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

8 March 2013 Thought for the Week:

Atonement: "Running through all history like the thread of Ariadne, it is possible to trace a continuous policy which I can only describe as a divorce between things themselves and the description of them.... At this very period at which we live, it is probable that one of the fundamental struggles which is taking place, and one on which the future of civilisation depends perhaps more than on any other, is the attempt to obtain an atonement, or as it has been pronounced, an at-one-ment, between reality and the description of it.
It is the importance of that attempt which justifies the work, which is being done by the Social Credit movement, which might be properly described as a movement for honesty in public life. It is elemental that no progress towards a sane world is possible while its malaise is subject to persistent misdirection."
- - C.H. Douglas, 18 March,1933 reprinted in The New Times Vol.51 No1, January 1987

Too Big to Fail has become Too Big to Trial
Elizabeth Warren cuts to the chase. She wants to know why Big Banks go free when they break the law. Banks commit major crimes with impunity while average citizens have their lives wrecked over trivia. See why the Wall Street jackals spent millions to try to shut this woman up. They failed. Now she's a US Senator... Or go to here


Is Douglas’ Financial Analysis Gaining Ground? asks Wallace Klinck:
Responding to the news of the Chairman of Britain's Financial Services Authority, Adair Turner posing the question “How do we get out of this mess?” Wallace Klinck continued:
“Are we approaching that critical moment when the march of labour-displacing technology is pressuring the viability of the existing defective financial system to the point of breakdown - as Douglas predicted so presciently would happen? We Social Crediters must rise to this historic opportunity and step up our promotional efforts, educational and practical, as never before!”

“While Lord Turner is certainly correct about excessive debt accumulation and a shortage of effective income able to liquidate it, he obviously does not understand the nature of real cost as Douglas revealed it to be. Also, he seems to confine his discussion to monetary theory and does not enter into a discussion of real (cost) as opposed to financial cost and of realistic national cost accountancy. Nevertheless his advocacy of "free money to the people" is definitely a constructive progression of thought, insofar as it goes.”

Lord Adair Turner, Chairman of Britain's Financial Services Authority has issued a 70-page paper (https://www.fsa.gov.uk/library/communication/speeches/2013/0206-at) “apparently admitting the inadequacy of current financial policies such as low interest rates and "quantitative easing" advanced to financial institutions, in dealing with our financial and economic problems--and is apparently advocating the distribution of free money to the people at large!!” wrote Wallace.

“This would appear to be a significant recognition, if not complete, of the Social Credit analysis by the late C. H. Douglas of an inherent and increasing deficiency of effective, cost-liquidating, consumer demand in the modern economy wherein labour is being increasingly displaced as a factor of production by advances in technology.”

In his capacity as FSA Chairman and visiting professor, Adair gave his annual address to the Cass Business School with this year’s topic being “Debt, Money and Mephistopheles: How do we get out of this mess?”
The entire speech and the attached slideshow found here:

Reuters reported the news thus
“A Breakthrough Speech on Monetary Policy”.

Smear by Association: Wallace Klinck continued...
“This proposal by Lord Turner has predictably agitated the Libertarian-von Mises-Gary North elements and they are attacking the idea in their usual way by promoting a market economy based upon gold and silver and using the rather Marxist "amalgam" technique of trying to associate essentially all other schools of monetary "reform" and branding them as totalitarian under the fascist label”.

The Daily Bell - Shock: Powerful British Money Man Calls for Central ...

Bryan Monahan’s “Introduction to Social Credit” found here. Plus further reading https://www.scribd.com/doc/114593844/Money-in-Industry

John Fitzgerald’s “The Physical Basis of Leisure” here…


An anonymous US banker who studied the writings of Clifford Hugh Douglas asked that question. When did he ask it? Well, he asked about the conundrum in 1935! He was questioning why the people were starving in the midst of plenty in the 1930s. He wrote:

• Why are millions of men unemployed while thousands of factories stand idle?
• Why are we literally starving to death while standing in wheat up to our knees?

"Over-production" say the experts, and we see the paradox of destroying and limiting the production of wealth in order to create more wealth. If over-production is the cause of "poverty in the midst of plenty" it means that we can't eat bread because we grow too much wheat and must go barefoot because we produce too many shoes. It would be ludicrous, if it was not tragic!
But let's add the word "money." Then we have this:
"We have no money because we have no jobs. We have no jobs because there is no demand for our product. There is no demand for the product because we have no money to buy it. And we have no money because we have no jobs."

