What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Is Pot lawful in australia?

Status
Not open for further replies.

isaih520

Member
In order to explain why it's lawful to ignore prohibition on pot in Australia, I'll have to give a quick history lesson. Explain how law works.
And to put this in practice- explain how the world works, whose in power in australia, why the courts are corrupt and how to succeed anyhow.
To the best of my knowledge.

If anyone is interested in this, please ask questions if I lack clarity or you can't put it in perspective.
I'll assume everyone has had the complete lack of historical education that our education system provides in Australia.

Mulling this explanation over in my mind , I'm realising it will take a a while, to get to the point where you waltz out of court without a conviction.
I'll start with the history lesson tonight.

But first I'll explain what law is , so you'll see the relevance of boring history.

Might is Right is the absence of law. It is the natural way of the world where the strong tells the weak what is what. And the weak either complies or dies.
Law is the agreement between civilised men to decide might is right through war. The winner of the war makes the law.
And thats where law comes from.
Principles established via war.
The winner of the war has what we call in our system "divine right".
God has blessed his cause with victory.
And the last relevant internal war that our law is based on was 1688. This is the foundation of law in the British commonwealth countries.


History hidden from us by our education system.
Imagine if there was an agenda by McDonalds to make us all think their food is health food. We wouldn't believe it today, but they planned long term. Organised a couple of world wars to kill most of us. And then educated our kids at school to believe it was healthy. Took control of TV and told us it was healthy that way.
In 2 generations its feasible that most people would be unaware that anyone ever thought that McDonalds was anything but health food.
Well that's what's happened but what everyone knew in our grandfathers day, that very few know today is that the catholic church is trying to take over the protestant countries.
Australia is a protestant country.

Somehow in 2 generations that knowledge has been forgotten. And the reason people are oblivious is because the catholic church has taken control of education and the media to fool us into believing the opposite to , or be completely oblivious to our grandparents beliefs.

I dont want to put people off by mentioning religion, but its behind the power that unlawfully prohibits drugs.
Its this battle between the Roman church and those who want to be free of its control , that is the basis of our law.
And the source of your power in the law to say I'll grow any damn thing I like and its none of the governments business.

The protestant revolution in Eurpoe saw men awaken to the fact that the roman church was anything but christian, many scholars realised that it was the antichrist of prophecy and they fought against being controlled by it.

In england , where our law was formed, they had several revolutions to oust catholic monarchs. The people wanted to be free of the Roman church and they kept winning these wars.

The last being the Glorious Revolution of 1688, where the papist monarch fled to France and a Dutch monarch , of an entirely different line was invited in by the english people to act as executive of their law. Pretty much the same role as our governor general. As opposed to the monarch being a dictator as he was prior.

In previous revolutions that century, after winning the protestants had tried rule via parliament without a monarch which was flawed and failed and they decided a monarch as executive is the best system. A monarch that is subject to the law, rather than the old system where the monarch is above it.

And that is the system we have today.
Whats important to note re: the law is that it was the people who made the law. Not the parliament or the monarch. Because the people held power through victory at arms.
they had divine right.

This was the true revolution for freedom in history, rather than the American or french which were organised by and for the benefit of the Roman catholic church.

And the foundational law is called the Bill of Rights (1688). Which I'll go into another night because there is alot of power in that law for us in Australia today. And it tells you alot about who holds power.
I'll copy paste it here for now. Its worth a read, you may see history is repeating itself.
you may also notice that even though its hundreds of years old, it is easier to read than any piece of legislation that comes out of parliament today.

Many people don't know that in the early days in australia that it was against the law for any catholic to hold any public office. specifically because they had proven in the past to use that position to further the interests of the pope, and to give preference to other catholics.
Today the australian public service is dominated by catholics.








English Bill Of Rights (1688)

1688 c.2 1_Will_and_Mar_Sess_2
An Act declareing the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Setleing the Succession of the Crowne.

