Cops to use licence to disqualify anyone guilty of anything

Police are vowing to disqualify licences of anyone convicted of an offence. Source: HeraldSun

 

EXCLUSIVE: TENS of thousands more Victorians each year stand to lose their drivers' licences under a new law police are vowing to exercise in court. 

Sweeping legal changes which came into effect on September 30 allow courts to suspend or cancel the licence of any person convicted or found guilty of any offence - regardless of whether that offence has anything to do with driving.

Victoria Police has exclusively revealed to the Herald Sun that it will seek to use the new powers in up to 50,000 court cases each year.

It has already briefed its prosecutors on the law.

"If you're convicted or found guilty of any offence, a court may suspend or cancel and disqualify your licence," said Acting Senior Sergeant Richard Bowers, of the Victoria Police Prosecution Division.

"The legislation does not govern or put a limiting factor on which cases it applies to. It's any offence, and it's completely open to the magistrate as to whether or not they impose it.

"Unless a superior court gets hold of one of these cases and says 'Well, this is an inappropriate exercise of discretion,' it will remain open for use for a magistrate to use in any way they see fit."
But the move has angered civil libertarians.

"We are very disturbed at the lack of consultation, given this is such a sweeping and draconian measure," Jane Dixon, SC, the president of Liberty Victoria, said last night.

"To deprive someone of their driving licence can often also deprive them of their livelihood.

"We believe, for well-being, there should be a strong foundation between driving and the offending."

Victoria Police said it would advice its prosecutors to use the legislation in any case where the offending can be linked to using a vehicle, which it estimates at around 50,000 cases a year.

"We will raise the legislation in circumstances where driving had been part and parcel of the offending," Sen-Sgt Bowers said.

"It may be an offence where the accused used a car to commit the offences; for example, residential burglaries, using the car to get around."

In another change to the law, anyone disqualified from driving may be forced to fit an alcohol interlock device in their vehicle when the licence is reinstated, if the original crime can be linked in any way to alcohol or drugs.

First-time offenders, and those guilty of even the most minor offences, will not be exempt from the new law.

There are no set suspension or disqualification limits, giving magistrates free rein to cancel a licence for as long as they see fit.

Sen-Sgt Bowers also highlighted drug trafficking and family violence cases as likely ones for the exercise of the law.

"You have to look at each case on its merits and determine where is the best use of this legislation. We have left prosecutors with a fair bit of discretion," he said.

"It's a deterrent and a preventive measure. From our perspective, anything that has the potential to prevent further offending is a good thing," he said.

heraldsun.com.au 26 Nov 2013

Victoria is truly the POLICE STATE.

The facts are as follows:

• VicPol is a corporation (ABN: 63 446 481 493), and for every arrest there is a fininacial reimbursement from the government.

• The rush is on to arrest and put on file as many people as possible, which is a direct order from the top.

• With an arrest and criminal conviction (e.g. for not paying an invoice) you may be refused a passport, in effect incarcerating you in the new age prison isle of Australia.

How To Sign Your Name Without Assuming Liability

What does a signature mean? I will tell you right now that when you sign something (no matter what “they” say), it means that you accept liability. And if you don’t read and agree to EVERYTHING you sign, you are making a big mistake.

I am constantly being asked… “How do I sign my name? … AND maintain my rights?”

We all know that before they let us go, they ALWAYS want us to sign something to keep us coming back. There are other points in the “legal” system where a “signature” is expected or required before the court can proceed as well.

I have heard that adding “Under Duress”, or “All Rights Reserved” to a signature when signing a document will maintain our inherent human rights; and while this could work as well, the proper and Latin way to sign under duress is to add a “V.C.” before your name.

Vi Coactus, abbreviated to V.C., is a latin term. The website wikipedia cites the definition of vi coactus as:

“constrained by force”. Used when forced to sign (“or else …”)

Perhaps the most famous use of vi coactus when signing a document was that of Cornelius de Witt. Alexandre Dumas captured the event as follows:

The Grand Pensionary bowed before the will of his fellow citizens; Cornelius de Witt, however, was more obstinate, and notwithstanding all the threats of death from the Orangist rabble, who besieged him in his house at Dort, he stoutly refused to sign the act by which the office of Stadtholder was restored. Moved by the tears and entreaties of his wife, he at last complied, only adding to his signature the two letters V. C. (Vi Coactus), notifying thereby that he only yielded to force.

