20230627-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Michelle - Rowland.mp Communication Minister - COMPLAINT

Page 1
1
2
3 Michelle.Rowland.MP (Australian/Victoria date) 27-6-2023
4 Michelle.Rowland.MP@aph.gov.au <Michelle.Rowland.MP@aph.gov.au>;
5
6 Re: 20230627-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Michelle.Rowland.MP Communication Minister-
7 COMPLAINT
8
9 NOT RESTRICTED FOR PUBLICATION
10
11 COMPLAINT
12 Madam,
13 I refer to my 25 June 2023 COMPLAINT to “Julie Inman Grant, Australia’s eSafety
14 commissioner” of which included in the following document:
15
16 The eSafety commissioner would do better to deal with VOICE disinformation
17 equally against everyone. Also the Australian Federal Police should investigate the
18 army’s unconstitutional involvement in the covid scam.
19 You can download the document from:
20 https://www.scribd.com/document/655255407/20230625-Mr-G-H-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-
21 B-to-R-Kershaw-Chief-Commissioner-of-AFP-Suppl-98-DISINFORMATION-
22 WARMONGERING-Etc
23
24 You are a (Communication) Minister and as such must be a “constitutional adviser” to the
25 Governor-General. Your oath/affirmation for being a Minister must at all times one that you are
26 bound by the legal principles embedded in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act
27 1900 (UK), and not at all what your political party leader, whatever party tthis might be, may
28 demand/dictate.
29 There is, that is constitutionally, no such thing as a political party government, as such the term
30 “Coalition Government”, “Labor Government” or whatever pretended political government is
31 utter and sheer nonsense. As a Minister you are entitled to have your personal political beliefs
32 but you must act in the interest of all Australians and not merely for those aligned to your
33 political associations, if any. The leader of the Government (CEO) is the Governor-General, not
34 the commissioned (prime) Minister, the latter has the same constitutional duties and obligations
35 as to his/her portfolio(s) as any other Minister. The (prime) Minister therefore might be a leader
36 of a polical party but is constitutionally not the leader of the government. He/she, cannot
37 overrule any other Minister as only the Minister who has been commissioned for a particular
38 portfolio can exercise all and any functions/duties associated with the portfolio(s). While
39 Members of Cabinet during Cabinet meetings may present their views and sugesstions there is
40 no such thing that Cabinet can dictate to a Minister how he/she has to do his/her
41 duties/obligations and/or decision making. It is ultimately that the commissioned Minister is the
42 “responsible Minister”. After all, Cabinet members may make recommendations but ultimately
43 the Minister commissioned for the portfolio(s) is legally accountable!
44
45 DPP v Field [2001] VSC 472 (29 November 2001)
27-6-2023 Page 1 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® series by making a reservation, or E-mail
admin@inspector-rikati.com See also www.scribd.com/inspectorrikati
Page 2
1 QUOTE
2 24. Section 35 of the Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984 provides that in the interpretation
3 of the provision of an Act consideration may be given to any matter or document that is
4 relevant, including reports of proceedings in any House of the Parliament. The section
5 further provides that a construction that would promote the purpose or object underlying an
6 Act is to be preferred to a construction that would not promote that purpose or object. Those
7 provisions are well known.
8 QUOTE
9
10 As the Framers of the Constitution made very clear:
11
12 Hansard 2-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
13 QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN (Victoria).-
14 The record of these debates may fairly be expected to be widely read, and the observations to which I
15 allude might otherwise lead to a certain amount of misconception.
16 END QUOTE
17
19 QUOTE Sir JOHN DOWNER.-
20 I think we might, on the attempt to found this great Commonwealth, just advance one step,
21 not beyond the substance of the legislation, but beyond the form of the legislation, of the
22 different colonies, and say that there shall be embedded in the Constitution the righteous
23 principle that the Ministers of the Crown and their officials shall be liable for any
24 arbitrary act or wrong they may do, in the same way as any private person would be.
25 END QUOTE
26
27 For example:
28
29 HANSARD 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
30 QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-
31 Then, again, there is the prerogative right to declare war and peace, an adjunct of which it
32 is that the Queen herself, or her representative, where Her Majesty is not present, holds that
33 prerogative. No one would ever dream of saying that the Queen would declare war or
34 peace without the advice of a responsible Minister.
35 END QUOTE
36
37 HANSARD 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
38 QUOTE
39 Mr. DEAKIN: We can make an exception in favour of imperial interests. We have no
40 desire to interfere with the imperial prerogative in matters of war and peace!
41 END QUOTE
42
44 QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH:
45 The practice in England has been that when the House of Commons is dissolved, the
46 Gazette which contains the proclamation, or one issued concurrently, also contains a
47 proclamation summoning a parliament to meet on a given day, and all the writs are
48 appointed to be returned on that day.
