QLD LABOR RAMPS UP LNP FASCIST LAWS PROVING A ONE PARTY STATE

Queensland Labor Attorney General Yvette D’Ath is proving herself to be just as unpopular with Queenslanders as Campbell Newman.  According to the Friday’s edition of the Courier Mail on 19 June 2015, “Drinkers face Random Bar Booze testing from Police”.

This cultural shift will disrupt the good old Aussie tradition of buying your mates a beer at the local bar if the police Gestapo are allowed to turn up at essentially private outings by Queenslanders, without a warrant, and demand that you blow in the bag in order to build a case for the government prosecution for the pre-crime of violence.

What about the consent of the governed?  What happens to those people who refuse to blow in the bag?  Will the government charge them with being violent in a public place, like they charge drivers for being drunk behind the wheel if they refuse to submit to a breath test?  .

Or perhaps the Labor government will charge non-violent dissenters with being drunk and disorderly?  Will they hand dissenters fines, or will the police get violent towards the non-violent dissenters, handcuff them and throw them in the watchhouse for being drunk, violent and disorderly because they refuse to submit?  Will dissenters lose their right to go out and become banned from nightclub precincts altogether if they don’t submit?  Will continual dissent see normal law-abiding citizens end up in jail for pre-crime offences?

Will licensed pubs, clubs and restaurants be placed under economic duress by becoming unwitting targets in the further fascist crackdown to control the movement and actions of otherwise law-abiding citizens?

When will the young people wake up from their slumber?  Everyone in Queensland particularly young people need to learn Jurisdictionary® so they can protect and enforce their rights in a court of law without spending a large amount of money on expensive lawyers.

 

Advertisements

RICK WILLIAMS MP FAILED LEGAL ARGUMENT

Rick Williams, MP endorsed by Labor in the State Seat of Pumicestone, is a Defendant in the case against Unitywater and Moreton Bay Regional Council, is also a Justice of the Peace Qualified (Queensland) and a Certified Financial Planner.

The Courier Mail article on Wednesday 17th June 2015 attempted to sensationalize the story by calling his claim “bizarre”  to make it look as though Rick Williams was insane for mentioning the Constitution, Contract Law and The Torrens Title system that backed up the notion that his land is his own.  Not only that, but the Rupert Murdoch owned paper, the lap-dog of the political party system, said that the case raised “… serious questions about Labor’s pre-selection and vetting process”.

Labor cannot be seen to have a thinking man who appears to be part of the current Worldwide Revolution in Nationalism and Liberty in its ranks of boot-lickers, as all members of Labor are expected, nay required, to tow the party line, which is Fabian Socialist in nature.

The arguments against Unitywater and Moreton Bay Regional Council are on the right track, but are not completely correct, and in law, if there is a mistake or misnomer in one sentence, then the whole sentence is struck out.  Rick Williams is correct in his assertion that there is “…no enforceable WET INK contract of agreement” with Unitywater. Unitywater has a monopoly on its supply of water, where is the consumer choice here?

Unfortunately water is something that we cannot live without, and for that reason Unitywater operate an extortion racket, to make people pay for water which is an inalienable inherent right.  He is correct to state that Unitywater was placing him under economic duress.  Pay up or die for lack of water.  If Unitywater cut off his supply of water, would this not amount to attempted murder?

It all comes down to whether or not you know who you are, a fiction (corpse-oration:  dead man speaking: your birth certificate registration number) or are you a spirit inhabiting a body?  If you are an atheist and say you are just flesh and blood, then even cadavers are flesh and blood which puts you back to the status of corporation, for even the dead have estates.  This follows the old Bablyonnian law that declared all the slaves as being dead in the eyes of the law, but the remedy was in the Live Birth Certificate.   Learn how to attain legal remedy by learning how to conduct your own lawsuit using Jurisdictionary®

Rick Williams major fault with his argument, was using the Commonwealth Constitution and the Torrens Title system.  Unfortunately the Commonwealth Constitution is no longer valid or in operation because all the world became insolvent in 1933.  Can a company declared insolvent still operate?  Yes, if it is placed under Administration, the company Constitution becomes invalid and the Administrators control the functions of the company. This is what has happened to Australia.  We became insolvent in 1933, like so many other countries, and our Constitution largely became invalid from that date.  We are now run by the shadowy Central Bankers and IMF.

Although Councils do not technically have the right to tax, with the Constitution in mothballs, they can and do disguise the land tax as rates.  Their rate notices are purposely not broken down into its relevant subsections such as garbage collection, otherwise people would realise they are being forced to pay a tax to the owner of the land, which is the Crown, which is owned by the Private Central Bankers.

