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

24 May 2013 Thought for the Week:

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." - - Galileo Galilei

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."- - Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

"Often war is waged only in order to show valour; thus an inner dignity is ascribed to war itself, and even some philosophers have praised it as an ennoblement of humanity, forgetting the pronouncement of the Greek who said, "War is an evil in as much as it produces more wicked men than it takes away." - - Immanuel Kant

"If a war be undertaken for the most righteous end, before the resources of peace have been tried and proved vain to secure it, that war has no defense, it is a national crime." - - Charles Eliot Norton  


ENOCH POWELL WAS RIGHT AFTER ALL: THE RISING TIDE OF COLOUR IN BRITAIN

by Peter Ewer and Peter West
We in Australia need to pay close attention to the fate of Britain and America. Census figures have shown that because of mass migration white Britons are now a minority in London. The number of mixed race people has doubled since the last census, now exceeding one million. British Labour, in a deliberate attempt at demographic-racial change to produce Labour voters, brought four million immigrants to England and Wales in 10 years.

The foreign-born portion of the population rose from 9 per cent in 2001 to 13 per cent in 2011. In 2011, 7.5 million residents were foreign-born, constituting one in eight of the population. Now only 44.9 per cent of Londoners describe themselves as white Britons. In Briton, 1 million school children live in homes where English is not spoken; there are 4 million fewer Christians now than in 2001; 1.8 per cent more people are Muslims, making Muslims 5 per cent of the population; in 25 per cent of London homes, English is not spoken. We could go on, but we hope you see the pattern.

What next? Demographer David Coleman has said:
“Net international migration is now the dominant element in population change in most Western European countries and in parts of the ‘Anglosphere’ (US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand)” (The Australian 19 April, 2013 p.7). In England, Wales, France and Germany, around a quarter of all births are from foreign-born mothers. Consequently by the time of the next British Census in 2021, a large number of other once-English and majority white cities will be majority non-white, including Birmingham, Manchester and Oxford, to name a few. Leicester and Luton have a minority white British population of 45 per cent.

With demographic change comes inevitable cultural change, with the way now open for sharia divorces. (The Weekend Australian 2-3 February 2013, p.9) The British High Court has approved the divorce settlement of a Jewish couple under rabbinical beth din law, which is the first time a British family has delegated its power to a religious court. Muslims hope that this decision will create a precedence leading to acceptance of sharia divorces. No doubt, as Muslim numbers grow, this will occur and then there will be the next frontier of multiculturalism : sharia law in a legally pluralistic multicult.

There have been some interesting recent discussions of how the West accepted displacement-level migration and its associated ideologies (multiculturalism, Asianisation, etc) e.g., Anthony Hilton, “Giving Away the Farm. Why?” 17 March 2013 says that the elites who gave us these programmes were full of fear, hatred and loathing for Western society.

Another article “Peter Hitchen’s Show of Guilt: Enoch Powell was Right quotes Hitchens saying that when he was a Trotskyite supporting mass migration he did so not because “we liked immigrants, but because we didn’t like Britain”. Immigrants were seen as the means of changing British society. In this sense Enoch Powell was right and his claim that “Commonwealth” migration to Britain would be 10 per cent by 2000 was almost correct (it was 8 per cent).

William Gayley Simpson in “Which Way Western Man?” (Washington DC, 1978, p.180) said:
“The stark fact is that even we as a people… are very near the end of our run – not merely the United States but the whole White Man’s world, and the white man himself… We shall soon be locked in a struggle for sheer survival, and shall hardly escape catastrophe…
Sooner or later, in one way or another, our gates will be forced and our city put to the torch and sword. Our civilization will go up in flames, and the proud White man who created it… will have to bend (their) neck to a yoke in order to live.
Spengler foresaw it with the eyes of a clairvoyant when he predicted starkly that our “machine technics will end… and one day will lie in fragments, forgotten – and our railways as dead as the Roman roads and Chinese walls, our giant cities and skyscrapers in ruins like old Memphis and Babylon”.  


IT’S NOT JUST A PROBLEM IN AUSTRALIA

While the BBC article is not calling for an end to mass immigration, it does show the enormity of the problem. How would you respond to illegal migrant ‘Michael’s’ rebuke at the end of the article? 