49 END QUOTE
50
51 Meaning that Neither Scott Morrison (then PM) John Howard (then PM) or any other (prime)
52 Minister including Anthony Albanese (Travelling Pete) not being the Minister of Defence can
53 even request the Governor-General to pubvlish in the Gazette a DECLARATION OF WAR
54 naming a country intended to be invaded. Not even a Minister of Defence can authorise
55 Australian military to invade another sovereign country unless the Governor-General first has
Page 3
1 published a DECLARATION OF WAR naming one or more countries. As such without any
2 DECLARATION OF WAR published it means each such (prime \) Minister not only acted
3 outside the portfolio (s) commissioned for, withm out warrant of law but also effectively in my
4 view committed TREASON! I may however clarify that the Framers of the Constitution maqde
5 clear that if there is a enemy ship entering the waters of the Commonwealth then it can be
6 assumed they are not coming for brotherly love and so the Australian military can hold this to be
7 as DECLATION OF WAR by such enemy ship owned country.
8
9 QUOTE email
10 "Anthony Albanese Announces ANOTHER $110,000,000 to Ukraine, Continues To Help
11 Anyone But Australians"
12 (Sender request not to make known his/jher email details)
13 To:Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
14 Cc: Mon, 26 June at 4:21 pm
15 https://youtu.be/OSoJZS7wChU
16 END QUOTE email
17
18 QUOTE EMAIL
19 Will Australia get a star in the US flag? / Inquiries / Afghan Opium
20 Yahoo/Inbox
21
22 Citizens Party <citizensparty@citizensmail.com.au>
23 To:inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au
24 Mon, 26 June at 1:39 pm
25
26 Citizens Report
27 This week Elisa Barwick is joined by Richard Bardon for the 22 June Citizens
28 Report discussing:
29 Watch out for Canberra wild cards!
30 Will Australia get a star in the US flag?
31 US think tank says 80% drop in Afghan opium ‘bad for world’
32
33 The Citizens Report is the weekly political and economic update of the Citizens
34 Party’s fight to save Australia from economic collapse. The report is now posted
35 and ready for you to view. Click on your preferred platform to view:
36 Click here to view The Citizens Report on our website.
37 Click here to view The Citizens Report on YouTube.
38 Click here to listen to it on SoundCloud.
‘Enough is enough’ is not good enough—
‘Escalate pressure on politicians to free Assange’
The UK’s denial of Julian Assange’s appeal against extradition to the USA proves that Prime
Minister Anthony Albanese’s approach of advocating for Assange just by saying “enough is
Page 4
enough” is not good enough.

The British and American governments are treating the Australian Parliament with contempt.
Australians who support Assange must escalate pressure on Parliament to do much more—
namely, direct the Prime Minister to DEMAND the UK and USA end their persecution and
free Assange immediately.
Email, call, and join delegations to see MPs
Email and call the PM’s office and your local MP to demand they do more:
Contact PM Albanese: https://www.pm.gov.au/contact-your-pm
Contact your MP (search on name or
electorate): https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members
Tell PM Albanese: “Enough is enough” is not good enough—demand the UK and US
release Assange. Are you just pretending to support Assange to placate the majority of
the Australian people who support him, or are you serious? If you’re serious, the
Australian people expect you to stand up for a fellow Australian.
Tell your MP: Tell PM Albanese his “enough is enough” is not good enough—he must
demand Assange’s release.
Join a delegation to your MP

Delegations of concerned citizens to MPs send a powerful message, and the more
delegations the louder the message. If you’d like to join a delegation in your local
electorate to meet your MP about Assange register your interest with the Australian
Citizens Party on 1800 636 432 or at info@citizensparty.org.au. The ACP will
coordinate delegations for each electorate by putting you in contact with others in your
area who are also interested in joining a delegation.
Read the Australian Alert Service
Content covered in The Citizens Report is elaborated in the Citizen Party’s
weekly Australian Alert Service magazine, which reports on the political fight to free
Australia and all nations from the financial control of the City of London and Wall
Street. The 21 June issue includes the following:
1  Editorial: ACP shaping economic deliberations in Canberra
2  Senator Bragg’s ASIC inquiry must do better
3  Australia’s designation as ‘domestic source’ for US defence industry
4 foreshadows further erosion of sovereignty
5  Enough is enough’ is not good enough—Escalate pressure on politicians
6 to free Assange
7  Is the Attorney-General persecuting an Australian political prisoner
8 under orders from Washington?
9  Shirtfronting Australia
10  Behind the railroading of Assange: the ‘Special Relationship’
11  Sub-Imperial Power: Australia in the International Arena
12  Ukraine: Taking leave of our senses
13  The Non-Aligned Movement rises again, for peace and development
14  ACP’s ideas emerge on many fronts
15  80 per cent Afghan opium ‘bad for world’?
