Category Archives: political spin
by Leonard William
Exposing the lies of GEORGE HENRY BRANDIS, JOSHUA ANTHONY FRYDENBERG and MALCOLM BLIGH TURNBULL.
It makes me quite angry to see the shenanigans being carried out by the liars that infest OUR parliaments, namely the fe’ral parliament in Canberra.
GEORGE HENRY BRANDIS is a German citizen or at least is ENTITLED to the rights and privileges of a German citizen. The point being missed by all and sundry is that Section 44 of OUR constitution is THE paramount law of OUR land and is not there for anybody to breach and that it does not just mean being under acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power, but being otherwise ENTITLED to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power. Ergo, being entitled to a passport of a foreign power prohibits any person sitting in OUR fe’ral parliament.
BRANDIS IS A LIAR AND NOT ELIGIBLE TO SIT IN OUR PARLIAMENT.
The bedwetting snowflakes and job protectionists who whinge and whine saying that we should forget the problem and get on with more important things, and this includes many radio talk-back hosts do not understand there are no more important things than getting the liars, manipulators and connivers out of OUR parliament now. It is not a difficult thing to ascertain who is and who is not eligible.
It is the job of the Governor-General and the Australian Federal Police to sort out the mess, not the parliament.
Any person who:
(i) is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power; or
(ii) is attainted of treason, or has been convicted and is under sentence, or subject to be sentenced, for any offence punishable under the law of the Commonwealth or of a State by imprisonment for one year or longer; or
(iii) is an undischarged bankrupt or insolvent; or
(iv) holds any office of profit under the Crown, or any pension payable during the pleasure of the Crown out of any of the revenues of the Commonwealth; or
(v) has any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in any agreement with the Public Service of the Commonwealth otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company consisting of more than twenty‑five persons;
shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.
But subsection (iv) does not apply to the office of any of the Queen’s Ministers of State for the Commonwealth, or of any of the Queen’s Ministers for a State, or to the receipt of pay, half pay, or a pension, by any person as an officer or member of the Queen’s navy or army, or to the receipt of pay as an officer or member of the naval or military forces of the Commonwealth by any person whose services are not wholly employed by the Commonwealth. Editor: Please note the Governor General according to the Constitution is still paid in pounds, shillings and pence.
Letter to the editor
The Canberra Times
Now that the High Court has shown it will almost strictly interpret OUR constitution, will we now see those who are “entitled” to the rights and privileges of citizens of foreign powers willingly or otherwise be removed from OUR parliament?
There are many who are in the proverbial cleft stick as they have parents who are citizens of Great Britain, Greece and others. If you have, for instance, renounced your British citizenship, you may still recover it by way of application and the Home Secretary will approve it unless you have a criminal record or an unstable mind. Apparently you will only have it returned once, but to reapply for it to rid yourself of it demonstrates a disloyalty to Australia.
Those born of German parents automatically gain German citizenship, as with George Henry Brandis.
How many other of those sitting in OUR federal parliament are ineligible according to Section 44?
Queensland State election to be held on November 25
by Gil Hanrahan in Brisbane
Rumblings from One Nation members have confirmed there is an unhatched master plan in place to elevate Pauline Hanson’s Chief of Staff James Ashby to the senate.
In its usual response the High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns has ordered a recount for the next candidate on the party ticket to replace the ousted Malcolm Roberts, a most competent senator.
Roberts now will stand in the state seat of Ipswich as a part of the plan, to take over the state leadership should sitting One Nation member Steve Dickson(another competent Member) lose his seat of Buderim at the November 25 poll.
In the current episode of sloppy administration by One Nation, the next in line is Fraser Anning, a Gladstone business man.
Sources have revealed that Anning, believed to be close to bankruptcy, suddenly had his creditors paid off allowing him to sit in the senate.
It seems the deal is for Anning to step aside and create a casual vacancy which would allow Pauline Hanson to insert Ashby into the senate.