If people are forced to pay a tax on the land, then the owner of the land, the Council, representing the Private Banking Fraternity, can repossess the land.  If that is the case, then mortgages and legal title become just ink and paper.

As for the Torrens Title system of registration, just ask any farmer whether or not their land belongs to them, and you’ll be presented with a tonne of legislation that virtually eliminates all rights to land ownership in Queensland, indeed Australia, giving more rights to the land to those who seek to exploit it, being the big corporations and the government itself, than to the landowner.

The key is the word “registration”, particularly the prefix “regis” which means the King, the “Crown”.  Once anything is registered to the Crown, the Crown becomes the legal owner of the thing and you then pay to use that which you have surrendered; ownership is vested in the Crown.

The legal system, hence the economic system of Central Bank oligopoly is supported by stupid barristers and lawyers.  Having said that, all in the profession of law are not bad people. some such as Dr Graves from Jurisdictionary® have the peoples best interests at heart because they want you to learn how the system works so you can learn how to protect your rights, without having to use expensive and often out-of-reach lawyers.

Remember lawyers are bound to worship the court, and some do so in more ways than one, especially if they are part of the freemasonic clique.  The law schools state on one hand that uncertain clauses in contracts are illegal, yet mortgages with variable interest rates, with no upper limit, are allowed to stand as lawful.  How can this be so?

Rick Williams MP should quit the labor party and stand as an Independent, and cement himself as representing the people and not the corporations, which is the Labor and Liberal fascist Fabian Socialist agenda.

ALP Corruption Rife

First published by Pickering Post

Some interesting information came to light this week, (from, um, let’s just say an impeccable source deep within the Labor Party, and I would give my right testicle to be able to tell you who).

I always wondered why the disastrous Julia Gillard was feted as ‘PM extraordinaire’ at the ALP National Conference by Big Bill Ludwig whose union she helped steal hundreds of thousands of dollars from.

To quickly recap: In August of 1996 Gillard was discovered assisting to steal funds from her employer, Slater & Gordon’s, blue chip client, the AWU.

Peter Gordon pulled Gillard in and asked her to explain on tape but apparently the explanation was lacking and Peter Gordon claims to have sacked her on the spot.

S & G Partner, Bernard Murphy, who was also involved in the scam, was asked to leave at the same time. (Later as PM, Gillard promoted him to the Bench of the Federal Court.)

Bill Ludwig was livid and called in the cops to find the funds and lay charges. He also commenced Federal Court proceedings to recover $114,000 that Gillard’s lover, Bruce Wilson, had paid himself and others in redundancy payments once he had realised the game was up.

The Court duly ruled in favour of Ludwig’s application.

This is where it gets interesting. Strangely, and despite the Court ruling, Ludwig made no attempt to recover the $114,000 from Wilson and others.

Stranger still, although the AWU had sacked S & G and moved their account to the other bent Labor law firm Maurice Blackburn, who at the time employed lovers Roxon and Shorten, no attempt was made to recover the defrauded funds or to indict S & G, Gillard, Murphy or Wilson.

In fact Police were so frustrated by the lack of cooperation from the supposed “victims”, they closed the file.

Why? Why did the many “victims” of Gillard and Wilson (all except the AWU’s Bob Kernohan) suddenly want the matter shut down?

Bill Shorten certainly wanted it shut down and even called in the heavies to bash Bob after he refused to accept the safe Melbourne seat of Melton as a pay-off.

“You know, a lot of money changed hands around that time”, said my informant. “No, no I didn’t know that”, I said, sitting bolt upright. “Can you tell me about that?”

“Well, Ludwig was given $60,000 in cash and others were given lesser amounts.”

“By whom?”, I asked.

“Who do you think? Wilson of course!”

“Who were the others?” I asked. “I can’t say who, but let’s just say a lot of money changed hands”, he said.

I lit a rollie,“Let me get this straight, so AWU heavies, whose members were defrauded of hundreds of thousands, were silenced using those same defrauded funds? Do Vicpol know about this?”

“You bet they do.”

So now it makes sense… the missing piece of the puzzle! Shorten, Ludwig and others had, apparently inexplicably, shut down the police investigation because they had willingly become beneficiaries of the defrauded funds. (Although I have no direct evidence that Shorten himself was a recipient.)

Of course Shorten has always been the “go to” man for corruption cover-ups.

He went close to “burying” the $20 million Michael Williamson defrauded from HSU East branch members.

Shorten savagely targeted and victimised whistleblower Kathy Jackson and sequestrated the Union to get his grubby hands on the books.

Fortunately that didn’t work and Williamson, via a plea bargain (he accepted a charge of stealing a mere $1 million) is now facing a long jail sentence.

