Monday 4th January 1999


This on-line paper is now archived for perpetuity in the National Library of Australia

Subscriber's password check (have your subscription number handy)
Subscribers get free access to the monthly "The Strategy" on-line from April 1998.

Current topical links (available to all readers):
[Links to the MAI]
[One Nation on-line DISCUSSION forum] [One Nation Web Site]
HAVE YOU ORDERED:
[MURDER BY MEDIA, DEATH OF DEMOCRACY IN AUSTRALIA]

from an Aussie's viewpoint on Australia's first daily Internet newspaper.
Since October 1995

Well the multinationals disguised as "peak business groups" are now calling for John Howard to approve a big increase in migration to Australia... The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry is pushing for the migration intake to be raised from 80,000 to over 100,000 this year. The reason - big business is unable to to plan their "expansion" plans within the current immigration policy.

Of course most of the new immigrants will come from Asia where salaries can be as low as Au$30 per month. What does this mean to the Australian worker? Lower salaries and more Macjobs (low pay, no future) as a result.

For a country which already has 20% of the population underemployed and a similar number now officially recognised as unemployed or the "working poor" because of low award wages the call by the peak body is a disgrace.

It was peak business groups who had been kept fully informed on the MAI while Australians went about their business blissfully unaware of its impact - if it had gone ahead. It was these same peak businesses that said the MAI was good for Australia.

The outlook for kids leaving school is not great with the only jobs now available to them are Macjobs in the hospitality and retailing sectors where part time work is king - meaning that you can be fired at a moment's notice, have no leave pay and no overtime.

Of course it is now the foreign owned multinationals who dominate in these two markets as our traditional manufacturing industry has gone "walkabout" thanks to "globalisation" which is supposed to be "good for Australia"... "good for whom in Australia" should be the question being asked.

The blue collar worker has all but disappeared and now it is chefs, waiters, bar attendants, meeting organisers, hotel staff, caravan park staff and retail assistants where work can still be found. Every one a Macjob. Is it any wonder that there is a growing revolt in this country against the evil foreign money men who are screwing our standards of living down to the bottom rung of the so-called "level playing field" while our politicians puff out their little, little chests and say that Australia has "fared well" in the economic turmoil devastating countries. 

What a load of crap!

One of the most interesting cases, and the background of the term "MacJobs" can be seen at this link. (Note this is a slow site but worthwhile visiting).

Here is an extract from this page:

"McDonald's employees have ketchup in their veins." Paul Preston McDonald's UK President.

And on employment at MacDonalds:

When I was hired by the company, I was told by Norman Donahue, the Wabash manager that I would receive a performance review every 3 months, and this review would determine whether or not I received a wage increase.

As best I can recall I received a performance review in either September or October last year. I was paid $2.60 and received a raise of 15 cents, bringing me to $2.75 (per hour). At that time I was told that I had a great attitude by Ron Kas who interviewed me. At that time he was 1st assistant manager at Wabash. He is now manager at Randolph.

On March 10, 1978, I was given a performance review in the manager's room of the Wabash sore. Lee Essarove, Norman Donahue and Leon Hutchinson were present. Leon did most of the talking.

He stated McDonald's gives periodic raises on how well you do your job and how well you know your job. He said each manager evaluates you and submits their findings. the employer is graded on a scale of 1 to 5.

Norman stated performance reviews would be conducted again in 8 to 10 weeks.

I was told I had been given an overall average of 2.4%, which is high grade, but that my attitude rating had dropped to 4.0 rating.

I asked why the attitude rating was so low. Leon Essagrove said you really don't know what your feeling toward this company and store is. He continued to ask this kind of question for a few moments. Then I was told that I would receive a 10% raise. I was not told when it would become effective.

The interview lasted some 10 to 15 minutes. He then told me to tell Donald Hall to come down to the manager's office when I went up. I did this.

I was told by my co-workers Brian Cunningham that he had received a nickel; Baron Deadwyler told me he had received ten cents; Darlene Johnson said she got fifteen cents; Brenda Archer said she got ten cents; Margo Nance told me she got fifteen cents; denise Strong said she received a nickel; Don Hall said he got a nickel. I know of other employees who received increases by heresay.