There is a similar precedent to this scenario going back to the famous case when a hostile Labor Party member,Albert Patrick Field(Pat) was appointed to the senate after union organiser, Senator Bertie Milliner died suddenly. This extract from Wikipedia explains how One Nation could appoint Ashby:
“On 30 June 1975, Bertie Milliner, a Queensland ALP Senator, died suddenly. It had long been a tradition that when a casual vacancy occurred in the Senate, the relevant political party would nominate the replacement to the state premier, and the state parliament would formally appoint the new senator. As was usual practice, the Labor Party nominated only one name, Mal Colston, to replace Milliner. Country Party Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen asked for a list of three names from which he would choose the replacement; he was possibly relying on a 1962 precedent, when his predecessor, Frank Nicklin, had also required such a list of names. The Labor Party refused to provide a list and insisted on Colston being appointed.
Although Field had long Labor Party and union connections, he was certainly not an active politician and had never before sought to become one. Nevertheless, he made himself known to the Premier’s office and offered his services.
Although he would be technically a Labor Senator, he vowed never to vote for the Whitlam government. Field was conservative and religious and was openly critical of what he saw as a range of “immoral” policies being advanced by Whitlam and his government. That was exactly the sort of person wanted by Bjelke-Petersen, who responded by nominating Field in the Parliament of Queensland as the new senator.”
To the public, One Nation it appears, can do no wrong. Their savage internal politics have seen numerous candidates kicked out because they would not pay Ashby’s Sunshine Coast printing business for election material believing they could buy it cheaper elsewhere. Others have been kicked out for not adhering to Hanson’s ‘it’s my way or the highway’ policy.
This writer does not believe the platitudes coming from the mouth of Liberal leader Tim Nicholls stating he will not do a deal with Hanson to form government. He would do a deal with the devil to grab a hold of the Treasury spoils.
So would Hanson and Ashby, both traditional Liberals with close ties to both the state and federal Liberal parties.
At a Canberra function soon after last year’s federal election, according to a bystander, Hanson’s first comments to Malcolm Turnbull were,” how can I help you Malcolm?” (Cairns News has contacted a bystander and Hanson’s comments were confirmed).
Attorney General George Brandis QC next to go: says government insider
We have been made a Republic without a Referendum. The High Court of Australia is not even ashamed of itself for failing to read the Sections 16 and 34(2) Constitution, and the ABC in the form of Anthony Green tweets that those Sections of the Constitution, were exhausted in 1901 with the first Election. In this republic we never agreed to there must be some sort of magic that turns people into gender neutral robots, who fail to understand the plain words of the English language. It is time the whole Parliament, the 76 Senators and 150 members of the House of Representatives met in a joint sitting and asked some hard questions of the seven members of the High Court and the judiciary generally but especially the High Court, because we need these questions answered.
What do you not understand about Clause 5 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900? It says , This Act and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under this Constitution, Shall be binding on the courts judges and people of every State notwithstanding anything in the laws of any State. If the High Court Judges are people, they are bound. If not or they do not understand that the Constitution binds them, and if Anthony Green of the ABC does not understand that he is one of the people referred to in that Section, the Commonwealth and ABC should let them go. If someone who earns $350,000 at least tax free cannot read and understand plain written English, then it is time that we got someone in there who can. That is what S 72 (ii) Constitution provides.
S 16 Constitution deals specifically with the Qualification of Senators, and S 34 (ii) Constitution deals with the qualification of Members of the House of Representatives. These sections say that if they have been in the country five years and owe allegiance to the Queen, they are eligible. Clear straight forward instructions, to the courts judges and people and once again the High Court is defying the Parliament of the Commonwealth and the Laws of the Commonwealth. So too are Judges and Magistrates all over Australia and a regime of institutional theft has been introduced by the States, for the benefit of the States because the High Court needs to go to Specsavers. So too it seems do all the lawyers who had their expenses paid by the Commonwealth and failed to make this argument to the Apex Club sitting at the top of the organised crime gang, presently operating in Australia and severely burdening the people with greater and greater expenses keeping children in poverty, and old people poor while our wealth is exported and the Banks pay huge dividends and make enormous profits.