The Bligh Government, before it was thrown out, handed unaccounted-for millions to Ludwig’s Queensland Racing.

In 1999, Beattie’s Government privatised the TAB and sold it for the bargain basement price of $262 Million.

Who they sold it to (the shareholders) reads like a who’s who of Labor crooks, including Queensland Racing’s Bob Bentley, who he himself admits is “likely” to spend some time with Her Majesty.

Unitab now clears in excess of $100 million per year.

Ludwig’s grifted dollars are converted to numbers and those numbers are converted to power.

Power enabled the unholy alliance of Richo’s and Bob Carr’s NSW Right, Victoria’s Socialist Left and Ludwig’s QLD AWU to present us with a delightful three years of Julia Gillard.

The list of who Julia duly repaid is a long one.

Mafioso bosses ruled from their cells as indeed Labor luminaries intend to.

… and the disgustingly credentialled Bill Shorten has their next tick of approval.

Was Graham Rynders set-up by Newman Government to create the Queensland Gestapo?

Post by Renaissance Learning Foundation

Martin Bryant

Martin Bryant (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Where to begin?  Having seen the video of the infamous Port Arthur Massacre which was on You Tube for a brief time showed ALL the victims had been shot in the head.  If I was on a jury I would vote in favour of it being a professional hit rather than the murderous aggression supposedly displayed by one man, an intellectually challenged man called Martin Bryant who looks like a peaceful hippy dude.  I don’t believe the story in the Courier Mail on the weekend just gone where Rupert Murdoch’s journalists push the story that Martin Bryant had a look of murderous intent according to a third hand hearsay of a supposed guard assigned to protect Bryant.

Australia - Queensland - Queensland Police

The set-up or conspiracy surrounding Graham Rynders, former Assistant Police Commissioner of Queensland, and the new Bikie Laws set to be rammed through the Queensland Parliament, without the Fitzgerald Report’s recommended Committee Review, is prima facie evidence that the Queensland Government is out of control.  I would even go so far to say that the Campbell Newman lead Queensland Government has lost control of the State to those “faceless men” that the politicians keep referring to.

Word around the water cooler is that there’s a hit out on Campbell Newman, which would explain the crackdown of security around the Queensland Parliament.  After winning government his rapid unpopularity with Queenslanders leaves about 95% of the population with a grudge against him and his stupid laws.

One of 20 bikies from some gang

However I suspect these laws that are being passed on bikie gangs are directives which have been passed down via the United States Government, given that Brisbane will be holding the G20 in Brisbane next year.  Is our Fuhrer, Campbell Newman, a Dictator, or are his hands literally tied behind his back?  Has he been told to toe the line or get a bullett in the head, which is one of the favoured means of assassinations upon which the government can seize upon a “story” like the “story” that Lee Harvey Oswald, a lone gunman assassinated JFK, and magic bullett theory.  It is the fiftieth anniversary of the JFK assassination and Sixty Minutes is still pumping this stupid theory while simultaneously ignoring all the evidence, so they can shout TERRORIST to support the ramp up of more laws like the Patriot Act, or if the powers that be decided they didn’t want it public, Mr Newman would find himself in a very nasty car accident like Princess Di and Princess Grace, using an assassination technique called the Boston Brakes technique.

Back to Graham Rynders.  Rumour has it that this whole episode started when Campbell Newman rang now retired ex-Assistant Police Commissioner Kathy Rynders to ask her to go to Bundaberg to do the Flood Report.  She flatly refused but Mr Newman told her to think about it and that he would ring her back.  Upon the second phone call Kathy Rynders again flatly refused to interrupt her retirement with any work commitments.

Campbell Newman then asked Brett Pointing to go to Bundaberg to do the Flood Report which he accepted.  Did Brett Pointing conditionally consent to Newman’s request, with his reward being a raise and promotion?  Alternatively, was Newman leaned upon, perhaps by ex-Queensland Police Commissioner Atkinson to use Pointing to further the LNP’s agenda?  Brett Pointing has used Atkinson as a referee, so it is reasonable to suggest that they have a connection, which could be just friends, or possibly there is connection with freemasonry, given Penelope Wensley had an appointment at the PRIVATE Masonic Centre in Ann Street, Brisbane that had something to do with Pointing.  Was Newman leaned upon to parachute FBI Trained Bulldog Brett Pointing into position down the Gold Coast?

Rumour also has it that Graham Rynders was set-up by Queensland Police Commissioner Stewart or someone else of equal or higher authority, because when Graham Rynders learned he was being kicked out of the Gold Coast he went to his boss or someone of higher authority and was told to take a holiday and go shooting and that it would all be taken care of by the time he returned.  However, while Graham Rynders was away on holiday, suddenly the papers run with the exact opposite story that Rynders was missing in action when the bikie brawl took place.

