Free Web Site - Free Web Space and Site Hosting - Web Hosting - Internet Store and Ecommerce Solution Provider - High Speed Internet
Search the Web

HIGH TREASON 3 (H.T.3)

The Illegal Selection of the Governor General.

Implications and Jeopardy.

Ian McLeod.

Copyright; Ian McLeod, 9 October 2001, see full notice at end.

Dedication; This publication is dedicated to the men and women of the Australian Armed Services who fought and suffered so much, and to those who gave the supreme sacrifice and never returned. This was all done for us, that we could retain our rights, freedoms and liberties, it was never guaranteed that we could retain these without due vigilance forever. We must not allow them to have died in vain.

LEST WE FORGET.

Index.

Paragraph 1; The offending document.---------------------------------------- page No 2

" " " 2; Introduction. ----------------------------------------------------- " " " 2

" " " 3; Purpose of writing. ---------------------------------------------- " " " 3

" " " 4; Ramifications. ---------------------------------------------------- " " " 3

" " " 5; Letters Patent Relating to the Office of Governor General.- " " " 3

" " " 6; Duties of the Governor General. ------------------------------- " " " 5

" " " 7; Republican Governor Generals. -------------------------------- " " " 7

" " " 8; Close. ------------------------------------------------------------- " " " 7

1. The Offending Document.

2. Introduction.

The purpose of writing this publication is to draw attention to a very treacherous breach of our Constitution, a breach that has ramifications right throughout the entire Administrative chain of Australian Administration (that some people mistakenly call the government).

4. Ramifications.

The ramifications begin with the Prime Ministers, who have increased their own powers over the years, with gradual beginnings in the 1930's and culminating in 1984 (Bob Hawke), and continued unashamedly and unrestricted ever since. The 1984 event appears to be an open conspiracy by Bob Hawke to subvert the Constitution in order to obtain additional power for himself (and Prime Ministers eversince) by the destruction of the intent and purpose of our (the peoples) INDEPENDENT ADJUDICATOR, the Governor General.

This destruction reverberates all the way down the line to the lowest public official because of the Prime Minister choosing the Governor General instead of the Queen, notwithstanding that the Queen then appoints this pre-chosen person. Clearly the Prime Ministers only choose a person who is COMPLIANT to the Prime Ministers wishes and will do exactly as they are told.

Constitutionally the Governor General appoints all of the high administrators, including the high ranking police (Federal) and judiciary (including the High Court) and all the others.

Clearly the Governor General only appoints those people who are COMPLIANT to the Governor Generals wishes, and by extension the Prime Ministers.

As the pecking order progresses downwards, the Governor General compliant persons only appoint employees who are also compliant to the Governor Generals wishes, no doubt at pain of loosing their own cushy job if they get it wrong. Down the line we go with these lower managers or administrators towing the line and only hiring compliant people themselves, which means instead of a Constitutional public service of honourable, independent departments, all separated by the Constitutional provisions to work diligently for the people and watch out for corruption within other departments, this is especially applicable to police, A.S.I.O. and like departments, instead of this, they are all compliant to the Governor General, who is compliant to the Prime Minister, who is one of the persons they are supposed to supervise.

And it's no use taking a genuine complaint to the courts because they are also compliant to the Governor general, who is compliant to the Prime Minister. WHAT AN ABOMINATION. WHAT HOPE DO WE HAVE??? NOTE; I acknowledge that there is probably an odd public servant contrary to my last statement, but you would need the best of British luck to find such persons, and it seems unlikely that they would retain their employment for long.

Now let us investigate the illegal document that has culminated this abomination. This document is called the "Letters Patent Relating to the Office of Governor General of the Commonwealth of Australia", signed by none other than the (then) Prime Minister Bob Hawke on 21 August 1984, which I have got to add, he was NOT qualified in any form whatsoever to sign or enact.

A copy of this document in full, can be found within any Commonwealth printer published copy of the Australian Constitution, YES, I am revolted to repeat that this document is printed within the official Constitution document, as though it is a part of our Constitution which it is NOT, indeed the abominable thing is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

The first lot of offending words appear in the 5th paragraph (not numbered), and the paragraph begins with, quote (in part); AND WHEREAS We are desirous of making new provisions relating to the Office of Governor General -------------------------" end part quote.

This poses a few questions;

a) Just WHO is desirous of committing treason? Bob Hawke perhaps?

b) how dare they have the temerity to foster such desires, contrary to our Constitution?

c) Why do we the people elect such persons into power?

d) And why do not we the people (who ARE the masters), revolt at such treason? And demand

that charges be laid?

