ELECTION FEVER

by Jeremy Lee
The first whiff of election fever is in the air. The strongest sign is that Prime Minister Howard is down-playing the idea that he will go early. That should make anyone who has looked at "Honest John's" record suspicious!
Howard thrives in the crisis environment - whether it is a refugee crisis or the prospect of war. Without these two he would have already returned to the Opposition benches.
Just at the moment there doesn't seem to be an imminent threat in this quarter. Howard, therefore, must start dealing with the long line of issues queuing up for attention - the health crisis, the education crisis, the threat that interest rates will start rising, the troubling trade deficit, the gradually-accumulating evidence of duplicity in the reasons given for war in Iraq etc. All these can be made into grist for an Opposition mill - even an Opposition with such mediocre leadership and such internal divisions.
Howard has a number of legislative blockages stored up which can be triggered for an early election at any time. Common sense would tell party leaders in office to go to the elections before the issues start catching up with him.
So we just may see a pre-Christmas federal election - although anything can happen in politics. Howard would probably get back at the moment with a reduced majority. We could well see an additional few independents joining Peter Andren, Tony Windsor, Bob Katter and Meg Lees. The best man currently in Parliament, Senator Len Harris, would have an uphill task to retain his Senate seat, although Pauline Hanson's incarceration might give him a lift.
Few people who think at all fail to get caught up to some degree in election fever and anxiety. It is only a small minority which has grasped that modern elections make no difference. Neither of the main parties give their allegiance to the electorate. Each has jumped into bed with corporate interests and donors. Apart from shuffling round our grossly-swollen taxation revenue between begging hands of interests in the electorate, they are both traveling in the same direction - globalism, free trade and international control of the world's money system. These are untouchable sacred cows. Woe betide the member of parliament who interrupts worship at these shrines.

Frankly, from the thinker's viewpoint, there is not much that can be done at election time. It is now work between elections that is increasingly important - the time that voters retreat into inaction because they believe that elections are the only possibility for change.
None of this is new to social crediters. The nature of the battle has been pointed out for 70 or 80 years. C.H. Douglas, for instance, speaking in 1937, made these points:
"The whole technique, as I see it, by which power has been filched from the House of Parliament, has been the technique for making it quite impossible for the average Member of Parliament to give an intelligent opinion upon more than one half per cent of the things he is asked questions about … The questions which come up in Parliament are obviously immensely remote from the place where the action takes place, and to expect them to be decided by Members of Parliament who have been elected by vote (even if they were really elected by the process by which people think they are elected) would be sufficiently grotesque. But when you think that each one of them is carefully vetted to take care that he knows nothing about things which are likely to be dangerous, the thing is even more grotesque. The consequence is that we have got now in the House of Commons (or the House of Representatives - Ed.) nothing but a rubber stamp for actions taken by the Cabinet...."

If that was true in 1937, as it undoubtedly was, how much worse is it now? Parliamentary salaries and perks, the massive influence of corporate money and the immense power of the media have combined to produce a position where the average member of parliament has sold his soul before even taking his seat.
So no real changes can be expected in elections, until a realignment of will is made amongst voters to get different results. The first step is to decide not to give legitimacy to the present process by being a passive partaker. Douglas put it this way:
"… You have to get an undertaking on the part of a sufficient number of people to bring effective pressure …. to bear upon the Member of Parliament so that he will do what you want, that is to say, you have got to make your Member of Parliament a representative - not a delegate ...."
Which leaves the question, "How many is a 'sufficient number' of people to do this?" The answer is "Not nearly as many as you might think. A very small number with a common philosophy and an idea of the techniques necessary, can achieve great things."
One of the most interesting things is that the small number who reach this position, having left the confrontational "party game' behind, are able to work peacefully and enthusiastically together in a way hitherto impossible.

SHOULD ELECTORS HAVE A SAY?

ONE THAT WORKED

THE TRUE END OF ECONOMICS

by Betty Luks
The first policy of the Australian League of Rights is the Christian revelation of God. In that revelation, is a new concept of 'righteousness'- God's righteousness based on His abundant Providence: "in good measure, pressed down and shaken together." In men's minds this new concept displaced the old concept of strict justice. "I have come that you might have life and have it more abundantly… Friend, I do thee no wrong. Didst thou not agree with me for a penny? Take that thine is, and go thy way. I will give unto this last even as unto thee." This righteousness includes the concept of equity, which contains the meaning of right as in nature - Natural Law. Man-made laws are but an imperfect expression of Natural Law.

This is the 'rightness' of which Clifford Hugh Douglas wrote: "To the extent that man seeks, finds and obediently adheres to the Canon - the Law of Rightness governing the Universe - he will find himself in harmony with creation and attain satisfaction and happiness in which he strives… To the extent man ignores the Canon or flouts it, he will bring disaster upon himself."

