|Home||Blog||Freedom Potentials||The Cross Roads||Veritas Books|
|OnTarget Archives||Newtimes Survey||Podcast Library||Video Library||PDF Library|
|Actionist Corner||YouTube Video Channel||BitChute Video Channel||Brighteon Video Channel||Social Credit Library|
14 March 2014 Thought for the Week:
Dedication: To all men of good will, of all racial origins and of all religious faiths.
Knowledge is a collection of facts. Wisdom is the use of knowledge. Without facts there is no knowledge. Without knowledge there is no wisdom. Facts prevent what nothing can cure. Facts are Man’s best defence mechanism. Without them men stumble and fail. Without them nations decline and fall. Wisdom wins wars before they start. Knowledge aborts national hostilities. Wisdom obviates racial antipathies. Knowledge effaces religious animosities. Emancipation from bigotry prefaces peace. Intolerance takes all and gives nothing. Peace rewards reciprocal respect and regard. To all Men of Good-Will, “Pax Vobiscum!”*
The rise and fall of the Kazaar Kingdom between the 1st century B.C. and the 13th century A.D. is the “key” to the solution of the 20th (now 21st) century international problems inimical to the nation’s security.
COMPETING NATIONALISMS IN UKRAINE…
The Swede Fredrik Hagsbergs’ speech to the Ukrainian Revolution He calls for a genuine freedom for his people and those of Ukraine.
Kevin McDonald, Occidental Observer, 27 February 2014.
Indeed, the EU solution to the nationalism problem is the worst of all possible worlds, resulting not only in high levels of tension and strife that we already see within European societies, but in the long run in the obliteration of all traditional European national cultures. This is because EU policy favours highly fertile and aggressive, unassimilable religious and ethnic groups that will eventually make native Europeans a relatively powerless minority in areas they have controlled for thousands of years.
It is very difficult to see how a Ukrainian nationalist could be optimistic about the long-term effects of allying Ukraine with the EU. The very clear signs of discontent with the EU precisely because of the obliteration of national cultures, should be a clear sign to the anti-Russian Ukrainian nationalists that the EU is not the answer.
A better solution would be to break up states like Ukraine with large ethnic divisions into ethnically homogeneous societies, but to also develop a consensus that the territorial wars fueled by nationalism should be a thing of the European past. Europeans must find unity in the face of the massive invasions of non-Europeans that have occurred throughout the West. That may be a tall order, but the way of the EU with its present policies is suicide for all European peoples. Source: here...
AGENDA 21: THE PYRAMID OF POWER
by James Reed:
Agenda 21 was, on the face of it, concerned with the environmental crisis and the need for humanity to live within its means. There are high and noble thoughts in the 300-page, 40-chapter document but nowhere is there any attempt to control the real destroyers of the planet – the globalists themselves and financial capital.
There is no “Agenda 21” for community self-reliance and local banking. On the contrary, the blame for environmental degradation is placed firmly on the shoulders of individuals in the West. It is them and their property which allegedly needs regulation. As detailed in an excellent exposition of the agenda behind Agenda 21, Henry Lamb’s “Sustainable Development or Sustainable Freedom” (2010) shows that across the West sustainable development has not only been about grants, workshops and “visioning” processes at the local level, but also about directly overturning individual private property rights because the eco-globalists believe that private land ownership leads to environmental degradation – when of course, the opposite is true as lack of property rights leads to the famous “tragedy of the commons” problem.
The public control by globalist entities of land is the basis of Agenda 21. This is to be done, in the first instance by zoning and land-use planning and then by direct intervention, such as acquisition and compensated expropriation. Legal controls of various forms can be used. Those failing to conform will be fined and if necessary, have their properties confiscated and sold.
In the United States, Agenda 21-inspired laws have seen citizens hauled off to gaol for failing to water their lawns! One person mentioned in “Sustainable Development of Sustainable Freedom” was fined for failure of lawn watering and in a dispute with an official that ended in a shouting match, was charged with “third-degree terroristic threatening”.
Agenda 21 is part of the globalist policy of global government. In the economic sphere we already have the march of ‘free trade’ and open migration to break down national identity; global governance compliments this as seen with the various free trade agreements, such as the Trans Pacific Partnership. If governments control ecological resources such as water, first on pretence of protecting water resources, it is easy in the next step to give or sell those assets off to transnational corporations or Capitalism’s great friend, the Chinese government. It is important to join up the dots and see all of these developments as part of the drive to global domination, and the “pyramid of power” as Major C.H. Douglas entitled an essay in The English Review of 1919. The goal is nothing short of “a claim for the complete subjection of the individual to an objective which is externally imposed on him; which is not necessary or desirable that he should understand in full; and in the forging of a social, industrial and political organisation which will concentrate control of policy while making effective revolt completely impossible and leaving its originator in possession of supreme power”.
