This letter/Article was written to: John Howard,
(One time supposed Prime Minister of Australia)
_____________________________________

    I reserve the entitlement to communicate with you directly.
(You should also be minded that you are required to reply.)
    As the so-called 'leader' of this so-called 'Nation', so-called 'Australia', I would refer you to these certain matters of import.
[Note: the use of the word 'his' is for convenience. The word 'his' equates equally with 'her'.]

1    This land upon which I choose to live as a freeman and sovereign to myself only (i.e. without subjects and subject to none) was and remains a stolen country, like most countries on this planet earth. (There should be no comfort in that 'stolen').

2    The fact that this country was founded a 'colony' by some nation/s  is no excuse for the continuance those founders, whomsoever they may be, that this is or was the 'correct' thing to do in terms of what is assumed to be 'rational' animal dealings.

3    This land (so-called 'Australia) was founded by some humans animals and on the premise that "King/Queen, Country and God" (an invention of said humans), were on their side (i.e. had some 'right' to taking over others' land; always by force and to the detriment of the native population and the decimation of the country) they took charge.
    This charge of the land was also based on the premise that all aboriginal peoples (the original definition) were not 'civilised' by said 'humans' and therefore they were of little consequence to the 'ends' (i.e. wilful stealing) of these 'humans'.

4    The fact of Australia's domination upon the indigenous peoples was dependent on the fact that 'Australian' aborigines did not set boundaries to their land. Boundaries were a conception by other nations who invented 'fences' to preclude/prevent others from entering their land. These nations devised (and still do) various unhealthy means to procure this result. The Australian aboriginal did not have this concept (which has led to their demise).

5    The then continent of 'Australia' assumed the aspects of its parent thief (usually regarded as England) and also assumed its 'Right of Might' and 'Authority' of the 'King/Queen' and 'God', its subsequent 'laws' and therefore a necessary judiciary to implement these laws .

6    It also assumed the notion of 'Democracy'.

7    It is mindful to repeat the notion of this so-called 'Democracy' as laid down, viz.:
          
Government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
(Note: This is certainly not a concept that any 'government' 'Australia' has accomplished.)

8    No-one with a brain-cell count of more than two (which excludes politicians with a brain-cell count of certainly less) believes this to be a truism in view of the way 'politicians' have handled the world (in any shape or form) since the concept was established.

9    The island continent then becoming known as Australia, instead of pursuing its own way of life, presumed (because it had no mind of its own)  to follow its 'home' nation. Australia had a unique opportunity to be itself, work with the indigenous population for the good of all. It failed miserably and continues to do so, relying on tried and tested failures in other countries to take as its own and for which the tax-payer pays a very high price.

10    According to the Charter of Human Rights, every person is a freeborn individual.  An individual has no innate obligation to submit to any authority that it does not claim, without coercion, to be its own, since none of us decides to be here, on this earth, at all. We are here because that is the nature of our animal heritage, nothing else, despite claims, by some, to the contrary.

11    The world as it is at present, is devolved from the aspect of control. That is, certain individuals claim to have control of others. These individuals have no control of themselves and feel the need to control others. To do this, they invent ways controlling others to satisfy their inadequacies as individuals. They invent spurious 'gods' of whatever kind to frighten those they should protect, if they are better survivors, so that they may control them. Such controllers go by a variety of names: Kings, Queens, Presidents, Popes, Lords, Chiefs, various 'gods' and so forth.

12    The notion that these controllers are doing things for others' benefit is absolute nonsense. This is a nannyistic principle where these controllers claim to be acting for the good of the population.  This morally bad for that population as well as, in most cases, 'criminal' (in terms of the definition of 'criminal' which controllers have defined for themselves).

13    Now, by their assumed Right of Might, these controllers have led the rest of the population into a fantasy world which believes that there is no other way than to follow them. They have been brain-washed into believing that voting for them to control them, is the 'way to go'. Poor fools they are. But not fools, only misled. Not stupid but naive. Controllers control everything.  And because they recognise each other, they have grouped together to have total control.

14    What do people 'vote' for? They vote for things about which they know nothing (since controllers do not allow them the knowledge of, or for what they might vote). This is carefully hidden amongst a plethora of garbage about which they know nothing because they are not taught these things. (Children are taught that 'this is the way things are' not what they might be.)
15    There is no choice in a vote for a party political dictatorship. Each is as good or bad as the last. The evidence is the mess the world is in.

