FOREIGN CONTROL OF AUSTRALIA
The first edition of this book is now more than twelve months old.
To bring this edition up to date we add this P.S.
Sweet & Sour' is not a kind of food I particularly enjoy but is the taste of a satisfaction that comes from a work which time has proved sadly accurate. No revision of that already written needs be made but only the addition of words that confirm both the great disaster of our times plus the encouragement of recent events.
Research by Dr David Mitchell (and other scholars) has improved our understanding of the constitutional heritage we are in such grave danger of losing. At the same time political events expose more and more the treachery that installed a world-wide socio-economic system designed to steal a world from its people.
The bitterness and frustration of trying to awaken a people sedated by a Shangri-la of pleasurable misinformation must he coupled with a reluctant admiration of the patience and cunning of alien subverters. Alien, not from outer space, but still so alien to what we understand as human, that we were unguarded against the possibility of their existence in a form so like our own.
These aliens have plotted over a period of generations to place a cuckoo in the nest of humanity knowing that our human instincts would cause us to feed this monster to our own destruction. Survival will need an incredible awakening and a return to basic values offered us nearly 2000 years ago. Values that will have to be re-discovered after the deformity and pollution resulting from 2,000 years of worldly manipulation.
This manipulation and treachery still progress even though there has been a great stirring. We have to understand that seeing something is wrong is not enough, the cuckoo is still in the human nest and still being fed by human craft. Unless we can regain control of our political system the end result will remain as the alien gospellers planned.
Oil on the water has damped down some waves but the tide remains under the control of that socio-economic system now drowning humanity.
Politically we are told that Australia is now free of its ties with the mother country and fully independent. So how is it that we are subject to a new form of law set up and controlled by unknown foreign people? How is it that this transfer of Australian sovereignty has been done secretly and without reference to Australians?
Whatever our rights may be, there is one thing certain, if we do not defend our inheritance we will lose it. There is no document, constitution, promise, system of law, Bill of Rights or agreement that will stand without our vigilant care. We have powerful enemies but their power rests with illusion. We are educated to believe in illusions and these bind us more strongly than chains.
Everything said in this book is now doubly evident. Unless we can regain control of our government very quickly we will soon be totally regulated by a world system under the control of an international elitist religious sect who regard us as a living liability.
OUR AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTION
It is revealing and exciting to learn that when Australia was settled, each State government was given its own constitution based on the law of England as of that date. This, as you will see, is a very important point.
When the States formed themselves into a Commonwealth, the new parliament was given only the powers needed to carry out its limited function. It was not given powers that would have tended either to clash with the States' Constitutions or make the States subservient to the Commonwealth Government.
You will appreciate now the insight of those who framed our national Constitution and retained that additional protection of freedoms defended by each individual and separate State. This safeguard should have made us secure but did not foresee the possibility of a conspiracy between political parties to transfer their power, in secret, to a Federal headquarters.
You will also appreciate the full cunning of the secretive Australia Act (1986) in making the States' Governors mere puppets, and how necessary this was to the achievement of the stated aim of the Act in divorcing Australia from all ties with the mother country.
Of even more importance however is that the Australia Act provided a cloak for the transfer of States' sovereignty to a Federal authority who in turn gave allegiance to foreign control.
It is the States which have been the custodians of the LAW and the gradual transfer of power has now progressed to give the Commonwealth Parliament the power (but not the right) to transfer Australian sovereignty to an international jurisdiction. Consequences of this betrayal are now becoming common in the news. Is it right and reasonable that an international court decide what we can or cannot do with our own land or laws'? Can you imagine the media outcry had this been a British or USA court.
WHY SHOULD REFERENDUM QUESTIONS THAT, ON THE FACE OF IT, GIVE US NO ADVANTAGE ON PRESENT LAW, BE MATTERS OF GREAT URGENCY?
Those who allow the news will know that our Australian Government needed an international court to adjudicate on the world heritage listing of an Australian forest. They will also know that other matters, such as labour management and social behaviour, are now subject to overseas control and decision-making. In addition the United Nations, through its agencies, is known to have prepared new agreements that will allow them control of local government and religion. The recent referendums were to clear the way for Federal use of the new agreements.