Whereas the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Comons assembled at Westminster lawfully fully and freely representing all the Estates of the People of this Realme did upon the thirteenth day of February in the yeare of our Lord one thousand six hundred eighty eight present unto their Majesties then called and known by the Names and Stile of William and Mary Prince and Princesse of Orange being present in their proper Persons a certaine Declaration in Writeing made by the said Lords and Comons in the Words following viz

The Heads of Declaration of Lords and Commons, recited.
Whereas the late King James the Second by the Assistance of diverse evill Councellors Judges and Ministers imployed by him did endeavour to subvert and extirpate the Protestant Religion and the Lawes and Liberties of this Kingdome.

Dispensing and Suspending Power.
By Assumeing and Exerciseing a Power of Dispensing with and Suspending of Lawes and the Execution of Lawes without Consent of Parlyament.

Committing Prelates.
By Committing and Prosecuting diverse Worthy Prelates for humbly Petitioning to be excused from Concurring to the said Assumed Power.

Ecclesiastical Commission.
By issueing and causeing to be executed a Commission under the Great Seale for Erecting a Court called The Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiasticall Causes.

Levying Money.
By Levying Money for and to the Use of the Crowne by pretence of Prerogative for other time and in other manner then the same was granted by Parlyament.

Standing Army.
By raising and keeping a Standing Army within this Kingdome in time of Peace without Consent of Parlyament and Quartering Soldiers contrary to Law.

Disarming Protestants, &c.
By causing severall good Subjects being Protestants to be disarmed at the same time when Papists were both Armed and Imployed contrary to Law.

Violating Elections.
By Violating the Freedome of Election of Members to serve in Parlyament.

Illegal Prosecutions.
By Prosecutions in the Court of Kings Bench for Matters and Causes cognizable onely in Parlyament and by diverse other Arbitrary and Illegall Courses.

Juries.
And whereas of late yeares Partiall Corrupt and Unqualifyed Persons have beene returned and served on Juryes in Tryalls and particularly diverse Jurors in Tryalls for High Treason which were not Freeholders,

Excessive Bail.
And excessive Baile hath beene required of Persons committed in Criminall Cases to elude the Benefitt of the Lawes made for the Liberty of the Subjects.

Fines.
And excessive Fines have beene imposed.

Punishments.
And illegall and cruell Punishments inflicted.

Grants of Fines, &c. before Conviction, &c.
And severall Grants and Promises made of Fines and Forfeitures before any Conviction or Judgement against the Persons upon whome the same were to be levyed.All which are utterly directly contrary to the knowne Lawes and Statutes and Freedome of this Realme.

Recital that the late King James II. had abdicated the Government, and that the Throne was vacant, and that the Prince of Orange had written Letters to the Lords and Commons for the choosing Representatives in Parliament.

And whereas the said late King James the Second haveing Abdicated the Government and the Throne being thereby Vacant His [ X1 Hignesse] the Prince of Orange (whome it hath pleased Almighty God to make the glorious Instrument of Delivering this Kingdome from Popery and Arbitrary Power) did (by the Advice of the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and diverse principall Persons of the Commons) cause Letters to be written to the Lords Spirituall and Temporall being Protestants and other Letters to the severall Countyes Cityes Universities Burroughs and Cinque Ports for the Choosing of such Persons to represent them as were of right to be sent to Parlyament to meete and sitt at Westminster upon the two and twentyeth day of January in this Yeare one thousand six hundred eighty and eight in order to such an Establishment as that their Religion Lawes and Liberties might not againe be in danger of being Subverted, Upon which Letters Elections haveing beene accordingly made.

The Subject’s Rights.
And thereupon the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons pursuant to their respective Letters and Elections being now assembled in a full and free Representative of this Nation takeing into their most serious Consideration the best meanes for attaining the Ends aforesaid Doe in the first place (as their Auncestors in like Case have usually done) for the Vindicating and Asserting their auntient Rights and Liberties, Declare

Dispensing Power.
That the pretended Power of Suspending of Laws or the Execution of Laws by Regall Authority without Consent of Parlyament is illegall.

Late dispensing Power.
That the pretended Power of Dispensing with Laws or the Execution of Laws by Regall Authoritie as it hath beene assumed and exercised of late is illegall.

Ecclesiastical Courts illegal.
That the Commission for erecting the late Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiasticall Causes and all other Commissions and Courts of like nature are Illegall and Pernicious.