More deaths? No thanks!

Hi Scott,

I am just another of those "dumb Australian voters" but I have to say that we can do better than propose more death as we stand on the dawn of a new millenium.

I am not opposed to the use of the death penalty for certain crimes per se, in a proper orderly civilised society. For murder, treason, possibly other extreme crimes in certain cases, but yesterday's dumb voter is quite right to be worried about the present system or anything even remotely like it administering such a penalty. Many innocents have died in the past under circumstances far less corrupt than those prevailing today.

I would have said that with the sort of common sense approach typical of One Nation in it's approach to a broad sweep of issues would (if O.N. were to achieve Government) soon show a rapid decline in the crime rate as social cohesion and community spirit begin to make a welcome return!

Many accused John Howard of wanting to return Australia to the 50s & 60s prior to the 1996 election just as P.H. was later so accused. Well what Johnny's critics failed to point out was that he planned to take us back to the 1850s & 60s!...

Take me back Pauline.

David Morgan.
Yet another D.A.V. from W.A.

P.S. How about a bumper sticker that reads "Dont blame me for this mess I voted O.N."

Misguided laws

S.E.T.O.N.S. Clerk
Brisbane Central "Magistrates Court"
GPO Box 1387
BRISBANE 4001

Dear Sir ,

I am in receipt of a document, directed by the postal service to me, entitled "ENFORCEMENT ORDER NOTICE".

You are advised that it appears to have come from your office. However, it bears no name nor signature of any person. You are also advised that, as those before you in the chain have obviously failed to brief you, or you have failed to understand the gravity of the situation you are now in, the interpretation has been upgraded to aggression, and as such, your name has been added to the submission which is now in the hands of Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of the United Nations. I am unable to determine the boundaries of the legal mine-field in which you now stand. The crime of aggression, in this instance, is the use of the law of a Member State (The United Kingdom) against a sovereign citizen of another Member State (Australia).

You are advised that, as an aboriginal Australian, I do not recognise the law you are attempting to impose upon me. It is a violation of both British and International law to impose British law upon any citizen of sovereign Australia. As recognised by the British Government, British law has no effect in sovereign Australia. Should you rely upon the decision handed down by Hayne J., in the "High Court of Australia" December 21 1998, where Hayne erred in points of law on two occasions, your reliance is fragile. I hold you personally responsible for the actions being taken against me.

You are well advised to read, digest, understand and heed the advice offered, as well as the enclosed (Part 1 - General Provisions - United Nations Codes of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind.)

The "magistrate" responsible for issuing your "enforcement order" is now also subject to the above mentioned submission.

Should you be able to produce the following documents,

a) The formal authority of the Governor-General and State Governors, in Australia, following the death of Queen Victoria, Queen of England in 1901. (Letters Patent cease to have validity upon the death of the Monarch),

b) the formal consent of the sovereign people of Australia for the use of British law, in Australia, post 28th June 1919, or

c) the formal consent of the people of Australia for the use of British law, in Australia post 10th January 1920,

d) the formal consent of the people of Australia for the appointment of a foreign Head of State,

e) the formal consent of the British people for the use of British law, in Australia, post 28th June 1919, or

f) the formal consent of the British people for the use of British law, in Australia, after 10th January 1920,

g) the Treaty between Australia and the United Kingdom allowing the use of British law in Australia and the certified registration of such Treaty with the League of Nations and the United Nations,

h) Letters Patent signed by a lawful Australian Monarch appointing a Governor-General and State Governors, and

i) the formal consent of the sovereign people of Australia allowing government by an hereditary Monarch,

which the federal "government" and various "government" departments have failed to do, I would only be too happy to abide by any law you prove to be valid. Until then, all persons using foreign law against myself will be vigorously pursued through the offices of the Secretary-General of the United Nations to satisfaction.

Yours faithfully,
Len Clampett.

