She’s Not Right Mate 29

An article by R.G.McCulloch:

It is well past time we Australians sorted out who we are. Are we an independent sovereign nation, or are we a colony? Who is legally sovereign the Queen of the United Kingdom, or the Queen of Australia, or the Australian people? Are we then legally a member of the United Nations?

I have done a lot of constitutional and legal research and I will share some of this to see if we can answer the questions above.

Queen Elizabeth II Queen of the UK. Is not Queen of Australia

Queen Elizabeth II Queen of the UK. Is not Queen of Australia

The high court of Australia in Sue V Hill 1999 HCA 30 ruled, “At the very least, the Commonwealth of Australia was transformed into a sovereign, independent nation with the enactment of the Australia acts. The consequence of that transformation is that the United Kingdom is now a foreign power for the purposes of s44 (i) of the constitution”.

Six years after the Australia Acts in 2002 in the District Court of New South Wales the Judge said, ”Bear in mind that we are still a colony, effectively a colony of the United Kingdom, we still do not have a separate sovereign nation.

“When he was the Chief Justice of Australia Murray Gleeson wrote in a publication The Rule of Law and the Constitution (ABC Books 2000) at page 6…‘’the sovereignty of our nation lies with the people, both as a matter of legal principle and as a matter of practical reality.”

Our constitution is still to this day part of a United Kingdom statute, being clause 9 which has 128 sections. The first 8 clauses are covering clauses which we cannot change. Clause 8 is clear that we are a self governing COLONY.The Oath and Affirmation in the Schedule is also outside clause 9 and we cannot change these either.

I also have a reply from The UK foreign and Commonwealth Office London which states “The Queen, in her role as Head of State of the United Kingdom and such advised by British Ministers, has no executive power exercisable within the Commonwealth of Australia.”

They went on to say, “The monarch’s role as Queen of Australia is separate from her role in relation to the United Kingdom and in it’s fulfillment she is advised by Australian Ministers. Clearly they are two separate legal entities and nowhere does the constitution give the parliament the power to create a head of state. Clause 2 of the constitution which we cannot change is.”

The provisions of this Act referring to the Queen shall extend to Her Majesty’s heirs and successors in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom. This Queen, so say the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, can no longer give commissions to Governors or Governor’s General or anything else requiring executive power.

Halsbury' Laws

Halsbury’ Laws

Halsbury’s Laws of England Second Edition VolumeV1 page 432 says, ”The King may not rule his subjects as King of any foreign country, but only as King of England and the dominions belonging thereto as expressed in the royal title.”According to the High Court Sue V Hill we are a foreign power. The Australian politicians passed the Royal Styles& Titles Acts in 1953 & 1973 creating the titular Queen of Australia and after 8 years of asking for the documents to show how the executive power was transferred to this Queen I can assure you they cannot provide them.All members of Parliament have sworn an oath as per the Schedule which is to the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland (A foreign power says the High Court)1) section 44 is clear if you have allegiance to a foreign power you are incapable of sitting in the parliament2).

They are also sworn in by a Governor General whose commission is given by the titular Queen of Australia.

This Governor General also issues the writs for elections, swears in the members of parliament and gives royal assent to their legislation to make it law.

Clearly Australia is a legal basket case totally relying on the Queen of Australia for legality.

I also requested from the UN in Canberra the documents Australia presented in 1945 to the UN to prove we were a sovereign independent nation, as is required to join the UN. As expected Canberra could not supply the documents and advised me to contact the UN in New York.

The final reply from New York was “There was no formal recognition of Australia as a sovereign state by the United Nations. Given Australia signed the Charter which is an international treaty it was implicitly recognized that it was a sovereign state by the other founding members of the United Nations.”

So have we illegally signed international treaties, or if we were in fact a sovereign nation in 1945 clearly under the United Kingdom’s laws (refer Halsbury’s laws) Queen Elizabeth the second Queen of the United Kingdom could never have had executive power in The Commonwealth of Australia.

