linked by the British government to change to the Act of Settlement which, being of a constitutional nature, is far more complicated and could delay its introduction”.  


TAX REBEL GETS 60 DAYS: EXTRA HARSH PENALTY FOR POLITICAL AND RELGIOUS VIEWS

from Paul Fromm, Canada.
David-Kevin Lindsay has been a lecturer across Canada. He is a committed Christian, a staunch constitutionalist and one who believes that Canada's Income Tax Act is illegal. For some years, he has failed to file his income tax return. He has fought a running battle in the courts and is a ferocious researcher and most learned. He has astounded many judges and lawyers with his learning. Last week, I reported on a disturbing trend by some government security "experts" and other officials to label non-violent free men (people with a strict sense of our ancient Anglo-Saxon liberties) dissidents and White supremacists as "terrorists."

My report said, in part:
"When Const. Curtis Rind pulled over a man without a valid driver’s licence during a routine traffic stop, he didn’t expect the man to start arguing that it was his God-given right to use the road. But the man was part of an emerging group of domestic terrorists that police have been notified to be on the look out for because of their anti-government beliefs. They’re called “freeman” or “sovereign citizens,” and basically believe the law doesn’t apply to them, and they shouldn’t have to pay taxes, Rind said. Rind, an officer in southwest division, first learned about freeman citizens a few years ago through notices and information bulletins circulating throughout the police service. In the last six months, Rind said freeman citizens have increased their presence in the city and now seem to be all over the place." (Edmonton Sun, November 7, 2012)

This Const. Rind is a dangerous ignoramus. He was outraged that some mere citizen, who pays his exorbitant salary, actually believes he has "rights" and that driving isn't some state-given "privilege." They may be dissenters, they may be oddballs, but they are not terrorists, if "terrorist" means using extreme violence to further their political goals. Ever since 9/11, many police and even rent-a-cops and airport security types have begun acting like Rambos on steroids, snarling, throwing their weight around and seeking to intimidate any mere citizen who doesn't act like a submissive sheep. It gets worse. The Sun report continued: "Anti-terrorism expert John Bain said police should be keeping a close eye on. Speaking at an anti-terrorism workshop Wednesday, Bain explained the different types of terrorists that range from “freedom fighters” such as Osama bin Laden and eco-terrorists such as Wiebo Ludwig, to religious and other extremist groups like white supremacists. At this time, it’s the White supremacist groups that Bain believes poses the biggest threat to Canadian safety."

David was sentenced to 60 days. This non-violent dissident and organic gardener fights through the courts. He argued with copious documentation that, in such cases, there is no jail time imposed for a first offence. However, David is seen as a leader. So, as a dissident with the wrong political views , he's off to prison in Kamloops. I'd call him a political prisoner.

When you consider the ongoing police indifference to Indians violently occupying land, despite court injunctions in Caledonia, Ontario, it's hard not to conclude that the real offence is not in the alleged breaking of the law but in having the wrong political views.

Why not send a Christmas card to David, thus:
David-Kevin Lindsay, Political Prisoner,
PO Box 820 Kamloops,
BC., V2C 5M9
CANADA  


SWEETIES FOR THE CHINESE FOOD BOWL

by James Reed
Got your “Food Bowl” yet? All trendy inner city types who ‘wanna be” Chinese have got one and carry it with them everywhere they go, especially to elite multicult restaurants. So don’t miss out! I wear mine on my head, especially going to Centrelink.

T he president of Chinese company Shanghai Zhongfu has been here in Australia, telling us how sweet it will be as he develops large-scale sugar farming in the Ord region. (The Australian 23 November 2012, p.6) You see, the Chinese real estate market is becoming more regulated so happy Chinese business folk want other good business opportunities. Yes, soon it will be Christmas.

The big question is whether enough sugar can be grown on the 13,000 ha of land to make the $425 million Australian tax payer funded sugar mill economically viable. A lot of Chinese business men are watching this project and will invest here if it is a success.

Personally, I hope the project dramatically fails. Australians deserve to lose every cent of this $425 million and more. As an external colony, Australians have had a cargo cult mentality regarding foreign investment. The idea is that only the ”other” can develop. Never do they critically look at how the “other” developed, using self-reliance and independence.

Foreign investmentism, like immigration, multiculturalism and Asianisation, is just another form of colonisation. We need to wake up – soon.  


GEOFFREY ROBERTSON ON THE NUCLEAR WEAPONS CRISIS

by Peter West
I am no fan of human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson, but his new book “Mullahs Without Mercy” tackles the important issue of an Iranian atomic bomb.. Robertson’s line is that Iran should not be allowed atomic bombs because its leaders are international human rights criminals who have killed thousands of their own people. Iran has also run an assassination squad that has killed, so far 162 of its enemies across the world.

