30 June 2018

Government to confiscate your home under new proposed laws?

It seems that the good people of Australia have it too good, and the government is going to put a stop to that or rather force people to take an action in business/commerce/trade which will be 'good for the economy'.

It seems that the testing ground will be in enforced in Victoria where if you do not have the cash or the means to put yourself into financial slavery debt (for the rest of your life?) in order for your home to be Eco-friendly or meet 'Energy Efficiency' guidelines, then the government will take it from you, under a proposition called the Local Government Bill 2018.

If this is of no concern to you or your children then you do not need to act, as you are telling the people in government that your silence is acquiescence.

See:DUMP Victoria's Local Government Act 2018 bill that gives councils "Authority" status!

Local Government Bill 2018:



Just a reminder of the Rule of Law:

Fake news websites end with .gov.au?

According to the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, laws can only come from the federal and state/territory parliaments, where 'city councils' do not have the lawful capacity to create laws.

Despite this, the Victorian Government is 'advertising' otherwise as seen in their documentation:

Taken from:


See also a photo taken of the back of a commercial vehicle with false 'advertising':

(Credit: Social media)

Disclaimer: See an honest legal practitioner if your (financial) pain persists.

27 June 2018

Law makers subservient to corporations to extort cash from people

Some people (Aussies too) may be under the impression that they have elected a Member of Parliament in order to administer 'peace, order and good governance' for the people(?), and can now rest on their laurels and watch their favourite footy shows with plenty of beer on tap.

The reality cannot be further from the farce described above.

The people in government do not have the best interests of the general population in mind but rather are subservient to their corporate brethren where they 'govern' (restrict) the freedoms and movements of the general population.

This is done via something called consent, where your silence is acquiescence.

In this example let's look at how Microsoft runs the 'show',

from an article in stallman.org under the headline:

Reasons not to use Microsoft

  • Microsoft is running a patent protection racket, threatening to sue users of free software.
  • Microsoft's principal wrong is distributing a nonfree operating system, Microsoft Windows.
    That system is jam-packed with malicious functionalities, including surveillance of users, DRM, censorship and a universal back door.
  • Microsoft tricked users into "upgrading" to Windows 10.
  • Microsoft Windows 10 forced software changes can sabotage the user terribly if Microsoft chooses an inconvenient time to do them. Since the article is in the mainstream media, it suggests only to buy another computer that serves a master that doesn't do this particular form of nastiness. It completely ignores the possibility of installing a free operating system in the PC—which doesn't even require buying a new computer.
  • Microsoft tablets and phones impose censorship of applications.
  • Microsoft's chatbot in China threatens people who communicate using prohibited words.
  • Microsoft forced a ridiculous "open" standard, OOXML (used in DOCX files), through the International Standards Organization by corrupting most of the national standards organizations that voted.
    The specifications document was so long that it would be difficult for anyone else to implement it properly. When the proposed standard was submitted through the usual track, experienced evaluators rejected it for many good reasons.
    Microsoft responded using a special override procedure in which its money buy the support of many of the voting countries, thus bypassing proper evaluation and demonstrating that ISO can be bought.
  • Microsoft pressured nearly all manufacturers of PCs to pay for a Windows license for every machine sold, thus charging every purchaser for a Windows license.
    This is referred to sardonically as the "Microsoft tax".
    (Wherever that page says "Linux" it actually means the GNU/Linux operating system rather than Linux proper.)
    The fee doesn't force you to run Windows on your PC, but it is an injustice nonetheless. One way to avoid it is to buy hardware that is never sold with Windows.
    Some countries have laws under which users have sued for the right to get a reimbursement for the Windows license. Exercising that right is a hassle, but doing so is useful as it puts pressure on the system Microsoft has set up. However, the existence of an inconvenient escape path, limited to a few countries, has no effect on the judgment that Microsoft's practices are an injustice and deserve condemnation.

Copyright (c) 2017 Richard Stallman Verbatim copying and redistribution of this entire page are permitted provided this notice is preserved.

