AUSTRALIA Revealed May 1999 - Law-Australia-Truth About The Colony Revealed

AUSTRALIA Revealed - May 1999

These are the historical facts and the internationally recognised legal position relating to each historical
event in the Australian colonies as it occurred.

New South Wales named by Captain James Cook in 1770.

New South Wales declared a British Colony in the name of His Britannic Majesty, King George III on
26th January 1788. Sovereignty over British Colonies is vested in the monarch therefore no change in the legal position occurred in 1801 when the United Kingdom was first formed.

On the death of George III of the United Kingdom in 1820, sovereignty over the Colony of New South
Wales was vested in the new monarch - George IV. By his death in 1837, the Colony of New South
Wales was already divided into three distinct colonies - New South Wales, Van Diemen's Land
(Tasmania) and South Australia. On his death sovereignty was transferred to the new monarch Queen
Victoria.

New South Wales was divided into five colonies by 1859.

Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania) - 1825

South Australia - 1836

Victoria - 1850

Queensland - 1859

Western Australia - 1829 founded as a separate colony

All colonial boundaries were completed by 1863.

Colonial Constitutions and the source of their relevant authority.

New South Wales - New South Wales Constitution Act 1855 (UK)

Victoria - Victoria Constitution Act 1855 (UK)

Tasmania - Australian Colonies Government Act 1850 (UK) - in 1855

South Australia - Australian Colonies Government Act 1850 (UK) - in 1856

Queensland - British Order in Council - in 1859

Western Australia - Western Australia Constitution Act 1890 (UK)

The colonies had authority to repeal or alter the contents of their constitutions. The United Kingdom
Government well aware the colonies could not repeal the Act itself nor repeal any significant part of the
Act without removing their own legislative power.

Earl Grey - Colonial Secretary 1846-1852, included provision for a central Australian authority with
limited competence in the first draft of the Australian Colonies Government Act 1850 (UK). Grey's
initiative was strongly criticised in Australia, but the Sydney and Melbourne leaders in their draft counter suggestions made similar if vaguer suggestions. The colonists were nearly as suspicious of possible central Australian authorities however modestly conceived, as they were of control from London.

Further attempts by the British Government to develop a centralised system of government in the
Australian colonies for the purpose of mutual defence were met with stern resistance until the final
decade of the nineteenth century when the colonists became perturbed by the continued German and
Japanese presence in the Pacific region.

Colonies to a colonial federation and the relevant legal authority.

An “Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK)”, the full title of the Commonwealth of
Australia Constitution Act, allegedly assented to by Queen Victoria on 9th July 1900, and proclaimed on
17th September 1900, was the legal instrument by which the colonial federation of the Commonwealth
of Australia became a legal entity. Queen Victoria was exercising her lawful sovereignty over the
Australian colonies. A prominent Australian QC claims Queen Victoria did not validly give the Royal
Assent to the Act, the Proclamation and Letters Patent as required by law as she was too ill. His source is written advice from the House of Lords, The Constitutional History of England by Professor F. W.
Maitland pages 422 and 423, English Constitutional History, Second Edition, by Professor S. B. Craines
at page 13. Although Australia was granted a copy of this document by an Act of the United Kingdom
Parliament in 1990, this copy does not indicate valid assent.

The preamble of this Act proclaims the Commonwealth to be “under the Crown of the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Ireland”. This legal entity ceased to exist as at 15th January 1922 when the Anglo-Irish Treaty was ratified. The Attorney-General of Eire states “The United Kingdom was unable to change the preamble because the Commonwealth of Australia was already acknowledged internationally as an independent sovereign nation”. The ratification of the Treaty of Versailles by the parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia is recognised under international law as the date of Australia's independence (Hansard of the Commonwealth of Australia 10th September 1919 - 1st October 1919).

Under Clause 6 of An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK) the colonies ceased to exist as legal entities. They became States of the Commonwealth of Australia while retaining their
original constitutions. Under Clause 8, The Commonwealth of Australia remained a colony of the United
Kingdom.

Queen Victoria died on 22nd January 1901. Sovereignty over the colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia passed to her successor - King Edward VII. King George V succeeded him
on his death in 1910.

In 1911 a resolution was passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom changing the name from the
Colony of the Commonwealth of Australia to the Dominion of the Commonwealth of Australia without
change in legal status. (source - British Foreign Office) At midnight on 4th August 1914, King George V
declared war on Germany in the name of the British Empire including his Dominion of the
Commonwealth of Australia, a colony of the United Kingdom.

As a colony of the United Kingdom, Australia was excluded from taking part in signing the armistice
with Turkey in Palestine on 30th October 1918 and the general armistice with the allies on 11th
November 1918 despite an earlier agreement with the UK.

Colonial Federation to Independent Sovereign Nation and the relevant legal authority.

Article IX of the 1917 Imperial War Conference declared the Dominion of the Commonwealth of
Australia to be an 'autonomous nation'. It is doubtful this declaration alone although published
internationally possessed the requisite legal power to pass sovereignty from the monarch of the United
Kingdom to the Australian People. This conference recognised that “Constitutional changes were
required with regard to the change in status of the Dominions”, however these changes would have to be addressed after the end of the war.

The Commonwealth of Australia signed the Peace Treaty of Versailles on 28th June 1919 as a
belligerent nation in its own right - its first act as an independent sovereign nation. Both international and domestic law acknowledges this document as the legal instrument that transferred sovereignty from King George V to the Australian People. The Commonwealth of Australia was then an independent, sovereign nation (Hansard 10 Sep 1919 - 1 Oct 1919). The legal power to enter into international treaties is possessed by sovereign nations alone. The Commonwealth of Australia joined the International Labour Organisation and the League of Nations in 1919, sovereignty being the fundamental requirement for entry.

As at 1st October 1919, the Commonwealth of Australia as a new legal entity ceased to be under the
Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. The Treaty of Peace Act 1919 which was
assented to on 28th October 1919 incorporated the Peace Treaty of Versailles into the laws of the
Commonwealth of Australia.

Sir Geoffrey Butler KBE, MA and Fellow, Librarian and Lecturer in International Law and Diplomacy
of Corpus Christi College, CAMBRIDGE, author of “A Handbook to the League of Nations”, made the
following statement in 1920. He refers to Article I of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

“It is arguable that this Article is the Covenant's most significant single measure. By it the British
Dominions, namely, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, and Canada, have their independent
nationhood established for the first time. There may be friction over small matters in giving effect to this
internationally acknowledged fact, but the Dominions will always look to the League of Nations
Covenant as their Declaration of Independence.” (source - Annotated Covenant of the League of Nations - League of Nations archives - Geneva, Switzerland).

As sovereignty had passed from the King of the United Kingdom, George V, to The People of the
Commonwealth of Australia, the colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia ceased to exist as a legal entity and became part of Australia's colonial past. The legislation authorising this colonial
federation was no longer tenable within the sovereign territory of the Commonwealth of Australia.

Because of this, the States too as an integral part of the colonial federation of the Commonwealth of
Australia became part of its colonial history as the authority for their existence was now extinct as were their colonial constitutions.

Under the Law of State Succession, the Australian politicians had failed to produce a document of
sovereignty following independence. They have continued to use the legally invalid An Act to Constitute
the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK) as a document of sovereignty contrary to every known legal
principle in domestic and international law.

The “Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK)” was legally valid only so long as the
Commonwealth of Australia remained a colony of the United Kingdom and the monarch, George V was
exercising his lawful sovereignty over the colony. As sovereignty now rested with the Australian People, the current political and judicial system in use in the Commonwealth of Australia is without legal foundation. The colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia existed from 9th July 1900
through to 30th September 1919.

The entry below appears in a Commonwealth document titled Commonwealth Power to Make and
Implement Treaties paragraph 4.13. Other entries in the same document make the point that treaties in the name of the Commonwealth of Australia signed by the government of the United Kingdom are no
longer valid.

“After the First World War, Australia was separately represented at the Peace Conference, and the
Dominions began to exercise greater powers in the area of external affairs. Australia became an
independent member of the League of Nations and the International Labour Organisation in 1919. In
both these, the Dominions were given separate votes and their representatives were accredited by, and responsible to, their own Dominion Governments, rather than the Imperial Government. They did not always vote in the same manner as Great Britain. This admission to the League and the International Labour Organisation involved recognition by other countries that Australia was now a sovereign nation with the necessary 'international personality' to enter into international relations.”

The Commonwealth of Australia became an independent Member State of the League of Nations on the
10th of January, 1920 when the League became part of international law. Declaration of Rights 1921
given by Mr. LLoyd George, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom at the 1921 Imperial Conference.

“In recognition of their services and achievements in the war, the British Dominions have now been
accepted into the “Comity of Nations” by the whole world. They have achieved full nation status, and
they now stand beside the United Kingdom as equal partners in the dignities and responsibilities of the
British Commonwealth......”

Similar statements were made in their respective parliaments in 1919 by Sir Robert Borden and General
Smuts, respectively, Prime Ministers of Canada and the Union of South Africa.

The 1923 Imperial Conference held in London declared the “Dominions” were autonomous nations with
the power to enter into international treaties.

The British Commonwealth of Nations was formed with Great Britain and the Dominions as equal
partners in all respects.

The 1929 report of the Royal Commission on the Constitution stated the same as the 1923 Imperial
Conference under the heading: Status of Great Britain and the Dominions. Their position and their
mutual relationship may be readily defined. They are autonomous communities within the British
Empire, equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect of their domestic affairs,
though united by a common allegiance to the Crown and freely associated as members of the British
Commonwealth of Nations.

In 1945 the Commonwealth of Australia became a foundation Member State of the United Nations. The
Charter of the United Nations was incorporated into the laws of the Commonwealth of Australia by an
Act of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia - Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 duly
assented to on 22nd October 1945. The current political system in use in the Commonwealth of Australia with assent for all bills signed by the Governor General or State Governors who are the representatives of Queen Elizabeth II or the “Queen of Australia” is quite impossible to uphold historically or legally under British domestic or international law.

Neither King George VI nor Queen Elizabeth II who succeeded him to the throne of the United Kingdom
in 1952 has ever held sovereignty over the Commonwealth of Australia, as a colony, a colonial
federation or as an independent sovereign nation.

Acts assented to in the name of Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom or the “Queen of Australia” are
invalid in both British domestic and international law. The United Nations Charter, a superior legal
document prevents interference with the sovereignty of a Member State. The Charter also effectively
prevents the usage of, and any change to current law of the Parliament of the United Kingdom by the
Australian government or the Australian People.

ROYAL ASSENT (source - The Royal line of Succession - Debrett's Peerage, P14 -17).

“Following the execution of Charles I in 1649, for the first time in its history, Britain did not have a
monarch. The British Parliament passed a measure declaring Britain to be a Commonwealth. Britain was
a republic until 1660. Finally, in 1701 the Act of Settlement was passed by the British Parliament
granting the status of a British citizen to the Protestant heirs of Mary II and her husband, William III of
the House of Orange. Catholics with better claims to the throne were passed over in accordance with the terms of the Act of Settlement”.

“In 1714, George I, the Elector of Hanover became the first king to rule under the 1701 Act of
Settlement. Both George I and George II were regarded in Britain as foreigners. George III (1760-1820) was the first of this imported lineage to be born in England. The current Royal Family reigns under the terms of this Act. Certainly, it is within the power of the Parliament of the United Kingdom to repeal the Act. The monarch reigns at the pleasure of the Parliament, not as a descendant of a ruling British lineage or divine rule”. As stated by Sir Kenneth McCaw QC, “The monarch in the United Kingdom is a constitutional monarch who occupies the throne by virtue of an Act of Parliament and bears a title conferred by that Act.”

At P15 ' People Versus Power' by Sir Kenneth M. McCaw QC (ISBN 0 03 900161 X).

The monarch and the monarch's representatives (State Governors/Governor General) are limited by the
current legislative power of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which under domestic and
international law excludes the right to bestow the power of assent to bills within the sovereign territory of the Commonwealth of Australia, a Member State of the United Nations, nor can this power of assent be bestowed by a government which is itself subordinate to Clause 9 of an Act that is current domestic legislation of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Power of assent is a 'sovereign power' held by the Australian People alone. Even they cannot bestow this power upon a citizen who is subordinate to the British Parliament. A nation's sovereignty is not negotiable under domestic and international law!

The Statute of Westminster 1931(UK), the Australia Act 1986(UK) and the Australia Act 1986 (AUS)
have no legal basis in domestic or international law. As sovereignty rested with the Australian People by 1919, the United Kingdom parliament did not have authority to legislate for Australia even if so
requested by the 'parliament' of the extinct colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia.

Articles XVIII and XX of the Covenant of the League of Nations (1920-1946), invalidates the usage of the laws of Member States within the sovereign territory of other Member States in the same manner as the Charter of the United Nations (1945-?) does today - Articles 2.1,2.4,102 and 103.

The Office of Legal Affairs of the Secretary General of the United Nations states, “Under international
law, the law of a Member State of the United Nations may be used within the sovereign territory of
another Member State only by means of a treaty duly registered with the United Nations. Any such treaty must not infringe upon the sovereignty of either Member State in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations”.

The International Court of Justice in written advice states “The fundamental principle of international
law tried and tested since 1872 is that international law prevails over domestic law. Where domestic or
municipal law is contrary to international law, then international law takes precedence over domestic or
municipal law. It is a generally accepted principle of international law that in the relations between
Powers who are contracting Parties to a treaty, the provisions of municipal law cannot prevail over those of the treaty”.

A plethora of legal precedence exists relating to the above. Most documents from the International Court of Justice refer to the position of international law with regard to domestic or municipal law. The
Republic of Chile exercised their rights under international law in a recent case in Melbourne. For once,
the Magistrate was aware of the superiority of international law over domestic law and ruled in
accordance with it.

There is a belief among lawyers in the Commonwealth of Australia that international law applies within
domestic law only after the parliament has legislated for same. This belief is erroneous as the above
amply demonstrates. An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK) is current domestic law of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. With respect to the Commonwealth of Australia, this Act cannot become part of its domestic law.

As outlined in 'A Shorter History of Australia' (ISBN 0 85561 599 0) by Professor Geoffrey Blainey on
page 160 - “When the assembly of the League of Nations met for the first time at Geneva in November
1920, Australia was one of the forty-two nations represented as full members. The Statute of
Westminster, passed by the British Government in 1931, was formally to give Australia an independence it already possessed.”

The Constitutional Convention's proposed changes to current domestic legislation of the Parliament of
the United Kingdom can now be seen as totally untenable within the concepts of domestic and
international law. In 1935, a joint committee of the House of Lords and the House of Commons, when
examining the petition of the government of the State of Western Australia for secession from the
Commonwealth, left no doubt as to the legal position of the Commonwealth and State governments with relation to An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia. The preamble and the Covering Clauses were the sole prerogative of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and operated separately from and independently of Clause 9 - The Constitution! The organisation and administration aspects, state and federal were confined to Clause 9 - the government and the judiciary.

The government of the United Kingdom states;

“An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK) is current legislation of the Parliament
of the United Kingdom. The UK parliament has the undenied authority to repeal this Act with or without
the consent of Australia. The preamble and covering clauses of this Act may be altered only by an Act of
the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The government of the colonial federation of the Commonwealth
of Australia was restricted to the conditions under Covering Clause 9 of this Act - the Constitution”
A recent UK document (11th December 1997) received from the British Foreign Office confirms this
position.

The current position in domestic and international law is clearly stated by two eminent members of the
Australian legal academe in their book - International Legal System: Cases & Materials (ISBN 0409436003) G. A. Brennan, LL.B (Hon) (Melb.), LL.M. (Lond.), Dip. Int.& Comp Air Law (Lond.) - Senior Lecturer in Law at Melbourne University and W. E. Holder, B.A. LL.B (Hons) (Melb.), LL.M.(Yale), Dip. Int. Law (Hague) - Senior Lecturer in Law at the Australian National University - Canberra - 1972. : Foreword by Chairs of International Law (Yale & London).

Page 75: “From 1917 onwards and following the peace discussions, Australia became an independent
minor country similar to Belgium. Theoretically by 1919 it was a totally independent country. In practice
sadly, this fact lagged behind theory.”

Note the superior academic post graduate qualifications including international law of the above two
authors! Download the CVs of the current batch of High Court judges as available on the Internet and
compare with these two authors. Note the difference in academic levels.

Comment: How then has the myth that Australia became an independent nation on 1st January 1901 been perpetrated and for what reason? Why haven't Australians been told the truth about their historical and legal heritage? Why does the celebration of a long dead colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia take precedence while other nations celebrate their Independence Day?

