Aus. Prime Minister denies Slavery in Australia!

Scott Morrison has made some huge gaffs in his career politician life.  He has shown himself to be a largely ignorant and under educated man and more so in the last few days.

The present prime minister took it upon himself to attempt to re-write history on a radio 2GB interview about BLM protests in Australia with comments regarding Slavery in Australia's history. 

Morrison said there wasn't slavery and that Australia was not built on Slavery.  He really messed it up so badly.

This man is a complete embarrassment to this land on the world stage and at home.   The world should be aware we are led now by a Christian narcissist.  We've had our fair share of Christian Circus Clowns - Tony Abbott the priest was bad enough.

Slavery was most certainly a very real part of this lands recent history since the days of the first colony at Sydney Cove.

I don't want this swept under the carpet any longer.  I want the NSW Education board along with other state and territory Education boards to look closely at their part in continuing the lie about Terra Nullius.    If there is going to be the indoctrination in schools then at least get history right as this should be taught in schools. 

Our kids deserve to know that Captain Phillip was not a good guy and he ignored the wishes of the Crown and went straight ahead and killed people as soon as he landed.

The children in schools are not taught the truth about the lengthy Frontier Wars that occurred here in the Nineteenth century and the genocidal tactics employed by the colonists to rid the place of people to back up the lie about no one being here and it being no mans land. 

That lie is the biggest one that has to be rectified by truth telling and in all levels of law and accepted and acted upon. 

What good is it to recognise it if it does not come with the returning of the rights of the people to their land that was stolen.  The Crown has to come toward the black fellah, not the other way around.

I hope this highlights the fact that there is a serious situation down here that has been festering for over 230 years now and if its not dealt with things will deteriorate and I don't want that happening on my watch.

I love this land - her ancient people of which I am apart of because I am standing with them and I stand on Ngarabal land and I respect that and acknowledge that. 

I understand being disenfranchised and how bad that is and my skin is not black and therefore my disenfranchisement had white privilege attached. It seems people find that difficult to understand how much more difficult it is for folk because of this.

I am angry about because my brothers and sisters deserve so much more in real terms and I am not speaking about money.  Money cannot buy what I am talking about.  Its a mind set change.
 I have heard the ancestors.  They revealed themselves to me and made everything get really real back in 2012.

 My story is my story and my story must help to make a difference for the good and the health of this astounding and precious land and its waters and everything that lives upon the land and in the waters.

Australia is by far without a doubt the most unique land on Earth.

 Seriously, Scott Morrison views just pale against that to the point there is no comparison to be had anywhere.  Its just rot that he thinks his words are more powerful than 120,000 years of continuous existence of sadly now 230 of what was over 530 different nations of this land.  He's a complete idiot.

SLAVE MAP of AUSTRALIA - click the link to the Conversation Article.

Was there slavery in Australia? Yes. It shouldn’t even be up for debate

SBS Article - Click the link below
'Ignorant and ill-informed': Prime Minister's slavery comments condemned

SBS Article - Click link below
Eight War Heroes you didn't read about at School

Images @ Eminpee Fotography

And so.... It's Constitutional.

• Overview of the Constitution, Chapter-by-Chapter
• Full Text (Including Amendments) On One Page
• Full Text – Downloadable PDF

Chapter-by-Chapter

• Preamble
• Chapter 1 – The Parliament – Sections 1-60
  • Part 1 – General – Sections 1-6
  • Part 2 – Senate – Sections 7-23
  • Part 3 – House of Representatives – Sections 24-40
  • Part 4 – Both Houses – Sections 41-50
  • Part 5 – Powers – Sections 51-60
• Chapter 2 – The Executive Government – Sections 61-70
• Chapter 3 – The Judicature – Sections 71-80
• Chapter 4 – Finance and Trade – Sections 81-105
• Chapter 5 – The States – Sections 106-120
• Chapter 6 – New States – Sections 121-124
• Chapter 7 – Miscellaneous – Section 125-127
• Chapter 8 – Alteration of the Constitution – Section 128
• Schedule – Oath and Affirmation

Section-by-Section

If you know the number of the Section of the Constitution you want to check, just click on the applicable link below. The text will appear in a popup window.