There is scant authoritative information regarding this term on the web. However, on the One Heaven Society of United Free States of Spirits website the following information is provided:

The Bar want you to sign as surety.

At key points in a Court case, the Bar members want you to sign certain documents. Why? Because your signature is like your vocalized consent – it can be legally interpreted as your agreement to be surety for an obligation and to perform as well as to waive other rights.  

Do you have to sign? No you don’t. But in many cases, the Bar has designed a system so that if you don’t it is interpreted as dishonor so that they can invoke their power of attorney powers to declare you delinquent, incompetent and send you to prison anyway.  

This is why you may have heard of people who refused to sign the papers when entering prison and yet were treated worse than most serious criminals, with complete apparent ignorance of their rights- why? because the system is designed at certain points where you MUST sign. So how do you overcome an unjust and unfair system that forces a man or woman to sign under duress, against their will and yet interprets such signatures as valid under Canon Law? The answer is making sure your signature follows a clear mark of duress.

Vi Coactus

Before you sign anything under duress, in order not to be unfairly determined as in dishonor and incompetent, you may lawfully initial in large letters the letters V.C. where you will sign, then sign your name after- always after.

What V.C. stands for is Latin for Vi Coactus which means literally “under constraint”. This should normally be sufficient on any document which you are forced to sign to bear witness to the fact that it was done under duress.

Now, at the earliest opportunity before the court or official, you can make it known that upon review of your signature it can be proven to have been forced under threat and coercion and so cannot be used as legally binding agreement.

In some locations and in some prisons as this knowledge grows, it is possible that law enforcement officials may start to reject such signatures, adding more threat and force on a person to sign without using V.C. It is your choice remembering that if you allow such criminal intimidation and torture to prevail and do sign without protest then the system can simply lie and state you made such a sign of your “own free will”.

 

So if they tear up the paperwork and demand you do it again, stating that such a signature is unlawful then such claims are against the laws of the Roman Cult Canon Law- the actual law that underpins their own statutes and regulations. However, if after several attempts they still refuse, there is a second method equally valid- the use of ellipse.

The use of ellipses

When the threat of intimidation or outright rejection of lawful protest is too great, then a second and equally valid method of signing under protest is permitted, namely the use of three full stops placed first, followed by the signature so that the three dots are not obscured by the signature.

This is called an ellipsis eg “…” and indicates that legally there was a form of words you wanted to state but were unable due to some event, in this case because of threat and coercion.

Thus, at the earliest opportunity the ellipsis can be revealed and it can be stated that you intended to write V.C. but were prevented therefore nullifying any agreement.

It would be of interest to the author if there have been any more recent cases where V.C. has been used to sign a document. There appears to have been a case in Indonesia where Dutch interests signed V.C., however, the author does not have full access to the journal in question:

The Measures Taken by the Indonesian Government against …by I Login – 1958 – Related articles

Authority” or “o.p.” (under protest) or “v.c.” (vi coactus). And that, of course, was preciously what it was: compelled by force. …

Source: journals.cambridge.org/article_S0165070X00029879

Further definitions and their sources:

Black’s Law Dictionary (9th edition)

The ninth edition does not provide a definition for vi coactus.

Cassell’s Latin Dictionary (27th edition, 1955, pp.103)

Coactus - a compulsion, compelling; coactu atque efflagitatu meo, cic.

The Oxford Latin Dictionary ABS-LIB (1968, pp. 339)

coactus1

1. Compressed, condensed; (of milk) curdled. b (neut. pl. as sb.) felt cloak.

2. Unnatural, artificial, forced, contrived.

3. (of instruments, actions, etc.) Unwilling, forced. b. required by law, compulsory.

coactus2

Compulsion, constraint.

Interestingly, Cassell’s Latin Dictionary and the Oxford Latin Dictionary provide the additional definitions:

Cassell’s Latin Dictionary:

coacto – To compel.

coactor – 1. a collector of rents, money at auctions, etc. 2. One who compels.

References

   List of Lation abbreviations (wikipedia.org)
   Dumas, Alexandre – Black Tulip, The (literature.org)
   Signing in protest and under duress (one-heaven.org)
   Cassell’s Latin Dictionary, pp.103 (exfacie.com)
   Oxford Latin Dictionary, pp.339 (exfacie.com)

Note: Correction to the reference from one-heaven.org was applied (removing the term ellipse for ellipsis). Thanks to Gerald for identifying this correction.

