Category Archives: Commonwealth of Australia
NOTICE AT COMMON LAW
On the………………………… day of……………….2021…………….am/pm
Peter Alexander Gargan
Of, 1365 Corringle Road
In the Electorate of Gippsland
The Prime Minister
Scott John Morrison
Canberra ACT 2600.
REF: Being Grossly negligent in allowing the States of Australia to ignore the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 and Constitution, Laws of the Commonwealth and the Federal Court of Australia to ignore its obligations at law.
This document is Time Sensitive.
- I, Peter Alexander Gargan (as commonly called), being the Undersigned Affiant, do solemnly swear, declare, and depose:
- That, I am competent to state the matters set forth herein. and
- That, I have first-hand knowledge of the facts stated herein. and
- That, I the Affiant am a Natural Human Man. and
- That, I the Affiant am within the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. and
- That, I the Affiant am a subject of Elizabeth the Second By the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her Other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.
- For Consideration
- I write in the utmost of good faith, as a law enforcement partner of the Crown in right of the Commonwealth, to lay a complaint and information before you as Prime Minister, and a number of key members of your government with the aim that if you do not act upon it, it will be on the public record that you have offended S 44 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) which carries three years imprisonment and will forever be disqualified from sitting in the Parliament of the Commonwealth under S 44, of the Constitution.
- I claim the status of law enforcement partner because in S 13 and 15F Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second as heir and successor to the King in 1913 is bound to recognise this Act as legitimate, the High Court has confirmed it as legitimate in 1915 ( R V Kidman ( 1915) 20 CLR 425) In 1487, in the Statute 4 Hen VII Ch 20 ( Imp) the then King granted a franchise to every subject of the Queen of the Constitution to partner with the Crown to obtain a profit for the Crown as well as themselves, by involving themselves in law enforcement. This complies with S 5 Partnership Act 1891 (Q).
- The partnership is further confirmed in S 42 and 43 Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Q). The High Court has confirmed partnerships exist whenever two or more entities enter an agreement to work together to obtain a profit. (United Dominions Corporation LTD V Brian Pty Ltd (1985) 157 CLR 1.)
- The partnership cannot be conducted uberrimae fidei by the Crown unless the Crown Courts abide the Free Access to Courts Act 1400, 2 Hen 4 Ch 1 S 4 and 5. In force in the Australian Capital Territory and cease protecting alleged criminals.
- There is at present a criminal cartel running law enforcement in the Commonwealth, every bit as horrific as the Deep State that is being dismantled as we speak in the United States of America. That cartel is the legal profession, with large numbers of its members in the Parliament of the Commonwealth and in your government.
Letter to the Editor
To the Editor, well said in your about the Editor post.
However it is the 1985/86 Australian Act by Bob Hawke and it has no relevance to the Federation because there is no States left in the Federation.
SS106, 107 and 108 states that all Colonies shall becomes States with the establishment of the Commonwealth of Australia and they are all bound by the Commonwealth of Australia Act 1900 UK, proclaimed in September 1900 and came into effect on the 1st January 1901.
Six States formed the Federation NSW, VICT. QLD, TAS. S.A. and W.A. who joined the Federation by July 1900.
August 1902 NSW changed their Constitution without following the indissoluble Commonwealth Constitution without going to the people of NSW for a referendum as required by law.
Then in 1904 WA did the same as well as Qld in 1924, plus do away with the Senate without referendum. 1934 Tas. and SA followed suit, also against the Constitution and that now only leaves Vic. because all the other States left the Federation and revert back to Colonies without a referendum.
1975 Vic. finally changed their Constitution without a referendum and that left no State in the Federation, so how can the States and Hawke form the 1985/86 Australian Act when no States are part of the Federation.
They outsmarted themselves as treasonous traitors to the people of the Commonwealth of Australia.
by Anna Von Reitz
Apparently, they did a process in Australia that is very similar to what they did here (US), except that what they did there started from the basis of a Constitutional Monarchy— which, as it has never been repealed, remains the basis for the land and soil jurisdiction of Australia, even though they are running Australia as a corporation structure in the international jurisdiction of the sea and are enslaving Australians in that foreign jurisdiction just as they were caught enslaving Americans in the same domain.