The Bikie Brawl had to be a set-up by the police &/or the Government (ASIO) to oust Graham Rynders from his post, and to remove his standing and power within police ranks. The whole bikie thing stinks to high heaven.  It is a beat up.  Their rap sheet is pretty weak when you take out the drug charges and failing to appear.

Anyway, the Iran Contra scandal showed that it is certain people within the government that are the ones that ship the guns and smuggle the drugs, and the worldwide drug trade has no trade barriers, and the tentacles reach into the highest places.  Sure, the bikies could be involved in the drug trade, but the Mr Bigs are the untouchables – the ones with the network of power of blood oaths to conceal and never reveal as in the Freemasonic Order, High initiates in positions of power can control the evidence and control the media.

The killing of Damian Leeding who was shot in the head was the mark of a hit, possibly because Damian Leeding knew too much, or was about to talk.  The attempted hit on Gary Hamrey has the same hallmarks, however it was either a warning, or Hamrey was very lucky.  Whatever the case, it is reasonable to suggest that the hits emanated from the government or police or ASIO or even the CIA, which are the real Nazi’s.

The JFK Assassination (John F. Kennedy) showed clearly the links and that the American Nazi’s actually won WWII, and that JFK’s assassination was a coup d’etat to overthrow the American Government.  Australian Archives show that there was a Nazi gang here just after the war, and their diagram indicating how they were going to infiltrate and run the Australian government, with Black Ops to keep and take control of dissenters.

The ASIO and CIA are linked by the common fact that Australia’s Parliament has a Capitol Hill, and America has Capitol Hill, and the Vatican also has a Capitol Hill.  Both America’s private Federal Reserve (which is not Federal and has no reserves) and the private Reserve Bank of Australia commenced in 1913.  That is not a mere coincidence.

The signs and symbols are satanic in meaning and nature, and these people who have the real power live to control and kill and wreck havoc.  The assassins work for the bankers, the Rothschilds who are Zionists and who apparently own 80% of IS-RA-EL.  It’s not about the money, it’s about control for the sake of control.

Rynders had been told not to quit, but to wait until the Newman sacks him because the stingy LNP will then have to fork out about $300,000 to pay him out.

 

Today Tonight pushes New World Order in Queensland

Tuesday 10 September 2013

English: Information Awareness Office logo; fr...

Last night (Monday 9th September 2013) Brisbane Channel 7’s show “Today Tonight” had a segment on the Queensland Plan, and while the announcer did not orally say the words, on the screen came the words “NEW WORLD ORDER”.  We just about fell over.

They are openly announcing it, but if you say anything about the New World Order you’re told you’re a conspiracy theorist.  So is Queensland the epicentre?  Certainly could be, since they’ve already managed to get rid of Queensland Parliament’s Upper House in 1922 and changed our Constitution fraudulently, thanks to Peter Beattie.  They have everything in place to secede from Australia, and the Courier Mail has already published plans to abolish the States in Australia.

This is not the first time this has been brought up either.  There was some talk of Queensland seceding from Australia around the end of the Joh Bjelke-Petersen and the Fitzgerald Enquiry, from the 1970’s and 1980’s.  This idea is not new.

The ICLEI initiative is the plan to regionalise its agenda, which is United Nations Agenda 21.  If you think that our views are important to the Queensland Plan Agenda, it is an illusion to placate you.  The ICLEI Agenda, which, lo and behold is centered in Germany, is a plan to control us absolutely, including what and how much we eat, and charging us for water because they are privatising this as well.  Look it up – its in the Futures Market.

So if you stupid lawyers, and young wannabe lawyers think this isn’t an attack on you personally, use your brain dummy.  You’ve probably already been injected with who knows what – mercury, live cancer viruses.  They don’t care about you either, and you better understand this, if there is no economy because it’s all RIGGED by PRIVATE CENTRAL BANKS, and if there is tyranny (communism), there is no need for lawyers.  You’ll be out of a job, and severely out of luck.  So WAKE UP.

Quest for Murrawarri Republic

The Media Release below from the Murrawarri republic shows the way forward for our Aboriginal nations to claim sovereignty over their traditional lands.  Michael Anderson then explains further that this action by Uncle Fred Hooper is not just a flash in the pan. (see below). i fully endorse the current push for the sovereignty of our nations.  More independent Aboriginal states in the pipeline.

MEDIA RELEASE
10TH May 2013

QUEEN RECOGNISES MURRAWARRI REPUBLIC

 Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth the Second the Queen of England and the Head of the Commonwealth recognises the Murrawarri Nations continued Independence and Statehood.

