Love for Life

THIS LETTER SHOULD BE SENT TO THE COMMISSIONER Of TAXATION BY EVERY AUSTRALIAN.

LETTER TO AUSTRALIAN TAX OFFICE ON GST.

Remove this line and everything above it, then address and date the letter. Print out, sign and send.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Carmody

"Commissioner of Taxation"

"Australian Taxation Office"

GPO Box 900

Civic Square ACT 2608

Dear Mr. Carmody,

I am in receipt of your demand that I comply with your requirement that I enter into a binding contract with you, with respect to a recent Bill voted on in our federal parliament, purporting to create a Goods and Services Tax.

As a free citizen of a nation unconquered in war, and with its founding Constitution perfectly intact, I would naturally expect you, as my lawfully designated servant, to fully demonstrate to me that such a demand is consistent with your delegated authority from the united Australian people through their Queen, as provided for under the Australian Constitutional Contract (i.e. Australian Constitution). As a free citizen, and a loyal subject of the Crown, I have an obligation to require you, as a public servant, to furnish me with the following evidence of your delegated authority to act in this matter, together with convincing evidence that the contract that you offer to me is of a lawful nature. In brief:

1. I naturally require certified photocopies of all documents required to fully document your authority to act in this matter, each signed by a person lawfully authorised to grant you such authority from the united Australian people and in accord with the Australian Constitutional Contract.

2. I obviously require certified evidence that the Parliamentary Bill (for the GST), upon which you rely for your present actions, was created in full accordance with the Australian Constitutional Contract which fully regulates your activities.

3. I certainly require a certified photocopy of the authorisation of this Bill as an Act of Parliament by a Governor-General lawfully appointed under our Constitutional Contract, one who has valid Letters Patent and has demonstrated his knowledge of our laws and that he means to abide by them (as required by Magna Carta 1215 Section 45).

4. I assuredly require certified evidence that the contract which you demand that I sign with respect to the GST is in full accordance with the terms of British/Australian Common Law.

In case these requirements in brief are not clear enough, I will now expand upon them, requirement by requirement, so that you need not respond in ignorance.

1. I require certified photocopies of all documents required to fully document your authority to act in this matter, each signed by a person lawfully authorised to grant you such authority under the Australian Constitutional Contract.

I must see conclusive evidence that you have lawful authority to act in this matter, authority delegated to you by the united Australian people through their lawful Monarch, in full accordance with the Australian Constitutional Contract between the people and their lawfully appointed Monarch. This involves a paper trail (surely available in any duly accredited "quality assurance" organisation), showing that:

A. You were duly authorised (in writing) to act in this matter of the GST by a properly chosen and lawfully appointed Minister of the Crown, as provided for in the Australian Constitutional Contract.

B. That the Minister of the Crown who authorised you to act was himself lawfully chosen and appointed by a lawfully chosen and appointed Governor-General who was in turn authorised to give that Ministerial authority by a lawfully created Act of Parliament. Please supply a certified photocopy of the duly signed documentation appointing and authorising the Minister of the Crown to act on this matter.

C. That the Governor-General was lawfully chosen and appointed by the Monarch by means of duly accredited Letters Patent, granting him delegated authority to act in this matter. Please supply a certified photocopy of his authorisation (i.e. his Letters Patent).

D. That the Monarch who chose and appointed the Governor-General did so in full accordance with her Constitutional Contract with the united Australian people, and has acted in full accord with her contract (e.g. has not appointed a Governor-General who either does not know our laws, or does not mean to keep them (as required by Magna Carta 1215 Section 45)).

2. I require certified evidence that the Parliamentary Bill (for the GST), upon which you rely to provide the legal basis for your current actions, was created in full accordance with the Australian Constitutional Contract.

I must see complete evidence that the Bill upon which authority that you claim to act was passed in full conformity with the Australian Constitutional Contract. This involves a paper trail (surely available in a duly accredited "quality assurance" organisation), showing that:

A. There was a full quorum of lawfully sitting members voting at the passing of the Bill for the GST in both houses of parliament. (I require certified evidence of the numbers in both houses of parliament who voted for and against this Bill, their full names, and, for each one, their constitutional legal status that gave them authority to vote on this matter [see below])