It is important to note that thousands of agreements have now been made with United Nations' agencies and this for no practical reason other than the specific purpose of overruling Australian sovereignty and making us subservient to a foreign authority. If you tend to doubt that this power could be obtained without going through the legal process of national referendum, here is just a sample of the authority on public record: Justice Dawson, Justice of the Australian High Court, as reported in The Australian newspaper on 16/3/'88: There is now no practical limit to the scope of the external affairs power [EAP].
The Australian Editorial 14/7/'88:
Mr Willis has widened the possible use of this [EA] power, this time through the international Labour Organization convention ratified by Federal Parliament . . . and We now have the possibility of the Commonwealth using the Closer Economic Relations treaty with New Zealand to change the laws governing our financial system and, headline July 16: Tertiary tax 'would flout U.N. treaty'.
So you see from this small outline that 'OUR (?)' Australian Government has been hijacked and is now intent on creating a public aura of legality for the gradual imposition of despotism. A despotism which, in turn, intermingles with a program of genocide. It is not unlike the progress of events in Hitler's Germany or red Russia.
Dr D.M. White, a Senior Lecturer in Politics at Monash University, wrote a long article called The Constitution Under Siege for the IPA Review (Feb, 1988). Referring to the effect of Constitutional Commission recommendations for changing our constitution, he says:
I shall be arguing that these amendments would upset every major balance in our constitution, and enshrine a number of sinister new possibilities. They would also make the central government much more powerful, and substantially more interventionist. It is ironical that this should be proposed at a time when the tide has turned against excessive regulation.
The community has been given almost no idea of what impact these amendments would have on Australia and our way of life ....
One glaring example of inadequate attention to consequences is the recommendation to give the Commonwealth power over matters affecting the national economy ....
What would be the consequence of giving this power to the Commonwealth in 1988?... There would be no sanctuary for anyone trying to escape from almost any conceivable form of Commonwealth economic control. End quote (EA).
The above is of particular relevance at a time when the use of money can be outlawed and all transactions forced to be made via a plastic credit card and so allow 'authorities to monitor every move and purchase. We could be located by every phone call or bus ride we make. This with technology already in place. If we GIVE these powers to those who betray us we will no longer be able to claim that they misused their powers nor that they STOLE powers they were not entitled to. Their legal position and authority then become secure.
THE ORIGIN OF LAW
Every aspect of our social and economic life is now subject to foreign control through EAP treaty and yet, in origin, our Constitution and law were based on the Ten Commandments. Even less well known is that the role of the legal system was to interpret these commandments in the light of the Holy Scripture while the role of parliament was to correct any mistakes (deliberate or otherwise) that might be made by the Courts.
From this we see that neither the Courts of Law nor the Parliament were there to make laws. They were there to preserve the law and to defend the human welfare. Subsequent historic events were outlined earlier in this book.
Now here is another little-known fact:
In 1917 English law ruled (as part of a gradual usurping of traditional authority) that Biblical law was no longer relevant to British law. However, as the Australian States were formed before this date, they, in the strictly legal sense, are still under law as at the date of their formation and under law as at the date of their formation and, until this is legally changed, your rights and responsibilities are as laid down by the Ten Commandments and Holy Bible.
Does that surprise you? Do you appreciate what a restraint keeping to the law would place on the bureaucratic meddlers? Do you wonder why the political parties are so urgently and secretly trying to get rid of all restraints imposed on them by our legal constitution? Do you understand what an effective restraint our legal constitution places on the manipulators by enforcing law restricted to that proclaimed by a WRITTEN unchangeable document?
The WRITTEN document
In the interests of a better understanding let us deviate a little. Notice the key word in the preceding sentence is 'WRITTEN'. The history of communication is a long story involving feel, smell, sight and sound, but we need not study this story to appreciate that no civilization beyond the primitive can develop without the written word. The WRITTEN word is our most modern form of communication.
Now many people reading this may mentally 'jump up' and say, 'What about radio and TV?'
You only have to think for a minute to realize that these, no matter how sophisticated their means of transmission, deliver only the passing vibrations of sight and sound.
The international elitists understand very well that if they can divorce the people from effective use of written communication then they produce a society primitive in understanding and easily manipulated. No parent of young children should keep TV or radio sets in the home unless their use is severely restricted.
We, the peoples of the world, were able to be reduced to our present state of apathetic futility mainly because we have become so heavily conditioned to sight and sound for entertainment and secret indoctrination what is socially acceptable.