Article courtesy of Freedom From Government (http://freedomfromgovernment.org/)

New Biker Laws another False Flag?

WHEN THE GOVERNMENT & POLICE SERVICES ATTACK THE RIGHTS OF ALL AUSTRALIANS, IT IS THEY WHO OUGHT TO BE DRAGGED BEFORE THE COURTS

Latest attempts to tackle crime in Australia, are in themselves being exposed as a crime against justice.

Laws of association, laws that dictate where a person can work, what they can own, what they can wear, where they can go, and how a judge must act, are unacceptable in any supposed democratic nation.

Not only are the new laws abhorrent, they were rushed through with out adequate scrutiny, so far the list of changes needed are a disgrace, the wording alone has been a failure with the government now rushing through amendments to make the laws work.

The list of prescribed places that people/bikers can not visit has already entrapped the innocent, with a man who purchased his workshop in 2006, finding it on the list of prescribed places, simply because prior to the purchase it was a gearbox repair shop, owned by an ex member of a bike club.

Innocent motorcyclists are also being hit hard by the legislation, with riders already lodging complaints as a result or police intimidation, even those riding sports bikes, so is wearing black leather now an offence?

Then there is the "What you can wear" section that resulted in arrests because of a belt buckle, or the young man questioned for wearing a "Sons of Anarchy" shirt, which is from a television show.

Some of the answers offered up to those who chose 2 wheels as their mode of transport, is that if they are to ride together in groups of 3 or more, they should liaise with police first?

So people know, I ride a motorcycle more so now days for recreation, so if I go for a ride with a friend, and meet up with another, should I have to phone and ask permission of the police, should I have to accept police intervention and questioning, or wear dodgy fines and defects if I dare question the polices motives? Because that is already happening.

It appears now the QLD police are pulling over innocent bikers because they fear the outlaws as they are being labelled, may have taken of their colours, making every innocent biker the target of intimidation.

So the tough new laws are not working, because if they do, all that will happen is the criminal component of motorcycle clubs will simply go underground, making policing harder than ever. An interesting statistic to add here is that the governments own facts show the criminal component of the banned clubs account for only 0.3% of crime.

It is interesting to also note that while the clubs in questions all rode wearing colours and gathered at designated club rooms, the police were unable to convict them of the crimes the police tell us they commit, so what chance will they have when the criminal element go underground.

The administration of criminal justice is “not a political plaything or a suitable area for political grandstanding”.

Queensland police asked to ignore the law and community safety by their own commissioner

When the QLD police union warned that police were being ordered to employ questionable tactics including the execution of “dodgy” warrants on people’s homes, clubs and businesses, their senior executive have stepped well over the mark and beyond their mandate.

Any legislation that allows police to arrest a person for entering their own premises, is not supported by any form of justice, and having senior police executive demanding police to ignore the law, is unacceptable.

Bikers are also banned from their own businesses and or visiting tattoo parlours, even if it is their lively hood, with police staff told to check on these businesses up to 20 times a day, any failure by the police to do as they are told, will face disciplinary action or face being sacked.

Even the police themselves in QLD are objecting to being taken off normal duties and being told to sit outside biker premises to make sure the owners or members do not go inside, this also applies to their own legal businesses.

If Bikers cannot go home, go to their businesses or their own club houses, or can no longer seek the support of their close friends, what do the police expect they will do? Pushing supposed criminals underground, and pushing innocent parties over the line will only result in more issues for QLD police, on top of undermining justice at its grass roots.

The actions of Campbell Newman’s government have the ability to make criminals out of honest people in the very same way the failed South Australian laws did.

If a biker is on the straight and narrow regardless of past mistakes, they can now have their business destroyed, their property taken and their support network taken from them. If this happened to any innocent man, the only option left to survive is the very one these draconian laws are meant to address.

In Australia we have laws to address crime. Increasing penalties in line with community expectations is one thing, writing draconian laws that offend natural justice or that take away the presumption of innocence are indeed abhorrent, but demanding that police excuse our present protections is totally unacceptable.

The past 5 years have been interesting times in direct relation with these serious issues, with most crime related articles including even distant relationships to bikers, as if these proposed legislative amendments are reliant on the public’s perceptions of bikers in general.

So is the issue really about bikers, or is it as it appears, a massive grab for power?

Whether it is the result of this spin, or genuine public outrage over the actions of outlaw bikers, the proposed legislation to deal with the problem creates an issue for every Australian in regards to the erosion of their civil and human rights, because the legislation is not biker specific.

