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

19 September 2014 Thought for the Week:
“The policy of America, as proved by deeds, is not an American policy. It is that of the force, masquerading as “liberalism”, which has infested and infected every government of “the free world”. By penetration it has gained control of all means of public persuasion and the public masses are today, in fact, hypnotized by it: glued to their newspapers, radio and television, a wall has been put between them and truth. The general multitude has been reduced to that state of bewilderment and confusion which in the Liberal plan of action is the essential pre-condition for a final bid to clamp down World Government. In this situation American State actions (as distinct from proclaimed “policy”) are as a high voltage cable severed and thrashing destructively about in the world…”
Douglas Reed in “The Battle for Rhodesia” 1966
Comment: First it was Rhodesia, then South Africa went next. Well, Eric D. Butler did warn us it was our (Australia’s) turn next!


Berlin / Damascus / Moscow (Own report) - The director of Catholic Relief and Works Agency Caritas Lebanon sharply criticizes the West's Syria policy. It is high time for the West, together with its middle eastern allies, to stop supplying the rebels in Syria with weapons of war, declared the Lebanese Caritas director Paul Karam. In addition, they must ensure that citizens of European countries are not constantly joining the Salafist terrorist militias in Syria - at the expense of the stricken civilian population. Insight into why the West sticks to its efforts to oust Assad, despite growing demands to put an end to the terrorist regime of the "Islamic State" as quickly as possible, is provided by the foreign policy expert Dmitri Trenin of the Moscow Carnegie Centre. Trenin says Russia has succeeded in the course of the Syrian war in dealing the West sensitive blows to its political power. The West, in turn, is doing everything it can to destroy Russia's Middle Eastern influence in Syria. In fact, in Germany the demand for Western military intervention in Syria is gathering momentum.

Syria: War of Deception. Ken O'Keefe on the Syrian conflict: Hard truths, 11 January, 2014. This is an edited version of a debate between Ex Marine/Activist Kenneth O'Keefe and Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress shown on Press TV of Iran.

Ken O'Keefe

“Look at Iraq, we invaded their country, destroyed it, created millions of refugees and never so much as apologised for that… We have destroyed so many countries. We have tortured and killed and maimed and raped around this planet – who the hell in their right mind would consider the United States, or the West in general, to be in a position to punish anybody...”

The video has been edited, writes WWW.PRESSTV.COM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st05PWCypLQ


by Richard Miller
Tony Abbott is going on tour! No, he is not going to sing Rolling Stones’ songs or even Bobby (“Zimmerman”) Dylan songs. No, he “will begin a week-long trip to Arnhem Land on September 15”, and he “vowed to spend the next few months making (the Aboriginal Constitution recognition) issue a top priority and boost momentum for the change through a bigger campaign”. (The Weekend Australian 30-31 August 2014, p.8)

All this from a prime minister who said as opposition leader that he would repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act when/if elected, but who caved in at the first sign of ethnic/multicultural resistance. This is a PM little different from Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard. Perhaps he is even worse because he comes with the “serve the capitalist” mentality of the Liberal governments. Thus the Abbott government is now championing an influx of foreign workers to meet some mythical “chronic skills shortages” which they have never proven to exist. (“Foreign Worker Influx Looms” The Weekend Australian 30-31 August 2014, p.2) This is not a government serving Australian interests, but one geared towards international capitalism, high finance and their religion of political correctness. Will this mad cycle of decay, a downward spiral go on until “Australia” is a burnt-out shell, or will the ‘sheeple’ awake at one second to midnight?


by Peter Ewer
In Rotherham, in the Disunited Kingdom, the media are finally talking about the grooming of well over 1,400 female Anglo Saxon girls by Pakistani Muslim gangs. Wait, we can say that under section 18D of the “Act” because the media have said it, as did the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham. The systematic rapings of girls as young as 13 led to 100 mixed-race babies being born. The police were “seemingly paralysed by fears of appearing racist”, as put at: www.brisbanetimes.com 30 August 2014.

There have been comments made about this by conservative philosopher, Roger Scruton, who sees the silence of authorities as due to “not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat”. Not only the police, but the entire fabric of British society, e.g., social workers, went along in allowing these crimes to occur. I would suggest a mass class action against the police; although the legal establishment are also highly politically correct, this would at least get closure for the victims and make fully public the evils which have occurred.