B. That each person contributing to the quorum had been properly sworn in, either by a lawfully appointed Governor General, or by a person duly appointed by that lawfully appointed Governor-General. (i.e. I require a certified photocopy of the duly signed Letters Patent for the Governor-General in question. If the members of parliament were not sworn in by the Governor-General himself, I also require a photocopy of a duly signed authorisation by him for another person to swear in the members of parliament who voted for the Bill. I also require certified evidence that the Governor-General who approved the appointment of these members of parliament both knew the laws of the land and meant to keep them, as required by Magna Carta 1215 Section 45)

C. That each and every person contributing to the quorum was not disbarred, for any reason whatsoever, from holding his or her parliamentary seat. For example

1. Had not committed perjury when making his/her oath/affirmation of loyalty to the Queen (e.g. he/she would have committed perjury if he/she had argued a republican cause; or had previously acted in any way in breach of the Australian Constitutional Contract.)
2. Was not disbarred from Parliament because of dual citizenship
3. Was not disbarred from Parliament because of allegiance to a foreign power (e.g. the Socialist International, the Freemasons , the International Financiers, the United Nations, The Fabians, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, The Institute of Pacific Relations, etc.)
4. Was not disbarred from Parliament because of being tainted with treason (eg had not participated in any activity in contravention of the Australian Constitutional Contract such as permitting an unconstitutional Prime Minister to exist in defiance of their responsibility under section 47 of the Australian Constitutional Contract to disbar such a Constitutionally disqualified person from Parliament)
5. Was not disbarred under Section 45 (iii) of the Australian Constitutional Contract by "directly or indirectly taking or agreeing to take any fee or honorarium for services rendered to the Commonwealth, or for services rendered in the Parliament to any person or State". (e.g. had not accepted electoral allowances, stamp allowance, election allowance, electoral contributions by members of the public etc.)

D. That the Bill for the GST is in conformity with both the Australian Constitutional Contract and British/Australian Common Law. I particularly require a simple and plausible explanation of why a Bill imposing a tax on both goods and services is not in total conflict with Section 55 of the Australian Constitutional Contract which specifies that valid laws on taxation must deal with one subject of taxation only. Any reasonable person would conclude that a Bill for taxes on both goods and on services, is imposing two quite separate types of taxes in the one bill. I also naturally require a simple and plausible explanation of why you, as a bailiff, are not in breach of section 45 of the Magna Carta 1215, if you try to enforce a Bill that clearly defies the Australian Constitutional Contract. Under such circumstances, the King can not have appointed you, and you have no lawful authority to act on this matter.

E. That the Governor-General who approved this Bill as an Act of Parliament was lawfully appointed by the Monarch with duly accredited Letters Patent, granting him delegated authority to act in this manner. Please supply a certified photocopy of this authorisation (i.e. his Letters Patent as supplied and signed by a lawful Monarch).

F. That the Monarch who appointed and retained the Governor-General did so in full accordance with her Constitutional Contract with the Australian people, and has not acted in breach of her own contract by retaining him (e.g. he seemingly contravened Section 55 by signing the GST Bill as just one instance in many).

3. I require a certified photocopy of the authorisation of this Bill as an Act of Parliament by a Governor-General, lawfully appointed under our Constitutional Contract, who has furthermore demonstrated his knowledge of our laws and who means to abide by them (as required by Magna Carta 1215 Section 45).

I am sure that you are aware that, for a Governor-General to have lawful authority to act in this matter under our Australian Constitutional Contract, he must be duly appointed and authorised in writing by the Monarch to act on her behalf in Australia. The Governor-General's authority from the Queen is transmitted by means of Letters Patent, signed by Her Majesty herself.

I obviously require a duly certified photocopy of this document, signed by her Majesty, and appointing this particular Governor-General, and specifying the limits to the Royal Power that she has delegated to this particular Governor-General to act on Her behalf in Australia.

I draw your attention to a booklet called "Australia's Constitution" that is issued by the Attorney- General's Department through the Australian Government Publishing Service. The "overview" given in this booklet indicates that the Governor-General is currently appointed by a "Prime Minister" whose office does not even appear in the Australian Constitutional Contract. Even if it had, no Minister of the Crown can have authority over a Viceroy, and still less over a Monarch and remain within the terms of the Australian Constitutional Contract.

Perhaps this unconstitutional activity by Australian politicians, judges, and bureaucrats, is why no valid Letters Patent exist for any Governor-General or state Governor, since 1900? Without the authority granted by those Letters Patent, in Australia no lawful Parliament can be formed, no lawful legislation can be passed by Parliament or approved by a Viceroy, no judge may lawfully be appointed, and no government bureaucrat can be lawfully appointed.

