Society & Culture Principality of Hutt River.

Remove this Banner Ad

Bomberboyokay said:
So shrewd he owes $3,000,000 in taxes.
Click to expand...


How can he owe anything to the Australian Government if he has seceded?

Anyway, his constitutional principles for secession are sound, but he hasn't worked out that Australia is run by gangsters.

Wolter Joose tried to run similar arguments in the High Court years ago, and was steamrolled.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/1998/77.html?context=1;query=Joosse v Australian Securities and Investment Commission;mask_path=

What these folks fail to realise is that the role of the High Court is uphold the Australian Constitution Act, regardless of the strength of their legal arguments.
 
Donners said:
Exactly.

SovCits and their assorted variations make for entertaining lunchtime stories, but it's not like they're coming up with all-powerful loopholes.

They just spout a bunch of pseudo-legal nonsense and either get ignored or steamrolled - I saw the latter in a court hearing just a few months ago, and it was quite amusing to watch the punter quickly back down when he realised that pressing his argument was definitely not in his interest.
Click to expand...

a good friend of mine is currently preparing a prosecution brief for one of these clowns. i am hoping to get the day off to sit in the gallery :)
 
Snake_Baker said:
How can he owe anything to the Australian Government if he has seceded?

Anyway, his constitutional principles for secession are sound, but he hasn't worked out that Australia is run by gangsters.
Click to expand...

do enlighten us. which principles in particular?

Snake_Baker said:
What these folks fail to realise is that the role of the High Court is uphold the Australian Constitution Act, regardless of the strength of their legal arguments.
Click to expand...

any examples you'd like to give where the high court got a point of law wrong in your opinion?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Snake_Baker said:
Stop behaving like a ponce.

http://www.principality-hutt-river.com/Principality Downloads/Historic Documents/Secession Documents/JUDICIAL FACTORS EFFECTING LEGALLITY OF SECESSION.pdf
Click to expand...

:tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy: stop behaving like a freeman nutjob.

i don't need an insight into their BS, i've been reading their s**t for about a decade. i want to hear your thoughts regarding secession and why his arguments are valid within the context of australian law. i don't do "copy-paste, do your own research, sheeple".

Snake_Baker said:
Sure. Show me where the High Court have have ratified the date of Australian independence.
Click to expand...

could you elaborate on why you think they have/need to? a court is only required to rule on cases that are brought before it and/or they have chosen to hear. legislation in australia doesn't require "ratification" from the courts, it requires royal assent.

further, i asked you for an example of a point of law that you feel was incorrectly ignored or dismissed by the high court. a lack of a decision from an argument not brought before the court is kind of the opposite of that.
 
Long Live HFC said:
:tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy: stop behaving like a freeman nutjob.

i don't need an insight into their BS, i've been reading their s**t for about a decade. i want to hear your thoughts regarding secession and why his arguments are valid within the context of australian law. i don't do "copy-paste, do your own research, sheeple".
Click to expand...

You dismiss arguments out of hand and provide nothing in support as a rebuttal.

Stop passing yourself off as some type of constitutional legal insider.

You're full of s**t.

Long Live HFC said:
could you elaborate on why you think they have/need to? a court is only required to rule on cases that are brought before it and/or they have chosen to hear. legislation in australia doesn't require "ratification" from the courts, it requires royal assent.

further, i asked you for an example of a point of law that you feel was incorrectly ignored or dismissed by the high court. a lack of a decision from an argument not brought before the court is kind of the opposite of that.
Click to expand...

Just say, "I don't know", next time.
 
Snake_Baker said:
You dismiss arguments out of hand and provide nothing in support as a rebuttal.
Click to expand...

lol, which arguments!? i've been asking you to make one, and so far all you've been able to do is the typical try-hard copy-paste of someone else's nonsense. do you have any of your own thoughts to impart at all? that's me asking for the third time now, in case you missed it.

Snake_Baker said:
Stop passing yourself off as some type of constitutional legal insider.
Click to expand...

hahahahaha. dude, i am passing myself off as an FMOTL "insider"; as in the literal last rung on the ladder of legal expertise. i have set my "insiderness" against the easiest target in modern legal history. you need virtually no knowledge to dismiss this kind of complete bollocks. it is hilarious you can't see that :D

Snake_Baker said:
You're full of s**t.
Click to expand...

let's say that you're right. how does that explain your obvious reluctance to answer direct questions about the claims that you make?

Snake_Baker said:
Just say, "I don't know", next time.
Click to expand...

as per the above. dancing around slinging insults doesn't prevent everyone noticing your inability to respond to simple, direct questions. i can make it simpler for you if you want- why do you think the high court needs to "ratify" australia's independence?
 
Long Live HFC said:
lol, which arguments!? i've been asking you to make one, and so far all you've been able to do is the typical try-hard copy-paste of someone else's nonsense. do you have any of your own thoughts to impart at all? that's me asking for the third time now, in case you missed it.

hahahahaha. dude, i am passing myself off as an FMOTL "insider"; as in the literal last rung on the ladder of legal expertise. i have set my "insiderness" against the easiest target in modern legal history. you need virtually no knowledge to dismiss this kind of complete bollocks. it is hilarious you can't see that :D

let's say that you're right. how does that explain your obvious reluctance to answer direct questions about the claims that you make?

as per the above. dancing around slinging insults doesn't prevent everyone noticing your inability to respond to simple, direct questions. i can make it simpler for you if you want- why do you think the high court needs to "ratify" australia's independence?
Click to expand...