Could maintaining the 'status quo' be the answer?

The actual comments made by the forefathers of the Constitution have been hidden away in the archives.

Indeed, the original annotated Constitution with comments by two of the lawyers who helped write the
document hasn't seen light of day since it was written in 1901. The first reprint at $199 by Legal Books
in 1995 was not for public consumption. (Editors note: Quick and Garran's “Annotated Constitution of
the Australian Commonwealth” was reprinted in 1976 with a foreword by Professor Geoffrey Sawer,
B.A., LL.M. Professor Emeritus of the Australian National University, Visiting Fellow in the Faculty of
Law at the Australian National University. I know this to be a fact as I have the original copy that was
used for the reprint and bought it from The Law Book Company in the middle eighties for $200.)

I quote from Page 17 of The Australian Constitution published in 1997 by the Constitutional Centenary
Foundation with the annotated text by Professor Cheryl Saunders of Melbourne University “Australia
became an independent nation in 1901”. I. M. Cumpston, Emeritus Reader in Commonwealth History,
University of London begs to differ “The Commonwealth of Australia as a colony of the UK had limited
self-government in 1901” at P3 of History of Australian Foreign Policy 1901-1991 Volume one. One
need only refer to the eighth Clause in the “Preamble” to the “Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of
Australia 1900 (UK)” to understand the status of the “Commonwealth” in 1901;

8 Application of Colonial Boundaries Act

After the passing of this Act the Colonial Boundaries Act, 1895, shall not apply to any colony which
becomes a State of the Commonwealth; but the Commonwealth shall be taken to be a self-governing
colony for the purposes of that Act.

Her most recent book “It's Your Constitution”, Saunders falls far short of the expected legal argument
emanating from the Director for the Centre of Constitutional Studies, University of Melbourne. An
example on p.24 of this book is almost unbelievable “Some of the constitutional powers of the Queen are undoubtedly colonial in character, however, and would not have been included in a Constitution for an independent Australia. The most well known of these is section 59 which gives the Queen power to
overrule or “disallow” any Commonwealth law within one year after it has been made. The power has
never been used and certainly would not be used now”.

One wonders if we are living on the same planet as this academic - what happened to the sovereignty of The People in this independent nation? She is describing a Parliamentary Monarchy not an independent sovereign democracy! On p.8 of the same book she states “But this is a democracy, in which government is “by The People”. Somewhere between p.8 and p.24 “The People” appear to have lost their sovereignty. She doesn't discuss by what means the Queen or her representative continues to assent to bills under section 58 of the same document!

One would think a highly paid public servant such as Saunders and her colleagues could spend some
time investigating the validity of using current British domestic legislation within Australian sovereign
territory. The colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia metamorphosed into the sovereign
nation of the Commonwealth of Australia eighty-six years ago! The evidence, both historical and legal is overwhelming! (Saunders errors are many in number. LWC Ed.)

What has the Parliament of the United Kingdom to say about these statements? “The colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia came into being by the authority of An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK). It remained a colony of the United Kingdom. The Act is current legislation of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. This parliament reserves the right to repeal its legislation with or without the consent of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia”.

An Australian citizen recently wrote to the Office of the Lord Chancellor in London asking a question
relating to this alleged statement by the Lord Chancellor. “The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution
Act (UK)1900 is an Act of the United Kingdom Parliament. The right to repeal this Act remains the sole
prerogative of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. There is no means by which under United
Kingdom or international law this power can be transferred to a foreign country or Member State of the
United Nations. Indeed, the United Nations Charter itself precludes any such action. The government of
the United Kingdom presented the original document of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act to Australia in 1988 as a gesture of goodwill on its 100th anniversary”.

The reply dated 11th December 1997 from the Foreign & Commonwealth Office stated they could not
trace the alleged statement by the Lord Chancellor, however they wished to correct but one item in the
statement. “A copy of An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia was given to Australia by
special Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom in 1990 although a copy was loaned in 1988.

Otherwise the statement is an accurate description of the power of the British Parliament in relation to its own legislation”.

This recent document received from the British Foreign Office offers to repeal the Act if so requested by
the Commonwealth Government. Conclusively, the so called 'Australian Constitution' is current domestic
legislation of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and may be dealt with by any present or future
British Parliament as it deems fit. The Parliament of the United Kingdom claims full control over its own
legislation.

A recent communication received from the United Kingdom states:

“The Parliament of the United Kingdom does not possess the legal authority to assent to Bills within the sovereign territory of the Commonwealth of Australia nor can it delegate any such authority. This would be inconsistent with domestic and international law. The United Kingdom recognises the Commonwealth of Australia as an independent sovereign nation and Member State of the United Nations. The United Kingdom acknowledges that Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain reigns by the authority of the Act of Settlement 1701. This Act is current legislation of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It is within the power of the parliament to repeal this Act if and when it so decides.”

I quote from Hansard of the parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia for the 10th September 1919, Pages 12169a and 12171d. The speech is by Mr. Hughes, Prime Minister and Attorney General moving this motion: 'That this house approves the Treaty of Peace between the Allies and Associated Powers and Germany, signed at Versailles on 29th June 1919”. “It was necessary, therefore - and the same applies to other Dominions - that we should be represented. Not as at first suggested, in a British panel, where we would take our place in rotation, but with separate representation like other belligerent nations.

Separate and direct representation was at length conceded to Australia and to every other self-governing Dominion. By this recognition Australia became a nation and entered into a family of nations on a footing of equality. The League of Nations comprises at the onset some thirty-two nations including the Dominions of the British Empire and India, and we have signed the covenant as separate nations.” The motion was unanimously passed on 1st Oct 1919.

Perhaps the situation is best explained by one of Australia's foremost historians - Russel Ward in 'A
Nation for a Continent' pages 124 and 125. “Notwithstanding all his playing to the gallery, the incredible Welshman served Australia well at Versailles. He insisted that he (and Joseph Cook who was completely overshadowed by him) should represent Australia as a belligerent nation in its own right, not merely as part of the British delegation. The point was made when he signed the treaty separately on behalf of Australia. We shall see for the following twenty years a succession of conservative governments was content, in the field of foreign relations, almost to revert to Australia's earlier quasi-colonial status; but Hughes did set the precedent for independent action within the British Empire”.

Australia lost 60,000 young men in World War I. Prime Minister W. Hughes stated in the Parliament,
that these men had given us our new status as a nation. The sovereign People of this great country
through ignorance of its true political history and the resultant legal changes resulting from these
historical events have allowed the politicians, the judiciary, the academe and the media with their huge
vested personal interest in maintaining the 'status quo' to commit what can only be described as treason!

There is comfort in the knowledge that over 2,000,000 Australians now know and have confirmed for
themselves the above true history of this nation. Their numbers grow daily as they spread this
knowledge.

The author, in early 1974 after arriving back from London with the knowledge that the Commonwealth
of Australia most certainly did not become a nation in 1901, as he had been taught at school, became
interested in the actual date Australia became an independent sovereign nation. The 1971 Immigration & Asylum Act (UK) stating Australian were aliens, started him thinking. It has taken him over 25 years to unravel and document the true history of Australia. Little did he realise he was about to open a 'can of worms' of enormous proportions exposing politicians, judiciary, media and the academe, both legal and historical in what can only be described as a conspiracy beyond belief.

None could disprove or dismiss any of the facts presented. Each fact is already part of history. Instead of asking what could be done to correct these anomalies, he was asked why was he “attempting to destroy the Commonwealth”? It appears that politicians, judiciary, media and the academe are no longer interested in the truth! Even the National Library in Canberra does not contain a section on Australian Independence!

This data went before Justice Hayne. J. of the High Court of Australia on 15th December 1998. Justice
Hayne stated (off of the record) it was his duty to uphold the current system. He stated that Covering
Clause 5 is valid. If this is so, then so are all the other Covering Clauses plus the preamble. The
Australian People just lost their sovereignty. He has created a time warp with the Commonwealth of
Australia back in time prior to 1st October 1919 as a British Colony.

The “Queen of Australia” has gone with all the international treaties and 5,500,000 migrants just lost
their Australian Citizenship. Under Covering Clause 8, the Commonwealth of Australia is designated as
a self-governing colony. This decision is a total nonsense as it contradicts the Parliament of the
Commonwealth of Australia - a higher court!

Malcolm Turnbull in his book “The Reluctant Republic” on page 38 states.....”At the Peace Conference
in Paris after the first World War, the dominions were represented - albeit as part of the British
delegation.....”. Turnbull hangs his hat on that erroneous statement. The rest of his book becomes
irrelevant at that point. The fact that the Commonwealth of Australia was a plenipotentiary in its own
right is well documented in Hansard.

Recently, the author had an in-depth discussion with a person who holds a chair of International Law at one of the USA's most prestigious universities (Stanford). “When a government of what was formerly a colony attempts to maintain colonial law past the terms of 'Uti possidetis juris'(national boundaries), it will run into many legal problems. For instance, it cannot, under international law, sign a treaty, or declare war, nor can it legislate for citizenship. It cannot join an international body nor can it make
decisions as a sovereign nation within the international community. All its Acts must have some form of
assent, either by the previous monarch, a representative of the monarch or perhaps the parliament of what is now under international law, a foreign country. Such a system is not workable within the newly
sovereign nation and is not recognised under international law. In the case of Australia, its submission to the United Nations stated that its constitution was a sovereign document based upon British law.

This was untrue, the document is not sovereign, it is current British law.” Similar discussions with the Chairs of International Law at Yale, Harvard, Cambridge, London and The Hague resulted in almost identical comments with Cambridge and London confirming the statement made by the Parliament of the United Kingdom that the monarch does not possess the legal power of assent within Australia.
The Crown, as per the preamble, has not been a legal entity since 15th January 1922. The Commonwealth of Australia is a separate legal entity receiving its sovereign independence on 1st
October 1919. These two items alone eliminated the sense of the Act.

Both the League of Nations Covenant and the Charter of the United Nations eliminated the rest of the
Act as this quasi-colonial 'arrangement' did not comply with the requirements of either treaty,
remembering that international law always takes precedence over domestic or municipal law. The
administrative and organisational aspects of the “ghost” of the colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia are still enforced through Covering Clause 9 of An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK). This Act is current domestic legislation of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

The High Court of the Commonwealth of Australia acknowledges that the “Act to Constitute the
Commonwealth of Australia” owes its legal force to its character as a statute of the Imperial Parliament
and as such its is not a document of sovereignty. The High Court then uses this document as the
fundamental document of sovereignty within the Commonwealth of Australia saying that The People of
the Commonwealth of Australia have agreed to be bound by it. No such plebiscite of The People of the
Commonwealth of Australia has ever been conducted after the Commonwealth of Australia became an
independent sovereign nation. The Australian Government Solicitor is unable to produce any such
document!

As recently as 1992, a former Chief Justice of the High Court, Sir Anthony Mason, demonstrated what
must be seen as a complete lack of knowledge of international law when he said “The Australia Act 1986 (UK) marked the end of the legal sovereignty of the Imperial Parliament and recognised that ultimate sovereignty resided in the Australian People” 177 CLR 106 at 137-8. He was obviously unaware that the Commonwealth of Australia became a Member State of the League of Nations as at 10th January 1920 and the United Nations as at 24th October 1945. It is a rarity for a judge to have postgraduate academic qualifications. Most hold the honorary title of QC, which is irrelevant with regard to their attained academic levels. With few exceptions, their academic qualifications are the same as your average suburban solicitor a B.A., LL.B. or an LL.B. All High Court judges are political appointees.

The Australian Government Solicitor in a recent letter states “Since Australia has attained its
independent status, the character of the Constitution as Australia's fundamental law can be seen as resting predominantly on the Australian People's decision to approve and be bound by its terms and not on the status of the Constitution as an Act of the British parliament.”

At no time since Australia attained its independent status has any such plebiscite been conducted! The
statement is political rhetoric and legal “psycho-babble” as a sovereign Australia could not 'adopt' current law of a foreign country as its fundamental law. Such an act would contravene British domestic and international law! Both nations are Member States of the United Nations and the Charter of the United Nations precludes any such action.

How can one explain the fact that the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia agrees with the
above facts about sovereignty and uses that sovereignty to sign international treaties? Everyone
associated with international law recognises its superiority over domestic law. Article 2 (1) of the Charter of the United Nations:- The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The “Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK)” is documented by the British
government as current domestic legislation of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. In order for a court to hear matters relating to current British domestic law the court must be empowered by the Parliament of the United Kingdom to carry out this function. The Commonwealth of Australia is an independent sovereign nation and is outside the legal jurisdiction of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. No court, federal or state, in the Commonwealth of Australia is empowered to hear matters pertaining to current

British domestic law. This power ceased on 1st October 1919.

The High Court of the Commonwealth of Australia states that sovereignty rests with the Australian
People. Why then are the politicians and the judiciary compelled to sign a document giving allegiance to
Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, a British citizen who is subordinate to the laws of the
Parliament of the United Kingdom? Politicians are told in no uncertain terms that if they do not sign,
then they cannot be declared as winning the seat! Surely, any such document must be a confession of
treason? Sadly, the Queen has been badly misinformed and is completely exposed to an International
Criminal Tribunal. Many Australians have been imprisoned unlawfully by her assent to bills. Two at
least were hung! I would strongly advise all public servants to read the results of the Nuremberg Trials
following World War II. Many said they were only carrying out orders as they were taken to prison or
the gallows! A formal request for an ICT is now being prepared. One single document would suffice to
support an ICT - the current Letters Patent relating to the Governor of Victoria issued by Elizabeth II of
the United Kingdom as at 3 March 1986!

If there is still any doubt left as to when and by what means the Commonwealth of Australia became a
sovereign nation this is a verbatim extract from W. M. Hughes's book (The Splendid Adventure) and
Hansard of the House of Representatives at page 11631 on 30 September 1921.

The speech made by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom leaves no doubt as to the status quo of
the Dominions. The speech by the Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa also leaves no doubt as to
the status quo of the legislative power of the House of Commons within the Parliament of the United
Kingdom.

THE SPLENDID ADVENTURE

A review of Empire relations within and without the Commonwealth of Britannic Nations by: The Right
Hon. W. M. Hughes formerly Prime Minister of Australia.

London - Ernest Benn Limited 1929 printed in Great Britain - first edition Pages 234, 235 and 236 and
Hansard - House of Representatives at P11631 on 30 Sep 1921.

The Report of the Inter-Empire Relations Committee covers a wide field and demands separate
treatment, but I may quote here three Declarations of Rights. In his opening speech to the 1921
Conference Mr. LLoyd George (Prime Minister of the United Kingdom) said: “In recognition of their services and achievements in the war, the British Dominions have now been accepted fully into the Comity of Nations by the whole world. They are signatories to the Treaty of Versailles and of all other Treaties of Peace; they are members of the Assembly of the League of Nations, and their representatives have already attended meetings of the League; in other words, they have achieved full national status, and they now stand beside the United Kingdom as equal partners in the dignities and responsibilities of the British Commonwealth. If there are any means by which that status can be rendered even more clear to their own communities and to the world at large we shall be glad to have them put forward at this Conference.”

Sir Robert Borden, in his speech to the Canadian Parliament in 1919, set out the position of the
Dominion representatives in the Imperial council-chamber in terms equally clear and comprehensive:
“We meet here on terms of equality under the presidency of the First Minister of the United Kingdom...

Ministers from six nations around the council-board, all of them responsible to their respective Parliaments and to The People of the countries they represent. Each nation has its voice upon questions of common concern; each preserves unimpaired its perfect autonomy, its self-government, and the responsibility to its own electorate.”

And in 1919 General Smuts, during the debate in the South African Parliament on the ratification of the
Peace Treaty, set out the new status of the Dominions in language no less clear and precise: “The Union Parliament stands on exactly the same basis as the British House of Commons, which has no legislative power over the Union. . . . Where in the past British Ministers could have acted for the Union
(in respect of foreign affairs), in future Ministers of the Union will act for the Union. The change is a far-reaching one which will alter the whole basis of the British Empire. . . .

We have received a position of absolute equality and freedom not only among the other States of the Empire, but among the other nations of the world.”

That the British Government itself fully realised the significance of the change which had taken place is
shown by the official statement made by Lord Milner, at that time Secretary of War.