It's a nice squirrel cage to be in, but nobody can deny that it is a fact! Being a fact, the obvious thing to do would be to make more money and put it into circulation in some way, say thru a National Dividend…."

Sounds so familiar doesn’t it? But it is not 1935, this is now 2013, 75 years later and still the bankers and their minions, the politicians, have not let go control of the peoples’ financial system.
In Australia’s case, as Jeremy Lee related in his 2008 paper, “Debt Driven Globalism”
The Great Depression. It only remains to say that the Depression disappeared in three days, once unlimited finance was made available for war!

The Subtle New Idea: As the post-war period of peace occurred a new change overtook the Labor Party. Ben Chifley was the last genuine working Prime Minister. By the time Whitlam came to power in 1972 the Fabian dream of internationalism as outlined by Marx’s Socialist International took hold. The remnants of the traditional working-man’s Labor Party were steadily weeded out.
By the time Hawke, and then Keating came to power the Fabian takeover was all but complete. Keating himself sold the Commonwealth Bank which Old Labor had striven so hard to establish. Its biggest single shareholders – as with the other three of the Big Four – are Listed nominees of New York.
Australia’s financial policies were shaped far away, in the lavish halls of the International Monetary Fund and the OECD.
The creation of credit became a private banking monopoly.
Only the growth of marvellous technical, industrial and electronic innovation held at bay the final onslaught of ‘debt slavery’. It has now caught up with a vengeance.”

It sure has Jeremy! ** “The Money Trick” is worth reading: $10.00 + postage from the Heritage Bookshop Services.


Technological progress is now eating up the better jobs, too:
Robert Sidelsky, professor of political economy at the UK Warwick University writes: "Sooner or later, we will run out of jobs – so, what are people to do if machines can do all (or most of) their work? "

He continues: "What impact will automation – the so-called "rise of the robots" – have on wages and employment over the coming decades? Nowadays, this question crops up whenever unemployment rises. In the early nineteenth century, David Ricardo considered the possibility that machines would replace labour; Karl Marx followed him.

Around the same time, the Luddites smashed the textile machinery that they saw as taking their jobs. Then the fear of machines died away…" Further reading …  


Frances Hutchinson, Chair of the Social Credit Secretariat and an economist in her own right, has put together a series of MP3 talks plus a series of notes for you, the layman, to grasp where we are in today’s world, how it all came about – and what is to be done about it.

Frances begins the Introduction to Home Economics with:
If the present generation of toddlers is to have a hope in hell’s chance of living out their lives in a habitable world, some revolutionary thinking needs to be done about the financial economy, the cultural framework through which it operates and the whole question of policy formation in the new post-modern era.
It is sheer madness to continue to allow ourselves to be restrained by a financial economy which takes no account of the intolerable strains it imposes upon the real economy. In truth, the natural world, which supplies all our physical needs, and our home communities, which supply all our social needs, combine to form the real economy. Yet, instead of saying, “That’s a good idea! This project is vitally necessary to us, and we have the skills, the knowledge and the resources to put it into action. So let’s get on with it!” - we say, “That’s a good idea, but who’s going to pay for it?

During the twentieth century, powerful vested interests have ensured that for the mass of the people education has been very largely reduced to the technical skills training necessary to keep the military-industrial show on the road. The financial system determines all public policy formation. And that policy is designed to fit people into the centrally-controlled institutions of government and bureaucracy which serve the global corporate system. Consequently, the entire social order - the cultural, political, economic and educational institutions – are constrained by a financial system that is beyond comprehension or control.
Where finance dictates social policy, the needs of the earth and its people are ignored. Beauty, harmony and wholesome living evaporate into thin air. Inevitably, as night follows day, wars, poverty, disease and degradation abound.
Humanity now faces the difficult transition from a society mastered by the demands of the Machine Age, to a society governed by human beings in tune with their earthly surroundings and aware of their cultural heritage. For that transition to take place, it is essential to break the cycle of feeding children into the workaday world, and spewing them out as retired, redundant or sick…." (emphasis added…ed)

Frances went on to produce an MP3 series of talks on The New Home Economics.
All can be downloaded from the ALOR Blog

Titles include:

• The Flat Earth Economics of the Circular Flow
• Your Money or Your Life • Galileo and Flat Earth Economics
• An African Education
• The New Home Economics
• Institutions
• The Theory of the Leisure Class
• The Wages System