As Scruton concludes in a few weeks “all will have been swept under the carpet, and the work of destruction can resume”. (Roger Scruton, “Why Did British Police Ignore Pakistani Muslim Gangs Abusing 1,400 Rotherham Children?” Political Correctness,” at https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerscruton/2014/08/30/why-did-British-police-ignore-…
Thus, the police force quick to nab Rolf Harris, and rightly so, let go probably tens of thousands of rapes (multiple rapes on each 1,400 plus victims).

The Rotherham pathology, Professor Kevin MacDonald observes is a type of collective psychosis arising because Nordic people have formed societies based on moral ingroups, rather than racial kinship groups, and this will prove to be a big mistake. The first step necessary is to regain white racial identities and this is far more important than the endless debates about economics. It is a matter of life or death for our people.


Source: Bernard Gaynor http://bernardgaynor.com.au/author/bejodelafi/

Too Tough
Yet another Defence report has been commissioned.

And yet another Defence report now recommends the further destruction of Defence capability.

The front cover of Defence’s latest report reads:
Battling with Words: A study of language, diversity and social inclusion in the Australian Department of Defence. Found here….


Bernard Gaynor writes:
It prides itself as a study of language use in Defence using social and linguistic theoretical frameworks to understand culture and cultural change. If we translate that into English, it simply means using the organisation charged with Australia’s security as a guinea pig in which to experiment with the latest radical social theory to emerge from Hippyville.

Hippyville, of course, has another name: elite academia. And it is located on the other side of the world from the ho-hum place known as Common Sense, where most people live and do useful but less trendy things than destroying societal norms.

This report states that the challenge facing Defence ‘is to build a more diverse workforce that is more representative of the Australian population.’ It’s written right there, at the start of the second paragraph of the summary on page XI.

That’s quite a bold and breathtaking assumption. I would have thought that the challenge facing Defence was something quite different. Like protecting Australia in a world that is increasingly unsafe.

But no. Forget the rise of the Islamic State. Don’t worry about failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ignore the growth of China and the revolution in global power that goes with it. And laugh off the increasing likelihood that we are staring down the barrel of the largest gunfight since 1945 with the increase in tension over events in Ukraine. We must focus instead on the big problem. Simply put, this report identifies this as the fact that the Anglo-Australian male is the dominant demographic in the Australian Defence Force. And it goes on to single out Anglo-Australian male domination as a problem 36 times. It does so while finding that 86 per cent of soldiers in the military are male with an Anglo-Australian background. But instead of thanking males with an Anglo-Australian background for defending our nation, this report instead states triumphantly that this has gotta change. It all sounds rather racist really. Except that in the logical world of diversity and tolerance it is a foregone conclusion that it is impossible to do or say anything negative about male Anglo-Australians that could possibly be considered racist. Or anti-male. Or logical. This report even states that the male-dominated, Anglo-Australian demographic in the military ‘is no longer desirable’. And it claims that it is not sustainable either. I can absolutely guarantee that an Australian Defence Force that no longer desires Anglo-Australian males is unsustainable. But that’s what the academics want. And Defence leadership is commissioning them to write these reports.

The report even recommends that blokes must be taught to be less blokey when they talk about their job destroying the opposition, so that others feel more welcome. Apparently, this is because Defence will be better at closing with the enemy, capturing or killing him, by day or night, regardless of season, weather or terrain if there are less Anglo-Australian males in it. That means a military with more women, more homosexuals and more people with diverse language and cultural backgrounds (or Muslims in less fancy language).

Islamic Uniform
The Royal Australian Navy now offers an Islamic uniform.

I didn’t read anywhere in this ‘study’ about the evidence to support this reasoning. Maybe I just missed that part. However, I’m sure it was not overlooked. Anyway, this report, like the others before it, puts diversity on a pedestal. It leads to the logical conclusion that Defence would be better off if it had more Islamic State sympathisers in the ranks and made them feel welcome. That’s about as diverse as you can get.

