From the February 1966 night when John Howard cheered on a neo-nazi, to the shady ASIO relationship with neo-nazi violence squads during the sunset years of the Liberal Party's ascendancy (1969 -72) , and finally right down until the present-day, there has been an odd relationship between the Liberal Party and so-called Nazis. Let's look at one recent example and ask some questions.
The British-Israel World Federation (BIWF) 'takeover plot' was the most ambitious neo-nazi scheme since the advent of the Palmer 'counter-gang' in the late 1980's. As this Kangaroo Reich Internet Page explains, the BIWF was the beneficiary of the K.D. Nicholls Estate to the value of about $500,000. The Federation was descended upon in 1999 by the neo-nazis, all eager for the plunder. An intensive internal struggle ensued, with the Palmer 'faction' which soon acquired executive influence, confident of expelling the legitimate Christian members and exercising control. Once the genuine British-Israel leader-members were removed, the neo-nazis would have been free to apply the assets, making Australian neo-nazism self-funded.
Of course it did not quite work out that way, with the official BIWF company (the structure was organised as a company) being wound up by a Supreme Court decision in April 2002. The Supreme Court action, sought by the legitimate members, led to the placement of the company's affairs in the hands of a liquidator whose mandate, as the court clearly noted, would secure the assets of the company in the hands of the BIWF's London headquarters. That body, it was expected, would eventually recognise some new structure in New South Wales, one that would exclude the neo-nazis.
However, the neo-nazis never abandoned their hopes of securing the bequest (now depleted) and have intervened since February 2003 in various parts of the wind-up process. Indeed, with their formation of a so-called 'British-Israelite World Federation Australia Limited', the neo-nazis have insinuated through means of a probate process connected to the finalisation of the affairs of the Estate, that their new bozo entity may yet be recognised as a suitable vehicle to realise the main asset - a property in the Blue Mountains (and residual cash). The legitimate members of the former BIWF have, of course, made their own organizational plans and have reacted properly to the latest manoeuvre. But it is more time, more expense.
Curiously, at each step of the struggle since the April 2002 Supreme Court wind-up order, and indeed in the full preparation of the neo-nazis' defence to that very process, the Palmer clique has received the intensive assistance of an experienced counsel. This remarkable fact has now raised serious political questions.
The Liberal Party Connection?
The solicitor/barrister acting for the neo-nazis is Mr. John Boyle of Boyle And Associates, situated at Eastwood and East Sydney.
Mr. Boyle was obtained to represent the neo-nazis in 2001, a remarkable find on the behalf of those in desperate need of legal counsel. It seems he was referred to the case through one of the neo-nazis, but the circumstances of his first-involvement are not clear. We shall happily publish his statement on the method behind his appointment to the case.
Mr. Boyle is a member of the Liberal Party, actually of its conservative fraction, a group that features members such as Lyenko Urbanchich and David Clarke (now a member of the New South Wales Legislative Council). Members of this fraction (as below) have had a long if tendentious relationship with Sydney neo-nazis.
It is not suggested here that Mr. Boyle was, or is, a neo-nazi. Quite the contrary! Mr. Boyle has established an Internet Site which may be consulted by the reader. Any cursory reading of the site would establish Mr. Boyle's solid Liberal Party connections. (See:www.johnboyle.com.au )
The Site notes that Mr. Boyle once directed the 'Chinese Special Branch' of the Liberal Party in the Haymarket area of Sydney, has travelled extensively to China and that he hob-nobs on occasion with senior Liberals. The writers certainly do not believe that Mr. Boyle harbours secret neo-nazi passions whilst acting out an entirely different public life. Of course, we could be wrong in that. If we are wrong and the gentleman is actually a neo-nazi, then we owe him an unusual apology (surely one should be proud to be a neo-nazi, if one seriously believes it's a great revealed truth?!). But we doubt that we are wrong, so we should conclude that Mr. Boyle is not a neo-nazi. Further, stationary issued by Boyle And Associates reveals that Mr. Boyle also serves as a 'migration agent' and almost certainly this occupation would involve him with Asian and other non-European migrants - something well-divorced from the public 'racist' persona of Australian neo-nazism. So we are at first left on one level only - with a counsel instructed to serve his clients.
That Mr. Boyle is a Liberal Party activist, and a member of its conservative fraction (he published a photograph on his Internet site of himself with David Clarke), does not mean he cannot, or should not, represent peculiar persons. He could represent Neddy Smith, or even a serial killer, if he chose. It is more a matter of how he represents or misrepresents (sic) his clients - which seems to be the issue.
