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

30 August 2013 Thought for the Week:

Antiracism without race may be quite complicated!
Q: The French government has recently decided on the removal of the word ‘race’ from all official documents. Removing the word in order to eradicate the evil, is this not, spot on, some magical thinking? Moreover, if there are no races, how can there be any racism? And in passing, how can there be any antiracism at all? Antiracism without race, well, this may be quite complicated!
A: Don’t’ you worry. If the French Republic indeed claims not to recognize any longer “the existence of any alleged race,” it nonetheless declares that it “condemns racism.” Indeed, what will be more difficult to justify is the indictment for “incitement to racial hatred”, that is to say, the incitement to hate something that does not exist in the first place. From now on it will also be more difficult to justify the defence of miscegenation, since from now on this notion will refer to a mixture of imaginary entities, or the promotion of “diversity”, having in mind that “we do not recognize any race diversity.” (François Hollande, March 12, 2012).
Finally, given that people insist on seeing and recognizing the “races” around them, somebody will really need to convince them that they are victims of optical illusions. Good luck to all those wishing to take on this task!
(Translated from the original French interview by Tom Sunic.)

- - Alain DeBenoist The Occidental Observer, 18 Aug 2013  


by Len the Dispossessed
There are so many people NOT to vote for in this election. The Greens: they want to shut down detention centres and increase Australia’s refugee intake. This socialist party is big on political correctness and light on the environment. I believe that you should put them last.
And Queenslanders will have the joy of making sure Peter Beattie doesn’t get in. Yes, the same Peter Beattie who damaged Queensland’s economy and health service has been recycled by Kevin Rudd after the Kruddite dismissed the pre-selected candidate in the Forde electorate.

After all, as the Liberals are gleefully rubbing in Rudd’s face, Beattie said about Rudd (The Weekend Australian 26 June 2010): “For me, Rudd’s lack of political judgement was demonstrated in the introduction of the mining tax without proper consultation, the backflip on timing of the emissions trading scheme and the bungled home insulation program.
His failure to listen to a broad range of advice particularly on issues in which he had little expertise also demonstrated poor judgment. On a more personal level, the stories of Kevin’s off-handed and at times brutal dealings with his staff and public officials spread like wildfire throughout the country…”

Then we have the Liberals and their “ethnic” candidates. Liberal candidate Jaymes Diaz seemed to have trouble remembering what policies the Liberals actually held, where, according to The Australian (7 August 2013, p.7) “he stumbled trying to describe a range of his party’s policies, was of little surprise even to Leader Tony Abbott.”
You see, the 37-year old Blacktown-based immigration lawyer “came under fire for a poor performance in 2010, when he ceded Greenway to Labor’s Michelle Rowland and in the process turned it into NSW’s most marginal seat.”
The Liberals think that running a Filipino candidate in an electorate with a large Filipino community, will be a winner. I hope that it is a loser, and that all ethnic candidates fail. That’s my personal opinion because I think racially, and I believe that our tribe should too if they want their kind to survive.

Then in South Australia there is Nick Xenophon in the Senate; born to Greek and Greek Cypriot migrants. Nick, as we call him, entered the South Australian Legislative Council on an Independent No Pokies Ticket. He only received 2.86 per cent of the vote in the 1997 State elections, which was far short of the 8.33 per cent needed for him to be elected in his own right. But Grey Power and other small party preferences helped him fall over the line. Nevertheless, once in power he did much good, speaking out on perks for politicians, consumer rights and taxation. I voted for him at the time.

However, in 2007 he resigned from the SA Legislative Council and sought a Senate seat. The Wikipedia entry on Xenophon says that “Ann Bressington criticised Xenophon, questioning his integrity and suitability for Federal parliament, suggesting that his “anti-politician” image was more spin than reality.” I agree given his Senate performance.
According to The Advertiser (7 August 2013, p.5) in this election “Senator Nick Xenophon would be “relentless” in using the balance of power to deliver more skilled migrants to South Australia.”

Nothing here about training our youth who are increasingly falling on to the dole lines – no, it is all the migrant/multicultural thing of bringing more migrants. Xenophon says that he will fight for South Australia’s water allowances, but doesn’t see that population growth in Australia is producing this crisis. For him, the big battle is to give SA its “fair share” of migrants. In my opinion – and I stress it is my opinion – Xenophon is indeed just spin and I believe he should not be re-elected.