If the High Court were not really ordinary people and did not have to eat as we do, drink as we do, and die eventually as we do, they would be entitled to consider themselves as Gods. They will all die eventually, they will all retire at seventy, but they should on their performance since 2004, be all sacked after their response to my first question. I asked Senator George Brandis the Commonwealth Attorney General, on the 12th September 2016 why for 12 years they had felt free to defy the Laws of the Commonwealth by leaving the Name of the Queen off all process issued out of the High Court. If they had bona fide set out to correct the High Court Rules 2004, after they admitted they were wrong, then this debacle of supposedly sacking six duly elected Members of Parliament would never have happened. I have incontrovertible evidence on the High Court letterhead that they were advised of this problem in 2006-7 and did nothing for nine more years.
They may look like a Golden Calf, and Act like a Golden Calf, but the same fate as befell those who worshipped that Golden Calf in Exodus, should all make their exodus, with their lives, but little else. The Sins of the High Court are many. They believe, if the Record is examined that they are the Government and the Parliament is an inconvenient nuisance to be ignored. I and every other member of the people of the Commonwealth, have been given authority to call them before the Queen they deny is the Sovereign, the Queen to whom I swore allegiance when I became a Senator. I have got Senator George Brandis as George Henry Brandis before that Queen on criminal charges, and when a person, any person reads S 5 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 and then S 147.1 Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) it is quite clear that it is a serious crime to put violence on a Commonwealth Public Official. The head -butter who assaulted Tony Abbott is prosecuted by the Australian Federal Police but they have not yet prosecuted the High Court for assaulting by Paper Order they expect to be obeyed, 6 out of the eight sitting Members illegally haled before them, and thrown out of Parliament by them. There is a special punishment prescribed for people who are Judges and Magistrates who assault Members of Parliament. Instead of ten years imprisonment the Parliament says they must get 13 years . It’s all there in black and white.
As for the lawyers of the Commonwealth. Not one of them publicly pointed out that Ss 16 and 34(ii) Constitution make the politically murdered perfectly qualified to be in Parliament. As for the lawyers of the Commonwealth. Not one of them publicly pointed out that Ss 16 and 34 (ii) Constitution mean they are perfectly qualified if they were here for five years and owe allegiance to the Queen. Not one of them.
Lets get to the Court of Disputed Returns. After I attempted to intervene to save the other five elected representatives in this proceedings, by pointing out that S 77 (i) Constitution prohibits the Parliament of the Commonwealth from legislating to define the jurisdiction of the High Court, which it has done in the Court of Disputed Returns, and pointed out that since 1986 the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is definitely part of the Laws of the Commonwealth, they ploughed on regardless. The Court of Disputed Returns is illegal and has been ever since it was created. It is being used not for its intended purpose but to intimidate Members of Parliament. It exercises a defined jurisdiction. So intimidated are the Members of both Houses the High Court and Federal Court of Australia have been allowed to get away with political murder.
For 498 years from 1372, to 1870 lawyers were banned from Parliament in the United Kingdom. Perhaps we need a referendum to ban them from this nations Parliament in the House of Representatives. If the best we have can get it so wrong, what are we employing them for? I am a rainmaker. The drought certainly broke for the lawyers I employed to defend me in the High Court and the Federal Court of Australia has arguably by sitting without a jury, which I requested, broken the law in S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) which bans the arbitrary infliction of imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty upon any of us, and a Sequestration Order in Bankruptcy, is a severe deprivation of physical liberty carrying Seventeen Years imprisonment , and this Order of the High Court is another. Where are the Australian Federal Police when we really need them? They should march up to the High Court as Moses did to the worshippers of the Golden Calf, and lay the charges that ought to be laid on them for political murder. A political murder that should not go unpunished in the Parliament of the Commonwealth. It is utter and complete contempt by them for your elected representatives, and must be fixed. The Parliament of the Commonwealth has the power. For our Nations sake it must use it. from Rodney Culleton’s law research team
THE DIARIES OF PETER BEATTIE’S MISTRESS
[Accuracy of the following report cannot be assured beyond doubt. Material that could not be corroborated has been deleted. Information in these diaries is more an indictment on Kevin Rudd’s judgment than the ethics of Peter Beattie. Rudd, as an ALP and Premier Wayne Goss confidant, would have been privy to the following information.]On June 15, 2006 Andrew Bolt reported: “EX-PREMIER Peter Beattie is embroiled in a war of words with a Nationals MP after claims he had an affair with a cabinet minister were referred to the CMC.