The true goal of Economics (i.e., household management) is the earthly use of goods to satisfy man's needs - the needs of all men. To join goods to needs; food, drink, clothing and shelter this is the true goal, the true end of economic life. Economics can be called 'good' management when it reaches its true end; that for which it was meant. It is here that the Law of Rightness running through the Universe comes into play. "Life is more than food and the body more than raiment." Food is the means and Life is the end purpose of it.

When are politicians going to realise that in an industrialised, technological, automated, computerised age, more than enough for an abundant life could be supplied to each and everyone within the nation, with less and less human effort? We don't need 'full employment'. What we do need is a financial system based on the Law of Rightness, providing the financial means, over and above the employment system, to distribute the goods where and when needed, and, at the same time, paying the wage earners and the salaried employees a just return for their efforts, and the investors for their investments.

WALKING ON EGGS

by Israel Shamir
The NY Times is a bountiful spring of instructions to perplexed mankind. Its editors appointed by Mr Sulzberger (apparently, God's representative on earth) have advice for everybody:
· What should the French do with their cheese (pasteurise and shove it you-know-where)
· Russians with their media (give it to Mr Gusinsky, a coreligionist of Mr Sulzberger)
· Chinese with their country (open it to Enron)
· And Palestinians with themselves (die, soonest).

Now from their Mt Sinai on the 5th Avenue they conferred on grateful humanity a new commandment penned by Ian Buruma, directing us "How to Talk about Israel." [1] Yes, it is delicate task. You may speak freely about: · Saudis and describe them as a medieval Kingdom of Evil, famous for their cruelty and barbarism (Norman Liebman) or their monstrous regime (Lenni Brenner).
· You may say that Swiss are mean and ugly.
· You may call French 'froggies'.
· Moreover, you may pour scorn and hate on the United States of America, as (justifiably) did Ms Roy in her recent epistle.

"Israel" by any other name
But you have to be guided by Mr Sulzberger and his hacks if you dare to "Talk about Israel". What is so special about Israel? Our sweet Jaffa oranges? Our modest nuclear armed forces able to destroy every European capital? Our superb snipers who can kill a child at half a mile? Our wonderful torture equipment eagerly purchased by every 'Enemy of Terrorism'? No, when Buruma writes 'Israel', he does not mean the State of Israel, a small but nasty piece of goods located somewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean. He means a much stronger entity. Our friend, a gifted American writer Ghassan Ghraizi, whose novel, "Israel, by Any Other Name," I warmly recommend, was tricked by wily Buruma: "I started reading Buruma, expecting an answer to how I can discuss Israel with some of my Jewish friends; but all I got was obfuscation and misdirection.

Starting with the first three words, 'the Jewish Problem', Buruma exploits the symbols of historically European Jewish persecution to confuse the Palestinian grievances. Like a magician's, Buruma's misdirection of focus on 'anti-Semitism' blurs a reader's understanding. The remaining text suffers from contradictions, omissions, and false comparisons." Innocent man, Ghraizi, did not understand that Buruma (and many other people) used 'Israel' as a euphemism for the ineffable J-word. There is nothing special about Israel but we are full of Mr Sulzberger's nephews and Mr Wolfowitz' cousins. Nothing special, but whatever passes for the American Mind is manufactured by the JINSA. Nothing special, but we get more American money than any part of the USA. Nothing special, but every American politician from the President down to last State Governor will say 'uncle' if asked by our Prime Minister. In plain words, our special position is nothing but an indicator of exalted, nay, unique position of the American Jews.

Goliath has been 'hurt'
Witty Miriam Reik from New York City noted: "The fact that Ian Buruma wrote it as if walking on eggs, shows the depth of the problem." Still, publication of Buruma's essay is an important and encouraging event. Not because he says something new - he does not. Not because he is honest or sincere - he is not. But it is a sign that the elusive Enemy reels under the brunt of attack. It is a hurt cry, the first cry of Goliath hurt.

Two years ago, when this list departed into uncharted waters of checking the Jewish connection behind the developments in the US and the Middle East, such an essay would not be needed. One could talk about Israel with admiration, or at worst with regret that she lost her youthful idealism. One could not even notice the new American Jewish elite of the superpower who directed every bullet of Israeli snipers and every bomb dropped by the US planes on Iraq and Afghanistan. Things had changed. Buruma admits that "the idea that Jewish interests are somehow at the centre of American foreign policy in the Middle East is widely held, and not only outside the United States".
He tries to pooh-pooh it, but he is painfully aware of peeling Stealth cover of the American Judeocracy. Once revealed, this peculiar form of social organisation, akin to Brahmin predominance in India, became obvious to millions of spectators.