Levying Money.
That levying Money for or to the Use of the Crowne by pretence of Prerogative without Grant of Parlyament for longer time or in other manner then the same is or shall be granted is Illegall.

Right to petition.
That it is the Right of the Subjects to petition the King and all Commitments and Prosecutions for such Petitioning are Illegall.

Standing Army.
That the raising or keeping a standing Army within the Kingdome in time of Peace unlesse it be with Consent of Parlyament is against Law.

Subjects’ Arms.
That the Subjects which are Protestants may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law.

Freedom of Election.
That Election of Members of Parlyament ought to be free.

Freedom of Speech.
That the Freedome of Speech and Debates or Proceedings in Parlyament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any Court or Place out of Parlyament.

Excessive Bail.
That excessive Baile ought not to be required nor excessive Fines imposed nor cruell and unusuall Punishments inflicted.

Juries.
That Jurors ought to be duely impannelled and returned . . . F1

Grants of Forfeitures.
That all Grants and Promises of Fines and Forfeitures of particular persons before Conviction are illegall and void.

Frequent Parliaments.
And that for Redresse of all Grievances and for the amending strengthening and preserveing of the Lawes Parlyaments ought to be held frequently.

The said Rights claimed. Tender of the Crown. Regal Power exercised. Limitation of the Crown.
And they doe Claime Demand and Insist upon all and singular the Premises as their undoubted Rights and Liberties and that noe Declarations Judgements Doeings or Proceedings to the Prejudice of the People in any of the said Premisses ought in any wise to be drawne hereafter into Consequence or Example. To which Demand of their Rights they are particularly encouraged by the Declaration of this Highnesse the Prince of Orange as being the onely meanes for obtaining a full Redresse and Remedy therein. Haveing therefore an intire Confidence That his said Highnesse the Prince of Orange will perfect the Deliverance soe farr advanced by him and will still preserve them from the Violation of their Rights which they have here asserted and from all other Attempts upon their Religion Rights and Liberties. The said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons assembled at Westminster doe Resolve That William and Mary Prince and Princesse of Orange be and be declared King and Queene of England France and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging to hold the Crowne and Royall Dignity of the said Kingdomes and Dominions to them the said Prince and Princesse dureing their Lives and the Life of the Survivour of them And that the sole and full Exercise of the Regall Power be onely in and executed by the said Prince of Orange in the Names of the said Prince and Princesse dureing their joynt Lives And after their Deceases the said Crowne and Royall Dignitie of the said Kingdoms and Dominions to be to the Heires of the Body of the said Princesse And for default of such Issue to the Princesse Anne of Denmarke and the Heires of her Body And for default of such Issue to the Heires of the Body of the said Prince of Orange. And the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons doe pray the said Prince and ( X2) Princesse to accept the same accordingly.

New Oaths of Allegiance, &c.
And that the Oathes hereafter mentioned be taken by all Persons of whome the Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacy might be required by Law instead of them And that the said Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacy be abrogated.

Allegiance.
I A B doe sincerely promise and sweare That I will be faithfull and beare true Allegiance to their Majestyes King William and Queene Mary Soe helpe me God.

Supremacy.
I A B doe sweare That I doe from my Heart Abhorr, Detest and Abjure as Impious and Hereticall this damnable Doctrine and Position That Princes Excommunicated or Deprived by the Pope or any Authority of the See of Rome may be deposed or murdered by their Subjects or any other whatsoever. And I doe declare That noe Forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within this Realme Soe helpe me God.