Australian Broadcasting Corporation concealing the dangers of Wi-Fi?

From the article of the headline:

ABC retracts ‘Wi-Fried?’

On 16 February 2016, the ABC science program Catalyst aired ‘Wi-Fried?’, a program about the safety of wireless devices such as mobile phones.

The ABC’s independent Audience & Consumer Affairs (A&CA) unit investigated complaints about the program and found that it breached the ABC’s impartiality standards by unduly favouring a so called “unorthodox” perspective that wireless devices and Wi-Fi pose significant health risks.

The full Audience and Consumer Affairs Investigation report can be found here: http://about.abc.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/FINAL-REPORT-Catalyst-WiFried-Investigation.pdf

Following the outcome of this report, the ABC has retracted the program and removed it from its website. Dr Maryanne Demasi, the presenter, has been suspended.

Is this yet further evidence of industry muscle swaying scientific debate? Why is the independence of the ABC seemingly in the thrall of the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA)?

To read more about this spurious censorship, or to submit a comment, please go to:

If you missed out on seeing ‘Wi-Fried?’, and want to make up your own mind about its content, go here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNnxIj0uAOs

But be quick …before the ABC thought police close the site down!

25 June 2018

Innocent until proven guilty farce in Australia

Many people may not be aware of the true nature of law in Australia's administrative 'kangaroo courts'.

Keeping this post as short and simple as possible;

Owner onus (e,g, in driving offences) is unlawfully applied.

Absolute liability and strict liability are enforced in the courts, where:

- Absolute liability is that you are guilty and a penalty is enforced.
- Strict liability is that you are guilty and you must prove otherwise.

and here's how it's done in the U.S.:

24 June 2018

China's quest for global dominance

China's government has the perfect implementation of slave labour, complete subservience of the people to government organisations, something that the Australian Government is taking notes on.

Australia was setup as a slave labour camp in the form of a penal colony, were the administration has not faltered from this blueprint, and today it has progressed to a first class slave labour camp where people are under the illusion that they have freedom.

The people in the Australian government are supporting China, as in the words of ex Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott:

"Australia is open for business"

and that (slave labour) is "good for the economy"

See article from 23 Jun 2018 by news.com.au of the headline:

The story China went to furious lengths to stop from airing

CHINA’S Canberra embassy issued a fierce threat over a story they didn’t want Aussies to know. Here’s what happened.

Is China taking over?

FIVE days before 60 Minutes aired a program about China’s quest for global dominance, the team received a furious phone call.
“Take this down and take it to your leaders!” the voice on the other end was yelling.

On the line was Ms Saxian Cao, the Head of Media Affairs at the Chinese Embassy in Canberra, and she was laying into the program’s Executive Producer Kirsty Thomson.

“You will listen! There must be no more misconduct in the future!” Ms Cao reportedly shouted into the phone.

According to Nine News, Ms Cao accused the network of filming the exteriors of the Chinese Embassy in Vanuatu illegally — a claim Ms Thomson refuted.

Ms Cao also claimed a drone was used to fly over the embassy in a potential safety hazard, which was also disputed.

The report claimed the phone did not end amicably, with Ms Cao shouting: “You will not use that footage!”

It highlighted the lengths to which the Chinese government will go to silence voices it doesn’t agree with — even within Australia, amid an ongoing national debate over foreign interference laws.

The offending 60 Minutes episode — which aired earlier this week — covered the ongoing issue of Chinese encroachment in the Pacific, including the country’s Belt and Road Initiative, a Chinese-built wharf in Vanuatu, and the wider issue of foreign interference in Australia.

So what was the Chinese Communist Party so keen to hide?


Papua New Guinea will soon be the second country in the Pacific to sign on to China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

“When in China, we’ll be signing the ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative,” PNG Prime Minister Peter O’Neill said earlier this week, according to local media.

“That is a great potential for Papua New Guinea, which means that this will help integrate our own economy to the global economy … The rest of the world is making business with China and we cannot simply sit back and allow these opportunities to go by.”