In this and all other elections, Anglo Saxons should follow this principle: think racially and vote locally. All ethnic candidates, from what I can work out, support the immigration racket. I believe you should not vote for them. If you can’t find a candidate vaguely sympathetic to our concerns, then vote against the sitting member (consistent with the racial principle).

And, most importantly, write “REDUCE IMMIGRATION” on your ballot papers. This is something the dispossessed once majority, now minority, can do in protest. If the ethnic candidates get defeated, and a big “reduce immigration” write-on occurs, maybe the elites will take notice.
I, for one, am saving money from my now disability pension to print off Denis McCormack’s “REDUCE IMMIGRATION” leaflet, and as far as my ‘bung’ leg will allow me, I will be out letter boxing. You can do this too, it feels amazing good to do. If you are in Adelaide you might even see me hobbling from letter-box to letter-box, mumbling and cursing our plight.


by Chris Knight
In “Death to Modernity” Alex Kurtagic reflects upon the “Manifesto for a European Renaissance” by Alain DeBenoist and Charles Champetier, first published 13 years ago, but now republished by Arktos Media. To create a new civilisation, first the old one must be destroyed.
Our civilisation is drenched in cultural Marxism, but liberalism is the parent of Marxism and responses to it such as National Socialism :
“Liberalism is the enemy : it is the originating formulation of the evil of modernity, and the main agent of the accelerating destruction of European cultures over the past hundred or so years.”

Unfortunately, rather than focus on liberalism’s atomisation of society, making people individual units of consumption, the authors of the Manifesto blame Christianity for creating liberalism. Thus the idea of individual salvation led to individualism, for example. But this is historically absurd and ignores the fact that the idea of individual salvation existed for hundreds of years without producing liberal ideology as we know it.

Liberal ideology is closely connected to the emergence of capitalism and is essentially the real theology of capitalism. Thus movements such as women’s liberation and feminism can be seen as developments to serve capitalist profit motives by creating more atomistic consumers. “Anti-racism: seeks to expand the global economy by making everyone on Earth a consumer in an inclusive global society.
The “Manifesto for a European Renaissance” would get closer to addressing the problem of the survival of Western civilisation if it addressed the political economy and financial motives behind liberalism and who controls and benefits from it.

Serbian-American writer Srdja Trifkovic, “Multiculturalism and the Alienation of Western Civilization’s Elites” The Social Contract, Summer 2012, pp.40-43, points out that multiculturalism, although a product of neoliberalism seems to have mutated and generated a madness that “goes way beyond Cultural Wars” and “is the looming end of culture itself.”
Now, white people should not feel any special bond to their race, culture or nation. Both Islam and the Western cultural elites are “both programs of globalisation that have as their object the destruction of the old nation-state system based on nationhood defined by ethno-linguistic, cultural, and territorial commonalities.”

What these authors do not discuss is that these globalist, cosmopolitan ideologies have flourished because they serve present global capitalist interests. But, as we attempt to show at this site, this financial and economic system is unstable and capable of collapse. When it topples over, with it will go the ideologies - and parasites that mouth them.  


by James Reed
Journalist Nick Cater penned a good piece on the Labor Party back in March of this year (“Gentrifying the Workers’ Party” The Australian 26 March 2013, p.12). Once the working man’s party it has now become the party of the new class and inner city university elites. The rot began with university educated god Gough Whitlam’s ascendency.

In 1967 many in the rank and file Labor Party regarded Whitlam as a “class traitor” and an “opportunist”. But when Whitlam became leader of the opposition he had a teacher as deputy and two lawyers as leader and deputy in the Senate. And now, a university education is the minimum entrance qualification to enter the Labor political class.

As I see it, any new political party needs to start afresh and break away from the suffocating unionism that has followed the Labor Party. It needs to address the concerns of working people because they, not the capitalist class stand to suffer most from their dispossession by globalism, immigration and multiculturalism.

The values of the working class have not been corrupted by the systematic brainwashing of a university education. These are the people that any new political party needs to focus upon, reaching out and spreading the message of good news. It is time to bury the LibLab Party ; the party’s over!  