“The Peace Treaty recently made in Paris,” said Lord Milner, “was signed on behalf of the British
Empire by Ministers of the self-governing Dominions as well as by British Ministers. They were all
equally plenipotentiaries of His Majesty the King, who was the 'High Contracting Party' for the whole
Empire. This procedure illustrates the new constitution of the Empire which has been gradually growing
up for many years past. The United Kingdom and the Dominions are partner nations not yet indeed of
equal power, but for good and all of equal status.”

Conclusion:

Each conclusion is a documented, historical and legal fact that is beyond historical or legal challenge
under both domestic and international law.

(1) An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK) is current domestic legislation of
the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

(2) The colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia became the independent sovereign nation of the Commonwealth of Australia on 1st October 1919.

(3) The Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland ceased to exist as a legal entity on
15th January 1922.

(4) Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom reigns by the authority of the Act of Settlement 1701. She
is therefore subordinate to the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The Parliament of the United
Kingdom, Queen Elizabeth II or her representatives do not have the legal authority under British
domestic or international law to assent to legislation within the sovereign territory of the Commonwealth of Australia.

(5) The legal authority of the United Kingdom over the former Dominion of the Commonwealth of
Australia ceased as at 1st October 1919.

(6) No laws of the Parliament of the United Kingdom are valid within the sovereign territory of the
Commonwealth of Australia with the exception of those designated diplomatic areas under the Charter of the United Nations - British High Commission etc.

(7) Sovereignty over the Commonwealth of Australia rests with the Australian People.

(8) The Australian Government Solicitor states “Since Australia has attained its independent status, the
character of the Constitution (Clause 9 of An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900
(UK) as Australia's fundamental law can be seen as resting predominantly on the Australian People's
decision to approve and be bound by its terms, and not on the status of the Constitution as an Act of the British parliament.”

Answer (8a) The Australian Government Solicitor and the Australian Electoral Commission are unable
to produce documentation as to when and by what means this plebiscite of the Australian People was
allegedly conducted after gaining sovereignty.

Answer (8b): An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK) is current domestic
legislation of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and as such has no status within the sovereign
territory of the Commonwealth of Australia. See (6) also.

Answer (8c): As An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK) is current domestic
legislation of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the Australian People are excluded from 'adopting'
this Act even if they so desired as such would be in direct violation of British domestic law, international
law and the Charter of the United Nations.

Answer (9): The High Court of Australia states “The Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia
1900 (UK) is not a sovereign document. Sovereignty rests with the Australian People.” The Australian
Government Solicitor states “What has been described as 'the sovereignty of the Australian People' is
recognised by section 128 of the Constitution”.

Answer (9): Here we have the Australian Government Solicitor stating the sovereignty of the Australian
People actually resides in Section 128 of An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900
(UK) while the High Court of Australia states categorically that this Act is not a document of
sovereignty! If the sovereignty of the Australian People is recognised by section 128 of the Constitution then sovereignty under the Crown could never have existed.

The inescapable historical and legal conclusion is thus clearly established by the previous pages plus the supporting historical and legal documentation held for each statement. The current political and legal system in use in Australia is limited by law to the following;

(a) The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia had the undoubted authority to make laws for the peace, order and good government of the colonial federation of the Commonwealth of Australia from 1st January 1901 through to the passing of a resolution by the Parliament of the United Kingdom changing the name from the Colony of the Commonwealth of Australia to the Dominion of the Commonwealth of Australia in 1911.

(b) The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia had the undoubted authority to make laws for the peace, order and good government of the Dominion of the Commonwealth of Australia from the time of the British resolution in 1911 changing the name from Colony to Dominion to 1st October 1919 when the Dominion of the Commonwealth of Australia became an independent sovereign nation.

(c) The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia is unable to produce any documented form of
authority dating from 1st October 1919 to the current date. Certainly, an Act to Constitute the
Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK) as current British domestic law cannot be enforced within the
sovereign territory of the Commonwealth of Australia under British domestic and international law. The
assertion by the Australian Government Solicitor that the Australian People have agreed to abide by the Act is political rhetoric as no documented basis in law exists (source - Australian Electoral Commission).

This would contravene British domestic law, international law and the Charter of the United Nations.
William Morris Hughes as Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia is recorded in 1921 as
recognising the necessity for a new constitution. His colleagues recognised the fact the Australian People would never approve a new constitution based upon the old colonial model. Eighty years have passed since the Commonwealth of Australia became an independent sovereign nation under British domestic and international law.

The Australian People still do not have a document of sovereignty! Under the current 'regime', political
and legal, the Commonwealth of Australia remains in a quasi-colonial limbo! The content of this
document is the result of over 25 years of fully documented meticulous research. No member of the body politic, the judiciary, the legal profession, the academe, historical or legal has been able to disprove a single item. Many have tried to deny it through political rhetoric - none have disproved it by historical fact or legal argument!

I was asked by a very senior member of the legal profession to state a worst case scenario from my
research. The Parliament of the United Kingdom has the undoubted authority under British domestic and international law to repeal An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK) at any time from the date this Act ceased to be valid within the previous British Colony or Dominion (1st October 1919) up to the current date. Not that they would - but they can!

Thousands of Australians now know about this document and have proven its contents for themselves.
They would rather go to war again than surrender the sovereignty of this nation for which so many
Australian service personnel have given their lives. I have looked upon the massed graves of some of
these young men in France - we can't let them die for nothing!

This statement is attributed to the current holder of a Chair of International Law at Cambridge University who had this to say.....”It never ceases to amaze me that all Chairs of Law in the Commonwealth of Australia are based upon a single piece of current British domestic law - An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK). This Act is current legislation of the Parliament of the United Kingdom therefore usage of this Act in the Commonwealth of Australia has the Parliament of the United Kingdom legislating within the sovereign territory of a member nation of the British Commonwealth of Nations. This is unlawful under British domestic law and the legal structure of the British Commonwealth of Nations let alone international law and the Charter of the United Nations. The
Commonwealth of Australia is not a dependency of the United Kingdom therefore the Parliament of the
United Kingdom is prevented from legislating within its designated territorial limits. This old British
colonial Act long ago ceased to be valid within the sovereign territory of the Commonwealth of
Australia.”

“When recently conversing with an Australian QC, I was astonished to hear his comment that even if the 'Australian Constitution' was no longer valid the legal basis for law would remain as common law would prevail as it does within the United Kingdom. He appeared to believe that law within the United
Kingdom was based upon centuries of convention and common law. This is a fallacy! The adoption of
the following major legal documents by the Parliament of the United Kingdom forms the basis of law
within the United Kingdom. I told this QC that only a court within the jurisdiction of the Parliament of
the United Kingdom could hear a case involving British domestic law thus excluding all Australian
courts.”

“The Magna Carta was confirmed by parliament in 1216/1217 by order of Henry III. The Petition of
Right was confirmed by parliament in 1628 with the Bill of Rights confirmed in 1689. These documents
adopted by the parliament provide documentary authority for the rule of law in England and later from
1801, the United Kingdom. The Parliament of the United Kingdom has the authority to repeal any of
these documents as it deems fit. Although there are well established precedents and conventions which have developed over the past 700 years, they do not constitute written law.”

“It is my opinion any international court or forum will quickly expose this feeble attempt at 'creative
legislating' by the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia. A government might have been able to
get away with such a nonsense in the earlier time periods of 1920 through to perhaps 1960. Certainly not following the Immigration & Asylum Act 1971(UK) which declares Australians to be 'aliens'. Also the
enormous library of the Internet is now available to the public at large plus of course the public can for
the first time publish on the Internet with the world as an audience.”

A document just to hand is more than worthy of inclusion within this disclosure document. The
document is headed as follows with the contents listed.....1920-1921

THE PARLIAMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
PEACE TREATIES
PAPERS RELATING TO SIGNING AND RATIFICATION OF THE PEACE TREATIES

(a) Memorandum dated 12th March, 1919 circulated by Sir Robert Borden, on behalf of the Dominion
Prime Ministers. (Sir Robert Borden was Prime Minister of Canada)

(b) Rules of the Peace Conference contained in Annex II to Protocol I of the Conference, defining the
position and representation of the several powers, including the Dominions (dated 18th January 1919).

(c) Correspondence between the Commonwealth Government and the Secretary of State for the Colonies concerning the signing and ratification of the Peace Treaties.

(d) Order in Council passed in Australia, moving his majesty The King to issue Letters Patent appointing
plenipotentiaries in respect of the Commonwealth of Australia.

Section (b) of this document was classified Secret by His Britannic Majesty's Government and had a
nominal 30 years non disclosure attachment notification.

The document clearly demonstrates the Commonwealth of Australia was in fact a sovereign nation in its own right in 1919. It was represented by its two delegates at the Peace Conference of Versailles as a belligerent nation. The document discloses the Dominions and the United Kingdom decided to join
together on a common panel under the flag of the British Empire for administrative convenience only.
Each Dominion was a plenipotentiary in its own right. No wonder the politicians didn't want this
document to see the light of day for some 30 years. It was annotated as a secret document. It has in fact not seen light of day for some 80 years!

Paragraph 5 (b) of the Secret Memorandum.....

(b) The recital in the Preamble of the names of the Plenipotentiaries appointed by the High Contracting
Parties for the purpose of concluding the treaty would include the names of the Dominion
Plenipotentiaries immediately after the names of the Plenipotentiaries appointed by the United Kingdom.

Under the general heading “The British Empire” the sub-headings “The United Kingdom,” “The
Dominion of Canada,” “The Commonwealth of Australia,” “The Union of South Africa,” &c., would be
used as headings to distinguish the various Plenipotentiaries.

The Oxford Dictionary defines plenipotentiary as.....

1. Especially of a diplomatic envoy invested with or possessing fully authority.

2. Conferring full authority.

3. Power of authority full; absolute.

4. A person vested with full authority to transact business especially a diplomat authorised to
represent a country.

"Australia, The Concealed Colony", ISBN 0-0906087-5-X

This is the title given to a publication which was prepared as a submission to the International
Court of Justice and subsequently to every member nation of the U.N.

(www.members.westnet.com.au/unrealneil).

It deals with the constitutional fraud which certain U.K. interests have perpetrated against the Australian peoples, to keep us in an unlawful state of subjugation, and this situation remains to this day - kept afloat by a corrupt and criminal judiciary, who deliberately ignore all arguments that the lynch-pins of our system (Governors and Governors-General) are invalidly appointed, in order that our right to self-determination be prevented. It has been necessary to do a bit of creative conjuring to keep the scam alive and the (foreign) U.K. Queen has obliged by invoking the schizoid ruse of becoming, before our very eyes, a Queen of Australia. All this without the creation of a monarchy, with no Act of Succession and throneless. Halsbury’s Laws of England cites the preclusion of the U.K. monarch from ruling in a foreign land but we can't let such a small detail intervene, can we?

Have you ever broken a traffic law and been stopped by a cop? Notice the British Crown on his car, uniform, warrant card and infringement notice? He has sworn an oath to "our good lady, Queen Elizabeth II". Now lets say we elect to contest his complaint in a court - We are served with a summons and commanded to appear, in the name of Her Majesty. We then appear in a court which proudly displays the British coat of arms. The Magistrates Act 1991 prescribes the oath which the magistrate must take (Magistrates Act Regulations 1993 – Form of Oath or Affirmation) and the prosecutor plus the
complainant (cop) both have sworn similar oaths to the magistrate. They will then proceed to impose British law upon you. Now hold it for a minute - are you not a national of an independent sovereign nation? A member state of the U.N.? Doesn't it smell a bit fishy? A Newcastle barrister decided that it did, so he broke ranks and has taken the matter through the British Courts.

David Claude Fitzgibbon v Her Majesty's Attorney General of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland went before

1. Master Bowman 9th March 2004, Chancery Division, High Court of Justice.
2. Master Bowman, 25 June 2004, Chancery Division, HC03C03923.
3. Justice Lightman, 31 January 2005, Chancery Division, CH/2004/PTA/0447.
4. Lord Justice Waller and Sir William Aldous, Court of Appeal, Civil Division

21 April 2005 C1/2005/0474

The British courts evaded the issue to some degree, so having exhausted all avenues in the U.K., the barrister filed the matter in the European Court of Human Rights on 20 Oct. 2005. The British have since failed to file a defence within the prescribed time (because they obviously have none) so the matter is currently waiting it's turn to be heard in what can only be a favourable default judgment. It is strange that a matter of such huge importance to all Australians has not had a mention in the major media. The result of this impending court judgment is likely to establish that we became independent in 1919 (or 1931, or 1945) and that all of our present governments and vice regals are frauds.

The U.K. government in all probability will be ordered to revoke their Statute, the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900 (U.K.). This is scary stuff, but it is the truth and maybe the truth will set us free from being a Concealed Colony. Watch "Little Johnnie War Crimes" try desperately to bring on a republic. (We've been one since 1919). He is likely to stand down and permit a new P.M. Malcolm Turnbull to attempt another con job on us.

That will be the time that all Australians need to know the truth. Spread the word. Happy truth hunting!

William-Graham: Bolton.

Feel Free To Distribute – And Be Part of the Legend
http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/judgmentsfiles/j3083/fitzgibbon-v-hma...

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/young_and_free.htm

http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/legcon_ctte/terrorism/submissions... (No. 258)

http://www.gg.gov.au/textonly/listfiles_2005.html (2005/50)

http://www.brumbywatchaustralia.com/Principality04.htm

http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/themagazine/vol14/articles/timebomb.shtml

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/08/08/1091903444867.html

http://www.fourwinds10.com/news/05-government/C-fraud/02-australia-canad...

http://www.principalityofcamside.cc/Audio/OzAudioIntro.htm

http://www.familieslink.co.uk/pages/courts_australia_challenge_UK.htm

http://www.abc.net.au/cgi-bin/guestlst/guestbook.pl?4corners/guestbooks/...

http://web.archive.org/web/20001204204400/www.levick.com.au/constitution...

http://web.archive.org/web/20001204150500/http://www.institutetr.com.au/

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/young_and_free.htm

http://groups.msn.com/TLgcommunity/auconstitution.msnw?action=get_messag...

http://groups.msn.com/TLgcommunity/auconstitution.msnw?action=get_messag...

---------------------------------------------------

Peter Gillies letter to newspaper
Peter Gillies
11 Scott Circuit
Salamander Bay 2317
NSW Australia
Ph/Fax: 612 4984 7010
Mobile: 0428 822 920
Email: oceania3 @ optusnet.com.au

Question: Has the Queen of the United Kingdom committed a crime?

Question: Should the Australian Government be allowed to vote in the UN General Assembly?

At the outset I say that I am not a lawyer. I am an ordinary bloke who happens to believe in a level playing field. I believe that those that make the laws should be the first to obey them. This is not the case in Australia.

Some time ago I had a dispute with my local council. A senior planner told me that the council knew they were breaking the law, but that they did not care. “We’ve always done it” he said. They claim that all their authority derives from the Local Government Act 1993. So I set about finding what authority they actually did have.

What a can of worms I opened. Talk about lies and deceit.

First of all I went to our ‘Australian’ Constitution, which is not really ours. It is an Act of the UK Parliament and has never been part of Australian legislation. My first thought on finding this was, “How can this be right in an independent country?”

However, this aside, I did ascertain that what powers have not been conferred by the Constitution cannot be taken. That is hard legal fact. The Constitution allows for Federal and State governments but does not allow for a third level of government. A Constitutional inquiry (1985) also found this so it was decided to take it to a referendum of the people, which is the only way we can alter the Constitution.

This referendum was held in 1988.

The question was asked, “Do you want to recognize Local Government?” All States came back with a resounding “NO” vote.

Despite this denial by the people, all State Governments later passed a Local Government Act.

Not good so far, I thought, for a supposed democracy. But I looked further. For a government to be legally valid in Australia, under both State and Federal Constitutions, the Government must consist of three parts. It must have a lower and upper house, and it must have a Governor (State) or Governor General (Federal) who has been appointed by the Queen of the United Kingdom under her Royal Sign Manual.

OK. So now it’s getting really weird. First Australia, this independent country, has as its supreme law – the ‘Australian’ Constitution - a law of another nation.

Then, for the governments of this independent nation to be legally valid they must have a representative appointed by the leader of another nation appointed according to the laws of that other nation’s parliament. Surely this couldn’t be right?

So I checked with the United Nations. They told me that one of the essential ingredients of the Charter of the United Nations is that the laws of one independent nation cannot be enforced within the territories of another independent nation.

So… if the Queen has done what her own UK Act says, and has appointed a State Governor, or a Federal Governor General in Australia, then is she guilty of committing an offence against international law?

But had she really appointed these people?

