Charge John Howard
John Howard's Mugshot
Home Page Contact Us

Criminal Syndicates.

This article was originally posted to Melbourne Indymedia in May, 2003.
Minimal modifications have been made to the links from the original article - otherwise this is exactly how it appeared.

Criminal Syndicates in Australia.

By Writting on the Wall Denialist.
Email: ben@fuckthewar.com (Email server has since been disrupted to the point of no longer working)

Once again it has been left to us "Punters" to fight crime in an environment where the people paid to do just that seem to be the actual criminals we're fighting.


Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.  I am not a politician.  I am not a law enforcement or security officer.  I have no allegance with our courts or any political party.  I am a no one.

Unfortunatley, due to a massive failure of our country's (or is it our planet's) security infrastructure it has been left to this no one, and others like me to address these crimes.

Hold onto your hats, we're about to plunge into the murky depths of a world inhabited by ambulance chasers, politicians and other associated vermin.  Here we go:

A new section (471.12) of the Australian Criminal Code makes an "offence of using a 'postal or similar service' to menace, harass or cause offence."

"Further, the proscribed action must be regarded by 'reasonable persons' as being menacing, harassing or offensive - in other words, the victim need not be menaced, harassed or offended."
Criminal Code Amendment (Anti-hoax and Other Measures) Bill 2002 [http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bd/2001-02/02bd089.htm]

Now, call me unreasonable, but I was offended by the Government's "Terrorism Pack" sent to all households in Australia recently.

I was offended by the government's implication that we should all be alarmed by the terrorism they insist is sweeping the globe at the moment.

I was offended that by failing to offer any substantial activities to be on the watch for, I fear the government have been placed me at serious risk of a violent home invasion by my country's secret service simply because my activities, including distribution of anti-status-quo material, could - in the eyes of unnaccountable, anonamous lerts - subject me to "being informed on".

Remember the bombing of Paddy's bar in Kuta Beach, Bali, on October 12, 2002?

Our government claimed at the time, and countless times since, that the attack was intended to directly target Australians.  This position is almost laughable when you consider that any "terrorists" asked about Australia are either reduced to tears of laughter (in the case of the Taliban's foriegn minister) or tears of remorse (as in the case of Bali Bomber Ali Imron. - Suspect 'regrets' Aussie deaths [http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6435138%255E1702,00.html]

According to Australia's new legal definition of terrorism, which can be reviewed at  http://scaletext.law.gov.au/html/comact/11/6499/0/CM000080.htm, our government is guilty of terrorism in the Bali case because: (Bare with me here, I am explicitly examining the associated legislation)
  • Making the recklessly stress and fear enducing claim that Australians were deliberately targeted was:
    • intended to endanger persons' lives;
    • or create a serious risk to:
      • the health or safety of the public:
      • or a section of the public,
    • through associated rises in stress and fear levels;
    • without the intention of making:
      • an advocacy, or
      • protest, or
      • dissent or
      • industrial action, and;
    • was made with the associated intention of:
      • causing serious physical harm to a person; or
      • to cause a person's death; or
      • to endanger the life of a person; or
      • to create a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public.


Likewise, in the case of our illegal threatened and subsequent real invasion of Iraq, (see my earlier article: Why John Howard must face justice. [https://chargejohnhoward.tripod.com/resources/BadLegalAdvice.html]) our government is guilty of Terrorism crimes because: (Again being explicit in the wording of the law)

  • the action is done or the threat is made with the intention of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause;
  • and the action is done or the threat is made with the intention of:
    • coercing, or influencing by intimidation:
      • the government of a foreign country or;
      • of part of a foreign country;
    • and:
      • causes serious harm that is physical harm to a person;
      • or causes serious damage to property;
      • or causes a person's death;
      • or endangers a person's life;
      • or creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public;
      • or seriously interferes with, seriously disrupts, or destroys, an electronic system including, but not limited to:
        • an information system;
        • or a telecommunications system;
        • or a financial system;
        • or a system used for the delivery of essential government services;
        • or a system used for, or by, an essential public utility;
        • or a system used for, or by, a transport system;
    • and is not advocacy, protest, dissent or industrial action;
    • and is intended:
      • to cause serious harm that is physical harm to a person;
      • or to cause a person's death;
      • or to endanger the life of a person, other than the person taking the action;
      • or to create a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public.


    Note: A reference to any person or property is a reference to any person or property wherever situated, within or outside Australia; and a reference to the public includes a reference to the public of a country other than Australia.


So what are you going to do about it?

Discuss these facts with everyone you can.

Do you know someone who can bring this complaint to the attention of the relevant authorities without subjecting themselves to arrest and chemical labotamy?  Pressure them to do it.

As I have pointed out, I'm no lawyer, but the law is written in English, and as far as I can tell, everyone below the level of Prime Minister and above the level of lowly plebian can be immediately arrested and brought to justice on these few issues alone.

As for the Prime Minister, his Governor General and the Queen, recent ammendments to the treason act protect them from arrest. (Yes - even if the three of them walk down Bourke Street with machine guns mowing down everyone they see.)

Our only hope for them is to wait for each of them to leave the offices they are protected by, then we can arrest them and charge them with the crimes they are guilty of.

Don't take my word for it though, use whatever rights you're still clinging to to ensure the rule of law doesn't fade away into obscurity.  A criminal trial is our mechanism for this and supposedly ensures a just outcome for both the accused and the accuser:

Disclaimer - No I don't have my head up my arse.  To me: abandoning the belief in the rule of law presiding over our society is exactly the same thing as realising there is no option but to go around ceremoniously sacrificing those who I perceive to be leading us by contempt and corruption.

Appreciate our efforts?
A donation will help us to keep up the good work.

Contact us at: chargeJohnHoward@hotmail.com.