Australian Politics Forum

MeisterEckhart

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17122
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #15 - Nov 3^rd, 2024 at 12:33pm

chimera wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2024 at 11:28am:

Yes we did China in history at school. The British established treaty ports in China after the First Opium War through the Treaty of Nanking in 1842. The treaty established five treaty ports in China. The Queen had a secret port Jackson for convicts and republican whitlams and pick pockets. She flogged them, her memoirs and any mad theory in the trash novels of those dark days.

We’re you educated in mainland China?

Back to top

IP Logged

Grappler Racist Filth

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 90433
Proud Old White Australian Man
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #16 - Nov 3^rd, 2024 at 12:51pm

I missed this one - I assume that it is about the farcical 'decolonialisation' - without colonisation there would be no avenues for anyone to use to attempt to de-colonise anything... no legal right to do so ... no media ...

Let's look at Japan - once 'trade colonialism' was established and Japanese began to see how the West worked, they very quickly adapted and created a massively similar economy and military etc, and began to actively compete on the world stage - first fighting the Russians, then siding with the Allies in WWI and then you know the rest...

Point is - without that 'trade' colonisation, they would never have done any of those things, nor would they have the style of government or economy they now have, nor would the fools with alphabet names have any right to even consider such a thing in their 'new country' ..... imagine Japan as a form of Nipporassic Park, where the traditional old ways hold sway, and tourists arrive to travel through hermetically sealed plastiglass tunnels to watch the goings-on ... and peasants are arbitrarily beheaded by a passing Samurai for 'disrespect' ... and so forth... while various clans fight it out for the Shogunate which effectively dictates to the
Emperor...

Why would they even WANT to 'de-colonise'? Why would an African chief in a tinpot dictatorship want to 'de-colonise'? Why would a Singapore Chinese want to 'de-colonise'? Why would an Arab prince want to 'de-colonise' and miss out on all the benefits etc of oil (the Saudi, despite some shortcoming and skullduggery, seem to have the right idea)?

Perhaps in countries where the ruling elite/class are derived from some foreign stock you might suggest some 'need' - perhaps some South American countries fit that bill ...... but why anyone else who is doing well? Why would the Idiot Classes in the West want to 'de-colonise' that which benefits them to the point where they can even discuss such lunacy?

Truly we live in interesting times - we also live amongst some interesting types of people..... no asylum seekers - Asylum Escapees....

Back to top

asylums_012.jpg (99 KB | 10 )

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

chimera

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 15426
Armidale
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #17 - Nov 3^rd, 2024 at 2:43pm

MeisterEckhart wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2024 at 12:33pm:

We’re you educated in mainland China?

We're with you. You and me.
We're with Queen Victoria, bless her royal socks, and Victoria 維城 Hong Kong, land of cherry blossoms. It always was, always will be, and used to be Elizabeth's land directly ruled with rod of iron and hereditary reserves of power. Charles is Forbidden in the City, with all the king's horses and GGs. Hocking has no chance even at Yarralumla.

Back to top

IP Logged

chimera Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 15426 Armidale Gender:	Re: suspect? Reply #18 - Nov 3^rd, 2024 at 3:16pm The Big Race. Longines Hong Kong Cup Sha Tin Racetrack. $40,000,000 2000m. 23 Feb 2025 Sha Tin Hong Kong Gold Cup, Queen's Silver Jubilee Cup. The winning jockey is communist royalty until dismissal by the next king of sports.
Back to top	IP Logged

chimera

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 15426
Armidale
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #19 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 8:21am

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 74
Appeal to Queen in Council.
No appeal shall be permitted to the Queen in Council from a decision of the High Court upon any question, howsoever arising, as to the limits inter se of the Constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and those of any State or States, or as to the limits inter se of the Constitutional powers of any two or more States, unless the High Court shall certify that the question is one which ought to be determined by Her Majesty in Council.

The High Court may so certify if satisfied that for any special reason the certificate should be granted, and thereupon an appeal shall lie to Her Majesty in Council on the question without further leave.

Except as provided in this section, this Constitution shall not impair any right which the Queen may be pleased to exercise by virtue of Her Royal prerogative to grant special leave of appeal from the High Court to Her Majesty in Council. The Parliament may make laws limiting the matters in which such leave may be asked, but proposed laws containing any such limitation shall be reserved by the Governor-General for Her Majesty's pleasure.
-----------
The limits on royal powers to destroy the Commonwealth PM as described by the accused Ms Hocking are liable to be heard by the monarchy. He will bring down the hammer, hard.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grappler Racist Filth

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 90433
Proud Old White Australian Man
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #20 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 8:37am

chimera wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 8:21am:

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 74
Appeal to Queen in Council.
No appeal shall be permitted to the Queen in Council from a decision of the High Court upon any question, howsoever arising, as to the limits inter se of the Constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and those of any State or States, or as to the limits inter se of the Constitutional powers of any two or more States, unless the High Court shall certify that the question is one which ought to be determined by Her Majesty in Council.

The High Court may so certify if satisfied that for any special reason the certificate should be granted, and thereupon an appeal shall lie to Her Majesty in Council on the question without further leave.

Except as provided in this section, this Constitution shall not impair any right which the Queen may be pleased to exercise by virtue of Her Royal prerogative to grant special leave of appeal from the High Court to Her Majesty in Council. The Parliament may make laws limiting the matters in which such leave may be asked, but proposed laws containing any such limitation shall be reserved by the Governor-General for Her Majesty's pleasure.
-----------
The limits on royal powers to destroy the Commonwealth PM as described by the accused Ms Hocking are liable to be heard by the monarchy. He will bring down the hammer, hard.

