NATIONAL WATCHMAN UPDATE No 13. Vol 2. DATE : Tuesday, 10 April 2001 SUBJECT : Where From Freedom? - Part II Bringing you step by step to an understanding of the coming New World Order and associated One World Government. Yes, there is time to prepare but you must listen to The National Watchman. ============================================= Where From Freedom? - Part I ============================= The National Watchman Update of Friday, 9 March 2001 was ‘ Where From Freedom?’. It was never intended to have a follow-up. Now there is a Part II and very likely a Part III. The first UPDATE of the series explored the new idea of political free speech that is taking place in Europe, the Star Chamber. The simple thrust of this UPDATE (Freedom Part II) is that preparation for similar legislation is in place for Australia. Today Star Chamber methodology is openly discussed in the Parliament of Australia; it is to be found in current Anti Discrimination Bills being considered by a number of State Parliaments. The Victorian Fascism Bill ========================== One of these Bills has previously been discussed in UPDATE No4. Vol 2 ( Quick Updates). The Discussion Paper, launched by the Victorian Brack’s government on December 14 2000, would implement laws outlawing racial and religious intolerance. The Victorian Bill heralds Communist style legislation that would make it an "offense" under racial and religious vilification laws for anyone to make any politically incorrect statements, wear any politically incorrect uniforms or make any politically incorrect gestures in the "privacy" of their own homes. General Concerns ================ Some concerns are: • There is no actual definition of what constitutes vilification - actual words or actions are not defined, • Intent is not a defence, • YOU ARE GUILTY until you prove you are innocent, • It will be up to the "reasonable observer" to decide if the behaviour is acceptable or not. • Vilification could be reported by a third party, possibly even in the home Under the present form of the Victorian legislation, according to the "Herald Sun" article 7/12/00, "defences might not be available to people accused of vilification." Following is one man’s analysis of this legislation. That man is Mr. Ron Owen, a retired Queensland business professional, who has long been trying to notify the Australian public of the importance of our Constitution and the source of our liberties. Another Man's Views =================== Ron Owen’s email is on the ANTI-DISCRIMINATION AMENDMENT BILL 2001 The explanatory notes this Bill state (says Ron), “The Bill contains new racial and religious vilification provisions which will limit the right to freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech is not absolute, but is limited by a number of existing laws such as defamation, censorship and sedition.” Freedom is not granted, it is Earned ==================================== In the first Freedom UPDATE the following was stated, The freedoms that you take for granted today in Australia (trail by jury, innocent until provide guilty, right to be brought before a judge) come only from the English common law. Remove this law and you will graduate to rule by State sanction, a return to the Roman Empire.” If you read Mr. Owns in this light, the loss of English Freedoms, it bears great power and indicates clearly what is to come. Ron Owen’s missive ends with, “The State will find a way to either make us too scared to say anything or condemn us for what we do say. It is a Galileo's return to the Inquisition, a return to despotism.” You can disregard the English legal heritage if you like. But heritage, law and power do not exist in a vacuum. If you remove one, there is an immediate rush, within the legal and constitutional structures, that seeks to fill the void. A vacuum is only a stage of transition; it is not the destination. Today our legal and constitutional structure is punctured in two places. In one great hole English law and liberty rush out. In the other international law, tyranny, the New World Order and Mystery Babylon rush in. Kerry Spencer-Salt B.E., LL.B (Hons) The National Watchman Australian Community Organisation P.O. Box 136, Surry Hills NSW 2010 Phone : (02) 9 690 2211 E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website : www.rockroll.com.au/watchman *********************************** EMAIL OF RON OWENS<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ARE YOU GOING TO BREAK THE LAW TODAY? (Headings were not in the original and have been inserted by The National Watchman to make for easier reading.) *********************************** Introduction ============ 'Freedom of Speech Lost', if this important individual right is suppressed the only opinions expressed will be from Media Speak. As we know rights and liberties are not removed overnight, the Fabians invented gradualism and Bob Hawke perfected it. First individual responsibilities are removed, and then rights are eaten up by the parasitical 'white ants' known as parliamentary drafters for the, 'so called' common good of us all. New Loss of Freedom Legislation =============================== One of our most recent infestations into the wooden legs of freedom is the: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION AMENDMENT BILL 2001 Well that sounds harmless enough, but I always thought I had the right to discriminate about who I employed, or who I asked into my home, or who my children go to school with. I must have been wrong. I don't hate anyone, so it's not going to affect me, I'm not a racist. Those laws are for racists and bigots not fair minded ‘middle of the roaders’ like me. So if I don't have the right to discriminate anymore I can live with that, it's easy. A Politician Lies ================= As well as that, I felt comfortable when I read in the paper that on it's first introduction to the parliament Matt Foley Attorney General said, it was designed to protect the right to Free Speech. I should have remembered that old saying, 'How do you know when a politician's lying? When you see his lips moving.' It applies to all politicians who have sold their souls to the major parties. How do you know he or she is lying many would ask? Well in the explanatory notes which are up there in the Parliamentary Library's web page right next to the Bill itself, it say's. “EXPLANATORY NOTES GENERAL OUTLINE Objectives of the Legislation The Bill contains new racial and religious vilification provisions which will limit the right to freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech is not absolute, but is limited by a number of existing laws such as defamation, censorship and sedition.” The 180 Degree Turn =================== Well that's a 180 degree turn around for starters, the Minister says one thing the parliamentary drafters, who work for him, say the opposite. Maybe he never read it, well how can he honestly recommend it to the house? Rights are absolutes, you can either use them or be a slave, you're either dead or alive. You cannot limit the lion when you have let him out of the cage, in the same way you cannot expect common