How is it that any natural person outside of the private political parties can be brought before a court?
Commencing on the morning of Monday, the 14th February 1966, no politically appointed
Judge/Justice in any Supreme Court of Queensland who has accepted payment in Australian
Decimal Currency for their private services to (the “State”) cannot impose any pecuniary penalty
in Australian Decimal Currency and cannot imprison any private person for any term of
imprisonment as held to -THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT, 1899 63 Vic. No.9 as they themselves
hold the authority of an individual person only.
I refer to the public Seal affixed to the Judiciary Act No.6 of 1903, any politically appointed
Judge/Justice in any private Australian Court, who receives their Salaries and allowances in
Australian Decimal Currency in any format which includes an electronic transaction in AUS$.
Every politically appointed Australian Judge/Justice each hold a signed person to person contract in De
Facto Relationships with the Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Government, the Prime
Minister of Australia, and are paid out of the profits of the firm in the private currency of the firm
AUS$, which is an electronic currency as held to Electronic Transactions Act 1999.
The Judges/Justice so politically are inside the Council of Australian Governments or COAG and
only hold the single authority of the Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Government the
Prime Minister of Australia who personally holds the Seals of the Corporation
No politically sworn and appointed Judge /Justice in any private positions in any private Australia
Courts, can impose any pecuniary sentence in Australian Decimal Currency upon any private
persons, and to be paid into the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Australian Government in any
electronic transition or by the use of Australian Decimal Currency, held to Currency Act 1965 and
the Reserve Bank Act 1959.
No politically sworn and appointed Judge /Justice in any private positions in any private Australian Court, cannot imprison any person on the land of the Crown, for any purported Civil Law, Criminal Offence, of the privately elected Members of the Registered Political Parties of the Australian Government, the holders of the Seal affixed to the Crimes Act 1914.
J Madison said – “Most of these comments show that people who read this article fail to understand what the Petitioner said. There is no legitimate Court or Parliament or valid authority within Australia at the present time.”
One could be forgiven for thinking that – but I suspect most people get the general gist. It’s just that we each have our own personal perspective on the matter.
J Madison also said – “You cannot take anyone into a Australian court as none exist.”
And yet, they DO. Seems impossible things are easy when you have a brain-dead army of hired Gestapo mercenary bash-artist arseholes on the company payroll, and a complict media to reinforce the company narrative.
J Madison then said – “The only possibility is that the Army or a popular citizens uprising forcibly remove these traitors in the Parliament house the courts and bureaucracy and put them on trial for treason and sedition, after restoration of either our old Constitution with or without Charles.”
And there’s the rub – Mao was right. The chickens will never beat the foxes by playing the foxes’ game. If the chickens want justice, then them chickens gotta arm themselves and go postal on the foxes (and them foxes aren’t going to go down quietly – this is Game of Thrones material).
And then comes the rope and lamp posts. That’s my favourite part.
The author said – “No politically sworn and appointed Judge /Justice in any private positions in any private Australian Court, cannot imprison any person on the land of the Crown, for any purported Civil Law, Criminal Offence, of the privately elected Members of the Registered Political Parties of the Australian Government, the holders of the Seal affixed to the Crimes Act 1914.”
… and yet, they DO.
I guess that’s the difference between waving pieces of paper in the air and having a private army of hired shit-for-brains Gestapo mercenary thugs armed to the teeth and all too willing to bash, maim and kill their fellow Australians for thirty pieces of silver.
Al Capone wasn’t supposed to be able to do the stuff he did, either – and yet he DID.
Mao was right – “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun”.
Keep waving pieces of paper in their face, good luck with that – they’ll just shoot you.
Just saying.
@ J Madison,
“The only possibility is that the Army or a popular citizens…..”
There can never be a “popular CITIZENS” anything……
A CITIZEN is defined as CHATTEL of Government; You will never be able to refute any Corporate pretend Government :DEBT: so long as you declare yourself to be CITIZEN;
You will Never be able to Refute any “Government” control over your life, your assets, your property or any other aspect of being as long as you are CITIZEN;
Rant Over;
We (people) do have Lawful Capacity to be Imperial Land Forces as were utilised during both world wars; One Crown, One Uniform under One Flag
Most of these comments show that people who read this article fail to understand what the Petitioner said. There is no legitimate Court or Parliament or valid authority within Australia at the present time.
Sir Harry Gibbs said exactly that. Justice Kirby said that and Elizabeth the second failed her duty to fix it.
You cannot take anyone into a Australian court as none exist. They cannot uphold your common law or property Rights because they can only find in favour of their employer, ie. This illicit political subdivision of the USA.
The only possibility is that the Army or a popular citizens uprising forcibly remove these traitors in the Parliament house the courts and bureaucracy and put them on trial for treason and sedition, after restoration of either our old Constitution with or without Charles.
The debt these criminals have incurred then must be refuted. They being a private Corporation own the debt, not we the people, nor can it be secured to our Australian land. This is behind the black fella “voice” trickery. A attempt by Rothschild to get a land backing for a debt that these private “governments” have incurred.
Under section 44 the so called politicians being subject to a foreign power namely the RBA and the UN have no right to sit in parliament. Any amendment to the Constitution will be invalid.
In fact all of their legislation is invalid
@wontbdenied thanks for pointing that I was not aware of that fine point of ‘lawfulese’. The best part of charley dribbled down past ol “Lizzies clacker
If you read the text of which i replied to from va121;
“Pointing out that they (and Here I mean 99%) of people in the ‘government’ that are employed to hold legal sway or enforce the illegal laws that they propogate, means sweet blow all without the ability to enforce the fact that what these buggers are doing is illegal and get them arrested”
The word “illegal” is used twice
I have seen many of these types of letter sin the last 3 years and they seem to go nowhere. I am not sure if they are false hope, or just arrogance personified on the end of the receiver. Maybe both?
We believe so it is a maxim of law. Ed
Ignoring it means he accepts it .? Isn’t that the rules Sent from my Galaxy
Didn’t see the word ‘íllegal’ anywhere in that doc. Ed
@va121
We both know that there is not an outback dunny doors chance in a cyclone that there will ever be a trial awarded to We The People in the snakepit called the LEGAL realm;
Further, to have any hope of a Lawful win in any private capacity, we must not utter terms like “illegal laws”, “illegal” or “against the law” as these are all terms that render you (unwittingly) as Consenting to Their LEGAL “authority”;
Stick with Lawful, Unlawful and Rule Of Law as these statements are outside of the LEGAL realm to which any (presumed) Authority is CON-TRACTED to;
Never UNDERSTAND; Never CONSENT; Never argue their “LANGUAGE”
I have said it before and I will say it again!
Pointing out that they (and Here I mean 99%) of people in the ‘government’ that are employed to hold legal sway or enforce the illegal laws that they propogate, means sweet blow all without the ability to enforce the fact that what these buggers are doing is illegal and get them arrested.
If – and this is a massive ‘IF’ – we could get one or several of these swamp dwellers arrested, do you think their reptilian brothers will hold a fair dinkum trial?
I think not!