TOTALITARIANISM IN NEW ZEALAND

Mr. Eric Butler reports from New Zealand where he is currently lecturing under the auspices of the New Zealand League of Rights|
Immediately upon my recent arrival in New Zealand, to lecture primarily on the threat to freedom by UN-sponsored Human "Rights" Commissions, I was brought face to face with the escalating menace of totalitarianism in "God's own country". The Race Relations Board has written to the New Zealand League of Rights demanding that the League gives a written assurance that it will not stock or sell certain books, one being "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century", by American author, Dr. Arthur Butz. As witnessed by the Canadian situation, where the Butz book has been banned, even for use in educational centres, "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century" is regarded by the Zionist mafia and its creatures as a major target.

As I write the New Zealand League of Rights is obtaining legal opinion on where it stands on the issue of the Butz book. It is also proposing to follow the lead of the national weekly "Truth", in publishing correspondence from the Race Relations Board."Truth" editorially said that a high percentage of violent crimes in New Zealand were committed by non-Europeans. In spite of threats by the Race Relations Board, "Truth" has to date refused to back down in any way. Clearly the maximum publicity is the only way to resist the Human Rights totalitarians.

When Christchurch businessman Mr. Eric Sykes advertised for a Christian foreman some years back, a complaint was laid before the Human "Rights" Commission and Sykes was prosecuted. The two Christchurch papers were also prosecuted for having published the Sykes advertisement and found guilty. The case cost Mr. Sykes thousands of dollars, but the resulting nation wide publicity saw the end of any further prosecutions - at least for the time being.

But now the totalitarians are on the move again, with the League of Rights the major target. Perhaps it was more than a coincidence that on the Phillip Adams visit to New Zealand a few weeks before my arrival, well-known radio New Zealand interviewer Jessica Waddell opened an interview by asking for comment on "fascist" Eric Butler. Mr. Adams lost no time in telling New Zealanders that I was the "most dangerous man in Australia, and that he was devoting himself to destroying my influence. He linked me with Mr. John Bennett and Professor Geoffrey Blainey".

Being anti-Christian herself, Jessica Waddell no doubt felt at one with Phillip Adams as he says his goading of the Christian Church is his idea of good fun. Jessica Waddell once interviewed me on her programme, agreeing basically with most of what I said. She knows, of course, that I am not a "fascist", but she got such a fright as a result of the torrent of highly organised complaints that she never had me back again!

Striking posters are now going up in public places in New Zealand, headed DISCRIMINATION, which is "unlawful" on the basis of sex, race or religion. And "if you feel you have been unjustly treated, consult the Human Rights Commission or The Race Relations Conciliator." This is, of course, an encouragement to every misfit to lodge complaints, in confidence, against their fellows. The battle for freedom in New Zealand is clearly about to enter a new phase.

MR. JEREMY LEE REPORTS : LANGE, HAWKE AND ANZUS

Australians and New Zealanders are now witnessing the final dismembering of our defences. Public reaction to the threatened destruction of the ANZUS treaty has forced P.M. Hawke to adapt a more cautious posture than his N.Z. counterpart; but the performance of his Government to date inspires little confidence. One of the A.L.P's first acts was to appoint Mr. Richard Butler - former husband of Senator Susan Ryan as Ambassador for Disarmament to the U.N. This was in keeping with a campaign run by the United Nations Association in Australia prior to the Federal election, and for the disarmament programme sponsored by "Parliamentarians For World Order" an association of politicians from countries in the West pushing for World Government.

Last December Australia, for the first time, voted for a nuclear freeze resolution in the U.N. The National Times (Feb. 8-14, '85) said: ".... The resolution urges: "The USSR and the US, as the two major nuclear weapons states, to proclaim... an immediate nuclear arms freeze which would be a first step towards a comprehensive programme of disarmament". The resolution further states that a freeze would embrace:
* A comprehensive test ban on nuclear weapons and of their delivery vehicles;
* The complete cessation of the manufacture of nuclear weapons and of their delivery vehicles; and
* a ban on all further deployment of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems...."

That resolution, which Australia voted for in the U.N. last December, is the precise position New Zealand has now adopted. No wonder the U.S. finds it difficult to trust the Hawke government. Current events have been timed to a nicety, from the USSR's point of view.

Victorian RSL President Bruce Ruxton, writing in the Toorak Times on January 27, issued this graphic warning; "…An item of concern is the Soviet build-up at their Cam Ranh Bay base in Vietnam. Five more TU-16 Badger nuclear bombers have arrived in Vietnam to bolster the already large strength of Badger bombers in Vietnam (now 14). The Soviet military might in Cam Ranh Bay, including the enlarged garrison of Soviet sea-going infantry, could easily cut off support and shipping lanes, including all important Middle-East-Japan oil route. The Soviet is known to have at least twice as many submarines operating in the Pacific as the US Navy. The Soviet island north of Japan - Etorofu, is getting the new Flanker and Fulcrum low-flying jet fighters, and many more ships are destined for the Pacific to bolster the already large Soviet fleet of 600 ships stationed in the Pacific. These new ships include more of the KIROV class 28,000 tonne nuclear powered missile-carrying cruisers, and the huge deep-water Alpha submarines. The large Soviet military presence, together with troubles in various Pacific nations augers for a not-so-nice future in our part of the world…"

