Thanks for the Automatic Reply from ABC Radio to my 'Help Mr O'Shea use all
the authority he can, to prevent DISENFRANCHISEMENT' message. I'm replying
to the 612 address hoping to get a more human response.
A phone call is probably essential, so I can fax the hard evidence (already
sent the Governor of Queensland), and I could even explain on air, the
intended disenfranchisement of One Nation supporters, whose 2080 exhausted
ballots have been reclassified from valid in the first Kawana count, to
invalid in the second count. The total number set for such outrageous
betrayal will emerge only slowly unless the ABC quickly encourages other
candidates, including those being offered 'election' based on
disenfranchisement of voters for taking Mr Beattie's advice, to come forth.
I hope it has been read by all ABC employees concerned with democracy and
the rule of law. As His Honour Justice Murray Gleesen, Chief Justice of the
High Court of Australia, said, on ABC Radio, in his first of the six Boyer
Lectures for 2000: "The democratic and lawful means of securing change, if
change be necessary, is an expression of the will of an informed
electorate." The only legally enforceable expressions of such people's will
are parliamentary elections and referendums, so it is vital to peace and
good government, that they are all truly "free and fair", as well as
"informed".
His Honour also said: "In our society, threats to the rule of law are not
likely to come from large and violent measures. They are more likely to come
from small and sometimes well-intentioned encroachments upon basic
principles, sometimes by people who do not understand those principles."
Perhaps the encroachment upon basic principles involved in disenfranchising
the 2080 One Nation supporters whose exhausted ballots have been
reclassified from valid in the first count, to invalid in the second count
was well-intentioned, but I hope all at the ABC would agree with the
conclusion of the following submission to His Excellency, Major General
Peter Arnison, Governor of Queensland. "Any subversive lowering of the
democratic ‘bar’ in final counts, by disenfranchisement of voters expressing
no preference for candidates remaining in the count, would not be just
unlawful, but plainly treacherous."
If the ABC uses its independence and authority, to expose those like
returning officer M R Stubbins (see below), it can take the lead in
informing the electorates like Kawana, and others like it, just how they
will have, for perhaps the first time in modern history, a chance to
exercise their votes in truly democratic, as well as "informed" elections,
rather than the phony democracy of first-past- the post, or the fraudulent
democracy being attempted right now in Kawana, and who knows which other
electorates!
Since e-mailing His Excellency, I have learned that Gympie is also heading
for a failed election. Understandably such remaining candidates are facing
a quandary. What should they do if offered ‘election’ by the ECQ, based on
in the unlawful, anti-democratic process, which they like Antony Green, were
deceived into believing? Will they join the ‘others’ with strong interests
in suppressing the democratic truth that democratic, free, and fair
elections can fail?
Here is a real chance for the ABC, particularly with Antony Green's growing
authority, to do far more than help Mr O'Shea and His Excellency, use all
the authority they can, to prevent such DISENFRANCHISEMENT. To further help
in this "democratic and lawful means of securing change", I'll CC others
besides Don Schultz, and those also CCd to my original message. Among them
are Antony Green and Dennis Shanahan of the Australian (eg.'Seducing those
sullen voters') suggest he should want to take up this story. It will be
interesting to see if any of the Murdoch/Packer stables break their silence
before the ABC.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, 28 February 2001 7:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Lawful Process of Elections or Disenfranchisement of Voters
Importance: High
The attached document is intended for His Excellency, Major General Peter
Arnison, Governor of Queensland. If he does not open this e-mail, please
print the attached Word file for his urgent attention.
In case there is a problem opening it, the plain text of my submission is
reproduced below. Also I can't include the faxed copy of the official
results for Kawana Electorate in this e-mail, but will endevour to get it to
His Excellency with the original submission.