• Section 1 – Legislative Power
• Section 2 – Governor-General
• Section 3 – Salary of Governor-General
• Section 4 – Provisions relating to Governor-General
• Section 5 – Sessions of Parliament – Prorogation and Dissolution
• Section 6 – Summoning Parliament
• Section 7 – The Senate
• Section 8 – Qualifications of Electors
• Section 9 – Method of election of senators
• Section 10 – Application of State laws
• Section 11 – Failure to choose senators
• Section 12 – Issue of writs
• Section 13 – Rotation of senators
• Section 14 – Further provision for rotation
• Section 15 – Casual vacancies
• Section 16 – Qualifications of senator
• Section 17 – Election of President
• Section 18 – Absence of President
• Section 19 – Resignation of senator
• Section 20 – Vacancy by absence
• Section 21 – Vacancy to be notified
• Section 22 – Quorum
• Section 23 – Voting in the Senate
• Section 24 – Constitution of House of Representatives
• Section 25 – Provisions as to races disqualified from voting
• Section 26 – Representatives in first Parliament
• Section 27 – Alteration of number of members
• Section 28 – Duration of House of Representatives
• Section 29 – Electoral divisions
• Section 30 – Qualification of electors
• Section 31 – Application of State laws
• Section 32 – Writs for general election
• Section 33 – Writs for vacancies
• Section 34 – Qualifications of members
• Section 35 – Election of Speaker
• Section 36 – Absence of Speaker
• Section 37 – Resignation of member
• Section 38 – Vacancy by absence
• Section 39 – Quorum
• Section 40 – Voting in House of Representatives
• Section 41 – Rights of electors of States
• Section 42 – Oath or affirmation of allegiance
• Section 43 – Member of one House ineligible for other
• Section 44 – Disqualification
• Section 45 – Vacancy on happening of disqualification
• Section 46 – Penalty for sitting when disqualified
• Section 47 – Disputed elections
• Section 48 – Allowance to members
• Section 49 – Privileges &c. of Houses
• Section 50 – Rules and orders
• Section 51 – Legislative powers of the Parliament
• Section 52 – Exclusive powers of the Parliament
• Section 53 – Powers of the Houses in respect of legislation
• Section 54 – Appropriation Bills
• Section 55 – Tax Bill
• Section 56 – Recommendation of money votes
• Section 57 – Disagreement between the Houses
• Section 58 – Royal assent to Bills & Recommendations by Governor-General
• Section 59 – Disallowance by the Queen
• Section 60 – Signification of Queen’s pleasure on Bills reserved
• Section 61 – Executive power
• Section 62 – Federal Executive Council
• Section 63 – Provisions referring to Governor-General
• Section 64 – Ministers of State & Ministers to sit in Parliament
• Section 65 – Number of ministers
• Section 66 – Salaries of Ministers
• Section 67 – Appointment of civil servants
• Section 68 – Command of naval and military forces
• Section 69 – Transfer of certain departments
• Section 70 – Certain powers of Governors to vest in Governor-General
• Section 71 – Judicial power and Courts
• Section 72 – Judges’ appointment, tenure and remuneration
• Section 73 – Appellate jurisdiction of High Court
• Section 74 – Appeal to Queen in Council
• Section 75 – Original jurisdiction of High Court
• Section 76 – Additional original jurisdiction
• Section 77 – Power to define jurisdiction
• Section 78 – Proceedings against Commonwealth or State
• Section 79 – Number of judges
• Section 80 – Trial by jury
• Section 81 – Consolidated Revenue Fund
• Section 82 – Expenditure charged thereon
• Section 83 – Money to be appropriated by law
• Section 84 – Transfer of officers
• Section 85 – Transfer of property of State
• Section 86 – Collection and control of duties to pass to Commonwealth
• Section 87 – Revenue to be paid to States in first ten years
• Section 88 – Uniform duties of customs
• Section 89 – Payment to States before uniform duties
• Section 90 – Exclusive power over customs, excise, and bounties
• Section 91 – Exceptions as to bounties
• Section 92 – Trade within the Commonwealth to be free
• Section 93 – Payment to States for five years after uniform tariffs
• Section 94 – Distribution of surplus
• Section 95 – Customs duties of Western Australia
• Section 96 – Financial assistance to States
• Section 97 – Audit
• Section 98 – Trade and commerce includes navigation and State railways
• Section 99 – Commonwealth not to give preference
• Section 100 – Nor abridge right to use water
• Section 101 – Inter-State Commission
• Section 102 – Parliament may forbid preferences by State
• Section 103 – Commissioners’ appointment, tenure, and remuneration
• Section 104 – Saving of certain rates
• Section 105 – Taking over public debts of States
• Section 106 – Saving of Constitutions
• Section 107 – Saving of Power of State Parliaments
• Section 108 – Saving of State laws
• Section 109 – Inconsistency of laws
• Section 110 – Provisions referring to Governor
• Section 111 – States may surrender territory
• Section 112 – States may levy charges for inspection laws
• Section 113 – Intoxicating liquids
• Section 114 – States may not raise forces – Taxation of property of Commonwealth or State
• Section 115 – States not to coin money
• Section 116 – Commonwealth not to legislate in respect of religion
• Section 117 – Rights of residents in States
• Section 118 – Recognition of laws, &c. of States
• Section 119 – Protection of States from invasion and violence
• Section 120 – Custody of offenders against laws of the Commonwealth
• Section 121 – New states may be admitted or established
• Section 122 – Government of territories
• Section 123 – Alteration of limits of States
• Section 124 – Formation of new States
• Section 125 – Seat of Government
• Section 126 – Power to Her Majesty to authorise Governor-General to appoint deputies
• Section 127 – Aboriginal natives not to be counted
• Section 128 – Mode of altering the Constitution