Many Australians are already showing their support for laws that attack their own fundamental rights, but taking away the rights of over 21 million people, over the abhorrent actions of a few hundred, or even a thousand, is very short sighted indeed.

Bike riders in QLD that have even joined in on charity rides are now finding their names on the list of associates, so at every level, the actions of the government and the police are worthy of criminal charges.

“From the equality of rights springs identity of our highest interests; you cannot subvert your neighbours’ interests without striking a dangerous blow at your own.” Carl Schurtz

The high court has already dismissed as invalid previous attempts by state governments to introduce similar legislation, but his case goes further, because in essence the police themselves are being asked to partake in criminal actions.

It is interesting to note, that the QLD police minister stated “I don’t care if they give up their colours” so even if these clubs disband, they will still be targeted, even those with no recent criminal activity “should be in jail” 25 years jail for attending their own property is bad law, who will be next is the question every Australian should ask, but will they?

Imagine you are invited to a family barbecue in the park.

Your advernturous Aunt Chrissy, has recently started a new relationship with Mick, a member of the Finks Motorcycle Club. You have met Mick and a couple of his mates, also members of the Finks Motorcycle Club, on one occasion before, and had a laugh over a few beers.

You head out to the park with all the other members of the family. As you are enjoying your steak and beverage Mick’s friends arrive on their motorcycles and join in the fun. You have a chat with them about the football game last weekend.

Under the new so called “Anti-Bikie” laws you and possibly other members of your family have committed an offence for which you could all be gaoled for a minimum of six months.

On top of that, you could be potentially liable to being hauled before the CMC to answer questions about Mick and his two mates.

This is what happens when governments pass laws that make people liable not for what they have done but for who they associate with, and you risk innocent people getting hurt.

These laws make no mention whatsoever of Bikers. They apply to any association of 3 or more people.

If say you are a member of the local bowls or golf club. You get involved in a scuffle trying to throw a misbehaving member out of the club. You are convicted of wounding, which simply requires that the true skin of the other person is broken. Under these laws, you get an extra 15 years added to your gaol sentence.

Bad law will never replace lazy policing, we have laws in this country to address criminal actions, and we don’t need laws that entrap the innocent. If the police cannot prove guilt by way of a person’s actions, then that person is innocent until proven otherwise.

The QLD government are well aware that biker related crime makes up for less that 1% of all crime (0.37%) yet are diverting all their resources in the scrutiny of Outlaw motorcycle clubs, so one must ask, who is watching the other criminals doing the other 99.63% of crime in QLD?

On that note their own facts and figures also show that less than 50% of Outlaw motorcycle club members have recorded offences, so are the 51% that have done nothing wrong along with other innocent motorcycle riders being entrapped by these laws considered acceptable collateral damage?

Any minister or government that would promote laws attacking the rights and liberties of their own people, or any minister that dare demand our police services break the law, are the ones that we should be charging with criminal offences.

Mark Aldridge

  "Community advocate" & Independent Federal candidate for Wakefield SA

How to not pay for tolls

It is illegal to collect payment for tollway.

SPER (State Payments Enforcement Registry of Queensland)

115 States not to coin money

A State shall not coin money, nor make anything but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts.

This section is what is known constitutionally as an “express prohibition”. In other words the States are expressly prohibited from making anything other than gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts. 

A State cannot substitute anything for payment of a debt, such as property or assets of any kind, nor can a period of imprisonment be substituted for non-payment. State courts may find liability but cannot order other than gold and silver coin be paid to extinguish debt. 

This was confirmed to me recently in the Queensland Supreme Court when Justice Ros Atkinson, when I asked her how costs could be paid considering Section 115 of the Commonwealth Constitution, said, “I won’t go into that, it is up to you”. I then said “Thank you your Honour, that means they can’t be paid”. 

Crown Law has not sent me a bill since that time as they know full well they cannot collect what is not available. 

As there are no gold and silver coins in common circulation it is not possible for a State to make any person pay debts to a State, or to any person in a State, as this would breach Section 115. 

Conversely, not being able to compel any person to accept other than gold and silver coin, a State is prohibited from demanding other than gold and silver coin.

Power and the inconvenience of truth

Tony Fitzgerald QC.

More than 25 years ago, Tony Fitzgerald QC headed an inquiry into police corruption in Queensland. 