The Murrawarri peoples declared their continued Independence and Statehood on the 30th of March 2013 through their Declaration of Independence and Statehood. In line with the Murrawarri Republic draft constitution a People’s Council was formed and will act as the Provisional Government of the Murrawarri Republic.

On the 3rd of April 2013 the Murrawarri Peoples Council wrote to Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth the Second advising her of the declaration of the Murrawarri Nations continued Independence and Statehood and requested Her Royal Highness produce documents that show how Sovereignty, Dominion and Ultimate (Radical) Title was obtained over the Murrawarri Nation Ancient Lands, Waters, Subsurface, Natural Resources and Airspace under International and British Common Law.

The documents requested were:

  1. Treaty documents between the Murrawarri Nation and the Crown of Great Britain outlining the conditions of such a treaty,
  2. A Deed of Cession document  that show the Murrawarri Nation has ceded Sovereignty, Dominion and Ultimate (Radical)  to the Crown of Great Britain, or
  3. Documents showing a declaration of war against the Murrawarri Nation and its people by the Crown of Great Britain.

The Murrawarri Peoples Council also advised Her Royal Highness that if these documents cannot be produced within 28 days of receipt of this correspondence, we will make representation to the United Nations to be accepted as the world’s newest Independent Nation in line with United Nations protocols.

We have confirmation from Buckingham Palace that shows the Murrawarri Peoples Council letter was received on 10th of April 2013. The 28 days expired on the 8th of May 2013 and the Peoples Council of the Murrawarri have not received a response from Her Royal Highness.

By not producing these documents the Crown has affirmed the Murrawarri Republic to be a continued Free and Independent State, in line with International law and covenants,

The Peoples Council of the Murrawarri will write to the Secretary General of the United Nations requesting United Nation assistance in the development of a recovery framework for the repatriation of all Ancient Lands, Subsurface, Natural Resources, Waters and Airspace within the Murrawarri Boundaries to the Murrawarri Republic under United Nations Resolution 1541 (XV) VI:

The Council will be also making representation to the United Nations to be accepted as the world’s newest Nation.

Any enquiries can be directed to Mr Fred Hooper on 0427957960 or Email at mundaguddah@gmail.com

Aboriginal Embassy and Mount Ainslie 29-10-06

Aboriginal Embassy and Mount Ainslie 29-10-06 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Goodooga, 20 May 2013 – – Aborigines who have just met for two days in Brisbane are looking to launching their own independent states, as the Murrawarri people have just done in northwest NSW and southwest Queensland.

“Clearly the people are now asking the pertinent questions relating to a process of asserting their continuing sovereignty as individual nations,” writes Michael Ghillar Anderson, Convenor of the Sovereign Union of First Nations and Peoples in Australia in a media release.

The last surviving 1972 founder of the Aboriginal Embassy in Canberra says the Brisbane treaty talks were “one of the best meetings that has been held on a single national issue, that I have attended for many years”.

Participants expressed great admiration for the steps taken by the Murrawarri Republic , Mr. Anderson writes, and they are now seeking further advice on processes they adopted for “this revolutionary action”. The participants would now make all efforts to follow the same or similar path.

“The participants of the conference and workshops know in their own hearts that this is what their Elders past have been seeking to achieve. Now the people are saying that now they need to make a greater effort to achieve what the Murrawarri have.”

There is to be another meeting in five weeks to further investigate domestic and legal positions for establishing “our own statehood under international law”. It would be open to all people considering these actions, including non-Aboriginal supporters.

Mr. Anderson points out that one thing holding people back from committing to the sovereignty movement is the question of citizenship rights and possible ramifications that may flow from it.

“One of the working points that was submitted in discussion was that, if post war immigrants are entitled to hold dual citizenship, which permits them to access all social benefits and then in retirement return to their own countries to live, such as Greece and Italy, and there continue to receive their social benefits, then so, too, can First Nations people within Australia have dual citizenship, that is they can be Anangu, Wokka Wokka etc and be Australians at the same time, thereby maintaining the benefits of that dual citizenship status.”

It was pointed out in a workshop that Aboriginal people seeking to declare their independence within their homelands need to return to Country. “Only those who live on Country are in a position to make such a Declaration of Independence.

But it was also important to understand, just as the Murrawarri Republic do, that they must also recognise the rights of their diaspora, that is, people who belong to that nation but choose to live outside of their Country, have the same rights as those living on Country, but are not immune from punishment for any offences committed against the law of the nation whose land they live on.

Mr. Anderson’s release in full:

Having attended a two-day Brisbane Treaty Talks conference and workshops on the continuing sovereignty of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, I can say that the meeting is one of the best meetings that has been held on a single national issue, that I have attended for many years.

