Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Australia the new Paedophile's Paradise?


It seems that the Australian 'justice' system is in support of paedophilia.

Is it letting out criminals, so that they can re-offend, create more victims from the slave populous, and keep the 'justice' business afloat?

From Queensland, Gary Brabham raped a 6 year old girl and only gets 6 months jail...

From Victoria a CONVICTED pervert gets 'unlimited' (?) access to fresh meat, i.e. children of the slave population.


Would the sentences be different if children of the judiciary were raped?

Just showing the peasant victim's their true standing at law, i.e. that of a slave.

Note:

IF you do not pay unlawful fines from a toll company you can and will end up in prison for over a year, depending on the amount, i.e. more than for raping a 6 year old girl.

Still not caring about taking 'action' ??? !!! ???

Too much footy and beer in the house ???

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

Centrelink involved in unlawful extortion racket



It's bad enough that Centrelink is scamming it's clients millions of dollars annually by falsely declaring that the recipients have 'breached' Centrelink guidelines, as a result their payments being stopped, but now we have obtained information that Centrelink is unlawfully using debt collectors over falsified debts (a criminal act).

Is there no boundaries that the corporation conglomerate will stop at to extort cash from the 'weak'?

On a side note the true colour of Australian law is that of "Guilty until proven innocent", where absolute and strict liability is (unlawfully) applied. This falls under Roman Law.

See article from 6 December 2016 of the headline:

Guilty until proven innocent – Centrelink gone rogue

The Independent Member for Denison, Andrew Wilkie, urged the Federal Government to call to heel Centrelink which is generating numerous incorrect debt notices and frightening the community with heavy-handed tactics and debt collectors.

Centrelink has begun using a new automated system that matches government payments to tax records to identify fraud or overpayments worth up to $4 billion.

However based on complaints to his office, Mr Wilkie said the new IT system was spitting out numerous incorrect debt notices among the $4.5 million compliance notices produced daily.

“I have no problem with the Government retrieving genuine overpayments or cracking down on fraud,” Mr Wilkie said. “But I do have grave concerns with Centrelink acting like loan sharks and treating people as guilty until proven innocent and sending in the debt collectors.”

Mr Wilkie said his office has heard from distraught and terrified people wrongly receiving debt notices of up to $6500 that date back as far as 2010. They are given three weeks to provide documentation to Centrelink to prove they were not overpaid. If they have changed address, they may not even receive the debt notice.

“These people can explain why they were not overpaid, but are struggling to lay their hands on the documents to prove it as the so-called debt dates back years and in some cases their employers have gone out of business,’’ Mr Wilkie said. “How many of us could lay our hands on a pay slip from six years ago?”

Mr Wilkie said if people could not prove the debt was incorrect, they have to pay up or risk a visit from the debt collector.

“Clearly this new IT system is badly designed and must be sorted out,” Mr Wilkie said. “The Human Services Minister, Alan Tudge, should drop his Grinch act and suspend the program until Centrelink is confident of its system integrity. We don’t treat people as guilty until proven innocent in Australia, unless you’re Centrelink it seems.

“If Minister Tudge does not act, the program will be exposed as another cruel and ideological attack from the Liberal Government on the nation’s vulnerable and disadvantaged.”

Queensland's dodgy government passes law at 2:30am when the sheep are sleeping

This bad enough that literally every single law in Queensland is invalid from the moment the upper house was removed from the law making process, but passing laws at 2:30am seriously??? !!! ???

Just another dodgy 'money for mates' law passed while the slave population are sleeping.

See article from 1 Dec 2016 by brisbanetimes.com.au of the headline:

Public servant super laws passed overnight

The LNP opposition has accused the government of rushing through laws to get its hands on public servants' superannuation.

About 2.30am on Thursday, the government passed its Revenue and Other Legislation Amendment Bill.

 
The Queensland government has passed laws that will change how some public servants' superannuation is calculated.

Shadow Treasurer Scott Emerson said the changes could leave a public servant with more than 30 years' service $210,000 worse off.