I doubt you have had a single independent thought in your life.

You rubber stamp everything the ruling order declares and then jump on board pretending to be some type of clever legalese pseudo intellectual.

I asked a very simple question that is extremely relevant to the Hutt River provinces claims, and you can't answer it.

Now, I will ask you a question again that most 12 year old children around the world can answer, as it pertains to their country:

On what date did Australia cease to be a dominion/colony and became a sovereign and independent nation?
 
Snake_Baker said:
I doubt you have had a single independent thought in your life.
Click to expand...

i only care about being right. whether that's because of my own work, or someone else's, isn't important to me. however, i can still answer straightforward questions about the things that i believe, or the claims that i make.

Snake_Baker said:
You rubber stamp everything the ruling order declares and then jump on board pretending to be some type of clever legalese pseudo intellectual.
Click to expand...

:D oh noes, not the ruling order! wrong again, captain cretin. i pick on conspiracy theorists and their buds because it's easy and get my jollies from doing so.

Snake_Baker said:
I asked a very simple question that is extremely relevant to the Hutt River provinces claims, and you can't answer it.
Click to expand...

i already did answer it (or at least strongly implied in post #30). the high court haven't "ratified" the date of australian independence, because that's not the role of the court. which is why i've asked you several times now to explain why you think the court needs to "ratify" anything? your continued refusal to do so gives me the previously mentioned jollies ;)

Snake_Baker said:
On what date did Australia cease to be a dominion/colony and became a sovereign and independent nation?
Click to expand...

you would need to define what you and the rest of the nutjobs consider "sovereign" and "independent" to mean. for example if we want to be technical, the queen is still our head of state, so in those terms someone might argue "never". for almost all other intents and purposes however, australia became a truly independent nation on 3rd march 1986.
 
Long Live HFC said:
australia became a truly independent nation on 3rd march 1986.
Click to expand...

Keep your feigned wisdom for those you can bluff.

Keep following the bouncing ball son.

On what date did the Hutt River Province purportedly secede?
 
Snake_Baker said:
Keep your feigned wisdom for those you can bluff.

Keep following the bouncing ball son.

On what date did the Hutt River Province purportedly secede?
Click to expand...

:D nope, champ. it's your turn (for the fourth time), i'll quote the posts again in case you've forgotten:

Snake_Baker said:
Sure. Show me where the High Court have have ratified the date of Australian independence.
Click to expand...

on what basis does the high court have to ratify the date of australian independence, and which particularly " strong legal argument" did they demonstrably ignore in relation to it:

Snake_Baker said:
regardless of the strength of their legal arguments.
Click to expand...

tick tock. you've had 24 hours already :thumbsu:
 
:D like clockwork.

3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Snake_Baker said:
On what date did Australia cease to be a dominion/colony and became a sovereign and independent nation?
Click to expand...

Well it could be on a number of dates. The Balfour Declaration of 1926 declared that the Dominions (Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc.) were autonomous members of the British Empire, equal to each other and to the United Kingdom. The Statute of Westmnster 1931 gave legal effect to the Balfour Declaration and declared that the UK Parliament no longer had any legislative authority over the Dominions. This was adopted in Australia on 9th October 1942 but backdated to 3rd September 1939.

All British power to legislate with effect in Australia ended with the Australia Act 1986 on 3rd March 1986.
 
Roylion said:
Well it could be on a number of dates. The Balfour Declaration of 1926 declared that the Dominions (Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc.) were autonomous members of the British Empire, equal to each other and to the United Kingdom. The Statute of Westmnster 1931 gave legal effect to the Balfour Declaration and declared that the UK Parliament no longer had any legislative authority over the Dominions. This was adopted in Australia on 9th October 1942 but backdated to 3rd September 1939.

All British power to legislate with effect in Australia ended with the Australia Act 1986 on 3rd March 1986.
Click to expand...


Yes RL, I know this.

I was trapping the clueless poster that is making out like he knows something.
 
Snake_Baker said:
Yes RL, I know this.
Click to expand...

is that because he previously schooled you in this thread, brad roo? some serious lols in there!

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/australian-constitution.649910/

Snake_Baker said:
I was trapping the clueless poster that is making out like he knows something.
Click to expand...

hahahaha, "trap". is that when you try and play a transparent game of "gotcha" while refusing to answer simple and direct questions about the nonsense you believe? :D you cunning devil.

once again for those in the cheap reading comprehension seats, i "made out" that i have a fair bit of knowledge and experience with freemen dickheads, making me a reasonable identifier of both freemen, and dickheads :thumbsu:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Coolangatta
  • Question
Food, Drink & Dining Out How big of an air fryer do you need to cook a 3kg chicken?
Replies
5
Views
1K
Coolangatta
Coolangatta

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top