All these 'conspiracy' theories!
The ever-watchful Anti-Defamation League (ADL) also noticed "hateful conspiracy theories about Jews continue to gather force around the world - despite two years of intensive efforts by watchdog groups and democratic governments to combat them"[2] But a "conspiracy theory" is not prima facie absurd, at any rate in Anglo-American jurisprudence. Indeed, "participation in a common plan or conspiracy" to commit aggression was the centrepiece of the prosecution's indictment at the Nuremberg trial," writes Norman Finkelstein.[3]

The conspiracy of silence was undermined by the 'Jewish' dissidents: Norman Finkelstein, Miriam Reik, Jeff Blankfort, Michael Neumann, Gilad Atzmon, Edward Herman, Israel Shahak together with their 'gentile' comrades, for the 'Jewish conspiracy' works for the interests of the organised Jewish leadership, and against the true interests of ordinary folk of Jewish origin. More to the point, there is no Jew or Gentile but brotherhood of humanity for whoever accepts this brotherhood. But their effort and self-sacrifice will be lost unless supported by others. Or, in words of Samuel Adams, "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."

If Ian Buruma 'walked on eggs', wonderful Arundhati Roy in her ode to equally wonderful Noam Chomsky did not even come close to the eggs. She noticed "the mainstream media's blatant performance as the U.S. government's mouthpiece, its display of vengeful patriotism, its willingness to publish Pentagon press handouts as news, and its explicit censorship". She noticed that the United States can commit horrible crimes and escape condemnation because "it has enlisted the services of the most powerful, most successful publicity firm in the world: Hollywood".
But she circumspectly does not notice the American Jews who are predominant in the media and Hollywood.

Manufacturing consent
Out of two dozens of Media moguls she carefully mentions a non-Jewish one, although a friend of Israel, Berlusconi. She justly condemns 'Neoliberal capitalism' without referring to Milton Friedman and genocidal bombing of Cambodia without the name of Henry Kissinger. She writes of "the key role America has played in the conflict in the Middle East, in which thousands have died fighting Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory," but avoids the real reason behind this American role: the mighty power of the Jewish Lobby, as attended and duly described by Noam Chomsky's co-author of Manufacturing Consent, fearless Edward Herman (alas, he remained unmentioned in her piece).
She speaks of the war and preceding "sanctions that have led directly, and indirectly, to the death of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq" but does not notice the [self-styled] Cabal, these 25 people, in words of Thomas Friedman to Ari Shavit ["Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened,"[4]) who caused the war, and almost all of them Jewish disciples of Leo Strauss and their schoolmates.
Indeed, it is like talking of India's policy in the 19th century without mentioning the British rule. Could it be that for an Indian writer, the Brahmins' leading role goes without saying? But our problem is exactly that: the huge monopoly of media causing lack of democracy in the U.S. The monopoly should receive the same treatment the giant Standard Oil received in the beginning of 20th century: it should be broken and democratised."

[1] How To Talk About Israel by Ian Buruma New York Times Magazine, 31/8/ 2003 https://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/31/magazine/31ANTISEMITISM.html

[2] Conspiracy Theories about Jews, US Newswire 2/9/03

[3] In his new foreword to the German translation he quotes Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations (New York: 2000), intro. by Robert Reich to such effect, while defending himself against such charges.

[4] https://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=280279

HAVE THUGS WILL TRAVEL

by Bill Berkowitz
WorkingForChange.com 10th September, 2003
"On Sunday night, President Bush announced that major operations in the war against terrorism were over; Al Qaeda's Osama bin Laden has been captured in the mountains of Afghanistan; the Taliban's Mullah Omar has surrendered to an envoy from the Vatican; Iraq's Saddam Hussein was killed outside an ice-cream parlor in Tikrit; and Iraq's weapons of mass destruction have been discovered buried under an apple tree near Ur, in what some believe was the site of the garden of Eden. Bush pledged that democracy would be established in Iraq by Christmas and all U.S. troops would be home no later than 'Groundhog Day'; to guarantee fair and free elections, the president announced the administration had cut a deal with the Diebold Co. for its touch-screen machines; Veteran's hospitals in the U.S. will not be closed; benefits for all soldiers serving oversees will be doubled immediately; and a plan for universal health care will soon be sent to Congress… And, of course, that's the way it wasn't!

War Criminals Hire War Criminals to Hunt Down War Criminals
Now, those bright folks at the Pentagon have decided that the best way to hunt down Hussein and any remaining Baathists is to put some of the brutal dictator's former buddies on the payroll. They figure if you offer the former regime's torturers, executioners, and rapists enough money and outfit them properly, they can be of great assistance to the occupation forces.