I started with the Local Government Act of New South Wales. The Governor who gave this Act Royal Assent was Rear Admiral Peter Sinclair. I emailed the House of Lords and asked, “Where are records of appointments made under the Sign Manual kept? They promptly replied that they were all kept in Folio C_ _ in the UK Archives and provided a link to that web site. I return emailed and thanked them but asked, “What about records of appointments of persons overseas?”

They replied, “Records of ALL appointments under the Sign Manual are kept in this folio in the UK Archives.”

The UK Archives web site quickly provided the subject folio, but it is not readily accessible to the general public.

However, a list of accredited researchers was provided so I engaged one to locate and forward a copy of the documents of appointment of Peter Sinclair.

She eventually came back with the reply, “There is no record of any such appointment.”

“How odd!” says I. So I placed a Freedom of Information request to the NSW Premier for a copy of the documents. They definitely did NOT want to give them to me.

While I was waiting for them, I went to the Newcastle University Law Library and found the UK laws relating to appointments made under the Royal Sign Manual. There are four essential ingredients necessary for an appointment to be valid. These are: -

1. The person MUST be a British Subject;

2. The appointment MUST be signed by the Queen of the United Kingdom;

3. It MUST be countersigned by a senior member of the UK parliament; and, most importantly,

4. It MUST bear the Great Seal of the United Kingdom.

OK. So these rules are set in concrete within UK legislation.

First, I found that Peter Sinclair is an Australian Citizen. He is NOT a British Subject.

Second, when the documents arrived, they did have a signature I presume was that of the Queen of the United Kingdom.

However it was at the top right hand corner of the front page, BEFORE any other writing on the document. There was NO signature where it said, “Signed at Our Court of St James on….”.

Third, there was NO signature of ANY member of the UK parliament.

Fourth, there was NO Great Seal of the United Kingdom.

AHA!

We now have NO record of the appointment at the UK Archives, and NO compliance with the various UK Acts that dictate what the Queen must do with regard to appointments under the Sign Manual. But what about other Governors, and what about Governors General? A similar check on several other ‘appointees’ at various dates revealed a similar situation.

Obviously the Australian public has been deceived. But by whom? None of these persons had been appointed by the Queen of the United Kingdom under her Sign Manual. According to our State and Federal Constitutions, a law does not become a law until it receives ‘Royal Assent’ by someone who has been appointed under the Sign Manual. Obviously then, the Local Government Act (NSW) 1993 never received Royal Assent and so never became a law.

You beauty! I’ve got the bastards! But hang on. Why was a signature of the Queen there at all? Clearly she hadn’t made the appointments, or a record would be at the Archives, and the documents would have been signed at the ‘Court of St James’ bit.

So who did sign them?

A little more digging revealed that several decades ago, several Acts were passed both in the UK and in Australia.

One of these Australian Acts – the Royal Styles and Title Act, 1973 - created some person called “The Queen of Australia.”

Who the hell is she? I didn’t vote for her. And in any case, the Constitution of Australia (and the Constitutions of the Australian States) only gives executive authority to the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. So this ‘Queen of Australia’ has no permission to do anything anyway.

Multiple queries later I was reluctantly informed by both UK and Aussie governments, that the Queen of the UK and the Queen of Australia are one and the same person; that they are ‘indivisible’, but the Queen of Australia acts on advice from “her Australian ministers”.

Now I have two major problems with this, and this is where the bit about the Queen committing a crime comes in.

First, nowhere does this ‘Queen of Australia’ have permission to hold the Executive Authority necessary to make appointments and laws legally valid. She certainly was not given that permission by the Australian people, and she does NOT have that permission under the UK Act, the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (UK) 1900.

Second, under certain UK legislation, she is only allowed to be known as the Queen of another country if the foreign policy of that country is controlled by the United Kingdom Parliament. Quite clearly Australian foreign policy is NOT controlled by the UK parliament so the Queen CANNOT be known as the Queen of Australia under requirements of her own laws.

Now I did find out that the Queen is immune from most laws, but I also found out that she is NOT immune from laws that relate to her. So has she committed an offence?

Has she allowed her law (The Constitution Act) to be enforced in another independent nation in contravention of international law?

Has she allowed herself to be known as ‘Queen of Australia’ in defiance of her own parliament’s Acts?
AND… If the Australian Constitution requires that a valid Australian government consist of an Upper House, a Lower House, AND a Governor General appointed by the Queen of the United Kingdom under her Sign Manual, and the Governor General HAS NOT been appointed in that manner, then does Australia have a legally valid government?

If it does not have a legally valid government, then does it have a right to sit on the UN General Assembly and vote on issues before that assembly?

It goes back to a level playing field. If I have to obey the law, then so do they.

Just as an aside…

If no Australian laws have received Royal Assent as required by the Constitution, are any of these laws themselves legally valid?

Just as a besides the aside…

The Australian Constitution has NEVER been agreed to by the Australian people. What WAS agreed to prior to 1900 was sent to the UK for enactment, but the UK made over 60 alterations to the document and then legislated it. The altered document was never sent back to Australia to be voted on by the Australian people.

We demand that Iraq have its own Constitution freely adopted by the people of Iraq, but what about Australia?

---------------------------

Zach Roberts email from Wayne Levick

Dear Zach Roberts,
"The continued usage of the Australian Constitution Act (UK) by the Australian Governments and the
judiciary is a confidence trick of monstrous proportions played upon the Australian people with the intent of maintaining power. It remains an Act of the United Kingdom. After joining the League of Nations in 1919 Australia became a sovereign nation. It had no further legal power to use, alter or otherwise tamper with another nation’s legislation. Authority over the Australian Constitution Act lies not with the Australian government nor with the Australian people, it rests solely with the UK. Only they have the authority to repeal this legislation ..."

The late Professor G. Clements Eminent UK QC and emeritus Professor in Law at Cambridge University
Thank you for your prompt response.

This story is a relatively simply one to understand, but the Devil is in the detail. This is the reason it has been overlooked and hidden by history. It involves the British Parliament, a succession of British monarchs (including Elizabeth II), other members of the British royal family, British and Australian politicians and the Australian, British and European court systems. As should be evident, news stories rarely get any bigger, have as many consequences or people working against the truth.

This is without doubt the greatest perpetrated fraud that has continued for decades within our modern times and definitely will be one of, if not, the largest news & media story ever uncovered. It will show how the corrupt past and present politicians, as well as the judicial systems of two countries have deliberately lied, misled and manipulated the Australian people for their own personal financial gain and greed.

For the past 80 years every Australian Politician, Judge, Magistrate, Defence Force Personnel, Federal &
State Police Officer, Sheriff, Local Mayor, etc., in other words the people in Authority, have ALL committed an Act of Treason against the Australian People, by swearing allegiance and subscribing to an oath to serve Elizabeth II, Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland and therefore the government of a Power foreign to Australia.

Since 1919 the Monarchs of the United Kingdoms (and there have been two UKs) have allegedly appointed a Governor General, who has in turn, sworn into office the Federal Government. This Federal Government then had the rights and privilege to administer the laws and run the Commonwealth of Australia.

However, for reasons outlined further in this document these Monarchs have had NO legal basis to do so!

Elizabeth II has NEVER been coronated the “Queen of Australia”??

You will then start to shortly understand how the appointment of our Australian Governments, the various government departments and our Australian Constitution are and have been for decades - illegal and invalid.

The whole Judicial System in Australia is not only corrupt but also invalid!!! Most Judges (especially those in the High, Federal and State Supreme Courts) are aware of this invalidity and know that their own appointments are totally unlawful. However, these same Judges have continued to preside and rule against hundreds of people, when their invalidity was actually stated in documents filed in their own courts!

Innocent people have been ordered to pay fines, had property re-possessed, been forced into bankruptcy or imprisoned by corrupt Judges who are more interested in protecting their own livelihoods, positions, power and the status quo.

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) is also an organization with NO lawful authority. Yet people once
again had their lives ruined to the point of suicide for being unable to pay their taxes.

In October 2005 an action against the British Government was submitted and accepted by the European Court of Human Rights for “Human Rights Abuse”, relating to Mr. David Claude Fitzgibbon, Barrister-atlaw.

The British Government had 90 days to lodge their Defence, which was NOT entered. This was perhaps
the FIRST time in the history of the Court that a Defence had not been lodged!

In October 2006, the Court mysteriously ruled that there was NO evidence of Human Rights offence having occurred ti Mr. Fitzgibbon. How can you possibly lose a court case when the other party does not even submit a Defence?? What deals were struck in order to have the case quashed??? (Mr. Fitzgibbon was told personally by Justice Lightman that Australian Prime Minister, John Howard actually put pressure on him to decide as he did.)

Furthermore, Australia is the only modern country in the world that does NOT have a “Bill Of Rights”!!
I believe that whoever has the conviction and fortitude to break this story worldwide will go down in history as the person who uncovered and made public a scandal of such monumental political significance and decades old human rights abuse that it will make scandals such as Watergate, Clinton and Lewinsky, Enron, etc., fade into obscurity.

Having practised Law in Australia as a Lawyer for many years, I apologise upfront for the nature of the
following information and its legal complexity. However, I would rather give you the exact facts so that if necessary you can have your own legal people confirm my allegations, accusations and claims.

I ask that you adopt an attitude of scepticism to the information I supply. Internet references have been provided where possible. If you require any further documentation to substantiate or support the points made please do not hesitate to ask. If you don’t have any questions as you examine the information you will not have understood it.

There is only so much I am able (and willing) to convey via the internet.

There are two approaches to the issues. First, that the so called ‘Australian’ constitution is invalid. Second, that the ‘Australian’ constitution is valid law. This article advances the former position. The Peter Gillies article advances the latter position. Either way Australia’s legal and political systems are defunct!

The consequences of this inescapable conclusion are numerous and significant both nationally and internationally.

By way of only some examples:

1. How can the Commonwealth of Australia be a member State of the United Nations and vote in that body’s General Assembly?

2. Which nations are using this information against various Australian governments for their own ends and against the Australian people? (i.e. Does this explain why David Hicks is rotting in an American military prison and the federal government of Australia has been so deafeningly quiet and sickeningly compliant?)

3. How can non-Australians be granted Australian citizenship by a British constitution? (That would be like the U.S.A. granting Japanese citizenship under the U.S. Constitution.)

A Brief Summary:

The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act was passed by the British Parliament at Westminster in July of 1900. It consists of a Preamble, 9 clauses and a Schedule. The 9th clause is usually referred to as the ‘Australian’ Constitution.

http://www.pm.gov.au/aus_in_focus/constitution/index.html

The 9th clause - the ‘Australian’ Constitution -was, is, and remains conditional upon the first 8 clauses of that Act, a current Act of domestic law of the United Kingdom Parliament. Copies of the Act are still available from Her Majesty’s Stationary Office in the UK.

Under Section 128 of Clause 9, minor alterations to the Constitution are permitted to be made by the Australian People. However, the Australian People are not permitted to alter, in any way, Clauses 1 to 8 of the Imperial Act.

Since the Australian People have only ever had the right to change sections 1 to 128 of clause 9 of that Act, it follows that covering clauses 1 to 8 remain law in Australia. This conclusion was confirmed by the Australian High Court: see Joosse v ASIC HCA 1998 159 ALR 260 and the transcript of this case at
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/hca/transcripts/1998/M35/1.html The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900 (Imp) commenced as law in Australia on the 1st of January 1901. This means that while ever the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900 remains in use, British colonial law still operates in Australia and that Australia is a self governing colony of the United Kingdom as stated in that Act: see clause 8. However, the High Court of Australia ruled in 1999 that the United Kingdom was a foreign power, and that the UK Parliament could not have any effect on the Governments of Australia:

see Sue v Hill HCA 30 of 1999 at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/1999/30.html

Hence, if British colonial law continues to operate in Australia, this constitutes a clear breach of international law, along with the duties and responsibilities of the Australian and the United Kingdom governments, as both were Foundation Members to the League of Nations and subsequently the United Nations. The Covenant and the Charter of both bodies, respectively, bind both nations.

The Australian people do not have ultimate control over the 'Australian' Constitution. In mid- July 1995 the Lord Chancellor of the UK, in answer to a question asked about the ‘Australian’ Constitution, is reported to have stated:

"The British Constitution Act 1900 was for self government. It was never intended to be and is not suitable to be the basis for independence. The right to repeal this Act remains the sole prerogative of the United Kingdom. There is no means by which under United Kingdom or international law this power can be transferred to a foreign country or Member State of the United Nations. Indeed, the United Nations Charter precludes any such action”.

Australia is an Independent Sovereign nation.

During the 'Great War', the United Kingdom held Imperial War Conferences to which the Dominions, as a result of their contributions to the war effort, were finally invited in 1917. It was at the 1917 Conference that the UK government resolved to start the Dominions on the path to independent nationhood. Resolution IX stated:

“The Imperial War Conference are of the opinion that the readjustment of constitutional relations of the component parts of the Empire is too important and intricate a subject to be dealt with during the War and that it should form the subject of a special Imperial Conference to be summoned as soon as possible after the cessation of hostilities. They deem it their duty, however, to place on record their view that any such readjustment, while thoroughly preserving all existing powers of self-government and complete control of domestic affairs, should be based on a full recognition of the Dominions as autonomous nations of an Imperial Commonwealth…”

Further, both as the result of the Dominions' World War I contributions and the forceful position advanced at Versailles by the then United States President, Woodrow Wilson, the United Kingdom government - initially reluctantly - granted the Dominions the right to attend the Peace Treaty negotiations in their own right.

This was followed by King George V instructing the Australian Governor-General, R. M. Ferguson, to issue a Head of State full powers document on the 23rd April 1919, being in "good and due form" authorising Australian Prime Minister Mr. Hughes and Sir Joseph Cook to attend the Peace Conference and to negotiate and sign the Treaty of Peace on behalf of the Commonwealth of Australia.

This emancipation of the Australian nation was recognised by the other signatories to the Treaty which allowed Australia, and the other former Dominions, to sign as separate nations.

The United Kingdom no longer signed Treaties on behalf of Australia. (This response was confirmed by letter from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, dated 11th Dec 1997, under the hand of Mark Armstrong, Far Eastern and Pacific Dept.)

The politics behind Britain granting its colonies independence are not obvious until it is realized that if Britain had kept its colonies none of those colonies would have been able to join or therefore vote in the League of Nations.

By granting independence the British government correctly calculated that their former colonies would mostly) vote in accordance with the wishes of Mother England. Moreover, far-flung British peoples knew full well the value of the British navy.

The unanimous ratification of this action was finalised in the Federal Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia on the 1st of October, 1919. Australia immediately became a Member State of the League of Nations and the International Labor Organisation. Membership of these organisations being only available to sovereign nation states: see http://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/versailles.html Indeed, upon joining the European Economic Community in 1969, the United Kingdom lodged with that Body a statement listing the 16 dependent Areas (colonies) which still formed part of the United Kingdom.

These were:

Anguilla
Bermuda
British Indian Ocean Territory (Diego Garcia)
British Virgin Islands
Cayman Islands
Falkland Islands
Gibraltar
Guernsey
Hong Kong (until 1 July 1997)
Jersey
Isle of Man
Montserrat
Pitcairn Islands
Saint Helena
South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands
Turks and Caicos Islands

Neither the Colonial Federation of the Commonwealth of Australia, nor any of its constituent colonies (being the States and Territories of the Commonwealth of Australia) were mentioned as continued dependencies.

Again in the year 2000 the United Kingdom declared to the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations that "Australia became an independent nation no later than 3rd September 1939". As of that date, Australia declared war against Powers other than those that were officially at war with the United Kingdom! A 'Declaration of War' is an action recognised under international law as only capable of being performed by a Sovereign Power.

The United Kingdom had further declared to the United Nations that "United Kingdom domestic law is now ultra vires within Australia", as the United Kingdom Parliament no longer possessed legal sovereignty over the Australian people.

In Australia as recently as November 1995, the Australian Commonwealth Parliament, through the release of a report by the 'Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee’, restated the historical events leading up to the achievement of Australia’s independence. Referring to the 1917 Imperial War Conference Resolution IX at para. 4.12, the report clearly stated at para. 4.13 that Australia was a sovereign nation:

"Australia became an independent member of the League of Nations and the International
Labour Organisation in 1919."

and further in 4.13:

"This admission to the League and the International Labour Organisation involved recognition by other countries that Australia was now a sovereign nation with the necessary 'international personality' to enter into international relations”. Trick or Treaty? Power to Make and Implement Treaties, ISBN 0 642 24418 9

or see http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/legcon_ctte/completed_inquiries/p...