Of late, there have been rumblings, not so much of corruption; rather, a government that seems to be bypassing democratic processes to instigate new legislation. Breaking a silence on Queensland government practices and the issue of democracy, Mr Fitzgerald has written an article exclusively for brisbanetimes.com.au, which he titles "Power and the Inconvenience of Truth". The article runs unedited, and in full.

Power and the Inconvenience of Truth

For what it's worth, my impression is that most Queenslanders don't want to revisit the dark days of political caprice and corruption and "don't you worry about that" 

In practical terms, democracy for most Australians means little more than a periodic obligation to choose between two major parties which, according to the Commonwealth Parliament's Education Office, "exist to represent the interests of different groups and individuals in society; their ultimate goal is to have members elected to represent these interests." The public interest isn't mentioned.

Voters, most of whom aren't members or supporters of any party, often have no real choice because one major party has so disgraced itself that it's unelectable.

After each election, one or other oligarchy rules for a period, during which its power, including power to advance the interests of its adherents and supporters at the expense of the general community, is effectively unlimited.
 
It's "not nepotism, .. just the way the world works." The arrogant, the ignorant and bullies thrive in the absence of enforceable rules.

Political parties use common advertising techniques to "sell" themselves to voters. Although the internet is producing major changes, most political advertising is still conducted through the mass media, which is expensive.

Public funding favours the major parties and obstructs others unless they're extremely wealthy. Each of the major parties also has affluent supporters. There's a risk that, over time, a significant imbalance in funding between the major parties will distort the electoral process as extremely wealthy individuals and corporations finance the party which represents their interests.

The media causes another major distortion when it takes sides, which is a significant concern in Australia where media ownership is highly concentrated and some - for whatever reason - is ostentatiously biased.
Advertising seeks to persuade. Propaganda seeks to deceive and is most effective when the truth is hidden.

When in power, politicians routinely use spurious excuses to deny or restrict access to information: "Cabinet-in-confidence", "commercial-in-confidence", "operational matters", etc.

In trade and commerce, deceptive conduct is prohibited and heavy penalties apply. There is no similar restriction on political propaganda, euphemistically (deceptively) called "spin".

With prejudiced media support, politicians regularly denigrate their opponents and falsely blame them for every problem, exaggerate the supposed advantages of their own policies and promise improbable results and fanciful financial benefits, reduce policies to simplistic, misleading slogans ("war on terror", "war on drugs", "stop the boats"), associate their policies with ordinary people ("battlers" on "struggle street") in contrast to impractical, "elite" dissidents who live in "ivory towers" in isolation from the "real world", appeal to emotion (jingoism and especially fear), claim public support (their assertion of "what the people want"), extend their influence by partisan appointments to public office and foster disdain for potential critics of political excess, especially the judiciary and independent media.

The inevitable loss of respect for essential institutions, public office and authority generally is, like truth, dismissed as immaterial.

Effective, functioning democracy is unachievable while the public is uninformed or misinformed. Australian democracy is now not merely or even substantially a contest between political parties and their policies but an invisible struggle between the general public and an increasingly professional, deeply cynical, "win at all costs" political class.

Although the public has the numbers, the political class dominates public discussion and is firmly in control.

Not for the first time, Queensland is at the forefront. It is again effectively a one-party State controlled by a group who seemingly don't know, or don't care, that the use and abuse of a large parliamentary majority is not true democracy irrespective of what they claim "the people want".

For what it's worth, my impression is that most Queenslanders don't want to revisit the dark days of political caprice and corruption and "don't you worry about that".

To me, it seems much more likely that "the people want" to live, and have their children and grandchildren live, in an orderly but free, ethical, tolerant society which is governed in accordance with established democratic principles which have evolved over centuries.

A government which behaved in that way wouldn't be able to indulge itself and its cronies but might well find little difficulty in implementing any substantive policies which are genuinely in the public interest.

theage.com.au 22 Nov 2013

Corporate fraud from the bowels of the government is a high priority on the agenda to ultimate slavery of the Australian populous.

This fact is widely omitted by the corporate media only dismissed and discredited into 'conspiracy theories' and negatively portrayed as 'activists' or 'protesters' or even 'pensioners'.

The Australian police 'force' is a corrupt government sponsored debt collection agency, which is ready to incarcerate you for civil disobedience to the corporate laws.

ABN - Australian Business Numbers

This post is a listing of Australian Business / Company Numbers with their respective trading names.