16  ALMANAC: Return to the high-water mark of banking (Part II)
17 Click here for a free copy of the latest issue of the Australian Alert Service
18 END QUOTE EMAIL
19
20 It must be very clear that being it the Vietnam War, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, the Commonwealth
21 lacks any integrity as it was each time based upon lies. to then claim that the federal government
22 somnehow is to have a “Ministry of Truth” then one must question what kind of idiot came up
Page 5
1 with this utter and sheer nonsense? After all Anthony Albanese of about $275 being cheaper of
2 hardly was or now is the TRUTH!
3 The same with “safe and effective” the jabs to be preventing infections and transmission, etc.
4 Is this meaning that the Ministry of Truth will apply fines to the lying politicians? I do not think
5 so!
6
7 While the Commonwealth of Australia can engage in treaties with foreign nations, such as
8 ANZAC, AUKUS or whatever those treaties cannot be used to circumvent constitutional
9 restrained. Neither can the Consolidated Revenue Funds be pilfered to provide monies,
10 ammunition, weapons, vehicles to some country for war mongering, as is now unconstitutionally
11 doine in support of the Ukraine NAZI Government to continues its genocide against the ethnic
12 Russins since 2014 residing in the Donbass and surround areas. Any such, donations cannot be
13 justified by any Appropriation Bill passed by both Houses of Parliament and then enacted, this
14 because our constitution doesn’t provide any provision for this. External Affairs is for treaties,
15 etc, not the giving away of monies, etc. In fact when the Parliament has approved Appropriation
16 Bills for the following financial year than those Bills were devided in ordinary Appropriation
17 Bills which are for monies of the yearly (annual) expenditure of a Department and then Special
18 Appropriation Bills which are for special expenses. Remember Anthony Albanese (Travelling
19 Pete) after the purported 2022 federal election wnet over to Ukraine about monies, etc he was
20 going to provide for their war this even so no Parliament was in session to approve this in the
21 first place and secondly they ghave no constitutional powers to legislate for this. Just consider
22 that it took a Premiers conference to amend the draft constitution to allow the Commonwealth to
23 provide financial assistance to the States, then where is the Section in the constitution to provide
24 monies, weapons, etc, to the Ukraine NAZI Government to contin ue its genocide since 2014?
25
27 QUOTE
28 Mr. ISAACS.-I should hope that the expenditure caused by a bush fire would not be part
29 of an annual service.
30 Mr. MCMILLAN.-Would it not into the Appropriation Bill?
31 Mr. ISAACS.-Yes; but not as an annual service.
32 Mr. MCMILLAN.-The annual services of the Government are those which we
33 distinguish from special grants and from loan services. The difficulty is that we have got
34 rid of the phraseology to which we are accustomed, and instead of the words Appropriation
35 Bill, we are using the word law.
36 Mr. ISAACS.-A difficulty arises in connexion with the honorable members proposal to
37 place expenditure incurred for bush fires in the ordinary, it would not be annual, and it
38 would not be a service.
39 END QUOTE
40
41 Therefore, the taking of Military supplies to hand to a foreign Ukraine NAZI Government to
42 contin ue its genocide upon ethinic Russians is not only unconstitutional but repulsive and a
43 criminal conduct. It is to become involoved in a “HOT WAR” against a sovereign country
44 (Russian Federation” whom are legally held to be a “friendly” nation as long as no
45 DECLARATION OF WAR naming the Russian Federation has been published by the Governor-
46 General in the Gazette.
47
48 Scheuer v Thodes, 416 US 232 94S Ct 1683, 1687 (1974) states:
49 “when a state officer (which includes Judges) acts under a state law in a manner violative
50 of the US Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that
51 Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is
52 subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct.
Page 6
1 The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the
2 supreme authority of the United States”.
3
4 The same applies in the Commonwealth of Australia!
5 This means that by S44 of the constitution any Minister whom engages in TREASON no longer
6 validly holds any seat in the Parliament. It doesn’t requitre a court decision as the Constitution
7 itself stipulated that a person who violates s44 has no entitlement to a seat.
8
9 Actually, currently I have as much constitutional powers as has the purported Governor-General
10 this as the Framers of the Constitution made clear that the person is recommended by the Home
11 Office (10 Downing Street, London, UK) to the Monarch to be commissioned as the Governor-
12 General to represent the Monarch or the person is one which was successful in an election by the
13 electors. Isaac Isaacs and every other purported Governor-General were never chosedn by the
14 Hone Office and neither were elected by the electors!
15
16 More trouble some also is that on 17 July 2022 I actually wrote to then Lt General Cosgrove that
17 he would need to have the Governor-General to publish in the Gazette a DECLARATION POF
18 WAR naming the country to be invaded (as he did in 2003 in Iraq) but so without authorisation
19 by the Governor-General and as such in my viuew he committed TREASON. In my view so
20 likewise to General Hurley where I understand he was in charge of Australia’s armed forced
21 invading Afhanistan.
