Category: General Interest

Brilliant post by a barrister:
Know this. Lockdown Orders have zero legal standing. Why did Daniel Andrews desperately want the Omnibus detention powers? He had the existing fines mechanism to enforce Directions orders which are the basis of the lockdown. So why the need for new powers. This answer is because people are waking up.

Everyone should go and read page 106 of The Public Health and Wellbeing Act Division 1 Section 111. It states: the spread of an infectious disease should be prevented or minimised with the MINIMUM RESTRICTIONS on the RIGHTS of any person. Has that been happening? No. Why?

The clause doesn’t say; the restrictions on the rights of any person will be minimum to contain the spread of an infectious disease. If the clause’s construction read this way, it would attempt to give the Chief Health Officer arbitrary power to decide what’s minimum to get his job done as he sees fit, and with no consideration or reference to what the person, whose rights being restricted, thinks. This is not how the law works or what the clause says.

The legal drafting and clause construction is very clear. It says; the Chief Health Officer can do his job to stop the spread of an infectious disease, BUT a person’s rights restrictions must be minimal. He has a qualifier and restraint. He doesn’t decide what’s minimum. So who does decide what’s minimum?

If a person, whose rights are being restricted, has no say in the matter, there would have been no need to include the clause in the legislation. The Parliament sought to preserve and protect civil liberties. It’s a check on unfettered powers. That is the purpose of the clause, otherwise, why have it in the legislation if the Chief Health Officer has unrestrained powers? It’s a reminder and constraint on the Chief Health Officer.

The Westminster system constrains, separates, checks and contains power, through a mechanism known as the Separation of Powers. This means that the legislature (who makes laws), the Executive (Premier and Ministry) who execute law, and the Judiciary who interpret laws, remain separate. This is a check on power so it’s not concentrated as we seem to have in Victoria at the present.

The default ‘Mentis’ (mind) of Parliament, in a liberal democracy, is to preserve freedoms. Particularly the freedom of movement and association which the High Court has protected over and over and now Daniel Andrews thinks he can extinguish.

The person who decides what’s a minimum restraint on a person’s rights is the person who has the rights. If that person has no say on what’s a restraint, the person would be deemed to have no rights, so why mention them? In this event, the person at best, has privileges which can be limited or extinguished. Like a driving licence.

True rights can only be suspended or limited by the right’s holder. These are known as inalienable rights. God given which cannot be extinguished by the State, the Chief Health Officer or Daniel Andrews. Division 1 Section 111 was drafted in acknowledgement of this liberal democratic principle. The Section is even referred to as the Principle of the Act, against which all Directions Orders must be measured. Case closed.

What I have just set out is a legal argument by a Barrister might make before a Magistrate, who is usually ill equipped to handle such arguments. Now you understand why the last thing Daniel Andrews wants is fines to be challenged in Court. Push the problem into the future. Maybe, even forgive fines so they never see a courtroom.

Victorians don’t know or understand the law and Andrews feels omnipotent whilst Victorians are oblivious and kept in the dark.The average police member in the street is even less well equipped to handle these matter, so don’t try to enlighten them or argue whilst being issued with an illegal and worthless fine. They have no idea. They’re just following orders. In any event, fines are only allegations and not findings of fact or guilt. Fines become an admission of guilt when you pay them.

That’s why the fines can’t be challenged.

Daniel Andrews’ decrees from the podium have zero standing and will never stand up in court when the BS fines are challenged. They’re all a big bluff. The lockdown is a bluff.

It’s no wonder the Magistrates Court has adjourned all Covid challenged fines well into 2021.

If one illegal fine gets before a court, Andrews will buckle like he did with the Curfew when it was uncovered as a fraud. The Directions Order will be found to be as illegal as the Curfew. The day before the Curfew was challenged in the Supreme Court, it was quickly ended by Andrews.

The 5klm restraint is equally illegal as an excessive restraint on the rights of Victorians. I remind you. If Victorians have no rights, as Andrews asserts, then why mention them in the Act?

While Andrews can’t be removed as Premier, he is subject to the Westminster system Separation of Powers, which means the Parliament or Courts can clip his wings and stop his tyranny. As he has the numbers and Parliament and it’s not sitting, it’s useless to try a no confidence motion against Andrews, so we’re left with the Judiciary and the Courts. Spread this across social media.

Being awake and informed will set you free. With the legal illusion of fines swept away, so is lockdown. We decide when the lockdown ends, not Daniel Andrews. The police will run out of ink in their pens writing fines if we don’t cooperate.

It was for this reason Daniel Andrews wanted detention powers in his Omnibus Bill. He feared someone would write a post like this, and wake up Victoria. Repost this as far and wide as you can.

An expose of the top ranks of the system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5ridwIcFl4

One of my principle concerns with the current scene is the rapidly escalating speed with which human rights are being trampled. The lack of peace in certain regions is proof positive that these principles are actually valid and needed, more than ever.

This trend needs to be reversed. The entrance point is educating people that they do have rights. Hence this post and the request you share these posts so more people are aware of and insist upon their rights so that we can live in a peaceful society.

Watch the video and if you think so too, please share it!

Do you know it is a fundamental right of yours to have your own opinion? You would not think so from the way some people (including the government) try to belittle you for disagreeing with them but it is.