Acceptance of the Crown. The Two Houses to sit. Subjects’ Liberties to be allowed, and Ministers hereafter to serve according to the same. William and Mary declared King and Queen. Limitation of the Crown. Papists debarred the Crown. Every King, &c. shall make the Declaration of 30 Car. II. If under 12 Years old, to be done after Attainment thereof. King’s and Queen’s Assent

Upon which their said Majestyes did accept the Crowne and Royall Dignitie of the Kingdoms of England France and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging according to the Resolution and Desire of the said Lords and Commons contained in the said Declaration. And thereupon their Majestyes were pleased That the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons being the two Houses of Parlyament should continue to sitt and with their Majesties Royall Concurrence make effectuall Provision for the Setlement of the Religion Lawes and Liberties of this Kingdome soe that the same for the future might not be in danger againe of being subverted, To which the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons did agree and proceede to act accordingly. Now in pursuance of the Premisses the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons in Parlyament assembled for the ratifying confirming and establishing the said Declaration and the Articles Clauses Matters and Things therein contained by the Force of a Law made in due Forme by Authority of Parlyament doe pray that it may be declared and enacted That all and singular the Rights and Liberties asserted and claimed in the said Declaration are the true auntient and indubitable Rights and Liberties of the People of this Kingdome and soe shall be esteemed allowed adjudged deemed and taken to be and that all and every the particulars aforesaid shall be firmly and strictly holden and observed as they are expressed in the said Declaration And all Officers and Ministers whatsoever shall serve their Majestyes and their Successors according to the same in all times to come. And the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons seriously considering how it hath pleased Almighty God in his marvellous Providence and mercifull Goodness to this Nation to provide and preserve their said Majestyes Royall Persons most happily to Raigne over us upon the Throne of their Auncestors for which they render unto him from the bottome of their Hearts their humblest Thanks and Praises doe truely firmely assuredly and in the Sincerity of their Hearts thinke and doe hereby recognize acknowledge and declare That King James the Second haveing abdicated the Government and their Majestyes haveing accepted the Crowne and Royall Dignity [ X3 as] aforesaid Their said Majestyes did become were are and of right ought to be by the Lawes of this Realme our Soveraigne Liege Lord and Lady King and Queene of England France and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging in and to whose Princely Persons the Royall State Crowne and Dignity of the said Realmes with all Honours Stiles Titles Regalities Prerogatives Powers Jurisdictions and Authorities to the same belonging and appertaining are most fully rightfully and intirely invested and incorporated united and annexed And for preventing all Questions and Divisions in this Realme by reason of any pretended Titles to the Crowne and for preserveing a Certainty in the Succession thereof in and upon which the Unity Peace Tranquillity and Safety of this Nation doth under God wholly consist and depend The said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons doe beseech their Majestyes That it may be enacted established and declared That the Crowne and Regall Government of the said Kingdoms and Dominions with all and singular the Premisses thereunto belonging and appertaining shall bee and continue to their said Majestyes and the Survivour of them dureing their Lives and the Life of the Survivour of them And that the entire perfect and full Exercise of the Regall Power and Government be onely in and executed by his Majestie in the Names of both their Majestyes dureing their joynt Lives And after their deceases the said Crowne and Premisses shall be and remaine to the Heires of the Body of her Majestie and for default of such Issue to her Royall Highnesse the Princess Anne of Denmarke and the Heires of her Body and for default of such Issue to the Heires of the Body of his said Majestie And thereunto the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons doe in the Name of all the People aforesaid most humbly and faithfully submitt themselves their Heires and Posterities for ever and doe faithfully promise That they will stand to maintaine and defend their said Majesties and alsoe the Limitation and Succession of the Crowne herein specified and contained to the utmost of their Powers with their Lives and Estates against all Persons whatsoever that shall attempt any thing to the contrary. And whereas it hath beene found by Experience that it is inconsistent with the Safety and Welfaire of this Protestant Kingdome to be governed by a Popish Prince or by any King or Queene marrying a Papist the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons doe further pray that it may be enacted That all and every person and persons that is are or shall be reconciled to or shall hold Communion with the See or Church of Rome or shall professe the Popish Religion or shall marry a Papist shall be excluded and be for ever uncapeable to inherit possesse or enjoy the Crowne and Government of this Realme and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging or any part of the same or to have use or exercise any Regall Power Authoritie or Jurisdiction within the same [ X4 And in all and every such Case or Cases the People of these Realmes shall be and are hereby absolved of their Allegiance] And the said Crowne and Government shall from time to time descend to and be enjoyed by such person or persons being Protestants as should have inherited and enjoyed the same in case the said person or persons soe reconciled holding Communion or Professing or Marrying as aforesaid were naturally dead [ X5 And that every King and Queene of this Realme who at any time hereafter shall come to and succeede in the Imperiall Crowne of this Kingdome shall on the first day of the meeting of the first Parlyament next after his or her comeing to the Crowne sitting in his or her Throne in the House of Peeres in the presence of the Lords and Commons therein assembled or at his or her Coronation before such person or persons who shall administer the Coronation Oath to him or her at the time of his or her takeing the said Oath (which shall first happen) make subscribe and audibly repeate the Declaration mentioned in the Statute made in the thirtyeth yeare of the Raigne of King Charles the Second Entituled An Act for the more effectuall Preserveing the Kings Person and Government by disableing Papists from sitting in either House of Parlyament But if it shall happen that such King or Queene upon his or her Succession to the Crowne of this Realme shall be under the Age of twelve yeares then every such King or Queene shall make subscribe and audibly repeate the said Declaration at his or her Coronation or the first day of the meeting of the first Parlyament as aforesaid which shall first happen after such King or Queene shall have attained the said Age of twelve yeares.] All which Their Majestyes are contented and pleased shall be declared enacted and established by authoritie of this present Parliament and shall stand remaine and be the Law of this Realme for ever And the same are by their said Majesties by and with the advice
 