22
23 But there is more to it all.
24 As I earlier referred to the Federal Government can enter in treaties but they cannot be entered
25 into in violation to the legal principles ensdhrined in the constitution, and as such any treaty with
26 the United Nations (U.N.), the World Health Organisation (WHO), World Economic Forum
27 (W.E.F.) G7, G20, etc must be within the rule of law! The same rregarding contracts the
28 Commonwealth entered into with pharmaceutical companies, etc. The contract with Pfizer did
29 refer to preventing infection and it didn’t!
30
31 "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury vs.
32 Madison 1803, 5 U.S. (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176.
33
34 THE FOUNDATION
35 "If individuals be not influenced by moral principles; it is in vain to look for public virtue;
36 it is, therefore, the duty of legislators to enforce, both by precept and example, the utility,
37 as well as the necessity of a strict adherence to the rules of distributive justice." —James
38 Madison (1789)
39
40 “A pretend law made in excess of power is not and never has been a law at all. Anybody in the
41 country is entitled to disregard it”. Chief Justice Latham 1942
42
43 While the Commonwealth has certain legislative powers it is bound they are for the “peace
44 order and good government” regardless if the High Court of Australia may falsely claim
45 otherwise, this because the High Court of Australia has no judicial powers to by back door
46 manner amend the true meaning and application of the constitution!
47
49 QUOTE
50 Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: If the hon. gentleman will look at the bill he will see that the
51 only laws which can apply are laws for the peace, order, and good government of the
52 commonwealth.
Page 7
1 END QUOTE
2
3 Scott Morrison (PM) engaged in contracts with pharmaceutical companies that were not funded
4 by special Appropriation bills and neither were legitimately for NATIONAL SECURITY as
5 when a Government enters in a contract with a company then the terms must be made known to
6 the tax payers whom’s monies are involved.
7
8 There can therefore be no secrecy and any Government of the Day involved in dirty business
9 will claim it is for the best interest of the general community that matters remain secret, but it
10 undermines the very constitutional principles of being able to hold a Government of the Day
11 accountable. Indeed, how can an elector pursue the local Member of Parliament to pursue
12 something when the Government of the Day conceals relevant details?
13 As such, any notion of confidentiality of commercial dealing also is utter and sheer nonsense
14 because any contracts that involved the spending of public monies must be open for scrutiny.
15 If a business doesn’t like to deal with the Government of the Day because it seeks to avoid
16 scrutiny then so be it and it stays out of being awarded any contracts but if it desires to gain
17 contracts then there is no such as commercial confidentiality as that can never exist when it
18 involved public monies.
19 Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton, Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Bassat, Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Cunningham's
20 Warehouse Sales Pty Ltd, [2012] HCA 7, 8 March 2012, M128/2010, M129/2010, M130/2010,
21 M131/2010 & M132/2010
22 QUOTE
23 1. More recently, in Yaxley v Gotts[182] the English Court of Appeal considered the
24 requirement now made in absolute terms by s 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous
25 Provisions) Act 1989 (UK) that a contract for sale of land can only be made in writing
26 which incorporates all the terms the parties have expressly agreed. It was held that an oral
27 agreement nevertheless might give rise to a constructive trust because such trusts were
28 saved by s 2(5) of that Act. But the Court of Appeal saw no scope for the doctrine of
29 proprietary estoppel. Robert Walker LJ said[183]:
30 "Parliament's requirement that any contract for the disposition of an interest in land
31 must be made in a particular documentary form, and will otherwise be void, does not
32 have such an obviously social aim as statutory provisions relating to contracts by or
33 with moneylenders, infants, or protected tenants. Nevertheless it can be seen as
34 embodying Parliament's conclusion, in the general public interest, that the need
35 for certainty as to the formation of contracts of this type must in general
36 outweigh the disappointment of those who make informal bargains in ignorance
37 of the statutory requirement. If an estoppel would have the effect of enforcing a
38 void contract and subverting Parliament's purpose it may have to yield to the statutory
39 law which confronts it, except so far as the statute's saving for a constructive trust
40 provides a means of reconciliation of the apparent conflict."
41 END QUOTE
42
43 There is actually no constitutional provision for documents to be kept as “NATIONAL
44 SECURITY” merely because some Minister may desire to possibly hide any corrupt conduct.
45 The framers of the Constitution in fect desired transparency.
46
47 DPP v Field [2001] VSC 472 (29 November 2001)
48 QUOTE
49 24. Section 35 of the Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984 provides that in the interpretation
50 of the provision of an Act consideration may be given to any matter or document that is
51 relevant, including reports of proceedings in any House of the Parliament. The section
52 further provides that a construction that would promote the purpose or object underlying an
Page 8
1 Act is to be preferred to a construction that would not promote that purpose or object. Those
2 provisions are well known.
3 QUOTE
4 .