Now let us check the reasons for my repulsion at this situation, these reasons are because the above document is in conflict with our Australian Constitution, which is the SUPREME LAW OF AUSTRALIA, if it is in conflict, then it is unconstitutional, which means it is automatically invalid and of none affect, at least to the unconstitutional sections if not in it's entirety.

Let us now study some of the provisions of the Constitution;

Covering Clause 3, quote (in part) "---------------------------------------But the Queen may, at any time after the proclamation, appoint a Governor General for the Commonwealth" end part quote.

Section 2, quote (in part) "A Governor General appointed by the Queen shall be Her Majesty's representative in the Commonwealth -------------------------------------------" end part quote.

Section 4, quote (in part) " ------------------------------------------------------------------ or such person as the Queen may appoint to administer the Government of the Commonwealth;----- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------" end part quote.

The above is so obvious that it was not even considered necessary to word it into the Constitution in strict language, in legal terms "appoint" infers choosing and selecting.

Therefore this has made it abundantly clear that the Queen choses as well as appoints Her Governor General, not the Prime Minister. Therefore The Queen choses Her representative from people Her Majesty choses to trust and rely upon.

If the Queen was not meant to choose then the Constitution would spell that out by stating that the Prime Minister will choose and the Queen appoint. This matter was debated during the 1890s in the Constitutional Committees (the writers of the Constitution) and some of them thought that stating expressly what everyone took for granted would be treated as Constitutionally naive and subject them to ridicule in London.

Furthermore if the Queen was not meant to choose Her own Governor General, I question why Her majesty used to send out Her Governor General from the U.K., YES that's correct, for the first thirty years of Federation the Governor General came to Australia from the U.K. by ship to take up his post for five years, after that time he returned to the U.K. and another Englishman, chosen by the Queen took his place. This Constitutional rotation was designed to retain the affect of INDEPENDENT ADJUDICATION and FAIRNESS, as even a Governor General can become corrupted by those around him if holding Office for too long.

In those days the Parliament behaved itself and only made laws within the law, because Parliamentarians knew unlawful legislation (proposed laws) would not receive the Governor Generals Assent and therefore would not become a law, which meant it was a waste of time trying anything illegal.

At this point I will pose the question, what is the use of an umpire (which is what the Governor General is), who is appointed by one of the teams. To put this in another way, if the crows were playing the eagles in a game of football, would it be acceptable for the crows to choose and appoint a crow compliant puppet umpire?

Would the eagle team accept this situation without rebellion?

Would the eagle supporters accept this situation without rebellion? Would you? Then may I ask why the Australian people tolerate, contrary to law, the Administration (govt) team choosing an Administrative compliant puppet umpire (Governor General)?

Whether we like it or not, there is a contest in progress consisting of the Administrations (govt) V/S us the people, and with the Administrations choosing the umpire, we the people are losing the contest every time, just as one would expect, and this has been happening for the last forty years, and worsening as time has progressed, and if we cannot see that it's no wonder we are in a state of tyranny, despite that the tyranny is not commonly visible (but will be after the 2001 election).

The treason continues within the aforesaid Letters Patent document, please refer to;

Section I; I ask who revokes, and under what authority does this person/s revoke Her Majesty's

Officially Enacted/instructed Letters Patent?

Sub Section II(a); This is unconstitutional (see Constitutional quotes above) and appears to be treason of the highest order.

Sub Section III (a); What ratbags, section 4 is totally irrelevant to this pretence, and certainly does not allow or provide for anybody other than the Queen to chose Her Majesty's Governor General. I suggest this is also treason of the highest order, by people who have Sworn their Allegiance to the Queen.

Sub Section III (b); Same as Sub Section III (a) above

The subversion of the Office of Governor General has contributed equal to, if not more than anything else to our decline into tyranny, and continues on UN-corrected, to this day.

Returning to the document in discussion, it is so ambiguous (unclear) that it is a nonsense, to whom does the references "WE" , "OUR", "US", refer to? As within the stated "We are desirous" "We revoke" "We declare" "Our pleasure" "Our Sign Manual"

"to serve us" ect.

Are these vague references deliberate so that if ever the matter comes before a court (and it will), it is impossible to prosecute as there is nobody clearly identified? And no meaning can be clearly understood? What an abomination!

6. Duties of the Governor General.

The Governor General has numerous defined duties, as well as acting in the role of independent adjudicator, both in his defined duties and any other matters that may arise in the course of his GOVERNMENT.

