There have been a few posts on here lately about Indicting certain Parliamentarians and other Public figures for Treason and Misprison of Treason. Here is a reply to a query on this matter from the Usher of the Black Rod of the Victorian Parliament
Section 23 of the Constitution Act 1975 (Victoria) requires every Member of the Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council to take an oath or affirmation. The wording of the oath and affirmation are contained in Schedule 2 of the Constitution and are as follows -
SECOND SCHEDULE Sch. 2: See note 1.
I swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty and Her Majesty's heirs and successors according to law.
I do solemnly and sincerely affirm that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty and Her Majesty's heirs and successors according to law.
[If circumstances so require, His Majesty is to be substituted for Her Majesty.] |-----------------------------
-----------------------| | | |NOTE: For forms of administering oaths, see | | Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1958, | | section 100. | |----------------------------------------------------|
I am awaiting a similar reply from the Usher of the Black Rod for the Commonwealth Parliament.
Dear EdwinFar be it for me to steal the thunder of my wisers and betters, but do you have any idea why the Commonwealth of Australia is listed under United States Corporation Law? I will give you a big, big hint, try looking up something like 'The United States of America' under Australian corporations law!
If you were to ask the first 100 people you came across, 'are you in favour of Australia becoming a republic?' It is my opinion that you would get at least 60% of respondents answering in the affirmative. Yet if you were to ask these same people to answer you on what form said republic was to take and what the head of state was to be called, viz President, Grand Poobah or even 'Grand Snark of the Universe', I'll bet that you couldn't get a majority answer or even indeed any answer, other than the 'motherhood' statement, 'I'm in favour of a republic'.
BTW, I wouldn't worry about us getting rid of the Queen in a hurry, speaking of Oaths, my goodself, along with quite a number of other Australians has taken this one
'I swear by almighty God to well and truly serve and protect Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors, according to law'
Just received this reply from the Office of the Official Secretary to the Governor-General regarding the form of oath used by Julia Gillard when she was sworn in as Prime Minister
I can advise you that the oath that the Prime Minister used was as follows: “I, Julia Eileen Gillard, do solemnly and sincerely affirm and declare that I will well and truly serve the Commonwealth of Australia, her land and her people in the office of Prime Minister.”
This should not be confused with the oath or affirmation contained in the Constitution. Section 42 of the Constitution prescribes the oath or affirmation required to be made by every Senator and every Member of the House of Representatives. All Members of the House, including Ministers make their oaths in this form before they take their seats in the House. All Senators, including Ministers, make this oath at the commencement of their Senate terms.
In contrast, the oath or affirmation used by Members and Senators when they are sworn to the Ministry is not specified in the Constitution or in legislation. Rather, the text of the oath and affirmation is a matter of choice for each government, and successive governments since at least 1993 have adopted a different form of words. The Governor-General does not direct governments as to the form of words used in the oath or affirmation and has no power to do so.
If I could find this out with a simple email, what does it say for those who push the 'Treason' barrow? Hope they enjoy spending all that money trying to get non-existent Grand juries empanelled?
While it was a little on the slow side of excitement, I found the swearing-in of the P.M. and the new ministry quite interesting. It is good to see the system working as it is meant to. There are many countries that would be envious of a system that has such peaceful, democratic elections producing on the whole, very stable governments.
As for those who would see conspiracy theories in everything, I feel sorry for them. They seem to have so little else in their lives.
I only have to walk ten minutes from my place to a major freeway into the Melbourne CBD, yet running alongside this freeway for a couple of kilometres is a nature reserve, complete with creek and wetlands.
They have just completed renovations at a major shopping complex at Doncaster, including a glass walled food court. Yet when you sit up there and look out it is hard to believe you are in the middle of suburbia looking at the city, all you see is a sea of green, lots of trees in the streets and suburban backyards.
Now if you will excuse me I have to erect my pyramid in my backyard and sit under it chanting 'Kumbaya!' ;-)
ps if this is in Agenda 21 and our State and Local governments are embracing it, aren't they guilty of racial vilification? ;-)
The Brigalow saga is not and will not be part of this discussion.
I invite those who have posted reference to it to remove it and re-post (if they must) in the Truthers Forum. Perhaps they, the Truthers, may have more patience than me? If they don't remove there posts, then I will.
For newcomers to Agmates, if you use the site Search engine you will appreciate what I mean.