isaih520

Member
Now with these protestant revolutions of the 17th century in england, the catholic church must have seen the writing on the wall. English people were never going to be ruled by the pope. So they decided to try to rule covertly, through freemasonry.

And to that end they inveigled William of Orange, this supposedly protestant monarch just brought in to uphold protestant law to lay the foundations of covert papal rule.
Whether he did it wittingly for the catholic church or was conned, I dont know.

Anyhow he did this by creating the soverign city of London.
By making it soverign it was outside protestant law.
Within this city is another country or soverign state called the temple. Known as middle temple and inner temple.
And this is the hub of the BAR association. Whose allegiance lawyers owe.
The temple is controlled by the soverign Knights of Malta who today directly control our law and courts through the BAR association on the surface and freemasonry below the surface.
The soverign knights of Malta are a papal order. And therefore have no business in our courts.

Odd as it may seem to us today, we used to elect our judges from the townsfolk we knew. They weren't lawyers but farmers or what have you.
This is our real law and the way we are supposed to govern ourselves.
There should be no lawyers in a common law court, as they owe allegiance to a papal order, contrary to law.
 

isaih520

Member
So the beak looking down at you from the bench is not your master, nor does he have dejure power. He is a papist working against the law. Treat him as such.
Your real law demands a judge elected by the people and a jury of your peers for all matters.
Criminal and civil. and yes we used to have juries for civil matters in australia too.
 

isaih520

Member
Gee you read that quickly, I only just wrote it.
I set myself free by ousting the beak and taking the bench.
But prior to that I was offered bail which I refused and then consequently ordered into custody. And i refused that too.
Court is like a battle. I understand your impatience, but I'm trying to arm you with what I was armed with in order to win.
Its not as though you fill a form the correct way or say open sesame and you win.
You have to fight.
 

Terroir

Member
what were you charged with?

what court heard the matter?

Were you found or did you plead guilty or did it not reach this stage?

Was a conviction recorded? ie section 10 guilty but charges dismissed sort of thing.

Were you sentenced? ie 2 years fully suspended.
 

Globule

Member
...and back in the real world where most of us find ourselves, we have elected bodies of government whose responsibility it is to make laws according to the will of its people rather than carry forward laws that have long since lost their relevancy in a progressive society.

It is our responsibility as citizens of this country to remind these temporarily elected officials what our will is and which laws we see as no longer relevant.
 

isaih520

Member
Globule, be patient and your eyes will be opened, to your profit.

Terrior I forget what the charge was called. But it was a 'serious indictable offence'.
From googling sentences in WA i saw that equivalent quantities has received prison sentences from 2 to 4 years. And that was prior to the WA legislation doubling sentences for pot in 2011.
The court was Norseman local Court WA, on the edge of the nullabor. Magistrate the second time was a **** named Tanya Watt.