Lest you laugh this off as some hysterical ranting, remember that the Australian Defence Force leadership has stated publicly that our military needs more Muslims and now both the Navy and Air Force have even allowed them to have their own uniform. This is why it should come as no surprise that the Australian Defence Force also has the dubious honour of being the first Western military to train a soldier for the Islamic State.

Caner Temel http://bernardgaynor.com.au/dying-in-syria-is-the-best-thing-caner-temel-ever-did-for-australia/ was his name and he did us all a favour when he died in Syria earlier this year. But I do admit that his decision to go AWOL and travel to Syria to fight with the Islamic State is right up there in the diversity rankings. If it didn’t hit ‘hipster cool’, it can’t have been far off the mark.

Unfortunately, there’s likely to be more Caner Temels while Defence leadership commissions flawed studies that use mumbo-jumbo to confuse everyone about Defence’s role. This report states that ‘Defence does not represent the community it services’ because it has different demographics than the Australian population. It implies that Defence’s role is to reflect accurately everybody in our society, including the growing demographic of Muslims with Australian passports signing up to fight in black ninja suits in Iraq.

But Defence’s role has absolutely nothing to do with reflecting society’s demographics.
Every part of its role is about schwacking bad guys and keeping us safe. And the best way of doing that is by training lots of young men to fight and win wars. Defence is not a game. Yet in every game of strength, males dominate completely. And in team games, it is no surprise that the teams where everyone is on the same side do better. It is no different in the brutal life and death contest on the battlefield.

Reflecting Australia’s demographics does not even enter into the equation when it comes to war fighting. If it did, every deployed unit would have its quota of infants, octogenarians and paraplegics. Breast-feeding mothers would be in demand. And so would dole-bludging drug addicts. For a whole bunch of very good reasons, these people and many others do not form part of military units. Mostly, it is for reasons of their own volition. But even if they did want to sign up and ship off overseas, they would be told no anyway, notwithstanding their national pride. In the real world, we can’t all do whatever we please. Sometimes the best way to help is to accept that others can do a better job.

Of course, this report pretends that Defence would be better off if it reflected Australia’s demographics and then immediately goes on to decide that it should not reflect Australia’s demographics at all. Just the chosen categories for promotion get a mention: women, homosexuals, Indigenous Australians and recent arrivals (although it did have a bit of a swing at the fact that Defence’s soldiers are primarily hetero-normative, able-bodied males, so limbless lesbians should just bide their time).

But these chosen groups are just used as a smokescreen for the report’s real purpose: reducing the number of Anglo-Australian males in the military. Perhaps the most astounding thing about this report is that it states Defence directives and doctrine need to ‘counter the ideal identity of the Anglo-Australian male soldier renowned for acts of courage’.

And you did read that right. This report recommends that Defence spend less time promoting battlefield courage because it leads minority groups to feel less welcome. It even states that the focus on the courageous battlefield hero is unnecessarily exclusive.

Welcome to the Australian Defence Force of the 21st Century: a military where the attribute of courage is now disparaged and males are the enemy. It’s a direct result of the denigration of the courageous role that the Anglo-Australian male has made to our nation’s defences for the last 100 years. (emphasis added…ed)


by Richard Miller
The papers are overflowing with articles and opinion pieces dealing with “Islamic extremism” and the threat of “home grown” terrorists, when Australian soldiers, now fighting in Syria, return to Australia. Of course there is no recognition that there is an intrinsic fault in our immigration/multiculturalism regime. This article should be read in conjunction with Peter Ewer’s “Rotten on Rotherham” to bring home the full effect.

The Norwegian news portal VG Nett has reported that a Muslim terrorist group “Ansar al-Sunna” has threatened that unless a breakaway Islamic Sharia nation is formed in Norway, then Norway will face a 9/11-style attack.