Robertson argues that nuclear weapons are a human rights issue and that building atomic weapons is a crime against humanity. He sees the UN as having the right to bomb and invade a country developing bombs illegally. Leave aside his faith in the UN as a global policeman.
This line of thought leads to also challenging existing nu clear stockpiles in countries like the US, China and Israel. How and why should Israel or China eliminate its nukes?

Robertson’s answer is that there is likely to be either a nuclear war or, nuclear disaster in the next ten years which will galvanise world opinion against nukes. All this is idle fantasy.
A nuclear war will escalate into a global conflict which is likely to destroy the world as we know it and the fragile democratic institutions that Robertson’s human rights law regime depends upon.

He sees the UN as controlling these nuclear states. But that too is fantasy because nuclear weapons would be used against UN forces if an essential threat was posed to these states. Robertson has not fully understood the gravity of the nuclear threat issue, which cannot be solved by clever talking lawyers. The threat, now, may be too late to avert.  


FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! SOUNDS LIKE WALLY IS LOSING PATIENCE!

The following is from our usually very polite Canadian correspondent Wallace Klinck. It is in response to those calling for ‘more work’ in answer to the world ‘financial crisis’.

He writes: “The policy of creating "jobs" is by its fundamental nature retrogressive - a socialist, communist, fascist, labour - and finance-capitalist policy of sabotage of the rapidly growing productivity inherent in our vast Cultural Heritage. The policy of creating work, increasingly for the mere sake of distributing financial incomes is totally irrational, destructive, and specifically anti-Christian. Making an end of a means is a major sin within the boundaries of Christian morality.

A formal State policy of full or near-full employment is based upon the Doctrine of Salvation through Works (known as the philosophy of "do uet des") which is diametrically opposed to the Christian Doctrine of Salvation through Grace. Our existing financial system is squarely based upon the Doctrine of Salvation through Works. That is why it issues money, or effective demand, in the first instance only for production and never for consumption. We could, through technology eliminate virtually all need for human participation in production and the financial system, and the Puritanical influence behind it, would still demand that no one should eat because they had no job to justify drawing from the surfeit of goods produced through non-labour processes.

The problem is not a lack of "jobs" but rather a lack of effective consumer demand, due to a fundamental and intrinsic flaw in the costing methods used in the price-system. Production will naturally respond to effective consumer demand but demand is increasingly incapable of responding consequent to the evermore inadequate incomes, distributed by the modern capital-intensifying economy.

Need creates demand and effective consumer demand is a call upon produced goods which in an efficient economy, will be increasingly provided with evermore diminishing need for human intervention. But effective demand in a money economy requires that consumers possess enough unattached financial income to claim the entire output of industry.

We do not need more work but rather more real financial purchasing power. Increasing consumer debt does NOT qualify as genuine purchasing-power because it merely transfers financial costs as a charge against future production.
Real need does not decrease with inadequate financial income. Need decreases with satiation provided by adequate real wealth. If the financial system does not provide sufficient effective financial purchasing-power then this inadequacy requires to be investigated and rectified - a task that requires application of a certain amount of intellectual effort.

Unfortunately, however, as one Social Credit author was moved to observe, it seems that most people would rather die than think. (emphasis added…ed)
Download Bryan Monahan’s “Introduction to Social Credit”: https://www.scribd.com/doc/112942854/Introduction-to-Social-Credit-by-Dr-Bryan-W-Monahan
Also https://www.scribd.com/doc/114593844/Money-in-Industry  


ICONIC AUSSIE COMPANY ROSELLA ‘GOES UNDER’

Dick Smith thinks the problem lies with the Australian consumer: “An unwillingness among consumers to pay extra for Australian made products is putting the squeeze on local business, says Dick Smith as Rosella's parent company goes under”.

Dick, the Australian consumer would have a hundred and one genuine reasons why he/she doesn’t purchase the Rosella product. It is not enough for you to make that judgement, it is time you came to grips with the fraudulent financial system the people are oppressed by, which includes the chronic lack of purchasing power which affects ALL Australians.


HELLO… MALCOLM, ARE YOU WATCHING CHINA NOW?

by Peter Ewer
Remember a few months back how ageing ex-prime minister Malcolm Fraser told us that China was essentially an angel of peace and that we are all mistaken about its military pretensions?

Somehow the rest of Asia didn’t hear his speech. As detailed in an informative article by Rick Wallace “All Eyes on China in Asian Arms Build-Up”, The Australian 22 November, 2012, p.11, the rest of Asia apparently doesn’t follow the mal Fraser line. The rest of Asia has been frantically upgrading weaponry to deal with China’s claim to fame, and several Asian countries area already some of the world’s largest defence spenders. Defence budgets in Asia, unlike Europe and America, are rising.

A new arms race, fuelled by increased wealth from trade is occurring. If history is any guide to things, this will almost certainly end in war. The South China Sea is a flashpoint for conduct, and China is in dispute with Japan, The Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia and Indonesia. It won’t take much to set it all off. And, thanks to the policy of Asianisation, Australia will be right in the thick of it.  