"These changes will leave core public servants like teachers, police and nurses tens of thousands of dollars out of pocket," Mr Emerson said.
"In some cases this will cost public servants hundreds of thousands of dollars."

He accused the government of rushing through the laws late at night.

"(Treasurer Curtis Pitt) was caught trying to sneak through a change that could leave some public servants hundreds of thousands of dollars worse off," Mr Emerson said during the debate.

"We are seeing this Treasurer raiding public servants' superannuation."

The largely procedural bill includes a change to the State Public Sector (Superannuation) Act, which gives a government superannuation officer the power to change the multiple that dictates how much money an eligible worker receives from the fund when they go to cash out upon retirement.

The bill previously would have given the treasurer of the day the powers - but Mr Pitt introduced an amendment to that aspect overnight.

Currently, the formula is roughly the final salary of the worker multiplied by the multiple, which increases depending on the number of years of service - an increase in salary has an "immediate" increase in the accrued benefit for scheme members.

Workers eligible for the scheme could negotiate to use allowances to increase their overall salary; for example, a public servant with a base wage of $90,000 could negotiate to include $30,000 in allowances in their take home pay, bumping their salary to $120,000.

Under the changes, workers can no longer have their negotiated allowance payments count towards their overall pay, which lowers the multiple used.

Mr Pitt said the bill formalised the "existing administrative process to manage unfunded windfall benefit gains resulting from artificial salary increases".

"This amendment applies only to employees with defined benefit accounts," Mr Pitt said.

"There is no effect on the benefits accrued before the artificial increase in salary and there is no change to the treatment of normal salary growth, promotions or existing allowances."

Mr Pitt said if an employee believed a decision to adjust their multiple was an inappropriate application of the law, they could appeal under the Judicial Review Act.

He said the bill was no secret and accused the LNP of scaremongering.

"Sometimes an employee's permanent salary is increased artificially - for instance, because irregularly paid amounts such as loading are included," Mr Pitt said.

"This creates an immediate increase in the employee's defined benefits entitlement.

"While there is an immediate increase for those employees with a defined benefit account, those other employees with an accumulation account receive no such increase.

"That is not fair ... It is about making sure that co-workers who sit next to each other are treated in the same and equitable way."

The LNP did not oppose the bill, but opposed clause 68, which addressed the ability to change multiples.

The bill also allows state government and council workers to choose their own superannuation fund.

Monday, December 5, 2016

Justice for the serfs for superannuation theft may take 20 years

So let's have a look at a practical example of how law works in a colony of the United Kingdom called Australia.

So, you've gained access to a computer in the institution you lay your head at night to sleep in and you've gone on a legal crusade to find 'justice'. In your crusade you have been convinced that you're a 'free man' and that only one (universal?) law applies, that being "cause no harm".

Now armed with this knowledge you comprehend that 'theft' is also part of this universal law called 'cause no harm'.

Lucky for you that Australia's judicature has also caught on to this, as it's also defined in 'Common Law', where theft is considered a 'criminal' offence.

So, let's take for example a member of the masses / general populous / serfs / tax slaves / 'mums and dads investors' walks into a mobile phone retail giant and steals a 'dummy' mobile phone, who has the unfortunate luck of being caught by Australia's finest policy enforcers, will end up with a criminal record / conviction for 'theft', you know from the 'cause no harm' law.

If the same member of the above mentioned pleb populous would venture into a office stationary franchise to steal a box of 100 pack of 28mm paper clips of the retail value of  $0.94, and were to be unfortunately caught, one should be charged for the theft of the 'profit' on that item. None the less it is still theft irrespective of amount ($0.23?).

So let's do a flip to the situation where the victim is a member of the tax slave populous, you know the beer and footy bogan crowd.

Let's put aside the fact that that ATO (Australian Taxation Office) is not a lawful (it is a 'legal'?) entity.

Let's put aside that superannuation is a fraud on the unsuspecting masses.

We'll stop here as if we keep mentioning of what we should put to the 'side' we may not finish this post.