“A furious Mr Beattie yesterday hit out at Burnett MP Rob Messenger, who has referred a complaint that disgraced former Tourism Minister Merri Rose forced her electorate staff to falsify and shred documents to cover up an alleged relationship with Mr Beattie.”
This may be true but Pickering Post has been reliably informed (and it is widely held to be true among ALP insiders) that Peter’s transgressions extended to Merri Rose’s daughter who became pregnant to, and bore a daughter to, Beattie.
It is believed that it was this matter that Merri Rose attempted to blackmail Beattie over in order to obtain political favours.
Merri Rose was found guilty and spent jail time.
But Peter Beattie was embroiled in another affair with Pat Gillespie, a political journalist for The Sunday Mail and The Australian newspapers from the early 1990’s until 1996.
Gillespie became an embarrassment to the Government so she was shifted to The Children’s Commissioners Office where she became their problem.
Gillespie was concerned that the Criminal Justice Commission would raid her house so she gave the diaries (in disk or tape format) to a friend, Lorelle Saunders, a former police officer, for safe keeping.
Saunders didn’t want to keep the diaries, so she gave them to a solicitor friend, Mr Gordon Harris, for safe keeping. It was Gordon who had the data transcribed. The diary notes were legitimately obtained.
There are a number of people named in the diaries. Go to this site for much more:
Has Martin Bryant escaped from Risdon Prison to train a 64 year old retired accountant in firearms handling?
Cairns News has been examining the internet fallout since the Las Vegas ‘shootings’ that were thrust upon us by a tightly controlled major media campaign that has amounted to nothing more than brainwashing and anti-gun propaganda.
These are some of the stand-out anomalies we have discovered in the bogus news reports and police interviews.
- There were at least two shooters
- Two nearby hotel lobbies were shot up but not reported
- The alleged shooter had no motive
- In a similar style to Australia’s Port Arthur drill, firearms were inserted into the crime scene after the event
- At least 1500 to 2000 rounds would have to be fired at the distance of 400 yards for the high kill and wounded rate
- There were approximately 20 empty shells seen in photographs or television footage. Where are the remaining 1500?
- The rate of fire was examined at length by acoustics and military experts who insist a belt fed machine gun was used. A modern belt fed machine gun is almost impossible to acquire by any means even in the US
- Automatic firearms with a large rate of fire often jam, produce large volumes of gas and nitro-cellulose powder smoke, are extremely noisy in confined spaces and take a lot of effort to fire continuously, particularly for an unfit 64 year old. Did he wear earmuffs or plugs?
- The thousands of feet of posted mobile phone footage taken at the concert before and after the shooting started, clearly show there was no acute panic, no projectiles were seen to be hitting the ground, almost no ricochets were heard in the audio recordings
- Intercepted police radio recordings reveal the shooting was an exercise
- Right on cue Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull on the day of the alleged shooting, called for harsher gun laws, the establishment of a national facial recognition data bank using drivers licence photographs and other tough citizen surveillance measures, one being to hold terrorism suspects in jail for two weeks without charges
Australia took delivery of two F-35A Lightning II Block 2B aircraft amid much fanfare at the Avalon air show in Victoria earlier this year. Several more are in the late stages of construction, due for delivery next year.
These are almost exactly the same in their specifications to the 108 F-35A Block 2Bs delivered so far to the United States Air Force.
But a controversial development and delivery contract process – known as concurrency – has produced an aircraft with software and components that were never fully tested.
The argument was computer simulation could streamline the whole process, eliminating risk, reducing cost and speeding up delivery.
Now two senior US Pentagon officials responsible for the F-35 program have admitted they are seriously considering abandoning vital upgrades of those aircraft already delivered.