16    Politicians may claim to be 'professional'. They steal inflated salaries to prove this. (A professional is one who is paid for his work based on his accumulated knowledge and accepted wisdom by his peers and thereby authorised).

17    However, most politicians are amateurs. They should therefore not steal money to pursue their acts upon the population at large. (An amateur is one who is not paid for his contribution.)

18    A politician is a SERVANT of the public. A servant is one who abides by the wishes of his employer. It is a servant's contract to serve his self-appointed master. It is part of the work-place agreement. It is the master who sets the salary/wage, the servant who says 'yea' or 'nay' to that salary/wage.

19    However, once 'voted' for, a politician assumes the right of dictatorship ('You voted for me; now this is what you get, like it or not!'). This is a nonsense. What a politician may have decided he wants to do (for himself; albeit the few who have aims to the greater good (and who are quickly eliminated from the Control Equation)) he does, despite his promises to the contrary. Therein lies his control. Brainwash the public (who on earth are they anyway?) into believing he will do them good and five minutes later he is taking this away. Hence my concept of Right and rights. A pure philosophical nonsense. Still we have to live with Plato's Ultimate Right; fallacious.

20    Once 'elected', politicians then can invoke their judiciary to make sure that everyone else complies with their dictates leaving them (the politicians) to rip-off the public they are supposed to serve, to their heart's content accompanied by lies (In Winston Churchill's words, terminological inexactitudes) as to why this is so. They invent 'laws' and 'taxation'.

21    Taxation has always been the bug-bear of the population under a controller. We all know that taxation is theft. In terms of the judiciary set-up by controllers, it has always been so and is to be applied by the self-assumed Right of Might of controllers. Taxation is to swell the coffers of the controllers, not to serve the public good, again, contrary to what they imply.

22    To placate an ignorant public controllers apply 'laws' (backed up by their judiciary) to implement 'fines' when these self-made laws are 'broken'.

23    Most races of people live by rules. These rules are self-regulating. They aim at survival, pure and simple. Most races of people live by rules because they work (in the sense of survival).

24     Laws, on the other hand, are invented to protect the controllers because they can have a power (Right of Might or the Bully System) over those who break them (the ultimate is termination of existence). Inquisitions are about laws, not rules. Laws are not self-regulating. That is why they are dangerous to survival, not, as generally perceived (via brain-washing) to be the opposite. Laws rarely, if ever, stopped anyone from doing anything. Rules do. Laws that cannot be policed are absolutely useless.

25    Break a rule and you can get physically hurt. Break a law and you get a fine or incarceration (with all its subsequent help; no mind the victim) and yes, also, physically hurt (but that is not part of the law).
26    Politicians have set themselves above the population they claim have 'voted' for them. I would like to see the 'real' count  of voting for any party political dictatorship.
    "How to Lie with Statistics' was one of the first books I read doing my 'A' Levels over twenty years ago. Australia (at least) does not seem to have gone beyond that book.

27    Politicians seem to think (forgetting they are servants of the public) that they can (after being 'voted' for) dictate whatever they want and all must agree. As a freeborn sovereign I have never agreed to this notion and hence why I have never voted in my life and have no intention of doing so, since I have no choice, it seems. I am master of my fate, whatever anyone else says to the contrary.

28    In what George Orwell's words might be:

All politicians are dangerous.
Most politicians are more dangerous than others.

29    What a 'country' (or a place where a group of people might decide to live) might need is possibly, management. Management is a concept borne of experience in working relationships (i.e. survival). Experience is knowledge gained by living over a number of years and teaching that experience to others who learn from this and add their own unique personalities and experiences (about which no-one can have knowledge). In this way, we may also learn more ourselves.

30    This is certainly not the world in which we live. Successive groups of individuals who self-claim to be 'leaders' (there is no such thing: there are born followers, not leaders) have desecrated this planet Earth for their own ends. They have depleted the Earth's resources in pursuit of their controlling of others' lives.  They have minimalised human integrity for their own selfish ends. They are hysterics; the Born Victims.

STATEMENT
31    Under no self-indulged 'right' or entitlement (voted for or no) have politicians or any others who deem to control (i.e. those who set out to dominate and to dictate to others, by whatever means they deem to have control), to coerce or determine the outcome of any other individual's life by any means whatsoever.

So say I,
Peter K Sharpen
4th November, 1999

P.S.
There are many issues that need to be addressed to you and your cronies. These will remain the subject of further correspondence.



Return to CONTENTS page