by Doug. Harrison,
sub-editor, The Strategy
SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES!!
1. In 1793, Matra and separately Young
proposed colonial plans for Australia. Matra was a mid-shipman on
Cook's great voyage, and Young a well-regarded naval officer.
Together with the support of Sir Joseph Banks, each proposal saw
the use of convict labour as a means of colonising Australia. Exploitation of this new
land of was the main objective.
As Sir Joseph Banks was a personal
friend of the King, George III, and was highly influential
amongst Privy Councillors and Directors of the East India
Company, his personal endorsement was absolutely critical.
(a) The Crown; (b)
its advisers the Privy Council and (c) the East India Company,
were crucial to the legal foundation in the UK of the colony of
New South Wales.
2. So little was the interest of the Imperial
Parliament that Governor Philip's legal status under the Letters
patent was of questionable nature, and nought was done.
Besides, until Napoleon was
defeated in 1815, even less was done, with the first years being
a matter of fending off starvation.
3. The first great Govenor was Lachlan
Macquarie, from 1810-19. He was the first to use the word
"Auatralia". He cleaned up the debauchery and
rum-swilling of Bligh's goverorship and twice attempted to introduce
monetary control and an Australian peoples' bank.
The Privy Council
twice countered that this was beyond his letters of Commission
and to desist and immediately. The second time, he resisted using
using distance and time for correspondence back and forth,
achieving much good.
The Privy Council replied by
appointing Commissioner Bigge. Lord Bathurst, Secretary of State
for the Colonies gave Bigge instruction to report "on any
ill-considered compassion for convicts", ensure
transportation was "an object of real terror" and to
recommend the establishment of harsher penal settlements.
One of our great Governors was to
be humiliated by the application of the most unjust treatment
from the British aristocrats. Macquarie was a professional
soldier of humble birth, so the prejudice was ingrained and the
aristocrats acted with vengeance.
4. A century later Otto Neimeyer was sent to
the colonies to do the same job on another man of humble birth,
Premier Jack Lang. The way the British aristocracy saw the means
of "controlling" the Great Depression was to starve the
Australian people to submission, even to death!
5. In the late 189O's, the then Secretary of
the Colonies, Joseph Chamberlain, completely outwitted our
Colonial representatives at federation, in the modification of
the appeals to the Privy Council.
The Privy Council
was little worried about local matters of laws in the Colonies,
but ensured the Commonwealth of Australia remained technically a
colony of the British Empire, and that the exploitation of
Australia's resources was protected by the final Empire Court,
the Privy Council.
In fact, at federation, such a new
Empire Court was proposed, and the Imperial Parliament used this
as a bargaining point. It was never formed.
6. Post WW I and the formation of the League
of Nations, the tenure of British rule and the Empire was
slipping. After WW II, it was fading further as the ravages of
the war had left British foreign affairs in a unsound position.
Well the British
aristocrats needed to protect their Australian assets and thus
ensure continuing exploitation. The mining giant Rio Tinto
(Australianised to CRA, Conzinc Rio Tinto) and the pastoral
house, Dalgety, are good examples of empire building and
In 1953, the
pro-British element achieved probably their greatest coup with
the passing of the Double Taxation Act, 1953, through our Federal
Parliament This allowed initially the British to export profits
without being taxed in Australia, but worse, our Governments
until at least 1996 have negotiated like bilateral agreements
under this Act with most other countries.
7. The previous great coup was in 1924, when
they commenced the destruction of King O'Malley's great peoples'
bank, the Commonwealth Bank and the rise to Chairman of
Massey-Greene, one of the most powerful Collins' Street
businessmen in Australia.
Not by chance
either, as he was the son of Greene MHR who spoke vehemently
against O'Malley's bank bill in 1910.
8. The final link in the facts is the rise to
power of Hawke, a Rhodes Scholar, and Keating, a labor "bag man" in
his young days. First Keating "freed up" the banking
system and at the same time threw our financial controls out the
window and thus open to the world.
The next step was
the Commonwealth bank. It was completely and ruthlessly gutted
and so sold our soul to the devil.
TRADE", "ECONOMIC RATIONALISM" and "LEVEL
PLAYING FIELD" are are but the step by step
exploitation that Matra, Young and Banks envisaged in 1783.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Speaking at the Zionist Federation
of Australia's 36th bienial conference on May 28, 1994, then
Prime Minister Paul Keating claimed that the proposed Racial
Discrimination Amendment Bill was necessary to "dissuade
those who seek to incite violence and hatred."