5 The following applies as much to Federal laws of the Commonwealth of Australia as it does to
6 federal laws in the USA; http://familyguardian.tax-
7 tactics.com/Subjects/LawAndGovt/ChallJurisdiction/AuthoritiesArticle/AuthOnJurisdiction.htm
8 Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, 1998 version, Section 203 (formerly Section
9 256)
10 QUOTE
11 The following applies as much to Federal laws of the Commonwealth of Australia as it
12 does to federal laws in the USA; http37 Am Jur 2d at section 8 states, in part: "Fraud
13 vitiates every transaction and all contracts. Indeed, the principle is often stated, in broad
14 and sweeping language, that fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters,
15 and that it vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments."
16 END QUOTE
17 And
18 QUOTE
19 The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the
20 appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the
21 supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is
22 impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must
23 prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
24 The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and
25 name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any
26 purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not
27 merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in
28 legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a
29 statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the
30 statute not been enacted.
31 Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it
32 imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or
33 authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed
34 under it. . .
35 A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law
36 cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs
37 counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.
38 No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce
39 it.
40 END QUOTE
41
42 Here we have what appears to me to be unlawful conduct by Ministers and then when expoosing
43 this somehow the eSafety Commissioner will deam it HATE speech, not because it actually is
44 HATE speech but because it may expose the Federal goivernment unconstitutional conducdt.
45
46 A clear example is the VOICE issue that someholw the (prime) Minister is verbally attacking
47 opponents that they are in the wrong. This is HATE speech from a Minister and not even relating
48 to his portfolio! His argument appears to me to be you are either with us or against us. Never
49 mind his gross incomeptence to deal with the matter in a proper manner.
50
51 "The Voice to Parliament is Tanking So Bad, The Government Wants to Introduce a
52 Ministry of Truth"
Page 9
1 QUOTE email
2 (Sender request not to make known his/jher email details)
3 To:Mark B
4 Cc:Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
5 Mon, 26 June at 2:01 pm
6 https://youtu.be/ZmaifduwUCw
7
8 (2 mins)
9 END QUOTE email
10
11 When we consider the covid scam where “safe and effective” was more like “safe and effective
12 for DEPOPULATION” then the Federal Government lacks any credibility to be the judge of the
13 “truth”. Actually they tried this in the USA and the person to head it was exposed to act opposite
14 thaen presenting the truth, so they had to cancel it.
15
16 Again, I have absolutely no doubt that the disinformation published by Members of Parliament
17 has been and will be ignored by the so called eSafety Commissioner and yet they are the real
18 problem. After all, if the truth haqd been made known there would haqve been VIETNAM
19 WAR, Afghanistan invasion, Iraq invasion and a plethoria of other war mongering. Ukraine
20 would not have ended up as it is now! Tens of thousands of Australians soldiers wouldn’t have
21 lost their lives and neither be injured. And with the covid scam, well the death toll is still rising.
22 And I would not so far have written a 6202 pages COMPLAINT to the Australian Federal
23 Police either!
24
25 R v Kidman [1915] HCA 58; (1915) 20 CLR 425 (16 September 1915)
26 QUOTE
27 All this is implied executive power, but punishment, whether regarded as retribution
28 or as a deterrent, is beyond the scope of the executive power. That is, it is not
29 incidental to it, or to its execution, in the sense which would include it by implication
30 in the grant of power. The Executive cannot change or add to the law; it can only execute
31 it; and any change of or addition to law is not incidental when we are speaking of a non-
32 legislative power.
33 END QUOTE
34
35 It must be clear thaqt the eSafety Commissioner has absolutely no understanding that when
36 applying a law it must be done in an UNIFORM manner and so if she fails to go after the lying
37 politicians then her conduct fails to comply with the rule of law!
38
39 Sorell v Smith (1925) Lord Dunedin in the House of Lords
40 QUOTE
41 In an action against a set person in combination, a conspiracy to injure, followed by actual
42 injury, will give good cause for action, and motive or instant where the act itself is not
43 illegal is of the essence of the conspiracy.”
44 END QUOTE
45
46 Therefore any alleged HATE speech issue must be used also aqgainst the politicians in an equal
47 manner, and so the media, etc. Remember the “pandemic of the unvaccinated” and other rot
48 upon those deemed to be unvaccinated? Well why has the eSafety Commissioner not at all acted
49 against mthis? After all I was physically attacked by a man abolut 1/3 my age for not wearing a
50 mask! This is what the politicians achieved with their HATE speech.
51 I invite you to email me with an extenswive set out when you pursued politicians the media and
52 others to stop their HATE speech?
Page 10
1
2 I got numerous videos on file where they were stirring up citizens, even police commissioners
3 and others. Well, let see the files when you acted against them? I however doubt you ever did!
4
5 Remember the “informed consent” required, well there was ample then and still is HATE
6 speech that you need boosters, etc. NB ot a single person ever could have given “informed
7 consent” this because no one had full knowledge as to what was being injected and the associate
8 harm that could eventuate. So, let see how the law enforcement authorities were pursuing illegal
9 arrest as the mandates were outside the State/Territoriy powers, and you obviously was flat out
10 lecturing them they better stop their rot! Or was it you couldn’t care less regardless of your
11 oath/affirmation to uphold the constitution?