Add to these facts that on July 14, 1996, investigators working in the archives of the League of Nations, which are held in Geneva by the Swiss Government, found the original copy of the League of Nations’ Covenant.

Interspersed among the text is a commentary in italics by Sir Geoffrey Butler, KBE, Fellow in International Law and Diplomacy at Corpus Christie College, Cambridge University.

The discovery of the original copy of the Covenant revealed Sir Geoffrey's hand-written commentaries had been part of this crucial document from the beginning, not added later as historians had believed.

The full significance of Article I of the Covenant has never been widely understood by the people of Australia, whose future was nonetheless irrevocably altered by the Treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919.

Sir Geoffrey Butler's comments went to the heart of the events. His commentary on Article I states:
"It is arguable that this article is the Covenant's most significant measure. By it, the British Dominions,
namely New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and Canada have their independent nationhood
established for the first time. There maybe friction over small matters in giving effect to this
internationally acknowledged fact, but the Dominions will always look to the League of Nations
Covenant as their Declaration of Independence. That the change has come silently about and has been
welcomed in all corners of the British Empire is the final vindication of the United Empire Loyalists."
The law of one nation may not be used to govern over another nation.

Differing legal opinion cites the establishment of Australia as an independent sovereign nation over a wide range of dates. These include, but are not limited to:

1901 with the proclamation of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Imp)

1919 with the signing of and unanimous vote by the Federal Parliament of the Commonwealth of
Australia in acceptance of the Treaty of Versailles.

1926 by the declaration of the Inter-Imperial Relations Committee of the Imperial Conference.

1929 by the Balfour Declaration.

1939 by the Federal Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia enacting the Statute of
Westminster Adoption Act 1942 (Cth) back-dated to 1939.

1945 by the Commonwealth of Australia becoming a foundation member of the United Nations
and subsequently enacting the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945.

1986 with the passing of the Australia Acts (both UK & Cth)

1917-1939-1986: alternatively, the less controversial but flawed gradual evolution during the 20th century explanation. (This theory states that it is possible to be a little bit pregnant.)

Which ever date is chosen does not alter the consequences of the breach of Sovereignty, for Prof. O'Connell states:

"Whatever form the change in sovereignty may take it involves a disruption of the legal continuity…
These rules form a body of doctrine known as the law of state succession…" (International Law, P. D. O'Connell, Vol. 1, 2nd ed. 1970, p. 365-368)

From the moment a people gain independence they have a claim to, and possess the right of, self-determination.

They are sovereign over their affairs (see the Covenant of the League of Nations, Art. 10, and the Charter of the United Nations, Art. 2 paras 1 and 4: seehttp://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/ together with resolutions 2131 [xx] 1965 & 2625 [xxv] 1970)

From that moment, the laws of their former colonial master become ultra vires. For it to be otherwise is to offend both common sense and the first principle of international law - the right to self-determination! If this is not so, than the United States of America remains today as a collection of colonies of Great Britain! From October 1st 1919 'An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia' became ultra vires, with regard to Australia. Its continued use by Australia’s political parties to claim the power to establish a parliament to govern over the Australian people constitutes an offence against international law (see Quick & Garran "The Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth" 1901 at page 366). It represents political interference by the United Kingdom government and a denial of Australian citizens' inalienable right to self-determination.

From October 1st, 1919 the British Monarch became politically irrelevant to Australia. From October 1st 1919 Australia became a republic. From October 1st, 1919 it was necessary to create a political and judicial system capable of bridging the legal void created when sovereignty changed from the Parliament of the United Kingdom to the people of Australia. That necessity still exists!

If confirmation is required of this change in Australia's status from a "colony" to being "accepted fully into the comity of nations of the whole world", the Balfour Declaration 1929 makes interesting reading: see http://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/item.asp?dID=24), the Report of the Inter-Imperial Relations Committee 1926 - Extracts at page 348, ( see 'II. ⎯STATUS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND THE DOMINIONS' describing the Dominions as "autonomous communities within the British Empire, equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs"), and Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations.

By using UK law to claim power, Australian parliamentarians and others are agents of a foreign power.
By relying on an Act of domestic law of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the Australian Parliament is definable as an extension of the Parliament of the UK. The Governor-General, State and Territory Governors, individual parliamentarians, Senators and all others involved in government, including members of the judiciary, are definable as agents of the UK - that is, agents of a power foreign to the Commonwealth of Australia and this fact may yet have some very significant consequences!

The much-vaunted Statute of Westminster Act 1931 (UK) (see, http://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/item.asp?dID=25) was a thinly veiled attempt to patch up a broken legal system for the Dominions. Since it was design to operate beyond the shores of the UK, it failed the requirement under Article XVIII of the Covenant of the League of Nations as it was not registered with the Secretariat, and therefore never became a valid international instrument. It had no operational effect beyond the shores of the United Kingdom.

As previously stated, every Australian Parliamentary Member and Senator has committed an Act of treason by swearing and subscribing to an oath to serve the government of a power foreign to Australia.

To underline this, the Constitution (embraced by Australia’s parliamentarians) at section 42, dictates that all elected politicians of Australia must swear and subscribe an oath of allegiance to the current Monarch in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. (Confirmed by letter from the Parliament of Australia, House of Representatives dated 10th June 1999 under the hand of Robyn Webber, Director, Chamber Research Office.) But because the Monarch is appointed under the provisions of UK legislation and is therefore subordinate to the UK legislature (i.e. 'the Queen in Parliament') in point of legal fact, Parliamentarians, Senators and others have actually sworn an oath of allegiance to the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

Quite clearly this constitutes an act of treason against the sovereign people of Australia. The Oath appears as the Schedule to the Act and being outside “the Constitution” is beyond the reach of Section 128 (the referendum section), and thus, could not have been altered by any authority outside of the UK Parliament!

Further, The 'Queen of Australia' is purely titular. If indeed such an Office exists at all it does so without
legal authority.

Since the U.K. Bill of Rights of 1688, the Act of Settlement of 1701, and the Act of Union 1706, the U.K.
Monarch has been appointed, first by the English Parliament and then, by the UK Parliament.

The Queen is a ‘Statutory Monarch’.

She has no powers separate from the UK Parliament. In fact her official, descriptive title is ‘The Queen in Parliament’. In her Office, the ‘Queen’ has no legal power to make decisions. She may only endorse
and/or carry out decisions made by the Ministers that appointed her. (see, http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page4682.asp)

Further, the monarch has no executive function within the (British) Commonwealth of Nations, her role being purely titular: see http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page4678.asp)

This fact was recognised by the Federal Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia.

“…the plain truth is that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second sits on the throne not because of some law of Australia but because of the law of the United Kingdom. She sits there by virtue of two acts of parliament.

he first is the act of Settlement of 1701: the second is the Abdication Act, which signalized the
departure of Edward VIII. from the throne and the installation of His late Majesty King George VI. in 1936.

Therefore, in the literal, legal sense the Queen is Queen of Canada and of South Africa and of New Zealand, and so on, because she is Queen of the United Kingdom. We have no act of succession.”

Mr. Robert Menzies, Australian Prime Minister as recorded in Hansard 18th of February, 1953 at p.55.

In 1973, in her private life as Mrs Elizabeth Windsor (for she had no authority from the UK Parliament which possessed no power with regard to matters relating to an independent Australia), she chose to amuse Gough Whitlam, the then Prime Minister of Australia, by signing the Royal Styles and Titles Act 1973, which repealed the Royal Styles and Titles Act 1953, and ‘created’ the “Queen of Australia”.

Such an Office does not exist in UK law or, in particular, under the 'Australian' Constitution.

‘An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia’ is UK law and by definition (clause 2 of the Act) the only Monarch that the Constitution (clause 9 of the Act) recognises is the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Thus, even if it could be established that the ‘Australian’ Constitution has valid application, any law made under the Commonwealth Constitution or State and Territory Constitutions could and cannot be given valid Royal assent by a Governor-General or Governor appointed by and representing a purely titular “Queen of Australia”: see the Royal Styles and Titles Act 1973 (Cth) http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rsata1973258/

Further, taking into account the full content of that Act, even if it had been possible to alter the Constitution so that it recognised the “Queen of Australia”, a referendum under section 128 relating to the adoption of such an Office would have been necessary. Such a referendum was never conducted!

Attempts to "patch up the Constitutional mess" continued the concealment of the truth from the Australian people Adopting the Statute of Westminster 1931 (UK) in 1942, and making it commence retroactively from the 3rd September 1939, was an attempt to rule out any illegality of Australia’s involvement in WWII. The Statute was adopted at the time the newly appointed Prime Minister was declaring war on Japan, and the Australian Parliament needed to be sure of it's power to do so. (It is understood that the American government at this time also had an interest in the ability of Australia to legally declare war).

The concealment continues with 2 more documents. The first such document being "The Letters Patent Relating to her Office of Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia" which was gazetted on the 24th August 1984 after being signed 3 days earlier at Balmoral in the United Kingdom. Under UK law, the writs of the sovereign die with the sovereign. But when Queen Victoria died on the 21st January, 1900, no new Letters Patent were issued until August 1984! This was 4 – 5 monarchs later and more than eight decades late. These Letters Patent also had a clause to cover any 'invalid' Commission or appointment or any action taken by someone so commissioned or appointed without authority. This is the effect of clause VII.

The next document(s) created to continue the concealment of Australia’s constitutional problems was the passage of the Australia Acts through both the UK and the Australian Parliaments in 1985, to commence in 1986. Contrary to international law, both of these Acts attempt to infringe the sovereignty of another nation, were not registered to have extra-territorial effect as is required under the Charter of the United Nations and consequently, can not be relied on in any international forum! Notwithstanding the international status of the Australia Act 1986 (Cth), the preamble and several clauses clearly indicate that British colonial law is continuing to be applied in sovereign independent Australia, and that paradoxically, from the commencement of that Act, all such colonial law, as well
as the UK government, is to have no effect within Australia. If this was not the case, than there would not have been any need to have an Australia Act, let alone 2 of them.

There are several major structural problems associated with the Australia Act (Cth), and since it is continually referred to in Australian judicial decisions, it is worthwhile noting these problems.

First, it does not remove all existing British law used in Australia. It only refers to new British law. Any Australian lawyer can testify that the Commonwealth and State Statute books are pregnant with British law, the most obvious being the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK).

Second, the termination of British law in Australia - that was supposed to occur with this Act - when challenged within Australia, has to be determined in a court which is dependent for its existence on the very same British law! Third, Australia continues to have a monarch who derives her power from the British Parliament, and she remains the Executive Head of Government of the 6 Australian States. So, to exercise her power in those States, her power must still be seen as an extension of the power of the UK Parliament.

Finally, at the very time that the Australia Acts became law in Australia - to prevent the UK Government from interfering in Australian matters (see also Sue v Hill HCA 30 of 1999) - the Letters Patent relating to the Governors of South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia were signed off by none other than Sir Anthony Derek Maxwell Oulton, KCB, QC, MA, Ph.D., Permanent Secretary, Lord Chancellors Office, UK Parliament!

Grasp this simple point: an Australian can be elected to the Australian Parliament unanimously, they can propose a law that has the support of every Australian and receives a unanimous vote of acceptance in the Australian parliament – BUT that Bill of law cannot become an Act of law until such time as it receives royal ascent from a Governor-General or State Governor appointed to that Office by a distant, sour, emotionally-crippled old woman half a world away who has herself been appointed not by God or hereditary but by the British parliament at Westminster. An analogous situation would be the American government being unable to pass legislation without the signature of royal ascent from an individual appointed by the princess of Burundi! Free, independent and sovereign nation?

I don’t think so!

Recent confirmations establish invalidity of the political and judicial system currently being applied in
Australia.

While all of this is relevant and pertinent, it is as well to be aware that on 19th December 1997 the Office of Legal Council of the General Secretariat of the United Nations volunteered and thus confirmed that Australia has been a sovereign State from the 24th October 1945 at the latest. (This was stated by letter dated 19th December 1997, from the Acting Director and Deputy to the Under-Secretary-General, Office of the Legal Counsel, under the hand of Paul C. Szasz.)

On the 5th November 1999, the UK Government through its High Commission in Canberra, volunteered and thus confirmed that the UK British Nationality Act, 1948 legislated that Australia was not a protectorate of the United Kingdom, so both the UN and the UK had confirmed that Australia is a independent sovereign nation State. (This was stated by letter dated 5th November 1999, from the Chief Passport Examiner, British High Commission, Canberra, under the hand of Mrs Carole Turner.)

As a consequence, under both international and UK law, the UK Parliament’s The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900 (UK) has been ultra vires in relation to Australia for more than half a century – at least! So, for purposes of definition and resolution there is no fundamental need to look any further back into history.

It is also most pertinent to note that on the 6th November 1999 the entire people of Australia, by referendum, had for the first time the opportunity to have their say regarding the acceptance or otherwise of the Constitution under which they are governed. They overwhelmingly rejected the 'Preamble to the Constitution' question which included,

“We the Australian people commit ourselves to this Constitution”

(The proposition was rejected in every State and Territory of Australia on a national basis of 60.66% to 39.34%.)

Thus the question must now be asked: "How could Australian parliaments possibly continue to exist under the terms of a Constitution to which the people have refused to be committed?"

So it is that the Australian Parliament; relying for its existence, as it does, on a law which can not have application in Australia, remains a puppet, in legal terms, of the United Kingdom Parliament. The only way Australian Commonwealth Bills of law can be allegedly passed into Acts of law is by having these assented to in the name of a Monarch, who has no legal standing in any forum anywhere in the world!

Clause 2 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act rules that, for the purposes of that Act, all references to the Queen lay in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

However, the Anglo-Irish Treaty of December 1921, which was ratified on 15th January 1922, brought into existence the Irish Free State. In 1937 the Irish Free State became the Republic of Eire. Hence, "Ireland" ceased to exist as a legal entity on 15th January 1922.

At the same time, the sovereignty of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland ceased to exist.

The establishment of the new sovereignty of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland was formalised through the United Kingdom Parliament’s Royal and Parliamentary Titles Act 1927. The United Kingdom would constitute an international joke if at the beginning of the 21st Century it masqueraded as still existing in the 80 year defunct sovereignty of Great Britain and Ireland! But every Australian Parliamentarian; Senator, and Judge swears and subscribes an oath to the Monarch in the same 84 year obsolete sovereignty!

Effectively, this results in a legal limbo any independent observer would conclude is bizarre (and many in the know do).

In short, the Australian Parliament is not a valid organ representing the Sovereignty of the Commonwealth of Australia and can not pass any laws which can have valid application within Australia, or anywhere else for that matter. The only law that can have valid application in Australia is international law, and possibly the common law of Australia.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is a fundamental and urgent need to place before the Australian citizenry a new, if interim, Constitution under which they are prepared to be governed with a view to allowing the appropriate mechanisms to be established which will enable a democratically decided Constitution to be agreed to and implemented.

The Institute of Taxation Research and its sister organization, the Institute of Constitutional Education and Research became public bodies in the later half of the 1990s. From that time these organizations never hid or sought to hide their materials or agenda. Much to the chagrin of conspiracy theorists, these bodies were transparent in their intentions. Any number of letters was forwarded, an inter-net webpage was established (and later closed down by government agencies), lectures given and articles published in a number of less well read magazines – both academic and popular.

In 1999 a 2 volume, 480 page Submission was forwarded by courier to the individual Member States of the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Human Rights Commission and the International Criminal Commission, all of the United Nations. Copies of this 2 volume Submission were forwarded to Australia’s Chief Justices, academics, media professionals and a number of other prominent Australians.

This Submission was principally comprised of annexures consisting of, amongst other things, legislation,
Australian court decisions (including a decision of the High Court of Australia) and correspondence to and from Departments of the United Kingdom government. This material not only fleshed out, but proved the matters raised within the more limited body of the Report.

This two volume, 480 pages Submission was reprinted in soft-back book form as one volume of 455 pages. Again, this publication was forwarded to a number of prominent Australians together with copies to Australian libraries and members of the media: see www.members.westnet.com.au/unrealneil

The fact that the international media never published these matters is explicable. As was explained by a reporter for one such media group, ‘Australia is a farm and quarry and the people who own and operate these ventures are not even Australians, so it is easier for me to prepare two Australian sports stories a day.’

The fact that the so called mainstream Australian media never seriously examined, let alone published, the matters raised and which at great expense had been disseminated, should give pause for thought! Perhaps this indictment says as much about the Australian media as it does about the Australian population!