In order that he performs these duties in accordance with the honour of high office, he is required to subscribe (Swear it) two Oaths before the Chief Justice of Australia, or in the absence, some other High Justice. These are the Oath of Allegiance and the Oath of Office.

Oath of Allegiance. Quote (in full);

end quote.

Oath of Office. Quote (in full);

"I, (name) ,do swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second

Her heirs and successors according to law, in the office of Governor General of the Commonwealth of Australia, and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of the Commonwealth of Australia, without fear or favour, affection or illwill. SO HELP ME GOD. end quote.

To further help in the understanding Sir Paul Hasluck said on the Crowns (Governor Generals) role that the Crowns role is Quote; "to discuss, counsel and warn in its relations with Ministers" end quote

Therefore I must question the honour and intentions of Governor Generals who continually assent to Bills that appear contrary to Australian law and our liberties, some that spring to mind are U.N. treaties, G.A.T.T.S. , G.S.T., this goes on and on, and what about republican Governor Generals??? WHAT AN ABOMINATION!!

Some of the duties and responsibilities of the Governor General, it is not until we understand these that we can appreciate the power and importance of the office of Governor General, and the reasons why our errant Administrations desire to control this person (Governor General), and by extension his powers.

The Governor Generals powers and responsibilities are stipulated by GENUINE Letters Patent (issued by the Queen) and the Constitution, and are also restricted by the constitution, just as the Administrations (govt) powers are restricted in the same way, our Constitution is a document of restriction.

The power most hated by the Administrations is the Governor Generals power over every Bill (the name of a proposed law in the Parliament before it is passed, and assented to by the Governor General in order to become a law).

The Governor General has the absolute power (Section 58) to refuse to assent (authorise into effect) any Bill whatsoever, and the responsibility to refuse assent to any inappropriate Bills no matter what they deal with, this power cannot be legally infringed by anybody (including a Prime Minister), and upon the Governor Generals refusal the Bill is finished, gone and cannot become a law.

Because of the Governor Generals Oaths (above) and I will argue because also of the Queens Coronation Oaths, in the Queens case compulsorily subscribed IN A CHURCH during a very sincere church service with the words Quote (in part) "To solemnly promise and swear to govern the peoples of the United Kingdom (ect, countries list including Australia) , according to their respective laws and customs, to cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to be executed, to maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel ------------------------------------------------." end part quote.

As the Governor General IS the Representative of the Queen, I will argue that by implication and extention the Coronation Oaths also apply to the Australian Governor General, if this is so wouldn't you agree that he is therefore obliged to honour the Queens Oaths and behave accordingly? Does he? Has any of them in recent appointments? This failing of Governor Generals is at best a breach of duty and at worst chargeable treason, if enforced isn't this an absolutely brilliant system that we have here, and well worth retaining by any possible means.

As I was saying, because of the Governor Generals Oaths, he has a clear and absolute responsibility to check and police every Bill before he even considers giving his assent to them, and if he has any concerns whatsoever, no matter how trivial, he cannot ethically give his assent to the Bill, and must either reject it outright, recommend changes that he may make, or reserve the Bill for Her Majestys Pleasure, which means he passes it on to the Queen to make the decision for him. And YES this avenue is still available in the Constitution (Section 58).

This is a power of veto over every law that the Parliament can make, and if properly policed and continually enforced for a time, must lead to the Parliaments returning to law and order, and correcting their clandestine behaviour so that they only pass Bills which are reasonable and lawful, upon which an honourable Governor General would find no objection, and give his assent accordingly.

When the Governor General considers any Bill for his assent he must be mindful of the Constitutional restrictions that apply, he must exercise his judgement in accordance with quote in part; "subject to this Constitution" end part quote, (Section 2). These restrictions begin with the Preamble requirements of Gods Law, quote in part; "Humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God" end part quote, this means that he must apply his considerations consistent with Gods Law, e.g. the Ten Commandments among other.

Another provision he must consider are the words at the head of Section 51, this Section is the main law making head of power of the Constitution, or main Section under which laws can be Legislated, Section 51 header, quote; " The parliament shall, SUBJECT TO THIS CONSTITUTION have power to make laws for the PEACE, ORDER, AND GOOD GOVERNMENT of the Commonwealth with respect to; end quote, and thereafter follows 40 sub sections listing the matters that laws may be made under, providing they are consistent with the plain meaning of the header of this Section.