There is much more evidence, however. I believe, if in fact the Constitution is valid legal law (as the parliament claims when it suits them) then we are still a BRITISH COLONY. Either way, our legal system is invalid relying as it does on the Queen of Australia. This gives us a golden opportunity to put things right but this would require Australians to get off their backsides and get behind those who are aware and trying to do what has to be done.

Is Australia's Government Illegal?

Is Australia’s Government Illegal?





Leave a Reply

29 thoughts on “She’s Not Right Mate

  • Nicole Green

    Hello, i am a Australian Citizen who is strongly concerned about the Muslim Movement to take over our Country. It is very disturbing how the Australian Government seems to be advocating the Muslim Movement by enabling their demands.

    We are fighting a different type of war than that of our Grandfathers and Grandmothers. This is a silent war where Muslims are getting on School P & C’s and making changes at the bottom end of the scale. Some Australian State Schools are not flying the Australian flag, not singing the Australian National Anthem and only allowing Halal food on the tuck shop menu.

    In the suburbs of Sydney recently you could not buy a pie, sausage roll or soft drink for your child at the local children’s footy match. While this might seem small scale to some, it is the beginning of the erosion of the Australian way of life. If parents believe pie’s are not healthy enough we can always make them healthier by improving the quality of the ingredients.

    I do not want my grand daughters beautiful hair covered up. I do not want my grand daughters being treated like second class citizens.

    Being born in 1960 I am one of the ‘Baby Boomers’. It is my children and their children who are technology. savvy. They need to be educated on ways they can fight for this country in intelligent, information sharing ways through Social Media or what ever it takes. The Anti Discrimination Act has disabled people in negative ways as well as the positive. People are scared to voice their opinion. I do understand that discrimination in ways the Act was written for should not be tolerated. There must be a compromise surely.

    The rifle has been swapped for the Smart Phone. Come on Australia! Where is your grit? You do like Christmas don’t you? We live in the best country in the world. Please don’t just hand our home over.

    Nicole Green

    • mo

      good on you Nicole,dont let Australia end up like the UK my friend,although the Queen is still my sovereign i hate the way my country is being taking over by the muslim hordes,in fact the whole of europe is and the only way we will get it back is through civil war,Islam cannot co-exist with other faiths as these inferior people like to think of themselves as supremacists even though half of them can’t read or write.we only have to look at Sweden to see what Islam brings to society in general,this once beautiful country is now the rape capital of Europe because of muslim immigration,rape riots and murder of the indigenous people are a every day ocurrence,respect to you and Mr Mollison from Scotland

      • Jane

        What an ugly arrogant reply. Are you suggesting the original people are not actually people????? Just who the hell do you think you are!!! PIG!

        • restboss Post author

          If you bothered to think about it, I was talking about the fact that Aboriginal culture did not develop along the same lines as other cultures. While their culture was spiritually rich, they remained rooted in the stone age technologically.

          Oink! Oink!

    • restboss Post author

      Show me the lawful paperwork for Canada, the USA and dozens of other countries that have been occupied by superior civilizations in the past. And show me the legal paperwork that the Aborigines used to take this land when they occupied it 40,000 years ago and wiped out the “original” people.

      The fact is, we are here today. I don’t care whether the original settlers were here legally or not. Since our ancestors came here we have developed our country and made it ours. If the Aborigines want to live here they have to accept this fact too.

  • Originee

    To restboss,

    There has never been any law that permits anybody to cross the borders of another country without invitation from those who occupy that land as originees. There is no such thing as international law as there is not, and never has been, an international parliament to enact such laws, nor an international government to execute and maintain such laws. The only intelligent, lawful, legal, constitutional reason for war against another is self-defence. Ergo, when the British, and others before them, arrived on the shores of OUR homeland they committed unlawful acts of war and committed war crimes/murder against OUR ancestors. Our ancestors defence of their land/property can in no way be described as anything other than self-defence. Anybody who says/believes otherwise can only be described as claiming superiority where none can exist.