"Illegal immigrants in Italy who have no visa are unable to get a job. Mr Grimaldi, whose party leader, Interior Minister Roberto Maroni, ushered the new law through parliament, firmly believes Italy is facing an emergency. With nearly 37,000 immigrants arriving on their shores last year, mostly via boats from Libya and Tunisia, many Italians agree.

"There are too many people. You see in the city, on the streets in Milan, two million immigrants, I think," says one Milanese man, who did not want to give his name. "I wan t to help people who are poorer than me, but I want to know where they come from and what they are going to do," says Martina, a 23-year-old Northern League supporter. "It is better if they come here legally."

Criminalised: According to Saskia Sassen, an expert on European immigration at Columbia University in New York, Italy's new laws could be the beginning of "a catastrophic phase" for not only migrants but also Italian citizens. "This law really alters the landscape by criminalising the violation," she says.

Critics of the new citizen patrol groups have staged protests in Milan
"In the past you were in violation of the law. That doesn't mean you were a criminal. This law means if you break the law, now you are considered a criminal. That's a big deal." Mr Grimaldi readily admits that almost no illegal immigrants would be able to pay a 10,000-euro fine. In fact, he says, that is the point. European Union laws oblige all 25 countries party to the Schengen Agreement, which allows passport-free travel across the area, to allow illegal immigrants to make two "mistakes", and the new Italian law makes such "mistakes" more likely.

"We want to expel these illegal immigrants to their country of provenance," Mr Grimaldi says. "If they have already been arrested for something before, if they don't pay the fine, we will have recidivism." The immigrant will have made two "mistakes", and "so then we can make the expulsion". Italy issues very few visas to people who are already living in the country, and demand for work permits from potential immigrants greatly outstrips supply.

It quickly becomes a Catch-22 situation - illegal immigrants who have no visa are unable to get a job; those without a job are unable to get a visa. As a result, both illegal and legal migrants have become an increasingly obvious presence on the streets of Italian cities. At night, groups of men from across Africa, the Arab world and Asia roll out sleeping bags and cardboard boxes in Milan's numerous historic piazzas. By day, they get by however they can - some by selling fake designer handbags or toys, some by stealing.

If they didn't want me they shouldn't have rescued me
Michael lived on the streets of Milan for eight months before being given a bed at Casa della Carita, one of a number of charity-run hostels in the city which house immigrants. "I don't have a job. I can't go to the hospital if I am sick," he says. Beside him in the hostel's courtyard, a disparate group of migrants from as far away as Afghanistan and Bangladesh pass the time playing cards. "Italian people rescued me from their sea. If they didn't want me they shouldn't have rescued me," Michael adds. Source: "Michael"


RACIAL VILIFICATION AND THE ONUS OF PROOF: AGAIN AND AGAIN

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Former NSW attorney general, John Dowd, designed Australia’s first racial vilification law. He has said that the proposal to reverse the onus of proof will have multiple problems, including resulting in some private conversations resulting in criminal convictions, eroding freedom of speech, encouraging malicious threats of prosecution and interfering with the right to privacy. (The Australian 19 April, 2013, p.25) There is no need to change the law because there is no “major evil” unaddressed.

The comments were directed to the proposal by two law professors who want to change the onus of proof in the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act. Although this is good to hear, these sorts of changes have become part of the chattering classes’ agenda and will not disappear in any hurry. Once an elite changes the racial composition of a population, it is necessary, of course, to change its laws, and to eternally keep changing them.  


CONNECTING UP THE DOTS TO THE COMING REFERENDUM

The Gillard government plans to hold a referendum along with the coming federal election. Tim Blair in The Australian 14th May 2013 viewed the referendum as “Labor's Bid For Local Control”. He wrote:

“Last week Julia Gillard announced a referendum to amend the Constitution allowing the federal government to fund local government directly. The Prime Minister argued: "This is about saying yes to retaining important community benefits. This is about saying yes to our communities."