That significant sections of the Australian media knew, or ought to have known, about the important issues raised is beyond question. Investigative journalism within the electronic media of Australia has become conspicuous, but only by its absence. Television and, to a lesser extent, radio news is uniform in its coverage and treatment which provides politicians and reporters with a mutually satisfactory operation which allows the politicians’ processed messages to be broadcast without too much effort on anyone’s part.

That lawyers and judicial officers knew, or ought to have known, is also beyond question. The simple facts are:

1. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900 (UK) is the legislation from which all Australian legislation – State, Territorial and Federal – gets its validity. Moreover, that Act provides the basis for all of the various Australian courts to be established or to continue functioning. Indeed, the States themselves are the creation of this statute of the United Kingdom parliament at Westminster!

2. Like medical practitioners and the human body, lawyers are properly expected to have a reasonable
understanding of the legal system before inclination or circumstances cause them to specialize (or settle down to conveyancing). The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900 (UK) is for lawyers practicing within Australia the basis of the system within which they operate and this alone relieves them of any effective excuse they can proffer in support of their ignorance or inaction.

3. That judges of both the High Court and Federal Court of Australia deal, almost on a daily basis, with
constitutional law places them in a special and invidious position. Rather than seeking to impartially
interpret and apply the law, the judges of the High Court of Australia – to varying degrees from Justices Gleeson and Hayne to Kirby – compromised the trust of the Australian People. The same can be said for a number of Federal Court judges, the late Justice Kenneth Hill in particular.

I once again thank you for your interest in this matter and assure you that every claim and accusation within this document can be substantiated and justified with official evidence or with further information.

Yours sincerely,
Wayne Levick B.A. LL.B
+612 4305 2214
waynelevick @ yahoo.com

----------------------------------------------

The Commonwealth of Australia’s armed forces during World War I displayed a fighting ability, courage, and endurance which made them a legend wherever they fought. All of them were volunteers.

Sixty-one thousand, seven hundred and twenty of them died and ennoble the soils of France and Gallipoli. Over 155,000 of them were wounded. All carried the scars of war for life as a badge of honour.

“…By this recognition Australia became a nation, and entered into a family of nations on a footing of equality.

We had earned that, or, rather, our soldiers had earned it for us. In the achievement of victory they had played their part and no nation has a better right to be represented than Australia…” Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia, William Morris Hughes House of Representatives 10th September 1919.

Attachments

1. Greg Ray’s Taxing time when it comes to independence as published in the Newcastle Herald on Friday, 20th of October, last. This provides some simplified background.

2. Peter Gillies article with contact details for Peter. This article is based upon the ‘Australian’ constitution being valid law. An Affidavit from an accredited British Legal Researcher concerning Orders in Council of the Privy Council as these Orders relate to Australia is expected by Monday, 29th inst.

3. The Bill Bolton pamphlet contains relevant internet references, including Australia: The Concealed
Colony. This is a large volume owing to the Annexures included by way of substantiation.

4. Australia Revealed was originally drafted by Frank Coningham. It provides historical background.

5. James Kidner’s response dated 4th of January, 2005 to my letter to Charles, Prince of Wales.

6. James Kidner’s 21st of February, 2005 response to my letter to Charles, Prince of Wales.

Support The Love For Life Campaign, Kindom & The Cristian Family

Supporting The Love For Life Website, The Cristian Family and The Living Dream Of Kindom (Creation Of Do No Harm Communities) - The Love for Life website is produced for free without a fee (no contract or conditions attached) as a gift of love for the benefit of others. If you feel you have gained something from visiting it, feel inspired, and would like to reciprocate as an equal exchange in substance and support (value), you are most welcome to make a gift of love to keep it and the dream of Kindom going. As always, we thank you for your gifts of love.

Additional Options

Bank:
Account name:
BSB:
Account number:
SWIFT BIC Code:
Australia New Zealand Banking Group (ANZ)
Fiona Caroline Cristian
012 547
5576 81376
ANZBAU3M

PAY PAL

Go To Your Pay Pal Account To Send Gifts To action @ loveforlife.com.au
Additional Options

 

The Cristian Family November 2006

We Stand For NO SYSTEM

Kindom (Do No Harm Communities) is the dream for freedom, but it is the dream for the freedom of those around us who also live the dream of freedom, because it is in living for the freedom of others that we get our freedom. When we live for the dreams of Kindom of those around us, we live life as a gift because we live for (dedicate our lives to) their dream of freedom, truth, peace, joy, abundance, etc, just as they live for our Kindom dreams too. This is true co-creation (cooperation) with no attack on the uniqueness of each of us. When we live this way, we have no need for any man-made system - everything/everyone has already been taken care of by our love for life.

Just as we do not have to jump 10 feet across the room to grab our next breath, neither do we have to worry about food, water and shelter because it has all been taken care of as we each co-create Kindoms/Kin-Domains for everyone. Now everybody and everything of the dream of life that is Kindom/Paradise is free (has been set free once again). The issue is greed and selfishness, power and control trips, arrogance, ignorance, being fed many many lies and being traumatised. The issue is not overpopulation - there is more than enough land available for every family to have a hectare (2.5 acres Kin-Domain) to care for. The land of Australia can provide a Kin-Domain for every family across Earth, each with a food forest, clean fresh drinking water and plenty of space for building natural do no harm habitats and with plenty of land left over.

Everyone must have the freedom to take full-responsibility for their lives, for the water they drink, the food they eat and for their shelter. Currently, "The System" forces everyone to give up taking full-responsibility so that we become grown up children accustomed to sucking on the nipples of "The System" corporations for everything, having to use money to get by and to follow the rules of money because we are not co-creating freedom, peace, truth, joy and abundance for each other. Money only leads to haves and have nots and all the abuse, manipulation and distractions that we are subjected to as slaves to money.

When we give up living for other's Kindom dreams, we start creating hell ("The System") all around us because we become self-centred - now it's all about "my freedom","my money", "my land", "my belief", "my saviour", "mine", "mine","mine", "i","i", "i", "own", "own", "own", etc. To protect what we claim we own requires a man-made system with FORCE to protect those self-centred claims. This is ALL trauma based and all story-telling (brainwashing/braindirtying).

NO SYSTEM = KINDOM/DO NO HARM COMMUNITIES
NO SYSTEM = KINDOM/DO NO HARM COMMUNITIES photo Kindom_zpsa6d24e8a.jpg

Our true freedom comes when we set our thoughts of freedom into motion so that we live freedom rather than just talking and thinking about it while we still slave for "The System". Kindom will not happen while we meditate for hours in the bush or do yoga retreats or wait for Jesus or follow the processes of the OPPT (One People's Public Trust now called One People). This is not freedom because we are not living freedom because we are living the story-telling of Jesus or Zeitgeist or The Secret or Thrive or One Earth/Consciousness/People.

Living Kindom is very, very hard work as we set about repairing the damage to MAN/Earth/Nature that we are ALL responsible for but the burden becomes lighter the more of us put our life-energy into the dream of returning Earth to Paradise. Day-after-day, we all have to work our arses off until Kindom is all around us (MAN) once again. This is the price we pay to set each other free on a piece of land (Kin-Domain), so that no one is under the image-power (education/brainwashing/story-telling) of another MAN anymore and so that everyone can have their space of love to create and live their unique, do no harm dreams. This only happens once we have the Kindoms set up so that everyone is provided for.

Once we re-create the food forests, whether on land or in the suburbs, we can re-claim our freedom, breaking the strangle-hold of "The System" because we are no longer reliant on its services and benefits and no longer turning each other into slaves of "The System", cogs in the wheels of "The System" machine. If we don't put the effort in to set everyone and everything free all around us then we still live in HELL ("The System"). The key is to live for everyone else's freedom so that we can have it too.

From Bare Dirt To Abundance
A Year In The Life Of The
Love For Life Food Forest

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
8th February 2013
51 Minutes 46 Seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sJCcCvZ97A

From Bare Dirt To Abundance Part Two A
5th November 2014
http://youtu.be/TPTPn8tgcPI
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8545

From Bare Dirt To Abundance Part Two B
Coming Shortly

We live for NO SYSTEM. We do not lose anything by not having a man-made system and, in fact, we gain. We gain our freedom and we gain abundance. Let go of the fear.

The Cristian Family November 2006

A Collection Of Various Love For Life Posts
Providing The Big Picture We See

Sequential Order

We ask you to NOT believe anything we say/share and instead use scrutiny like an intense blow torch and go where the logic of truth/sense takes you. This is very, very important. Put everything you believe up to the test of scrutiny to see how it stacks up. If you are true to your heart/senses and go where the logic of truth/sense takes you will find that NO belief, etc, will stand up to the test of scrutiny. They just do not stack up because they are lies/fraud.

After you have watched and read all the material and any questions are left unanswered, send us your landline number and we will use the internet phone as a free unlimited call. We are on Sydney NSW Australia time. Best times for us to chat are between 11.00am and 6.00pm.

It is critical that you fully comprehend Image Power, "Spelling", Trauma, Reaction To Trauma, Curses, Processing Curses, Full-Responsibility/Liability, Limited Liability/Responsibility (passing-the-back), Slavery, Senses/Sense vs Non-Sense/Senses, Re-Presenting Intellectual Property such as but not limited to "Name", Storytelling/Storytellers, Duality, Black-Magic, Belief, Lies, "i", All Seeing "i" (eye), etc..... These themes and others are covered over and over and over again.

If you do not comprehend these insights and are unable to use your senses to sense your way through all the non-sense/non-sensory-images that enslave MAN under their image power (darkness = "The System" = Hell), men and women will remain deeply trapped under a terrible state of trauma. Our intention is to inspire you to remedy by showing you how to move away from reacting to trauma in all its nefarious and devious forms.

IMAGE POWER
Superb Diamond Range Interviewing
Arthur & Fiona Cristian 4th February 2014
http://youtu.be/qFnuuw3kLog
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8501

His-Story/Her-Story (History)
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
2005-2007 - Re-posted July 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8529

The Dream Of Life Part 6
Under The Spell Of Intellectual Property

Arthur Cristian - 51 Minutes 52 Seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMK7CkU1ih8

Trauma Induced Fantasy
July 2013 Interview With
Jeanice Barcelo And Arthur & Fiona Cristian
http://youtu.be/CZVj-ddUoZw
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8500

The Dark Side Of The Moon
The Background To "The System"

Arthur & Fiona Cristian Interviewed By
Jahnick Leaunier, The Tru-Mon Show
24th August 2016
Love For Life - 142 Minutes
https://youtu.be/C5TViw1NLr4

Eric Dubay's Flat Earth Is A Cult
The Background To The System Part Two

Arthur & Fiona Cristian Chatting With
Jahnick Leaunier On The Tru-Mon Show
Love For Life - 31st August 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8585
154 Minutes
https://youtu.be/rCPWgEQg-2M

Eclipse Of The Sun - Video (Arthur swears in this video)
The Background To The System Part Three
Arthur & Fiona Cristian Chatting With
Jahnick Leaunier On The Tru-Mon Show
Love For Life - 25th October 2016
https://youtu.be/FMOsOi1kNRc

The "Name" Is The Mark Of The Beast
The Strawman Identifying
Your Slave Status In "The System"

By Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
5th February 2012 - 56 Minutes 25 Seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdOag66v7uo

The Satanic Craft Of Inculcation In Practice
Fiona's ACT Supreme Court Affidavit Explaining Inculcation & Illumination
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
4th March 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8578

The Spinning Top
Full Bloom Inculcation

Arthur And Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
Facebook Discussions Between The
8th December 2016
And
26th January 2017
Link: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/16/03/04/satanic-craft-inculcation-pra...

The Shit Of Death
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
28th January 2017
Link: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/16/03/04/satanic-craft-inculcation-pra...

The Selfie Of Freakenstein
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
17th March 2017
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8588

Three Sets Of Fiona Cristian Documents Filed With ACAT
Merged Into One Document For Downloading
https://www.scribd.com/document/327370355/Fiona-Cristian-Affidavit-ACT-S...

Fiona Cristian Affidavit
ACT Supreme Court / Court Of Appeal

https://www.scribd.com/doc/316218306/Three-Sets-of-Fiona-Cristian-Docume...

Dancing With Magic (Lies)
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Videos, Articles, Comments
And Pending E-Book
Love Fort Life
September 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8575

Dancing With Magic Part One
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
5th September 2015
https://youtu.be/hx7qJ7r2OS4

Dancing With Magic Part Two
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
12th September 2015
https://youtu.be/b_KuEFdKmnA

Dancing With Magic Part Three
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
13th September 2015
https://youtu.be/9pJc1NfnAcI

Dancing With Magic (Lies) Part Four:
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
16th September 2015
https://youtu.be/kSVURGwm1Go

Introduction To Kindom Video
By Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
6th March 2015
https://youtu.be/7SspPm9wRgo

To Be Educated Is To Have No Soul
The System Is Soul Destroying

Frederick Malouf & Michael Tellinger's
Contrived Gifting
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
1st September 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8586

Illumination IS Definition
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
26th to 29th January 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8577

IMAGE POWER
The Nefarious Tactics Used
To Disguise Truth And Distract Us
From Remedy

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
24th January 2014
This post contains many recent Facebook comments
and email replies which collectively provides a big picture
into exposing the deception behind IMAGE POWER.
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8496

The Pull Of E-Motion
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
8th February 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8499

Processing Curses
A Lie Is A Curse
Liars Process Curses

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
26th February 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8503

How The System Is Really Constructed
Bouncing Back Curses Upon Curse Makers
To Stop Harm Forevermore

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
27th February 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8504

Slave To A Name
Parts One, Two, Three, Four,
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
3rd to 6th March 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8505

Educated Slaves
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
20th March 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8506

The Only Path To Freedom
Beware The False Steps

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 2nd April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8508

Free-Dumb For All
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 5th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8510

Revoking The Ego
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 8th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8511

How MAN Commits Spiritual Suicide
Arthur Cristian
Love For Life - 3rd April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8509

How To Detect Intel Operatives Working
For The New World Order Agenda
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 10th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8512

How The Psyop Program & Intel Networks
Are Messing With Your Head +
His-Story/Her-Story

Arthur & Fiona Cristian - April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8513

Godzilla Through The Looking Glass
Destroyed By Name"

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 20th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8514

What It's Going To Take
To Co-Create Freedom Forevermore

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 22nd April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8514

Falling For Fairy Stories
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 24th April 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8514

A Disassociation From The Work
Of Kate of Gaia

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 17th May 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8517

Separating The Wheat From The Chaff
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 22nd May 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8516

Revolution Or Revolution
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 25th May 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8520

Routing Out Psyop Programs
Routs Out Intel Operatives
Exposing Max Igan's Psyop Program

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 31st May 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8524

The Psyop Program Scam
Behind Religion Belief Faith
& Associated Opinion

Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
11th June 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8525

Another Delusion
Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
11th June 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8526

A World Of Words Is A World Of Lies
Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
13th June 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8527

E-MAN
The Name Of The Beast Is MAN

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 9th May 2014
Includes Mountain MAN Arrested
Facebook Discussion About "Name"
Uploaded 25th June 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8528

E-Motion
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 13th August 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8537

Discussion With Brother Gregory
Clearly Demonstrating Christianity
Is Part Of The Problem
And Not The Solution

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
Between the 12th May 2014 and 30th August 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8542

The Psyop Program Behind Free Food
And Permaculture

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
29th October 2014
Facebook Discussion With Unconditional Love Moon
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8544

Head So Strong
Music and Vocals Arthur Cristian
Backing Vocals and Vocal Effects Arthur Cristian & Hannah Wood
Lyrics Fiona and Arthur Cristian
Written during our spare time between Aug & Oct 2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG4UQCTsqwU

The Time Of Trauma That Destroys Us
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
9th November 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8547

The Most Powerful Video On Spirituality
And Happiness FOR SLAVES
Or
How To Accept Slavery And Be Happy About It

Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
6th August 2014
Facebook Discussion About The Work Of Eckhart Tolle
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8548

What Can We Do What Can We See
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
A series of Arthur Cristian Facebook
posts and discussions
between 17th and 21st November 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8552

The Misuse Of Love By Intel Networks
To Create Doubt And Uncertainty
With The Intention To Destroy Love
And Therefore Destroy MAN
(True Freedom, Peace, Joy, Abundance And Truth
For Everyone)

By Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
26th November 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8554

The Void Of E-GO That Is Spiritual Suicide
The Justification Of Laziness
That Perpetuates System Creature Comforts
Ensuring Our Fall