    OUR ancestors had the absolute right to defend their homeland against the aggressors, no matter what the beliefs of the aggressors at the time, but the aggressors used superior technology of the time which in no way made it lawful or just. There are only, and have only ever been, agreements between the re-presentatives of The Peoples of countries, called “treaties” which can be revoked at any time. This may just lead you to understand that all law is fictional. It is a product of the minds of men and has no substance apart from belief. It has no physical presence. You cannot show me the law, you cannot touch it, the same as you cannot touch “government”. These things have no existence apart from being notions implanted in the minds of men. Your law is no different from our tribal law in reality because it is all perception and acceptance of notions and perceptions, which are handed down over millennia. Our tribal law was in existence among the originees peoples long before your imported law came into existence and are therefore, importantly superior to your laws regardless of whatever you may believe otherwise, and even although you, and many of us, believe that many tribal laws are unjust and cruel. Want some facts? The are many more where these come from if you can handle the truth.

    You think you have problems with illegal boat-people now, how do you think our fore-fathers got on? There was no law that permitted the “king” of England to deport anybody from their homeland, i.e England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, to some place of his choosing, Ergo all that happened in the 16 & 1700’s was unlawful/illegal by any measure of lawfulness/legality/constitutionality and nothing alters these facts. As you claim that some facts have to be accepted, how about you accept the truth of it all? Our country was unlawfully invaded by boat-people who stayed to destroy we originees and all we stand for. Want proof of these facts, look to the record and see how we originees have been, and still are treated. That is not a claim that all people treat us with total indifference but your re-presentatives surely did and do.

    You write of nomadic hunter gatherers, well, did you know that before others before us became “educated” and “civilised” they came from hunter/gatherer stock as well? Simply because a people can claim to have “educated” others to their way, that does not mean they own them. Can you understand this?

    • restboss Post author

      Hi Originee:

      Long time no speak.

      I am an admirer of yours as you would know from the fact I quoted you in my book, “Drafting a New Constitution” (pages 435-436).

      Although I do not dispute what you say here below, I think you miss a couple of salient points.

      Firstly, there is growing evidence that in fact, those whom we now know as Australian Aborigines were NOT the original human inhabitants of this land but were themselves invaders of the land of others before them.

      Secondly, and more importantly, lands have been invaded and occupied since time began. Subsequent generations just have to get on with life. To do otherwise is to perpetuate hatred and envy that is totally unproductive.

      However, human civilisation is evolving and hopefully one day we will stop invading the land of other peoples and we can then live happily ever after in peace and harmony.

      In the meantime, I too am bitterly disappointed in the manner in which our government and society treat Aborigines. All efforts to date have only served to destroy the Aboriginal people. I am sure Aborigines would be much better off if they were simply treated by everyone as Australians.
      Charles Mollison

    • janelle

      Hello there,
      may I have permission to repost your comments above. I have been trying to educate people that they have rights and they can stand up to the oppression of local council.

  • agro

    people who decide to move somewhere else to live are not invaders.
    thieves are thieves
    murderers are murderers
    deceivers are deceivers (still just thieves)
    invaders are likely both
    descendents of invaders are people with no more questionable heritage than anybody else
    people need to be treated as men and women first before applying derogatory titles such as ‘Australian’
    before we all get put in uniforms

    • restboss Post author

      People who go country shopping and head here without a legal visa intending to evade our immigration laws are invaders, thieves and criminals. You can split hairs all you like but the truth is the truth. If you are referring to the colonization of Australia that displaced the Aborigines, then that is a different question and something that we will not waste time debating. The reality is, we are here today and RestoreAustralia is proposing a system of government that will include all Aussies.

  • Tony

    Does your Organisation have any Political clout ?.
    I’m a member of ONE NATION and think a new Party is needed.
    If it\’s everything it claims to be, I think RESTORE AUSTRALIA should form a Political party.
    People\’s opinions on a Website does\’nt count. We need an improved Parlimentary preseance.