Therefore the Parliament can only create Bills, and the Governor General can only assent to Bills "Subject to this Constitution" and which are conducive with the plain meaning of

"peace, order, and good government", and clearly the Governor General must ensure any Bill he is asked to assent to, is within those requirements. Should the Parliament circumvent, Oops make a mistake and pass a Bill outside of these explicit conditions, it is the Governor Generals duty to discover the circumvention, Oops mistake and withhold his assent so that the Bill is cancelled, dead and buried.

These provisions must be abided by, the Governor General has NO CHOICE, the conditions of his appointment COMPEL obeyance.

Then there is the powers over sacking an errant Prime Minister, or one unable to administer, e.g. Kerr and Whitlam. And the powers to dissolve the House of Representatives (sic), or even both Houses together under Sections 5 - 28 - 57.

Section 68 ensures that a tyrannical Prime minister (or other) can-not utilise our armed forces against us, quote; 68 The command in chief of the naval and military forces of the Commonwealth is vested in the Governor General as the Queens representative." end quote

in other words the armed forces only act on orders from their Commander in Chief, or more importantly will NOT act if told not to, this is a deliberate restrictive provision of the Constitution, and for good reason. I wonder if Mr Howard has consulted with his new Governor General before declaring that our forces will conduct acts of war, and the invasion of a Sovereign Nation (Afghanistan), without any provocation whatsoever. Oh yes, isn't this why Prime Ministers select a compliant puppet Governor General!!!

There are other duties of less importance which I won't enter into because of saving space and your reading time.

Hopefully we can now understand why the Governor General must remain as an INDEPENDENT arbiter, which is why his Constitutional appointment AND CHOOSING is to be by the Queen, who is Herself an independent arbiter and defender of the faith, NOT the Prime Minister or any other biased person within Australia who has ulterior motives to choose a compliant puppet Governor General.

7. Republican Governor Generals?????

For some years we appear to have managed Governor Generals with republican leanings, this is the most repulsive proposition. How can Her Majesty's Representative have republican ideals, this is exactly opposite to his duty, exactly opposite to his sworn Oaths of Allegiance, IT IS AN ABOMINATION, and appears to be treason of the highest degree.

If a particular Governor General does not wish to promote the Constitutional Monarchial system and ideals, then why has he sworn his Oaths to the same? How can such a person retain any honour whatsoever? How can they hold high office? Or perform the duties required?

If by some warped reasoning a republican continues in the office of Governor General then he must remain absolutely impartial and promote nothing of republicanism.

Alternatively, if he wishes to promote the republic he can always RESIGN his position, withdraw his Oaths of Allegiance, and free himself of his bonds, whereupon he is then free to promote republicanism as much as he desires, without the likelihood of attracting charges of high treason upon himself.

Personally I believe any Australian who promotes this repugnant (to our law) republic has no knowledge of our excellent Monarchial system or it's workings, and probably little honour, especially if they are educated in the above stated matters, like Governor Generals ought to be.

8. Close.

The illegal matters discussed in this publication are an absolute disgrace, our fore-fathers could not have foreseen the corruption and degree of subversion of our Constitution and Monarchial system by high office holders to the disadvantage of Her Majesty's Subjects who also pay the salaries of the said high office holders. Our fore-fathers so carefully debated and wrote a Constitution and placed it under our care and protection, for their children and our children and their children to come.

The Constitution and liberties are still there, still in force, but I ask you how can the written words of the Constitution and liberties (which after all are only words on paper), how can they protect you without you defending and upholding them? (Those few who do gratefully exempted). History has proven time and time again that if you want to keep your rights and liberties you must defend mine, and myself yours, and everybody their neighbours, even criminals liberties must be defended to allow trial by peers (jury), and innocence until proven guilty, because you never know when you yourself will fall victim to a bureaucracy out of control, or I myself.

Defending liberties entails vigilance, observation, supervision and instruction to Councillors and Parliamentarians, bureaucrats, Governor and Governor Generals even the Queen, and if all that fails to bring results in genuine cases, there is NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE DOING IT.

The situation has now deteriored to a degree that if WE the people do not correct it at this 2001 election, then it appears unlikely we will be able to correct it at any subsequent election, it appears we will lose the rights of free speech and expression enjoyed in this country for 100 years, rights that enable me to write this and letters to the Editor of similar calibre and still remain out of prison, it appears we will lose the last vestige of free elections before the next one.

Without rights we are in VISIBLE tyranny, and I don't need to tell you where that leads.