First time I went to court the magistrate was a good bloke, as far as they go, which is probably why he was exiled to the middle of nowhere. And when he asked for a plea he accepted my not recognising the court's authority.
I walked out without bail and they sent a letter inviting me back. I went back because the police hadn't paid the bill I sent them for 20 grand for stealing my private property. And this time the beak was a new one sent from the city, I assume to deal specifically with me. I didnt get my money. But i walked out again without bail and that as far as i'm concerned is the end of it. No bail = no requirement to return to court.

I'll tell the story in detail later on if you're interested. What I did and said isnt a template for someone else. You do what you have to do on the day to win.
You have to know what's going on to do it, i believe.

No i wasnt sentenced or convicted. I refused to honour the court or the charge or the beak's authority.
 
N

noyd666

most likely the beaks here would just hit you with contempt of court, glad you beat the bastards though. when cops take your gear I think of them as government sanctioned thieves. interesting thread and I did read it.
 
Last edited:

isaih520

Member
You're dead right actually noy. She was yelling that i was in contempt when I ousted her.
Which gives me a chance to to give you a valuable weapon.
What I did to oust her and take the bench was create a common law court. Contempt of court is a common law crime. So should a judge ever say that to you, a bluff by the way, thank her/him for agreeing with you that we're in a common law court on that basis.
 

isaih520

Member
You hold a royal flush when you walk into court on a pot charge. And they have a handful of nothing. They're trying to bluff you into laying down your cards.
The easiest way for them to get you to lay down your cards is to convince you to use a lawyer. If you don't do that they'll try to get you to make a plea.
If you don't do that they'll make orders , which by the way are not orders but suggestions.
And this is where the no thanks comes in.
In my case they were really trying to get me, the second time. For reasons other than growing pot. And so I used the ace up my sleeve and created a common law court,
Beak resisted it like hell, but eventually got up and left, I strolled up to the bench and took her seat.
Which is the whole point. We are the government. The people. Not this foreign country, the temple, which noones ever heard of. We self govern not through parliament, which the media fixes our attention on, but through the courts.

We as constitutional owners of this country have what few if any other countries have, law-wise. If we only knew. We certainly have no masters.
 
N

noyd666

lol I like the bit about taking her seat, cops in court would rush you quick smart to the floor.
 

isaih520

Member
The police have no business in the court either, which I'll get to later. But yes they did come up and grab me and throw me out of the court. I tried to get back in a couple times but they blocked the door. But the upshot is, they didnt put me in jail because the beak wasnt going to back them up.
She was hiding out the back because in common law she is committing treason just by being there. And thats a hanging offence,
And there I am without bail on what is supposed to be basically a mandatory prison sentence in WA, and the police trying to get me to go away. Wanted nothing to do with me all of a sudden.
 
W

willyweed

interesting read ,i am from the uk ,talk about shit laws here, it is legal to grow here now if you pay the government a massive licence fee ! we are also one of the larger makers of sativex ! gw pharma sells it all over europe and canada. i do believe that it will become a non crime over here in the next few years,and growing a few plants is only like brewing your own beer ! i do not think that judges are throwing small growers in prison any more(perhaps we should ship them to umm australia) i wish. commercial growers know the risks and lets not forget the rewards !
 

isaih520

Member
I may aswell go into the history of the police now.
I can't think of a systematic history explanation , so if its a little hodgepodge, try to be patient and it will hopefully all tie together to give you perspective by the time I'm done.

Actually I'm thinking now I should explain first that freemasonry was in my grandfather's day a protestant brotherhood. Well they thought it was.
And they thought a secret boys club was required in order to combat the diabolical schemes of the catholics .
Which leads me to surmise (and I have no proof its pure supposition) that the Knights of Malta therefore were touted and posed as a protestant knighthood, and distanced themselves from their catholic origins back in ye olden days.

This is important to realise. Because in the fullness of time its obvious now that Knights of Malta freemasonry was always a catholic scheme to undermine protestant law and freedom. They declare themselves openly catholic now.

But in order to make sense historically you have to keep in mind that most of these guys, although in-the-know, were hoodwinked by the catholic priests into working for them. Whilst thinking they were opposing them.