It enables ethnic organizations to
initiate criminal actions against individuals for
"psychological" hurt claimed by their members. Even the
London's Hollinger Corporation-controlled "Melbourne Age" condemned it in
its lead editorial - "Race Case Unproven" (May 31,
1992). "We could understand the government's concern if
there were in Australia significant neo-Nazi or other racially
bigoted groups intent on violence and civil disturbance. But
where is the evidence of such groups in Australia?"
The only "evidence"
in this country are the violence prone neo-Nazi "National
Action" and the "National Front"
founded or co-founded by City of London assets, Steve Jolly of
Melbourne-based International Socialist Organization (ISO), a
subsidiary of the Socialist Workers' Party (SWP) of Britain, and
David Greason, ISO speaker and columnist for MI-5 front,
"Searchlight" Magazine, and Isi and Mark Leibler's
"Australia-Israel Review" magazine.
(president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry) is
co-chairman with the infamous Edgar Bronfman of the World Jewish
Congress' racist anti-Semitic anti-Israelite Anti-Defamation
League of B'nai B'rith. Mark Leibler is head of Melbourne-based
Arnold Bloch Leibler law firm which specializes in tax evasion
for its wealthy clienteile, and according to one source, Paul
Ever since the
Jews paid Baron von Ritter to craft Naziism and groomed and
financed the Jew Adolf Hitler and his Jewish Administration
before his election and throughout the War, Jews have been behind
that move. Oh, not the street Jew, but the "elite" to
whom the street Jew is but an expendable footsoldier.
~ ~ ~ ~
(by Peter J.
Pro Bono Publico Australian
Taxpayers have been funding the subversion of their own country
and promoting their own unemployment by electing the Liberal,
Labor, National, Democrat and Green parties to their Parliaments.
Australians were conned by the
"political/secular trade elite as early as 1901 when
"The British Colony of the Commonwealth of Australia
Constitution Act" was passed by its short title "The
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act". Only 30% of the public voted
at the Federation Referendums. Since then, no referendum under
S.128 has been held to authorise "The Crown", nor to
confer "power under the Crown" upon the Commonwealth or
any parliament in Australia.
Both, the secular academic elite
of "the establishment" and Parliament repeatedly
contend that the "powers and privileges of parliament
were inherited from the 1689 U.K. Bill of Rights in 1901".
Validity of that belief has had no legal standing under
International Law since 1920. As a consequence, all Acts passed
in the Queen's name and decisions of the High Court (under S.51)
The 'Act' of
Federation and proclamation of the Constitution was never
anything less than a method of foreign governments and
corporations to freely exploit the minerals, resources and labour
of Australians for their own profit.
political parties only hold power over the people by withholding
this knowledge and exerting laws and regulations to control them.
over a quarter century and 35 double-taxation agreememts with
foreign countries and corporations since 1933 have made it easy
for companies to record a local loss minimising taxation dues,
and when a profit is made, transfer it to pacific island and
Asian tax shelters.
One Nation is
being vilified because its policies are directed at ensuring
Australians get a fair share of the $200 billion tax free profits
going off-shore as tax revenue to ensure a secure a future,
equality and employment for all Australians. That idea poses a
threat to those plundering corporate Australia.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
by Peter J.
When a former Prime Minister
comments, "We'd be out of our heads to popularly elect a
Prersident" and the incumbent says "A
popularly elected president would interfere with the Party
system", Australians recognise that the "free will
of the people" is to be again ignored as it was in 1901,
1920, 1945, 1953, 1967, 1970, 1975, 1980, 1989, 1997 and 1998.
of those years is that in 1901 a constitution was formed as a "free-trade
arrangement for the cartels and corporations to exploit Australia
and its people." In 1920 at the inauguration of the
League of Nations, Australia was accepted as a self governing
"republic". In 1945 Australia signed membership of the
U.N. with recognition as a "republic".
exploit Australia, l953 saw federal government adopt a U.N.