The virtual destruction of human development within the education system - revealed by the present upsurge of primitive tribalism, vandal morality and teenage suicide - is part of a well established Fabian plot based on 'gradualism'. Let us not forget that any reform of our culture must be based on written literature and logically connected to a scientific base rather than to an emotional ideology.
The predominant content and purpose of these writings is simply to demonstrate a unified view of social reality based on information readily available in the public domain. It must be seen as significant that the public response of the last few years only began after How to Avoid the LOOMING CATASTROPHE was distributed to the maincore of actively concerned people.
Do not be discouraged by a reluctant response from a brain-dulled community - it takes time. But also remember, that every year lost without our people regaining control of government, means we will have an increasingly primitive 'sight and sound' indoctrinated community. A community controlled by bureaucracy impossible to dismantle. Do not forget - our government is now alien-controlled.
This present revival has to be successful if we are to be saved an incredible death toll and unimaginable misery.
THE DEPTHS OF DEGRADATION
The depths to which we have been forced is perhaps best shown by an item of news in The Weekend Australian 25/6/'88. A Dr Paul Gerber, a reader in medico-legal studies, has suggested that brain-dead women, or "neo- morts", could be used a surrogate mothers. He described the proposal as "innovative and ethical". He thinks it a wonderful solution for surrogacy problems.
At the same time, millions of babies are aborted and people of foreign race and culture are imported, ostensibly, to fill the gap. Families are being discriminated against (very harshly) by taxation and welfare.
Complaints arc answered with new swear words such as sexism and racism. Parents are crying out and threatening to sue State Governments because of the activities of so-called 'community welfare' workers who take children away frown parents (Would kidnap be more accurate?) and charge the parents, often without benefit of legal evidence, with child abuse.
A recent visitor was one of many Australians complaining of such treatment. He had suffered for some years a troublemaker reporting to welfare authorities but on every occasion nothing was found wrong. Then the complaint reached a zealot who was not prepared to look at the history of the case or consider the facts. His child was spirited away to an unknown hiding place. Lawyers were amazed but could make no headway with welfare authorities.
The bypassing of accepted standards of evidence and legal trial is a feature of the new law being gradually imposed. A form of law growing out of thousands of pieces of legislation designed to support foreign treaties. This rash of legislation is passing through our parliaments too fast for the elected members to read and digest even should they have the inclination.
It has become clear that the political parties, collectively, are already dedicated to introducing a totally foreign form of social dictatorship.
We no longer have secure law! There is a rapidly spreading despotism protected by United Nations treaties! Treaties which even go so far as to protect the killer disease AIDS. Effective action to counter this disease would breach anti-discrimination laws and contravene our commitment to international treaty (See booklet, AIDS and the World Government Plot).
Should we be concerned by such developments or should we support our governments to subsidize anti-social activities? The Australian Money seized from drug traffickers was yesterday handed over to the Australian Prostitutes Collective by the Victorian Government as part of its campaign to return drug profits to the community. That is what is called adding insult to injury.
Although it may be impossible for anyone to now become a Prime Minister or President unless he in some way serves the purpose of the international elitists, this does no[ necessarily mean that he knowingly serves. It is likely that most leading politicians know something of what is going on, but because this is often a vague understanding we sometimes see surprising diversions.
These independent forays also serve the internationalists in that they give the public the impression of just that lack of co-ordination that is essential to mask the activity of conspiracy.
In relation to the September 3 referendum John Howard campaigned quite positively but with little media reporting. Does this mean he is not a stooge for the conspiracy?
THE THIN END OF THE WEDGE
In the lead-up to the 1988 referendum the Solicitor-General, Mr Keith Mason, QC, advised the Greiner Government that a 'YES' vote could mean that the High Court and not the State's democratically-elected Parliament, would be the ultimate decision-making body.
The Attorney-General, Mr John Dowd, said he was compelled to draw public attention to Mr Mason's advice in the interests of the people of NSW.
Mr Mason also expressed concern over the vague wording and intention of some of the proposals.
The above, and a constant stream of similar incidentals, expose the thin edge of the wedge of overseas control. Already, through use of External Affairs powers, the Constitution is subject to the votes of a few unelected lawyers. So much for one vote one value.
It is interesting that all authorities and even leaders of the opposition are given scant space by the news media when they oppose the treachery. When they are reported they are reported in the way of matters of little public importance. As an example of this the Sydney Sunday Telegraph of August 28 gave a two-column headline to the above Solicitor-General/Attorney-General report. Alongside and in overpoweringly larger print and space, was a beat-up about the trivia of friction between the Treasurer and Prime Minister.