THE LOW-DOWN ON LANGE

Mr. B. A. Santamaria, writing in The Australian (March 27, '85) said:
"….Mr. Lange was returned in an election which took place on July 14 1984. On July 15, exulting over the consequences of his victory, Radio Moscow's domestic service expressed the Soviet's appreciation of what was actually happening in the South Pacific. "…Implementation of New Zealand's Labour's election pledges" said Radio Moscow, "might set off a chain reaction leading to the collapse of the ANZUS block. The example of New Zealand might also be followed by Australia... "

Mr. Santamaria went on:
"... The catalyst for change in New Zealand was the establishment of the pro-Soviet Socialist Unity Party of N.Z. in October 1966 ... In 1980, the Soviet Ambassador, Sofinsky, who had been a senior KGB officer in London, was expelled from N.Z. when caught red handed passing money to the S.U.P…"

Mr. Santamaria's article went on to show how the communist controlled Socialist Unity Party in N.Z. first took over the Federation of Labour, (the equivalent of Australia's A.C.T.U.), and from there gained majority support in the Labour Party itself.
"... To drive home the communist victory, the N.Z. Labour Party... carried a resolution to withdraw from the ANZUS alliance. Mr. Lange was then only deputy leader of the Labour Party; yet as Prime Minister he claims to support ANZUS, while he knows very well that his party's policy is to withdraw. The progressive deterioration of the N.Z. Labour Party into a condition of de facto Soviet control provides the central reason why the Lange Government has pursued its present policy..."

CHIPP OFF WHOSE BLOCK?

CAPITAL PEACOCK

JUDICIAL VENOM

THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN LAND CLAIMS SITUATION

This information from David Thompson, who has rejoined the League full time staff;
"W.A. Premier (Brian) Burke faces the stiff task of defending his Government's Aboriginal Land Bill (1985) introduced to Parliament on March 12th. So high is the anti 'land rights' feeling in W.A. that Mr. Burke admits that the State Government will spend at least $120,000 of the taxpayers' money to convince us to change our opinions. His propaganda campaign takes the form of television and newspaper advertising, in which Mr. Burke earnestly appeals for a restoration of aboriginal dignity and fortune. Incidentally, his earnest composure is somewhat belied by the title that stands out in his library behind him in the T.V. advertisement: 'the Book of Insults", which is probably a useful guide to any M.P. debating the land claims legislation over the next few months.

"The Bill will carve WA. up into 9 Aboriginal land corporations. Land granted to the corporations will be held under inalienable freehold title; it cannot be mortgaged or sold without the specific consent of the Minister. There will be no mining veto, no rights to mineral royalties, and no special rights over access except the normal trespass laws. "This legislation is obviously an attempt to woo W.A. voters prior to a possible early State election in 1985. The 'teeth' have been drawn from the W.A. bill - to the obvious disgust of the radical aborigines and some church groups. Mr. Burke's case is that W.A. is better served with mild, benign, State land claims laws rather than harsher Federal laws about which he is always ready to lecture the W.A. Opposition. "This, however, is either naive or dishonest.

As David Barnett pointed out in his excellent The Bulletin (March 12th) land claims article, the Federal Government can and will over ride any State land claims legislation. Section 109 of the Constitution specifically states: 'When a Law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid'. Clear enough even for Mr. Justice Murphy. Mr. Brian Burke must know this, and therefore he is misleading West Australians that it is best to 'stick with the devil you know.'

"Apparently Mr. Burke has successfully misled the Executive of the Pastoralists' & Graziers' Association, in any case. Showing an appalling naivety, the P & G Executive assisted the Government to draft the Land Bill, claiming the W.A. Bill will serve as a model for Clyde Holding's Federal Bill on land claims. They reason that if the P & G can effectively water down the W.A. legislation, they will be setting the pattern for national land claims legislation. In the process, the P & G Executive agreed to set aside the principle of allocating land on the basis of race. "Fortunately, the W.A. Liberal Party has not yet set aside the principle, and is pledged to block the Bill in the Legislative Council, despite threats from Labor to 'reform' the Council to a one-vote-one value' chamber.

"Demonstrations in Perth over the last few weeks by militant aborigines and church groups (like the Land Rights Support Group, and the concerned Christians for Justice for Land Rights) indicate heavy opposition to Mr. Burke's Land Bill by the revolutionaries. It does not go far enough for them. Demonstrators still fly the Aboriginal 'Flag', indicating that the notion of separate sovereignty is still important to them. "In endorsing this Bill, the Labor Caucus departed significantly from usual practice in that very few M.P.s had actually seen it. Premier Burke not only managed to get them to endorse the 191 page Bill; sight unseen, but offered only 45 minutes in which to answer their questions upon its provisions.

"Our W.A. campaign must centre upon having that Land Bill rejected by the Upper House, Rather than 'a Victorian era anachronism', it is our very protection against the tyranny of politicians who believe that winning the occasional election gives them the power to do as they please."

A Sydney Actionist (N.S.W.) wrote to Andrew Peacock concerning the attempts to downgrade the Office of the State Governor in Victoria by the Cain Socialist Government. Mr. Peacock's reply is worthy of reproduction: (we hope he means it)
"You raise an interesting point about the independence of State Governors. The Coalition firmly believes that it is essential for the effective working of Australian political systems, both State and Federal, that the Queen's representative should be entirely independent of the political process. We will strongly oppose any attempt by Labor to undermine this independence."

Our Comment
The very fact that the Socialists are attempting to erode the role of Her Majesty's representatives (which they are) is proof positive that they do NOT accept the workings of the present Australian political systems; i.e. a Constitutional Monarchy so framed as to provide its subjects with the maximum democratic liberties.

LABOR IMMIGRATION MINISTER TALKS MORE SENSE THAN LIBERALS