And get this, No jail time was handed down to him by the court, all he got was a suspended sentence backdating to November 22nd, when he was first taken into custody.

In summary: A GUILTY CHILD MOLESTER, WHO RAPED A 12 YEAR OLD GIRL AND PRODUCED CHILD PORN GETS NO JAIL TIME OR PUNISHMENT AT ALL!?!?!

But why are we so surprised?

Terry Martin was a former MP,  he was in  position of power in Tasmania as a member of the government in which he undoubtedly made a high wage and had a lot of powerful contacts.  Terry Martin misused that power and position and thought he could get away with child rape, and you know what? – He DID.

Even today his influence has payed off for him and he has gotten away with one of the worst crimes of all. Ask yourself this, if somebody else, not a former MP was convicted of such a crime, do you think the judge would have passed down the same sentence, If you raped a child and produced child porn, would a judge let you walk free?

Of course they wouldn’t! – If you don’t think politicians are nothing but immoral scum, fighting for positions in power in society so they can get away such crimes then I hope this is a wake up call for you.

The State exists so that power hungry human beings can manipulate the system to suit their desires, and its about time we all started taking a good hard look at our society and realising that our government does nothing to help us at all, but instead only helps the people who are in power, if not for our sakes, then for the sake of the poor innocent 12year-old girl who was raped, and for all the other girls who might find themselves in the same position in the future.

Last weekend (ending 27/11/11) I had the pleasure of attending the first of many Australian Mises Seminars created by an organising committee of Samuel Marks (Macquarie University Libertarian League), Sukrit Sabhlok (Liberty Australia), Michael Conaghan (Liberty Australia), Dr Bulukani Mlalazi, Dr Washington Sanchez (Aussienomics), and Benjamin Marks (Economics.org.au) held in Sydney Australia with keynote speaker Prof. Hans Herman Hoppe of the Mises Institute in America.

The event consisted of a dinner on Friday night and an all day seminar on the Saturday with presentations from speakers on a range of topics from Natural law, Libertarian Philosophy, French Philosophers and the Workers Party to the RBA, government and the war on Afghanistan, even controversially (and still impressively) there was a speaker, Steven Kates who seemed to be advocating for the existence of government and declared himself to not be an Austrian but more of an English Classical, much to Prof. Hoppes dislike of which he quickly alerted his audience in his following presentation, who said Economics was boring? – The programme is still posted on the Mises Seminar Website (www.mises.org.au) for anyone who is interested in the other speaker that attended.

The highlights for me personally was meeting and talking to Prof. Hoppe and purchasing a signed copy of his book “The Economics and Ethics of Private Property” as well as meeting many other libertarians and networking. Also I had never heard of the Workers Party previously and so I felt a great sense of pride and joy to hear the stories from the people who first started the party and how they accomplished as much as they did.

As it was stated many times over the course of the event the number of young attendees(and committee members) was large, and that was a great sign for libertarian thought in Australia’s future. I would like to thank all the committee members for their hard work at commitment to the event and am looking forward to more Seminars in the future and I would recommend everyone that didn’t make it this year to start planning for the next one.

The next time someone calls you a radical, just remember that its ironic to be labelled a “radical” because you advocate the truth, libertarians are the most moral people on the planet, and if other people want to persecute for that, you should hold your head high and be proud to be a called a “radical”.

I. What is currency

What is currency, and why does society use it? – suffice to say that currency is no more than a medium of exchange. The use of currency in society is purely the use of a barter system where everyone recognizes the increased value of the currency in question. In a barter economy, if person A owned a pen and person B owned a pencil, and each party valued the other item more (Person A values a pencil more than his own pen, Person B values a pen more than his own pencil) Then they would simply trade, to the mutual benefit of both parties.

However, this process of barter is inefficient because of the fact that in order for both parties A and B’s wants to be satisfied it relies on the coincidence that they meet up together and exchange knowledge of what their desires are. eg. Person A would have to meet person B at say, a park in which they would talk for a while and then A would tell B that he desired a pencil, but all he had was his lousy pen. B would then inform A, that coincidentally he possessed a pen, and was in search for a pencil. Both parties would then trade items and mutually benefit, however the consumption of time and effort and luck all contribute into making this system pretty inefficient.

