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,
Senate could investigate Attorney General George Brandis
West Australian ‘Senator in exile’, Rod Culleton, has today sent a letter to all Senators, informing them that his extension request for the purported Commonwealth debt of $700,000, is due to expire today. He has requested that the matters surrounding his removal from the Senate earlier this year be urgently addressed.
Mr Culleton has accused the Attorney-General of being in contempt of Parliament and claims that the High Court did not have the jurisdiction under section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, to remove him from the Senate based on the Senate’s referral on 7th November 2016.
“Section 353 of the Electoral Act clearly states that only a petition can be used by the High Court, sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns, to invalidate a member and remove them from Parliament. There has been no petition by the Senate in my matter and laws have appeared to been broken by the Attorney-General. Furthermore, his cavalier actions may have even brought the High Court into disrepute and that is unacceptable by the highest legal figure in our country.”
“I believe that Senator Brandis has misled the Parliament by hot-wiring the Court of Disputed Returns without a key, which was not activated correctly under the Electoral Act to remove me. His actions have not gone unnoticed by the people of Western Australia and also members within the legal profession.”
“As the highest court in the land, and under the Constitution, I have put the Senate on further notice and asked them to deal with the matter expediently. I believe that there have been serious constitutional breaches surrounding the passage of the motion that was granted leave, by the Senate.”
“I am standing up not only for the rights of my Western Australian constituents but also for my staff who were left jobless and financially disadvantaged due to this judicial abuse by Senator Brandis.”
Mr Culleton has said that he is currently in talks with Senators who have realised that there are serious questions that the Attorney-General must answer to before the Parliament and that Brandis now could find himself in breach of being disqualified from Parliament under section 44 of the Australian Constitution.
Former Western Australian senator Rod Culleton would have scuttled the criminal activities of the banks had he continued in the senate but Liberal Senators Stephen Parry and George Brandis, and their subservient courts acting under instruction from the ‘banks collective’ acted unlawfully by removing Culleton from the senate.
Parry has been compromised by his part in the Port Arthur massacre and will do everything he is told. Parry’s involvement in the Port Arthur scam has previously been revealed in Cairns News.
Cairns News has no misgivings that the phantom government is making the Liberal Party lean very hard on Parry and Brandis to keep Culleton out.
In reality the WA businessman and Liberal sycophant Dick Lester spent $1.6 million in legal fees, pursuing Culleton for an alleged $205,536.50 debt that resulted in his unlawful bankruptcy.
Culleton’s affidavits showed that Lester was not interested in any financial payout but instead wanted Culleton to give him the patent to his invention and the shares to his company.
Culleton believes that Lester used the courts to try to gain control of Culleton’s company and colluded to ensure his removal from the Senate.
Read this explosive story below and weep at the corruption in our parliaments and courts.
CULLETON SIGNALS “MAY-DAY” FOR WA
by Saraya Beric
West Australian ‘Senator in exile’, Rod Culleton is firing shots from all angles to reveal the truth in relation to his unconstitutional removal from the Senate earlier this year.
The resilient farmer was disqualified from the Senate on 23rd December 2016 over a purported bankruptcy. He and others have now filed petitions into the Senate under Standing Order 207, which allows people to dispute the election of his replacement. Mr Culleton says that he has filed a 231-paged affidavit into the High Court yesterday making this move, after learning from a ‘leaked source’ that the Government is moving to sue him for the salary he collected as a duly elected Senator for West Australia.
“In January, Senator Parry declared that I had been disqualified, yet the bankruptcy matter was still before the court at the time. He ignored the court stay on all proceedings and the notices from my legal team; he interfered with the process and I believe he breached both the Bankruptcy Act and Commonwealth Constitution,” Culleton argued.
“Senator Brandis, as Attorney General, was also asked to intervene to ensure a lawful and transparent process but was found derelict in his duty in refusing to act to rectify the anomalies. This matter is very serious, as it constitutes a breach of the Senate Standing Orders and both Brandis and Parry, I believe, are in contempt of the Senate standing orders.”