CD -“The New Home Economics” CD can be purchased from Heritage Bookshop Services. Ring Doug and Jean Holmes about it. Ph.08 8396 1245  


by Peter Ewer
Dutch MP Geert Wilders has been on his speaking tour of Australia, and even publicised an article “Islamification of Western Societies Threatens Everyone’s Freedoms”, The Australian 18 February 2013, p.12). Here is a sample from his article: “I used to live in the Kaneleneiland district of Utrecht. During my years there, the district was transformed into a dangerous neighbourhood for non-Muslims. I have been robbed. On several occasions I had to run for safety. The same transformation happened in several cities in the Netherlands and other European countries where Islam settled. Europe is going through an Islamification process, which makes our continent less free and safe.”

Of course Wilders distinguishes between Islam as a “totalitarian political ideology” and Muslims, for “Most Muslims are moderate” but Islam itself is not moderate” he says. No mention of immigration.
How exactly does Wilders, who is essentially a liberal, and far from being “Far Right”, make this distinction in practice? Is the rise in crime that he mentions – and he could also have used the example of drive-by shootings in western Sydney - a product of what he depicts as a “totalitarian political ideology”? I doubt it: the crimes are actions of people, not ideas. Whatever one thinks of Islam, the system does not accept robbery of people.

So why was Wilders robbed and threatened? The politico-intellectual class (‘new class’) generally do not see any historical racial aspect to liberal democracy: it is just an accident that it arose in Western Europe. They believe that all peoples will come to accept the wisdom of liberal democracy in a capitalist, multicultural, consumer society. Thus the Editorial of The Australian 20 February 2013, p.13 says that “our non-discriminating immigration policy and the continuation of our largely harmonious multi-ethnic society – one of the most diverse in the world – depends on a tolerance for this diversity and a commitment to Australian values.”

On the contrary, “Australian values” are undermined by the creation of this ethnic diversity by undemocratic immigration and socio-racial engineering programmes that have never been voted on, but opposed since 1947. Our immigration policy is discriminatory, deliberately geared to bring in Asians (even from traditional sources such as Britain). The demographic profile of a country cannot be altered so quickly without such a discriminatory policy. Otherwise, what sense can be made of the elite’s talk of the “Asianisation of Australia”?

Those elites who think that this project will work are mistaken: we may be ‘qualitatively’ diverse, but this to date has only been because lots of small groups are here. When the Anglo Saxon majority becomes a minority, as has been seen in the parallel of the United States, “Australian” values, if not Western values, will also disappear. But then, none dare call this... conspiracy.  


by Peter Ewer
President Robert Mugabe has banned the use of radios in Zimbabwe. Police are busy, busy, busy hunting for “communication devices”, wicked machines that were “meant to sow seeds of discontent within the country”. Worse yet, radios communicated “hate speech”. The “hate speech” is broadcasts from overseas, but also short-wave broadcasts by the opposition movement.

Yes, from Rhodesia the prosperous, to Zimbabwe the black dictatorship. My, how the white liberals in the West must be happy with what they have done in bringing Rhodesia down. I can’t for the life of me figure out why these liberals are not living in Zimbabwe or the new South Africa. Could it be that they hope to transform the West into these advanced utopias?  


In the New Times, Vol56, No2, February 1992, Eric Butler wrote of “The Islamic Factor in the World Struggle”.

“Some years ago at an international conference in Washington, D.C., I was having a friendly argument with a junior member of the Saudi Arabian Royal family. He was strongly anti-South Africa, claiming that Blacks were discriminated against because they did not have a vote.
When asked if women had a vote in Saudi Arabia, he said that such a policy was contrary to his people's culture. Courtesy prevented me from observing that not even men have a vote in his country.

We moved on to other matters, including the critical state of the world. My Moslem friend then said something I have never forgotten: "Although there was violent conflict between the Moslem and Christian worlds in the past, at least we of the Islamic world respected you. You stood firmly for something. But what does the Christian West stand for today?" A very telling question in view of the present plight of what was once called the Christian West.”  


by Ian Wilson LL.B.
The proposed “unified” anti-discrimination laws continue to be moulded and to evolve under the new Attorney General. While a small concession has been made in the dropping of the “offended” criterion, the legislation will still claim the reversal of the onus of proof. As well, religious organisations will lose key exemptions when they are involved in service delivery to the general public.
It is not exactly clear yet how far this social engineering will go especially when “intersex” is now being listed as another “protected attribute”, along with “domestic violence” and “irrelevant criminal record”.