Source: https://australianpolitics.com/constitution/text

Henry Reynolds: Australia was founded on a hypocrisy that haunts us to this day

A view of Sydney Cove, New South Wale, 1804. State Library of Victoria

Henry Reynolds, University of Tasmania
US slave owners wrote and spoke about liberty, equality and the pursuit of happiness. Similar hypocrisy, buried in the foundations of settler Australia, has escaped comparable scrutiny.
The nature of the early settlements is so well known that it is frequently taken for granted. But for the first 50 years New South Wales and Van Diemen’s Land were, above all else, places for the punishment by transportation, of property theft. Local courts also handed out severe punishment for theft. In many ways the sanctity of private property rivalled the sanctity of life itself.
This was all done in accordance with the common law as it operated at the time. This law struck a balance between the Commons (the British people) and the Crown.
The 17th-century jurist Sir Christopher Yelverton explained

…that no man’s property can legally be taken from him or invaded by the direct act or command of the sovereign [ie. the King], without the consent of the subject … is a jus indigene, an old home born truth, declared true by diverse statutes of the realm

The laws with which the colony was founded also declared that Aboriginal people became subjects of the Crown, which should have given them protection under British law. This created a problem of timing. Did the British seize the land of Aboriginal people before Aboriginal people became Crown subjects? Some law experts have suggested this may have been the case.
In the High Court in 1913 Justice Isaacs explained how he saw the situation:

So we start with the unquestionable position that, when Governor Phillip received his first Commission from King George III on 12th October 1786 the whole of the lands of Australia were already in law the property of the King of England.

It seems more likely that the the great legal moment came when the British actually arrived at Sydney Cove and formally read the legal instruments on February 7, 1788. But this still does not explain how Aboriginal people became subjects and lost their land at the same time.

Algernon Talmage, The Founding of Australia. By Capt. Arthur Phillip R.N. Sydney Cove, Jan. 26th 1788. Oil sketch, 1939. Wikimedia

Who gave us the terra nullius myth?

The only judicial explanation for what happened was provided in a judgement in the little-known Privy Council case of Cooper v Stewart in 1889. The case found that at the time of first settlement, New South Wales was “a tract of territory, practically uninhabited, without settled inhabitants”. This was regarded as binding on Australian courts until the 1970s.
If that had indeed been the case then much of the continent would have been literally a terra nullius, a “nobody’s land”.
Why did the British think this? As it happens, this was the advice of Sir Joseph Banks, a man of power and influence – an aristocrat, President of the Royal Society and, even more importantly, a member of Cook’s expedition of 1770. In his writing and in evidence to Britain’s parliamentary committees, Banks declared that the long coast of eastern Australia was “thinly inhabited even to admiration”. As for the vast hinterland, of which he knew nothing, he said that it was almost certainly uninhabited.