Ok police history. I think police originated in France, not 100% sure on that. But in our system they were created by a reknowned Irish pig breeder named Robert Peel.
A protestant , by the way, hence the earlier explanation.
And of course a freemason.
He created it around 1830 (approx) in that soverign city of London I mentioned earlier. Which is outside the law. And it took a generation or so before it was incremenatally established in the rest of Britain.

The reasons he gave for establishing it was to protect the widows and orphans that had no British subject to protect them.
Because strange as it may seem to us now, in our law we have to protect ourselves, our family and our possessions. That's our responsibility. Not the police or the government's.

Back then people were opposed to the idea of police because they were concerned it was a threat to their liberties. And since 1688 where you see in the Bill of Rights, it is against the law to have a standing army patrolling the streets the people had none.

What they had instead were swords and guns. And protected themselves.
Often times people would be unable to catch thieves themselves and bring them before the court. So an industry developed called the thief -takers.

The thief takers would be paid by the courts a bounty to catch criminals , aswell as paid by the individual who had their goods stolen.
It was a lucrative business and steeped in graft. The theif takers evolved into organised crime, whereby they were in control of the thieves themselves and played the system for profit.

The police are the coalition of the thief takers, organised under freemasonry and given certain rules to follow. To create order or organise crime.
They are literally criminals. Their job is to break the law in order to make money. And I'm pretty sure they're still receiving bounties from the court as in ye olden days. Although i don't have the financial nous to prove it.

They are certainly a business. A foreign owned business , by the way, and have absolutely no right to do anything to you.
They have no law behind their existence. they have treason laws against their existence.
And in fact it is your duty to shoot them on sight, as a foreign army invading your country.
Strange as that may seem.

Anyhow in practice, they find their way into our courts by assuming the role as part of the excecutive tier of government.
The 3 tiers of government being the parliament /excecutive/ judiciary.
Which in the westminster system are designed to oppose each other and keep each other in check.
Anyone who has been to a court lately will realise that the juducuary does not oppose the excecutive.They're in cahoots. In fact many beaks are ex-police.

What in fact should be happening is we have a grievance with someone we bring a prsecution against them ourselves by walking into court. People are so ignorant of the law these days, they ring the police instead.

But that's beside the point regarding pot , I suppose,
The police's main role is making money. they're a business (not government).
And they do this by enforcing policy contrary to law.
and yes occasionally they actually cathc criminals, but this is the cover for their real reason to exist. And a very minor part of their operation.

Prior to the police, courts were held maybe once a month in Australia. They have incrementally imposed so much unlawful policy on us that courts are often open every day of the week in order to process it.

Policy is against the law. Its all a con. Drug prohibition is policy. Not law, in fact as I'll explain later it is against the law.

And police , who have taken over our courts , which are supposed to be our access to self government, are breaking the law and turning them into money making business for organised crime .
Crime organised in every town in the masonic lodge. there'll be one in your town somewhere, if you look for it.

You do not have to ever stop for police, or speak to police or follow any direction they give you. In fact it is your duty to oppose them.
This was upheld last year by a Melbourne supreme court judge, who said noone has to stop for police and reinforced by a local beak in Melbourne this year.

So point is, police are nobodies. they have no place in our law. They're criminals and traitors and treat them as such
 

isaih520

Member
I should add, that i know what australia's sytem used to be like not through history books. which are propaganda. But a family history my grandma was custodian of. Her great or maybe great great grandfather and his brothers acted as judges in the early days of Melbourne. and were sheep farmers or horse breeders. not lawyers. And there were no police back then. No police, yet little crime. Why? Because we're pretty decent people and if everyone has a gun, the not so decent people tend to be careful.

Waltzing Matilda by the way confirms we didnt have police. The swagman wasn't was worried about "troopers" .
Our real system is pretty much like old American westerns. that's the closest thing to english Protestant law we have experienced . Old movies.
 

isaih520

Member
I cant edit- The swagman wasnt worrried about police. because they didnt exist in australia then. He was worried about the 'troopers' . a carryover from the penal settlement, but not part of protestant law
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top