Clearly the people are now asking the pertinent questions relating to a process of asserting their continuing sovereignty as individual nations.

They expressed their great admiration for the steps taken by the Murrawarri Republic and are now seeking further advice in relation to the processes that were adopted by the Murrawarri People to have taken this revolutionary action. The participants have consented unanimously to investigating the processes adopted by the Murrawarri Republic and will now make all efforts to follow the same or similar path.

The participants of the conference and workshops know in their own hearts that this is what their Elders past have been seeking to achieve. Now the people are saying that now they need to make a greater effort to achieve what the Murrawarri have.

A number of considerations were made and there will be a further meeting in five weeks time where we will further investigate domestic and legal positions that establish the legal foundation to establish our own statehood under international law.

Again this meeting will be open to all people considering these actions including non-Aboriginal supporters. The suggested date and venue is:

22 – 23 June 2013
Murri School,
1277 Beaudesert Road,
Acacia Ridge , Brisbane

It must be pointed out, however, that one factor that does, in fact, hold the people back from committing to the sovereignty movement is the question of citizenship rights and the possible ramifications that may flow from it.

One of the working points that was submitted in discussion was that, if post war immigrants are entitled to hold dual citizenship, which permits them to access all social benefits and then in retirement return to their own countries to live, such as Greece and Italy, and there continue to receive their social benefits, then so, too, can First Nations people within Australia have dual citizenship, that is they can be Anangu, Wokka Wokka etc and be Australians at the same time, thereby maintaining the benefits of that dual citizenship status.

It was pointed out in the workshop that if Aboriginal people seek to declare their independence within their homelands, they need to return to Country. Only those who live on Country are in a position make such a Declaration of Independence.

It is also important to understand, just as the Murrawarri Republic do, they also recognise the rights of their diaspora, that is, people who belong to that nation, but who choose to live outside of their Country, have the same rights as those living on Country, but are not immune from punishment for any offences committed against the Nation’s Law whose land they live on.

An example of this is: if you are a Wokka Wokka citizen and you choose to live within the land of Jageara then you are subject to the Jagaera law if they have declared independence. If you are on land whose owners have not declared independence, then you are subject to the laws originating from Britain .

The next meeting agreed to by the participants will address three main topics:

• The declarations of independence themselves, models and processes

• Governance

• Transition times.

The fundamental social factors, legal jurisdictions and methodologies for implementation each fit within the transitional process. The duration of the transitional process is not set, as there is a realisation that people are at different stages in their own understanding. But it was agreed at these treaty talks that information kits on sovereignty and independence be developed for circulation. It was requested that within this information kit a manifesto be created, pointing out all recent and past judgements in the law courts of the former British empire that go to recognising Aboriginal rights.

It was pointed out that we must be cautious about espousing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, as this Declaration requires First Nations Peoples to recognise the territorial integrity of the invader state. Alternatively, the majority of the rights defined in that UN Declaration are already included in UN Covenants and are recognised in international law. This includes the right of self-determination, without having to recognise the territorial integrity of the dominant state.

Another relevant international law, by way of a resolution from the UN General Assembly, is the 1970 Declaration on Friendly Relations that established the principles of equal rights and self-determination of peoples:

Every State has the duty to refrain from forcible action which deprives peoples…of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence. In their actions against, and resistance to, such forcible action in pursuit of the exercise of their right to self-determination, such peoples are entitled to seek and receive support in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter.

[Detailed in Principles VII-IX of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1541]

We look forward to the next meeting and hope we can see a greater number attend as this is a sovereignty movement that will not be stopped. (For those who were unable to attend, the treaty talks were webcast live.)

On the question of treaties, the participants agreed that the first step should be that those Aboriginal nations, who declare independence, should treaty with each other on each other’s recognition and commit to each to give support, if and when necessary in the formation of their state. No doubt future gatherings will locate other matters we each will treaty on.

In relation to treatying with the Commonwealth Government of Australia, it is not in our interest to treaty with Australia at this point as our people first need to be fully informed about all their rights as sovereign and independent peoples.

Michael Ghillar Anderson
Convenor,
Sovereign Union of First Nations and Peoples in Australia
0427 292 492 ghillar29@gmail.com
http://www.sovereignunion.mobi (or nationalunitygovernment.org)

To those who have contacted me asking for the full article by gary foley re noel pearson, all i can say is that i’m attempting to do so.

fkj
Ray Jackson
President

Indigenous Social Justice Association
isja01@internode.on.net

(m) 0450 651 063
(p) 02 9318 0947
address 1303/200 pitt street waterloo 2017
http://www.isja.org.au

we live and work on the stolen lands of the gadigal people.

sovereignty treaty social justice

An interview with Fred Hooper on Brisban’es 4ZZZ’s ‘Anarchy Show’

http://audioboo.fm/boos/1414792-audio-fred-hooper-murrawarri-republic-4zzz

Is Australia rushing into a Communist New World Order?