In the money (currency) economy, where A and B recognise money as a medium of exchange, A could sell his pen to anyone in the economy (person C,D,E,F,G,H,I etc until population maximum is reached) in exchange for a certain amount of money, person A purely needs to find someone else who is looking for a pen, rather than having to locate a person who desires a pen AND possesses a pencil such as in the barter system. When A has made this exchange for currency he can go about looking for someone in the economy who is selling pencils for currency, in which he can then exchange his currency for the a pencil.

The use of currency as a medium of exchange throughout the economy creates a degree of efficiency from the alternate, barter system because it allows for indirect exchange and is more efficient due to the ability to make exchanges with anyone in the economy rather than coincidentally finding the person who possess the item that you desire and who also desires the item that you possess. There are many more benefits to currency as a medium of exchange within the economy, in this article I have only covered one such benefit to illustrate a natural reason for the existence of a money economy.

II. What is fiat currency

Fiat currency is money that is created by government and given a value by regulation or law. Fiat currency is often (but not restricted to) the form of paper notes, due to incredibly low production costs as it essentially is a form of “printed paper”. An example of fiat currency is the Australian $50 (or any note/coin); the physical note itself is produced in Australian mints for a fraction of a dollar, but given an artificial value of “AU$50” because of government law that dictates that it is worth fifty dollars.

III. What is the problem with fiat currency?

The problem with fiat currency is because of its nature to be able to be created ‘out of thin air’ it can, theoretically and literally be created in infinite amounts. Every time more money is produced at mints and distributed into the economy the value of the money already in circulation decreases eg, take a hypothetical economy that has 100,000, $1 dollar coins (total money supply of $100,000) in circulation, if the central bank creates an additional 10,000, $1 dollar coins and places it into the economy, the increase in the money supply from $100,000 to $110,000 devalues the original money supply of $100,000 as there is an increased accessibility to physical coinage I.e the original $100,000 may actually only have a purchasing power equivalent of $95,000, in this example $5000 worth of value has been taken away from the original money in circulation as a result of the ability to create money out of ‘thin air’.

Still using the above example; people within the original economy have traded goods and services or worked in their jobs in order to receive hard earned wages, only to have those wages or goods forcibly devalued or robbed because the government would like to inject more money into society.

The money already circulating in the economy losses value for every extra dollar printed or created because of the fact that customers would purchase more goods and services, this increase in demand for goods and services, without being meet by any increase in supply creates higher costs of living or inflation, high inflation takes away from the purchasing power of the dollar simply by goods and services costing more, ie $1 purchases less amounts of bread than it may have previously. It is through higher inflation that fiat currency devalues the dollars already in circulation of an economy.

Of the newly printed $10,000, the first recipients of the new currency, tend to be the already wealthy, through the ease that they have in obtaining loans from banks as a result of the amount of assets they already possess (ie through ease to get loans with asset backing). In Australia, Newly printed cash is created by mints owned as subsidiaries to the Reserve Bank of Australia. This new money is loaned at cheaper interest rates to major banks who then can circulate the additional new currency into the economy through loans to its customers, who as stated earlier tend to (obviously) be those people who can actually obtain loans ie. People who the banks deem are able to pay it back through income streams such as a job etc. The wealthy class are the first class of people to receive new currency as their ability to get a loan is a lot easier than the middle or poor class.

These wealthy people generally receive the full value of the newly printed fiat currency. It takes a period of time for the markets to readjust the value of the currency due to increased supply, and by the time it has completed, the rich have already spent it and the middle and poorer classes suffer the consequences of a devalued currency, the middle or poorer classes in society have been robbed of their purchasing power to obtain desperately needed food and shelter due to the rise in inflation caused by the wealthiest classes ability to receive new currency first and by the existence of a mechanism of ‘fiat currency’ to provide the ability to create money out of ‘nowhere’.

By Andrew Kruup.

If you refuse to recognize the greater world, this greater life and way of being, if you refuse to accept your role and responsibility, you REMAIN a child. And Hence you remain under the authority of another.