That is what we must oppose for the sake of all we hold dear.
TIME FOR REFERENDUM ON SECTION 18C OF THE RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT:
Australia’s “peak Jewish organisation”, the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council, has backed Australia’s race discrimination commissioner for the federal government not to repeal section 18C, the section responsible for Andrew Bolt’s offence, of the Racial Discrimination Act. (The Australian 4 March 2014, p.6) The commissioner believes that doing so may “unleash a darker, even violent, side of our humanity”. Along this line of thought the Act is necessary to “preserve multicultural harmony”, and protect the “vulnerable”.
This multicultural view contrasts with the position of civil libertarians who have argued in many articles published in The Australian that section 18C is an “unnecessary curb on free speech”. Here is a political stand-off as hard as it gets. So put it to a Referendum : in fact have a vote on a clause parallel to the American First Amendment. If the people vote against this then ban free speech : the people have spoken. But at least let’s decide this issue democratically for a change. If there is to be a vote on Aboriginal recognition, then let us first recognise (or reject) the right to free speech!
WHAT ARE SOME OF THE FACTS BEHIND RUSSIA AND UKRAINE TENSION?
The BBC News (4 March 2014) tells me “The Russian military says it has test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile, as tension continues over Ukraine's Crimea region. The planned test comes after the US accused Russia of deploying troops in Crimea in an "act of aggression".
Russian President Vladimir Putin denied doing so, but said he had not ruled out military action to protect Russians and Russian speakers in Ukraine. US Secretary of State John Kerry accused Russia of seeking to invade. The US is keen to label Russia's action an "invasion" but as yet no one has been shot by the troops, and it is still time for a war of words - on friend as well as foe, as it happens.”
In one hint of progress on Tuesday, Ukraine's new Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk said consultations had taken place between Russian and Ukrainian ministers. He described them as "quite sluggish" but "first steps". So we await further developments. But in the meantime the following reports should prove of great interest to our readers. Roi Tov, a former Christian Israeli military officer tells his story in such books as “The Cross of Bethlehem”. As Benjamin Freedman explained in his book “Facts are Facts” most modern-day Jewry hails from Eastern Europe – not the Middle East. In the light of this knowledge, the following report from Roi Tov’s website makes more sense.
ZION SPLITS UKRAINE
People from Odessa abounded in Tel Aviv. Not being Russians, they had a similar problem. Russian was their language and culture, but they were not part of Mother Russia. They were Ukrainians, and spoke Russian with the odd accent of Nikita Khrushchev. "He sounded like a British farmer reading French poetry," I was told by a Russian speaker. Stalingradians and Leningradians spoke with Ukrainians only in emergencies: "Don't try the hummus, it is swine food!"
Unable to accept the Middle East, Russians, Ukrainians and even Moldovans created a society within a society. Many thrived creating bridges between Soviets and Israelis. "Sliding-scale Translations; Long Words at Discount on Shabbat," they painfully wrote on pieces of paper with badly shaped Hebrew letters. Former Communists were lousy marketers and hated computers.
The bridges crossed borders. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Israel created extensive relations with some of the former Soviet republics. Azerbaijan is probably the most surprising one, but Russia is steadily becoming more important. Delegations moved back and forth between the Middle East and the Sovietistans. Translators become frequent flyers. Journalists toured and reported. Office of Interests were opened; travel agencies conquered hole-in-the-wall shops near them. People start living well from these businesses.
In other words, articles about Sovietistan in the Hebrew media were written by Israeli-Russian journalists. One will seldom find such an article quoting a Western source. Israel has people everywhere there. In the case that no Israelis were in Stalinistan, then the uncle of one of them was there for sure.
On February 2014, the war between Russia and Europe over the control of Ukraine reached a boiling point. The pro-Russian president escaped and now there is turmoil. On February 28, Russian forces appeared in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, a 1954 gift from Russia to Ukraine, in the days when both were united under the USSR. The Hebrew media followed the events closely. I vaguely followed the Hebrew media on the issue; Ukraine is not a core issue of the website. Thus, it was not until the conquest of Crimea by a Russia attempting to revive its 19th Century empire that I noticed an oddity. Instead of the usual "our correspondent in Stalinleninistan reports exclusively", this time most articles quoted a wide range of Western sources. It was an attempt to avoid drawing unnecessary attention. What is happening to Israeli and Jewish organizations in Ukraine? Are they pro-Russia or pro-Europe?