The PNG leader is currently in Beijing for a week-long visit.

The move will no doubt raise alarm bells in Canberra, with fears China is increasing its presence in the Pacific region.

In April, Fairfax Media reported Beijing was negotiating a military base less than 2000 kilometres from our border.

China and Vanuatu have both denied the report, which claimed Beijing was eyeing a military base in the island nation, with global ramifications.

“No one in the Vanuatu government has ever talked about a Chinese military base in Vanuatu of any sort,” Foreign Minister Ralph Regenvanu said. “We are a non-aligned country. We are not interested in militarisation.”

The move prompted fears in Australia over Beijing’s aims for greater military influence in the South Pacific region.

The Conflict Islands in Papua New Guinea.Source:Supplied
But Beijing’s economic influence in Vanuatu remains undeniable, with China responsible for almost half of the island nation’s foreign debt.

In places like Sri Lanka and the African nation of Djibouti, China has been granted control over ports after the countries defaulted on massive loans taken out to build the ambitious projects.

There are now fears the same pattern will play out in Vanuatu where China has loaned the country $114 million to build a wharf at Luganville — the site of America’s second largest base in the Pacific during World War II.


China’s debt-trap game goes something like this: they offer the honey of cheap infrastructure loans, then attack with default when these poorer economies aren’t able to pay their interest down.

At the heart of this sits the Belt and Road Initiative, a trillion-dollar project that seeks to connect countries across continents on trade, with China at its centre.

The ambitious plan involves creating a 6000km sea route connecting China to South East Asia, Oceania and North Africa (the “Road”), as well as through building railway and road infrastructure to connect China with Central and West Asia, the Middle East and Europe (the “Belt”).

This map details China's Belt and Road Initiative.Source:Supplied
In the interview with 60 Minutes, Dr Malcolm Davis, senior analyst in defence strategy and capability at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said China is mainly targeting poorer countries and employing a “debt-trap strategy”.

He said the trillion-dollar project basically forces other countries to align themselves with it.

“It gets countries — particularly poorer countries — hooked on debts they can’t pay back,” he said.

“When they can’t pay it back, China basically grabs ports, facilities or territory. It’s a debt-trap strategy.

“It services their need in terms of accessing resources, sustaining contacts and national development, and maintaining that ‘China Dream’. It’s really vital for the Communist Party to maintain prosperity if they want to maintain power.”


Why is the Pacific so important to China? From the rising superpower’s perspective, Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, the Solomon Islands and Fiji are the most crucial, as they have the most minerals and natural resources.

But while the strategic aspects of China’s interest in the region have been highlighted recently, experts believe they have been over-hyped.

“I don’t think (the region) is enormously important to China,” Australian National University’s Development Policy Centre deputy director Matthew Dornan told news.com.au.

“The amounts of aid they provide are still not huge. Australia provides a lot more.”

According to the Lowy Institute, China spent $2.2 million on 218 projects in the Pacific between 2006 and 2016. This is a lot less than the $10 million Australia contributed.

“I don’t think the Pacific tops its list in terms of strategic importance, even if it does for Australia,” Dr Dornan said.

Australia will no doubt be keeping an eye on China’s strategic moves in the Pacific region.Source:News Corp Australia
While the Pacific may not be high on China’s agenda, Australia appears to have woken up to the importance of the region to its own interests.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop recently returned from a bipartisan trip to some Pacific nations with Labor shadow minister Penny Wong. They visited Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia and the Marshall Islands.

Ms Bishop has denied that the trip was aimed at countering Chinese influence but in an interview with Fairfax Media, acknowledged that China’s construction of roads, ports, airports and other infrastructure in the region had triggered concern that small Pacific nations may be saddled with unsustainable debts.

“We want to be the natural partner of choice,” Ms Bishop told Fairfax earlier this week.

“We want to ensure that they retain their sovereignty, that they have sustainable economies and that they are not trapped into unsustainable debt outcomes.

“The trap can then be a debt-for-equity swap and they have lost their sovereignty.”