NB/:  A Private business has an ABN which in turn has NO authority of the Crown.

This list is updated periodically.

ABN's - Australian Business Numbers

Brisbane City Council - ABN 72 002 765 795

Centrelink - ABN 29 468 422 437
Commonwealth of Australia - ABN 122 104 616
County Court of Victoria - ABN  32 790 288 959

Dept of Justice & Attorney General - ABN 13 846 673 994
Queensland Police Service - ABN 29 409 225 509
Queensland State Government - ABN 75 818 456 675

STATE OF VICTORIA - PARLIAMENT OF VICTORIA - ABN 57 505 521 939
STATE OF VICTORIA - DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - ABN 32 790 228 959

The Department of the Attorney General - ABN 70 598 519 443
The State Government of Western Australia - ABN: 66 012 878 629
The State of New South Wales - ABN 066 561 153
The State of Queensland - ABN 066 102 930
The State of South Australia - ABN 050 208 921
The State of Tasmania - ABN 053 201 308
The State of Victoria - ABN 054 558 619

The State of Western Australia - ABN 072 526 008



Police:

AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE - ABN 17 864 931 143
DEPT OF POLICE & EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (TAS) - ABN: 19 173 586 474
NSW POLICE FORCE - ABN: 43 408 613 180
POLICE DEPARTMENT (VIC) / VICTORIA POLICE - ABN 63 446 481 493
QUEENSLAND POLICE SERVICE  - ABN 29 409 225 509
SOUTH AUSTRALIA POLICE  - ABN 93 799 021 552
WESTERN AUSTRALIA POLICE  - ABN 91 724 684 688


ACN's - Australian Company Numbers


Banking and Financial Services Law Association - ACN 006 354 089
Banking and Financial Services Ombudsman Limited - ACN 050 070 034
Credit Ombudsman Service Limited - ACN 104 961 882
Financial Ombudsman Service Pty Ltd - ACN 114 322 468
Independent Ombudsman Service - ACN 117 680 172
Mortgage Industry Ombudsman Service Limited - ACN 104 961 882
The Australian Banking Industry Ombudsman Ltd - ACN  050 070 034

How the government trades on prisoners

From the dodgy world of politics and banking and finance comes information on how the slave trade is alive and well on a global scale.

This information is provided from people within the industry, who naturally wish to remain anonymous, as the fear of  repercussions is real that may  follow through to their children.

When a child is born in Australia, it is allegedly discarded from the vessel of its mother, and ownership is claimed by the corporate entity commonly known as the STATE OF (NEW SOUTH WALES or QUEENSLAND or VICTORIA, etc).

The 'seal' in the illustration is of a corporate entity and not a government / constitutional / common law seal.

Each 'State' of Australia is a separate business unit;

• The State of New South Wales: ABN 066 561 153

• The State of Queensland ABN 066 102 930

• The State of South Australia: ABN 050 208 921

• The State of Tasmania ABN 053 201 308

• The State of Victoria ABN 054 558 619

• The State of Western Australia ABN 072 526 008

The 'Commonwealth of Australia' with the ABN 122 104 616 is registered (consisting of the above mentioned 'states' or businesses) with the United States of America, Securities and Exchange Commission, No. 00 080 5157, as a result open for trading on the global market place.

Each individual is given a CUSIP number which then translates to a bond value which is put on the stock exchange.

A prisoner also is traded on the stock market, under the name of the bonding warehouse (prison), where the surety (prisoner) is kept.

The 'persons' name is in CAPITALS, as the 'corporate' entity.

Under the U.N laws, of which Australia is a part of, slavery or the slave trade is illegal.

The term 'bond' is commonly used, but rarely understood by the general public as to its true meaning.

When a prisoner is release, the 'bond' matures, and earnings or profits have been realised.

A Prisoner can be released (irrespective of crime) if a financial transaction occurs to cover the cost of the earnings/profits for the duration of the incarceration.

There is an enormous demand for prisoners (for financial reasons), where in the United States of America one can be incarcerated for 'looking' incorrectly at a police officer.

In Australia you can be arrested and charged (become a criminal) for not paying a bill (or invoice) given by anyone.

The person in Australia is considered as self loading baggage in a commercial transaction of international trade and securities exchange when we travel from port to port.

This also include Sea Port, Air Port, and the Trans - Port dept regulates all vehicles including trains, trams busses (Public Trans-Port).