This, I think, goes to the heart of the Queen’s behavior revealed in JAH v. Regina — of taking the
Coronation Oath, and then, three days later, assuming the Chair of the Estates instead of the Throne.
There is something very peculiar going on with the Throne and it may be that the Throne itself has been lost or compromised in some way so that it is not viable for the Queen to exercise its offices, but whatever it is — debt, blackmail, fraud — it is standing in the way of the British Government functioning properly, and that leads to the government of Australia being in a Mess also.
My understanding of the British system is still fledgling compared to my knowledge of the American system, — but it is my understanding that in the British Land Law, all land and soil is held by the Queen in Trust, but she does that with multiple Trusts—- there are the various National Trusts which hold historic places for preservation purposes– castles and so on, that would otherwise fall into disrepair, parks and nature conservancies, etc. and there is the Public Trust which consists of infrastructure of Great Britain — the railways, train stations, harbors, bridges, docks, public utilities, etc., and there is the Queen’s Trust which includes all the land of Great Britain — with land defined as everything six inches and below of the soil. As a result, any building in Britain that has a foundation belongs in part to the Queen, which severely limits the definition of “private property” to moveable sheds, motorhomes, and caravans, etc. Finally, there is the Commonwealth Trust which the Queen manages for the Roman Catholic Church — an arrangement that has been in place since the days of King John.
So let’s look at the Commonwealth Trust which consists of Commonwealth land and properties. The Commonwealth tradition began with William the Conqueror who set aside church properties in England (Roman Catholic Church at that time, of course) and added lots of scraps of waste land and all the cemeteries to the Church’s properties. The idea was to give the Church marginal land in its parishes to turn into worthwhile holdings using the slave labor of mendicants and others dependents on the Church’s dole—- for example, donate a swamp to the Church and then the Monks and Brothers together with able-bodied beggars and indigents that the Church cared for, would work to drain the swamp and turn it into arable land, which they would then use for — an apple orchard, a bee apiary, pasture, herb garden, or sheep pen for example — and thereby improve the value of their holdings and gain a basis to support their charitable works.
by Peter Gargan in WA
The “Stinkin Thinkin” that underpins the left of Australian Politics is that Almighty God is elected to the Parliament of the Commonwealth, and that he also is elected to every State and Territory Parliament with unlimited power, to use and abuse the electorate as it deems fit. The “Stinkin Thinkin” introduced by Whitlam, followed by Fraser, and continued by every Liberal-Australian Labor Party –Greens Coalition Government since, is that once a Parliament is elected it has a divine right to govern as it sees fit.
However like Mighty Mouse, confronted with a Tiger, it has and looks pathetic when push comes to shove. This “Stinkin Thinkin” has permeated the United Kingdom, the European Union, and is of course in force in China, which on every occasion when united has sought to expand. Donald Trump has ended the “Stinkin Thinkin” in the United States of America, and Scott Morrison ought to be given a chance to end it here. Unless the Parliament of the Commonwealth asserts it superiority by getting its identity correct, and the Paramount Parliament, chaos will continue for another three years unless a minor party, the Great Australian Party gets enough Senators to ensure sanity returns.
While it is a lovely dream to think that we elect Almighty God when we elect a Prime Minister: it aint necessarily so. Bill Shorten inane question to Scott Morrison about whether homosexuals go to hell, exposes his absolute lack even though he is a lawyer, of the first question any lawyer asks, when confronted with a court. Has this Court jurisdiction? The wonderful great big court of public opinion, in which we have a contest for Prime Minister, and lots of little contests for individual seats, is being led astray by a silver tongued lawyer, who presumes that the Australian Electorate is equivalent to Almighty God.