-------

Kenneth Madison Hayne
"Justice" of "The High Court of Australia"
c/o "The High Court of Australia"
Canberra ACT 2600

Kenneth Hayne,

In support of your recent "decision" regarding the validity of the "British Colony of the Commonwealth of Australian Constitution Act 1900 (UK)", it would be entirely appropriate for you to produce evidence of the following,

a) The formal authority of the Governor-General and State Governors, in Australia, following the death of Queen Victoria, Queen of England in 1901. (Letters Patent cease to have validity upon the death of the Monarch),

b) the formal consent of the sovereign people of Australia for the use of British law, in Australia, post 28th June 1919, or

c) the formal consent of the people of Australia for the use of British law, in Australia post 10th January 1920,

d) the formal consent of the people of Australia for the appointment of a foreign Head of State,

e) the formal consent of the British people for the use of British law, in Australia, post 28th June 1919, or

f) the formal consent of the British people for the use of British law, in Australia, after 10th January 1920,

g) the Treaty between Australia and the United Kingdom allowing the use of British law in Australia and the certified registration of such Treaty with the League of Nations and the United Nations,

h) Letters Patent signed by a lawful Australian Monarch appointing a Governor-General and State Governors, and

i) the formal consent of the sovereign people of Australia allowing government by an hereditary Monarch,

Until such time as you are able to produce the required evidence, your "decision" remains a fabrication in collusion with the other parasites and predators infesting Canberra.

Thank you for your time.

Yours faithfully,
Len Clampett.

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

Kofi Annan
The Secretary-General of The United Nations
United Nations Headquarters
New York
NY 10017
U.S.A.

Dear Mr. Secretary-General,

I wish to bring to your attention, for urgent action, the fact that the law in Australia, as used today, has been invalid since at least June 28th 1919. This means that, in the absence of any higher authority, indigenous law is the authority of the land.

As an aboriginal Australian I strenuously object to the use of foreign law, namely British law, against any Australian. This situation continues and it has been brought to my attention that the "authorities", in our capital city, Canberra, have known of the fault for over fifty years.

Currently, I am being aggressively persecuted by "authorities" over a matter of an alleged "Motor Traffic Act" infringement and threatened with incarceration. As the law is invalid there can be no "infringement".

I am particularly objecting to this use of invalid law, as the "authorities" in Australia have strutted the world stage for many decades attempting to right wrongs such as in the demand for "self determination" for the peoples of Cambodia, East Timor and West Papua, whilst all the time they have hidden from their own people the fact that they act without validity.

The invalidity stems from the day that the Prime Minister of Australia, William Hughes, signed the Treaty of Versailles as an independent, sovereign nation on June 28th 1919. It seems to escape the notice of those in "authority" that sovereign and independent have the same meaning.

Sovereign: Supreme; unmitigated;

Independent: Not depending on authority or control; self-governing; not depending on something else for validity;

These are but a few meanings of these words.

I have the well established opinions of some very eminent legal scholars who believe, as I do, that the only way in which a constitution can be put in place, in Australia, is, by an action of, and under the auspices of, the International Court of Justice.

Upon becoming a sovereign nation, Australia ceased to be a colony of the United Kingdom and therefore British law, in Australia, became invalid. When, on January 10th 1920, without seeking the approval of the Australian people at referendum, Hughes enjoined Australia to the League of Nations, as a founding member, the sovereignty and independence were fortified.

The Letters Patent signed by Queen Victoria, Queen of England, appointing Governor-General and State Governors in Australia, became invalid upon her death in 1901. This means, at law, that without valid Letters Patent, there has been no law other than indigenous law, since the death of Queen Victoria of England. This was not recognised by the powers that were, and the invalidity continued right through the time until 1984, when the then "Prime Minister" R.J.L. Hawke, went to Balmoral Castle, in England, and had Queen Elizabeth 11, Queen of England, sign new Letters Patent. These were invalid because she is unable to sign Letters Patent for any other than British subjects. Australians became aliens in Great Britain in 1973 when the British Parliament passed a new Immigration Act. It has to be noted that in 1972, when "Prime Minister" Whitlam changed the title of Queen Elizabeth 11 to that of Queen of Australia he did so without authority and in face of the fact that Queen Elizabeth 11 cannot be Queen of Australia, as she is not Australian. Even if the laws were valid, the "Prime Minister" has no authority to install a foreigner as Head of State.