An article in the mainstream media stated that there are 2.4 million workers ( read tax slaves / serfs / bogans, etc etc - geez the mainstream media gloss things over) defrauded of their superannuation to the value of $3.6 billion for the financial year of 2013-2014.

Now this is the BEST part (NOT!):

IF you want 'justice' for your person with regards to your stolen superannuation it may take up to 20 years, see attached illustration:


How law works against criminals within the 'system' 101:

  • If policy enforcers / employees of a law enforcing monopoly, break into your house (unlawfully) and beat you senseless (until you cannot remember your name), as in the example of Corinna Horvath, you have to seek remedy outside of Australia, namely the UN (Human Right Commission), and it takes 20 years for an employee of  Victoria Police to get charged.

  • As an example in Victoria when you obtain an unlawful 'fine' originating from Victoria Police, where it comes from a person (NOT a police officer) sitting in a car parked illegally on a nature strip taking photos (with equipment not certified by the NMI - National Measurements Institute) of a vehicle traveling above the speed limit and do not pay it, the registered person of that vehicle is automatically classified as guilty (in breach of the law), the unlawful fine progresses to a warrant from an unlawful sheriff, where if you do not pay, they clamp the vehicle or STEAL that person's possessions.

Their 'remedy' can be reached in as little as one year, the slave populous 20 years...

STILL not hurting enough and want to keep watching the telly?

Australia's 'laws' made by corporations for corporations.

Corporate Criminals: 1, Slave population:0

The 'Australian Government' forcing law on people

Warning to:
sensitive people, people who get hurt by words, facebook wannabe lawyers who are just online legal studies students, 'free man' theory promoters, lawful rebellion protagonists, and many others who we do not care about...

'Conspiracy theory' content contained within
(i.e. NO case law for facebook legal studies patrons to hijack as their own)

So, we (the people) are apparently told that we live in a democracy, which according to Black's law dictionary 2nd edition (1910) conflicts with living in a monarchy (as we have a Queen), but that's another post or dozen which could be entertained at a later point.

Damn you Sue v Hill damn you!

Anyway, we are also told that we have laws (yes silly, more than one - 'cause no harm') that MUST be in accordance to the supreme document called the 'Australian Constitution', so much so that a court, aptly named the High Court of Australia, has been set up to make sure that ALL laws abide by this Constitution.

The herd populace can even challenge the law that is used against them, from e.g. an unlawful parking fine, in this place called the High Court of Australia.

BUT the plot thickens....

ALL Australian courts must be enacted lawfully, meaning their empowering document, their respective 'Act' must have the correct process to be in circulation.

An example of an alleged 'court' in Victoria, where the slaves get fined unlawfully from, is one that's called the 'Infringements Court'. This is not a legal nor lawful court, as it does not have an empowering document creating its existence, namely the "Infringements Court Act (of whatever year it comes into existence)".

Conversely the High Court of Australia, has its empowering document called the High Court of Australia Act 1979.

Remember that all 'laws' (read Acts) must be in line with this document called the Australian Constitution.

Chapter III of the Australian Constitution  also defines how the judicature is to function, including the High Court.

Now, as an example we move along to this law (Act) defining the existence of the current High Court called the High Court of Australia Act of 1979.

We will also note that laws (once again Acts) are to be passed once they obtain royal assent, that being by the current UK monarch, in this case Her most excellent majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

We are also told, via a piece of legislation, that laws submitted can be given royal assent by the Governor-General.

The Australian Government tells the people that Sir Zelman Cowen was put in office as Governor-General from 1977 - 1982, i.e. the time when the High Court of Australia Act 1979 was put into 'force', see illustration below:




Why was this Act put into 'force'?

Why was it not in 'circulation', or 'enacted' or  to a much lesser extent in 'operation'?

This Act was put in by the 'Australian Government', not the de jure (based on law) government as described in the document called the Australian Constitution.

Is this why this 'Act' is in 'force'. Has it been forced upon the people?

Do YOU know where the High Court of Australia Act of 1979 fails to be enacted 'lawfully'?

Sunday, December 4, 2016

Mainstream media concealing ex 'top cop' speeding away crime?