And Australia has at least two Block 2B F-35s that will likely require many millions being sunk into reconstruction and upgrade before they are fully capable of fighting on the front line.
from Larry Pickering, the last surviving iconic commentator, journalist and cartoonist
It’s got me stuffed. Australians hardly ever pass changes in the law by ballot. They have on only 8 of 44 occasions, and although this survey is not a referendum, or even a plebiscite, the “survey” if successful, will lead to fully gazetted legislation. So why are 70 per cent of citizens going to vote yes? But is it really 70 per cent? Or is it really about the question the pollster asked?
More likely it is the question, a highly biased question designed to evoke only a “YES” answer: “Do you agree with marriage equality?”
That question will almost always get a “yes”, and the GGGGLL will ride a wave of confidence all the way to where they want it to finish… and where they want it to finish they dare not tell you.
I read the question on the survey paper and it asks if you want the Marriage Act changed to accommodate gay marriage. That is not what will happen if a “yes” vote gets up.
In fact the Marriage Act will be abolished completely and a new gender neutral Act will be drafted by the Gay Greens in the Senate, an Act that will please only the wind chime and bong manufacturers in the inner suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne, Byron Bay and South Australia all over.
Ex PM Howard is right when he says that we need to see the legislation first, http://pickeringpost.com/story/okay-mal-just-show-us-the-bloody-bill-/7542 but people are voting already and what’s to say the Gay Green Senate won’t make amendments we will never know about until they become law?
They will get no resistance from Turnbull as he wants the whole gay crap off the table and forgotten about. And so do we. We have energy prices and the Zika Kid to entertain us… we are sick and tired of listening to moaning gay people and Sky and ABC interviewers agreeing with them.
On another part of the survey sheet I read, “If you make a mistake just ask us to send you another form”. On another part is says the survey is 100 per cent anonymous, no names no addresses, no worries.
What a perfect set up for the devious and well-organised GetUp mob to easily skew the result. They will already have a dozen schemes in place.
The survey sheet is of such poor quality that any Asian printer could run off an undetectable few million. Any number of union-committed postmen could take every letter home or deliver them to GetUp’s hard-working gnomes who distance themselves from Shorten and Wong.
This postal survey seems almost designed to be scammed.
And the cherry on the top is when the Government makes temporary laws (that will of course stay in place) where opponents of this scam can be fined $12,500 with an adjudicator by the name of George Brandis at the helm. He alone will decide if you are guilty of offending the “YES” brigade.
What more do you need to vote “NO”?
Or maybe you believe GetUp is an honest political pressure group? Or Maybe North Korea is a pacifist group? Or banks don’t steal your money?
Maybe you really want these hairy arm-pitted, bare-titted sheilas and bare-arsed loony-tune, radical, pillow biters writing your marriage vows for you. If so, then vote “YES”.
But I don’t believe a “YES” vote will survive. If it does, we are not true-blue Australians. Because true-blue Aussies would never vote yes to something as full of holes and as deviously scammable as this.
A “YES” result could never be relied upon as even remotely accurate.
It’s more likely to be a “NO” result that CAN be relied upon because real Australians would never align themselves with a decadent, illegal mob like the Labor Green’s GetUp.
We are better than that,
The Federal Government and Opposition continue to fall apart driven by corruption scandals, citizenship disqualification and a judiciary acting as the arm of dishonest political parties.
Former One Nation WA senator Rod Culleton has borne the brunt of a corrupt and unaccountable judiciary marching to the orders of Liberal Attorney General George Brandis.
This time justice might catch up to the errant Brandis after he was served with a summons to face the Magistrates Court on a criminal conspiracy charge.
Culleton has charged the beleaguered Attorney General with conspiracy allegedly over his part in giving the senate false information to have the High Court disqualify Culleton over his bankruptcy which he says was an intentionally incorrect finding of a Federal Court judge.
Culleton launched the private prosecution after a meeting with the Chief Magistrate in Canberra.
Meanwhile the Director of Public Prosecutions is attempting to take over the case and shut it down, no doubt on orders from the accused Attorney General.
Culleton says the DPP is a public servant, “not a duly elected public officer.”
“The Director has no right or qualifications to take over my case. They are not a judge or jury,” he claimed.
