Archive for the ‘Governments and Law’ Category

What is democracy?

We the people always seem to believe that a democracy is a system that should benefit the people, yet is this something God promotes? It has been said by several that within a democracy, the people are acting as God by deciding what LAW they wish to be under. What happens when 51% of the population votes on a Law that conflicts with a Biblical law or principle? This would imply 49% of the population have a social obligation to honor an ungodly law.

The Greek translation of Democracy seems to come from the words DEMONA and KRATISI, which simply translates to Demonic Possession. It is the people who are attempting to possess demonic law into their lives? Under a Civil system, the people are Children of the State, thus possibly the Government is acting as a spiritual guardian (father). If this is true perhaps within a democratic civil system, Government truly has the final say in what is lawful, without any true interest in the people, rather an interest to personal private wealth.
The following comes from :

Isn’t it strange that even after all warrnigs from the EU and Human Rights Assosiations for Greeks bad treatmens on non-Greek citizents and NO given even basic rights to all non-Greeks or their RECOGNITION – Greek government don’t even budge about it and CONTINUES WITH THEIR TYRANY on the dally bases even MORE stronger?????

Looking trough their history of been fathers of “democracy” and the meening of it, I’ve conclude that THEY ARE DOING “NOTHING WRONG” – according to THEIR original translation and implementation of THEIR “democracy”, therefore finding themselves SPREADERS of their “democracy” with its ALL and FULL true meaning and type of sociaty practice.

To BE MORE ACCEPTED TROUGH THE WORLD and WIN PEOLES HEARTS they LIE to the world saying that “DEMOCRACY” means “freedom of the people”


Even if we look at the word NOW we will see its meaning DEMO-cracy????

But let’s go trough the whole Greek ethymology meaning:

1574, from M.Fr. democratie, from M.L. democratia (13c.), from Gk. demokratia, from demos “common people,” originally “district” (see demotic),+ kratos “rule, strength” (see -cracy). Democratic for one of the two major U.S. political parties is 1829, though members of the Democratic-Republican (formerly Anti-Federal) party had been called Democrats since 1798; though colloquial abbrev. Demo dates to 1793.

1822, from Gk. demotikos “of or for the common people,” from demos “common people,” originally “district,” from PIE *da-mo- “division,” from base *da- “to divide” (see tide). In contrast to hieratic. Originally of the simpler of two forms of ancient Egyptian writing; broader sense is from 1831; used of Greek since 1927.
1656 (implied in hieratical), from Gk. hieratikos, from hierateia “priesthood,” from hierasthai “be a priest,” from hiereus “priest,” from hieros “sacred.”

In ITS terminology will see the TRUE meaning of the society type of life, which is;

DEMOTIC=divide (demon) opposite to HIERATIC=unite (holly spirit)

And KRATOS=rule


Greeks themselves knowingly APPLY this kind of society and SPREAD around the world under a (LIE) meaning “freedom of people”?????????

In their history of explaining their “democracy” is says:

“Athenian democracy, the tyrants, and the archons, Athens was ruled by kings. Most of these are probably mythical or only semi-historical.”





Posted on October 23rd, 2015 by admin  |  No Comments »

I Declare I’m Free! Bill Turner

Bill Turner, does an admirable job explaining:

  • What a Birth Certificate is
  • What Summary Judgement really means
  • Claiming your Inheritance
  • How to Lien your Birth Certificate
  • Using PPSA as Public Notice
  • The Deception of Public Trustees
  • The Corporate Trinity
  • What is a Warrant
  • Maxims of Law
  • Who is the Crown
  • What True Sovereignty means

Posted on May 27th, 2012 by admin  |  No Comments »

For We are Young and Free

A few interesting key points :

  • The purpose of the Law is the protection of individual rights and freedoms
  • Government is claiming to be public masters not public servants
  • Australian Citizens are no longer recognised as British subjects, which would destroy our Imperial laws/rights.
  • The Australian Act 1986 enacted Australia as a separate nation from England, and changed the heads of the Constitution. Such a change required a referendum, thus is illegal and Ultra Vires.
  • The true function of the court is to interpret and apply the law correctly, provide justice and support the separation of powers in our nation, but today the court is only acting as an executive instrument to safe guard their revenue to pay their own salaries.