“Furthermore, the Governor of West Australia, who had the jurisdiction to appoint a replacement Senator because the WA State Parliament was not sitting, had not ratified the appointment. The procedure under Section 15 of the Commonwealth Constitution clearly demands these procedures are followed, however there is no evidence to suggest this has happened. Documents tabled in the Senate show that Senator Parry used the 10th March, 2017, Court of Disputed Returns Order over a matter which had been annulled, to fill the ‘vacant position’ instead, clearly showing that correct procedure was not adhered to.”
“Senator Parry has crossed the legal boundaries, breaching his responsibilities as Senate President and must review the Senate rules on this matter. He is not above the law and has clearly usurped the powers of the Senate and the West Australian Parliament. This has become an embarrassment for the government and the evidence points to Senator Parry and Senator Brandis having mislead the Senate.”
“My submissions state that the Supreme, Federal and High Courts breached Constitutional clauses, the Parliamentary Privileges Act and the Senate’s manual on its powers, procedures and practices, ‘Odgers’ Senate Practice’, which instructs that ‘no vacancy is to be filled until an outcome is final, or that placement will be void’” .
Culleton forces HCA to restore the wrong Queen in court process, resulting in its bench closing ranks on Culleton and refusing to hear his arguments about nullified charges in a NSW court involving the disappearance of a $7.50 car key
The continual denial of natural justice in Australia is a direct result of political appointments to the bench
a dissertation by law analyst Peter Gargan
The Restoration of the Queen and all She stands for in the law, must be a priority for every West Australian voter this election because:
The Queen by Her Coronation Oath represents peace, order and good government as the Corporate Parliament of the Commonwealth has tried to legislate since 1986, but after the Australia Act 1986, The Parliament of Western Australia has legislated to remove all safeguards for private property, all freedoms of travel except other than that they approve, and tax, legislated to imprison people without fair trials, and not one Judge or Magistrate in Australia has ever said this is wrong.
Because all WA Judges and Magistrates are supposed to represent the Queen but now only represent the State of Western Australia and its people, they are repudiating the Australian Constitution. Consequently the entire Commonwealth Parliament is absolutely useless to the people of Western Australia because the Judges and Magistrates are treating the work of the Commonwealth politicians as a joke.
When Rodney Norman Culleton asked why the Queen was removed from the High Court the republican lawyers as Judges and Magistrates set out to get him. They put the Queen back in, but only the Queen of Australia not the one who represented peace order and good government from 1900 to 1973.
Your hip pocket is paying all the time for this new regime. Every time a Sheriff attempts to have a Judgment executed or take away your licence to drive, unless you pay the fines they have in the Fines Registry, they are breaking the Laws of the Commonwealth. By levying fines without first taking you to a proper Ch III Constitution Court they are breaking S 43 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and should be paying you, instead of attempting to steal your property. The penalty for that is ten years jail. It should mean the State of Western Australia pays you, $540,000 in liquidated damages every time a Sheriff tries to steal a car for unpaid fines. The Sheriff himself should pay $108,000 and so should every Police Officer who helps him get away with highway robbery.
Likewise every person who has lost his or her property in the last ten years, since the real Queen was abolished, ought to be able to collect this liquidated penalty, pay fifty percent tax upon it, and still be far better off than they are now. The biggest beneficiaries of this regime put in place by the Liberal Party are the Big Banks who made a $46 Billion Dollar profit last year, while the Liberal Government in Canberra is trying to screw Centrelink clients, to rake in around the $35 billion dollars deficit that they have allowed the Banks to evade using captive Judges and Magistrates.
Since 1983, the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Commonwealth has had power to overrule the Laws of the Commonwealth when it comes to law enforcement. Each and every one of the people was granted power, in 1914 in the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) in s 13 of that Act, to prosecute any offender, but the Protection Racket this person has been running since this Act was passed, a protection racket for Banks, Corporate Offenders, Drug Dealers and Judges and Magistrates that has directly caused the present Budget Deficit of the Commonwealth is still there. The DPP has done this by s 9.5 Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1983, an Act that should never have received the Royal Assent because it has robbed the Crown. This should be repealed, but you need Rodney Norman Culleton in the Senate to get it done.