Essentially this law is the Labor Party’s politically correct bill of rights, or as I prefer, “bill of wrongs”. It is part of a larger agenda, as seen with the Constitutional change proposal to recognise Aborigines for, well, whatever it is they are supposed to be recognised for. (Accounts vary: “First people”, “First Australians”, etc.)

We need to see all of this as part of a general “cultural war” and oppose it rigorously. How? At least start at grassroots level, talking to family and friends. Get the chain of resistance going.  


by James Reed
It’s early days yet. But the war is beginning. The US has declared “war” on Chinese hacking as part of its cyber espionage strategy. One of China’s goals is to gain trade secrets from governments and corporations. (The Australian 22 February 2013, p.12) Corporation systems are hacked in the search for commercially-useful material, and government systems are hacked for intelligence-information and weapons information.

China denies that that it is launching any such attacks and says that it is the US who is attacking China’s IT infrastructure. (The Australian 12 February, 2013, p.21)
Expect more of the same as a prelude to the inevitable US versus China war in a few years time (which I call World War V, with World War III being the Cold War and World War IV the war on “terror”. I was interested to see Roy Medcalf (“Asian Century is Marked by Rising Conflict”, The Australian 18 February, 2013, p.9) take issue with the optimism of the Government’s Asian Century paper, and point out the obvious, that China and Japan are “edging to the brink of war.”

Conflict between China and both Vietnam and The Philippines could also draw the US into a war with China. As I see it, the Asian Century could fast go up in smoke, as will we, being “a part of Asia”.  


by Brian Simpson
You don’t need a crystal ball to see Julia Gillard’s fate. Even Labor followers are talking about an annihilation at the polls, maybe worse than the one that ended the arrogant Keating Labor regime. At the end of that regime, people could not stand what they were doing, and slaughtered them on election day.

Gillard hasn’t openly carried on a version of the cultural wars as we found pre-1996, with an open attack upon the British heritage of Australia; her onslaught has been more subtle and consists in measures such as the Constitutional change for Aboriginal recognition (an Australian bill of rights, I believe) and the new one-Stop-shop anti-discrimination law) a comprehensive bill of rights for new class values and the end of freedom of speech).

Waiting to return is Rudd – remember him? It is a toss-up whether he is worse than Gillard, but really the names don’t matter and nor do the individuals in this system where structuralism rules. My guess is Rudd will be returned as “leader” just before the election, as a circuit breaker. Tony Rabbit may not be able to cope. Then, probably, another hung parliament. (No, this doesn’t mean that parliamentarians will be hung!)  


by Peter West
Well, they have done it. Britain now has gay marriage after British MPs voted 400 to 175 for it. For David Cameron this would make Britain “stronger” and was “an important step forward for our country”.
But 60 per cent of his own MPs did not agree with the ever-politically correct Cameron and many felt that the move would cost him the 2015 election.
Cameron had pleaded with the Tories, telling them that the Party would look “out of touch” if the moves were rejected. It was another equality question.

Thankfully the vote has caused deep divisions in the Tories’ camp and may be the beginning of the end for Cameron, yet another disastrous politician. Britain is an experiment which is just a few years down the track from us, and the New World Order hasn’t forgotten us here in Australia and will be working us over in the near future.  


We know that the many League supporters, and freedom lovers generally around the world, who knew of, or who met Doug Christie, would want to know. We received the following email from Canadian Paul Fromm:
“The Battling Barrister, my dear friend and ally and sometime attorney, of 32 years has been battling prostate cancer for several years. He now has been advised that he has advanced liver cancer and has been given six months. He has suspended his legal practice.

Paul Fromm continues:
For now I would ask everyone concerned to please lend their moral and spiritual support to Doug and his family in whatever way you can....

Keltie Zubko, Doug Christie's wife and mother of his children, has sent out a message which included the following:
I am infinitely grateful for the people who have seen who he really is, and cared enough to communicate this to him, reminding him that he has not been alone in these terrible struggles.
I hope that those of you who feel inclined to do so, will send him a little message of what is in your heart and mind for him.
You can email me in reply to this letter, or send messages to Box 101, 255 Menzies Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3G6.
Emails would be better as they will get here faster.