    • restboss Post author

      I was a member of One Nation but quit. No political party is every going to solve our problems…they are PART OF THE PROBLEM. We need to change the whole political structure. You can’t fix the current one.

      We are working to build up a grassroots organization of committed citizens who want change. Read our vision to see what we advocate:
      RestoreAustralia Vision

  • Tony

    Assuming RESTORE AUSTRALIA is everything it claims to be, how does it propose getting its message across to the masses ?.
    Unless there’s some sort of Parlimentary preseance, I can’t see how RA could get ahead.
    I have nothing against Muslims, however they don’t belong here in Australia.
    My main concern is they could ingratiate themselves as Parliamentry representatives and try to overthrow the Government.
    Australians would then be political prisoners in their own country. Government coups are quite common overseas.
    Multiculturism has failed, there are now far too many Migrants here from all countries – taking our jobs, our housing and our money.
    Islamic extremists are turning our own people against us.
    We are too involved with the U.S. war machine, a country these extremists hate.
    The Martin Place tragedy wasn’t an act of Terrorism, but a simple Seige.

    • restboss Post author

      Tony, changing our political system cannot be achieved from within the 2-party system. The push must come from We the people. To achieve that we have published a Draft Constitution so that all Aussies can read it, consider it, and suggest amendments to it. Read this page first to see what our vision is, and then download the Draft to see what could be our future if we adopt some or all of it.
      The RA Vision

  • Graeme

    I am a fourth generation Australian and i am sick and tired of the Muslim INVASION in OUR country.
    Islam is a very dangerous religion, as it has shown many times.
    I get really angry when THEY want US to change OUR ways to suit them.
    I can see Restore Australia as an option to the two major parties for Australia to once again become AUSTRALIA.
    I do think that Abbott under extreme pressure has done quite a bit to keep Australia FREE from EXTREMISM.
    But Shorten is a real problem with the help of the greens.
    I will be voting for RA in any election they wish to stand.

    • restboss Post author

      As you can see from this page Australia faces a real problem…but RestoreAustralia is not a political party and we never will be. The problem is the political parties. Read this Graeme, to see what the basic problems are. RestoreAustralia offers a different solution….one that must start with the people, not a political party.
      The RestoreAustralia Vision

  • disappointed

    fuck, me….reading this thinking “this is great! this is how i can help change my country” then i get to the bottom and read the boycott halal and islam shit and realise your an antiquated fool. There are 382,000 people who identify as muslim in this country…..that is FUCK ALL! You want to restore Australia? give it back to the indigenous people who never even signed a treaty. You cunts make me fuckin sick with the bile you spew.

    • restboss Post author

      I nearly didn’t approve your comment because you are rude, crude and abusive…but I decided to let the whole world see the type of idiots we have in our nation. Islam appeasers are the worst type of traitors to our nation.

    • Wayne Linguey

      To Disappointed.
      The fact is the indigenous persons here lost the war, but are still bellyaching about it and expectimg compensation?
      They were so lucky that it was ‘white fella’s’ who got here first and not the asians.
      There would not have been any of them left alive.
      If you think that we’re racist, ask any black person who’s ever been to Japan what their treatment was like!

  • Steve

    ‘Democracy’ “government by the people; especially : rule of the majority (b:) ” a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people
    Parties are dictated to by their party executive, caucuses, factions and leaders, parties do not represent Australians or Australia, only whims of influence, each ‘party’ should technically be only allowed 1 candidate.
    Is why there is so much corruption and waste in our public services, parties beach the constitutional, political liberty and duty of our representatives to represent we the people.
    CRIMES ACT 1914 – SECT 28
    Interfering with political liberty
    Any person who, by violence or by threats or intimidation of any kind, hinders or interferes with the free exercise or performance, by any other person, of any political right or duty, shall be guilty of an offence.
    Penalty: Imprisonment for 3 years.