The goal of many an evil person is to keep you in such a child-like state. As in such a state, you are easily kept as a perpetual slave. Evil people can then ‘harvest’ a percentage of your wealth via any number of means. The key is shunting your ability to think and then feeding you ‘entertainment’ and fear in such proportion as to keep you in QUIET bondage, thus preventing the spread of ideas, notions, & concerns to others of a similar persuasion.

Growing up is a process of beginning to tell others what you really perceive in the greater world. This starts when you take the burden upon yourself to communicate real worldly issues with friends, family & in your networks — letting go of the fear of being ostracized, as that fear hold you captive to evil – this fear of ostracization is precisely the social phobia LIE evil people want you to accept as it’s how they keep society under their control.

SO SPEAK OUT, against all systems of authority – if they are truly beneficial, then they’ll withstand hard scutiny, if not, then let them remain only in our history books for the sake of posterity.

When you break the mold, when you cast out your fear, only then do you begin to raise yourself to adulthood, and only then shall we, as a society have enlightenment and freedom.

BE A TRUE ADULT, BE IRREVERENT.

            Money is bad and government is good.

Where there is wealth to be had, there will be individuals who seek a means of having it. Important to understand then, is why this particular belief is so very profitable to the ultra wealthy that own the media and manipulate the politicans.

“Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.” Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812), founder of the House of Rothschild.

Our economic growth rate is tethered to the way money is created – mostly mortgages, which, to have a growth economy, requires that more loans be given out than taken back in by the banks – because:

            Principle ≠ Principle + Interest

And this is especially so under a fractional reserve banking regime that allows banks to loan out up to ten times of what they hold in reserve.

What we have today, and have had for a hundred years is a massive PONZI/PYRAMID SCHEME. And, like all such schemes when it collapses (when it reaches some limit to its growth), those at the bottom be squeezed to the point of dire poverty..

In our case, the system has been highly leveraged such that most of those in the middle and even right up to the top are going to lose out to a large degree as well.

“The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favors that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.” The Rothschild brothers of London writing to associates in New York, 1863.

BUT

Money is the greatest tool for trade ever. Trade is our means of building great wealth and mutually agreed upon ties that create the conditions for peace and more prosperity. After all you don’t attack the farmer who produces your food – he knows his trade better than you, just as he doesn’t attack you for shipping it around for him. Humans are limited. Nobody wants to go back to living in caves – so we must have a means of making arrangements with each other to have a productive specialization of trade. Money does this automatically. It does it so well, that the fraudsters have learned over the millennia how to steal it from us without our knowing it. They do this by cornering the market on money and then debasing the metal to make more coins or (as today) printing more to debase the overall supply. Inflation of the money supply is a surreptitious way (tax) of stealing money from all of society. A highly regressive tax that mostly impacts the poor.

So to sum up

Our unsustainable economic growth and even our population growth is a product of the manipulations of the elite bankers. In a real free market economy there are interdependencies and mutual exchanges that cause people to act for the benefit of the whole of society. This stems from what is called Natural Law.

Governments have been instituted by people who seek to control others. Their primary means of doing so is through control of the monetary system and secondarily through the use of Positive Law (government law).

If money wasn’t so good at organizing society, government would have nothing to prey upon. Without money we’d live with very little trade and hence we’d have very little specialization and hence very little wealth. Without excess wealth to skim off, government have no reason for being. This is why central banking is THE central issue with regard to government. Take away this power and government would fade into oblivion.

What we need is a new money that cannot be tampered with. We need a money that is limited in amount. It must be secure. It must allow anonymous transactions. It must be decentralized and it’s regulation automated and open-source. With such a monetary system individuals who seek power will not be able to impose their will over others. Natural Law shall rule humanity.

Where will we get such a miracle money?

We already have it. Bitcoin. Look it up and please get involved. It will be successful inevitability, but we need that to be sooner rather than later – lives really do hang in the balance and your choice matters.

It’s up to you. Spread the word.

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation.. and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

The United States Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights were written by individuals who supported, fought and defeated the tyranny of the British Empire. These documents were created for the purposes of establishing Natural Law as the primary order of a civil society. In essence they established that humankind possesses certain inalienable rights that should be defended and never violated. Together they embodied the philosophy and desires of hopeful and freedom loving individuals everywhere and gave the mandate to the people themselves to defend their Natural Rights for the ultimate benefit of all in society. These documents strictly limit government power and maintain the destiny of humankind with the individual and not the state.

