Thursday, September 21, 2017

Judge supports drink driving with get out of jail free card?

The Australian 'authorities' (you know, the people actually in government and not the masses according to the Constitution) are full of sayings.

"Nothing to hide nothing to fear", right?
(Please note this does NOT apply to the people in government, as many of their documents are sealed never to be released to the public).

How about "Do the crime do the time"?

Unless you've been a 'free man' traveler in the Australian outback, where the mainstream media radio waves cannot reach your television or radio, you would know that the authorities advertise that drink driving is not acceptable behaviour.

Well one New South Wales 'judge' doesn't seem to think so.





Paul Conlon (pictured above) reckons that if you're a "person of good character", where you've been sentenced before to a 6 months prison term for drink driving, he will get you out of gaol (proper Australian term for "jail').

Apparently a Brazilian national Arthur Rohsig (pictured centre) was drink driving in Australia, where he accumulated 36 demerit points and his blew a breath test reading of 0.172.


The police have stated that he had “no regard for Australian law” and was “a danger to himself and others”, but (naturally) the police were unable to revoke his Brazilian licence.

As a result of his 'crime' he was sentenced in July to serve six months in the slammer but good ol' Paul Conlon got him out.

As a consolation prize though drink driver Arthur will be apparently deported.

So the message is loud and clear from (judge) Paul Conlon, if you want to drink drive and your a "person of good character" (whatever that means) he'll let you off the hook.

It might help if you're visiting here too.

DRINK DRIVERS REJOICE !!! !!! !!!

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

The SSM 'vote' is a statistic that will be sold by the ABS

With all the racket about the YES or NO 'vote' on Same Sex Marriage, many people have lost focus on the documentation that is provided to them.

First of all it is NOT a 'vote' but rather an indication whether you support homosexuals marrying.

Secondly it goes to a business called the Australian Bureau of Statistics, which will then SELL your data to whoever wants those 'statistics'.

Don't forget the ABS sold 'your' census data for $41,000,000.

You have been fooled into 'voting' where you are conducting an action in business / commerce / trade, albeit for free, and for profit to the ABS.

Corporation:$$$, People:$000.00

Thank you for your 'business', dumbos!!! !!! !!!

Mainstream media hiding the truth re City Councils?

The slogan for the Herald Sun publication on the front of the newspaper is "We're for Victoria".

So what any average Joe would maybe comprehend from that statement is that the Herald Sun 'supports' the people (?) of Victoria?

This does not necessarily seem to be the case.

Does the HS seem to publish the stories that the 'herd population' are supposed to know to in order to keep them docile and distracted?

Another publication 'curates' stories for its subscribers, with a liberal left wing bias rather than the 'truth' irrespective of its perceived political slant.

A post on social media showed how the Fairfax publication The Age stated that a rape was committed by an ex Victorian Police man on a five year old child, while in the next paragraph it was stated that she was raped by an employed Victorian police officer.

So, let's have a look at what the Herald Sun publication did not publish in their online comments


Bit of a bugger that!

Monday, September 18, 2017

Australian Government's Violent LBGT Agenda?

We're NOT into meme's, but hey WTH...


You know they saying....

So, surely with the application of simple mathematics, the good peeps should be able to comment at least a couple (non married, of course, ESPECIALLY with the amendment to the Marriage Act of 1961) of thousand words....

Saturday, September 16, 2017

Mobile speed camera fines are ILLEGAL

An enormous amount of detail can be written into why a or rather any fine before (prior to) a court appearance is not lawful, where the details are not going to be discussed in this post, but rather can be found in various other posts within the Corporate Australia blog.

SO, we'll start off with why a certain 'category' of fine can be dismissed IMMEDIATELY.

Let's look at one aspect of law that is advertised by your friendly 'city councils'.

