Ken Atherton
Pindari Herb Farm
200 Norwich Drive, LONGFORD 7301
Tasmania AUSTRALIA Telephone (03) 6391 1799
www.pindariherbfarm.com Email welcome@pindariherbfarm.com

Gil Withington
Assistant Bailiff
PO Box 1913
LAUNCESTON TAS 725
19^th of November 2009

Dear Gill, after our meeting today I am inspired to answer your “how can you help me” request with the understanding below.

You did say that you believed in a God and that you did good things re the football club etc but my heart reaches out to you to share that we are known by what we do in totality and your actions towards my wife and myself were threatening as you attempted to extort funds from us on ‘behalf’ of the NMC.

And under God’s SUPREME and IMMUTABLE LAW: As you sow so shall you reap, what you have and threaten to do to us will ahead be done to you as and when God’s so decides. So I reach out to you as a ‘would be friend’ and again ask that you look deeply into the truth of your daily actions as they relate to God’s Command to: Go your way in peace and only be loving, compassionate, merciful and forgiving.

The council’s on going attempt to extort funds from me is fully detailed on our web page: www.pindariherbfarm.com/ratelet/ratelist.htm . I receive no direct services and have no contract with the NMC and I do exercise my God given freedom of choice right to fund my community the way that God so inspires me, not by what a local service organization demands.

As our actions decide our spiritual destiny on our physical demise and as we both are no longer young men, we thus approach that time when we will return to spirit.

As a brother I ask that you put aside your “badge of authority’ and reconsider where you stand with God and His Command? For when we deny His Command we FAIL our earthly test, and thus descend away from the Light of Heaven into the pits of hell when we die. I would have that not be the case for either of us.

To further ‘clarify’ how the darkness has deceived so many in ‘government’ employment I paste below a recent response from the office of Senator Bob Brown to a forwarded copy of the letter to Heather Butler MP from myself making a complaint re the ongoing religious PERSECUTION that I and my wife are receiving around this issue.

In truth,

Ken Atherton

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dear 'John Dodd,' thank you for the 'courtesy' of a response. It in now the time for humanity to see the depth of insanity that prevails due to the FACT that 'some' as you hold the 'belief' that - - - irrespective of the 'belief' of others, that you can forcefully IMPOSE your belief upon everyone, and you are 'one' of those people (dictatorship) and, this is quite 'clear' from the text in your email, and IT as well as this response will be added to my web site for public viewing (www.the-testament-of-truth.co.uk/web/final.htm ). I point out the 'contrariness' of your expression:

A - (Whilst we acknowledge your right to your own beliefs)

B - (we also believe that, - - - We do not however accept that you have the right to simply apply your own interpretation of them and conduct your affairs accordingly.)

Can you not see that politicians and/or their 'staff' such as yourself are in FACT stating that 'we' the people that hold a 'contrary' belief have NO 'right' to live by a code of conduct 'policy' that is contrary to yours OR, in variance to 'some' of the dictates named 'the law,' and I would ADD, that it is quite CLEAR to me that it is also INSANE to advise me that I am 'illiterate' and cannot understand the text of the Constitution to the 'point' that I must 'contest' IT in the Court OR, is it that you 'Sir' are so ignorant that you cannot understand ITS 'freedom of belief' statement and thus you expect me to fund a 'hearing' so that a Judge can show you your error?

You write in the 'first' person (John Dodd) but you keep referring to 'WE' and this to me appears to be your gravest error, for you are hiding behind the 'we' bit IN THE ASSUMPTION that the 'system' to which you allude has OF ITSELF a 'conscience' or some 'divine right' to impose 'religious' rulings reference 'doctrine' upon those as me that can THE TRUTH clearly see. As I see it, you are speaking on a 'personal' level FOR 'the greens.'