From vdare.com "Write-On Campaign In Australia"
An Australian friend points out that there's an immigration protest campaign planned for the upcoming Australian federal election scheduled for September 7, 2013. In Australia, the electoral system is different from both the American and British models, and they have a thing called a "write-on" campaign.

As the Reduce Immigration Campaign page explains
In Australia we are allowed to write messages on blank parts of a ballot paper to convey our personal views. A write-on campaign encourages people to write the same message on their ballot papers so as to convey a consistent idea to scrutineers, staff of the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), other observers and the media when votes are being counted.
In many countries, this would be called a "spoiled ballot", but not in Australia.
The issue is legal immigration. For all the fuss made about illegal immigration to Australia, it's numerically small compared to the legal immigration, because Australia is surrounded on all sides by water.

Here's what the write-on campaign has to say:
Reduce Immigration - A write-on campaign to reduce immigration to Australia
Australia’s annual immigration numbers have more than doubled between 1999 and 2013.
Immigration contributes 60% of our annual population growth rate of 1.8%, one of the highest in the world.

Bipartisanship across the major political parties has kept the idea of a lower immigration policy from becoming a real electoral issue, let alone the political reality. Both major parties are committed to high immigration, but this flies in the face of our environmental sustainability, social cohesion and cultural integrity.

Around 70% of Australians are concerned about increased immigration into Australia and our high rate of population growth.

The REDUCE IMMIGRATION write-on campaign encourages Australian voters to express their objection to excessive immigration and to influence our immigration policy by adding a message to ballot papers in elections.

Click on the links below to:
Learn how to write REDUCE IMMIGRATION on a ballot paper.
Learn more about write-on campaigns.
Download a leaflet (in PDF format) about the REDUCE IMMIGRATION write-on campaign.

Some frequently asked questions are answered on the FAQ page. [More] http://reduceimmigration.wordpress.com/write-on-campaigns/
An important point about this "write-on" idea is that it's can be done while voting for either party. They say above that "Bipartisanship across the major political parties has kept the idea of a lower immigration policy from becoming a real electoral issue...".

This has been a consistent theme at VDARE.com.
If the politicians of BOTH major parties agree, then there's no one to vote for to change things. That's in spite of the fact that as you say above, 70 percent of Australians are concerned about increased immigration, which may include a majority of both political parties.
So in Australia, patriots on both the left and right sides of the political spectrum can participate in a protest campaign without wasting any votes. Australian readers take note!  


The Editor, On Target 13th August 2013
Dear Madam,
In Melbourne on 19th November 1999 Mark Latham, then Labor Member for Werriwa, read a paper titled “MUTUALISM; A THIRD WAY FOR AUSTRALIA” to the Third Way Conference hosted by Mutuality Australia and the Australian Fabian Society. Today this paper is being used as a consultation source on the website wwwcivilsocietv.org.au
The Centre for Civil Society Organization was formed in 2007 as a public policy and social movement. The core unit of the organization is the Federal Electorate with a Convenor appointed in each federal electorate (l5O). Applications for appointment as a FEA Convenor should be made to the Director Vern@ civilsociety.org.au.
The Centre for Civil Society website provides information for a THIRD WAY FORUM and PROJECTS using internet communications. An extensive volunteer network has been built up. Vern Hughes is Convenor, PO Box 159, Yarraville Victoria 3013. Tel 0425 722 800.
This information is taken from the Centre for Civil Society website. Having lived through the I939-45 war and read history of the way Hitler took control of Germany before this war, I am worried at the lack of information of this organization; began in India.
Is the third way the way to the street riots where constitutional governments have lost control ‘?
A resident of the Australian Electorate of INDI I believe we need to be very careful who we elect in the coming Federal election.

- - Yours sincerely, Alison Walpole, Whorouly South, Victoria  


by Betty Luks
The Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus writes thus about The Third Way: “a political movement in which the development of business is balanced with the needs of society. Tony Blair claimed that New Labour is the Third Way between capitalism and socialism.”

But wait! There is more to the history of the name than that!
And how do we know? Easy. We did a search of the League’s Archives – that’s how we know!

Jeremy Lee wrote of The Third Way in 1999: “Douglas, Orage and the ‘Third Way’:
“The 'Third Way' is a phrase increasingly heard. It is used more by globalist-inclined socialists such as Britain's Tony Blair and Australia's Mark Latham. It acknowledges that Capitalism offers no more to humanity than Communism, and poses the suggestion that an alternative to the inflictions of both is the challenge for the Third Millennium.