In 1973 the Governor General was misled into consenting to the creation of the Queen of Australia. Since then only a few High Court Justices have cast doubt on any allegiance whatsoever to the homespun Queen looking upon Her as illegitimate. Every Senator and Member of the Parliament of the Commonwealth swears allegiance to the Successor of Queen Victoria. This pretend Queen does not qualify, and no wonder some High Court Justices think she is a pretender. The present High Court which had five Judges declare Rodney Norman Culleton disqualified from the Senate, and the five Federal Court Judges who accepted a Judgment from a District Court Judge in Western Australia not made in the name of the Queen ought to be charged and disgraced. This should be enough to see Rodney Norman Culleton restored to the Senate and that Attorney General and President of the Senate charged as accessories to the said perversion of justice.
The Attorney General Senator George Brandis got a written Notice that Rodney Norman Culleton wanted the Commonwealth to strictly prove the Queen was legitimate in Western Australia, and he refused to come to the party. Senator Parry used the Judgment of an alleged illegitimate Judge in bankruptcy to kick out Rodney Norman Culleton from the Senate, on a dodgy contract no self- respecting lawyer would hold valid.
The Family Court has been illegal since its creation. It owes no allegiance whatsoever to the Queen. It destroys lives every time it adjudicates. It sends children into danger. It treats fathers and mothers alike as slaves. It treats children as chattels, as property of the State, to be dealt with like a commodity. It is the greatest lawyer’s money making machine ever created. It only continues because the High Court refuses to acknowledge the Queen and all She stands for.
No one, no one at all, should be imprisoned, have to pay any debt, unless the approval has been obtained from one of the Courts of Her Majesty. There are no such Courts in Australia today. There are lawyers Courts in the present Australia, but none “in the name of the Queen”, the words Senator Culleton insisted the High Court comply with, and as top of the pile, every lower court must comply too. For this they set out to destroy him, using Courts of Lawyers, and the lack of a proper education for every lawyer in Australia including those who advise the President of the Senate. The people of Western Australia must protest. By protesting and tossing out the present lawyers government in Western Australia and putting in a democratic party with the balance of power, you, the people of Western Australia will get your lives back, and your fair share of the GST. You will also lead the Commonwealth back to the Rule of Law, and get justice restored.
Rod Culleton, One Nation senator for Western Australia puts the Attorney General and the High Court on notice: the HCA been acting unlawfully since 1979
HCA agrees to amend its Rules: the banks could owe the Commonwealth $30 billion in fines
David with his slingshot , aka WA One Nation senator Rod Culleton, launched his first question in the Senate at Goliath’s Attorney General George Brandis that shattered the halls of power.
Culleton’s legal team had discovered Constitutional flaws in the High Court Rules and the response from the Attorney General confirms the HCA Rules Committee will make amendments to bring the rules into line with the Commonwealth Constitution of Australia Act 1900.
This decision begs the question, what effect will this have on every matter that has been before the HCA over the past 37 years?
The Question asked in the senate that rattled the High Court:
“Chapter III of the Constitution creates a Federal Supreme Court to be called the High Court. Could the Attorney General please explain to the Senate how the High Court of Australia Act 1979, complies with the first paragraph of Chapter III Constitution and why when the Federal Supreme Court in the United States overturned sixty seven Statutes between 1952 and 1998 when the book, The Judicial Process (which I have) was last printed, the High Court in Australia hardly overturned any at all, because they have been allowed to make Rules of Court preventing ordinary Australians going to them for Judicial Review of alleged breaches of the Constitution and Laws of the Commonwealth.”
George Brandis, reflecting on his arrogance with ignorance, smirking while congratulating Culleton on his question, attempting to distract from his own, obvious limited legal ability, then answered:
“I will refer the question to the High Court rules committee”.