With members of societies around the globe becoming more polarised in their viewpoints, with popular discontent mounting over public exposure of the evidence of government corruption, with protest over injustices and with hidden influencers seeking to foment trouble, we have an increasing number of potential flashpoints that could erupt into chaos. Indeed, many have.

This is not good for the majority of the population. Most of us just want to be left in peace to live our lives.

The insane have the intention to harm or destroy. Their product is death and destruction.

The criminal has the intention to obtain without exchange. To get something for nothing. His product is stolen property.

A researcher observed some decades ago that 20-25% of a population are insane. The majority are sane and look to create rather than destroy. The sane people need and deserve protection from the insane and the criminal.

The first priority of a sane government official has to be to preserve order – to protect life and property. Their actions should all lead to the product of a safe and orderly environment. To do any less than that is in violation of the purpose of their position.

The recent civil commotion in many US cities is the result of the actions of the criminal and insane. The fact that this was deliberately facilitated by some governors and mayors is evidence of their insanity.

A governor or mayor telling the police to stand down in the face of impending unrest is facilitating death and destruction. It is acting contrary to the best interest of the majority of the population. This is treason. Not calling for Federal assistance when local resources are deemed inadequate is likewise treason.

Any police chief, on receiving an order for the members of their department to stand down in the face of civil unrest should recognise that order as an illegal order and that to comply would be treason. The police chief’s proper response would be to arrest the person issuing the order on a charge of treason. Following the illegal order to stand down and not perform their duties is treasonous on their part.

Unfortunately there are many elements in this society who profit from chaos. Arms makers and vendors sell more in times of unrest. Bankers lend money to warring factions. The newspapers and digital media increase readers/viewers in times of war and unrest. Consequently the media are always looking for sex, scandal and controversy.

Good works do not “just happen”. They do not spring spontaneously from the ground. To build a house, land and materials need to be procured, skilled labour needs to be hired and instructed. Same with anything you create.

Similarly, bad conditions do not “just happen”. They are created.

Behind every bad condition will be found a psychiatrist.

Psychiatry also profit from people’s anxiety. They get larger government appropriations for “mental health” which they then proceed to destroy with their mind-altering “treatments” that harm and destroy. Do your own homework to confirm this. Nearly every mass shooter over the past few decades was in the hands of psychiatrists prior to their rampage. Many celebrities have died as a result of being fed illegal drugs or toxic cocktails of “medications”.

I spoke to one person who personally knew a chap who conducted some research in this area. He looked into every major crime that had been commited over a 6 month period in a US city. EVERY single one had psychiatrist at the root of it. So it is not hard to see the truth in the statement that behind every bad condition you will find a psychiatrist.

And when you understand a psychiatrist’s basic intent you can see that their product of chaos and destruction aligns perfectly with their intention and actions.

In 1947 the then president of the World Federation of Mental Health, Brock Chisholm, said, “The reinterpretation and eventual eradication of the concept of right and wrong are the belated objectives of nearly all Psychotherapy.”

If we as parents and teachers do not instill in our children respect for one another, tolerance for differences, that there is right and wrong, the difference between right and wrong, that actions have consequences and that regardless of what has happened in the past one has the ultimate responsibility for the actions one takes in the present, then we are, by our neglect, cocreating a society where psychiatry’s evil intentions are widely manifest, as is happening at present.

Unfortunately, those in power are ignorant of psychiatry’s true intentions and are often “advised” or influenced by psychiatrists. As a result we get illogical and insane policies and legislation that harms or reduces freedom.

Proposed legislation could be evaluated on this basis.

Anything that reduces the freedom and ability to live, work and play of a sane, responsible, ethical member of society has negative worth. It is counter-productive.

Anything that restricts the ability of the insane and criminal to harm others is productive and worth-while.

If you look over a history of revolts and revolutions you will find that even those that occurred as a result of heavy suppression by tyrants resulted only in harsher tyranny. The French and Russion revolutions are large, classic examples of this point.

So, despite the tyranny of a current government, revolt against it does not improve conditions but only worsens them. It spawns a greater tyranny.

I am not saying this to preserve any tyranny but to prevent worse.

No, what we need to do as a first action in improving conditions is to maintain order. Anything that leads to less order is to be reduced or eradicated. Anything that leads to greater order is to be enhanced and improved.

Knowledge improves one’s ability to control his envirnment and bring order to it. So spread truth.

Communication improves relations and increases understanding. So increase your level of communication. The world needs more and better communication.

If you see someone working for a greater good, support their efforts.

Arguments don’t work. I have never won an argument. I have never changed another person’s mind by arguing with them. In arguing, all you do is cement the other fellow’s viewpoint. Look over your past arguments and you will probably find the same.

Where a change of mind occurred it was more communication that brought it about, not aguing.

So I am asking you to pour oil on troubled waters whenever you see it.

To promote more communication not censorship.
To promote peace not war.
To promote justice and fairness rather than tyranny.
To promote truth and honesty not lies.
To promote freedom not slavery and oppression.

Any time you see something non-optimum by all means decry it but remember to promote the opposite of it. We get what we resist so it is most important to promote what we want.

And remember, every dollar you spend rewards the actions and intentions of the person who sold you the goods or service you purchased. Most large firms are owned and controlled by a handful of families at the top of the food chain whose objective is to increase and consolidate their power and to eradicate competition.

This increases the potential for tyranny.

So spend wisely.

And if you found value in this article, feel free to share it.

Tom Grimshaw