Gillard is wrong. It will say no to local communities, and yes to a Canberra takeover. Different levels of government are given, rightly, different responsibilities. Federal government is responsible for foreign affairs and those responsibilities that require national consistency, and has little service delivery capacity because it is so distant from Australians. States are responsible for matters that marry local responsiveness with scale. Local government delivers services that require direct relationships because of their closeness to Australians.”

Mr. Blair cautioned Australians thus: “Constitutional recognition will turn our democracy on its head and perpetuate centralisation. Canberra freely will be able to direct local government by attaching policy strings to funding.”

But Australians are discovering they are subject to more rules and regulations that didn’t stem from either their state or federal governments. They are discovering that slowly but surely they are being subjected to United Nations directives.
Tim Blair does give us a clue to where we should be looking for these rules and regulations when he writes:
“And there'll be almost no restrictions on the breadth of areas. The dubious Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Act 2012 gives the commonwealth the power to spend in 415 areas of public policy, well beyond constitutional restraints.”

Almost no restrictions on the breadth of areas?
Could the ‘breadth of the areas’ take in the United Nations? That is a question Australians should be asking and seeking answers to – before it is too late.
That brave lady South Australian parliamentarian Anne Bressington has given us all a lead by speaking out about Agenda 21 – and she has connected the dots for us. Agenda 21 is based on the principle that government is the maker of rights.

Agenda 21 and the New World Order
“Agenda 21” is the name of a policy document first unveiled at the United Nations' Earth Summit in 1992. Implementation of the treaty is through a policy called Sustainable Development. This program is being systematically imposed in cities and towns throughout the land. There are very few exceptions.
Sustainable Development is no less than a ruling principle through which decisions for all aspects of our lives are determined through public/private partnerships between government (at all levels) and private institutions in our communities.
They provide guidelines to determine business decisions; property use; medical care; education curriculum; foreign policy; economics; taxes; labour policy; career decisions; housing; building material; farming policy; and much more.

If you truly believe you were not born to be subservient to any tyrannical government and instead choose to remain free, then you must exercise that freedom. This includes acting as a counter to Agenda 21 and its Sustainable Development program.

The League’s National Director Lou Cook presented two papers outlining just what Agenda 21 means.
His presentations were filmed and are readily available from the Heritage Bookshop Services and Veritas Online. The League has made a special offer of 3 DVDs for actionists.

Featured are: Lou Cook’s two presentations, “How a Social Crediter Deals with Local Councils” and “Confronting Agenda 21” : Archbishop John Hepworth’s “Australia: A Vision Splendid : Nigel Jackson’s “Tony Abbott and Free Speech in Australia” : Betty Luks’ “Why Social Credit?” and Don Auchterlonie’s “The Incarnation and Social Credit”.
Special Price $25.00 for 3 DVDs posted.  


DIBBLING WITH CHINA WAR

by James Reed
Defence White Paper author Paul Dibb has said that the view that a US/China war is inevitable and that Australia will be drawn into it is “a dangerous miscalculation”. (The Australian 23 April, 2013 p.8). Julia Gillard, in describing the Australia-China relationship said that Australia was “a feisty, activist polity, boxing smart, overachieving in global affairs”.

Now which statement is the silliest? Clearly Gillard’s, it uses the “feisty” word (small dog breaking wind) and she should have learnt her lesson from her last public use of that word. And Professor Dibbs, well, plenty of wise folk disagree with him. Especially so when China seems to have commenced the war with its on-going cyber attacks. If an individual did this, he would be marked as a terrorist. So, how is this not a threat?

Further, few strategic theorists say that any events in politics are inevitable – highly probable is the concept needed. Australia’s defence spending is, proportionately, at its lowest since the 1930s in the lead up to the last big banger. Is there a hidden meaning to this?


THE BOSTON MARATHON FALSE FLAG

by Chris Knight
According to an article in The Australian’s magazine The Deal (April 2013) “Audits done at the US Securities and Exchange Commission in the wake of the global financial crisis found that senior investigators were spending hours viewing internet porn.” (p.34) The investigators needed investigating, and were found to be in derelict of duty: they were not paid their high salaries to ogle internet porn!