St. Petersburg (Russia) Times columnist Chris Floyd recently mused that a headline covering this new enterprise might read: "War Criminals Hire War Criminals to Hunt Down War Criminals". According to Floyd, America's tax dollars are now being used by the Bush Administration "to hire the murderers of the infamous Mukhabarat and other agents of the Baathist Gestapo -- perhaps hundreds of them. The logic, if that's the word," writes Floyd, "seems to be that these bloodstained 'insiders' will lead their new imperial masters to other bloodstained 'insiders' responsible for bombing the UN headquarters in Baghdad -- and killing another dozen American soldiers..."

The Washington Post's Anthony Shadid and Daniel Williams first reported on these disturbing developments in late August: "U.S.-led occupation authorities have begun a covert campaign to recruit and train agents with the once-dreaded Iraqi intelligence service to help identify resistance to American forces here after months of increasingly sophisticated attacks and bombings, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials." Although U.S., officials wouldn't say how many former Husseinistas were being put on the payroll, "recruitment' had been "stepped up" despite protestations from members of the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council, "who complain that they have too little control over the pool of recruits."

… Shadid and Williams
"The emphasis in recruitment appears to be on the intelligence service known as the Mukhabarat, one of four branches in Hussein's former security service, although it is not the only target for the U.S. effort. The Mukhabarat, whose name itself inspired fear in ordinary Iraqis, was the foreign intelligence service, the most sophisticated of the four. Within that service, officials have reached out to agents who once were assigned to Syria and Iran, Iraqi officials and former intelligence agents say."

As Chris Floyd points out, this isn't the first time the U.S. has embraced world class thugs and killers and put them in service of the homeland
It appears to be "business as usual for the American security apparatus, which happily incorporated scores of its Nazi brethren into the fold after World War II, and over the years has climbed into bed with many a casually raping and murdering thug -- such as, er, Saddam Hussein, who spent a bit of quality time on the CIA payroll."… Bush's neoconservative advisors have thoroughly botched the post-war occupation of Iraq by
a) over-estimating the support the Iraqi man/woman on the street would have for Operation Iraqi Freedom and,
b) by under-estimating the strength of the resistance.

Caught with their pants down, but still claiming success, Bush's neocons, both inside and outside the administration, are clamoring for more troops to be sent to Iraq -- two divisions -- and for more money to be tossed down the occupation rat hole. As ever, it's easy and oh-so-painless to issue a call for greater sacrifice from America's young men and women from the safety and comfort of a Washington, DC air-conditioned office…

Conservative columnist Paul Craig Roberts recently wrote that the "war plans [of the neocons] are taking us back to the draft... Lacking sufficient military forces to occupy Iraq with its small population of 25 million, what would we do once neocons get us mired down in Iran or Egypt with their large populations?"… If William Kristol, Robert Kagan and their Weekly Standard crowd still think that Iraq is a noble enterprise, this would be just about the right time for them to escort their sons, daughters, nephews, nieces and cousins to a nearby recruiting office. And while they're at it, they might want to enlist as well." (emphasis added …ed)

SYDNEY CONSERVATIVE SPEAKERS' CLUB

The next meeting of the SCSC will be held Thursday, 25th September 2003, commencing at 7.30pm. Guest speaker is Mrs. Eve Hillary and her subject is: "Death Blow to Natural Supplements in Oz." The meeting will be held at the Lithuanian Club, 10 East Terrace, Bankstown, it has ample parking facilities. The Club is situated approximately 600 metres from the Bankstown Railway Station. There are a variety of restaurants along South Terrace for those wanting an evening meal. Cost of attendance is $4; bring a friend for the first time and there is no entrance fee. Books for sale will be on display from the Heritage Book Service.

Date for your diary: Thursday 27th November, 2003. Your opportunity to have a say. Each speaker will be allotted 5 minutes. On the night advise the Chairman of your subject

NATIONAL WEEKEND COMING UP

National Weekend details are: The New Times Dinner, Friday 10th October,2003; Seminar, Saturday 11th October; and Divine Service & Action Conference, Sunday, 12th October, 2003.
Speakers for the Seminar: Betty Luks, National Director, Australian League of Rights - "The New Day"; Eve Hillary, Health Care Professional and Researcher - "They are Stealing Our Children"; Donald Martin, National Director British League of Rights - "Is the European Union Faltering?" and Bill Daly, National Director, New Zealand League of Rights - "Is a Revolt Against Globalism Happening?" Looking forward to meeting up with you there and sharing fellowship with you!

The "New Times" Dinner ($29.50 per person) and Seminar bookings ($15.00 per person) are to be sent direct to the League's Melbourne postal address. Money Order or Cheque, made out to Australian League of Rights:- Box 1052, GPO, Melbourne 3001 - no later than Friday, 3rd October 2003.

SYDNEY CONSERVATIVE SPEAKERS' CLUB

BOOKS, BOOKS, BOOKS