If you do not have a ticket to ride from port to port, e.g. a train i.e. their vehicle ... the policy enforcers are waiting to take you away with an overwhelming force, to charge you as a criminal. (See photo)

NB/ - Policy enforcer - is a 'person' who forces a (policy) corporate law upon you, the 'free man'.

Australia is the new 'Alcatraz' (prison isle) a fact that the 'sheeple' are blissfully unaware of, to which the corporate media shows a dead eerie silence on.

This is one rather bizarre airport stuff up

 

Heathrow Terminal 5. Picture: EGuide Travel, Flickr Source: Supplied

 

HOW many people does it take to change a light bulb? Well, if it is in Heathrow's Terminal 5, apparently an entire team of highwire walkers is necessary. 

When the vast $8 billion terminal was constructed, its designers seemed to have overlooked one basic problem: how to safely change 120,000 light bulbs when they are up to 37 metres above the ground.

Since opening in 2008, not a single bulb has been replaced on its immense single-span roof, and in some areas up to 60 per cent of the lights have blown, making the concourse increasingly gloomy. And an email obtained by news website Exaro suggested that Terminal 5's owners had been unable to solve the conundrum for some time.

Having tried cherry-pickers and hydraulic boom lifts to replace the downlighters, none were deemed to be practical or safe enough.

But now, a team of specialist wire walkers has been given the job of preventing the lights going out completely.

The email, which was reportedly sent to staff by Vicki O'Brien, head of Heathrow customer service at British Airways, revealed that all the light bulbs will now be changed in a project lasting four months. She wrote: "As many of you will have seen recently, the departures concourse has been becoming darker than normal in the late afternoons/evenings, as well as in the early mornings. The reason for the poor light is that 60 per cent of the downlighters have failed, and until recently Heathrow had no viable way to replace them.

"Various things have been investigated in the past five years, but for a number of reasons none of these were practical or safe. The good news is that Heathrow has now identified a safe and robust way to replace all the light bulbs, and this is high-level rope work carried out by a specialist company."

The terminal is a vast building and houses the world's largest controlled-lighting system, with 120,000 light fittings and 2,600 sensors designed to switch them off when no motion is detected.

The airport's operators now plan to replace all the bulbs in one go with LEDs that are expected to last at least five years.

A spokesman for Heathrow said: 'The current lighting on the terminal 5 concourse is being replaced with environmentally friendly LED bulbs. Contingency lighting has been used on the concourse while a viable and safe solution for replacing the lights was being agreed.'

A spokeswoman for British Airways said: "We are working with the owners of Heathrow Airport to improve the lighting levels inside Terminal 5 due to concerns over the brightness of the terminal in the winter months.

"Work has already started on the lighting improvements and we are confident that it will be resolved to our satisfaction very soon."

She added that she could not confirm whether the email by Vicki O'Brien was genuine.

news.com.au 25 Nov 2013

How on earth did the authorities sign off on the project.

Private buildings in plan to ease jail overcrowding

• HIGH ALERT: Prisons on watch for gang, bikie threat
• TOUGH POLICIES: Spike in women in prison
• BEHIND BARS: Life is slow for the devils inside
• INTEL: Prisons turn to spycraft to keep tabs on criminal networks
• GALLERY: Barwon maximum | Port Phillip maximum

VICTORIA'S prison overcrowding crisis has forced the Napthine Government to search for privately owned buildings that can be bought and transformed into minimum security prisons. 

A range of options are being assessed, including former school bush camp sites, that could host female prisoners without greatly disrupting local neighbourhoods.

The move comes as the Sunday Herald Sun can reveal that at least $2.5 million in wages and other costs is being sucked out of Victoria Police every month because officers are ­being forced to act as jailers.

At one stage last week, 357 offenders were squeezed into police cells overnight, ripping dozens of police away from frontline duties.

Of the 357 offenders, 322 were Corrections Victoria prisoners who should have been in jails or remand centres.

Police Association secretary Greg Davies said the problem had become "ridiculous".

"We're not trying to be alarmist, nor are we trying to make trouble for a government that did not create the problem," Mr Davies said.

"But there is a very real chance that this will end in tears, or worse, if it is not positively and urgently addressed."

To address the problem urgently, Mr Davies said vacant government buildings should be transformed into prisons because "we simply can't wait five years for Ravenhall to come on line".