They state that "Parking on nature strips is illegal - penalties apply"
(check with your local council, referring to state law - i.e. an Act to where this is 'claim' is referred to)



So, if you obtained a 'fine' from a person who parked their car like this:

(illustration of white Toyota speed camera equipped car parked on a nature strip)

or a fine from a person who is hiding their grey Mitsubishi behind some bins on a nature strip as shown in illustration below:




then should you choose to go to court over that matter you could ask the well versed at law magistrate or judicial registrar, who is at your service whether they support 'evidence' obtained illegally, referring to the relevant state law with regards to illegally obtained evidence.

Please note that a mobile speed camera operator is not a police officer, but rather an 'independent' contractor.

Should you choose to contest this type of fine in court, it would be to your benefit to obtain the owner's manual as part of evidence in order to ascertain whether the correct conditions were met that led to the allegation that a vehicle was speeding.

Friday, September 15, 2017

New law for Centrelink to punish people for being unemployed

The administration of the penal colony called Australia can even use brute force against the tax slaves of this country.

What the people in government do, is import (more) slave labour who take jobs from Australians.

The Aussies that are 'forced' out of work, in order to apply for welfare, must do so with a company called Centrelink.

They are then being punished for being unemployed, a 'welfare problem' the people in government created in the first place.


Centrelink (together with a host of Job Network Agencies) has been 'punishing' people for being unemployed for quite some time, whereas now it's going to be 'legal'.

See article from 12 Sep 2017 by aimn.com.au of the headline:

The Jobless Did Not Ask For This!


Who is responsible for jobs? Should we punish the jobless? Is welfare a right or a privilege? These are the questions the Government is too gutless to ask. By accepting the Government’s answers to these issues without question, it may be shaping a future we haven’t asked for. The Jobless didn’t ask for this!

The term “welfare” is often touted as synonymous with the word “problem”. The question we are not asked is, “Is welfare a problem?”

The Government is asking us to argue vehemently over answers to a question they are too gutless to ask. We should ask the Government questions.

Welfare Reform is a complex issue. However, the wider narrative has a huge impact on how we address reform in this space.
Welfare ‘Reform’

The Welfare Reform Bill currently before the house, is focused on using punishment as a blunt force to solve the ‘welfare problem.’ The Government is quite brazen in no longer hiding punishment as a measure.

One system of punishment is a demerit point system. Another is drug testing. Therefore, the Government has predetermined, that the jobless ‘do the wrong thing’.

The Liberal National Coalition have successfully chipped away at society, along with the opposition in some respects. That is, to create a sub-human welfare class who society appears comfortable to punish.

Punishment sits well with a large section of society. This is due to continuous stigma aimed at the jobless. In the words of Erving Goffman, we have actively inflicted upon the jobless a ‘spoiled identity.’

The Labor opposition opposes these measures. However, since the late 1980’s the Labor party has joined with the Liberals with the same mantra.. That is, the onus is on the jobless to find a job, rather than the responsibility of Government to sustain an economy offering jobs for all.

In short, the narrative over the last 30 years is that jobseekers need a paternalistic guiding hand to motivate them. Therefore, the Government shuns the notion of the jobseeker’s own intrinsic motivation.
Who is Responsible For Jobs?

The answer given to us over the last 30 years is that the jobless are a problem. The Government(s) place the burden on the jobseeker to find jobs, although these jobs may not exist. Where jobs do not exist, the Turnbull Government believes the jobless should create their own job. For ideological reasons, the Government shuns Government intervention and job creation.

The Government(s) have given us answers without asking any questions. They assume that we, in society, simply agree that the jobless are a problem.  The Government assumes that we agree that the Government is blameless. They assume we are completely happy with the amount and types of jobs available.
The questions the Government(s) are too gutless to ask is:

“Is the Government doing enough to ensure there are enough jobs for the people?”

“Is the Government skilled enough to implement the right solutions to increase available jobs?”

“If the Government does not believe it is their role to create jobs, is self-determination to create our own job by starting our own business, a practical solution for all?”

“Do we aim for a society where large pockets of ghost towns exist, along with a number of over-populated vibrant cities for workers to transition to, or do we aim for a society where the Government places the same commitment to develop all regions equally?”
Should We Punish the Jobless?