“I was tossed out of the senate because my first question to Senator Brandis pointed out the High Court and all other courts had been functioning unlawfully since 2004 when the courts removed the Crown(Queen) from all process.” (Cairns News Nov 22, 2016)
Disqualification of sitting politicians under Section 44 of the Commonwealth Constitution of Australia, should also apply to lawyers or barristers who sit in Parliament.
“The Parliament is in conflict with the Constitution by having lawyers as politicians,” Mr Culleton explained.
“These members are officers of the court and being a politician they receive a reward under the Crown and as such should be disqualified under Section 44 too.”
A constitutional analyst has pointed out to Cairns News that George Brandis’ parents were both born in Germany, entitling him to German citizenship.
“”This would bar him from sitting,” the analyst said.
Green preferences are driving the Labor Government’s proposed draconian environmental policies as a trade-off for the Adani coal mine approval.
A source close to the ALP is warning Wild Rivers “on steroids” rebadged as ‘Pristine Rivers’ will be put back on the table along with revamped, tough vegetation management laws should the ALP win the upcoming election.
The source said revisiting Wild Rivers and vegetation management laws are on the agenda for the upcoming State ALP conference to be held in Townsville at the Convention Centre on July 28 and 29.
A World Heritage listing over the Laura sandstone escarpment country, mooted by the State Government, also looms large for the people of the Peninsula.
Deputy Premier Jackie Trad is moving to pacify the Greens’ hostility over approvals to allow Australia’s largest coal mine in Central Queensland to go ahead.
Trad and her colleague, Environment and Heritage Protection Minister Stephen Miles, have not yet taken into consideration the strident opposition of Cape York Peninsula communities, the Cape York Land Council and pastoralists alike, some of whom claim they will campaign against the party at the State election expected on November 4 this year.
Pastoralists and some communities believe a World Heritage nomination by the State Government will be the precursor for listing the entire Peninsula, in effect the beginning of the end for the economic prosperity of Aboriginal communities sitting on vast tracts of grazing property.
In a recent radio interview, Chairman of the CYLC, Richie AhMat castigated the proposed new versions of Wild Rivers and vegetation laws as well as the existing environmental overlays on most Aboriginal freehold and Deed of Grant in Trust land(DOGIT) covering nearly one half of the land area of the Peninsula.
Referring to the Wild Rivers legislation, Mr AhMat asked how the government expected Aboriginal people to start up businesses and to be economically viable “when these land restrictions appear out of nowhere?”
“You can’t talk about economic development on one hand and you can’t talk about indigenous employment on the other, and you can’t talk about Northern Australia on both hands.”
In reply to a question about the as yet undisclosed ‘Pristine Rivers’ policy Mr AhMat alluded to funding that had been allocated in the past two state budgets purportedly for consultation with traditional owners.
He said he was worried about all the rivers in Cape York which could be affected by a lock up policy.
“All of our rivers in Cape York are fresh water rivers, water is a huge commodity now and nobody in their wildest dreams 10 years or fifteen years ago expected them to buy a bottle of fresh water,” Mr Ah Mat said.
“To buy a bottle of fresh water is more than a litre of fuel.
“Why does the government want to lock up Cape York, because they have a 20 to 30 year plan but they aren’t talking to anybody, it’s all secretive because we are out of sight and out of mind.
“We fought long and hard against the wild rivers, long and hard and we were untied as one on Cape York.
“This Pristine Rivers believe me there are rumblings about it in 1 William Street (Executive Building) now.
“This legislation over land is going to block everything.”
Gordon Rasmussen, Katters Australian Party candidate for the Cook electorate, which takes in all of Cape York, agreed with Mr Ah Mat.
“It looks like Northern Development is just a talk fest because what Mr Ah Mat says about locking up all the rivers and land on Cape York makes a mockery of the $5 billion federal fund for northern land development,” Mr Rasmussen pointed out.
“How does the federal government expect to achieve anything in an area like the Peninsula to help economic development for struggling communities when the State Government has divided up most of the Aboriginal land into nature reserves, national parks and heritage areas?
“If the Labor Party gets back into government we are all in for a very rough trot.”