So far so good. The ruins of collapsed Communism look to be overtaken by the crumbling edifice of Capitalism. The damage to suffering humanity in both cases dwarfs anything in history. A 'Third Way' is needed if a reversion to a Dark Age is to be averted.
Both the big "C's are similar. Their trade is centralisation, monopoly, compulsion and oppression. They are systems born in the minds of idealists who seek to replace reality...
Globalism is a marriage made in Hell between Communism and Capitalism, into which bankers, politicians, commissars and directors easily accommodate themselves. It becomes the legion of the lost, seeking to 'systemise' the world…”

Myths, Legends and Spiritual Survival - Economics of the Third Way
Quoting Anthony Cooney, I wrote of the Third Way in the New Times in 2007:
Social crediters will be interested to discover Tolkien's social philosophy placed him within a tradition of Catholic social thought known as Distributism.
Distributists saw the family as the only solid basis for civil society and of any sustainable civilisation. They believed in a society of households, and were suspicious of top-down government. Power, they held, should be devolved to the lowest level compatible with a reasonable degree of order (the principle of 'subsidiarity').

Social order flows from the natural bonds of friendship, co-operation and family loyalty, within the context of a local culture possessing a strong sense of right and wrong. It cannot be imposed by force, and indeed force should never be employed except as a last resort and in self-defence.

In the opinion of the Distributists, the problem with modern Capitalism, was that there were not enough capitalists around: property and wealth had become concentrated in the hands of a few, reducing other people to the state of wage slaves (hence the title of Hilaire Belloc's book on the subject, "The Servile State"). Ninety years ago, the result of modern Capitalism in Britain had been a pseudo-democracy which was really a disguised plutocracy - actual power lay with the employers and the managers, and political gurus were largely manipulated by these for their own ends, public opinion being handled by allied interests in the media.
The situation is much worse today and the Distributists and Social Crediters of a hundred years ago have been proved right. They well understood the nature of the problem and what was needed to rectify it.  

The term 'The Third Way' was originally coined by the Distributist League, in the 1920s and Anthony Cooney records Chesterton's outline of Distributism in his booklet "Social Credit: Aspects":
"Distributism presents a social idea which nine men out of ten would in normal circumstances regard as normal. Distributism is not merely a moderate form of Socialism; it is not merely a humane sort of Capitalism. Its two primary principles may be stated thus:
1. That the only way to preserve liberty is to preserve property so that the individual and the family may in some degree be independent of oppressive systems, whether unofficial or official.
2. That the only way to preserve property is to distribute it much more equally among citizens so that all, or approximately all, may understand and defend it. This can only be done by breaking up the plutocratic concentrations of our time."

The Hobbitts' Shire of Tolkien's great parable fits neatly into the Distributists' tradition of social thought, and I for one was most disappointed that the film version of "Lord of the Rings" did not finish with the battle for the Shire. The Shire represents an agricultural, largely self-sufficient way of life, cut off from the rest of the world and happy to remain so. It was a way of life founded on local tradition which G.K. Chesterton once called 'the democracy of the dead' - one shaped by one's ancestors, not just by those who happened to be walking around.

The tradition within which men such as Cooney works and thinks, and before him, Belloc and Chesterton and Douglas is that of Christendom or western civilisation - and their roots went down deep. Anthony Cooney wrote of the Distributists in his Social Credit series, all of which are available from our Book Services.
He saw that C.H. Douglas' proposals form an important part of the Methods necessary to achieve the Distributist Objectives and have long been recognised as the Economics of the Third Way.Read more here…

Distributism: philosophy of the Individual Quest as against over-riding Function

“The Life and Work of Anthony Cooney” by Michael Lane
Let us examine what Michael Lane had to write about Cooney – who was involved with the Third Way movement from an early age.
“From the late 1970s Cooney published a poetry magazine, the Old Police Station (including the critical review Witana Gemot, Great Thought). The Liverpool Newsletter saw twelve--then ten--issues per year till 1980 and is today a quarterly review.
Articles (sometimes under a pen name) discuss such disparate subjects as Roman Britain, the real St. George, Alfred the Great, the Russian royal family, the Holocaust, antisemitism, medieval painting and architecture, the Pre-Raphaelites, the Arts-and-Crafts movement, Shakespeare, imagism, nation/empire, Ireland, South Africa, the "Fascist Grand Council in Brussels," Rerum Novarum, the death penalty, and Standard Time.

