If the emphasis was more on responsibility that comes with rights we would not have Africa as a basket case full of corrupt leaders, we would not murder the unborn in the name of rights and people would not think it is their 'right' for sit down money. The more humanistic we have become the more violent and unhappy. 'Human rights' is just a smokescreen for social engineers with a perverted agenda.

It is interesting to note that it is those of rightwing belief, that oppose a Charter of Human Rights.

Could it be that their mode of indocrination and denigration,to the rights of minority groups in society, may be legally challenged and they fear the loss of their "self moral status"in society.

kipp [i think from memory the world court dosnt 'enforce' its rulings[they dont have a world 'policing' force [yet][peace keepers dont do the policing [they just stand by and c'let it happen' then occasionally report what they had to stand by and just watch.

i would jump on my soap box about bosnian/serb issue where one or the other was handed over by the dutch 'observers'? or rave on about how the murdered were deliberatly chosen because they were the ones who could read and write [mail masters, lord majors etc [that cleanses the 'ethnic' that the other claims god gave to them

or the other huge one [the starvation of the palesteins, because some agetators want the palistein issue [hey again for free land]

or idi amin ,or [heck the list goes on [and all well within the un declaration [is it a declaration or just an agreement[regardless it is one of the few 'good' things it has [almost] done

im not seeing where this 60 years of human rights ever really got off the ground[1,000,000 iraqies dead] millions from african power plays [noting thatchers own son was gun running to get control over some area [to exploit]or mug-abie ,or angola ,im just not seeing how elenor rossevelt vision was ever realised.

really
besides ausyralia is a coleny [we never actually voted our REFERendumb to become a REAL country[we still have the queens reperasentive who vets our laws [who dseems who is our pm[who tells parlement when it can sit and wjhen it cant

like canada GG just shut down the parlement to protect its stooge pm[it isnt legally a member then either [25 percent of the world is still overseen by HRH] long may you prosper maam[did you ever get to read the petition i delivered to you at chogm 2002]the elders still await your reply.

soon the sovereigns of the world will unite to turn the UN into the SUN[sovereign'S united nation[your still invited still maam]

Where is the proof of people not wanting detention of children? What is the popularity of other options such as immediated deportation?
There is billions of people in the world who would immigrate to western countries if they could. We will only let a small proportion in. THey shouldn't all have equal rights in this respect. The money spent on the welfare payments for one refugee could feed an entire village in the motherland.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT SOLUTION

Local Government comes under the provisions of S 51 Placitum VI Constitution, and the Commonwealth has a duty, to control the forces that execute and maintain the laws of the Commonwealth and one of those bodies is Local Government.

Because the Chief Executive Officer of the Commonwealth is Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second represented by the Governor General by s 61 Constitution, and She owns the root or radical title to all land in Australia, and the ownership of land, is only held on grant from Her, Local Government over that land, is vested in the Commonwealth, as soon as it becomes Freehold.

The Commonwealth must free up access to the Federal Court of Australia and abolish Section 39 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 and Order 46 Rule 7A Federal Court Rules so that its Executive Officers, appointed to the Federal Court of Australia as Justices, must comply with Ch III Constitution, in all matters involving local planning laws. The States have no jurisdiction over Freehold Land, but currently the Federal Court of Australia does not provide a political venue, with 12 local electors selected at random, in which to settle Land Disputes.

Neither the Supreme Court nor the Land and Environment Court in New South Wales, Queensland or Victoria has jurisdiction over Freehold Land, while they remain State Courts. They must be federal Courts before they can exercise jurisdiction over Freehold Land, because all Freehold Land is Commonwealth land, by reference to the Constitution and Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second.

If the Commonwealth had all its executive officers including Catherine Branson, the Human Rights Commissioner, take a crash course in Statutory Interpretation, and act honestly, then Local Government would immediately come under the Commonwealth because 22 years ago, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was legitimately enacted. It is Schedule 2 to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 and no amount of hand wringing will make it go away

Dear Peter...I note with interest your mention of the Land and Environment court and Local Government.

Have you taken an interest in the Camden Islamic School issue?

Previously, the Baulkham Hills council decision against an Islamic Prayer Centre at Annangrove was overturned by the Land and Environment Court. Now...there is an identical situation emerging in Camden.

Google the issue to find out more pls.

How does all this stack up in the light of your knowledge of the consitution etc?

-Can the Land and Environment court legitimately overturn a local council decision?