All officers of the Crown are empowered to act, only by means of the delegated authority that we, the united Australian people, lent to the Monarch whom we chose. According to section 45 of the Magna Charta 1215AD, one of the contracts that binds our Monarch, the King says: "We will appoint as justices, constables, sheriffs, or bailiffs only such as know the law of the realm and mean to observe it well."

Since it is also a well established maxim of British Common Law that "The King can do no wrong", if any officer of the Crown acts contrary to the law of the land, (as most if not all can now be proven to have so acted) then, by long established Law, the King could not have lawfully appointed that officer of the Crown. So that officer's rulings are not legally valid, and that officer must return to the public purse all moneys that he may have received from it, plus appropriate interest. That officer's actions in such matters can literally be taken to be forbidden by the still valid Treason Act 1351 and to be subject to the significant penalties prescribed therein.

4. I require certified evidence that the contract that you demand that I sign with respect to the GST is in full accordance with British/Australian Common Law

I would draw your attention to THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A VALID CONTRACT as given in "Australian Mercantile Law" - Yorston and Fortesque. This text book is typical of its type and defines the essentials of a valid contract in the following terms.

A valid contract is an agreement made between two or more parties, whereby legal rights and obligations are created which the law will enforce.

In order that rights may be acquired and obligations incurred under a contract certain "essential elements" must be present or else the contemplated contract will be invalid. The essential elements are:

1. The intention of the parties to create a legal relationship.

2. An offer by one party and its acceptance by the other.

3. Valuable consideration or execution under seal or (in some instances) valuable consideration plus some written record.

4. Legal capacity of the parties to act.

5. A genuine consent by the parties.

6. Legality of the objects of the agreement.

7. Certainty of agreed conditions.

I quite naturally require an answer to the following concerns about the lawful nature of your GST contract that you seek to impose upon me.

(i) If you demand a contract and I do not want one, in what way does that meet the need for both parties to have an "intent to form a legal relationship"?

(ii) If you have made the offer and I have no wish to accept it, how does that meet the second requirement for a legally enforceable contract?

(iii) What valuable consideration would I receive if I agreed to your contract that you demand that I sign? I can see none! I can see that you wish me to UNLAWFULLY take from others their lawfully acquired assets (i.e. demanding money with menaces), and that you demand my slave labour (i.e. free of charge) to keep accounts for your planned theft of the assets of my fellow Australians. How can such a contract be valid under the third requirement for a legally binding contract?

(iv) It is necessary for both parties to a contract to have a legal capacity to act. As an adult of sound mind, I certainly would be lawfully entitled to enter into such a contract as you demand, if I were rash enough, but from whence comes your lawful authority to act. Please show me a fully documented paper trail, as described previously, showing that the legislation that you are implementing is lawful, and that you have been lawfully granted authority by the united people of Australia, through the monarch, to represent the will of the united people of Australia on this matter. No such authority exists!

(v) A legally enforceable contract requires a genuine consent by both parties. The only way I would consent is in answer to unstoppable force, and such consent is not a genuine consent, making the contract legally unenforceable.

(vi) There must be legality of the objects of any agreed contract. The objects of this contract are based on a law which contravenes the Australian Constitutional Contract, was not voted upon by a quorum of parliamentarians who were lawfully holding their seats, being disbarred on a number of grounds. It was not approved and signed by a Governor-General appointed with genuine Letters Patent signed by a lawful Monarch. It seeks to force me to commit theft in depriving my fellow Australians of their assets (for your exclusive benefit) and to force me into slave labour to keep records of these thefts for you, while giving me absolutely nothing of value in return. Perhaps you could explain how the objects of this contract are lawful?

Since your proposed contract is legally unenforceable if it fails to meet any single one of the six separate requirements specified by law, and it in fact fails to meet all six requirements, perhaps you, as a servant of the people, could explain to me why I should make myself a party to what appears to be a criminal conspiracy to subvert the lawful government of Australia, as described in the Australian Constitutional Contract?

Perhaps you, as a servant of the people, would also care to explain why you yourself have engaged in what has all the appearances of such a conspiracy, especially given the sanctions traditionally imposed by law upon persons engaging in such enterprises (see Treason Act 1351)?

You remain my humble servant,

....Your Name & Address etc....

-----------------------------------------------------

Link to where this document was found: http://www.nutech2000.com/webtext/upaussie/letcomtax.html