Convention on "Double Taxation", which today allows
international cartels to avoid $200 billion in annual tax debts,
of which only $945 million was recovered in 1996. This tax
holiday allowed a 90% foreign takeover of local businesses.
of 1967 gave Canberra powers to legislate for "other
races" and began "multiculturalism", the UNESCO agenda.
parliament was challenged in the U.N. in 1970 to show cause why
"lmperial Acts" which violate the UN Charter on
"free nations", were not rescinded. Despite the
illegality, government was dismissed in 1975. Also in 1975, a
Royal Commission into Banking fraud was stopped.
In 1980 a UN
document "The New International Economic Order and its
implications for Australia" was adopied "ad hoc"
to administer the economy for the transnational cartels' benefit,
in the name of "free trade".
After the 1988
referendum the Federal government ignored the public vote against
Council amalgamations and set-up of regional local government --
as the preferred infrastructure for a republic, with adoption of
a U.N. Declaration in 1989. The constitutional convention was
initiated in 1997 on two only -- very narrow agendas -- whether
Australia becomes or does not become a "republic".
A heavily stacked
group of elected nobodies in constitutional knowledge were
elected by the public against the greater odds of
company-sponsored delegates (former politicians) vying for the
Convention is chaired by a devout party faithful who will not
accept public agenda -- only that decided by the parliamentaty
Are all these
things a true account of democratic government -- or a massive
fraud like the change to the Auditor-General's office in
The public must be
the "judge" of these facts and the convention must
allow the "free will of the people" to be the prime
consideration, at another convention.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
(by Peter J.
It riles me beyond measure to read
decisions of the High Court, the machinations of Mason K, etc.
These people have no powers, nor prerogative to interpret British
Acts, vary them, nor make decisions based upon "their
interpretations of them" and they know it.
Native Title came from the United
Nations in a 1974 General Assembly Ad Hoc Committee under
"Resolution Nos. 3201(S-VI) and 3202(S-V1) dated 1 May
1974." Quote: Parliamentary Paper No 1/1980 - ISBN 0 642
04725.1 Titled -- The New International Economic Order -
Implications for Australia.
Justice Moynihan in the Mabo Case
was the 7th High Court Judge. Justice Moynihan collected 3,664
pages of evidence from hundreds of people around the Island of
Mer, and the mainland.
His evidence found Eddie Mabo was
claimed as a dependent on his Father's 1947 Tax return, only the
name of his father was Mr. SAMBO.
The High Court ignored that, and
changed the common law (U.K. LAW) to initiate Native-Title. Now
the rat-bags can start screaming "racist", if
they want, but these words should shut them up. The fact is,
lamentably, that the many impoverished Aborigines that I have met
and those with Land Claims, have been conned -- like the rest of
A challenge under International
Law against the British Acts, that comprise our Constitution -
"The British Colony of the Commonwealth of Australia
Act" and State Constitutions (passed in HRM name) would
leave many Aborigines and other Australians stateless and
But don't you worry about that, if
recession comes, those cashed up will buy our homes for 35% of
their value, or buy the mortgage and become your landlord, and
your friendly un-communicative Council will still charge you full
water, land rates and a garbage charge. But there'll be no
garbage to collect. (Only spent political "assurances").
The High Court, Parliament and
many noted Law Academics hold to the belief that "powers and
privilees of parliament were inherited from the 1689 U.K. Bill of
Rights", these are fallacious views. Notably, it is only the
British Parliameut that has authority to change British Acts
which the Australian States inherited in their constitutions
prior to and after Federation. E.R. II Herself, has no powers in
Britain to change Acts, nor as Queen of Australia has our
Constitutional Sovereign powers to proclaim or rescind any Act of
the Australian or U.K. parliaments.
It is a fact, that "The
British Colony of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution
Act" is itself invalid under Section 128. The 30% of the
populace who voted at the Federation referendums were franchised
to vote, notably, the majority of citizens did not and were
refused the franchise to vote. The rules at that time for the
franchise to vote, were much the same as the qualifications for
Members of Parliament, that they must own property etc., to
qualify -- that is a violation of S.128.
The "notion" that the
Federation debates and subsequent referenda were held to
establish Unity amongst the States in a Federation is also
riddied with falsehoods. The basic reason for Federation was for
free trade of goods and services between the states, intrastate
and international trade. A handful of "merchants and
graziers" from Victoria and New South Wales lobbied for
Federation to the parliaments, so they would be spared the
"bounties and tariffs" on their goods.