Since 1995 the Liverpool Newsletter has been produced under the auspices of the Third Way organization, but Cooney's contribution is still decisive…
The best compliment we can pay Anthony Cooney--and the one he would most appreciate--is to build on his work.
It is useful to think of distributism (the philosophy of the individual quest as against the overriding function) as the larger concept into which social credit fits. Berkeley, Jefferson, Cobbett, Leo XIII, Ruskin, Tolstoy, Morris, Gandhi, Belloc, Douglas, Orage, and Chesterton were all distributists, but only Douglas and Orage would be called social crediters.

Distributism attracts people who are happiest minding their own business and who would not be bothering with politics if politics hadn't bothered them first. It does not attract people who enjoy being part of something big and feel powerful when they rally and shout in unison, nor does it attract people who are not happy unless they are saving the world. It is therefore par for the course that its methods of activism are different from others.

Cooney took his cue from Douglas, who wrote: "Fix your objective in relation to your resources. This is rather more than to say concentrate on a narrow front--it means narrowing your front until you must break through. There are hundreds of spots in the present position which are vulnerable to quite weak forces. The Housewives face many of them" (Development of World Dominion 132). There is nothing shameful about being a "weak force," and the British Housewives League proved to be one of Cooney's most valuable allies.

Belloc expressed the idea in a pretty metaphor: When you are considering how a fortress may be attacked with the means at your disposal it is your first business to ask where its weak points are to be found. The weakness may seem slight, the opportunity of action against such great and highly organized strength may seem negligible, but the very first business is to find out, at least, where there is an opportunity, even on a small scale, for beginning. . . .
The process may be compared to the killing of a tree by one who must attack with some instrument--say, shears--too feeble for cutting the tree down, let alone for uprooting it; too feeble even for inflicting a serious wound upon its trunk; too feeble for cutting off main branches or perhaps even secondary branches, but not too feeble for clipping leaves. Now, if you cut enough leaves off a tree ["for several springs" -- Cooney] the tree dies" (Essay on the Restoration of Property, pp. 39- 40 out of 86).”


Once Upon a Time ‘Socialism’ Did NOT Mean Nationalisation of Production and Distribution.

In “Social Credit of the Left” Michael Lane fills in more historical details of the Third Way (Triumph of The Past July, August, September, and October 2001):
“That there is a social credit of the Left will come as news to many social crediters. To understand it, the reader will have to disabuse himself of the notion that socialism means nationalization of the means of production.
This meaning became the paradigm after 1922, when the Labour party declared that social credit was not compatible with socialism.
Before 1922, the Left still had room for a Morrisian vision of economics, in which "the ordinary things men made ought to be so made as to be a `joy to the maker and the user'."

In "The Political Economy of Social Credit and Guild Socialism", Frances Hutchinson and Brian Burkitt adopt the definition of Henry Smith:
"Socialism is the economic equivalent of political freedom, equality and fellowship. Its defining criterion is the reduction to a minimum of conflict due to economic causes." When it rejected social credit, the Labour party rejected true socialism.
In calling attention to the origins of social credit in the trades union movement, Hutchinson and Burkitt bring a new dimension to the subject.
In 1907, A. R. Orage and Holbrook Jackson formed the Fabian Arts Group as a wing of the Fabian Society and purchased a bankrupt magazine, the New Age. The New Age declared its intention to examine the philosophical basis of socialism, to which end it provided a forum for the guild socialism of Arthur Penty and S. G. Hobson and the distributism of Hilaire Belloc and G. K. Chesterton. In consequence, the New Age became the black sheep of the Fabian Society, and by 1909 the rupture was complete.

Unless Mark Latham and those around him have had a dramatic ‘Road to Damascus’ conversion, methinks his version of the “Third Way” is a counterfeit way. Read further here…

Malcolm Muggeridge married the niece of Sidney and Beatrice Webb and his own father was a member of the early Fabian group. Read his story here…

This report was put out by the 1935 Labour Party. The Fabian Socialists have never had any trouble working with the fraudulent, corrupt financial system. Read further ...