The Australia Act 1986 may well be a live document of the British Parliament, however, it is a mute document that cannot apply to Australia as the British parliament has no authority to enact legislation for an independent and sovereign Australia.

It has been well known for years that the people of Australia are sovereign. Not the Parliaments, not the politicians, not the bureaucracy, not the "government", not the Governor-General nor State Governors, not the political parties or the "government" departments, but the people. Without the people there are no votes, there is no authority. Without the people there is a vast empty land. The people are that which make up a nation. Without the people there would be no "parliament" and the elected members could not be given mandates. You will note that politicians always claim mandates from the people, even when there has been no mandate given. The people of Australia originally united in "one indissoluble Federation", under British law. The land did not unite, neither did the trees or stones, the politicians certainly did not and could not.

We have the ridiculous situation now whereby the people in "authority" having known of the invalidity of our law for so long, are reluctant to admit publicly, their knowledge. We have even had the farce of a "Justice" of the "High Court of Australia", which cannot legally exist, handing down a judgement to the effect that, in his opinion, the "Constitution" is valid, thereby personally holding himself responsible for each and every action taken against a citizen, using invalid law.

It should also be noted that when the Constitution was voted upon in 1900, the only people allowed to vote were land-holders, and they were all British, as the Australian aborigines were not even recognised as human beings and citizens worthy of a vote until 1967, in Australia. The other residents of Australia were, at the time, mostly convicts and those who had been given their freedom. The voting population amounted to less than 7% of the entire white population at that time.

Each and every time a law is used against any person or entity, in Australia, International and British law is broken. This has to stop and the people have to decide how they want to be governed.

The "authorities" in Australia are unable to produce evidence of the following documents, particularly "Justice" Hayne,

a) The formal authority of the Governor-General and State Governors, in Australia, following the death of Queen Victoria, Queen of England in 1901. (Letters Patent cease to have validity upon the death of the Monarch),

b) the formal consent of the sovereign people of Australia for the use of British law, in Australia, post 28th June 1919, or

c) the formal consent of the people of Australia for the use of British law, in Australia post 10th January 1920,

d) the formal consent of the people of Australia for the appointment of a foreign Head of State,

e) the formal consent of the British people for the use of British law, in Australia, post 28th June 1919, or

f) the formal consent of the British people for the use of British law, in Australia, after 10th January 1920,

g) the Treaty between Australia and the United Kingdom allowing the use of British law in Australia and the certified registration of such Treaty with the League of Nations and the United Nations,

h) Letters Patent signed by a lawful Australian Monarch appointing a Governor-General and State Governors, and

i) the formal consent of the sovereign people of Australia allowing government by an hereditary Monarch,

There is an urgency attached to this matter and I ask for immediate attention to the resolution.

I thank you for your time.

Yours faithfully,
Len Clampett.

from the global office:

Another perfect day in paradise.

Have a good one.

This Ring Name site is owned by One Nation. Want to join the One Nation ring? [Skip Prev] [Prev] [Next] [Skip Next] [Random] [Next 5] [List Sites]

exclusive to  (how to) subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day:

One Nation's Queensland State Conference - 27th to 29th November
Dual Citizenship and politicians- 20th November 1998
Where Prize Turkeys Gather - 17th November 1998
A time with Heather Hill - exclusive interview with One Nation's first Federal Representative - 25th October 1998
A day with Pauline - exclusive interview after the Federal Election - 22nd October 1998
It's YOUR ABC? - 17th October 1998
The Federal Election - 3rd October 1998
One Nation launch - the day the media snapped.- 29th September 1998
Pauline Hanson defeats the politically correct lobby- 28th September 1998
Fairfax on trial- 23rd September 1998
Where the politically correct hang out - 20th September 1998
A brief lunch time controntation with Jeff Kennett- 8th September 1998
One Nation's Primary Industry Policy- 7th September 1998

Return to Australian National News of the Day

#

See GLOBE International for other world news.