sense and rational thinking from power hungry bureaucratic government employees. Take liberty from the individual, give power to the State and they will use it. The Unlimited Power of the Act ============================== Laws on defamation state that the truth is a defence, but that does not apply in this Act. Laws on censorship are not used to stop the exploitation of minors and people prostituting themselves, but at present, only employed to protect the government from criticism. Again the law of sedition was enacted with good intentions to protect the Monarch from republicans and traitors. Not to protect our politicians from criticism, which is the way it's currently being employed. Real Rights - Near Forgotten ============================ Our rights suffer incursions constantly. That the politicians have exceeded their powers cannot, now, be used as an excuse to make it acceptable. Their unlawful legislation, unlawful as it is invalidated by the 'Rule of Law ' which is the code we are supposed to live under, cannot remove a right. The 'Rule of Law', developed over a thousand years, codifies our perspectives of what Rights are. Some of these include, o The Right to defend our rights and our lives, as one without the other is useless. o The Right to own and use tools to defend our lives. o The Right to free expression. o The Right to own property. o The Right to travel freely. o The Right to earn a living and feed our families. o The Right to access free justice, where no one is above the 'Rule of Law' English Liberty Lost ==================== Rights are what places us above the animals, without Rights we may as well be a monkey on a chain. Matt Foley and Peter Beatty cannot legislate Statute Law to remove any of these rights, they may think so, as many might believe them, but ultimately they will in time be judged inequitable. This Act when passed will overturn our English Legal tradition and help convert it into a totalitarian tool of dissent control. It gives gaol terms, even if there is no proof of intent. (Section 12 a). There is no presumption of innocence until found guilty once you are reported to the commissioner, he prosecutes you at the government's expense. You defend yourself as best as you can at yours. Section 226 A ============= You will be judged not by a Jury of your neighbours but by a government appointed tribunal. As in all dictatorial regimes you do not have the right to be confronted by your accusers or even know who they are. As Section 226 A gives the power to the tribunal to suppress it. “226A Continuing prohibition on identity disclosure '(1) This section applies if- (a) under section 191(1),2 the tribunal makes an order prohibiting the disclosure of the identity of a person Matt Foley says it's so Good - BUT ================================== By their own words, if you commit, hate-speech, graffiti, gestures, distribute propaganda or any other forms of offensive literature that are damaging to individuals or groups you are breaching this Act and could end up in goal for six months. You only have to vilify the cohesion and harmony of a culturally diverse society and you're in the slammer too. Does this mean I cannot tell any more Irish jokes? Or dress up as Al Jolson? Every week I used to enjoy the Black and White Minstrel Show, can I still keep my Golly Wog? First Nobel Prize - Tyrannical Legislation ========================================== This is all bad news for freedom loving individuals that may like to have an outrageous tee shirt or who may like to take up a petition (Petition a Right included in the Bill of Rights 1689) to ban the Moslem practice of female circumcision, but the part which gives it First Prize in the Nobel Prize of tyrannical legislation for 2001 is this little section. Excerpt from ANTI-DISCRIMINATION AMENDMENT BILL 2001 “EXPLANATORY NOTES Clause 8 inserts a new Chapter 4 Part 4 which establishes a new ground of complaint of racial or religious vilification... the section will not require proof that anyone was actually incited, to be satisfied. The test of whether incitement has occurred is an objective one, based on a hypothetical listener or viewer.. If a complaint to the Anti-Discrimination Commission in Queensland discloses a possible contravention of the new section 124A, it may be conciliated and enforced under the existing provisions of the Act” Brand New Ground ================ So there you go, this is one of those Acts which completely break new ground, as well as being accused by someone who can remain anonymous, for something you did not intend to do, they do not have to prove that the crime of incitement occurred, only if it could happen hypothetically, then the tribunal finds you guilty and off you go to gaol. The terminology of this Act is so obscure it could be used against anyone at anytime, petition to stop the de-sexing of cats and you could offend someone. It's a Free Country, or Was It ============================== This couldn't happen in a free country could it? I did meet some fourteen year old school children once, who believed we lived in a free country they had been told that at school and like good kids, had never thought that it might not be so. Of course even with adults these days, people who think are harder to find. Still there might be some adults, who would not believe that this sort of thing could happen here. Jews Seek to Limit Freedom of Speech ==================================== Well I have news for them, it's happening here already under the Commonwealth Act, which is not quite as draconian but still infringes on the Freedom of Speech and ultimately destroys the individual. A Directions Hearing before Her Honour, Justice Branson, Federal Court of Australia has been set down for 10 May 2001. Dr. Frederick Toben from Adelaide, has been charged by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. The Executive Council of Australian Jewry is seeking the enforcement of an order made last October by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. It demanded the removal of material which challenges the existence of the Nazi Holocaust against millions of Jews during the 1930s and 40's. Dr. Toben says, "If you deny me my freedom to think and to speak, then you deny me my humanity - and YOU commit a crime against humanity!" It makes no matter if Dr. Toben says anything, on his web site, about what Germans did to Jews or Americans did to Germans or if he says the Moon is made of green cheese, what he is saying about the Freedom of Speech is very appropriate and he has to be supported or we and our children will all lose in a very dramatic way. The State will find a way to either make us too scared to say anything or condemn us for what we do say. It is a Galileo's return to the Inquisition, a return to despotism. Ron Owen ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion. To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subjectçsubscribe To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?SubjectÎbscribe For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm For archives http://www.mail-archive.com/public-list@neither.org