By Spengler, Asia Times, 19 August 2013
“The giant sucking sound you hear, I said on August 15 on CNBC's The Kudlow Report, is the implosion of America's influence in the Middle East. Vladimir Putin's August 17 offer of Russian military assistance to the Egyptian army after US President Barack Obama cancelled joint exercises with the Egyptians denotes a post-Cold-War low point in America's standing. Along with Russia, Saudi Arabia and China are collaborating to contain the damage left by American blundering. They have being doing this quietly for more than a year.

The pipe-dream has popped of Egyptian democracy led by a Muslim Brotherhood weaned from its wicked past, but official Washington has not woken up. Egypt was on the verge of starvation when military pushed out Mohammed Morsi.
Most of the Egyptian poor had been living on nothing but state-subsidized bread for months, and even bread supplies were at risk. The military brought in US$12 billion of aid from the Gulf States, enough to avert a humanitarian catastrophe. That's the reality. It's the one thing that Russia, Saudi Arabia and Israel agree about.

America's whimsical attitude towards Egypt is not a blunder but rather a catastrophic institutional failure. President Obama has surrounded himself with a camarilla, with Susan Rice as National Security Advisor, flanked by Valerie Jarrett, the Iranian-born public housing millionaire. Compared to Obama's team, Zbigniew Brzezinski was an intellectual colossus at Jimmy Carter's NSC. These are amateurs, and it is anyone's guess what they will do from one day to the next.

By default, Republican policy is defined by Senator John McCain, whom the head of Egypt's ruling National Salvation Party dismissed as a "senile old man" after the senator's last visit to Cairo. McCain's belief in Egyptian democracy is echoed by a few high-profile Republican pundits, for example, Reuel Marc Gerecht, Robert Kagan, and Max Boot.
Most of the Republican foreign policy community disagrees, by my informal poll. Former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld blasted Obama for undermining the Egyptian military's ability to keep order, but his statement went unreported by major media…” Read further here…


by Brian Simpson
We may not hear much about it but there is a debate among scientists about whether or not the Aborigines were responsible for the mass extinction of Australia’s megaFauna. A recent article in The Weekend Australian (3-4 August 2013 p.1) mentioned that sink holes in the far north may have an answer to this debate.
Did Aboriginal firestick “farming”, that is, creating bush fires to capture animals, lead to a fundamental change in the vegetation of the country, that ultimately decreased rainfall and led to the continent becoming a savannah desert? If this is so, then it undermines one of the current regime’s ideological foundations that Aborigines lived in harmony with mother-nature.

On the contrary, if this is all true, ancient Aborigines are arguably as destructive of the environment as modern man. This is not to make a specific criticism of them, but to point out that the thesis of ‘romantic primitivism”, beloved by the Left and Greenies, is incorrect. Humans of all races, past and present, radically alter their environments, and have never lived in harmony with it.

Stephen Wroe (et.al.) “Climate Change Frames Debate Over Extinction of megaFauna in Sahul (Pleistocene Australia-New Guinea,” PNAS, (2013) believe that the evidence indicates that these species were lost before Australia was populated by the Aborigines. The problem with this hypothesis is that there is no clear reason why climate change should have eliminated all megaFauna such as predators Thylacoleo Carnifex, a 100-130 kilogram marsupial lion which hunted and didn’t depend on vegetation.
Sure its prey depended on vegetation, but it would have survived fine eating even the marsupials alive today, such as kangaroos. Climate change would therefore not be responsible for all such extinctions. There are no “kill sites” discovered yet, but this not disprove the hypothesis that Aborigines killed the megaFauna because there would be few such sites in any case.  


by Ian Wilson LL.B.
There is not any difference between having sex and eating a sandwich – or getting injured from having sex and choking on a sandwich – according to our learned High Court justices. (The Australian 9 August 2013, p.29) In a case being heard, Comcare v P, a Ms P was on a country work trip to a NSW town in 2007. She had sex with a man and was injured when a light fitting was pulled from its mount, falling on her, injuring nose and mouth and resulting in psychological trauma, causing post-traumatic stress disorder! How was a light fitting ripped from the ceiling during sex, you may ask? Don’t ask!