Would it be a surprise to find out that all is not what it seems with the Boston Marathon bombing? I know that people on this side of the fence frequently cry “conspiracy”, but hey, conspiracies happen. Conspiracies are just planned human activities which aim for secrecy.

That said, consider World Trade Centre (WTC) building 7 which was not hit by any plane, but which collapsed merely because of fires burning in the building. Better yet, the BBC reported the collapse of WTC 7 20 minutes before it actually collapsed, with someone obviously confusing time zones.
(See “BBC Reports Collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7 Early – Twice”, Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s.

Regarding the Boston Marathon bombing the alternative media is reporting that the Boston bomb squad apparently had advanced notice of the bombing and an eye witness said that when the bombs exploded the officials said that it was just a drill. There were bomb sniffing dogs at the start and the finish of the race, well before the explosions. There were announcements over the loud speaker that it was a drill. So if there was advanced notice of the bombing and the Establishment did not do it as a false flag, it was the duty of officials to stop the race and warn runners instead of letting them be blown apart. (Source: Natural News.com April 16 2013). There is a full phone interview with an athlete’s coach who was an “ear witness” to the “it’s just a drill” announcement.

The US alternative media have also reported that there were private military contractors with backpacks at the scene of the bombing. Natural News.com April 17, 2013 has photographs of these operatives who have been said to be wearing clothing with a special “skull” symbol associated with military contractors known as “The Craft”. Now how does all of this fit together? You tell me!  


THE CUT ‘n’ PASTE UNIVERSITY

by James Reed
School kiddies today, apparently do assignments by cut and pasting from internet sites and, if you are lucky, planting down a reference. In my teaching days the kids just copied from books. Anyway academics, at least over in SA, are getting all hot and bothered about the same practice being conducted at the high and mighty universities (“Cut and Paste Cheats”, The Advertiser 10 May 2013, p.1,6)
Does it matter? Such work is largely in the arts, humanities and social sciences, where essay after essay must be churned out.

With the brainwashing and political correctness that dominates these fields of study, I say: good on the students! Plagiarise away to your heart’s content for all I care! (Of course, satire aside, I am not encouraging cheating – rather I encourage students not to do arts, humanities and social sciences courses with their endless essays and words, words, words.)  


MAJ-GEN JOHN CANTWELL ON DEFENCE MINISTER STEPHEN SMITH

I cast around in my mind for the element that seemed to be missing in his dealings with the men and women of the ADF who I led. Then I had it: respect. Smith had no respect for those who chose to serve in uniform for their country. It was an uncomfortable insight.

 The Defence Minister appears to merely tolerate those in the armed forces, writes John Cantwell. It's all about respect. Does the Defence Minister, Stephen Smith, respect the men and women of the Australian Defence Force? Regrettably, the answer appears to be ''no''. In recent years, I've found myself in the company of several defence ministers for extended periods. In 2008, as the senior military officer running the force structure review as part of the present defence white paper, I spent long hours over many sessions briefing the then minister, Joel Fitzgibbon. It was a painful process.

Fitzgibbon was out of his depth. He simply didn't get it. Not only could he not understand what we were trying to tell him, he didn't put in the time to try to get across his brief. When he was required to sell the concepts and costs to his cabinet colleagues, I found myself having to prepare additional PowerPoint charts to explain to him the briefing that had already been simplified to the point of banality. He was an auto-electrician in a suit. But at least Fitzgibbon occasionally expressed a desire to do the right thing by the service personnel who delivered our military capability.

There was a sigh of relief around the Defence precinct on Canberra's Russell Hill when Fitzgibbon was forced to resign and was replaced by the vastly experienced and influential John Faulkner. I spent several days with Faulkner when I was commander of forces serving in Afghanistan and the wider Middle East area of operations. Two things struck me about his attitude towards our Diggers and the risks they take every day.