Joseph Banks, painted by Joshua Reynolds, circa 1771-1773. Wikimedia

It seems a perfectly reasonable assumption that this advice had a decisive influence on both the decision to send an expedition to Botany Bay, and to justify a lack of recognition of Aboriginal sovereignty or property. This was a fundamental departure from well-established precedents in the North American colonies.
Throughout the 18th century the American colonial governments negotiated treaties with Native Americans, and this practice was carried on by the American republic after independence from Britain. In Canada, treaty-making continued until the early 20th century and has resumed in recent years. The underlying assumption was that indigenous peoples were landowners and also held a form of sovereignty.
The British decision to depart from this path in the settlement of New South Wales had disastrous consequences for the Australians, and predetermined much of the violence that characterised the outward spread of settlement for more than a century. The British imperial government carries a heavy burden of responsibility for the horrors that unfolded.
It may have been the result of the mistake of making fundamental and portentous decisions before the First Fleet had even set sail. But ignorance does not lighten the burden of responsibility. Clearly no convicts were ever excused by claiming their theft had all been a mistake and that they thought the stolen property in question belonged to no one.
More troubling is that it took Australian courts until the 1992 Mabo decision to provide some limited remediation, but not reparation, for one of the greatest land grabs in modern history.

The incurable flaw

There were people at the time who were troubled by the way the annexation had taken place. When Governor King was preparing to hand power over to his chosen successor William Bligh he provided him with notes to help with his orientation including the observation about the Aborigines and that he had “ever considered them the real proprietors of the soil.”
At much the same time in Britain the great political philosopher Jeremy Bentham wrote a pamphlet criticising the legal arrangements that had been made for the settlement of New South Wales. Among many points he made was the observation that there had been no negotiation with the Aborigines and no treaty had been signed with them. This created problems which would be enduring. “The flaw”, he declared, would be “an incurable one.”
Similar concerns about the conduct of the settlers, the fate of the Aboriginal people and the linked problems of property and sovereignty continued to be expressed across the generations by men and women who responded to the “whispering in their hearts” (a whispering first raised by Sydney barrister Richard Windeyer in 1842). They are part of the most enduring political debate in our history. They are still with us as Bentham predicted more than 200 years ago.
The problem is that there is no clear explanation in Australian legal theory to show how sovereignty passed from the first nations to the British crown. On this matter international law has been clear since the 18th century. Sovereignty can be lost and acquired either by conquest or by cession, that is, by the negotiation of a treaty. This was clearly understood by Bentham.
So what can be done? Ideally we should have a decision from the High Court. They could revisit the Mabo judgement and consider the question of sovereignty as Eddie Mabo himself wanted it settled. The case would be simpler than one which considered the actions of the British Imperial government. Murray Island was annexed by the Queensland colonial administration in 1879.
And if the High Court argues that it is unable to decide on such a question, the way forward may be an appeal to the International Court of Justice for an opinion on the matter. That would clear the way for treaty making in Australia itself which would finally provide a cure for Bentham’s flaw.

---

Henry Reynold’s The Whispering in Our Hearts Revisited has recently been published by NewSouth.
Henry Reynolds, Honorary Research Professor, Aboriginal Studies Global Cultures & Languages, University of Tasmania
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

STRAYA .. How bad is It?

Ships in Port in Yamba

I decided to keep this excellent commentary from my friend Mr Forsythe because I found it to be extremely informative.

The USA makes shitloads (stacks) of money from Australia. Way more than some pathetic 3 billion you claim we get from the US. 

British and Americans own the majority of Australian resources - about 85%. They consistently pay NO TAX on these energy and mineral resources - and when we tried to tax them they literally over threw our government via advertising or use the CIA to overthrow our government (Gough Whitlam).

America corporations have taken over our public service with consulting and auditing firms - who also advise other American firms how to not pay tax - resulting in literally HUNDREDS of BILLIONS in lost revenue to the US while also costing us hundreds of billions in revenue to pay for our own public service.

While things like the ABS are outsourced to the US firms like IBM - who can't even run our census - zero accountability.

How about our ENTIRE national fiber broad band network being literally destroyed by an American so his company can continue to reap massive profits - the Prime Minister of our country announced the destruction of the NBN from fucking Fox Studios.

Companies like Raytheon are literally running our military while we have US military all over our country.

We are a vassal state which is forced into terrible trade deals which cost thousands of lives protecting US IP laws on pharmaceuticals while countries like India pay cents - we're buying next to USELESS US military hardware and are endlessly forced into sending Australian men and women to DIE for US political interests.  