GILLARD’S REAL CONTRIBUTION TO WOMEN AND ABORIGINES

by Mrs. Vera West
The proof of the pudding is in the eating – or in this case, the lack of eating. (“Hard-Up Mothers Told to Try Charities”, The Australian 27 November 2012, p.3) Gillard’s government has passed a law moving single mothers on to the dole when their youngest child turns eight.
This was done as a budget-balancing strategy, given the enormous cost that asylum seekers have posed to Australia. Centrelink is already directing single mums who feel that they will not be able to cope to welfare agencies, all of whom are going to be put under severe strain.

Then there is the issue of the treatment of outback Aborigines by the Labor government. Nigel Scullion, “Racist Reality Evident in Homes Not Fit For a Dog”, The Weekend Australian 24-25 November, 2012 p.21, sums it up: “In remote communities [the Gillard government] is content to apply lower standards and lower expectations in health, housing and infrastructure, and education than it would dare to adopt for other Australians… Having a separate, but different and lower standard and lower expectations for Aboriginal communities is racist”.

The Gillard government is big on talk and feel-good rhetoric, designed to play the inner city elites. It claims to be the champion of anti-sexism and anti-racism, but it harms vulnerable members of our community in budget fudging measures. It’s enough to make anyone die of shame. Especially at election time.  


CONTINUED FROM LAST WEEK“A Critique of the High Court” by Ian Wilson LL.B.

“… PGA v The Queen [2012] HCA 21, the rape in marriage case, is another example of political correctness run mad. The majority held that the marital exception to rape in marriage didn’t even exist in 1935, let alone 1963.
The majority view is utterly destroyed by the dissenting judgment of a female judge, Justice Bell. Bell J shows that the majority position is flawed and that it ignores considerable historical evidence. There is no attempt by the majority to even address her arguments.

I could write a book going into all these cases in detail. Would it be of interest to people, or is it better to devote one’s energies to perhaps more important matters? The rot of society has sunk so deeply into law, that until we get society under control, law will continue to run amok.”  


LETTERS

TO TONY ABBOTT, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION
December 2, 2012. Dear Mr Abbott,
This morning on Andrew Bolt’s TV show, you expressed the Coalition’s “Rock solid support for Israel” and how this view was an endorsement of Prime Minister Gillard’s preference to vote against granting the Palestinians, Observer Status at the UN. How can you offer such unqualified support for Israel? This week Israel declared its plan to build over three thousand homes on Palestinian territory and this blatant announcement came just days after the so-called peace announcement and cease-fire.
One of the main factors contributing to the hostilities between Israel and the Palestinians has been the expansion of Israel over the border. I am not saying there have not been faults on both sides. However, in this case, Israel’s announcement to continue their policy at this time shows how insincere they were about any commitment to peace.
Surely, whether it is Israel or any other country, a ‘rock solid support’ policy should be brought into question after such confrontational behaviour. In any case, what was so wrong with Palestine having Observer Status? Would it not bring more of a “United” image of the United Nations?

- - Ken Grundy Naracoorte South Australia  

TO THE EDITOR 

The Editor, On Target, Dear Sir,
There are aspects of the letter from the Jewish religious group Neturei Karta Al-Quds (On Target, 30 November) which show a serious misunderstanding of Zionism and its particular idealism.
This error is similar to that of various Christian persons or groups who seek to deny the title of ‘Christian’ to all those who do not assent to their select theology.
The fact is that it is nonsense to assert that ‘Zionism has no connection with the Jewish people’ and that ‘Zionists are not Jews at all.’
The great English novelist George Eliot has given us a moving portrait of a Zionist visionary in the character of Mordecai in Daniel Deronda. In Chapter 42 Mordecai sums up his hopes:
'There is a store of wisdom among us to found a new Jewish polity, grand, simple, just, like the old – a republic where there is equality of protection, an equality which shone like a star on the forehead of our ancient community, and gave it more than the brightness of Western freedom amid the despotisms of the East. Then our race shall have an organic centre, a heart and brain to watch and guide and execute; the outraged Jew shall have a defence in the court of nations, as the outraged Englishman or American. And the world will gain as Israel gains. For there will be a community in the van of the East which carries the culture and the sympathies of every great nation in its bosom; there will be a land set for a halting-place of enmities, a neutral ground for the East as Belgium is for the West.’
For seventeen centuries Jews in the diaspora had looked, like Mordecai, for a restoration of a Jewish homeland, Eretz Israel, with Jerusalem as its capital. The same Zionist idealism is celebrated in Chaim Potok’s fine novel The Chosen, in which the Malter father and son stand for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Potok expresses respect in the novel both for the Zionists and for the more traditional Hasidic Jews, led by Reb Saunders, who believe that Jews should ‘wait for the Messiah’ first.
The reality of the foundation of the state of Israel and its subsequent history has not fully matched such idealism; but if peace and goodwill are to be strengthened in the Middle East, the nobility of the Zionist ideal should not be denigrated.

- - Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Victoria  

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