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
13th December 2014
Massive Update Occurred 14th Dec 2014 3.10pm Sydney Aust time
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8556

Darkness Visible Part One A, B, C, D
The Freemasonic World In Plain Sight
Decoding George Washington Lithographs

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
14th December 2014
Part One A http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8557
Part One B http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8567
Part One C http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8568
Part One D http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8569

Darkness Visible Part Two
Yin And Yang, Duality, Spiritual Suicide
And Frank O'Collins UCADIA / One Heaven

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
14th December 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8558

Darkness Visible Part Three
How The Word Sausage
Re-Presents The New World Order
Boiling Point & Out To Get Us

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
27th December 2014
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8560

Darkness Visible Part Four
Aleister Crowley - Thelema - OTO
And The Black Magic Psychedelia Of The Intellect

Facebook Discussion
4th to 10th January 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8561

Darkness Visible Part Five
Living MAN Fiona Cristian's Standing
+ Decoding Judeo/Judaism

Fiona Cristian & Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
24th January 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8562

Darkness Visible Part Six
The Many Fingers Of The Hidden Hand Appearing
YouTube Community Flagged A Video
Posted To The ArthurLoveForLife YouTube Channel
As Being "Hate Speech"

Fiona Cristian & Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
4th February 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8563

Darkness Visible Part Seven
The Full Responsibility For Setting
True Freedom For All Into Motion
In Present-Sense Forevermore

Fiona Cristian & Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
10th February 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8564

Who We Really Are Does Not End
At The Surface Of Our Skin

Arthur Cristian & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 22nd February 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8565

Introduction To Kindom Video
By Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
6th March 2015
https://youtu.be/7SspPm9wRgo

The Rot Parts One, Two, Three
Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
5th June 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8571

"The Good Guys" And The "Bad Guys"
Working Together To Bring In
The New World Order

Arthur Cristian - 18th July 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8572

Can You Spot The Ego?
Where's Wally? Part One

Compilation of Facebook & Youtube
Insight Posts During Aug/Sept 2015
By Arthur Cristian
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8573

Can You Spot The Ego?
Where's Wally? Part Two

Compilation of Facebook & Youtube
Insight Posts During Aug/Sept 2015
By Arthur Cristian
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8576

Dancing With Magic (Lies)
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Videos, Articles, Comments
And Pending E-Book
Love Fort Life
September 2015
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8575

Dancing With Magic Part One
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
5th September 2015
https://youtu.be/hx7qJ7r2OS4

Dancing With Magic Part Two
Arthur Cristian - Love For Life
12th September 2015
https://youtu.be/b_KuEFdKmnA

Dancing With Magic Part Three
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
13th September 2015
https://youtu.be/9pJc1NfnAcI

Dancing With Magic (Lies) Part Four:
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
16th September 2015
https://youtu.be/kSVURGwm1Go

Illumination IS Definition
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
26th to 29th January 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8577

The Satanic Craft Of Inculcation In Practice
Fiona's ACT Supreme Court Affidavit Explaining Inculcation & Illumination
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
4th March 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8578

The Dark Side Of The Moon
The Background To "The System" Part One

Arthur & Fiona Cristian Chatting With
Jahnick Leaunier On The Tru-Mon Show
Love For Life - 24th August 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8583

Eric Dubay's Flat Earth Is A Cult
The Background To The System Part Two

Arthur & Fiona Cristian Chatting With
Jahnick Leaunier On The Tru-Mon Show
Love For Life - 31st August 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8585

To Be Educated Is To Have No Soul
The System Is Soul Destroying
Frederick Malouf & Michael Tellinger's
Contrived Gifting

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
1st September 2016
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8586

New Love For Life Kindom Facebook Group
Started March 2015
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1434747556816918
Includes 63 Minute
Introduction To Kindom Video
https://youtu.be/7SspPm9wRgo
By Arthur & Fiona Cristian
and
Facebook Kindom Group Guidelines
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8566
The Love For Life website home-page provides
the bigger-picture background to the themes
touched on in this video: http://loveforlife.com.au

Crop Circles Are A Massive Hoax
Facebook Discussion On Simon Kawai's Wall
Involving Arthur & Fiona Cristian
31st August 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8470

OPPT & Slavery Through Intellectual Conscription By Deceit
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
27th February 2013 onwards...
Part One: http://youtu.be/Qjp_9nlrBao
Part Two: http://youtu.be/tbybeOWZ-Bc
Part Three: http://youtu.be/yOWoxH-HbVw

Water Is The Life Of MANS Consciousness (Breath)
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life - 8th February 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8350
Part One: http://youtu.be/4ze66_33wxM - 70 Minutes 5 Seconds
Part Two: http://youtu.be/43gIi-sjxJc - 81 Minutes 13 Seconds
Part Three: http://youtu.be/oooY6W63K-M - 70 Minutes 18 Seconds

What Do You Believe On Origins?
Who Said There Was A Beginning?
Who's Truth Do You Accept?
Belief Is A Strange Idea.

Discussion Lyndell, Scott and Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Between March and April 2013
Posted 29th October 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8487

So You Want The Good Bits Of "The System"
But Not The Bad Bits?

By Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life - 12th August 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8468

Turning Away From The Reflection
Of MANS Looking Glass

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
30th April 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8404

REMEDY

From Bare Dirt To Abundance
A Year In The Life Of The
Love For Life Food Forest

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
8th February 2013
51 Minutes 46 Seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sJCcCvZ97A

From Bare Dirt To Abundance Part Two
5th November 2014
http://youtu.be/TPTPn8tgcPI
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8545

From Bare Dirt To Abundance Part Three
7th March 2016
60 Minutes
https://youtu.be/SH9i8ZStzWI

Love For Life Food Forest & Native Garden March 2016
Extension Of The Love For Life Food Forest And Establishment
Of A New Native Garden At The Front Of The Rental Property
In East Bowral - 24th October 2015 to Mid February 2016.
15 Minutes
https://youtu.be/y-Uz8HmnSIM

Control The Land
And You Control MAN On The Land
Displace MAN From Land
And You Turn MAN Into Slaves

Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
April 2011 (Updated 14th September 2011)
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8237

The Divine Spark
Facebook Discussion With Raymond Karczewski
Arthur & Fiona Cristian & Others
2nd October 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8483

Capturing Another MANS Uniqueness
A Facebook Debate With
Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
And Raymond Karczewski
Starting 13th May 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8414

The Spell Is Broken
Taking The Land To Create Kindom

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
3rd March 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8365

The Steps Of Kindom
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life 2006/2007
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8304

To explore these themes in greater detail go here where you can find links to all our Love For Life comments, articles, debates, discussions, videos, podcasts, etc: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3385

All the best
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life

Website: http://loveforlife.com.au
Email : action@loveforlife.com.au
Mobile : 0011 61 418 203204 - (0418 203204)
Snail Mail: PO Box 1320 Bowral 2576 NSW Australia
Facebook Arthur Cristian : http://www.facebook.com/arthurcristian
YouTube Arthur Cristian : http://www.youtube.com/ArthurLoveForLife

Register To The Love For Life Mailing List: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/09/05/14/mailing-list

Facebook Group Why Aren't We Free Discussion : http://www.facebook.com/164918753537287
Facebook Group Kindom/Do No Harm Community Discussion : http://www.facebook.com/151811728195925

Links below will kick in when the professionally recorded Love For Life music is released.

SoundCloud : http://soundcloud.com/loveforlife
Nimbit Music : http://www.nimbitmusic.com/loveforlife
Twitter : https://twitter.com/loveforlifemusi
Facebook Music : http://www.facebook.com/loveforlifemusic
YouTube Love For Life Music : http://www.myspace.com/loveforlifemusic
MySpace : http://www.myspace.com/loveforlifemusic
Google + Fiona Cristian : https://plus.google.com/100490175160871610090

Peaceful Transition Through Sacrifice And Service

We feel there is an essential peaceful do no harm transition required to get all of MAN back to standing on MANS feet without reliance upon another MAN for water, food, shelter. As it stands everyone in "The System" are highly dependent and reliant on the "group mind-set" that forms "The System" of slaves providing services and benefits for the emotionally addicted slaves to "The System" (and you can put us in the same basket too). The transition is to get MAN back to relying ONLY on nature without 3rd party interlopers, intermeddlers, interceders getting in the way. The transition is a team effort with the foresight for setting all of MAN free down-the-line so that MAN is no longer dependent on slaves and masters providing services, benefits, privileges and exclusivity while being bound to contracts, rituals, procedures, conditions, rules & regulations which compromises MAN severely.

This transition is all about shifting from limited liability/responsibility to full liability/responsibility. This full responsibility is all about caring for our health, nature all around us, clean uncorrupted (pure) water and food, partner/co-creator, children, shelter, animal-friends in partnership, etc. In "The System", we are already together destroying each other - we have to come together to create peace together so that we can all have peace. We cannot live peacefully when we are islands, not taking full responsibility for the lives of those around us until EVERYONE can take full responsibility for their life, which means that EVERYONE is healed of system trauma. In "The System", we all come together to make slaves of each other - now is the moment to come together to set each other free, to live for each other's freedom, peace, joy and abundance. Once we have set each other free, we are free.

Control The Land
And You Control MAN On The Land
Displace MAN From Land
And You Turn MAN Into Slaves

Arthur & Fiona Cristian - Love For Life
April 2011 (Updated 14th September 2011)
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8237

The Spell Is Broken
Taking The Land To Create Kindom

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
3rd March 2013
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8365

"The Steps Of Kindom"
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8304

---------

Once we fix these issues, we or our children or our descendants to come, can start focusing on the even bigger picture of getting back to where our ancestors were, as breatharyan's, before they fell into non-sense images to be enslaved by them.

All the best to you and your family
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life

The Cristian Family November 2006

The Cristian Family Declaration

The Cristian family and The Love for Life Campaign are apolitical, non-religious, non-violent, anti weapons, anti drugs (both pharmaceutical and recreational) and anti any ideology that denies the existence of Do No Harm Communities (Kindoms) and suppresses the uniqueness and freedom of all men, women and children.

The Cristian family and our Love For Life work is unaligned to any big business corporation, intelligence agency, government body, "system" law, "system" think tanks, "system" green or environmental movements, religion, cult, sect, society (fraternity, brotherhood, sisterhood, order, club, etc,) secret or not, hidden agenda, law or sovereignty group, occult, esoteric, New Age or Old Age.

The Cristian family supports and promotes the remedy that brings an everlasting peace, freedom, truth, joy, abundance and do no harm for all of life without causing loss of uniqueness or the need for having slaves and rulers. We are not into following the one in front or being shepherds for sheeple. Most importantly, we take full-responsibility for everything we think, feel and do.

The Cristian family are not Christians.

Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life

December 2006

The Cristian Family November 2006

THE CRISTIAN FAMILY PLEDGE

Being of clear brain, heart and intention, we each declare the following to be true:

• We have no intention of ending our own lives.

• We will not tolerate suppression of truth, ideas, freedom, or our work. We stand for freedom of speech.

• We stand together to support others in the expression of truths and freedom to speak out no matter how radical those ideas may seem.

• Standing for freedom takes courage; together we shall be strong in the face of all odds.

• If it is ever claimed that we have committed suicide, encountered an unfortunate accident, died of sickness/disease, disappeared, been institutionalized, or sold out financially or in any other way to self-interested factions, we declare those claims false and fabricated.

• We testify, assert and affirm without reservation, on behalf of all those who have dedicated their lives to the ending of secrecy and the promotion of freedom of thought, ideas and expression that we shall prevail.

• We Do Not Have Multiple Personality Disorders

Arthur Cristian
Fiona Cristian
Jasmin Lily Cristian
Emma Rose Cristian
Frances Hannah Cristian
Xanthe Jane Cristian

15th December 2006 (Edited/Updated 18th September 2011)

The Cristian Family November 2006

Update Regarding The Love For Life
Home Page And Quick User Guide

We are turning the Love for Life Quick User Guide http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6608 into a blog of all the main insights of our work since March 2005, whether through articles, videos, podcasts or discussions/debates.

As we do not have the time to compile everything we have written into a book, as many have suggested we do, compiling all our most important work into one area of the website is a way of providing easy access to this work so those interested are able to fully comprehend the big picture.

Instead of having to find our different articles, videos, etc, in various parts of the website, it will all be accessible here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6608 and here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3385.

Love For Life Videos

As amateurs and posted in the Quick User Guide below the Facebook links, we're currently creating and posting a series of videos called "The Dream Of Life" which covers the ground of all the Love For Life insights. We plan to have the videos completed by December 31st 2012. Once this is behind us, our intention is to create a 2 hour or so video covering the body of this work. All videos are embedded in the quick user guide http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6608 and uploaded in Arthur's YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/ArthurLoveForLife.

Love For Life Music

We have started recording songs, with others, that express the themes of Love For Life. They are now being posted on Arthur's YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/ArthurLoveForLife and are embedded in the quick user guide http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6608. We have over 100 songs to record. A few rough demos have already been used as the soundtrack on the first "Dream of Life" video.

About Us - Love For Life & The Cristian Family

Also, everything we, the Cristian family, have gone through, from bank fraud and the theft of the family home to death threats and attempts on Arthur's life, is documented in the Quick User Guide too. If you, the reader, are prepared to put the effort in, you will comprehend the extent to which we have all been tricked into becoming slaves, giving up our uniqueness and our full-responsibility for life and destroying everything of life to the point where life is in danger of dying out completely. You will also comprehend the remedy to all this chaos; a remedy that requires only love for life and the determination to do what needs to be done. Though our focus is very strongly on the remedy that creates a world of freedom, truth, peace, joy, abundance and Do No Harm for all of life without loss of uniqueness or the need for slaves and rulers, we realise that it is vital to comprehend how to get there and what stops us from getting there. This is why there is so much information on the hows and whys of everything going wrong in the world today. We are not into peddling conspiracy theories, we are into routing out all forms of organised crime.

Saturday 26th November 2011

Arthur and Fiona Cristian
Love For Life

Website: http://loveforlife.com.au
Email: action@loveforlife.com.au
Mobile: 0011 61 418 203204 - (0418 203204)
Facebook Arthur Cristian: http://www.facebook.com/arthurcristian
YouTube Arthur Cristian: http://www.youtube.com/ArthurLoveForLife
SoundCloud: http://soundcloud.com/loveforlife
Nimbit Music: http://www.nimbitmusic.com/loveforlife
Twitter: https://twitter.com/loveforlifemusi
Facebook Music: http://www.facebook.com/loveforlifemusic
Facebook Why Aren't We Free Discussion: http://www.facebook.com/164918753537287
Facebook Do No Harm Community: http://www.facebook.com/151811728195925
YouTube Love For Life Music: http://www.myspace.com/loveforlifemusic
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/loveforlifemusic
Google + Fiona Cristian: https://plus.google.com/100490175160871610090
Register To The Love For Life Mailing List: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/09/05/14/mailing-list

1. For The Body Of The Love For Life Work by Arthur and Fiona Cristian

Which Unravels The Reasons For The Chaos, Mayhem and Confusion Being Experienced In The World Today, Explains The Need For "Community Immunity" and Responsibility, and Focuses On The Creation Of Kindoms - Do No Harm, Life-Sustainable Communities (As The Remedy That Heals All Mans Woes) - And How We Can Co-Create Them. For Comments, Articles And Discussions, Go Here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3385 - Also Go Here To See Podcasts And Videos Posted by Arthur & Fiona Cristian: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/7309 - The Information Shared Comes From Inspiration, Intuition, Heartfelt-Logic And Information Gathered From Nature And Many Amazing Men And Women Along The Way. It Is Not Found In Any Books Or Channellings, Or Talked About By "Experts". Go Here To Read A Brief Synopsis Of Why We Started Love For Life: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8182

2. For Information About The Ringing Cedars of Russia Series

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/1125 and for more on Eco Homes, Villages, Organic and Permaculture Gardening and Life-Sustainability, etc, go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3641 and here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/1985 and Mikhail Petrovich Shchetinin - Kin's School - Lycee School at Tekos: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5173

3. For How To Eat A Raw, Living Food Diet,

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5068 - LIFE is information. When we distort LIFE and then eat, drink, absorb, think, feel, hear, see, touch, taste, smell and perform these distortions, the information of LIFE, your LIFE, our LIFE, our children's lives, everyone's LIFE, is distorted.