You also appear to believe that simply because some 'men' are voted in to a position of authority that they THEN can 'make up' any 'policy' that they wish to and THEN force IT down everyone's throat. Yes, this they can do for they foolishly use the 'back up of 'mercenary forces' carrying guns, seeing NOT that no 'vote' nor mandate of 'power' bestowed by any majority vote nullifies nor 'voids' God's Law and, - - - what you do not see either is that there are those as me that do not vote, for 'we' clearly see the error of placing men in the 'position' of 'God.'

Note: 'mercenary forces' - Unconscionable men knowing NO God that DO anything they are told to for a few pieces of silver.

What I would like everyone to see is that irrespective of any 'decrees/acts/rules/laws' of mere mortals, that GOD the Creator has given each of us the divine RIGHT to choose whether to live in accordance with HIS "Peace & love" Command and thus abide within the 'happy' precepts of HIS "As you sow so shall ye reap" Law OR, to be as you and defy Him as you 'aggressively' interfere and impose forcefully upon the living ways of others and force them to bow to your 'belief' dictates whether they like it or not.

John, men once elevated into positions of 'service & trust' have for 'ages' of time followed the FALSE belief that they have the right to raise up 'text' DOCTRINE that they name 'the law,' and then using 'armed' POWER and other men as their 'judges,' they then FORCE God's children to 'bow' to said 'decrees' or be 'condemned' and punished, ostracised, banished or killed.

The ONLY 'dictatorial' RIGHT bequeathed unto man is for the individual (you or I) to dictate our OWN personal code of conduct 'policy,' and God will be the 'Judge' as to whether or not IT is in 'accordance' with and in conformity to HIS "Peace & love & mercy & compassion" Command Decree and, HE will 'settle' the matter according to HIS Law.

I 'Sir' cannot fund your iniquity of 'belief' imposition upon others nor myself, and I cannot condone, fund, nor support you, for THAT would mean that I was unfaithful to God and to my conscience, and I would be complicit to all the 'injury' and control that your institution imposes upon others. Try and understand that GOD already 'dictated' the CODE OF CONDUCT policy to be adhered to by ALL that I personally now 'reinstate' so that a 'few' will avoid HELL'S gate.

Reference - The ONE True faith < http://www.the-testament-of-truth.com/web/faith.htm >

IF you truly believe that YOU, your 'badge of office' and Institutional 'rulings' can 'legitimately' override the Command of God then it is you to place your own soul within the punitive/suffering aspect of the precepts of God's Law for your defiance of His Command. It is pure iniquity and a treasonable 'offence' to force people to 'bow' to your 'beliefs' using legislation, be they supposedly legitimate 'decrees' or otherwise. You John believe in the use of force & 'War' and I hold the opposing belief in absolute 'pacifism' and PEACE.

Contrary to your 'belief' (We do not however accept that you have the right to simply apply your own interpretation of them and conduct your affairs accordingly.) Please TRY and understand that as YOU are not 'God' I thus do have the GOD given 'right' to conduct my 'affairs' according to my 'belief,' being that God's "Peace & love" Command stands above YOUR belief, and I will conduct myself accordingly.

My 'outreach' letter was and yet IS a courtesy 'call' to everyone that is defiant of God, and the fact that that 'precedent' has been in 'vogue' for centuries does not make IT right.

There are 'men' that live by rules and THE GUN, and there are others that follow their God.

I paste below the High Court's ruling on 'religion' and the 'freedom' thereof to assist you.

Submitted by Terence Malaher on behalf of Ken Atherton and humanity

~~~~~

Below is the reply from John Dodd from the ‘office’ of Senator Bob Brown in response to an emailed copy of the Complaint Letter to Heather Butler (letter 56) November 17, 2009 11:20AM

~~~~

17^th of November 2009

Dear Ken

Thank you for your e-mail.

Whilst we acknowledge your right to your own beliefs and have no doubt that your religious beliefs are sincerely held, we also believe that, for our society to function effectively, it is necessary for citizens to abide by the laws of the land ie those passed by legitimately constituted authorities such as parliaments and councils.