His email address is dougchristie@shaw.ca and he can get them on his cellphone, which he has with him in the hospital while they do more tests and try to get his pain and nausea under control before he can, we hope, come home.

He does not have the stamina right now for visitors or many phone calls. For quite a few years now, I’ve been trying to get him to at least start on his memoirs, and I want to tell you that he’s left a body of writing that I will be able to work with so that his courageous story will be told.

Thanks again for the loving kindness of you, our friends near and far. You have supported the principles of freedom for many years, through all these struggles and we are deeply grateful for you. - - signed: Keltie Zubko  Email address: kzubko@shaw.ca

On behalf of all League supporters our national director Louis Cook sent the following message:
Dear Douglas,
It is with a great deal of sadness that I read the message from Keltie Zubko received this morning describing your illness.
I well remember your visit to Australia as a guest of the Australian League of Rights - quite a few years ago now - when Eric Butler was National Director and I a neophyte of the League.
It is difficult to put my feelings into words for whatever comes to mind sounds 'soppy' (to quote the 'poms').
You have held high the 'Torch of Freedom and Truth' and I can assure you it has reflected brightly in Australia as we have shared your adventures in the courts and through your delightful occasional newsletters that were always a joy to read.
Speaking on behalf of supporters of the Australian League of Rights, I convey our sincerest Love and good wishes to you at this time.
Kind regards,
Louis Cook
National Director, Australian League of Rights


Indeed, the WBCSD’s website is rather candid about its aims and its “One World vision,” explicitly touting the UN Agenda 21 and its radical plan for transforming human civilization. “The One World vision is the ultimate stage of a conceptual evolution that started decades ago,” the council notes on its site. “This evolution produced several paradigm shifts that combine how we comprehend our world, and, as a result, how we try to deal with it.”

“GMO Giant Monsanto Joins Big Business Coalition for UN Agenda 2”, by Alex Newman
Corporate giant Monsanto, known for its controversial business model, lobbying, and its widely criticized genetically modified organisms (GMOs), has officially joined the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, a group of powerful interests including major banks and Big Oil backing the United Nations “Agenda 21” scheme for so-called “sustainable development.”
Critics, however, expressed alarm over the announcement, saying the global “sustainability” push is really a transparent plot to centralize power in the UN and enrich special interests at the expense of private property rights, national sovereignty, and individual liberty.

Despite the widespread suspicion and criticism plaguing both Monsanto and the global Big Business alliance pushing the UN’s Agenda 21, the company and the coalition celebrated the move in a recent press release. According to the announcement late last month, (January 2013 …ed) the biotech behemoth will be rolling out a “sustainability” course for its employees all over the world. Chairman and CEO Hugh Grant will represent the GMO company as a “Council Member” in the global “sustainable development” coalition.

Even though Monsanto has become probably one of the most controversial companies in the world, it is extraordinarily well connected in the halls of power, and the global business alliance for “sustainable development” celebrated the firm’s decision to sign up. “In joining the WBCSD, Monsanto is taking an important step along a continuum towards developing a more sustainable agriculture system — one that improves our daily lives, respects our global environment and recognizes the importance of the world’s small-holder farmers,” claimed council President Peter Bakker in a statement posted on the group’s website. Farming and global agriculture must change, the WBCSD continued. “We must find new ways to protect soils, enhance ecosystems and optimize land use in ways that are environmentally sound,” Bakker added in the press release. “And we must move towards a future vision for agriculture where absolutes become as out of place as a one-size-fits-all approach to farming.”

Meanwhile, even as opposition to the UN’s vision of so-called “sustainable development” continues to surge worldwide, the controversial biotech giant also publicly celebrated its decision to join forces with Big Business “sustainability” proponents. The press release publicly announcing the move claimed that a growing population would put a strain on natural resources and that “new agriculture systems” would be needed for “sustainability” purposes.

“At Monsanto, our company vision for sustainable agriculture strives to contribute to meeting the needs of the growing population, to protect and preserve natural resources, and to help improve lives,” said Jerry Steiner, the biotech firm’s executive vice president for sustainability and corporate affairs. “We are excited to join the WBCSD and connect with a global coalition of more than 200 companies that advocate for progress on sustainable development.”

Frankenfood Products: Monsanto, of course, has come under heavy criticism recently — particularly last year when a French university study found that its genetically engineered “frankenfood” products were associated with serious health concerns such as cancer. In the wake of the explosive research findings, which the company itself criticized as flawed, the Russian government actually banned the import or sale of Monsanto’s NK603 genetically engineered corn. European authorities considered similar measures as well.