This, I think, is the logical conclusion of multiculturalism, for after a certain critical mass is reached in migrant populations, the once host majority becomes demographically diluted and there is nothing to assimilate to. This is also being seen in the United States down south, where high numbers of Hispanic migrants are transforming the country into a part of Mexico. Interestingly enough a US federal bulletin released to law enforcement agencies has warned that terrorists from the Islamic State group have infiltrated the city of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, and are planning a terrorist attack on America… if internet reports are correct.


by Len the Discriminatory.
Maybe you guys in the eastern states have heard, that former Vietnamese “boat person” Hieu Van Le is the Queen’s first “Asian representative in Australia”. Le has replaced Rear Admiral Kevin Scarce as Governor of South Australia. The general line taken in the media here is “Wow! Wonderful achievement etc., etc.” But I am not convinced because our politically correct system goes out of its way to promote non-Anglos. Ask yourself: how many Anglo-Australians could rise to such a position in Vietnam or China? Then ask: why are we different?

Journalist Amanda Blair (The Advertiser 30 August 2014, p.13) comments on this appointment in the context of asking if we are “still a nation of racists”. Her article begins by reporting on a conversation she overheard between two airport workers, one who said, “Honestly it was just terrible up there. I mean, it’s supposed to be an Australian icon that Sydney opera house but there were just Asians everywhere. Not one Aussie. Just heaps of Asians… I started playing spot the Aussie”.

Blair responds, on the high liberal moral ground with the usual boring rejoinder ( I looked that word up), “let me think about that. A country filled with racists?” Well, if only. If Australians had the same degree of racial identity as the Chinese, say, would Asianisation be championed?

Even an invaded Japan in 1945 did not embrace such a degree of racial annihilation. For the likes of the Asianists, it follows that an Australia 99% Asian is fine and any Anglo opposing this is “racist”. Well, I can only hope that more Anglos start to think like the airport workers. Good on them! We have a right to a racial identity too!

As for Mr. Hieu Van Le, he may or may not be a fine Governor, but he should be judged on his performance, not on his race, which the media are doing in a form of reverse discrimination, championed by multiculturalism. I had never heard of Hieu Van le, I don’t know what he has achieved other than coming to Australia on a boat as an asylum seeker in 1977. But, I am not impressed by his claims that his appointment challenges the perception that Australia “is a white Anglo-Celtic Christian society”. (The Advertiser 30 August 2014, p.8)

I wonder how he would feel if Vietnam was changed in the way that Australia is being changed? Oh, wait a minute, he fled Vietnam in 1977 as an “asylum seeker”,… didn’t he”?…


Kevin MacDonald in The Occidental Observer 4 Sep 2014 “WE CAN’T CARRY ON LIKE THIS… We Just Can’t”

Margaret Wente, “The Unspeakable Truth about Rotherham” (The Globe and Mail, Sept.4, 2014) wrote:
“Andrew Norfolk, the Times journalist whose investigative reports prompted this inquiry and others now under way, has explained why this travesty is so toxic to Britain’s liberal elites: ‘The suggestion that men from a minority ethnic background were committing sex crimes against white children was always going to be the far right’s fantasy come true,” he wrote. “Innocent white victims, evil dark-skinned abusers. Liberal angst kicked instinctively into top gear.’”

But of course, the anxieties of the right were never fantasies. The fantasy was the left’s ideology that there are no important differences between people, that race doesn’t exist, and that the bloody history of ethnic conflict would magically disappear when millions of Muslims immigrated to the UK.

Institutionalized political correctness has inflicted appalling damage…
“But no amount of liberal angst will make this story go away. Current Home Secretary Theresa May has acknowledged that “institutionalized political correctness” has inflicted appalling damage on the innocent. And the broader failures of Muslim integration are now too obvious to ignore. It’s not just all the young men who run off to join the caliphate and saw off people’s heads. It’s the Birmingham school scandal, where it was discovered that dozens of secular schools had been targeted for Islamization by Muslim radicals. It’s the imported culture of violence and misogyny.”

Right. It’s not just the Pakistani rape gangs preying on White girls, but the reality that the West has imported cultures of violence, misogyny, extreme ethnocentrism, political corruption, and hostility toward the West. As Wente notes, the effects of the campaign to displace the native British populations has resulted in moral travesty against the innocent. There is thus a powerful moral dimension here that should be exploited by patriots. White populations have been endlessly lectured by the Left about the moral failures of the past — mainly slavery and colonialism. But the left has not only failed to provide a realistic assessment of the powerful currents of moral indignation that ended slavery in the West and which are unique to the West, it has failed to come to grips with the reality of what these other cultures are really like. Again, the West has imported cultures of violence, misogyny, extreme ethnocentrism, political corruption, and hostility toward the West.
As Dan Hodges (a professed liberal) wrote this week in The Telegraph: “We can’t carry on like this. We just can’t.”