12
13 Alexander v. Bothsworth, 1915. “Party cannot be bound by contract that he has not made or
14 authorized. Free consent is an indispensable element in making valid contracts.”
15 HALE v. HENKEL 201 U.S. 43 at 89 (1906) Hale v. Henkel was decided by the united States Supreme
16 Court in 1906. The opinion of the court states: "The "individual" may stand upon "his Constitutional Rights"
17 as a CITIZEN. He is entitled to carry on his "private" business in his own way. "His power to contract is
18 unlimited." He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to
19 an investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him. He owes no duty to the State, since he receives
20 nothing there from, beyond the protection of his life and property. "His rights" are such as "existed" by the
21 Law of the Land (Common Law) "long antecedent" to the organization of the State", and can only be taken
22 from him by "due process of law", and "in accordance with the Constitution." "He owes nothing" to the
23 public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights."
24 HALE V. HENKEL 201 U.S. 43 at 89 (1906) Hale v. Henkel is binding on all the courts of the United
25 States of America until another Supreme Court case says it isn’t. No other Supreme Court case has ever
26 overturned Hale v. Henkel None of the various issues of Hale v. Henkel has ever been overruled since 1906,
27 Hale v. Henkel has been cited by the Federal and State Appellate Court systems over 1,600 times! In nearly
28 every instance when a case is cited, it has an impact on precedent authority of the cited case. Compared with
29 other previously decided Supreme Court cases, no other case has surpassed Hale v. Henkel in the number of
30 times it has been cited by the courts. "The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they
31 have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government."
32 City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944
33 “An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the
34 same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v.
35 Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
36
37 I will below quote yeat another email which may underline the rot you as Minister let go in
38 Ausdtralia albeit the emaqil deals with the UK casualties, but in Australia it is as bad.
39
40 QUOTE EMAIL George Christensen
41 https://nationfirst.substack.com/p/bombshell-jab-death-stats-you-
42 have?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo3NzI2NjI2NiwicG9zdF9pZCI6MTI5NjkzNTkxLCJpYXQiOjE2ODc3NTg4M
43 DYsImV4cCI6MTY5MDM1MDgwNiwiaXNzIjoicHViLTQ1NDE4MiIsInN1YiI6InBvc3QtcmVhY3Rpb24i
44 fQ.1vqonm07Kj_LvzK2wLZK6QbDQpsVtIA2S6UqbJiC1yw&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
45 Bombshell jab death stats you have to see!
46
47 Nation First looks at new data from the UK regarding ‘vaccine’ deaths.
48
49 GEORGE CHRISTENSEN
50 JUN 26, 2023
51 Dear friend,
52 Nation First, by George Christensen is a reader-supported publication. To receive new
53 posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Page 11
1 Future historians will consider the use of mRNA ‘vaccines’ to be among the worst crime
2 committed against humanity.
3 As astute Nation First readers know, I try to always put the word ‘vaccine’ in air quotes
4 when it comes to the mRNA jab as the reality is it’s not a vaccine at all but rather an
5 experimental gene therapy injection masquerading as a vaccine.
6 Billions were forced to take this slow poison, from which far more have died by now than
7 they did from the so-called COVID-19 pandemic.
8 Miscarriages, cancer, and cardiovascular diseases rates have all soared since the forced
9 ‘vaccination’ campaigns began.
10 More after these messages from Nation First sponsors…
11
12 See Donald Trump Jr live along with ‘Mr Brexit’ Nigel Farage and gutsy
13 Australian Senator Alex Antic in either Sydney, Brisbane, or Melbourne. Tickets available
14 at www.trumplive.com.au
15
16
17
18 See Trump Jr LIVE!
19
20 Attend Friedman ’23 — the Southern Hemisphere’s #1 Freedom Conference in Sydney
21 this 7 to 9 July. Go to www.alsfc.com.au/buy-tickets to buy your tickets. Nation
22 First readers get a 20% discount by using the code NATIONFIRST20.
23
24
25
26 Attend Friedman '23
27
28 The new look www.EurekaFreePress.com — your pro-freedom news source — will launch
29 on Monday, 3 July 2023!
30 Eureka Free Press will be migrating to Substack but will remain a free news aggregation
31 service for all regardless of whether they are paid or free subscribers.
32
33 Eureka Free Press
34 News and views you can trust.
35 By George Christensen
Page 12
1
2 You can support Eureka Free Press on Substack with a paid subscription, or you can
3 support the current Eureka Free Press website at www.eurekafreepress.com/support-
4 eureka-free-press
5 Your support will help Eureka Free Press contract original news stories as well as market
6 the site online, spreading pro-freedom news to as many Australians as possible.
7
8
9
10 A bombshell UK government report reveals that 92% of all COVID-19 deaths in 2022
11 occurred among those who had received three doses of the ‘vaccine’.
