-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Undisclosed. Recipients <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, 6 July 1999 7:26 PM
Subject: votergram
>This is a reply from the attorney generals office in regards to the
>Votergram below they just can't afford to admit they are wrong and that
>history proves it.
>
>(I would be interested in your comments)
>
>
>
>
>
>Votergram
>
>Given that the Act of Settlement 1701 clearly places the British crown
under
>the direct control of, and therefore subject to, the Parliament of the
>United Kingdom, it is patently obvious to even the most casual observer of
>the political process, that neither the Australian "federal government",
nor
>State "governments" have authority to impose British law upon the sovereign
>citizens of Australia by way of any "law" let alone a "GST", or a
>"referendum" regarding the covering clauses to "The British Colony of the
>Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)", as the
aforementioned
>Act is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and those covering
>clauses are the exclusive preserve of that Parliament.
>
> The insurmountable barrier is the fact that to seek "Royal Assent" in any
>"parliament" in Australia, is to seek the approval of the Parliament of the
>United Kingdom and this is expressly forbidden by both British and
>International law.
>
> Any further attempts to impose British law upon sovereign Australian
>citizens will immediately attract addition to actions commencing in the
>British courts to bring to account all those imposing British law upon
>sovereign Australian citizens and therefore outside the sovereignty of the
>United Kingdom.
>
>
>
attorney reply jpg.jpg
attorney reply page 2 jpg.jpg
attorney reply jpg.jpg
attorney reply page 2 jpg.jpg