First, Faulkner was genuinely concerned about the soldiers he met in Afghanistan. He spoke sincerely to them of his gratitude for the sacrifices they were making. I admired the way he was able to distinguish between his personal abhorrence of war and the necessity, as Defence Minister, to make the people we send to war understand that he supported them unreservedly.
Second, he took the deaths of Australian soldiers very personally. When I briefed him on the circumstances of the deaths of two of our soldiers, killed by a roadside bomb, he was visibly pained by the description of what had happened. He sat for long moments grim-faced, then said, in an uncharacteristically quiet voice, ''That's the most appalling thing that anyone has ever briefed me on.''
Towards the end of his tour, Faulkner told me, ''I want you to know that if there is anything, anything, that you need here, you only have to ask.'' I believed him. Faulkner spent only a little over a year as Defence Minister before returning to the backbench.

When his replacement, Stephen Smith, made his first visit to the troops in Afghanistan I made sure he understood what was going well and what wasn't. I warned him of potential problems. I briefed him on the nuanced, often sensitive relationships with our coalition partners in Afghanistan. I provided a frank assessment of the quality of Afghanistan security forces we were training. Throughout, Smith sat immobile, taking no notes, making no comment. At the conclusion of this briefing, to which the then chief of the Defence Force Angus Houston added his insights, I asked if he had any questions. There were none. It must have been a cracking brief.

Later in the tour, in the joint US-Australian headquarters at Tarin Kowt in Uruzgan province, I saw the same stony-faced response to similar briefings. At one stage the commanding officer of the taskforce charged with mentoring the Afghan 4th Brigade provided a detailed, honest appraisal of his troops' daily battles with insurgents, the progress of the local soldiers and prospects for the future. The CO asked if the minister had any questions. The 20 or 30 Australian and American officers in the room looked to Smith for comments, questions, words of encouragement. His response? ''No, thank you'', followed by a glance at me with the question, ''What's next?'' Inspirational, it wasn't.

That same day I escorted Smith to one of our forward patrol bases, which were established when we expanded our operations into an area previously covered by Dutch and French troops, who had recently departed. The CO of the mentoring taskforce had sensibly rebalanced his force to cover the new territory. But the Australian and Afghan troops there had been in constant and occasionally heavy contact with the enemy. They were under the pump.

We gathered the dirty, tired Diggers together at the end of Smith's tour. Media crews travelling with the minister turned on their cameras and he made a lacklustre speech clearly pitched at the audience back home. He talked ''at'' the soldiers, not to them. He then turned to walk back to the helicopter pad.
''Minister,'' I said, ''perhaps you might take a couple of questions from the soldiers before you go?'' The look I got in response was poisonous. ''Well, are there any questions?'' he asked the soldiers.
''Yes, sir,'' one said. ''We got moved out here earlier than we were supposed to and we're spread a bit thin on the ground. Can we get some additional troops sent out from Australia?''

It was a reasonable question, at least from the perspective of a soldier fighting in a scrubby valley in Afghanistan. Smith launched into a long spiel about supporting the coalition and fighting terrorism and building capacity in the Afghan security forces and making a contribution and all the phrases that work well in Canberra. It didn't work so well when delivered to blokes who would soon start another patrol along paths hiding improvised bombs designed to kill them. There were no other questions.

Walking towards the helicopter for the ride back to Tarin Kowt, Smith said to me, ''Don't set me up with unscheduled questions like that again''. He was not happy. After 38 years as a soldier and as a commander, I'd learned to read people, quickly and accurately. Reflecting on Smith's visit, the abiding impression I was left with was that he merely tolerated people like me and the troops I commanded.
I cast around in my mind for the element that seemed to be missing in his dealings with the men and women of the ADF who I led. Then I had it: respect. Smith had no respect for those who chose to serve in uniform for their country. It was an uncomfortable insight.

Based on the utterances of Smith, both last year and this week, in relation to the commandant of the Australian Defence Force Academy and the inexcusable Skype scandal, I sense that the judgment I formed in 2010 was on the money. There's no respect, and it works both ways.

John Cantwell retired from the Australian Army with the rank of major-general. We have read he is writing a book about his experiences. Source:...


ECHOES FROM THE PAST

by Betty Luks
Andrew Tink’s article “Echoes of Curtin in Abbott’s no-confidence motion” (The Drum, 13 May 2013) sparked my interest because Mr. Eric Butler many a time wrote and spoke of the downfall of the early WWII Menzies government and the rise of the Curtin government. Eric was a personal friend of Alex Wilson, one of the parliamentarians involved in the Menzies’ downfall.