America corporations have taken over our public service with consulting and auditing firms - who also advise other American firms how to not pay tax - resulting in literally HUNDREDS of BILLIONS in lost revenue to the US while also costing us hundreds of billions in revenue to pay for our own public service. 

While things like the ABS are outsourced to the US firms like IBM - who can't even run our census - zero accountability. 

How about our ENTIRE national fiber broad band network being literally destroyed by an American so his company can continue to reap massive profits - the Prime Minister of our country announced the destruction of the NBN from fucking Fox Studios.
Companies like Raytheon are literally running our military while we have US military all over our country. 

We are a vassal state which is forced into terrible trade deals which cost thousands of lives protecting US IP laws on pharmaceuticals while countries like India pay cents - we're buying next to USELESS US military hardware and are endlessly forced into sending Australian men and women to DIE for US political interests.

Images @ Eminpee Fotography 

Historic Bi-Centenary Protest

The Institute Times

Aboriginal People Protest Bicentenary

The Bicentenary of Australia was celebrated on Australian Day in 1988. It marked 200 years since the arrival of the First Fleet of British convict ships at Sydney in 1788.
The Bicentenary celebration day also marked a day of protest by Aboriginal peoples.

Yesterday myself and a friend re watched this video... this was 30 years ago on the 26th January in 1988.  Nothing has gotten better with regards to justice where the remaining nations that are left after colonization genocidal actions by successive governments and the general public at large are concerned.  Ignorance is no longer an excuse when it comes to this serious issue.  This is a crime against humanity.

After you have watched this one above you can click through HERE and go to an SBS site that has another version.


More images @ Eminpee Fotography

http://www.50yearjourney.aiatsis.gov.au/stage5/item5.htm

Not sure why it does not let you play video from here but click through to Vimeo to watch like it says.

Artilla ... Mt Connor Central Australia.

What a magical place to gaze upon... 

Mt Connor is a Mesa 700 million years old and lies in a direct line (and older x 2 to 300 million yrs) with the Northern Territories two other large sacred places, that of Uluru and Kata Tjuta.  Artilla as it is known is now apart of the huge Curtain Springs cattle property.

 

Aboriginal stories

In the Dreamtime stories of the local Aboriginal People it is connected with the feared Ninya, or Ice Men, the creators of cold weather. The Ninya are believed to have camped at Artila during the Dreamtime, but now they live about 25 km away to the north beneath a dry lake. The Aboriginal People believe that when deep cracks form on the soles of their feet they are caused by ice left in the grass by the Ninya. There is evidence on the coarse pebbles of the mesa that at some point in the past, presumably in the Pleistocene ice age, the area did indeed undergo some degree of glaciation. Maybe the dreamtime stories in this area are memories of the glacial phase that has been passed on through many generations. History remembered in stories.
Mt Conner, especially her caves, is a refuge to some rock-dwelling marsupials and bats.

Images @ Eminpee Fotography

How Dungog got its name.

My personal introduction to Dungog was in 1981.   I had friends who moved to this area from Newcastle.  We would travel up through the Hunter Valley and visit them often.  The joke was to say you were off to the town of "Dead Dog".  Dungog was affectionately known as  this by many people.

Dungog is a Dairy and Timber town in the Upper Hunter Valley on the Williams River, which is one of ten tributaries which flow into the Hunter River.

Observing the town from my perspective back in 1981, I could see that Dungog had become a quiet place and it appeared a shadow of its former self.  This was evident in the buildings of the main street still there for all to see when I visited for the first time.  I am seriously not sure what it looks like now after the fatal 2015 weather event.

My friends lived in a tin house.  The entire house was corrugated iron.  Apparently this was a very cheap way to clad a house in the early part of the 20th Century.  The house would have been erected   around the 1920's circa.  It was a funny old house with a grape vine with the sweetest grapes I have ever tasted growing from the grape trellis build on the southern side of the house.   This area was an oasis to sit down under during the heat in the endless summers of the Upper Hunter Valley area. 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gringai

The Gringai people, a group of indigenous people of Australia, are those Australian Aborigines that were united by a common language, strong ties of kinship and survived as skilled hunter–fisher–gatherers in family groups as a clan of the Worimi people, whose traditional land is now known as the Port Stephens of New South Wales, Australia.
Gringai lands are mostly in the Williams River and the Manning Valley, and include what is now known as Dungog, Paterson, Gresford, Brookfield, Tocal, to the headwaters of the Williams and Chichester rivers.