12 Among non-COVID-19 deaths, mortality rates were highest among triple ‘vaccinated’
13 individuals, up to 30 times higher than the unvaccinated.
14 Mortality rates among the ‘vaccinated’ have grown significantly over time, with a 43.71%
15 increase in deaths per 100,000 people between June 2021 and June 2022.
16 Many health professionals are now coming out to reveal terrifying insights about the
17 ‘vaccine’ and criticise governments for forcing an untested drug on billions of innocent
18 people.
19 The use of mRNA ‘vaccines’ could be considered one of the worst crimes committed
20 against humanity, as the ‘elites’ execute their 2030 agenda of de-population and mass
21 migration through the weakening and destabilisation of nation-states.
22
23 Censored and intimidated into silence during the pandemic, more and more health
24 professionals are now coming out to reveal terrifying insights about the ‘vaccine’ and
25 criticise governments for forcing an untested drug on billions of innocent people.
26 Take Dr Conni Turni, a senior research fellow at the University of Queensland who leads a
27 national and international reference laboratory for respiratory bacterial pathogens where
28 identification, serotyping, genotyping, sequencing and antimicrobial sensitivity testing are
29 performed and where vaccine efficacy trials are undertaken.
30 In a peer-reviewed paper titled ‘COVID-19 vaccines – An Australian Review’ published
31 in the Journal of Clinical & Experimental Immunology late last year, Dr Turni lists the
32 following:
33 Just to name a few short-term side effects: Death, Cardiac disorders such as Myocarditis,
34 Blood and lymphatic system disorders, such as blood clots, thrombocytopenia, low platelet
35 count, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, capillary leakage syndrome, Congenital and
36 genetic disorders, Eye disorders, Immune disorders, Muscular, skeletal and connective
37 tissue disorders, Cancerous tumours, Nervous system disorders, Pregnancy and perinatal
38 conditions, Guillain-Barre syndrome and the list goes on…
39 The Australian Bureau of statistics has just released the national death rate for March 20,
40 2021 up until 31 March 2022 (registered by 31 May 2022) as 44,331, which according to
41 their own statement lies 6,609 (17.5%) above the historical average. These extra deaths
42 cannot be explained by COVID alone (Fig 2) which is responsible for less than half of the

Page 13
1 excess deaths in the first 4 months of 2022 in Australia. Cancer, diabetes and
2 neurodegenerative diseases are all above the baseline in this time frame…
3 Long-term risks of vaccination as predicted by scientists, many already validated by
4 scientists and doctors: Vaccine-induced autoimmunity, pathogenic priming, multisystem
5 inflammatory disease and autoimmunity, antibody dependent enhancement (ADE),
6 activation of latent viral infections, neurodegeneration and prion disease, increased
7 thrombosis, cardiomyopathy and other vascular events following vaccination, babies
8 suffering enduring adverse consequences, mRNA reverse transcribing intracellularly into
9 the DNA and death due to autoimmune disease long after vaccination
10 Never in Vaccine history have 57 leading scientists and policy experts released a report
11 questioning the safety and efficacy of a vaccine. They not only questioned the safety of the
12 current Covid-19 injections but were calling for an immediate end to all vaccination. Many
13 doctors and scientists around the world have voiced similar misgivings and warned of
14 consequences due to long-term side effects. Yet there is no discussion or even mention of
15 studies that do not follow the narrative on safety and efficacy of Covid-19 vaccination.
16 Dr Turni’s paper is worth reading in full.
17 Upgrade to paid
18 Not only were the mRNA ‘vaccines’ increasing your risk of other diseases but also
19 weakened your immune system against COVID-19, the very virus it supposedly was meant
20 to protect against.
21 Recently, a new bombshell report published by the UK government revealed that 92 of all
22 COVID-19 deaths in 2022 occurred among the triple ‘vaccinated’.
23 Even among non-COVID-19 deaths, mortality rates were highest among the triple
24 ‘vaccinated’, as much as 30 times higher compared to the ‘unvaccinated’.
25 And among the triple-jabbed group, mortality rates seem to rapidly pick up after three
26 weeks following their last dose.
27 This is an indicator of the fact that the ‘vaccine’ works in killing us by proxy by
28 compromising our autoimmune system, resulting in a higher risk of getting autoimmune-
29 related diseases.
30
31
Page 14
1
2 The data also shows that mortality rates among the ‘vaccinated’ have grown significantly
3 over time.
4 For instance, in the June of 2021, there were 30,453 deaths per 100,000 people among the
5 ‘vaccinated’ compared to just 2,385 per 100,000 among the ‘unvaccinated’.
6 By June of 2022, this already massive difference grew by 43.71%.
7 Some 34,414 deaths per 100,000 people among the ‘vaccinated’ were recorded compared
8 to just 1,342 per 100,000 among the ‘unvaccinated’.
9 The data is right before you.
10 Now tell me that mRNA ‘vaccines’ were safe and effective.
11 Well, they have been effective, but for something else rather than preventing transmission
12 of COVID-19!