Quite right. Cataclysmic changes must be made because the Left that has been culturally dominant throughout the West for decades is intellectually bankrupt; more importantly, it is morally bankrupt. Perhaps Rotherham and the other rape scandals around the UK will finally burst the Left’s aura of moral superiority to the point where advocating immigration and multiculturalism will make one a moral pariah and induce feelings of guilt among Whites. It’s not guilt per se that is destroying the West. It’s guilt about advocating the morally legitimate interests of retaining the lands that Europeans have historically dominated. The disaster is that for decades Western elites have been hostile to the traditional peoples and cultures of Europe. And with the dominance of these elites has come the dominance of ideologies that induce guilt for advocating what every other people and culture, always, have always advocated.

Placing the moral onus on the Left is an important step forward because for so many White people, the need to feel that their actions are morally sanctioned is critical…”

Read further here… https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2014/09/the-moral-dimension-of-rotherham-we-cant-carry-on-like-this-we-just-cant/


by Ian Wilson LL.B.
The Gillard Labor government proposed the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples Recognition Act in late 2012. The Act “acknowledged” that the Aborigines were the “first” inhabitants of this land mass. This is, of course the standard politically correct line which ignores a vast amount of evidence refuting it, mentioned at this site. The Act aimed to have a referendum within two years – and a sunset date of 2015 was named. That sunset date is set to lapse in about six months.

The new class elites are concerned that awareness and understanding of the issues associated with the referendum is not growing. The panel headed by former deputy prime minister John Anderson has told Tony Abbott, a man committed to this referendum but not to defending freedom of speech, that “it is one thing to commit to a referendum on constitutional recognition of indigenous Australians and another to deliver a successful referendum outcome”.

It seems likely that the elites will push for a “maximalist” change, probably with a clause giving eternal affirmative action and special benefits, and maybe an outright constitutional ban on “discrimination”. Courts will create a bill of rights such as the world has never seen. Yet by doing this, by over-extending themselves the elite can be defeated. All it takes is the will to fight.

I suggest that the “Vote NO!” campaign on our side make a “No” vote a symbol for everything we oppose that the elites have oppressively imposed upon us, such as the denial of freedom of speech, Asianisation, mass migration and multiculturalism. The write-on, “Reduce Immigration” campaign, for example, should or could, make a campaign to Vote No to deliver a message to Abbott and the elites.


by Peter West
There was a lot of media sympathy here in Australia for the feminist Russian punk band “Pussy Riot” when two members Masha Alyokhina and Nadaya Tolokonnikova were sentenced to two years goal after staging a protest performance in 2012 in a Moscow cathedral. The two have been in Australia (yes, they were released) saying that “Australia’s asylum seeker policy is as bad as conditions in Russian prisons”, The Daily Mail 31 August 2014) reports.

All I can say if these feminists are arrested and imprisoned again in Moscow, I for one will not be shedding any tears. Oh, and why are these feminist one worlders here – don’t we have enough home grown ones?


by Peter West
Little has appeared in the mainstream and even the alternative press about the September 18 Scottish referendum which is about Independence. In The Australian 29 July 2014, p.12 Michael Sexton wrote that, “Scotland Chips Away at the English Empire”, and rightly observed that “the fact the referendum is being held at all underlines the decline of the English culture and confidence across the past half century”.

However, as I see it, the decline of this culture has not been a “natural” process. England has been under attack in a very special cultural war designed to denigrate English achievement, for it was England that made the modern world as we know it and contributed to the advancement of civilization in every field. Those who seek to destroy this noble heritage are no doubt working away behind the scenes of the Scottish referendum.

Steve Hummel (Social Credit Discussion Group) writes: Wouldn't it be a wonderful irony if they did so (voted for Independence) and then instituted a Social Credit economy there? The Secretariat should be all over this, no?
Wallace Klinck responded: Well, the Scottish poet and a founder of the Scottish Nationalist Party is reported to have said, whatever else he may have believed, that C. H. Douglas was the pinnacle of Scottish intellectual development during the 20th Century. All we have to do is convince all the rest of the Scots of the truth of this claim.