High Court Justice Stephen Gageler said: “if I am eating a sandwich in my lunch hour at work and I choke, that is in the course of employment. If I am eating the same sandwich at home and I choke in exactly the same way, then that is outside the course of employment.” This summarises the rule in Hatzimanolis v ANI Corporation (1992) 173 CL473. That High Court case involved an employee injured during a sightseeing tour on his day off. It was held that the appellant sustained injury during an interval within the overall period of work (held by Mason CJ, Deane, Dawson and McHugh JJ).

The problem here is that this legal principle entails that injuries occurring between periods of work are part of the course of employment, and that all activities undertaken during that time (such as sex), occur in the course of employment. So, substitute Ms P’s sex with some other activity, say playing Russian roulette or mountain climbing blind folded, and you can see the absurdity.
That decisions like Hatzimanolis were reached and establish a precedence, shows the absurdity of modern Australian common Law. Oh, but wait and see what our High Court decides in the after hours sex injury case.  

NATIONAL WEEKEND – 4, 5, 6 October 2013

“Science is knowledge. In action it is the research and documentation of natural law. For that job there is one essential besides training and common intelligence and that is integrity, i.e., singleness of purpose. The “single eye” that Christ said is the only means to enlightenment. In that sense the scientist is truly religious in spirit and it is only in that obedient, impersonal, selfless spirit that Truth, his objective, can be attained.”

Friday 4th October: New Times Dinner
Guest Speaker, Anne Bressington, MLC

Saturday 5th October National Seminar
“Down to Earth: an Orderly Approach to Truth”
Whether it is in the art of composting with organic matter, the rebuilding of our soils according to organic/biodynamic methods, to the rotten decomposing-politics of the UN Agenda 21, we are all seeking to deal with various aspects of Truth.

• Adam Voysey, Roseneath Organics, Mylor South Australia.
• Ann Bressington, MLC, South Australian Parliament
• Matthew Quinn, B. Sc. (Biological Studies) Churchill Fellowship 1997, Director SA Composters, Lonsdale South Australia.

Adam Voysey of Roseneath Organics: “Born Out of Personal Experiences”
Roseneath Organics combines modern peer reviewed medical research with old fashioned herbal folklore, as passed down to us over millennia by wise persons, sages and mystics. They are bio-organic growers and have a keen desire to promote the sustainable use of the sanctuary we all share.
A healing herbal philosophy was born out of a personal sickness, an eclectic blend of unpleasant doctor experiences, an urgent need to resolve personal health problems and the passion to make affordable all-natural products that really truly help. Adam originally attended Peter Bennett’s Organic Gardening Course.

Ann Bressington MLC will speak on: “The Growing Tentacles of Agenda 21: Are Coming to a Place Near You!”
Ann was elected to the Legislative Council of South Australia as an Independent Member on 18 March, 2006. She is the first female Independent to be elected in the history of that parliament.
Ann has done her homework on Agenda 21, which she first heard about in 2008, at first dismissing it as a ‘conspiracy theory’. Later she noticed a legislative pattern emerging with laws being created that were consistent with Agenda 21.
Ann noted: “Australia signed the Lima Agreement and 100s of other agreements with the support of all major political players, Whitlam, Fraser, Hawke, Keating, Hewson, Howard, Rudd, the Democrats, the Greens, and even the Nationals. It has been put to me that all of these treaties were the foundation for the roll out of Agenda 21.”

Matthew Quinn, B. Sc., on “Why Compost?”
After completing a Biology degree and an Organic Gardening course with well known organic gardener and author, Peter Bennett, Matt started SA Composters.
It started from his organic home garden, but soon demand for the high quality compost out-grew the backyard and after undertaking a Churchill Fellowship world tour where he studied composting operations in America, UK and New Zealand, SA Composters was born. SA Composters have been making quality compost since 1990.

Sunday 6th October 2013
Divine Service
Action Conference

Accommodation Addresses
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.

• St Francis Winery Motel at Reynella. Closer to Lothlorien than the others. Early bookings: at this stage, rooms can be booked on line for $90 for a standard room. Phone them for more options if desired 08 8322 2246.

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.

Election commentr authorised by Louis Cook National Director
Australian League of Rights 145 Russell Street Melbourne Vic 3000 

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