Anyone understanding the layout of news would instantly see that this was a 'set up' to attract attention away from the socially important and give the reader a feeling that the serious item was of little importance.
This censorship 'by manipulation' clearly demonstrates that the treason is established in the very soul of the administrative and communications establishment.
However the overseas dictators take great pride in their ability to manipulate. They won't destroy us in a direct manner, their way is to entice us to willing self-destruction.
The referendums program would not give central government significantly more power - what more power can we give them now that the law courts give them access to total power through the external affairs scam? No, the referendums are to give us, the people, the chance to freely and openly grant the transfer of powers already stolen. They want us to relieve them of their guilt by, of our own 'free' will, putting our necks across the chopping block.
This is all very difficult to accept by the average citizen who has lived within the cocoon of personal needs and aspirations. Perhaps the following quotation, taken from our most authoritative newspaper, will be convincing. On June 11, from The Australian Editorial:
We have stumbled into a Constitutional crisis that is likely to be remembered as one of the most significant political events in our history.
Few people realize that when, on September 3, adult Australians will be summoned to vote on four referendum questions designed to alter our constitution, they will be taking part in little more than a charade with horrendous implications.
Let the Government come clean, stop this charade and give us back the full strength of the rights we were given on January 1, 1901.
Any honest appraisal shows the referendum questions were outrageously dishonest. How could any elected politician ask people to vote on them? Every question misrepresented the powers publicly granted to political parties by a 'yes' vote.
"One vote one value" was a pure con. This system already applies to Federal elections in the House of Representatives, but at the 1987 election, Labor received 45.83% of the votes and 86 seats. Lib/Nat 46.07% and 62 seats. This is just as bad as the so-called Queensland gerrymander.
You see, the way in which the electorate is divided can be decisive. Suppose we have half the people voting for party A and half voting for party B. And suppose we have 10 equal electorates but in 9 of them we have 51% party A supporters and 49% party B supporters; 9 x 51 = 459.9 x 49 = 441. In the tenth electorate we have 59% for party B and 41% supporting party A.
Equal votes, equal value? With equal support and careful arrangement of boundaries, one party may get nine seats and the other one Seat. As members of the United Nations we have one vote and China has one vote. What is the value of Australia's vote if 'one vote one value' is established as a principle of World Government?
In the last N.S.W. election it required 52% of electors to support the Liberal party before they could be elected. 'Fair elections!?' We all want fair elections but that was not advanced by the legislation proposed for referendum. What the legislation allowed was Federal Government dictate in review of States' electoral boundaries.
A four-year term of government. The proposed legislation did nothing to ensure a four-year term - the party in power could still call an election at and time within this term. The purpose of the States' interests. The proposed legislation would allow greater power to manipulate the electorate and effectively reduce the value of the Senate.
Do you know that Senator Gareth Evans himself said, You don't abolish the Senate by doing it up-front, you white-ant it from within?
L.J.M. Cooray, Associate Professor, School of Law, Macquarie University, puts a strong case, quote:
The view has been expressed and widely publicized that the Referendum Bills tabled by the Hawke Government do not involve an extension of legislative power to the Commonwealth. The Attorney-General, Hon Lionel Bowen, in his speech to parliament during the second reading of the Fair Elections Bill on May 10th,1988 said, "The four bills that I have introduced do not involve any increase in Commonwealth power." This is not true. End of quote.
Professor Cooray then gives two pages of rather legalistic jargon with quoted authorities to back up this comment and ends with, quote:
The above analysis must be assessed in the context that the High Court has provided interpretations of the Constitution which would have been unthinkable five or ten years before the decisions were handed down. The High Court can be expected to continue its process of construing the Constitution in such a way us to provide more power to the Commonwealth Parliament. End quote.
In other words the original meaning and intent of the Constitution is now totally irrelevant and the Commonwealth Parliament is set on a course of misappropriation of powers by deceit and public misrepresentation.
Removal of power from the States and the investment of power in the Commonwealth Government was clearly and deliberately the real purpose of all four bills.
Not only that but also the means of gaining public consent for this treachery was by misrepresenting the facts to the voting public.