Australian Electoral Commission Declaration of...

Australian Electoral Commission Declaration of Nominations and Ballot Draw in the ACT Federal Election 30th July 2010 (Photo credit: Senator Kate Lundy)

Wednesday, 13 March 2013
Reporting from Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Okay, so we have an election due soon, and our Fabian Socialist heroine of the nation, Julia Gillard, and her bootlickers in the parliament are rushing through legislation before they are ousted at the next election.  Given the Fabian Socialist (communist) agenda, there appears to be a silent war declared on the people and on the people’s sovereinty.  In particular the government are rushing through changes to the following important areas that directly affect our democracy and right to free speech.

1.  New Media Laws are Stephen Conroy’s attempt to foist government controlled sanctioned media upon the electors dictating what you can and can not hear or read, and directing physical and/or monetary punishment should you break their journalistic rules.  Sorry Julia, I am not a trained journalist and don’t have any certification to say I am a journalist.  If you can provide me with any receipts, transactions, or payroll receipts that say that I am qualified to be a journalist, that I work as a journalist, or that I am employed and performing some function of government, then your rules do not apply to me.

2.  New Electoral Rules will mean a dimming of our democracy as the major implication behind changing the word elector to the word person, which in the legal world is legal fiction.  An elector is substance and means man or woman.

3.  The Gonski Review by the government lapdogs, the unions are now communist controlled farsical entities.  Education reforms bring us in line with the controlled communist system by controlling the curriculum which is now under federal control, while simultaneously controlling and weeding out teachers who teach things outside what the government has approved.

The article below from Mark Aldridge “Community advocate” & Independent Federal candidate for Wakefield SA
08 82847482 / 0403379500 http://www.markmaldridge.com

New changes to the federal electoral act, would not be supported by any Australian!

UNDER ELECTORAL LAW, AND THE MANY PRECEDENTS OVER THE PAST YEARS A GENERAL ELECTION CAN NOT BE INVALIDATED REGARDLESS OF THE CONDUCT.  Such issues open the door to electoral fraud, because any government that takes power is there for years and there is not a thing we can do, even if they gain your vote through deceit, fraud or simply steal it.

Each year in Australia our election process is eroded, the electoral act is re-written to empower the 2 major parties, and ensure they face less opposition, on top of conduct issues that are nothing more than legalised fraud, they open the loop hole and jump through it.

 COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT – SECT 41 Right of electors of States

No adult person who has or acquires a right to vote at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of a State shall, while the right continues, be prevented by any law of the Commonwealth from voting at elections for either House of the Parliament of the Commonwealth.

Electors are people who have a right to vote at elections, yet the word elector as of 2/2013 has been removed from around 100 sections of the Federal electoral Act, and replaced in the most with the word person, a person does not necessarily have a right to vote, so why the change, and more so why the silence?

The Act now says A person may apply for a postal ballot paper, not an elector, as if ballot papers can now be sent out without the need to determine if a person is registered to vote.

The game is on and we the people are not invited to play, the new feel of the electoral Act is one of winning at any expense by the major party’s because they both backed the new amendments, so here is a taste of what they have in store for we the people they are supposedly representing, you might want to grab a tissue if you still retain and patriotism if even an inkling of respect to our constitution.

Many will not have noticed the electoral changes also are backed by changes to the taxation Act and several others, and there is good reason they do not want you to know, because the most massive attack on our founding documents and our rights and liberty’s is about to take place, and it is best you do not know.

Parliament has recently passed legislation to allow the Australian Electoral Commission to directly enrol voters (on the basis of information obtained from reputable sources such as a states Road Traffic Authority, the Taxation department and elsewhere) and there is no safe guards to ensure those enrolled even know, and the reason the Act now says “persons” not “electors”, is because the new enrolments may not meet the requirements of an elector?

Changes to our whole democratic system should be in line with the protections found in our constitution, and conversant with our common law rights, and I do not believe any of the new changes are!

“Recent amendments to the Electoral Act allow the Electoral Commissioner to directly update or transfer a persons enrolment, or enrol an unenrolled person, without claim or notice from or to the person (sections 103A and 103B of the Electoral Act)”….(Persons not electors)

The amount of “persons” to be added to the electoral rolls could exceed 1.5 million, with a large percentage of people being unable to meet the usual requirements of becoming an elector, because since the constitution was written, we have had safe guards, like the need to be an Australian citizen to be an elector.  If a person decides they do not want to vote, or do not wish to enrol adding them with out their knowledge will not ensure an educated outcome, or is that the very reason for these changes?