The answer given to us over the last 30 years is the we should punish the jobless. The punitive approach intensified during the Howard era, particularly financial penalties. The level of punishment today is very paternalistic and draconian.

The problem posed is that the jobless lack motivation. The assumption is that inaction by the Government is acceptable. However, the Government does not ask us if we agree.

Over the Abbott-Turnbull period, the level of punishment aimed at the jobless is unacceptable. From the jobless starve for six months policy, to the demerit system, to restrictions on volunteer work for over 55’s, cashless welfare and drug testing are aimed to develop a society, I do not recognise as an Australian society. This causes me a deep level of concern.
The questions the Government(s) are too gutless to ask is:

“Is it fair to punish the jobless, if the Government fails to provide enough jobs?”

“Should the Government punish the jobless, if they do not have the skills or capital to start their own business, if they cannot find a job?”

“Is it fair to punish the jobless if the Government has not provided an adequate jobsearch system to support the jobless to match them to available jobs?”

“Although studies show that extrinsic motivation factors such as punishment, affect psychological well-being, hinder job search and not assist it, is it acceptable to punish the jobless?
Is Welfare a Right or a Privilege?

The punitive approach of successive Governments aim to reduce spending in the welfare space. It is evident that the Abbott-Turnbull Government’s aim is to reclassify those on welfare into a sliding scale. This scale appears to bracket those on welfare from ‘acceptable citizens’ to ‘bludgers’ to ‘drug addled sub-humans.’

The Government had one other criteria “genuine jobseekers”, prior to this bill. However, all jobseekers now fall into the realm of bludgers. Every measure in the current bill, is underpinned by a suspicion the jobless individual may be prone to deviant behaviour.

The punitive measures in the current reforms are very much focused on financial penalty. They seek to exclude or restrict access to unemployment benefits. This is done by classifying welfare recipients into normal behaviour (reward) and deviant behaviour (exclusion).

In short, to save money on the welfare bill (which we all pay for, including the jobless), the Government has provided us with the answer of normals and deviants.

They haven’t asked us the question. However, it is clear their answer is ‘normals and deviants’.

The Government knows that Australians will always apply the ‘fair-go’ to normals, but not deviants. In short, it is a simple equation.

Jobless+30 years of stigma = Deviants
Normals-Deviants = Less welfare spending

This question I have left until last because it is crucial to how we see our future as a society.  Most importantly, I ask readers to please ponder upon this question. This is because the Government tells us everyday who we are. We need to stand up and tell them who we want to be.Therefore, it is crucial to argue if welfare is a right or a privilege. This is intrinsic to who we are as a society.
The question the Government(s) are too gutless to ask is:




Menzies Welfare

As you can see from the excerpt above, unemployment and sickness benefits were introduced in Australia as a right, not a privilege.  Three generations later, the Abbott-Turnbull Government speaks of welfare as a privilege and not a right. They have changed the definition whilst we were not looking. Additionally, they again, provided us with an answer without asking us a very important question.

“Should Welfare continue to be available as a right to all people in society, from the recently redundant to the most disenfranchised in society, or do we aim for a society, where the poorest class are further divided by the Government into entitled humans and excluded sub-humans?”
Real Reform

Real welfare reform will begin with asking confronting questions and shifting away from arguing over the answers the Government provides without them posing an actual question.

If the Government took on the burden instead of the jobless, our conversations around the dinner table, would be very different. Importantly, these tiny conversations are powerful enough to shape public policy.

It is evident from some of the emotive speakers within the Labor opposition and crossbenchers, speaking to this bill, that the punishment regime has gone way too far. However, after 30 years of placing the burden on the jobless and praising punishment as a motivator, why is anyone speaking to this welfare bill, angry or shocked?

Real Welfare Reform can only happen when a leader dares to stand apart from the pack. This leader will remove the burden from the jobless. They will lead us by being brave enough to take ownership and responsibility for job creation. Most importantly they will not stand idly by and allow the jobless in our society to suffer from stigma in silence. They will unite us and not divide us.

They will look back over the last 30 years, look back to us and with true emotion say “Under a Government I lead, the jobless will never be punished again.”