"Have you read the latest on Iran? Don't ask about Ukraine! The BBC had said everything that was needed to be said" was the attitude. In other words, "We are involved, do not spoil the party."
In the shifting geopolitics of this decade, Israel found itself struggling against sanctions imposed by the European Union on products from the West Bank.* Europe is the main market of Israeli exports. The annexation of Ukraine by the EU would mean a further weakening of the Israeli position. Not for the first time, Israel and Russia found themselves on the same side of a conflict. One of the oddest signs was the emphasis that was given to the claim that the forces in the Crimea did not belong to the Russian Army but were mercenaries of unclear allegiances. Did they mean that they were like the Syrian Free Army composed by Western et al. paid mercenaries? This was not explained, but it looks like a clear attempt to buy time for Russian authorities. "I can't comment now, I must check whom these mercenaries are being paid by".
Israel had collaborated with Russia in the Sochi Winter Games by providing the War Room controlling the theatre. Were the technologies passed by Israel used in the Crimea? Incredibly, Hebrew media were silent on these issues.
As Ben Judah wrote in his 2009 article for ISN Zurich, “Ukraine: The Rise of Yatsenyuk”:
What is most disturbing about the regime change that brought Yatsenyuk to power is that he seems to have been put in that position through the actions of Victoria Nuland, an official of the U.S. State Department who is married to Robert Kagan. The Kagan family, Lithuanian Jews of Khazar ancestry, seems to have a permanent fiefdom at the State Department. [Kagan and Kahn are Khazar names that derive from a title of imperial rank in the Mongolian and Turkic languages equal to the status of emperor and someone who rules a khaganate.]
Robert, Fred, and their father, Donald Kagan, were the founders of the Project for a New American Century, which aggressively pushed for war against Iraq during the Clinton and Bush administrations. Rather than being allowed to start new wars, the Kagans should be prosecuted for their roles in the conspiracy to wage a war of aggression against Iraq.
Paul Craig Roberts latest article "Russia Under Attack" is a well-informed piece about the Neo-con war against Russia and their dangerous strategy to Balkanize the states of the former Soviet Union, such as the Ukraine. The following is an extract from the beginning of the article:
The Russian government (and also the government of Ukraine) foolishly permitted large numbers of US funded NGOs to operate as Washington’s agents under cover of “human rights organizations,” “building democracy,” etc. The “pussy riot” event was an operation designed to put Putin and Russia in a bad light. (The women were useful dupes.) The Western media attacks on the Sochi Olympics are part of the ridiculing and demonizing of Putin and Russia. Washington is determined that Putin and Russia will not be permitted any appearance of success in any area, whether diplomacy, sports, or human rights.
The American media is a Ministry of Propaganda for the government and the corporations and helps Washington paint Russia in bad colours. Stephen F. Cohen accurately describes US media coverage of Russia as a “tsunami of shamefully unprofessional and politically inflammatory articles.”
Important books for further reading:
LETTER TO THE PRESS:
Letter to the Editor, The Australian:
Queensland academic James Allan, like IPA spokesman Simon Breheny, believes that there should be no legal sanctions against speech on race which offends, insults, humiliates, intimidates or incites hatred. In short, he believes in free speech on ethnic issues. Yet Spencer Zifcak, a supporter of political censorship ('Debate unites unlikely bedfellows', 28/2), calls Allan a 'free speech extremist'. What next? Are we to legislate against 'truth extremists'?
PILPUSIL LOGIC? LEFT–RIGHT TERMS USED TO VALIDATE DIALECTICS?
I do not like the use of the terms “Right” and “Left”. The terms tend to validate a Dialectic of Conflict, whereas C.H. Douglas in Social Credit philosophy sought a realistic integration of means and ends in the interests of balance. Human beings associate constructively to achieve beneficial ends for all participants and surely intelligent co-operation is more fruitful than association characterised by inherent conflict. As concerns the definition of “socialism” I think that it is fair and accurate to say that Social Credit involves the increasing “socialisation” of credit. But this is a very different socialisation than the usual concept of making individuals subservient to an abstraction called the “group” - exemplified or personified by the “State".
It involves, rather, the increased sharing of the unearned increment of association which derives increasingly from non-labour factors. There is a vast difference between a sharing society of this sort and one which is based upon confiscation and compulsion. Social Credit stands for the decentralisation of power through the socialisation of effective demand unlike the centralisation of power which accompanies “socialism” based upon labour relationships and State administration. Labels mean nothing unless they correspond with the actual contents of the bottle.