If you do not agree with these you have the right as a citizen to seek to have them changed. If you believe that they are illegal, or unconstitutional, you have the right to have them tested via the Court system.

We do not however accept that you have the right to simply apply your own interpretation of them and conduct your affairs accordingly.

Regards

John Dodd

Office of Senator Bob Brown

~~~~

The question is 'What is religion?'

Definition of Religion given by High Court of Australia In 1983

Scientology is a religious institution and exempt from State payroll tax, the High Court ruled unanimously yesterday.

It was the first time that the court came head on with the question "What is religion?" All the judges rejected the view that belief in a supreme being was essential to religion.

Justices Mason and Brennan, in a joint judgment, stressed the importance of the case in determining fundamental questions of religious freedom in Australia and the extent to which an individual is free to believe and act without legal restraint.

Mr Justice Murphy stressed the need to treat all religions equally, but indicated his distaste for religious tax exemptions by saying, "The crushing burden of taxation is heavier because of exemptions in favour of religious institutions, many of which have enormous and increasing wealth."

Justices Wilson and Deane stressed the need to match the evidence of the beliefs in question with the five or six main characteristics of the world's major religions.

All the judges said it was immaterial that the adherents might be misguided, illogical or gullible or that the leaders of the claimed religion had ulterior purposes of power or commerce.

The case began when the Victorian Commissioner for Payroll Tax assessed the Church of the New Faith (the Scientologists) for $70 in payroll tax.

The Scientologists objected saying they were exempt under a clause referring to "religious institutions". Mr Justice Crockett in the Victorian Supreme Court and later three judges of the Full Supreme Court ruled against the Scientologists.

As a result of yesterday's ruling, those judgments were overturned and the commissioner was ordered to pay the costs of all three proceedings.

Justices Mason and Brennan said, "Freedom of religion, the paradigm freedom of conscience, is of the essence of a free society. The chief function in the law of a definition of religion is to mark out an area within which a person subject to the law is free to believe and act in accordance with his belief without legal restraint."

The definition affected the operation of the religious-freedom guarantee under the Constitution and many other laws granting religions special benefits.

The question of religion had received little judicial attention in Australia; it was time to grapple with it.

Religious freedom in Australia would be subverted if freedom of religion excluded minority religions which needed special protection.

"Protection is accorded to preserve the dignity and freedom of each man so that he may adhere to any religion of his choosing or to none," they said. "The freedom of religion being equally conferred on all, the variety of religious beliefs which are within the area of legal immunity is not restricted."

The judges stressed the importance of the actions of the adherents rather than the dogma itself.

NOTE - 1

Constitution Act 1934 (Tas)

This document includes a legal guarantee of the religious liberty and equality of Tasmanians. Every citizen is guaranteed freedom of conscience and the free exercise of religion under Section 46(1) of this Act.

Part V - General provisions
Religious freedom

46. (1) Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen. -

(2) No person shall be subject to any disability, or be required to take any oath on account of his religion or religious belief -

Note: Australia's own Macquarie dictionary – page 835 (Compact version)

Religion = - - - - the quest for the values of the ideal life - - - the ideal, the practices for attaining the values of the ideal, - - -
A system of belief in the worship of a supernatural power or God' or the recognition by man of a superhuman power entitled to obedience, reverence, and worship.
Religious = - - - - scrupulously faithful, pious, devotion - - -

This means that ones 'religion' is not any named 'Church' organisation, but it is the policy of ones daily code of conduct interaction with other children of God.

Note: My personal religious ideal or ideology is that of absolute pacifism at all times and in all situations because that is the requirement of the Creator God according to my belief, and to that 'end' I am faithful because, God commands man to "Go your way in peace and love one another and BE merciful, compassionate and forgiving."

God is my chosen ‘Monarch,’ and I can never ‘vote’ for any man to rule me nor to be my ‘ruler,’ for that role is God’s prerogative only. I add: No mandate nor ‘badge’ nor position of ‘office’ voids or nullifies God’s immutable Law.