Property rights? What property rights?

Posted on November 22, 2014 by KG

Jo Nova:
‘Peter Spencer versus The Commonwealth
The Federal Government can’t take your assets  without paying, but the state governments can.
The Native Vegetation Acts were brought in by the states to stop farmers clearing native plants — but no compensation was ever paid to farmers. The Federal Government used the carbon credits contained in that vegetation to meet Australia’s obligations under the Kyoto Protocol, yet the burden of supplying these credits fell on some farmers and not on other Australians.
The Commonwealth is not allowed to confiscate assets without due compensation — it’s in the Australian Constitution. But states can do it. So what if the Federal Government makes an arrangement with the states for the states to make the confiscatory laws instead — does that get around the Constitution, is that ok?..’

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Property rights? What property rights?

  1. Warren Tooley says:
    November 22, 2014 at 22:22

    I was reading a book about the climate change scam, ‘Climategate Debunked’ by David E Robinson. And they talked about this very thing, people having their farms taken in the name of reducing the carbon footprint. So it seems to say, when countries make an international treaty, they have to stick to whatever they’ve said, and their own citizen’s rights are only secondary.

    So the question is, if I had been in Australia, and borrowed money for a farm, and then have it confiscated, who is liable for the loan that was backed by the property? I see I’m not the only one who knows about this thing that’s going on. :sad:

    • KG says:
      November 23, 2014 at 01:28

      I’d feel a little less angry about it, perhaps if we the people had some say in this business of signing up to treaties and other binding agreements which impact our lives. But we don’t. Half the time we’re not even kept informed.
      It always seems to me that no bastard is truly accountable.

      • Warren Tooley says:
        November 23, 2014 at 07:32

        Yes KG, this is exactly the issue. People negotiating treaties, not being open about it. And that’s how the people get screwed. I’m really worried about this TPPA. The fact that Key is not being open about it, is a real worry.

        • KG says:
          November 23, 2014 at 08:34

          You bet it is, Warren. I don’t trust the man an inch. Beneath that smiling exterior is a very ruthless (and unprincipled) operator.

        • rivoniaboy says:
          November 23, 2014 at 11:58

          Warren in case you haven’t worked it out yet, let me spell it out slowly to you – free trade agreement with China means that eventually you become a Chinese vassal state.

          • KG says:
            November 23, 2014 at 14:02

            Exactly.

          • Warren Tooley says:
            November 23, 2014 at 17:42

            rivoniaboy, I think I might of heard something like this. A vessel refers to admiralty/maritime law. I’ve been reading all about it. Whenever you participate in commerce, you don’t have trial by jury.

            For instance in a law dictionary, driver means someone paid to transport passengers and cargo. So if you don’t drive responsibily they can fine you, as a driver is meant to drive responsibly.

            Whereas if you kill someone, or injure someone outside of the domain of the road code, you get trial by jury.

            Is this what you are referring to. If not I think I need a bit of a clue. Is it the law of commerce, sea law or admiralty/maritime.

              • Warren Tooley says:
                November 23, 2014 at 18:53

                I see, I don’t think I quite got the idea at first. So I take it then, what you guys are saying, is that as China is the creditor to the world, China will once again have dominion over the world, as the borrower is servant to the lender, in the same way, that for decades the USA has dictated their thoughts to other countries and so will China be able to dictate to other countries. Have I now got the right idea? Yes I did look at the definition.

              • Warren Tooley says:
                November 23, 2014 at 18:56

                At the same time it will happen through so called free trade. That as they have the gold they will make the rules, to their benefit, as creditors always have an advantage over their debtors. That it will go far beyond trade of goods and services, it will also have something to do with loans and business buy outs.

  2. MvL says:
    November 23, 2014 at 08:59

    And don’t forget the insidious interference of local councils in this country in the name of “climate change”.
    Driven mostly by “climate consultants” riding the warmy gravy train, you will find most councils have embraced the scam, banning everything from home fires to coastal building in the name of saving the planet. All for our own good of course. :evil:

  3. Carol-Christian Soldier says:
    November 23, 2014 at 09:24

    Life Liberty PROPERTY – original words of Declaration-changed to Pursuit of Happiness-you all know why–
    the /founders if the US knew that a ‘royal’ govt could take the property of a citizen for any reason– –
    we freedom lovers from all countries will have to form a ‘band of sisters and brothers’ –
    C-CS

    • KG says:
      November 23, 2014 at 14:04

      We sure will, Carol. http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_good.gif

    • Cadwallader says:
      November 23, 2014 at 14:20

      The band already exists in the form of various libertarian parties throughout the western world. The problem is we the enslaved are fearful of personal freedom through the indoctrination that we cannot adequately function without the constant intervention of the state.

      Try getting a libertarian MP elected, sadly it is nigh on impossible. The NZ Libertarianz Party faltered for this reason and due to a few “difficult policies.”

      • KG says:
        November 23, 2014 at 14:29

        The NZ Libertarianz Party failed because of their obsession with drug legalisation and utterly loony open borders policy.
        Of all the serious issues facing us, drug legalisation must surely be well down the list in most people’s minds.
        (not that I’m against adults using whatever drugs they damn well please).
        As for the open borders business, I find it hard to get my head around that level of stupidity.

        • The Gantt Guy says:
          November 23, 2014 at 15:08

          http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_good.gifhttp://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_good.gifhttp://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_good.gif

        • Oswald Bastable says:
          November 23, 2014 at 17:58

          Yep, that’s where we had a parting of our ways. I understood the principle, but unlike them- understood the reality.

          Not all ‘immigrants’ are worth having. To make it crystal clear- Muslim colonists are as welcome as droplet-infectious Ebola.

            • Darin says:
              November 24, 2014 at 01:06

              Open borders only work if the welfare state doesn’t exist.

              The US originally had open borders,you came here and made it by your own grit,or you busted and went home.One well kept secret of US immigration is the large number of people who went home.