The Clients: Serious Questions
The first problem lies in the clients. Counsel is obliged to take instructions. However, it is also the rules of the Bar and the precepts of the decided cases, that no counsel may argue something in which he could have no reasonable confidence. Nor does the sanctity of professional legal privilege extend to the commission of offences or knowledge of offences.
Mr. Boyle is an intelligent man. He has the advantage of interviewing his clients and being able to 'research' them. He represents them in a set of civil (although not yet criminal) matters and is thus most entitled to look at their essential credibility without appearing to go behind his instructions. He is entitled also to withdraw from further association with them. A number of obvious things must present themselves.
Essentially, Mr. Boyle should reasonably apprehend that his clients are for all intents and purposes - ideological neo-nazis. If they now assert they are Christians and British-Israelites (and he has argued in writing that they definitely are Christian British-Israelites who may have an interest in the Nicholls Estate), this posture on the nutzis' part could be perceived upon his logical reflections as merely additional ideological baggage added to their already extensive retinue of public 'routines'. Mr. Boyle would reasonably know that Palmer has once effectively denied being Christian, in newsprint no less (at a time when he was supposedly a British-Israelite) and can observe that the religious interests of his clients are shallow at best. Indeed, he is entitled to ask how these devoted souls actually converted from their non-Christian ways?? It all seemed very sudden, in fact precisely in 1999 and just after, right at the time $500,000 was there to be had. It should then occur to a reasonable counsel: why are these people so keen to fight for control of a Christian society - if not for the money?
Mr. Boyle has travelled to meetings (Humanist House 'Open Forum' and the 'Conservative Speakers' Club') with neo-nazi Mark Pavic, a man who served a prison sentence over the killing of his mother and the disposal of her body in Lake Burley Griffin, way back in 1985. Mr. Pavic has used Mr. Boyle's office address as his residential address for various 'legal' purposes; and he keeps the whereabouts of his lodgings secret because of a 'fear' his sister will one day 'pop him off' for killing their mother. Mr. Pavic, whilst being an intimate of the Palmer group, also served as a secretary for the left-wing organization, 'Politics In The Pub'. This remarkable relationship with the Left went on for a long time unchallenged. Was he collecting information? While a counsel may associate with whomsoever serves a legal purpose, the relationship appears personal. Why would a counsel allow it to be thought by any member of the public that he was personally associated with - an unsavoury individual?
Mr. Boyle is well aware that his neo-nazi clients say in the public media that they are terrorists, that they physically attack people on racial grounds. Of course, they are entitled to be represented by counsel too, but why would a reasonable counsel have faith that such people are truthful advocates of a particular Christian confession? And do this to the point where he carries out actual organizational functions for them? And claims by implication that they engage in Bible reading and other Christian works?
There are serious questions here - of common sense.
Mr. Boyle has protested in a letter to the solicitors acting for the BIWF company-liquidator in April 2003, and in some ways in the Supreme Court in March 2003, against the procedures put in place to wind-up the company and so forth, and cited his clients as potential beneficiaries of the residue of the Nicholls Estate. He went on in his letter to attack those who represent the legitimate BI group because they might have been able to "pilfer" the books of the former company, given that the liquidator gave them control over the storage of these materials. Yes, they might have pinched the lot. But it was the Palmer gang who introduced the greatest array of criminal psychopaths, thieves and misfits into the old Book Room of the company and effectively 'occupied' it for two years. The legitimate BI members say stock is missing. Is Mr. Boyle concerned with the moral quality of his clients? Or does he believe it was all made up by the legitimate members during the attempted takeover? It is one thing to say that a 'faction' in the BIWF dispute might be no good, but it is quite another to try to pass the Palmer gang off as an upright group of people. Yet, this is the effect of Mr. Boyle's argument to the Supreme Court. Was this argument simply a reflection of his instructions? Or, if he was involved in the processes of the new company set up by the nutzis (as we shall now discuss), was his appearance before the Supreme Court a deception of the court?
These questions of legal ethics are, in our opinion, hovering very close to something else. Mr. Boyle should know that this gang of psychopaths has no loyalty and its movers and shakers are just as likely to suggest to the police, a court or the Bar Association/Law Society that he misled them, rather than that they misinstructed him.
The Founding Of BIWFAL: Serious Questions Need Answer
What appears most odd to us arose from the schedule of fees which Mr. Boyle brought forward as his costs in the BIWF wind-up matter. First, he asserted his costs as in excess of $100,000, a fee which would have made him such a hot shot as to be the Aussie version of 'Clarence Darrow'. He then reduced his fees to about $57,000. The counsel representing the legitimate group only charged $38,000, and was much more experienced. Why the two discrepancies? Fees just don't deflate by $50,000 and certainly the rigours of running the case for the Palmer gang could hardly have involved a twenty thousand dollars upstaging of the fees charged to the legitimate group. All fees were, of course, billed against the dead company, a sort of feasting on a corpse. Could it be that Mr. Boyle was putting together a war-chest to secure the balance of the Nicholls Estate?