Socialist policy is founded essentially upon the labour theory of value and conforms to a rigid ideology that elevates the primacy of labour. That is, it is conducive to the Work State which is the logical and practical end of the slogan "From each according to his ability." Social Credit declares: "To each according to his ability AND the added Beneficence of God and Abundance of Nature which latter, through our growing efficiency in using scientifically the laws of nature, becomes enormously greater than the results achieved by mere human labour". To even imagine that human labour is the creator of all wealth reveals an indescribable arrogant conceit amounting to outright blasphemy. In secular terms it is plainly insane.
Social Credit policy would confer upon the individual economic independence. This is what the puritanical elements in society - those who would exercise the will-to-power over their fellows through forced obedience within the group context - fear and hate most of all. At base this is what underlies the typical hostility and antipathy towards Social Credit of that Puritanism which is the motivating inspiration behind socialism, communism, fascism and all movements which accept and promote power exercised over the individual, whether by an individual or through a collectivity. Essentially, we are referring here to exploitation of the "mob mentality". Douglas said that genuine democracy would maximize the ability and choice of the individual to contract out of association. This implies the desirability of limited government and is compatible with the importance accorded to the individual by Christian philosophy.
Major C. H. Douglas on the purpose of production and economics in general
THE TPP’s CORPORATE-FRIENDLY EUROPEAN COUNTERPART – THE TTIP
While the United States Trade Representative has been finishing up the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), an agreement that covers Pacific Rim economies, it has also been working on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), a new trade pact with the European Union. Both agreements are favourable to corporations, but while increasing awareness of the TPP has generated public backlash, work on the TTIP has gone more under the radar. On December 16, negotiators met in Washington for the third round of TTIP talks, against a fragile backdrop of both a mini-rebellion in Congress against fast-tracking the TPP, and continuing revelations of U.S. spying habits worldwide.
Advocates of the TIPP argue that the goal of the agreement is what they call “regulatory harmonization,” echoing similar calls from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The idea is to standardize U.S. and European regulations on a variety of matters including finance, the environment, labour, and online data protection. Critics worry the final agreement could result in the most lax, corporate-friendly regulations for all countries involved. One potential provision is the EU’s desire for a “Regulatory Cooperation Council” that would be tasked with evaluating existing regulations and coordinating future rules. Another potential provision is the so-called “investor-state dispute settlement,” which would allow corporations to sue governments without being bound by domestic laws.
The agreement remains largely a secret, and the USTR’s Dan Mullaney has expressed the belief that negotiators need private space to negotiate in the national interest. A session of “stakeholder presentations” were held at George Washington University to provide negotiators with outside feedback, but on both sides of the Atlantic the stakeholders were overwhelmingly representative of business interests. The TTIP’s future is still uncertain, and will likely depend on the actions of Congress.
Source: Cole Stangler, “The Next Corporate-Friendly Trade Pact,” In These Times, December 30, 2013. Student Researcher: Noah Tenney (Sonoma State University) Faculty Evaluator: Peter Phillips (Sonoma State University)
IMMIGRATION AND THE PLANNED DESTRUCTION OF AUSTRALIA
by Peter Ewer.
Whites will cease to be a majority by about 2030. Australia will be majority Asian by about 2050, mostly Chinese. By that time all we will know of Traditional culture will be gone – maybe even the name of the country. But I expect that the onslaught of a doubling of Melbourne’s population to 8.5 million by 2060 will kill that city. The collapse of the “Australian” environment in great waves of pollution will finish off this land leading to an environment not unlike a Mad Max movie. Surely this, not economics, should be our number one concern. How could even alternative economics survive this Camp of the Saints scenario?
THE SWISS SHOW HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE ON ANTI-IMMIGRATION VOTE
by James Reed:
The EU bureaucrats are planning severe consequences for any nation in the EU standing up against the present immigration invasion. Switzerland is wisely outside the EU, so there is a need now for a EU country to stand up to the globalist tyrants.
ANCIENT GENETICS AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
by Brian Simpson
University of Adelaide evolutionist Alan Cooper is quoted in The Australian (5 December 2014 p.3) as saying that “It looks like frequent hybridisation has been a major part of our background”, and racial supremists beware: “It shows that we are all mongrels. Ironically, the Africans seem to be the purest bunch around. They don’t have all these other groups mixed in with them”.