13 Why would the elites, who basically see us as livestock to brutally exploit, and who never
14 fail to take advantage of an opportunity to further impose oppressive laws, ever think in
15 terms of our welfare?
16 We are witnessing the execution of their Agenda 2030; the weakening and destabilisation
17 of nation-states through rapid de-population and mass migration.
18 The ‘elites’ have rubbed it right on our face their plans for a one-world government.
19 The only question remains: are we going to sit ideally by while they orchestrate the
20 destruction of our society?
21 Until next time, God bless you, your family and nation.
22 Take care,
23 George Christensen, with a Nation First staff writer
24
25
26
27 George Christensen is a former Australian politician, a Christian, freedom lover,
28 conservative, blogger, podcaster, journalist and theologian. He has been feted by the Epoch
29 Times as a “champion of human rights” and his writings have been praised
30 by Infowars’ Alex Jones as “excellent and informative”.
31 George believes Nation First will be an essential part of the ongoing fight for freedom:
32 “The time is now for every proud patriot to step to the fore and fight for our freedom,
33 sovereignty and way of life. Information is a key tool in any battle and the Nation
34 First newsletter will be a valuable tool in the battle for the future of the West.”
35 — George Christensen.
36 Find more about George at his www.georgechristensen.com.au website.
37
38 Authorised by G. Christensen, Te Kowai (Mackay)
39 END QUOTE EMAIL George Christensen
40
41 I estimate having so far spent about 11,000 hours researching this all and still plenty of work
42 ahead of me and all without charging for my writings, etc. Now this is because I do care. Let me
43 see how much unpaid hours you did spent on researching the constitution to understand and
44 comprehend what you as a Minister can and cannot do? I doubt any because if you had you
45 would be well aware that thgis Ministry of TRUTH is utter and sheer nonsense. After all the
46 truth for what one person may claim may be a lie, deception, etc for another person. I used to
47 cross examine expert wiotnesses and to them their evidence was the truth but it was not factual
48 the truth! For example Mr Colosimo was declared by 2 expert medical witnesses to be mentally
49 incompetent to deal with his affairs and while legally represented by a barrister nevertheless
Page 15
1 ended up being placed under Orders of Administration. So, he got rid of the barrister and well
2 requested me to do his appeal, which I did very successfully, this because the Office of the
3 Public Advocate had misled both expert witnesses that Mr Colosimo was convicted for
4 CONTEMPT OF COURT and as he didn’t accept to have been convicted he was deemed unable
5 to accept reality, etc. Just that I appeared before Her Honour Harbison J who was dealing with
6 the CONTEMPT OF COURT issue and Her Honour made it very clear she had not convicted Mr
7 Colosimo at all! Actually he never after that either was convicted for CONTEMPT OF COURT.
8 So, the witnesses were telling the truth based upon the falsehood they were told by the Office of
9 the Public Advocate that Mr Colosimo was convicted and refusing to accept bering convicted
10 therefore was mentally not capable toi deal with his own affairs, albeit in FACTS they were
11 wrong, hence I succeeded in the appeal.
12
13 Therefore, your eSafety Commissioner may assume that someone is or might be spreading
14 HATE SPEECH not because it is done but because she lacks to understand what the true FACTS
15 are, and what constitutional rights are, etc. After all, how were people accused of spreading
16 disinformation, etc, when in the end it proved they were actually all along correct on the FACTS
17 but the lying politicians and their collaborators were they one spreading disinformation, etc, to
18 unconstitutionally wield power. Well, this is why I commenced from onset to search for the
19 FACTS and pursue that each and every one that pushed the covid scam be held legally
20 accountable and if convicted be rewarded with the death penalty!
21 Currently it appears to me that Anthony Albanese (Travelling Pete) and opthers are spreading
22 "disinformation" about what the Voice is bout and also what really is about Aboriginals, the
23 history of the constitution, etc. And then you are going to be sitting in judgment what the truth
24 and HATE speech is about? Come on, clean your own backyaqrd first before trying to lecture
25 others! When it comes to my extensive publications since start of 2020 till now versus the
26 Commonwealth, politicians and their collaborators I have no doubt that I will be held to be by far
27 more honest and correct, this as after all I rely upon scientific research, etc, that proved to be
28 correct. Let it be clear HATE speech is not something because it contradict thedisinformation by
29 the Government! The TRUTH is not because it has to be reflecting the lies of the government!
30 Wake up and for a start LEARN THE CONSTITUTION!
31
32
33
34 We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal
35 constitution!
36
37 This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
38 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)
39 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

40 (Our name is our motto!)

20230627-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Michelle - Rowland.mp Communication Minister - COMPLAINT

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

20230627-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Michelle - Rowland.mp Communication Minister - COMPLAINT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Page 1

enough” is not good enough.

Join a delegation to your MP

27-6-2023 Page 12 © Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

39 MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

You might also like