Do you want 'Freedom of Religion? Why did they ask us to vote on what is so obvious; something we already have? Why was the matter so urgent that we were only given a minimum of time for study? Why were the referendum questions 'guillotined' through parliament in such haste? Why could the referendum not have been left until the next parliamentary election? Why did the referendum not address matters of serious public concern such as immigration, Citizen Initiated Referendum or aboriginal land rights'?
Obviously there was no national emergency or any public feeling of urgency in respect of any of the questions asked, the only obvious reason for urgency was to get it over before the majority of people discovered the truth behind the question.
They would have done as well to just put one question; "Do you want good government?" Of course, people would have known that just voting for good government would not make it happen any more than it would make fair elections happen, but at least it would have shown that someone had thought the matter through to basics.
Most people now have some idea of what anti-discrimination means in practice. Do you understand that 'Freedom of Religion' means that the Federal government will have your expressed permission to enforce anti-discrimination in religion? This will mean that you cannot advocate the benefits of your religion in public because to do so would imply that your religion is better than other religions, i.e. you would be practicing discrimination. Do you know that the law they want to introduce is the same as that already used to prevent communal display of Christianity in some USA cities?
Do you realize that if this referendum had been carried, Satanism might have been promoted in schools in a policy of 'reverse discrimination'? The elitists are an anti-Christian religious sect most commonly known as the Illuminati'. Their policy is to use Satanism to destroy cohesion and make us defenseless.
When laws were introduced to outlaw discrimination on grounds of race or sex - women, Aborigines and Asians were given reverse discrimination to counter the assumed disadvantages they are ALLEGED to have suffered. This same reasoning can be used to destroy Christianity.
Do you realize that the religion of 'humanism' may not be classified as a religion in the true new order and thereby be free of control? Do you realize that the law said to grant freedom of religion was virtually the same as that in the USSR?
Do you realize that those four little referendum votes, seemingly so innocent and unimportant, allowed 33 constitutional changes? All were dishonestly presented and designed to serve one purpose only: to have the people of Australia officially hand powers of the State Governments to the Federal Government. They were to make legal some of the powers secretly and illegally gained by foreign affairs manipulation.
For some time there has been a need to expose the meaning of the well- known 'peace' symbol, as represented by an upside-down broken cross placed within a circle.
This symbol is not a chance production; our enemy is very conscious of the influence of symbolism. To capture the minds of our young people they do not overlook the seemingly innocent symbol as part of the subversion and eventual destruction of our culture. Let us look at a little of the history of this symbol.
The main element of the 'peace' symbol is an ancient and well established Satanic insignia and relates to sacrifice and desecration. It can be traced back to Emperor Nero (54-68 A.D.) who is said to have designed it at the time of the crucifixion of Simon Peter as a symbol of contempt for Christianity.
The Legions of Titus carried this anti-Christ symbol to the sacking of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. and the Bolsheviks painted it on the doors of churches closed in Russia. It was also an element in the symbolism of Hitler's National Socialism.
You do not have to be a Christian to realize that life (if you're allowed to live) would be very different in a world controlled by an anti-Christ religious sect.
The broken cross of the 'peace' sign represents a perversion of the Christian Cross upended and with the arms broken. It was widely used during the Middle Ages by anti-Christian rebels but, to have it accepted by today's innocent and ignorant, it is presented as a peace symbol designed by Lord Bertrand Russell. Its disguise is that it represents the semaphore code for the letters 'N' and 'D' (nuclear disarmament) but both Bertrand Russell and his wife were known to be actively anti-Christian and members of that elitist, 'social subversion' group known as the Fabian Society. The well known symbol for the Fabians is of a wolf in sheep's clothing - they pride themselves in treachery.
The 'peace' symbol is a sign within a language. The broken cross represents 'the death of man'; the circle represents the unborn child. Therefore, in its 'peace' format, it is the Satanic symbol for abortion - the sign of the plot to abort Christianity.
The permeative nature of treachery is self-evident in our society today. The 'peace' symbol is commonly displayed at Labor Party events and rallies. However it is not confined to the left of politics and ignorant protest groups; in fact the 'peace' symbol was seen prominently on display at a 'peace rally' held at Parramatta by the N.S.W. branch of the Festival of Light. It was on the banner of one of the supporting groups displayed, appropriately enough, on the left side of the speakers platform.
In Language as a Communist Weapon. Professor Stefan Possony observes: The deception of the non-Communist world is, of course, a main objective of their [the communist] language manipulations.
