19 June 2013
The propaganda machines will kick in to dupe the general populous of Australia, into electing another fraudulent government, but this time with a big difference.
The BIGGEST difference is that the government is going to try to sneak in the local city councils will be part of the Constitution, which currently they are NOT, nor do they have ANY powers to lawfully collect rates and/or foreclose on people who have not payed rates.
The corporate media is a government lap dog, that is subservient to whichever government is in power for the term.
Recently in New South Wales the 'government' has disbanded 50 'city councils'.
What most people are not aware of is that city councils are actually businesses or corporations, which are NOT lawfully the third tier of government that most people seem to believe they are.
This fraud has cost Aussie home or land owners billions annually, which the corporate media are reluctant to publish or expose.
Constitutional lawyers from various states have agreed that the current perceived third tier of 'government' is actually unlawful.
In some areas the general population are waking up, and taking action against the fraud committed, but at the end of the day, the police who are the subservient drones to the corporate government, are not even aware of the rights of people (or rather do not want to be) under Common Law.
Arresting or charging the masses is a policy that breaches Common Law, but is still practiced in order for the plebs to understand NOT to stick their neck out against the corrupt system of justice.
17 June 2013
In previous posts corpau has mentioned that local city councils and their charging of rates is unlawful.
In order to fully and lawfully explain this, one post, a few paragraphs or even a couple of dozen paragraphs will not be enough, as the information pertaining to this subject also calls on Australia’s Constitution, it’s validity, the Magna Carta, Royal Assent and Common Law, which prevails over all others, i.e. government and corporate.
The police swear an oath to the Queen to carry out the orders pertaining to this oath, and are NOT allowed to act in or on behalf of corporations which they factually do so, even now ‘enforcing’ unlawful city council fines.
If the peasants revolt or produce factually legal documentation, they are met with the police ‘force’ and removed even while presenting their case peacefully.
The police have the task to keep the masses in line for the establishment, that is their primary role, and NOT to fight crime as perceived by the general populous.
The police and legal system lets the criminals out onto the streets to offend and re-offend, and to murder the ‘canon fodder’.
Many people are disillusioned with how ‘unfair’ or how biased the legal system is, but the fact remains that Australia’s Westminster ‘Anglo-Masonic’ legal system is for the sole benefit of corporations and their brethren members, at the expense of the general populous and the tax payers.
A video posted on youtube Pirates of the Suburbs - Destroying Communities (55min) by Rena Iliades posted on 31 Dec 2012 documents such fraud, among other sources.
The shire where the expose begins is local to the poster, that being Melton City Council.
The Melton City Council / Shire of Melton / SHIRE OF MELTON has also the registered business name of Summersault with the ABN of 22 862 073 889.
Other ‘councils’ in the vicinity are HUME CITY COUNCIL ABN: 14 854 354 856, or MORELAND CITY COUNCIL with the ABN: 46 202 010 737.
ABN (Australian Business Number) / ACN (Australian Company Number) are numbers that relate to businesses/companies, corporations and NOT government institutions.
A referendum in 1974 AND 1988 produced results that the majority of people did not want local councils, but yet they still exist to this day, charging rates, 'fining' people and foreclosing on their homes, throwing them out onto the streets.
Just to perpetuate the fraud, some city councils change their names every few years, so that monies fraudulently taken cannot be recovered.
The corporate media is subservient to the authorities, as well as having the job not to incite the masses. While there may be exposures of government fraud, there is very little action done on this.
While there is a little bit of news that suggests that councils are illegal and fraudulent there is little follow up action that vindicates the plebs.
The police (including sheriffs) knowingly carry out unlawful breaking and entering, do not ‘serve’ as they are supposed ALL with the support of the legal system behind them, the key being here to keep the masses in their place.
The extent of this ‘city council’ rates fraud across Australia is worth billions annually to the general populous, where the authorities are vigorous at protecting their crimes.
Constitutional experts and a ratepayers' group are concerned that councils will be more difficult to control while some could be worse off if local government is formally recognised in the nation's founding document.
Anger is growing over the use of ratepayers' money to help fund the "yes" campaign for the September referendum, with some 50 Victorian councils pledging about $1 million towards a $10 million national fighting fund organised by the municipal lobby.
The Gillard Government has already committed $55.4 million of taxpayers' money for the referendum, including more than $11 million for a civic education campaign to promote the "yes" case.
But Victoria, which along with most states opposes the referendum, says it is a waste of public money and legally dangerous.
"(This is) supported by constitutional law experts Professor Cheryl Saunders and Professor Greg Craven, who state that changes could cause legal uncertainty, blurring the roles and responsibilities between the three tiers of government," she said.
"If this proposal gets up, the State Government's ability to intervene into poorly governed councils like Brimbank could be at risk."
Ms Powell said the Federal Government would spend $55 million on the referendum while cutting budgeted grants to Victorian councils by $13.4 million.
"Ratepayers are now asking why they are paying for the campaign," she said.
Prof Craven, also vice-chancellor of the Australian Catholic University, said that, speaking as a Carlton supporter, "this referendum has more problems than our backline".
"Most local governments are honest and hard-working but every now and then one goes out of control and then the State Government has to step in and re-boot the whole thing by sacking the council and putting in administrators," he said.
"The next time that happens the very first thing that council will say is, 'You can't touch us, we're in the federal Constitution', and the battle will end up in the High Court."
Lord Mayor Robert Doyle accused the states of being churlish and said they had been left flat-footed by the referendum.
"Their complaint was that it was going to create competitive sovereignty and that was the scare campaign they were going to run," he said.
"The Federal Government's wording makes it abundantly clear that local government is still the creature of state governments. They can still be sacked."
Cr Doyle said the constitutional change was a simple mechanism to provide direct funding to councils on projects of national and mutual benefit, such as the planned redevelopment of Queen Victoria Market.
"This might be something where you say to the federal government, this is not just about an open-air fresh food market. This is about a crucial part of Victoria's economy," he said.
Campaigner Tim Wilson, from the Institute of Public Affairs, urged ratepayers to tell their councils not to hand money over to run an irrelevant political campaign while they were struggling to fund services.
He said the constitutional change would make councils more indebted to the federal government, which could then dictate how money was spent.
"Councils will be worse off if this referendum passes because more power will be in the hands of Canberra politicians and bureaucrats, not local communities," he said.
heraldsun.com.au 16 June 2013
The general perception is that if something or someone is doing a 'dodgy' act, it could be on the edge of being legal or it's another way of putting it nicely that the act is illegal.
Local councils are in fact unconstitutional or 'illegal' but that it not really spelled out by the corporate media.
In 1974 AND 1988 a referendum was held and the people said "NO" to city councils.