The British Government is offering Scotland more “fiscal” and “taxation”, but not “financial' autonomy as an incentive not to separate. Not much time though—we will have to work on the problem after Scotland’s Independence, should this occur. They will not be able to use the British pound if and/or when they do separate.


By David Johnston john.vance@wangarattacity.com 9 Sept, 2014
“Paul O’Brien and Rozi Parisotto say the ombudsman has vindicated them. Two members of Wangaratta’s sacked council have claimed advice from the Victorian Ombudsman’s office has vindicated them and backed their view that “democracy was trashed”. Former mayor Rozi Parisotto and deputy mayor Paul O’Brien want an apology from the Victorian government, saying the sacked council was denied natural justice.

The ombudsman’s office has confirmed the municipal inspector appointed to Wangaratta at the height of the governance crisis last year, Peter Stephenson, didn’t tell councillors of reports that were used by former Local Government minister Jeanette Powell to dismiss the council almost a year ago. The ombudsman’s letter to Ms Parisotto said: “The former municipal inspector did not inform you of the content of his reports or give you an opportunity to respond to the statements in those reports. There was also no written evidence that the department had briefed the former municipal inspector about his obligations regarding natural justice.”

A letter to Mr O’Brien also contained a crucial short-coming in the government’s transport, planning and local infrastructure department’s handling of the crisis. “There was no written evidence the department had briefed the municipal inspector about his obligations regarding natural justice,” the letter said.
“The ombudsman wrote to the secretary of the department proposing that, in future, the department provide written guidance to municipal inspectors upon appointment that outlines their obligations regarding natural justice. The secretary has accepted that proposal.” Ms Parisotto and Mr O’Brien complained to the ombudsman’s office a month after the council was dismissed. Mrs Powell’s bill to remove the council gained rare bipartisan support from the Labor opposition. Mrs Powell claimed the council had failed to provide a safe workplace and had allowed a culture of bullying to grow.

The government has since introduced a bill, the Local Government Amendment (Governance and Conduct) Bill, to create a new position of municipal monitor and provide caretaker provisions to apply when a bill to dismiss a council is before Parliament. The ombudsman’s office has stopped short of an apology for failure to provide natural justice. In a joint statement, Ms Parisotto and Mr O’Brien said: “Democracy in Wangaratta was trashed, with due process and procedures not followed. We are still waiting for a public apology.”

Comment: Seeing that the Labor party was firmly defeated in Wangaratta Council, despite claiming to be non party aligned, their policies firmly showed in the previous Council they were Labor party agendas, and of course supported the sacking of the democratically elected council.
Opposing the new councillors were Don Joyce, McInirny and Tammy Adkins, previously National party supporters but benefitting from Labor parties’ failed rail, and NECWA positions previously held.
It is not surprising to me that a previously NECWA employee was also in the mix when the resignation of McInirny (due to possible exposure of mobile phone and Facebook messages and “Stress” caused by this was aired) when a new councillor was instated.
Doug Sharp was also firmly ensconced by the previous councillors and couldn’t allow policies by the new councillors to be implemented.
There is a long way to go to the next elections for council, but I feel the danger of Wangaratta being absorbed by Moira council if things don’t improve, as appears to be their aim….making an even larger council difficult to control by locals….”


Extracted from the book “The Wrenching Transformation of America: Agenda 21” Produced by: American Policy Center

CHAPTER 6 - Regional Planning Brings Regional Governance by (the late) Henry Lamb
So what is wrong with regional governance? Nothing unless you value the republican (representative) form of government and individual freedom and detest autocracy in all its forms. Regional governance evolved as a way to get around the obstacles presented by multiple local governments, all of which may have a stake in the region, but often disagree on what the region needs.

Regional governments--and their initiatives--are driven by government, not by the people. Government, by its very nature, seeks to increase its power and overcome any obstacles in its path. Local governments, like individual neighbours, often disagree on how best to resolve a common problem. Consequently, governments, especially the executive branch, tend to look for ways to get around the obstacle of disagreement. One successful method is regional governance, which diminishes the power of local governments by conferring increasing levels of authority on the executive branch, which then implements its authority through appointed bureaucrats.

