Quatloos!

Apparently high ranking officials of the Australian government have been charged with treason.

http://dnews.co.nz/node/26

High ranking members of the Australian Government including Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott are facing charges of treason in the Australian Federal Court.

The prosecution was brought against Rudd and Abbott as well as the Australian Electoral Commission by Brian Shaw after the Oath of Allegiance and reference to the British Crown were removed from Australian laws.

This treason is so far reaching that the Governor General has to conceal it.

http://omegatimes.com/article.php?intid=1321

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has been charged with Acts of Treason before the Courts of Australia. This is being concealed by the Governor General Quentin Bryce, the Judiciary and the Press ... who are also implicated in the treason. Brian Shaw, who has laid these charges, provides the following update.

How reliable is this information? It is so reliable there is a 147 page affidavit to support it.

http://199.85.215.243/Affidavit_Brian_Shaw_vs_AEC.pdf

I think we all will like para. 16, relating to human trafficking turning your birth certificates into a "bond" which is then sold all over the world.

I see that the plaintiff is a declared vexatious litigant in Victoria.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/ ... 7/148.html

I am therefore not expecting the fall of the Australian government to occur in the near future.

I will not pretend to have read the pleadings in detail but I did skim and the flavour of his claim is that the West Australian government introduced an Act which changed references in other Acts from "The Queen" to "the State of Western Australia". The argument is that this somehow removed the Queen as the head of State for Australia without referendum, which would be unconstitutional.

It's nonsense.

In Mr Shaw's case, as a vexatious litigant, he would need leave of the Court to bring an action. No Court would give that leave based on the pleadings I read and the thing would die. In the case of someone who hadn't been declared, the Defendant would ordinarily file a defence followed by an application to strike out or permanently stay the proceedings. Again, based on the pleadings, such an application would most likely be granted. Costs would follow against the (likely) impecunious defendant. Much money wasted by the Crown.

In direct answer to your question, there is no remedy request in the pleadings that I could see which was within the bounds of reality or which was even deserving of a hearing on its merits.

We have an election coming up in a few months and, afterwards, there will be a spike in frivolous litigation involving the electoral commission similar to this matter by the lunatic fringe.

I believe I have stumbled across Mr. Shaw's webpage where he documents his ... err ... efforts?

• Elijah's Challenge: http://www.elijahschallenge.net

There's a ton of stuff here, much Biblical, much cryptic. He has also uploaded some of his court documents and, even better, transcripts!

SMS Möwe