"Any sort of facility - ideally one that already has a commercial kitchen in it, that could have some razor wire fencing and CCTV installed," he said.

While the Sunday Herald Sun understands there are no plans to use government buildings to house prisoners, the radical move of transforming privately owned facilities into minimum security prisons is under way.

news.com.au 23 Nov 2013

The Australian police force have specific instructions from the government to follow quotas given to arrest, incarcerate, fine and charge the general populous for various 'offences ' under whatever pretext seen fit by the issuing 'officer'.

This is basically police corruption of the highest degree, which now is being supported by further government action by making Queensland police IMMUNE from prosecution of any form of law suite.

See article:

Police to gain protection from being sued

http://corpau.blogspot.com.au/2013/11/police-to-gain-protecion-from-being-sued.html

Australia is in the forefront of being officially called the POLICE STATE.

Fed up Queenslanders join forces to protest new government legislation

Demonstrators like those who protested the governments public service cuts earlier this year, are expected to march on Parliament House this week. Photo: Glenn Hunt

“Several thousand” workers, unionists, lawyers, environmentalists, civil libertarians, community groups and the fed up are among those joining forces to shout Parliament House down.

The main focus will be the government's industrial relations reforms, labelled as “more draconian than WorkChoices” by the Queensland Council of Unions, but if it involves rights, it will be yelled about on Tuesday afternoon, as government critics plan a statewide attack for the last week of parliament.

Introduced last month, while the government was pushing through its anti-bikie legislation, the Industrial Relations Fair Work Harmonisation Act will be passed this week.

Premier Campbell Newman and Attorney-General Jarrod Bleijie are blamed for orchestrating the anti-bikie laws in Queensland. Photo: Michelle Smith

Attorney-General Jarrod Bleijie said it would bring the state in line with the federal legislation, as well as making bargaining a fairer process for both employers and employees.

Opponents said the new laws strip away the rights of employees and unions to negotiate effectively, dismantle strike action protections and undermine the separation of powers between the Queensland Industrial Relations Court and the government.



The legislation will also make it an offence for union fees to be deducted from an employees pay and senior medical officers will be moved to individual contracts.



With the government's massive majority, there is no question the legislation will be passed, but QCU president John Battams said the community “would not be silenced”.

“I can tell you the groundswell of opinion against what the government is doing is growing by the day,” he said.

“With every new law that they pass, more people notice. I don't think you are going to see any diminution of campaigning against the government.

This government has been here almost two years and we are headed to an election and we are going to be there every step of the way.”
 
The government has repeatedly denied it has waged an ideological war against unions and said it had only made the playing field fairer.

As expected, Mr Battams disagreed, but he said “increasingly people were getting tired” of what he called the government's “arrogance”.

“They are only talking to the big end of town, only regard their own interests and disregard the interests of Queenslanders," Mr Battams said.

“Yes, they'll pass the law, but we'll make sure people will hear what is happening. These laws mainly affect public servants and local government employees – I don't think many of them will be voting for this government come next election, as well as anyone else who cares for a fair and just society.”

The industrial relations laws are not the only legislation expected to make waves this week.
Premier Campbell Newman said changes to the Queensland electoral act, as flagged by the government's green paper released earlier this year, will also be put through in the closing stages of the 54th parliament.





In July, Attorney-General Jarrod Bleijie announced changes to the Queensland Electoral Act, which included raising the declarable donation threshold for political candidates from $2000 to $12,400, with monthly disclosures.

But amounts under $12,400, including fundraising events which had a per-head entry fee under the threshold, would not have to be declared, regardless of the cumulative total raised.

At the time, Mr Bleijie said the changes would make the political donation process “more transparent”, but the opposition said the changes would muddy the waters, making it easier to hide electoral donations.






The extension of sand mining on North Stradbroke Island will also be finalised this week, as will the amendments to the government's bikie laws.

brisbanetimes.com.au 19 Nov 2013

 

The Queensland government as a whole is factually a corporation, the BRIGALOW COPORATION, a fact that is (deliberately?) not reported by the corporate media.

The actions of the protesters are in response to oppressive corporatised (government) actions.

The pictures of the above 'leaders' are photos of corrupt people.

From a 'lay' persons understanding a government is formed by the people, the individuals who are in governance are paid by the peoples' taxes, and as a result are called 'public servants'.

In reality this is NOT the case as Australian governments federal, state and local are factually businesses -> companies -> corporations, and function as such.

The general population are conned into a false reality.