Thankyou for your assistance
James Stewart
24 Moorbell Street
TARRAGINDI, 4121
Phone:+617 3411 7646
Mobile: 04 1427 4420 (voice-mail)
His Excellency, Major General Peter Arnison, Officer of the Order of
Australia, Governor of Queensland
Your Excellency
Lawful Process of Elections or Disenfranchisement of Voters
Recently you commanded Mr D J O'Shea, the Electoral Commissioner, to proceed
according to the law, with the election of eighty-nine Members of the
Legislative Assembly. There is mounting evidence that some of the of
eighty-nine elections will fail to produce winners with the necessary
majorities, but this simple truth will be suppressed by the unlawful and
fraudulent disenfranchisement of voters not preferring ‘remaining’
candidates.
This hurried letter follows consultations with other voters, and alerts you
to the possibility that you may become an unwitting accomplice in this
unlawful, anti-democratic process, and to encourage you to insist on lawful,
not fraudulent, elections. So far the hard evidence for such corruption is
rare, but I’ll include a faxed copy of the official results for Kawana
Electorate, submitted by returning officer M R Stubbins, which were
‘declared’ on Friday.
As you’ll see 2080 exhausted ballots have been reclassified from valid in
the first count, to invalid in the second count. The 2080 voters who cast
these ballots can be expected to get justifiably outraged when they learn
the truth. Hopefully this will be after your intervention to prevent the
conclusion reached by the Kawana Electorate returning officer, and evidently
the Electoral Commissioner.
Of course I sincerely hope that Mr O'Shea will prove I am wrong in the above
prediction, and involve your Excellency in defence of the democratic, free,
and fair elections, which are the only authority for enforcing laws for
peace and good government, rather than seek to deceive you, the way so many
others have been deceived. Two weeks ago, I raised these concerns with him,
and asked him to alert you, but he has yet to respond, so I feel it is
prudent to write directly to you. As the Queen's appointee, you are both
more free to act discreetly, quickly and responsibly, and have access to
better advice, than judges who could be asked to decide after 'winners on
preferences' of ‘failed’ elections have been submitted to you.
For each election to the Legislative Assembly, the law requires a majority
of the “first preference votes” (which equals all formal ballot papers, and
is hence the basis for a democratic and lawful majority), and second (and
further) counts “must take place” where no first preference winners emerge.
But with enough exhausted ballots, such as where enough voters marked their
ballots as advised by Mr Beattie, no candidate may get the democratic and
lawful majority, even after the final count of preferences.
Antony Green, the ABC’s election ‘expert’, predicted this during television
coverage of counting on 17 February, and even exposed the deception, albeit
without explicitly admitting the disenfranchisement of voters. He said:
“many will be excluded from the count”, referring explicitly to the
deceptive phrase in the Electoral Act: “remaining in the count”. The phrase
"remaining in the count" is being (and may have previously been) dishonestly
and UNLAWFULLY re-interpreted as authority to optionally disenfranchise
voters for not preferring ‘remaining’ candidates, so that candidates with
less than a “majority of the first preference votes" can be ‘elected’.
Not surprisingly, there is nothing in the Act to authorise exclusion of
exhausted formal ballot papers from the count of "votes remaining in the
count", and the idea that ballots of voters expressing no preference for
candidates remaining in the count can be admitted to first counts, but
optionally removed from subsequent counts, is so utterly repugnant to
democracy and the much-touted term "fair elections", that I expect Mr O'Shea
is not a willing agent of such subversion of democracy, but is intimidated
by others with stronger, more direct interests in suppressing the democratic
truth that democratic, free, and fair elections can fail.
My sincere apologies for what may at first seem confusing message, and I
trust this gets to you in good time to avert the harm to peace and good
government if electors, particularly those facing unauthorised
disenfranchisement, learn the truth after your proclaimation of the success
of candidates whose ‘election’ does not reflect the will of democratic
majorities. Any subversive lowering of the democratic ‘bar’ in final
counts, by disenfranchisement of voters expressing no preference for
candidates remaining in the count, would not be just unlawful, but plainly
treacherous.
Please feel free to discuss this as soon as possible, by calling my office
(3411 7646) or mobile any time.
Yours sincerely
J E Stewart
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion.
To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe
To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe
For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
For archives
http://www.mail-archive.com/public-list@neither.org
