Will you have treason, treachery or sedition.
Bugger – reading the P2 post, I thought Oh-ho, has OST gone to collect the purchase price gold from the Kiwi’s and assist them shredding their part 61 and installing the iconic, world best Australian one. Fat chance, wee Oliver has more chance of winning the Bledisloe, single handed.
Then the pawky suggestion that perhaps, the Skidmore passport could be Abbotted, for treason. Made me smile, but I wish I’d just left it there; set me thinking, which anyone can tell you is a never a good idea.
The question – is Skidmore committing ‘treason’ against the industry by keeping the McComic hit squads, slobbering all over 61 and doing sod all? It’s certainly a betrayal of faith, definitely treacherous, but when does it become ‘treason’, To act against the will of the people could be seen that way; but, to act against the government to meet the will of the people, what would that be called – rebellion?. As said, wish I’d left it alone, but it is a serious question, industry want 61 gone, ‘government’ don’t want to loose face and the half wits who wrote it cannot and will not back down and admit the error. Stalemate.
I doubt Skidmore will go against the wishes of his government paymasters, but could that be considered treason against the people, those who voted for that government. Seems to me whichever way it goes someone’s nose is going to be out of joint. Minnie breathes the word diplomacy as the porridge arrives – which gives me two good reasons to leave this topic alone. So enough; just an idle twiddle prompted by a throw away line – but it leaves the question begging answer; if ‘we’, who vote and pay for the system of governance reject 61 and yet it is not only kept against our will, but enforced; who is the betrayed and who the betrayer?
One thing certain sure; ‘we’ need to be equally as determined to have 61 repealed as ‘they’ are to keep it.
Aye, definitely a three pipe problem – one which will keep for a rainy day.
Bugger – reading the P2 post, I thought Oh-ho, has OST gone to collect the purchase price gold from the Kiwi’s and assist them shredding their part 61 and installing the iconic, world best Australian one. Fat chance, wee Oliver has more chance of winning the Bledisloe, single handed.
Then the pawky suggestion that perhaps, the Skidmore passport could be Abbotted, for treason. Made me smile, but I wish I’d just left it there; set me thinking, which anyone can tell you is a never a good idea.
The question – is Skidmore committing ‘treason’ against the industry by keeping the McComic hit squads, slobbering all over 61 and doing sod all? It’s certainly a betrayal of faith, definitely treacherous, but when does it become ‘treason’, To act against the will of the people could be seen that way; but, to act against the government to meet the will of the people, what would that be called – rebellion?. As said, wish I’d left it alone, but it is a serious question, industry want 61 gone, ‘government’ don’t want to loose face and the half wits who wrote it cannot and will not back down and admit the error. Stalemate.
I doubt Skidmore will go against the wishes of his government paymasters, but could that be considered treason against the people, those who voted for that government. Seems to me whichever way it goes someone’s nose is going to be out of joint. Minnie breathes the word diplomacy as the porridge arrives – which gives me two good reasons to leave this topic alone. So enough; just an idle twiddle prompted by a throw away line – but it leaves the question begging answer; if ‘we’, who vote and pay for the system of governance reject 61 and yet it is not only kept against our will, but enforced; who is the betrayed and who the betrayer?
One thing certain sure; ‘we’ need to be equally as determined to have 61 repealed as ‘they’ are to keep it.
Aye, definitely a three pipe problem – one which will keep for a rainy day.
Quote:However, one must consider the possibility that that Federal government, despite being lawfully-elected, is behaving in a manner in violation of the Constitution. In that case, an uprising against that government by armed citizens might actually be an attempt to defend the Constitution. Recall that U.S. soldiers, in particular, take an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Ultimately, in that case, what the "uprising" would be considered as would depend on whether it was successful or not; in Churchill's words, "History is written by the victors. HERE -
Quote:Petty treason comprised the murder of a master by his servant, of a husband by his wife, or of a bishop. Petty treason ceased to be a distinct offence from murder in 1828, and consequently high treason is today often referred to simply as treason. Considered to be the most serious of offences, high treason was often met with extraordinary punishment, because it threatened the security of the state. - HERE.-