Also widely criticized is the corporate giant’s business model itself — patenting genetically engineered DNA and using the force of government to protect what it calls its “intellectual property,” even when that DNA ends up contaminating an unwitting farmer’s crops. The U.S. government, in particular, is filled with former high-ranking Monsanto figures, and it plays a key role in pushing the firm’s dubious products worldwide. When governments or scientists express concerns about the health or economic impacts of GMOs, official documents have revealed, American authorities stand ready to exert overwhelming pressure to crush any resistance.

Aside from the numerous controversies surrounding genetically engineered food and Monsanto in particular, the whole concept of “sustainability” has also attracted a firestorm of criticism and outrage. Still, key members of the so-called global “establishment” — the UN, Big Business, taxpayer-funded “non-governmental organizations” (NGOs), the Obama administration, the mega-wealthy, among other powerful forces — have been promoting what they misleadingly tout as “sustainable development” for decades.

The ultimate UN plan, known as “Agenda 21,” was outlined and agreed to by national governments and dictatorships worldwide at a 1992 UN summit in Rio de Janeiro. “Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts (sic) on the environment,” the UN admits on its website, sparking suspicions from analysts who point out that virtually every aspect of human existence has some “impact” on the “environment.”

In essence, under the guise of environmentalism and, more recently, alleviating poverty, the global scheme calls for reducing consumption, further empowering the UN and national governments, more central planning in the economy, a gradual erosion of private property rights, and much more. The global entity’s own documents, as The New American has documented extensively, reveal the scope of the plan. Indeed, in recent years, the UN has become increasingly candid in discussing its goals, saying last year that even human thought would be targeted under the radical agenda.

While the U.S. Senate never ratified the UN scheme, both Democrat and Republican administrations, working with state and local officials, have been busy implementing it across the United States for decades. Using grants and federal pressure, presidents from George H.W. Bush, who originally signed on to Agenda 21, to Obama most recently, have been busy pushing and implementing the controversial UN plan within America. However, as public awareness of the plan has grown in recent years, opposition to the whole scheme has been steadily increasing as well.

Numerous states and local governments, for example, have adopted bi-partisan resolutions condemning UN Agenda 21 as a “socialist” and “communist” plot completely at odds with the U.S. Constitution, American traditions of self-government, and even fundamental liberties. That trend of resistance is accelerating. As The New American reported in June of 2012, Alabama became the first state to officially and completely ban the dangerous UN plan in an effort to protect private property and due process, with the bill passing unanimously in both chambers of the legislature before being signed into law by Gov. Robert Bentley.

Other states are also working on similar laws as opposition to the controversial global agenda surges nationwide — especially at the grassroots level. The Republican National Committee (RNC) and numerous state Republican parties, meanwhile, have also urged GOP officials at all levels of government to battle the UN scheme. More than a few Democrats have also urged opposition to the global plan.

And across America, local government meetings have been increasingly swamped by concerned citizens demanding an end to their elected officials’ cooperation with the agenda and its myriad tentacles — especially ICLEI, a Germany-based, UN-backed organization working to implement the plan formerly known as the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives. Monsanto joins a wide range of other international mega-corporations as part of the global “sustainability” alliance for businesses that includes Big Banks, Big Oil, Big Pharma, and more.
Some prominent examples include Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, Chevron, Petrobras, Shell, Novartis, and Coca Cola. Hundreds of other major corporate players are members as well.

As The New American reported last year from the most recent UN Conference on Sustainable Development, known as “Rio+20,” the global alliance pushing Agenda 21 is wide-ranging. Ruthless dictatorships — a top Chinese Communist Party official chaired the whole UN summit, for instance — have joined forces with Big Business, NGO front groups for the establishment, and powerful interests worldwide in the quest for global government. “Sustainability” is simply the buzzword used to conceal the increasingly transparent real agenda.

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is currently based in Europe. For complete article:

Agenda 21 is based on the principle that government is the maker of rights
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.

During the year National Director Lou Cook presented two papers outlining just what Agenda 21 means
His presentations have been 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.

Booklet: “Confronting Earth Summit: Agenda 21” - The United Nations Programme of Action from RIO. $5.00 posted from League book services.

Listen to South Australian parliamentarian outlining just what Agenda 21 means for communities world-wide. 
Anne Bressington and Agenda 21:

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