Then it became stranger still. Not long after the wind-up case was given judgement, the neo-nazis started making reference in public documents to the British-Israelite World Federation Australia Limited. In due course, such a company was registered with the Australian Securities And Investment Commission (ASIC) The registration was carried out by Patricia Holdings of Mosman, a company whose business is to 'create companies' ie. set up the paperwork framework for public companies. Their fees for BIWFAL's 'creation' would have been around $1100. There may have been an extra couple of hundreds in fees associated with the preparation of the company's constitution or articles. Given the gaggle of nutzis who are now registered with ASIC as 'directors' and members of the company, none of whom have the proverbial two bob between them, we must ask: where did the money come from to set up the company?
The BIWFAL has as its registered office Mr. Boyle's office address in Eastwood, which is also Mr. Pavic's legal address and supposedly his residential address for the purposes of company registration. Supposedly, the company operates its business from there too, a feat which must make for crowded living and difficult business operations. Why did a respectable solicitor allow all this?
The BIWFAL also has a Web Site, a remarkable construction that took a lot of time and effort. The Site is replete with plagiarised material drawn from the publications of legitimate British-Israel groups across the world. The Site misrepresents itself as belonging to a member of a "family" of religious entities in many countries. Yet, many of the same Christian groups have specifically repudiated their supposed family membership with the Palmer gang. They have done so by protest letters to the nutzis and by public disclaimers. This should convince Mr. Boyle that there is something wrong with his clients' claim to the doctrine and usages of British-Israelism. Interestingly however, it doesn't, if only for the incredible reason that it is Mr. Boyle himself who has 'ownership' of the Web Site.
The Website is situated at www.british-israelite-aust.org.au and is registered via the services of Domain Names Australia. The Registrant Contact is Mr. Boyle. The Administrative Contact is Mr. Boyle. The Billing Contact is Mr. Boyle. The Technical Contact is Mr. Boyle.
It surely might be time for ASIC to launch an inquiry into the BIWFAL. There is simply no reason for Mr. Boyle, who does not appear on ASIC documents in respect of this 'company', to formally control its plagiarised Web Site. The so-called company has plagiarised material from legitimate Christian groups who reject it absolutely. The so-called company was recently trying to register a logo, the historical property of another British-Israel group; is this so it could truly 'look the part'? The so-called company insists it is a genuine group ready to trade on the name-recognition it inspires. Now of course, our Federal Constitution guarantees freedom of religion and there is nothing to stop the nutzis proclaiming themselves The Church Of Adolf Hitler - if they are so minded. However, in the world governed by the corporations' law, false representation is a serious question indeed.
Are the Liberal Party hierarchs concerned with all these goings-on? What if it all became publicly damaging? The media has been helpful to date and has refused to touch the BIWF story. Somehow it doesn't match the evil-nazi-racist nonsense imposed upon patriotic groups as if they are neo-nazis and 'related' to the Palmer counter-gang. On this occasion, it is patriots acting against the nutzis, refusing them access to funds and new labels to employ in the media. No good liberal journalist is interested in that.
Nonetheless, we say unequivocally, that if Mr. Boyle himself was to come forward and tell us we have it wrong, we will provide his explanation of the material advanced here. We will withdraw anything that is wrong in fact or remotely misleading by imputation. We have nothing to hide and merely seek the truth. But it is a matter which is in the public arena now and which is heading very rapidly towards being a police matter and the time to speak - is now.
We note too that while Mr. Boyle is a good Liberal, and a supporter of its conservative fraction, the neo-nazis also have a connection of sorts with his fraction and most probably have had such a relationship outside of his knowledge. This knowledge is hard to come by and much of it near-forgotten.
A Little Bit Of Liberal / 'Nazi' History Makes The Wheel Turn Full Circle
The present-day Liberal Party conservative fraction of Lyenko Urbanchich and David Clarke began to coalesce back in the 1960's. It was very much a product of home-grown anti-communists and Cold War warriors drawn from several Eastern European migrant communities. By 1965-6, the nascent group was functioning through Captive Nations and a set of activist groups. These true-believer anti-communists soon rubbed up with the so-called National Socialist Party of Australia (NSPA).
Now we are accurate 'historians', not smear-mongers. We note that the 1960's NSPA neo-nazis were different in character to our modern-day nutzis. The earlier crew were themselves really 'anti-communists', funny ones who thought Hitler had shown himself to be the most effective anti-communist and with a bit of style-copying they thought they could save the conservative Establishment from the Bolsheviks. Unlike today's nutzis, they were short on weirdo racist cultism.