Shorten is supposed to say the Lord’s Prayer, every day he sits in the Parliament of the Commonwealth. No one has asked him if he does. I am sure his vision of heaven is a carbon free Australia, but without a World Referendum, Mr Shorten and his fellow dream merchants are urinating into the wind. The pandemonium that followed Whitlam’s election in 1992, and permanently damaged the Commonwealth, should not be repeated, in 2019. Only Almighty God can change the climate, and with over a billion Indians and more than a billion Chinese, all breathing out 2.5 pounds of carbon every day, only a nuclear war between those two superpowers can save the planet from Carbon Dioxide. That is if Carbon Dioxide is the villain Bill Shorten thinks it is.
My comment is that Bill Shorten made the same mistake as Mark Latham when he attacked Scott Morrison for his Christianity. Australia is still a Christian country albeit under attack. On Saturday the majority of Christians will smash Shorten and the Greens and endorse a return to the Constitution and its Christian roots. Take the five dollars the bookies are offering, because Almighty God always wins.
What sort of a question is it when the Leader of the Opposition wants the Prime Minister to talk for God Almighty, and decide who goes which way in the afterlife. Good on Israel Folau for sticking to his Christian beliefs, He may have just gifted Morrison an election!!
One question Bill Shorten and his lawyer mates need to answer: Since when did Almighty God appear on the ballot paper? Only Almighty God decides who goes to heaven or hell, not the Prime Minister. Does Bill Shorten believe he will become Almighty God and with his mighty wand end Climate Change, decide who goes to heaven or hell, and create all the gold he will need to keep his promises. There are 17% still undecided. How will they vote!!!!!!
Europe is burning wood to generate electricity, and the carbon released as Carbon Dioxide is not counted!!!!! Of course it is not counted as it is from the earth and when the ash is returned to the earth, the trees grow again and repeat the cycle. A biomass base load Power Station situated in the vast eucalyptus forests of the Savannah woodlands of Northern Australia would provide a renewable power source of unlimited potential.
Richard Marles, Mark Dreyfus, Penny Wong and Bill Shorten are all lawyers, and are assuming that if elected on Saturday Bill Shorten will become Almighty God and decide who will or will not go to hell, and who will not or will suffer from the actions on Climate Change. It is an insufferable imposition on Christians and Muslims alike, and the very worst kind of bullying, to attack the faith of a fellow Australian.
By having Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the Second the Queen of the Constitution of the Commonwealth as Sovereign, only a referendum can impose atheism upon the people of Australia. The Great Australian Party which is making the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 and Commonwealth its central policy, is a complete answer to this type of bullying, and Senator Rod Culleton and his team ought to be elected to the Senate to finish the job of returning law and order, as a civil and political right under the Constitution.
The legal profession which numbered among its number 23 Liberal Party members, and 23 Labor Party Members, and one Green in the House of Representatives and sixteen lawyers in the Senate carried bullying to an extreme, when Senator Rod Culleton as he then was called for a debate on the Judiciary, which are exclusively lawyers, in the Senate on the 1st December 2016.
The Turnbull Government carried out that bullying, by instructing the Australian Government Solicitor and its counsel in the High Court to mislead and deceive the High Court, by excluding admissible evidence, and mislead and deceive a Federal Court of Australia Judge in Perth, about the obligations of the Attorney General who was at the time Senator George Henry Brandis to obtain an adjournment on the 19th December 2016.
Banks and other criminal corporations have been using Bankruptcy for around 53 years to bully victims out of their day in a fair court with judges, as guaranteed by S 79 Constitution, and Bill Shorten’s arrack on Scott Morrison for his Christian views, is a full frontal attack by lawyers on the Christianity of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the Second, the Queen of the Constitution of the Commonweal and is part of this widespread and systematic bullying policy.
by Jim O’Toole
Senator in exile, Rodney Culleton, after being locked in battle with the corporate Australian legal system since 2016, has filed an action in the High Court of the United Kingdom to have his expulsion from the senate overturned.
Culleton said yesterday he was excited the High Court had accepted his Constitutional argument in the first step to overturn the Australian High Court direction he be thrown out of the senate because of bankruptcy.
“I have never been bankrupt,” he said.
A single judge of the Federal Court issued sequestration orders against Culleton in 2017 freezing his assets in spite of a 21 day stay of proceedings being granted by the Federal Court.