So the corporation conglomerate commonly referred to as the 'government' tells it's slave population that "speed kills" via graphic television ads and also that (speed / red light)cameras save lives.

When the government resorts of TV commercials you'd think something dodgy would be up, right?

Of course not you tin foil hatter slash 'conspiracy theorist'!!!

Well the government DID advertise to people that they must fill out the 2016 census forms, where many people on social media posted that there was no such lawful direction to do so, which also fell under the #censusfail hashtag for a botched up IT infrastructure concerning the census.

Can you even trust the mainstream media with reporting accurate or factual events?

Well, not from where we stand with the reports of fairly 'important' news articles that we were made aware of.

Lets take a look at recent one with regards to a former 'top cop' with regards to his road behaviour and an alleged attempted car jacking.

The newspaper publication the Herald Sun published this article on Saturday the 3rd of December 2016 sans comments in red:



What we find 'concerning' is that an ex 'top cop' was astute enough to notice that the Land Cruiser was 15 years old, but failed to note the number plates of the vehicle with the youths inside where the African youths had a weapon, allegedly a tomahawk.

Brand new Merc with no dash cam?

It was stated by the media in an online version of the article that the ex 'top cop' sped away, therefore he admitted that he was 'speeding', a criminal offence at law.

It is unacceptable that an ex 'top cop' speed given the fact that police beat the populous into submission on road crimes, and that 'speed kills'.


Noel Ashby therefore should be charged for a number of offences including reckless driving since he sped away, IF the police are really serious about the road toll.

Does it seem like the police can do whatever they want, where even road laws do not apply to them because they did a 'defensive driving' course?

See article from adelaidenow.com.au of the headline:

Former Victoria Police Assistant Commissioner Noel Ashby caught up in attempted carjacking on the Princess Freeway



A FORMER high ranking police officer has had a terrifying encounter with a gang armed with a tomahawk in an attempted carjacking.
Victoria Police Former Assistant Commissioner for Traffic and Detective Noel Ashby has told how four “aggressive” men tried to force him to pull over as he drove on the Princes Fwy between Melbourne and Geelong.

“I looked over and there was a car very close to me and it was a four-wheel drive, probably a 15-year-old Land Cruiser,” Mr Ashby told 3AW’s Neil Mitchell.

“There were four African males in it and the passenger was just articulating to me to pull over.

“So I popped into the near side lane and then they moved across so I then pulled the speed back from 100 off cruise control to 80 and they did the same.”

It soon became clear the teens had sinister intentions.

“When they didn’t pass, at that point I saw the passenger had, what looked like to me a small tomahawk in his hand,” Mr Ashby said.

Mr Ashby had been driving to Geelong in his Mercedes when his car’s lane encroachment alarm went off.

He believes the youths targeted his car.

“They picked my car out. I was near the end. It’s a Mercedes and they clearly picked it out. Its clean, I look after it. I like cars, always have but they clearly targeted it,” Mr Ashby said.

Mr Ashby, who had been trained in defensive driving, sped away and the men continued to follow before later disappearing into traffic.

The former top cop said “anything could have happened” had he pulled over.

“I think I could have been in some trouble and I think people would normally act in good faith and potentially stop and that’s where the danger starts,” Mr Ashby said.

“I was wary straight away, the car was behaving OK, there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s less than a year old so there was no real reason for them to be indicating any problem with the car.”

Though under law drivers are required to pull over if there is a crash, Mr Ashby said that if anyone had fears they should instead drive to their nearest police station.

“The message is, traditionally if we get bumped we stop and the law says if there’s a crash of any description, that’s what we have to do and that has to be respected,” he said.

“But if there’s doubts, if you saw what I saw yesterday, how I felt yesterday, there is no way known I was going to stop. The next thing was Triple 000 and head to the nearest police station.”

The offenders were described as in their late teens and of African appearance.

They were driving a Land Cruiser which carried a red P plate that had white writing on it.

I didn’t get a chance to look at the numberplate ... that’s how quick it happens,” Mr Ashby said.

Anyone with information should call Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.

Originally published as Ex top cop caught up in carjack drama