There is a big logical jump here from mixed groups to racial superiority. We simply don’t know what capacities such as with respect to intelligence, these groups had relative to the Africans. Further “hybridisation” and “purity” are of course highly relative over such long time frames and thus not relevant to contemporary race issues. Cromagnon man had a larger cranial capacity than contemporary humans and was probably more intelligent. The Neanderthals were physically superior to modern humans. Evolution thus shows the opposite of Cooper’s evolutionary liberalism
RETHINKING THE CHINA CARGO CULT
by James Reed:
This simple point takes us far, I believe. There is not justification for the Asianisation of Australia merely for our “economic future”. If our resources are of value, then if China or other Asian countries want them, trade will occur. Likewise if you have money, you can buy, say a bottle of drink, from anyone, without having to sell your soul to win him/her over. Capitalism, after all was supposed to be beyond race. Hence the Asianisation policy, as I see it, cannot be justified by mere economic criteria and must therefore be a matter of ideology and psycho-political warfare.
CHINA IS BUYING THE WORLD
by Brian Simpson Peter Nolan in “Is China Buying the World?” (Polity Press, 2012) puts the case contrary to the view held by the majority of writers at this site, China is not, at least not yet, buying and owning the world. His case is based on a great roll of facts, such as that China has no firms in the top 100 list and only nine firms in the top 400; that Chinese firma appear as only wholesalers in the West and that its labour-intensive manufacturing can be replicated in other countries such as Brazil.
All this is true but these facts are quite consistent with the “China will rule the world thesis” of Martin Jacques in “When China Rules the World: The End of the Western World and the Birth of a New Global Order” (Penguin, 2012). The real issue in this debate relates to the decline of the West thesis. This is determined by default simply by staying afloat as the West sinks. This is determined not be standard economic arguments but by consideration of the state of health of civilisations. The evidence that the West is facing a terminal illness is strong however much simplistic one-issue folk may deny this. The West could prove too weak to endure a fist fight with China.
In 2008 the US National Intelligence Council recognised that US power was in decline as China’s was rising. Standard economic indicates confirm this; China is projected to be a world leader in military technology by 2030 and will not have liberal qualms about using its might. Consequently those who see an emerging “China threat” are right. The difficulty is that our current economic pathway serves only to feed the dragon and prepare future generations for their “wake in fright”.
CANADA AND IMMIGRATION: TIDAL WAVE KEEPS MIDDLE CLASS POOR
From Paul Fromm, Director Canada First Immigration Reform Committee.
A Canadian Press article (February 24, 2014), entitled "Canada's Middle Class In Bad Shape, Internal Government Report Reveals" explains the problem further: "Canada's troubled middle class is holding back economic recovery because families are so cash-strapped, suggest federal bureaucrats who cite the work of a maverick American economist. An internal government analysis, which has stirred debate about what political party best champions the middle class, approvingly cites the work of Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist who argues that 'inequality is holding back the economic recovery. The hollowing out of the middle class means that they are unable to invest in their future, by educating themselves and their children by starting or improving businesses,' it adds, citing another of Stiglitz's arguments, referring to the U.S economy.
And a middle class with weak income does not deliver the taxes governments need to improve infrastructure, education, health and research, another borrowing from Stiglitz".
The National Post (July 9, 2013) recently sounded much the same theme: "Real after-tax income of middle-class families (the middle one-fifth of families) in Canada grew by only seven per cent between 1976 and 2010 — or 0.2 per cent per year — according to the report, with the average family income (after taxes and transfers) totalling $49,700 in 2010 for the middle-income families.
Seven percent over 35 years can hardly be referred to as progress. It compares especially poorly when held up against gains made at other income levels: The top 20 per cent saw real income rise by more than a quarter; while the next 20 per cent saw a 14 per cent increase. At lower income levels, tax breaks and other programs produced income increases of between nine and 16 percent.
But for those stuck between the top and the bottom — pretty much nothing. Wages have been particularly stagnant for men in the middle bracket; according to the report, the chief means of escape from the becalmed middle has come from more women joining the work force. That suggests that if you want to get ahead in Canada, forget about your pay keeping up with other costs: have a smaller family in which everyone works, even if they’re working for meagre or eroding wages".
What an insulting conclusion -- have a smaller family where everyone works, even at low paying jobs! Then, of course, the politicians will insist we need more immigrants to make up for the low Canadian birthrate -- low, because they are poor and losing ground financially! So, if wages are static and not keeping up with rising costs, how, just how, will continuing to bring in large numbers of immigrants (265,000) plus hundreds of thousands of foreigners on Temporary Workers' Permits help the job situation? Mass immigration keeps unemployment high. With high unemployment, the law of supply and demand dictates that wages remain low or at best, rise slowly. Unemployment is 7%, officially, and, according to the recent budget, will remain high…”
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|