As a statement of human morality and good conduct in a civil society, these documents went beyond the mere limitation of the state. They implied that, even the founders themselves, who had risked their lives and sacrificed their blood, were not good enough to legislate the destiny of their fellow man and thus made it clear that no man or group of men has the qualities necessary to regulate the destiny of humanity. They implicitly acknowledged that the best arrangement for humankind was one where no man could stand above another and that it was the duty of any capable man to struggle against those who would attempt to do such.

The US Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the US constitution) listed the fundamental rights of every citizen which, under no circumstances, should be violated; These rights included:

• Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of the Press (Media)
• Protection from unreasonable search and seizure
• Innocence unless proven guilty before an impartial jury
• And many other rights: Read them all here

Tasmanian Charter for Human Rights isn’t even a shadow of the American document.

Freedom Australia has been in discussion with several other groups throughout Tasmania and attended government consultation sessions on this document. It has been made abundantly clear that this charter does not protect the rights of Tasmanians. It creates a new taxpayer funded advisory board to inform lawmakers whether or not proposed legislation agrees or disagrees with it’s arbitrary and unnatural collectivist sentiments on human rights that violate all laws of economics, moral good conscience, and what used to pass for simple common sense.

Furthermore, given the nature of government bureaucracies, this charter appears to create a body which shall become a rubber stamp for government violations of Natural Human Rights, by giving the impression that they’re being given due respect, when in fact the very opposite may be occurring. But, just in case this new rubber stamp bureaucracy does decide to act honestly on occasion. a small loophole has been inserted – the government may simply ignore the board and continue ahead with the proposed legislation “for the greater good” – the collectivistic view which is not at all in favor or respect of our individual Natural Human Rights.

This Charter clearly fails in the protection of minority groups and the Natural Human Rights of all individuals. It does not protect the sovereignty of Tasmanians. It does not delineate, in any way, what powers the government has or is limited to, and consequently it leaves open the taking of all power unto the state.

This document is a fraud.

Freedom Australia urges all Tasmanians not to be fooled by the government on this issue. If passed, the hard earned wages of taxpayers will be used to fund a new tool for state propaganda and by no means shall it be a tool to facilitate justice for Tasmanians. The government is attempting to appear an active protector of Human rights through this creative illusion, but we easily see through it. Therefore, Tasmanians and Freedom Australia demand that any attempt at a charter of rights must include a declaration of our inalienable Natural Human Rights – including our right to maintain, by any means necessary, a government that does not transgress them. Thus ensuring the protection of our Natural Human Rights and the supreme sovereignty of the individual over the desires of government legislators.

The year is now 2011 and still we find ourselves, as Australians living in a country whose government continually condemns  and ignores fundamental human rights obligations to those people who trying to escape persecution through:

• race
• religion
• nationality
• membership of a particular social group
• political opinion.

The political state of affairs in Australia is that of bipartisanship between the two major parties on this issue.  Both parties advocate the mandatory detention of refugees on islands off the coast of Australia until processed, e.g. Christmas Island. This ‘processing’ can take years and is nothing less than a prison sentence without a crime.

What have these people done to deserve being treated as heinous villains?

The detention camps provide an appalling standard of life and the situation is as desperate as it is tragic. Suicide and other extreme measures, e.g. the sewing up of mouths, are a common occurrence. Protests from the prisoners themselves fall on deaf ears. The sound of their suffering is considered by government as the complaints of hardened criminals and are ignored.

Freedom Australia believes that all such inhuman treatment demonstrates a profound lack of respect for our fellow human beings and their natural rights.

If this treatment is accepted by Australians and not actively protested, then it is a step in the direction of tyranny. Once we accept the idea that innocent people can be locked away indefinitely without judge or jury, with none bearing witness to a crime, then we are morally accepting that such treatment can be applied to any that the state [government] deems a threat.

We would like to urge friends and supporters of Freedom Australia to attend our next meeting at 6pm on the 13th of January at the New Sydney to participate in an education/discussion forum on this issue and to build our understanding of our commonly held Natural Human Rights and the obligation we all have to our fellow human beings.