Non-Communists are easily deceived because they are brought up to believe that words convey certain specified meanings. But Communists, to the instruction of those behind the mask, use semi-secret meanings and symbols to communicate with their followers.
'Peace' means the secret 'War' or, to follow through the treacherous reasoning, it means the peace of victory after the total destruction of all opposition. To achieve this 'peace' the opposing force must be induced to trust the killer and feel guilty if feelings of suspicion are entered into. The victim is luffed into the state of trust where murder and robbery is easy. In short. PEACE means killing without danger of reprisal, i.e. murder.
Have no doubt that the misleading referendum questions form a common unity with the campaign for the destruction of human justice and freedom. We need not go further to expose the attempted trickery of those referendum questions, two thirds of our people saw sufficient danger to vote 'NO'.
The vital lynch-pin connecting Australia to world problems is political conspiracy. Our political parties well demonstrated this conspiracy in the early 1980s when, over a period of years, they conspired to introduce the Australia Act in such secrecy that the majority of Australians are still ignorant of this Act or its meaning. To achieve this cover-up required the FULL CO-OPERATION of ALL political parties. (Commonwealth and all States).
The officially stated purpose of the Act was to sever all ties between Australia and Great Britain. But those who heard rumours and asked questions were told that it was an Act or no public importance and only removed a few archaic ties. Some effects of the Australia Act are now becoming visible.
10/9/'88 - there is consternation in official circles. It has become public that many politicians have dual citizenship and the Australian Constitution (Section 44) expressly forbids such people M.P. status. This is made more intriguing because the Australia Act makes of Great Britain a foreign country. It is not easy to renounce British citizenship. If the law were to be kept it could mean the present parliament is unconstitutional. At best some parliamentary activity must be unlawful.
Much of what is happening could be challenged on legality. Unfortunately, as we have seen, High Court decisions over recent years have reflected the Canberra line. A general legal action would need large financial resources but the cost to challenge MPs with dual citizenship is not excessive. Is it likely the High Court will upset the Federal apple cart? Unfortunately, we cannot hold printing to see the result of this comedy.
Events of the above nature could be the key to a public awakening and make great legal debate a formality. An awakening that would necessarily mean a significant political reconstruction and, no doubt, treason trials.
To play your part in this awakening you need study this book and other Constitutional Heritage literature. But time is short, start now to help alert Australia.
The more we learn or the World Government plot the more obvious it becomes that this is a life or death struggle. World events, that previously defied explanation or reason, now (once we are awakened) shout their meaning so loudly that we wonder how we could have been so blind for so long.
FIRST THINGS FIRST
This comes down to the following essentials for the recovery and maintenance of political independence.
1: Inform the general public;
2: Choose and elect our own representatives to OUR parliament, a representative who contracts to serve the will of the electorate. It is already proven in Barambah Queensland that this can be done.
3: Withdraw from the United Nations: necessary to regain our political independence.
4: Create a mechanism to maintain control of our parliament: we need the protection of some practical form of Citizen Initiated Referendums.
The above come together to become complete: you use issues to awaken a political awareness: you use Citizens Electoral Councils to establish a community commitment and dialogue and from commitment and dialogue comes a reassessment of social reality and the correct instruction of your political candidate.
The objection is sometimes raised that a parliament made up of independents would be unworkable. Why should it be? Are any group of representatives naturally divided'? It did work before the system was subverted by the introduction of political/parties and there is no reason why it should not work now.
There is no more reason for difficulty in a group of independents electing a leader and an administration than for the elected members of a political party to do so. In fact there are less reasons for division as they do not suffer the ideological divisions. Once the Cabinet is elected the system can be very superior. If the Cabinet were kept in the minority and the balance of the MPs become the opposition, this would mean that all administrative decisions would have to get the approval of a majority not committed to voting on party lines. Consistent failure to produce acceptable legislation would result in changes in the Cabinet and allow any backbencher the chance to become a Cabinet Member.
It is now established beyond reasonable doubt that the political parties and media are combined in a conspiracy to deceive and betray the Australian people.
Barrister George Turner's research reveals that the meaning and consequences of section 44 were politically known at least from 1981 when the matter was written up by the Senate Standing Committee on Constitutional Qualifications of Members of Parliament". Other documentation includes Constitutional Convention reports in 1983 and 1985.