4. To Find A Menu For The Extensive Research Library (over 8,000 items posted embodying over 11,000 documents, pdf's, videos, podcasts, etc)

Which Covers Topics From Health to Chemtrails/Haarp to Brain Control to Archaeology to Astronomy Geocentricity Heliocentricity to Pandemics Bird Flu Swine Flu to Fluoride to Cancer to Free Energy to Global Warming, 9/11, Bali Bombings, Aspartame, MSG, Vaccinations, Aids/HIV, Mercury, New World Order, Satanism, Religions, Cults, Sects, Symbolism, etc, etc, go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/82

5. If You Would Like To Read About The Cristian Family NSW Supreme Court Case

(Macquarie Bank/Perpetual Limited Bank Fraud Condoned By Judges, Registrars, Barristers, Lawyers, Politicians, Public Servants, Bureaucrats, Big Business and Media Representatives - A Crime Syndicate/Terrorist Organisation) Which Prompted The Creation Of This Love For Life Website December 2006, And The Shooting And Torture Of Supporters Who Assisted Us In Reclaiming The Family Home, Joe Bryant And His Wife, Both In Their Late 70's, go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5 And Read Some Of Our Email Correspondence With Lawyer Paul Kean - Macedone Christie Willis Solari Partners - Miranda Sydney May 17th-June 27th 2006: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/7300

6. For The Stories Of Other Victims Of The System,

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/australian_stories (If you have a story you would like us to put up, we would love to here from you:
action @ loveforlife.com.au)

7. For Documentation Of Harm Done By The Powers-That-Be And Their Representatives,

Evidence Revealing How Victims Did Not Break The Peace, Caused No Crime or Harm, There Were No Injured Parties. Documenting Incontrovertible Evidence Demonstrating How The Powers That Be (PTB) And Their Lackeys Will Break All The Laws They Are Supposed To Uphold. They Will Kidnap, Intimidate, Terrorise, Rape, Pillage, Plunder And Lie And Take Responsibility For None Of It. All Part Of Their Tactics Of Using Fear And Trauma To Keep Us In Our Place. Relatives Of Those Under Their Radar Are Also Not Safe From Attack And Intimidation. All Starting From A $25 Fine For Not Voting And A $65 Fine For Not Changing A Dog Registration. We Do Not Have Freedom And Can Only Appear To Have Freedom If We Comply. Regardless How Small The Matter The PTB Throw Hundreds Of Thousands Of Dollars Away To Enforce Their Will.... Go Here:
Fiona Cristian Reply To State Debt Recovery Office - Part One to Part Ten - From 17th October 2008 And Still Continuing:
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6319 or
Fiona Cristian Reply To State Debt Recovery Office
Part One: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5742 - From 17th October 2008
Part Two: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6135 - From 18th December 2008
Part Three: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6295 - From 9th January 2009
Part Four: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6296 - From 14th January 2009
Part Five: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6375 - The Sick Puppy - From 20th February 2009
Part Six: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6390 - Police Officers, Sheriff’s Officers, Tow Truck Driver and State Debt Recovery Office Blatantly Ignore the Law To Rape, Pillage and Plunder The Private Property Of Fiona Cristian - From 11th March 2009
Part Seven: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6445 - Affidavit Of Truth - Letter To The Queen + Australia: Fascism is Corporatism - From 30th March 2009
Part Eight: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6652 - The Pirates Auction And The Ghost Of VSL386 - From 4th April 2009
Part Nine: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/7073 - Arthur Cristian's Letter To Pru Goward MP - From 15th December 2009
Part Ten: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/7500 - Should We Be In Fear Of Those Who Claim To Protect Us? "Roman Cult" Canon Law - Ecclesiastical Deed Poll - The Work Of Frank O'Collins - From 13th October 2010

8. If You Are Interested In Information On Freedom From Statutes, Rule-Of-Law, Free Man/Free Woman, Strawman, "Person" and Admiralty Law (The Law Of Commerce),

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/895 - For Common Law, Democracy, Constitution, Trial By Jury, Fee Simple, etc, go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/category/main/law-articles-documents

9. If You Are Interested In Banking and Money Created (Fiat/Credit/Debt/Mortgage/Loan/Overdraft etc) Out-Of-Thin-Air, How Banks Counterfeit Money,

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/banks

10. For A List Of All The Latest Posts In The Love For Life Website,

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/tracker

11. For Links To Many Hundreds Of Videos, DVDs And Podcasts

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/video_dvd

12. To See The Cristian Family Pledge, Legal and other Disclaimers

go here: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/06/12/05/love-life-legal-disclaimer

13. To Read About How A Representative Of The NSW Jewish Board Of Deputies Had Threatened To Shut Down The Love For Life Website

go here: Part One: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6616 Part Two: THE STEVE JOHNSON REPORT AND VIDEO: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6665 and Part Three: Latest Update On James Von Brunn: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6673

Conscious Love Always
Arthur & Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
action @ loveforlife.com.au
www.loveforlife.com.au
0418 203204 (int: 0011 61 418 203204)
PO Box 1320 Bowral 2576 NSW Australia

Arthur Cristian

Create Your Badge

Love For Life Discussions - Why Aren't We Free? How Can We Be Free?

Promote your Page too

The Cristian Family November 2006

Love For Life Legal Disclaimer

The information contained on this world wide web site (the web site and all information herein shall be collectively referred to as "Web Site Information"), under the registered url name, loveforlife.com.au, resides on a host server environment in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15203, United States of America.

The Web Site Information has been prepared to provide general information only and is not intended to constitute or be construed as providing substantive professional advice or opinion on any facts or circumstances. Transmission of the information is not intended to create, nor does its receipt give rise to, a professional-client relationship between 'Love for Life' and the receiver.

While every care has been taken to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of the information prepared and/or reported on this site, 'Love for Life' is not responsible for any errors or omissions or for the Web Site Information not being up to date. The Web Site Information may not reflect the most current developments.

The impact of the law, policy and/or procedure for any particular situation depends on a variety of factors; therefore, readers should not act upon any Web Site Information without seeking professional advice. 'Love for Life' is not responsible for any action taken in reliance on any Web Site Information herein.

'Love for Life' is not responsible for any action you or others take which relies on information in this website and/or responses thereto. 'Love for Life' disclaim all responsibility and liability for loss or damage suffered by any person relying, directly or indirectly, on the Web Site Information, including in relation to negligence or any other default.

'Love for Life' does not warrant, represent or hold out that any Web Site Information will not cause damage, or is free from any computer virus, defect(s) or error(s). 'Love for Life' is not liable to users for any loss or damage however caused resulting from the use of material found on its web site.

'Love for Life' does not necessarily endorse or approve of any Web Site Information linked to and contained on other web sites linked herein and makes no warranties or representations regarding the merchantability or fitness for purpose, accuracy and quality, of any such information.

The sending of information by you, and the receipt of it by 'Love for Life', is not intended to, and does not, create a professional-client relationship.

All Web Site Information is considered correct at the time of the web site's most recent revision.

ADDITIONAL DISCLAIMER

THE CRISTIAN FAMILY SUPPORTS
FREEDOM OF SPEECH - FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

The Cristian Family November 2006

Posted Wednesday 17th June 2009
Updated September 2011

NSW Jewish Board Of Deputies
Has Threatened To Shut Down
The Love For Life Website

No Freedom Of Speech - No Freedom Of Thought

Love For Life does not support harm doing in any shape or form. However, we are supporters of free speech and post articles, documentaries, etc, that represent a wide cross section of ideas. See the Love For Life extensive research library where over 6000 documents, articles and videos are posted: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/82. We clearly see the evidence of the destruction to MAN and the earth that has been caused by ALL religions over the centuries and are therefore not supporters of religions, cults, sects or any group that demands conformity of thought, speech or action, or has rules, regulations or rituals that must be followed. Religions, nationalities and cultural "identities" are formed as a result of the brainwashing we receive from childhood. They are part of the tactics the Establishment uses to keep us all divided from one another and fighting one another.

All religions promote discrimination and division, leading to hatred and even violence and murder. None of them have yet to produce a remedy to all the suffering, poverty, unhappiness and discrimination in the world. If any religion truly had the remedy to all the suffering on earth, there would no longer be any suffering. What have Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, atheism and the New Age done to end the suffering in the world?

Since December 2006, there have been many attempts to take down the Love For Life website. Any attempts have been thwarted by Love For Life supporters inundating the harm-doers with emails, etc, objecting to them taking down the website for a variety of reasons. The trouble makers usually back off when they realise that they can post all their views, arguments, beliefs, etc, in the Love For Life website without censorship or restriction imposed. They get to see that even the Queen, Pope, Prime Minister, President of America, etc, can post all their views without hindrance or sabotage and that we support freedom of speech/thought which means we support the right of all sides to express their views.

Of note, there is a vast amount of information posted in the Love For Life website which we do not agree with but we leave it all up because we refuse to be biased, opinionated or self-centered/self-serving. Of the many thousands of comments posted over the years we have only removed posts containing secret links to commercial advertisements, terrible foul language, threats of violence and death, etc, and attacks on other people's characters that avoid the subject/debate at hand. Besides links to advertisements, we have taken down less than six comments due to the above. We usually leave everything up, all warts and all, even those posts threatening to do terrible things to Fiona, our children, our dogs, our friends, family & supporters, etc.

The Love For Life website has information from all sides on many subjects, whether about Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Law, health, psychology, mind control, vaccination, aspartame, MSG, Chemtrails etc. There are over 11,000 articles, documentaries etc on the website and they are so diverse that we are sure that everyone would be able to find something they loved and something they hated, if they took the time to search. If we removed all the articles hated by everyone, there would probably be nothing left! We are not anti anyone but freedom of speech is freedom of speech and no one should condemn the work of another without taking the time to research the subject themselves. Yes, there are articles by those who have a less-than-rosy-viewpoint of Judaism, but there are also articles on the dark side of Tibetan Buddhism (and it is very dark) for those who are interested in the truth: Tibet - Buddhism - Dalai Lama: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6271 Should the authors of these articles be abused and imprisoned for daring to challenge the widely conceived reputation of Buddhism as being the religion of peace and love and that of the Dalai Lama as a saint, or should those interested be allowed to study the work and come to their own conclusions? The same applies to all the articles, documentaries, etc, about Christianity, Islam, Freemasonry, New World Order, etc.

The Love for Life website also shows how the Rule of Law, the Bar, the Government, the Monarchy, the system of commerce, the local, national and multi/trans-national private corporations, all the courses and careers on offer from our universities, all the educators, scientists, academics and experts, the aristocrats and the Establishment bloodlines have also done NOTHING to end the suffering in the world. The website maps the insanity of a world where there is no help for those in need, just as there was no help available for us when we were victims of terrible bank fraud: "NSW Supreme Court Case - Macquarie Bank/Perpetual Limited vs Fiona Cristian - Victims Of Bank Fraud Condoned By Judges" http://loveforlife.com.au/node/5 (orchestrated, condoned and protected by an international crime syndicate/terrorist organisation of judges, barristers, registrars, lawyers, politicians, banksters, big business representatives, media moguls and other lackeys who, all together, put up a wall of silence despite our trying many, many avenues. After the family home was stolen and business destroyed we were left close to poverty and destitution caring for 4 young daughters. Three years later not much has changed regardless of all our efforts. Where were all the followers of all the religions to help us? Or do we have to be members of those religions to receive help from others involved in them?

The New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies accused us of being anti - Jewish, see: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6616 and http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6665 because we had posted an excerpt from James von Brun's book: Kill the Best Gentiles: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6054 in which he blames Jews for the problems of the world. Obviously this is not our view because of what we have stated above. We do not hate anyone, whatever religion they follow. We are always open to talk to any religious leader or politician and meet with any judge, member of the Bar, experts, academics, educators etc to share the remedy we offer that heals all the divisions between MAN and MAN, and MAN and the EARTH.

Today, a representative of the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies is threatening to close the website down, because they have decided it is anti - Jewish and that we promote racism. What has the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies done to end the suffering in the world? Can they show that they are concerned with the suffering of ALL men, women and children AND ARE SEEN TO BE DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT or are they only concerned with Jewish affairs? If so, they, along with all the other religions that only care for their own, are part of the problem, not part of the solution. The man who rang Arthur today was only concerned with Jewish affairs; he was not interested in our intentions or in anybody else, just as most Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, Catholics, etc, are only interested in their own. While we separate ourselves into groups, dividing ourselves from others with rules, regulations, rituals, procedures and conditions, we will never solve our problems.

No matter what we in the Western World Civilisation of Commerce have been promised by our politicians, religious leaders, scientists, educators, philosophers, etc, for the past two hundred years, all we have seen is ever-increasing destruction of men, women and children and the earth. None of the so-called experts and leaders we have been taught to rely on are coming up with a solution and none of them are taking full-responsibility for the fact that they can't handle the problem. All religious books talk about end times full of destruction and suffering but why do we have to follow this program when there is an alternative to hatred, mayhem and death? Why are our leaders following the program of destruction and death rather than exploring the alternatives? It seems that any mainstream politician, priest or academic are only interested in supporting the RULES OF THE DIVIDE, that maintain the haves and the have nots. For 200+ years, 99% of the world population have been so trained to pass on their responsibility for themselves, others and the earth, that the 1% of the population that make up the leaders of the rest of us are making all the decisions leading to the destruction of all of us and the earth. Let's not forget the education system that brainwashes the 99% of the population that we are free and have equal rights while, in fact, we are feathering the nests of those at the top.

At the root of all our problems is self-centredness, an unwillingness nurtured by the Establishment that keeps us concerned only with our own needs rather than the needs of others around us and the Earth. Instead of creating and releasing acts of love for those around us as gifts to benefit them and the earth, we take, take and take, until there is nothing left. The whole point of the Love for Life website is to show people the root of all our problems and to share the remedy. The extensive research library is there to attract browsers and to provide access to information not available through mainstream channels. If the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies can, after careful examination of our work, prove that anything we are saying is wrong, we will be happy to accept their proof. If they cannot, and they are still insistent on closing the website down, they will be showing themselves to be traitors to MAN because they are not interested in pursuing any avenue that can end the suffering in the world.

All religions, corporations and organisations that support and maintain the Western World Civilisation of Commerce are part of the problem because our civilisation is a world of haves and have nots, racism, violence, hatred, poverty, sickness, discrimination, abuse, starvation, homelessness, corruption, collusion, vindictiveness, social unrest, arrogance, ignorance, fear, war and chaos. While we support civilisation, we support death and destruction because ALL civilisations that have ever existed are apocalyptic by design.

If we truly want peace on earth and freedom for all, we have to let go of all that which keeps us divided, and come together as MAN, conscious living co-creators of creation. The Love For Life website offers a remedy to the problems we all face in the form of DO NO HARM COMMUNITIES: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3641 For more details see here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6511 and here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3385 - We also highly recommend that everyone read the brilliant Russian books called The Ringing Cedars: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/1125 - The Love For Life Website Homepage also provides lots of inspiring remedy based information: http://loveforlife.com.au - If you want to be kept up to date with our work please register to the Love For Life Mailing List here: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/09/05/14/mailing-list. We usually send two postings per month. Presently (September 2011) there are over 7000 registrations reaching over 500,000 readers across Earth. The website now (September 2011) receives up to 12 million hits per month. Since December 2006, over 100 million people have visited the Love For Life website.

Conscious Love Always
Arthur and Fiona Cristian
Love For Life
17th June 2009

The Cristian Family November 2006

Clarification Regarding Our Intentions
Behind The Use Of Donations

The Love For Life website is offered for free without a fee and without any conditions attached. If people are inspired to donate money, then we accept their gift and have provided an avenue for them to support the work we do through Fiona's Paypal or ANZ bank account http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8515. There is no obligation whatsoever to donate and all are equally welcome to our work and to our "time", whether they donate or not. Over the last 9 years, all the Love For Life work has been put out for free and it has often been donations from supporters that have enabled us to renew the domain name, etc, to keep the website going. While some complain that we have an avenue for donations, others complained when we didn't! Either use it or don't - the choice is yours.

Since Love For Life started March 2005 and website December 2006, Arthur has worked 16 hours a day, 7 days a week unpaid for much of this period, putting together the website and sharing insights to wake people up to what has been done to them, whether through the 11,500+ individual articles, videos, podcasts, debates, discussions, pdf's, research documents, etc, found amongst the 8,500+ posts, as well as helping many, many men and women over the phone, and through email, website correspondence, Facebook and YouTube, and creating the Love For Life food forest vege garden and Love For Life music recording studio. This is our life is a gift commitment to serve MAN/Nature/Earth but we are still severely compromised by "The System" and still have to give to Caesar what is claimed to belong to Caesar, which is where the donations help us.

Fiona & Arthur Cristian
Love For Life
21st July 2014