Amending relevant legislation governing the protection of personal data collected by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), which would prevent the ATO from providing enrolment relevant data to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), to allow such data to be shared with the AEC for the purposes of facilitating enrolment, also allows said information access where it once was protected, but that is another story.

There are many other changes that will also allow the commissioner to invalidate votes, and several other serious matters, which I will cover in a further update, so why the decision to enrol with out their knowledge so many people living in Australia?

That is where the new postal voting system will come into play, but again, I still have some investigations pending, the fact is, nothing is done with out a reason, and if past conduct is anything to go by, we indeed should be worried.

In the state election in 2010 in South Australia, not only did 77,000 names going missing off the rolls, and near 30% of the Ramsay bi-election simply disappear from the count, over 22,000 postal ballot papers went missing or were deemed invalid, making matters worse 100s of thousands of postal ballot applications were handled by the 2 major parties.

Although while I was in the courts, this was all denied, until the electoral commissioner was forced to admit the truth by way of an affidavit, it is interesting another change seen though out the yet to be released federal electoral act, is the removal of the word DRO, district returning officers, the very ones that alerted me to many interesting breaches of the electoral Act during the final count of the SA election results, so they are now all gone.

Another of the many changes to the act, include the doubling of the costs of nomination and the doubling of the endorsements needed by independent candidates and Minor parties, making ones candidacy harder and more expensive to achieve.

The direct result will be less choice, and more votes to those who endorse these new laws, again disregarding the peoples rights.

We also see changes to the publicity and validity of “changes”, where once the commission was obliged by the Act to publish certain materials in a local paper, or at the very least in the government gazette, now a simple inclusion somewhere on their website has now become adequate.

Ease of de-registering political parties has also been addressed, but as expected there are no disadvantages to the two partys position, and not a hint of improved rights for the voting public.  We see no changes to address political partys misrepresenting their position, or dressing up as other political parties, we see no changes to the unfair preferential system, or to ensure we have adequate information or even adequate ballot papers.

Dodgy how to vote cards are not addressed neither are identity checks nor even security measures beyond the use of a pencil and rubber.

Major partys handling 100’s of thousands of postal voting applications is still acceptable practice, even though the JSCEM (Joint standing committee on electoral matters) recommended the complete opposite, in fact most of the changes recommended by the JSCEM to empower voters over the past 20 years are not adopted, in favour of changes to ensure the 2 party system takes a stronger hold on determining the outcome.

Lack of information to ensure voters can cast an informed vote has increased rather than remedied. More people will miss out on their vote and the electoral commissioner can now reject a ballot paper even easier.

Rather than increasing identity checks, we see less transparency, our electoral rolls will now become more inaccurate rather than ensuring they are competent instruments designed to protect the integrity of our election process.

Over recent years our elderly and disabled have endured a decline in support services, and the JSCEM recommendations to offer more support were also dismissed,one must wonder why we dare let those with the most to gain from structural biases continue to write electoral law.

Pre-poll voting used to demand those casting their vote signed documents to prove who they are, and that they had a right to vote, now even this protection has been taken away again undermining the integrity of the electoral system.

Over 3.1 million Australians are either not enrolled, refuse to attend, or simply have no idea how to cast an informed vote, and the new ideals preferred by the major political parties are all about ensuring they maintain power, rather than inspiring Australians to embrace our once fine democratic system.

I will continue to study all the changes made this week (28/2/13) and list them here by amendment, but lest to say, after 100 years of the word Elector and the constitution using the word Electora complete change to the use of the word “person” is not to empower an equitable electoral outcome.

One would have hoped over 140 changes to the federal electoral Act just prior to a federal election, would be news worthy, but in my years of exposing corruption in the system, it never has been.

The new changes empower the 2 major parties, they do not help inspire participation in our democratic system, they are biased deliberately in favour of those who write the law.

Our supposed independent review process “the board of the JSCEM” is adorned by major party members, and even when they recommend changes that reflect the will of the Australian people, even those recommendations are tossed aside by people who we employ to protect our best interests, here lays the whole problem.

Not only must we change the system, ensure it is Independent of political interference and self interest, we must ensure it allows both educated and freedom of choice, with over 370,000 ballot papers invalidated simply because voters did not have the right information to even cast a valid vote, (votes that were a deliberate attempt to be cast as valid) we can rule our democratic system “Broken” and there for the outcomes of the process are no longer just.

Mark Aldridge Independent Candidate