According to Mr. Tink, “No one knew John Curtin was about to fell a government when he brought a budget motion in 1941. The same uncertainty surrounds Tony Abbott's own vote of no confidence” writes Andrew Tink. “Tony Abbott's no-confidence motion in the Gillard Government, to be moved after Parliament resumes on May 14, brings to mind a time when Australia's war-time government fell in 1941.
It happened after two independents crossed the floor of a hung Parliament to support a similar motion moved by then leader of the opposition John Curtin. And as with Abbott's proposed strike against Prime Minister Gillard, the crisis which led to Curtin making his move 72 years ago had a long and bitter build-up…”
Read further ...

The Movement Demanding Financial Reform to Aid the War Effort
Let’s go back to Eric’s own words in On Target Vol28No19 22 May, 1992:

“The stock reply by the party strategists is to claim that Independents can do no good in Parliament. What needs to be widely publicised is that during the early dark days of the Second World War, there were many Independents in Australia's Parliaments, particularly in South Australia, where W. McGillvray of Chaffey was responsible for having a motion passed in the South Australian Parliament calling upon the Federal Government to use national credit to finance the war effort to the maximum.

Published in booklet form, the McGillvray address was distributed in hundreds of thousands around Australia and was a major contribution to the national grassroots movements demanding financial reform in order that a maximum war effort might be prosecuted.

This movement was responsible for the 1940 Federal Elections finishing with the balance of power held by two Independents, A.W. Coles of the famous Coles Stores, and Alex Wilson from the Mallee, Victoria. Wilson was prominently associated with the financial reform movement and eventually decided that national survival depended upon bringing the John Curtin Government to office.

Only a political ignoramus would dispute that the Curtin Government's liberal use of national financial credit enabled Australia to maximise the war effort, with both primary and secondary industries stimulated. It was the same Curtin Government, which broke with financial orthodoxy to implement a system of consumer price discounts which eliminated inflation in Australia for five years.
Australia's situation is even more critical today than it was during the dark days when Australia was fighting for survival against the Japanese thrust south. The nation pulled itself together during that critical period. The Independents played an honourable role at this time. Independents can do the same again today.” (emphasis added...ed)

Comment: I guess it just depends on how one views history as to what is written about it. It was C.H. Douglas who said written history is 95% opinion and 5% facts.

Source: On Target 22 May 1992 “Backlash Against Parties Growing”

Further reading: The New Times October 1995


MARCH AGAINST MONSANTO COMING UP !

Gene Ethics News March Against Monsanto: Saturday May 25th at 2pm

The movement for GM-free is now grass roots and global! Millions of people everywhere will demand the right to know and to choose GM-free crops and foods, when we March Against Monsanto on Sunday May 25.

Marches and meetings are planned in 321 cities, so far. Please join the March Against Monsanto in your town.

See what's happening globally at: http://on.fb.me/ZUxe3o
Find the cities already participating: http://bit.ly/ZTDsk8
Start a MAM in your town, here: http://on.fb.me/16qw2r4

AUSTRALIA Marches Against Monsanto
• Sydney: http://on.fb.me/XRruV6 NB: Noon, Archibald Fountain, Hyde Park North nomonsantosydoz@gmail.com
• Bellingen NSW: http://on.fb.me/12WDEh9 NB: 9am, Bellingen Council Chambers marguerite.montes556@gmail.com
• Redcliffe Qld: http://on.fb.me/10fhR5C 2pm in PDT
• Brisbane: http://on.fb.me/12HdWjh 2pm King George Square marchagainstmonsantobrisbane@gmail.com
• Adelaide: http://on.fb.me/125kFCy NB: 11am, Parliament House North Terrace
• Melbourne: http://on.fb.me/17FMbKS 2pm State Library of Victoria marchagainstmonsantomelbourne@gmail.com
• Perth: http://on.fb.me/14v5xno 2pm at Parliament, march to Russell Sq, Northbridge
• Hobart: http://on.fb.me/ZwEjox 2pm Parliament Lawns We will not accept inside deals and GM and agrichemical industry control of our food supply.