Vexatious litigant and Perth businessman Dick Lester claimed Culleton owed him $200,000 over a failed sale contract on land, a claim pursued hotly by Culleton but he says Federal Court Judge Michael Barker failed to follow court rules, ignored all due process and did not look at his affidavits.
“When I was sworn-in as a senator on August 30, 2016, I swore allegiance to Queen Elizabeth 2 of the United Kingdom, making an oath to uphold the law.
“I did not swear allegiance to the fictitious Queen of Australia.
“This ceremony was witnessed by the Governor General and his deputy.
“It should be noted the Commonwealth Constitution Act of Australia 1900, (UK) remains in force and cannot be repealed by an Australian Government.
“The High Court of Australia does not have the jurisdiction to throw senators or members out of Parliament. Either House has the only jurisdiction under s47 of the Constitution to deal with a Member’s qualification.
“The Constitution is everyone’s contract but we can’t get a remedy in Australian star chambers which don’t recognise the Constitution.”
The HCA has long drawn criticism from those being refused a hearing on Constitutional matters, with litigants claiming the court is not functioning as a Chapter 3 court as required by the Constitution.
Culleton gave the example of any senator or MHR who files an action in the HCA. It is unlawful for the court to hear any evidence relating to parliamentary procedures under s16 (iii) of the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987, he said.
“As a result they threw out my Motion 163 without having jurisdiction because they are not sitting as a Chapter 3 court operating under the proper Crown.
“There is no such thing as the ‘Queen of Australia’.
Culleton has asked the Law Lords of the Queens Bench to examine his request to debate his senate Motion 163 of 2016 which the Solicitor General filed in the HCA.
The statement of agreed facts filed in the HCA by the Solicitor General states a NSW Magistrate, in Culleton’s absence could not imprison him for the alleged theft of a $7 truck key from his own truck.
This matter could have, if imprisoned, disqualified Culleton from the senate under s44 of the Constitution.
“Motion 163 of 2016 was a requirement passed by the House announcing that Attorney General George Brandis’ referral of November 7, 2016 to the HCA is faulty and that there needs to be further investigation into that faulty action, originally orchestrated by former Senators Parry and Brandis, which was never passed by any procedure of law, ,” Mr Culleton said.
He said the senate could not lawfully vote on Brandis’ December 7 motion at the time because there were insufficient senators present to form a Quorum under s22 of the Constitution and the relevant material was withheld from the chamber by Senator Brandis and Senator Pauline Hanson.
Culleton’s legal team remains in London until a hearing date is set by the full bench.
Letter to the editor
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not a lawfully binding Treaty, so it does not directly create legal obligations for countries to provide these universally agreed human rights to their inhabitants or citizens and at the time of this universal Declaration some governments, including the government of the Commonwealth of Australia were already taking advantage of the ignorance of our parents and they were already securitising one of the declared human rights and trespassing on our parents personal property before and when they were adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on the 10 December 1948.
Australia has ratified almost all of the major international human rights instruments and it declares that human rights are universal – to be enjoyed by all people, no matter who they are or where they live EXCEPT those human beings who live or are born to the land in Australia as the Government is going to get the beneficial use of your universally accepted human right to the “security of person” in Article 3 as we have been doing that since 1934.
Motivated by the experiences of the preceding world wars, the Universal Declaration was the first time that countries agreed on a comprehensive statement of inalienable human rights but with the help of the Roman Civil administrative law that commenced in Australia after 1934, when the government of the Commonwealth of Australia signed up a juristic person and legal entity, COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA registered as an American company with the United States and Securities and Exchange Commission, to be bound by the statutory provisions of the Securities Act 1933 US and the Securities and Exchange Act 1934, we were then allegedly able to abandon this particular inalienable human right, our equitable share of the wealth in the land we were born to that provides for the “security of our person” of which the governments were already securitising and using and investing these securities and getting the beneficial use of as collateral for the debts of the government’s commercial entity, the COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA and State commercial entities that were registered in a foreign jurisdiction, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission and the securities and our financial assets were deposited in the Federal Reserve System without our knowledge or consent.
G J Tudehope