In February 1966, no less than John Howard, current Prime Minister, cheered on 'neo-nazi' Arthur Charles Smith, as he manhandled Francis James, a left-leaning clergyman with pro-North Vietnam views, at a hall meeting at Gordon on Sydney's North Shore. Lyenko had driven Smith to the meeting and brought a heckle squad to the hall. Various Young Liberals and migrant rightists gave Smith a rousing reception as he took an anti-communist position on the Vietnam War. Indeed, as Smith tells it, his 'role' was to ginger up the meeting and he succeeded admirably. Are we to assume the Zionists at the Anti-Defamation Commission and Australia-Israel Review don't know this? Of course, they do. And they know that 1960's neo-nazism was exactly as we described it and know John Howard as the strong supporter of Israeli aggression he truly is. But it is still instructive, very instructive.
We know that the research of Professor J.J. Ray revealed that Sydney's neo-nazis of the late 1960's were a rabid lot on red-bashers, friendly with the Liberal Party 'Right' around Lyenko, Geoffrey Holt (later a Liberal councillor on Waverley Council) and the others. The notorious neo-nazi con-man, Graeme Royce, met with these Liberals on a regular basis and Mr. Paul Unger, now a "director" of the BIWFAL, a close friend of Royce, also mixed in the same circle. The conservative Liberals operated the Fifty Club which demanded that Smith's 1968 Domain rallies be properly protected by the police. We also know from research conducted by two very-differently-minded doctoral students, that the ASIO, in the interests of serving the Liberal Country coalition government in the years 1969-72, sponsored and closely supported, or on some occasions simply indulged, the neo-nazi violence squads against the Extreme Left. Bluntly, all fractions of the Liberal Party considered the Nazis - useable dupes.
It is significant therefore that Palmer should also seek out the 'assistance' of the Liberal Party's 'Right' fraction. Palmer has known for years of the rumours that members of this fraction gave support to Special Branch provocateur Bob Cameron, the supposed 'victim' of the Ananda Marga bomb frame-up, and that they employed him for a certain purpose in 1979. Palmer's connection with the fraction is merely the continuation of an old relationship, under new conditions and for other purposes. In private conversation, Palmer has discussed this fraction more than once, and expressed a close interest in its workings. He was, after all, a candidate for the Liberal Party in Cairns in the early 1970's and reserves a certain affection for the party. However, as yet, we have no precise evidence as to whom within the conservative fraction, Palmer deals. We await therefore the resolute action of Messrs. Urbanchich and Clarke to discover the facts and discipline the person or persons involved. And we call on them to do this.
The conservative Right fraction in the New South Wales Liberal Party, once a great shock-horror show for breast-beating trendies, has long-since exposed itself as simply a grouping of system-servers. There was nothing ever truly oppositional in them and the modern Liberal Party still accommodates them very well indeed. But at the level of self-deception, the nutzis may conceive them as some sort of political ally to whom services can be sold. Some of these Right Liberals may serve the overall government (and thus State) agenda, in cultivating links with these people.
How could it work? If the nutzis could seize the assets of the legitimate BIWF, then Australian neo-nazism would become self-funded. They could pass off their counter-gang activities through a variety of labels: open-Nazi, KKK, British-Israel. Each time, they could target and destabilise different patriotic or nationalist organizations. That would serve the overall Liberal agenda no less than a Tony Abbott helping out some yobbo a few years back to cripple the One Nation party with a major law suit.
Having the nutzis financially secure at the expense of a small Christian fraternity would guarantee permanence. It would embolden their nuisance making. So the wheel may have turned full circle. Serving the state power is the ultimate 'release' for neo-nazism. There is no suggestion here that Mr. Boyle knows all this and is a willing party to it. More than likely, this is the first time he's ever heard of it. Yet, the relationship of these nutzis with State parties and groups remains a fact and anyone, an experienced counsel too, may wonder who's dealing the cards.
Risks For Liberals As Struggle Against Nutzism Will Be Fought To The End!
The struggle against the neo-nazis carried on by the British-Israel members and the Australian nationalists has merged together on the ground into a single-minded effort to expose and disintegrate this band of pirates, psychopaths and provocateurs.
There is no doubt this latest BIWFAL provocation will be defeated and the counter-gang once again marginalised. There is a fulsome determination to resist the nutzis. This struggle will be fought through to the end.
However, we are interested in learning the truth, learning what lies behind the mealy-mouthed lies and posturings of the nutzis. We can see on this occasion a Liberal Party connection and if certain Liberals are willing to employ this gang - then it is on their heads if we drag them into the maelstrom.