George Turner himself properly and formally brought this matter to the notice of the appropriate members of parliament, plus the Governor General and the main news media, on or about 28/8/'88. The cover-up of this dramatic story still remained in place at date of writing 4/10/'88. This proves conclusively that the political parties and the media are in conspiracy to deceive us. Why is this matter so important that contempt of the Constitution is necessary'?
It is an admitted thing that the political parties conspire to common policy in opposition to the will of the people. The political name for this is FASCISM. People must accept that it is now useless to send petitions and 'my will' letters to politicians and the Queen. Our rights arc scorned and our Constitution is held in contempt, every day that passes we become weaker and their hold becomes stronger. We must face the fact of alien control or we are lost.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL HERITAGE PROTECTION SOCIETY
The Constitutional Heritage Protection Society is a group of citizens dedicated to the protection of Australia's legal Constitution, our heritage of Truth, Justice and Mercy and freedom within a common law.
The CHPS strategy is also simple, it proposes that every issue be used to publicize and expose the conspiracy behind the issue. If every meeting exposing the fake referendum or the fake Bill of Rights had promoted the sale of this book then Australians would be far more aware of what is going on and not be so naive next time.
The CHPS group has been working for some years to put together basic, authoritative, practical and economic literature. You do not have to join CHPS or use our experience but obviously we can all be far more effective if we are united. Small groups are great but only if they are united. The house divided will fall.
To follow a sound strategy is better than dashing off in a dozen different directions all making the same amateurish mistakes over and over again.
There are other sources of useful material. The CEC at Baramba produce material explaining how they performed their miracle.
But do not forget, talk is just vibrating air. Talk is very useful for awakening an emotional response but it is necessary to provide hard copy for study to ensure maximum long-term benefit.
Written material should be available 'at the time' of meetings and recommended to that people can take a quick look before going to bed. Otherwise, in the morning, the hard-to-convince will probably dismiss the whole episode as just a bad dream.
Sales help to pay costs. When you come to setting up your political independent you need all the help you can get; have these recommended materials on hand.
Written materials from the CHPS range provide support without overpowering the new recruit or introducing the contradictions and confusions of foreign material.
For information or prices of CHPS materials, enquire: The Constitutional Heritage Protection Society, P.O. Box Q381, Queen Victoria Post Office, SYDNEY 2000.
* * *
THE TEST OF TIME
In 1944 Congressman S. Pettingill revealed to the U.S. House of Representatives a socialist plan for the destruction of free culture. If that plan did not so well what has since happened this book would not be so urgently needed. To follow are the main points of the plan; why was it allowed to happen here?
* "Constitutional guarantees must be swept aside. This is accomplished in part by ridiculing them as outmoded and an obstruction to progress.
* Public faith in the legal profession and respect for the courts must be undermined. The law-making body must be intimidated and from time to time rebuked, so as to prevent the development of public confidence in it.
* Economically, the people must be ground down by high taxes, which under one pretext or another they are called upon to pay. Thus they are brought to a common level, and all income above a meager living is taken from them. In this manner, economic independence is kept to a minimum.
* A great public debt must be built so that citizens can never escape its burden, making Government the virtual receiver for the entire nation.
* A general distrust of private business and industry must be kept alive so the public may not begin to rely upon its own resources.
* Government bureaux are set up to control practically every phrase of the citizen's life.
* The education of the youth of the nation is taken under control so that all may be inoculated at an early age with a spirit of submission to the system.
* To supplement and fortify all the foregoing, there is kept a steady stream of Government propaganda designed to extol all that bow the knee and to vilify those who dare to raise a voice of dissent.
* The principle of local self-government must be wiped out.
ISBN 0 9588651 2 4
"Having read your book Democracy and Treason in Australia, may I congratulate you on its startling revelation. I recommend it to each and every Australian. Democracy and Treasn in Australia provides the most disturbing and compelling reading - it bears a truth which cannot be denied."
W.H. Garing, Air Commodore, C.B.E., D.F.C., R.A.A.F. (Retired)
If you rely on others to tell you the truth, you will be told lies; If you rely on others to defend your freedom, you will be enslaved; If you rely on others to protect you, make sure you have no enemies.
Quote: "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."
Unless we retrieve our birthright we will be robbed! We will be deceived! WE WILL BE SOLD TO THE MERCY OF INTERNATIONAL VANDALS! d&ta13.htm
.../Back to Contents