We March Against Monsanto because:
• most foods and ingredients made using GM techniques are unlabelled; • some types of Monsanto's GM soy, corn and canola harm experimental animals, and maybe us;
• Monsanto's control of the world's seed and food supply using patents is 27% and growing;
• GM crops reduce biodiversity & harm the environment, e.g. by harming the Monarch butterfly;
• the US FDA, that sets policies on food safety is steered by ex-Monsanto executives;
• the US "Monsanto Protection" Act bans their courts from hearing disputes over GM seed.

Please March on May 25 to show Monsanto and other GM companies that we challenge their plans.  


WHAT IS THIS MAN’S WORD WORTH?

Turnbull promotes on-line republic plebiscite
So Malcolm Turnbull wants an on-line plebiscite (The Australian May 11, 2013), which is typical of a republican approach as it would disenfranchise a large section of the Australian community, particularly the elderly. He inferred that paper ballots are not secure. But if he holds this view, why did he not do something about it when his party had control of the senate from 2005 until they lost government in 2007?

He attacks the monarchy and wants to get rid of The Queen as head of state, but whenever he goes to take his seat in the parliament, he, together with other parliamentary republicans, blithely swears to be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, Her heirs and successors according to law. He has done this on no fewer than three previous occasions and will do it again later this year.

- - Philip Benwell National Chair Australian Monarchist League  


COMMENT - On Target

Issue No 15 carried an article suggesting the federal government owned NBN Co Ltd would cost in the vicinity of $1626.79 million per person and this has been challenged and I have to agree it is only $1626 per Australian.

Let’s go a bit further with the discussion; not every Australian is earning a wage so far fewer will be ’paying the bill’! This equates to $6507 per family of four... Mum, Dad and two children, to be added to whatever taxes and charges they are paying now.

There is no argument about the possibilities of an NBN Network, or some fancy ‘education proposals’, or new highways or new fast-rail networks or much needed improved health facilities, and goodness knows what else; we know it can technically be done but where is the money to come from without escalating the already burgeoning debt we did not vote for!

Every candidate in the coming federal election should be unmercifully questioned on this issue. The current financial trend is unsustainable and is a road to ‘socialist-financial slavery’. It is planned that way! Where to from here? ND


LEAGUE OF RIGHTS 2013 NATIONAL WEEKEND - FORWARD NOTICE

The 2013 National Weekend beginning with the 67th New Times Dinner on the Friday evening, 4th October will be held for the first time in Adelaide, South Australia.

The dates and events are as follows:
New Times Dinner, Friday 4th October :
Seminar, Saturday 5th October : Guest speakers will be announced at a later date.
Divine Service and Action Conference, Sunday 6th October.

The South Australian League members and supporters are looking forward to hosting this annual event and welcoming interstate visitors into their midst. The advance notice will help you plan a holiday along with attending our New Times Dinner, National Seminar and Action Conference.

The Friday evening New Times Dinner will be held at the Public Schools’ Club (within Adelaide proper).
The Saturday and Sunday events will be held at Lothlorien, Happy Valley (in Adelaide’s south).

The following accommodation addresses are within reasonable motoring distance of Lothlorien, Happy Valley.
These are only suggestions, you may already know where you would like to stay.

• Tollgate Motel, Glen Osmond: Conveniently situated between the scenic hills and the shopping district of Glen Osmond Road. Tollgate Motel accommodation from $68 single. Phone Number 08 8379 1651 Website: https://www.tollgatemotel.com/
• Glenelg Lake Holiday Units, Glenelg North: Glenelg Lake Holiday Units are situated in the pleasant seaside town of Glenelg in South Australia. From $77. Address: 1 George St, Glenelg Nth. Ph: (08) 8322 6007.
• Mick O’Shea’s Hotel/Motel, Main South Road, Hackam. Phone 8326 2939. $110 per night. Discount for early bookings.

The Internet-Google is very helpful for viewing the various accommodation venues.
The South Australian State Weekend will be replaced by the National Weekend in October 2013.
Please note the changes.

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