Gringai land also includes the southern valleys of the Barrington Tops.

Two people of the Gringai are known by that name as a result of their arrest and subsequent trials. Wong-ko-bi-kan and Charley were both arrested within a year or so of each other in the 1830s.

Wong-ko-bi-kan was sentenced to be transported to Tasmania for manslaughter after spearing a John Flynn, where he died soon after. Charley was the only man to be hanged in the town of Dungog on the Williams River, as a demonstration to his fellow Gringai.

Another was Jack Cook Maloogat (born 1830, Cobark Station NSW, died 1925), Captain Thunderbolt's horse boy. Maloogat was also one the last of his tribe to have gone through the last known Keepara - Kiapara ceremony or Boombit (from boy to man) where he got his name (Maloogat-son of thunder).

One of the Bora rings, initiation grounds of the local tribe, was in the Bulliac-Tugrabakh area, 4 miles (6 km) from Gloucester. Another two Bora rings where they used to camp and hold their corroborees are located where the Gloucester Public School now stands; one ring was used by the women and the other used by the men.

Looking across the valley overlooking Gloucester

Captain Thunderbolt - Fred Ward a close friend of my great grand father Edward Butler.  They often met in the bush for smoko.  This is a well known story in my family told to me by grandmother and her sisters.

On the 21st April, 2015 a devastating weather event occurred in the Dungog area.  This resulted in houses washed away and the human and material cost was gigantic.

NSW wild weather: Dungog like 'war zone' after flash flooding

Updated 22 Apr 2015, 10:35pm 

"Despite their best efforts, three elderly people died when their homes were literally swept away after 300 millimetres of rain hit the area in less than 24 hours."

It became known as Dungog's stormageddon!

Link ABC:  Dungog like 'war zone' after flash flooding

Images @ Eminpee Fotography

The Convicts who had no Choice

The first fleet consisted of ..... ships that were sent here full of people who had done very little wrong and they were sent to the other side of the world for this.  That should give you some idea of the type of people we have in charge now.  Not much has changed, although today money is the deciding factor on whether you are on alright person or not.   11 ships filled with sorrow and misery and anger and a mixture of English, Irish and Scottish people together.

r

I note there are 37 "John Shaw's" in the convict records of people transported to the colony, this astounded me.  If you want to take a closer look at the first fleet records go to this link:
http://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-62574532/view?partId=nla.obj-62574785#

Our shared history starts here with these poor souls torn from their families, some never to be seen again or died on the boat over here.

Palya Aunty, Yuwa Mirri

 ‘Palya’    ‘Yuwa’

‘Palya’ is a Pintupi language word meaning ‘good’.

My friend Vince from the Northern Territory ... a Luritja Man from the Peterman Ranges area.   Palya Vince

The word ‘Palya’ is also a way of greeting. For instance, seeing someone again one would say “Palya?”  an answer might be “Yuwa” – meaning yes – ‘Palya’.

Images @ Eminpee Fotography

The Internet ... making sense of what it actually is.

Image Source - Flickr

I had children in the eighties.  Game consoles were just taking off as a toy. They were a tool to interact with. .  My son had a Game-Boy and a Sega Master System console game.  Our entire family got involved with this when it was new.  It was exciting to us and we all loved the game known as Road Rash.  Many late nights were spent sitting trying to complete the levels.  

When computers started to poke their noses into peoples lives as a tool of entertainment and record keeping it seemed to me a natural progression from the earlier interactive gaming consoles. 

Image Source - Flickr

I used our families first computer we had acquired in 1998 to type stories.   It was easy to keep these and add to them.  We all played Back Gammon.  I taught my children to play on the computer.  From using the computer to play it was easier for them to move to the game in real time using a proper board.
I was thinking about all the changes we have seen in nearly 18 years of my personal use of the computer in the home and the use of the internet.  I love it.  I have seventy boxes of books I am well versed in carting around the country side in my life moving house - these days all of what is in those reference books can be sourced online.  I still would not discard the books yet or ever.  Maybe I am still caught in the old school mode - maybe I am suspicious still.

I found an article online and I found it interesting to read about the intricacies of some of the speculations and ideologies at the time when the internet was still new.  An article written back in 1999 sheds light on some of this in retrospect.  Its the looking back at this that was so very profound. 
 