Nothing has changed since then,
except 86% foreign ownership, 7,700 corporations registered as
multinationals, to avail themselves of the 35 double-taxation
agreements, forged since 1953, to dodge company tax both in their
countries of origin and in Australia, through tax shelters in
Pacific islands and Asian banks, the same which their corporate
mates and principals own. The constitution as it is, is nothing
less than a decree to allow for the free trade and exploitation
of Australia's resources, industries and labour force for
Many readers have been informed
that 7,700 corporations have now registered as
"multinationals". Why is that so? Apologies to Prof.
Julins Sumner Miller, I've stolen his line. Current estimates put
the national economic turnover of Australia at $40 trillion.
Foreign corporations export (ABS figure) $200 billion profit
offshore tax-free each year under 35 Double-Taxation
"Agreements" Libs and Labor have made since 1953 to
today. They have paid only 9% of the tax revenue, while payee
taxpayers paid 91% (unionists please note), that $200 billion
equals $72 billion tax revenue lost forever. (Details thanks to
The founding fathers, first
legislators and first Prime Ministers all made statements at one
time or another, alluding to the possibility that Parties and
Corporate interests would eventually takeover the constitution
for their sole benefit. Corporation (inc) Liberal Party has
signed 35 Double-Taxation agreements with foreign countries and
corporations since 1953. The "agreements" have
cumulatively robbed Australian taxpayers and the share holders in
Corporate Auslralia of some $2,000 plus billion in tax revenue,
-- trust Howard and Liberal/Labor incorporated? -- no way.
Then, R.G Menzies, Mr Howard's
icon, stayed in power from 1949 to 1966 with the support of a
faction of the Victorian Labor Party, and from that time, the
"establishment" the two parties developed, has served
to keep them in power cooperatively ever since. The founding
fathers were right were they not? A nation which is totally
reliant on the public spending and taxes on their very existence.
The debate between Howard and
Beazley was pedantic. Yes, I am annoyed my country is being sold
out and prepared for recession, because Howard hasn't the courage
to make his Party's corporate mates and election-fund sponsors
pay their fair share of company tax -- a whole $72 billion of it.
Yes, I am annoyed that foreign financiers call the shots and make
Rat on your mates, your countrymen
is more Howard's style -- he says he "considers himself a
humble servant of the people", excuse me folks, I cannot any
longer contain it, being honest -- that is bulldust.
Australia is technically under
international law a "political dictatorship. It is not a
parliamentary democracy, nor a "representative
democracy" as quoted by Mr Peter McGauran, in the Gippsland
Many noted politicians have cashed
themselves up to buy land on the Very Fast Train route through
Gippsland, to profiteer when the project starts. Land titles
documents over the past 5 years are the proof. In
recession/depression they will become the Landlords. That is the
situation that provoked the Magna Carta to be written 783 years
ago and that is how far backwards Howard and Beazley will take
But "there's still
more", benefactor and hnmble servant of the people, Mr
Howard has changed the rules on self-funded retirees and
superannuated pensioners with shares and assets so you can not
make a profit. If you do, your entitlement reduces -- Howard's
will increase of course.
And watch out you dole-recipients,
as they're fond of catching people who became the victims of
Labor/Liberal/Nats "economic rationalism" -- doesn't
that sound a bit like ration cards of the 1930's? I'm not
kidding, ration cards are in use by National Parks Organisations
to fund greenies on their jaunts into the forests to destroy
bulldozers and such.
Under Howard and Beazley, these
may become your New Credit Cards?
When you vote for Labor or
Liberal, Democrats, Nats or Greens do remember me folks, because
I'll still be there telling you how you were conned, and by that
time, you will know that yourselves anyway.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Doug Harrison, sub-editor, The Strategy
In 1939-45, Great
Bntain and her allied fought against democratically elected
tyrants viz. Hitler and Stalin. Churchill's epic address to his
nation said we shall defend FREEDOM on land, in the air, on the
seas and shores, till death. On his assent to Prime Minister in
May 1940, when Hitler had western Europe at his mercy, he
thundered to his nation "to wage war against a monstrous
tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of
And for his
stinging address, we still have our freedom, but fools still
confuse it as democracy!