In very short order, it is the unelected bureaucrats who wield the power. Elected officials become little more than a rubber stamp whose approval provides "official" respectability to the bureaucracy.

A classic example of just how this works is available in a report titled "Regional Governance Districts" produced by the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR). The purpose of the report includes, "...to assist the state in responding to globalization..." The report makes the following clarification: "Governance is distinct from government — while government is the traditional organization of public authority used to provide necessary services, governance is the provision of those services. While the word has been used to refer to service provision by traditional government, it has come to be used to refer more specifically to service provision through a non-traditional approach, such as by a contractor or through a public-private partnership." Virtually every state now has some form of this new regional approach to governance, which is simply further evidence of how extensively the "administrative" form of global governance has influenced domestic policy. The Chattanooga Area Regional Council of Governments, which consists of at least six alphabet agencies of appointed bureaucrats, has applied for a $2.5 million grant from the federal government's Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant program. Before the application is considered, each participating government must sign a Memorandum of Agreement to "develop a shared vision," and to "develop liveable communities," and other specific steps, all of which are defined by and must be approved, by the federal government. The Mayor of the city of Chattanooga has signed this MOA, thereby committing the entire city to conform to the requirements of the federal government in the expenditure of the federal money.

The citizens of Chattanooga have no idea that this grant application has been submitted, or what funding of the grant will mean to their individual freedom. They have had no opportunity to express their consent or opposition to this program, and it is unclear whether their elected representatives were even given the opportunity to vote on the application. Sixteen counties and all the municipalities they contain will be constrained by this grant application, and more importantly, by the forty-year regional plan it produces.

This process creates an administrative form of government which does not require the consent of the governed. Each step in the expansion of this process further extinguishes the republican (representative) form of government.

The federal government promotes this transformation of local government into regional administrative units which complies with the recommendations set forth in Chapter 8.5 of Agenda 21, which says: (e) Adopt integrated approaches to sustainable development at the regional level, including transboundary areas, subject to the requirements of particular circumstances and needs. The federal government has been using grants to shape regional governance for years. The Chattanooga Area Regional Council of Governments has already received more than $4 million in federal grants in just the last couple of years, and is only one of several regions supported by the federal government.

Citizens in the Chattanooga area, and across the nation, should realize that once these regional administrative units are in place, there will be no way to return to the republican (representative) form of government that allows citizens to expect their city councilman or county commissioner to consider their wishes. The consent of the governed will no longer be a factor in public policy. Virtually all human activity will be subject to the approval of a professional bureaucracy that first creates a plan it thinks is a utopian community, and then requires every person to live where the plan dictates.

To travel in a vehicle approved by the plan, and to be employed with a job allowed by the plan — whether you like it or not.

Freedom cannot exist in an administrative form of governance.
Henry Lamb is the man who discovered Agenda 21 and sounded the alarm. He attended multiple UN meetings around the world to report on them. To fight back, he created Freedom 21 which held 10 national conferences to educate and train activists to expose and stop Agenda 21. He passed away in 2012, but lived long enough to see Americans starting to heed his warnings and fight back against Agenda 21.

Although originally written for Americans, this Chapter is reproduced for Australian’s consideration – can you see Agenda 21 happening here. It is happening in Victoria!


Ombudsman Victoria, Level 9, North Tower,
459 Collins St., Melbourne 3000.
Dear Madam,
Attached for your information is copy of recent media releases and correspondence regarding the Rural City of Wangaratta. This is an update of my correspondence with your office until I was referred to the Office of the Local Government Minister.
May I stress to you once again the importance of your communication with community. This is of special concern when the local press is not independent and selective of information.
We fought hard to get Councillors elected to represent us on the Rural City of Wangaratta. When the Council was dismissed, as result of government interference, we were left unrepresented. This is not democracy. It is a situation which basically involves our right to own and farm our properties on which we pay Council rates. These should be used to provide services, not to fund political campaigns such as “Constitutional recognition of Local Government.
Yours sincerely,
Alison G Walpole.
Rural, resident, ratepayer RCOW.

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