Yeah - so if Australia or a state becomes a petty tyranny despotism like the Neo-Nazi/Stalinist putsch from the 'left' these days in their hooded jackets and their diktats from Gauleiters and Kommissars behind closed doors without the consent of the people, you bloody peasants have no right to appeal to the crown for intervention..... you'll just have to take it up the kazoo....

Your only alternative is revolution - one way or the other......

Vote 1 - Grappler Party. We ARE The People!

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

chimera Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 15426 Armidale Gender:	Re: suspect? Reply #21 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 10:11am The divine right vs. the unholy left. With a Mussie power base in Manchester, Ayatollah Charlie al ibn Mecca has the axe ready to fall.
Back to top	IP Logged

MeisterEckhart

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17122
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #22 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 10:41am

chimera wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 8:21am:

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 74
Appeal to Queen in Council.
No appeal shall be permitted to the Queen in Council from a decision of the High Court upon any question, howsoever arising, as to the limits inter se of the Constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and those of any State or States, or as to the limits inter se of the Constitutional powers of any two or more States, unless the High Court shall certify that the question is one which ought to be determined by Her Majesty in Council.

In the case of Hocking v. Director-General of the National Archives of Australia. Case No. S262/2019, did the High Court certify that the question ought to be determined by Elizabeth II in Council?

Back to top

IP Logged

MeisterEckhart

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17122
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #23 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 10:56am

MeisterEckhart wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 10:41am:

chimera wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 8:21am:

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 74
Appeal to Queen in Council.
No appeal shall be permitted to the Queen in Council from a decision of the High Court upon any question, howsoever arising, as to the limits inter se of the Constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and those of any State or States, or as to the limits inter se of the Constitutional powers of any two or more States, unless the High Court shall certify that the question is one which ought to be determined by Her Majesty in Council.

In the case of Hocking v. Director-General of the National Archives of Australia. Case No. S262/2019, did the High Court certify that the question ought to be determined by Elizabeth II in Council?

How did the Australia Act (1986) affect appeals to Her Majesty in Council?

Back to top

IP Logged

chimera

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 15426
Armidale
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #24 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 11:16am

MeisterEckhart wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 10:41am:

Hocking v. Director-General of the National Archives of Australia, did the High Court certify that the question ought to be determined by Elizabeth II in Council?

The prime minister of the Archives, a colonial outpost in the Antipodes Ocean, went down 6:1. The queen, popularly known as Bloody Elizabeth, had a fire of faggots and thumbscrew prepared, encouraged by the Royal Reserve Regiment and the big wigs of Windsor. It was a close call and Jenny escaped to drive a big garbage truck.

Back to top

IP Logged

chimera

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 15426
Armidale
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #25 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 11:22am

MeisterEckhart wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 10:56am:

How did the Australia Act (1986) affect appeals to Her Majesty in Council?

The British Umpire hears appeals often, usually 'not out'. The Windsor Council handles garbage collection and blocked drains.
Otherwise, s 74 remains the last man standing with backs to the wall, keeping powder dry and bulldog breed.

Back to top

IP Logged

MeisterEckhart

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17122
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #26 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 11:34am

chimera wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 11:22am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 10:56am:

How did the Australia Act (1986) affect appeals to Her Majesty in Council?

The British Umpire hears appeals often, usually 'not out'. The Windsor Council handles garbage collection and blocked drains.
Otherwise, s 74 remains the last man standing with backs to the wall, keeping powder dry and bulldog breed.

A direct translation from Mandarin?

For those of us who speak English: The Australia Act (1986) in Australia terminated appeals to Her Majesty in Council.

Back to top

IP Logged

chimera Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 15426 Armidale Gender:	Re: suspect? Reply #27 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 12:11pm MeisterEckhart wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 11:34am: The Australia Act (1986) in Australia terminated appeals to Her Majesty in Council. ..except under s 74 which is as valid today as the rest of the constitution (and more so than Hocking's book). Were you trained in Moscow to have secret knowledge to prove a case?
Back to top	IP Logged

MeisterEckhart

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17122
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #28 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 2:11pm

chimera wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 12:11pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Nov 4^th, 2024 at 11:34am:

The Australia Act (1986) in Australia terminated appeals to Her Majesty in Council.

..except under s 74 which is as valid today as the rest of the constitution (and more so than Hocking's book).
Were you trained in Moscow to have secret knowledge to prove a case?

Section 74 is known in Australian legal circles as a 'dead letter'.

In the case of Hocking v. the NAA, did the High Court certify that the question ought to be determined by Elizabeth II in Council?

If not, what was the High Court's attitude towards the wishes and expectations of Elizabeth II?

Back to top

IP Logged

chimera

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 15426
Armidale
Gender: male

Re: suspect?
Reply #29 - Nov 4^th, 2024 at 2:40pm

'Legal circles' is not 'the Law'. Politically, the court asserts it probably won't use s 74, to suit the pollies. But one judge can't dictate to future judges, who are enabled to ask for royal decisions. The section is in the constitution as a valid law of Australia.

As the archives in fact are not 'the commonwealth related to a state', the sec is not usable against Hocking. But it's an example of royal power, during 124 years. Whitlam knew about both powers and his lack of power against the GG.

Back to top

IP Logged