Below is an excerpt from an interesting article written on this subject.
The piece first appeared in the News Review section of the Sunday Times on August 29th 1999.

"How to Stop Worrying and Learn to Love the Internet" - Please go Here to read this in full.

http://www.douglasadams.com/dna/19990901-00-a.html

Because the Internet is so new we still don’t really understand what it is. We mistake it for a type of publishing or broadcasting, because that’s what we’re used to. So people complain that there’s a lot of rubbish online, or that it’s dominated by Americans, or that you can’t necessarily trust what you read on the web. Imagine trying to apply any of those criticisms to what you hear on the telephone. Of course you can’t ‘trust’ what people tell you on the web anymore than you can ‘trust’ what people tell you on megaphones, postcards or in restaurants.
Working out the social politics of who you can trust and why is, quite literally, what a very large part of our brain has evolved to do. For some batty reason we turn off this natural skepticism when we see things in any medium which require a lot of work or resources to work in, or in which we can’t easily answer back – like newspapers, television or granite. Hence ‘carved in stone.
What should concern us is not that we can’t take what we read on the internet on trust – of course you can’t, it’s just people talking – but that we ever got into the dangerous habit of believing what we read in the newspapers or saw on the TV – a mistake that no one who has met an actual journalist would ever make.
One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no ‘them’ out there. It’s just an awful lot of ‘us’.

 Recently, in Australia legislation around the use of the internet as a carriage service has been changed and updated and there has been new legislation introduced regarding its use. 

A lot of users were used to letting it all out there, fully blasting those not liked much in the real world.  The Politicians, Church Leaders, and people had opinions on all things that got up their

noses.  We met people online with similar interests.   Groups formed.  Its been a lot of change and for in some ways these changes have been swift. 

There hardly seems enough time to digest the first part let alone coming to the realization that we have to say nothing about how we feel - as big brother is watching every word we type.  Homeland Security monitors it all in the name of anti-terrorism.

I don't know where this will end up - it is extremely interactive now and all things can be done online and there is far less reason to interact with the world in real time because of this.  How this effects the general consciousness level of the planet is an exciting prospect.  There has never been such instant access to knowledge.

There is no valid government in Australia

Parliamentary Precinct

 The fundamental facts which give rise to the accuracy of the above statement are indeed simple and were succinctly stated a few years ago by the late Professor G. Clements (an eminent UK QC and emeritus Professor in law at Cambridge). He summed up the situation thus,

“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 …”.

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 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.
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)

However contrary to much of domestic Australian legal opinion, Australia became an independent sovereign nation following Mr. William Morris Hughes, Prime Minister and Commonwealth Attorney-General, together with Sir Joseph Cook, signing the multi-lateral Treaty of Peace at Versailles, France in June 1919. This included the Covenant of the League of Nations, along with many other important documents in International Law. Particular attention should be paid to clauses I, X, XVIII, and XX of the Covenant. go to ...The ‘Australian’ Constitution is United Kingdom law.

In “An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia”, the 9th clause of which is usually referred to as the ‘Australian Constitution’ was, is, and remains conditional upon the first 8 covering clauses of that Act, a current Act of domestic law of the United Kingdom Parliament.

Under Section 128 of Clause 9, minor alterations to the Constitution may be made by the Australian people. However, the Australian people may not 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.

The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act passed through the UK Parliament in June 1900, to commence as law in Australia on the 1st of January 1901. Since the people of Australia have only ever had the right to change Sections 1 to 128 of Clause 9 of this Act, it follows that covering clauses 2, 6 and 8 remain law in Australia. (See Joosse v ASIC HCA 1998 159 ALR 260 or go to http://www.austlii.edu.au/…/other/hca/trans…/1998/M35/1.html )

This means that 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 has recently ruled that the United Kingdom is a foreign power, and that the UK Parliament cannot have any effect on the Governments of Australia (Sue v Hill HCA 30 of 1999 or seehttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/1999/30.html).

Hence, if British colonial law continues to operate in Australia, then 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 the United Nations. The Covenant and the Charter of both bodies, respectively, bind these 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 Parliamentary question asked in the UK Parliament about the Australian Constitution, 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”.

https://endoppressioninoz.wordpress.com/valid-government-d…/


Images @ Eminpee Fotography