Posted on April 30th, 2012 by admin  |  No Comments »

Waiver Benefit Privilege – Winston Shrout

An interesting method to waive/reject fines.


Posted on April 27th, 2012 by admin  |  No Comments »

Interesting Court Case: Rumbel v Liverpool Council

Posted on April 27th, 2012 by admin  |  No Comments »

Constitutional Law Video Seminar (July 2010 Ashburton)

Posted on January 20th, 2012 by admin  |  No Comments »

Constitutional Law Video Seminar (2011 Ashburton)

Posted on January 20th, 2012 by admin  |  No Comments »

Constitutional Law Video Seminar (November 2011 Darnum)

Posted on December 16th, 2011 by admin  |  No Comments »

A Short Lesson in Public Law

The following information is based on my own research and knowledge of our Australian Law. The author and publisher disclaim all liabilities in connection with the use of this information Under the public benefit social security scheme, citizens may be subrogating their common law rights. It is the responsibility of all individuals to understand their contracts within the public system.

The Sovereign electors confirmed in the 1984 referendum (Question 2) that the power of the State CANNOT override Commonwealth Law. This protection also confirmed in s109 of the Australian Constitution. This makes the Australian Act 1986 null and void and any State Parliamentary Act that stems from the Australian Act also of no effect to a Sovereign Subject. The creation of Public Law in Australian must conform to section 58 of the Commonwealth Constitution, requiring Royal assent to all proposed Bills. This instruction, procedure and process cannot be compromised. In effect, the Road Safety Act 1986 (Vic), and the Infringement Act 2006 (Vic), both absent of Royal assent, are without doubt foreign private acts, and unenforceable in the Public, unless by the expressed consent of the Sovereign Subject.

An Act with Royal assent will begin with:

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly of Victoria in this present Parliament assembled and by the authority of the same as follows (that is to say):

A Private (non public) act will begin with:

The Parliament of Victoria enacts as follows:

The same legal logic applies to our court systems. All MAGISTRATE Courts operating in Australia, are acting as private courts, as a private commercial arbitration, as a star chamber court (as defined under Habeas Corpus), as a court under limited jurisdiction. No MAGISTRATE court will exercice “their” private courts under Federal Juristiction as their private state Magistrate Courts Act 1989 Sec100 (2) has removed this public right, for their own protection. This is in direct violation with Sections s71 (all State courts to operate under Federal Juristiction) and s80 (Trial by Jury) Commonwealth Constitution. In effect they are unfit to exercise any jurisdiction in any matter either civil or criminal, without the expressed consent of the Sovereign Subject.

In conclustion, any and all attempts to contract prejudicial to a Chapter III Constitutional (Public) Court is VOID.

Furthermore, any and all MAGISTRATE courts cannot produce a Commonwealth Court Order affixed with the Royal Public Seal Identifier as required under the Evidence Act 1958 (Victoria) Section 78 and Evidence Act (Commonwealth) Section 150 and 151, to demonstrate any civil or criminal conviction. Public law under s12 of the Bill or Rights requires a Conviction before a fine can be issued. These actions are both a breach of contract for failure to provide consideration, and an attempt to pervert justice under s43 of the Crimes Act 1914 (CTH).

All Sovereign Subjects must expressively deny being subject to the jurisdiction of any and all Acts of Law which have not received Royal assent, deny being any kind of Citizen, and deny being subject to any and all commercial legislative tribunals under limited jurisdiction, or anything of like character.

Posted on October 24th, 2011 by admin  |  1 Comment »

Trust Law

A very interesting talk segment/videos concerning trust law and remedies withing political systems:


David Clarence – Estate Executor Letter

Dean Clifford – Trust Law

Howard Griswold Audio February 10, 2011 Constructive Trust, Executor, Bonds Registration of Private Property

Bill Turner – THE LAW AND YOU

Posted on September 2nd, 2011 by admin  |  No Comments »

Crazy Hit Counters