While the new age of crossbench politicians continue to threaten the establishment, this farmer, now a senator, needed to be taught a lesson. Brandis was well aware Rod Culleton had admitted guilt to the theft of truck keys worth $7.50 during an altercation with a tow truck driver thug who attacked him while trying to repossess his truck before he was elected to the senate.
Brandis referred the application to the High Court on direction from ALP and LNP senators requesting a ruling if Culleton was an eligible candidate at the July 2nd 2016 election.
The problem facing the establishment’s attempt to get rid of bank-bashing Culleton is a lower court’s decision on appeal to annul Culleton’s conviction for larceny.
Rod Culleton’s question to the Attorney General was answered by the High Court:
Brandis congratulated Culleton for pointing out to the senate the existing rules did not conform to the Constitution. His hand written congratulatory note appears below
From Peter Gargan, legal affairs advisor to Senator Rodney Culleton, One Nation Senator for Western Australia:
Since 1952, the High Court has been refusing to file process unless it first approves of it, so we have no way of judicially reviewing the Commissioners appointed by the Parliament to execute and maintain the Laws of the Commonwealth. There are four Commissioners who should be Judicially reviewed and sacked. They are the Commissioner of theAustralian Federal Police on $600,000 per year, who has allowed State Police to terrorise the populations in breach of S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 in force since 2001, and has allowed the Judiciary of both the States and Commonwealth to sit as slave masters without juries, in their civil jurisdiction in breach of S 268:10 Criminal Code Act 1995.
S 12DJ of the Australian Securities and Investment Commission Act 2001 bans harassment and coercion in respect of loans from Banks, and the ASIC Commissioner has the power to collect $1,300,000 per offence from all the Banks when they use harassment and coercion to collect loans on which they have been manufacturing defaults. I estimate there is around thirty billion dollars owing to the Commonwealth, if that Commissioner was doing his job properly.
S 44ZZRA — of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 empowers the Commissioner for Consumer Protection to smash the cartel with the High Court at its head. People who use legal services are consumers, and because this cartel extends from the tiniest solicitor through Judges and Magistrates to the High Court the refusal to accept process to judicially review this lazy person, has allowed thousands of productive people to be destroyed by the cartel whose biggest clients are drug dealers, Banks and Insurance Companies who will not willingly pay, even if a premium has been paid for years.
The fourth Commissioner who should be immediately Judicially Reviewed is the Commissioner for Human Rights. She has the duty to enforce the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which is Schedule 2 to the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986. In Article 14 there is a Statutory Command drawn straight out of the New Testament that all persons shall be equal before the law. That section is an element of the Offence against S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995, so there can be no doubt it is a law. If that law was enforced every criminal would be entitled to be tried with a jury and also sentenced by a jury. Civil Litigants would no longer be second class citizens subject to arbitrary and ridiculous orders from Judges and Magistrates depriving them of their driving licences, their properties, and in some cases their children, on application from people who can afford the services of the Cartel.
Further if the High Court had not been in contempt of the Parliament for 64 years, S 90 of the Constitution would see car registration abolished, as car registration is an internal tax on goods, as are licence fees to drive cars, and the exclusive responsibility of the Parliament of the Commonwealth. Likewise if they had not been in contempt, the Fines Registry in every State, the subject of Political Protests from people who have no means to pay such fines, would have to be immediately abolished as they Offend S 43 Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) in that they are acting on the pockets of Australians without the sanction of the Judicial Power of the Commonwealth. That is about nine billion dollars that should no longer be owing. The Commonwealth would have to put a little more excise on fuel, to build the roads we need and Ferries needed to give Tasmanians equality of transport.
I attach for your perusal the brilliant Speech given by Alfred Deakin in 1902 which tells us what we should have as a High Court. It was to be head of an Independent Australian Judiciary separate from any State Parliaments influence. That it has been in contempt since 1952, has allowed all sorts of skulduggery to take place in Queensland , Western Australia, New south Wales and Victoria, where Rules of Court are held to overrule any prior inconsistent Act depriving the people of Australia of the Rule of Law, and substituting instead The Rule of Lawyers.
click the book.