Democracy? It is
simply majority rule. If we have tyranny, it is the rule of a
democratically elected tyrant -- a dictator. If we have anarchy,
it becomes mob rule. If the vote is so constricted to property,
then we have aristocratic rule. (note: an oligarchy is rule by
the elite, which may or may not be elected).
depends on how many of the people are given the vote. This is
known as enfranchisement. 'Enfranchisement' means granting or
having freeaom, Which gave a person a vote, and in the Greek
democracy this was in distinction to the slaves and women.
Great Britain has
never claimed to be a democracy with the aristocrats believing in
their "goodness" as ruler. In the debates re the
widening of the franchise in 1832 and 1867, many a Lord and MP in
the Commons ridiculed the idea of the commoner having a vote.
Pre 1832, just
500,000 were franchised. Immediately it was increased to 813,008.
This was one thirtieth of the total population: 1:7 in England
and Scotland; 1:20 in Ireland. Electoral enrolment was
introduced, but -- there were 576 types of freehold
qualification, 400 of copyhold, and 50 of occupying tenancy. A
solicitor's field day!
out of six males were voteless -- of course -- no women, and
one-half of the borough population of England had thirty-four
seats and the other half 300. Gerrymander, step aside; the Brits
had already perfected it long ago.
From about 1855
till his death in 1696, aged 75, Sir Henry Parkes almost
single-handedly guided the free world into a broad
enfranchisement of all adults. By 1902, in the federal arena this
was the standard for all adults over 21 years. In 1973 it was
lowered to 18 years.
Parkes saw his
father lose his tenant farm before he left England. He was
determined in his adopted homeland that all men be given an equal
share in the determination of the governance of themselves and
fellow citizens, and that a landed gentry did not corner the
wealth of this land.
Parkes is thought
of as thc "father of federation". True, but his vision
was for a nation, a new nation on Earth where all reasonable,
thoughtful adult men and women should be involved in the
governance of the nation. This involves a knowledgable and
interested citizen with the power to impose their will when the
government exceeds its power.
Parkes is the
"grandfather of nationhood". We have not reached the
social maturity desired by Parkes: The challenge is for ns to
achieve that, in our move to a constitutional amendment by ihe
and freedom are different, they are not mutually exclusive.
Professor L.F. Crisp (Chair of Political Science at ANU) in his
1960 hook "The Parliamentary Government of the Commonwealth
of Australia, 3rd Ed," wrote of a working democracy:
politics are based on certain assumptions, which the community as
a 'whole must understand and accept if democracy is to flourish.
Democrats assume that every citizen is capable of some
contribution to the general welfare of the community and the
management of its affairs, complex though these have become. They
assume at least a minimum interest and knowledge of national
affairs in all citizens: they assume the reality of the citizens'
freedom of will. They assume that the whole adult population must
be given reasonable equality of consideration by goveming
authorities and equality before the law. In basic social and
civil matters each must count for one and none for more than one
in the eyes of the state. They assume that the community must
make provision -- and reasonable equal opportunity for the
education of its citizens before they reach the age of full civil
rights and duties. They assume a standard of personal and civil
liberty, individual moral integrity, the moral tolerance natural
to a civilised people and a consequent absence of arbitrary
coercion from political and social life." EQ.
In the context of
the recent election campaign, October 3rd, one must doubt the
ability of the younger voters to make an informed choice due to
the paucity of knowledge from an education system that gives
information but almost zero understanding. The media compounds
the problem with a brazen display of brainwashing that seeks to
"railroad" our vote, not presenting factual material
that voters are capable of understanding in relation to good
govermnent and thus empower the voter to reasonably choose
his/her representative amongst the many candidates.
Just may be,
democracy and freedom are not a happy "marriage"
partnership in Australia today?
I contend that we
are ruled by an elected oligarchy, that are more concerned for
others; that is, others who are not Australian, whether as
citizens or corporations (being owned by Australians or taxed at
the same rate as other Australian businesses on Australian earned
profits). This puts the Federal Parliament, and especially the
Government at odds with the people who authorised their
governance through the Coastitution and last federal election;
and hence in a potential position of treason. strategy.htm
Retrieved from cache at Google.com
originally at www.biblebelievers.com
Notice: TGS HiddenMysteries and/or the donor of this material may or may not agree with all the data or conclusions of this data. It is presented here 'as is' for your benefit and research. Material for these pages are sent from around the world. If by chance there is a copyrighted article posted which the author does not want read, email the webmaster and it will be removed. If proper credit for authorship is not noted please email the webmaster for corrections to be posted.