ISSUE: 20190627-Re: The Theft of Our Democracy, Etc & The Constitution - Supplement 55-NATIONAL SECURITY-etc

ISSUE: 20190627- Re: The theft of our democracy, etc & the constitution-
Supplement 55-NATIONAL SECURITY-etc
As a CONSTITUTIONALIST my concern is the true meaning and application of the constitution.
* Gerrit, how on earth do you manage to get information?

**#** INSPECTOR-RIKATI®, generally I do not specifically look for it, merely type in
something and whatever comes up I take down the internet links and then I pick out some links
and check them out. I did state in my previous PRESS RELEASE:
QUOTE
Again it appears as I wrote about previously that the DARK FORCE is dictating our federal government
how to deal with matters contrary to Australians NATIONAL SECURITY and that of Australians safety and
wellbeing. What a gross incompetent federal government we have!
END QUOTE
Well, I typed in Jimmy Dore, which is an USA comedian and came across more than 3 thousand
of link. I didn’t even download 2 dozen of them but ample to get across material and that of some
articles published elsewhere that appear to me that the planning of the Iraq unconstitutional
invasion was indeed as I all along suspecting decided long before it. Remember Army Officer
going to Tampa USA in 2002 to plan the invasion?
Well it appears to me that the then Foreign Minister Mr Alexander Downer was a traitor, spy,
etc, associated with the Hillary Clinton campaign against presidential Candidate Mr Donald
Trump. And as I understand it we seem to have had our own intelligence service involved in
undermining our NATIONAL SECURITY.
* I am eager awaiting some of your details.
**#** Obviously I need to refer to the Australian Federal Police and how on earth can any
warrant authorize the destruction of property on ABC computers where the ABC was not even
provided with any opportunity to challenge such a warrant condition in a competent court of
law? Exposing was crimes such as Julian Assange did never could be an offence. It are the
politicians who are hiding it with the Intelligence services claiming CONFIDENTIALITY
because of NATIONAL SECURITY to hide the truth that is the real danger to NATIONAL
SECURITY.
The Framers of the Constitution did make clear:
p1 21-6-2019 © 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
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
Australasian Convention)
QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.-
What a charter of liberty is embraced within this Bill-of political liberty and religious liberty-the
liberty and the means to achieve all to which men in these days can reasonably aspire. A charter of
liberty is enshrined in this Constitution, which is also a charter of peace-of peace, order, and good
government for the whole of the peoples whom it will embrace and unite.
END QUOTE
And
HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE
Mr. SYMON (South Australia).- We who are assembled in this Convention are about to commit to the
people of Australia a new charter of union and liberty; we are about to commit this new Magna Charta
for their acceptance and confirmation, and I can conceive of nothing of greater magnitude in the whole
history of the peoples of the world than this question upon which we are about to invite the peoples of
Australia to vote. The Great Charter was wrung by the barons of England from a reluctant king. This
new charter is to be given by the people of Australia to themselves.
END QUOTE
HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE
Mr. BARTON.- We can have every faith in the constitution of that tribunal. It is appointed as the arbiter of
the Constitution. . It is appointed not to be above the Constitution, for no citizen is above it, but under
it; but it is appointed for the purpose of saying that those who are the instruments of the Constitution-
the Government and the Parliament of the day-shall not become the masters of those whom, as to the
Constitution, they are bound to serve. What I mean is this: That if you, after making a Constitution of
this kind, enable any Government or any Parliament to twist or infringe its provisions, then by slow
degrees you may have that Constitution-if not altered in terms-so whittled away in operation that the
guarantees of freedom which it gives your people will not be maintained; and so, in the highest sense, the
court you are creating here, which is to be the final interpreter of that Constitution, will be such a tribunal as
will preserve the popular liberty in all these regards, and will prevent, under any pretext of
constitutional action, the Commonwealth from dominating the states, or the states from usurping the sphere
of the Commonwealth.
END QUOTE
Hansard 11-3-1891 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
QUOTE Mr. GILLIES:
Surely we are not to be told that, because that is in contemplation, there is at the same time some
secret purpose or object of depriving the people of their right on any particular occasion when
possibly there may be some great difference of opinion on a great public question. There have been
no peoples in these colonies who have not enjoyed the most perfect freedom to express their opinions
in public, and through their representatives in parliament, on any public question of importance.
There has never been any occasion when such an opportunity has not been given to every man in this
country, and so free and liberal are our laws and public institutions that it has never been suggested
by any mortal upon this continent that that right should be in any way restricted. On the contrary,
we all feel proud of the freedom which every one in this country enjoys. It is a freedom not surpassed
in any state in the world, not even in the boasted republic of America.
END QUOTE
By then the 14TH AMENDMENT in the USA was already applicable.

Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
QUOTE

Mr. ISAACS (Victoria).-There is a very great deal of force in what my honorable friend (Mr. Trenwith)
has said as to whether this clause is or is not necessary. The origin of the clause, which is certainly very
modified, is the 14th amendment of the American Constitution.
END QUOTE
It is therefore clear that legal principles of the 1ST Amendment of the USA CONSTITUTION is
also embedded in our constitution. The USA CONSTITUTION and Amendments set out can be
purchased from:
PREPARED BY THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

JOHNNY H. KILLIAN, GEORGE A. COSTELLO, KENNETH R. THOMAS
CO-EDITORS: DAVID M. ACKERMAN, HENRY COHEN, ROBERT MELTZ
CONTRIBUTORS U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 77–500PS WASHINGTON : 2004
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001
QUOTE
FIRST AMENDMENT
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting
the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or
the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for
a redress of grievances.
END QUOTE
And
QUOTE
Most recently, the Court struck down on free speech grounds a town ordinance requiring door-to-
door solicitors, including persons seeking to proselytize about their faith, to register with the town
and obtain a solicitation permit. 261 The Court stated that the requirement was ‘‘offensive ... to the
very notion of a free society.’’
END QUOTE
And
QUOTE
There seems little doubt thatJefferson held to the Blackstonian view. Writing to Madison in 1788, he said:
‘‘A declaration that the federal government will never restrain the presses from printing anything they please,
will not take away the liability of the printers for false facts printed.’’ 13 PAPERS OF THOMAS
JEFFERSON 442 (J. Boyd ed., 1955). Commenting a year later to Madison on his proposed amendment,
Jefferson suggested that the free speech-free press clause might read something like: ‘‘The people shall not
be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write or otherwise to publish anything but false facts
affecting injuriously the life, liberty, property, or reputation of others or affecting the peace of the
confederacy with foreign nations.’’ 15 PAPERS, supra, at 367.
329 The Act, 1 Stat. 596 (1798), punished anyone who would ‘‘write, print, utter or publish . . . any false,
scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of
the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said
government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them,
into contempt or disrepute.’’ See J. SMITH, FREEDOM’S FETTERS— THE ALIEN AND SEDITION
LAWS AND AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES (1956).
END QUOTE
And
QUOTE
At first, Holmesand Brandeis remained in dissent, but in Fiske v. Kansas, 339 the Court sustained a First
Amendment type of claim in a state case, and in Stromberg v. California, 340 a state law was voided on
grounds of its interference with free speech. 341 State common law was also voided, the Court in an opinion
by Justice Black asserting that the First Amendment enlarged protections for speech, press, and religion
beyond those enjoyed under English common law. 342 Development over the years since has been uneven,
but by 1964 the Court could say with unanimity: ‘‘we consider this case against the background of a
profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and
wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on
government and public officials.’’ 343 And in 1969, the Court said that the cases ‘‘have fashioned the
principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or
proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting
or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.’’ 344 This development
and its myriad applications are elaborated in the following sections. The First Amendment by its terms
applies only to laws enacted by Congress, and not to the actions of private persons. 345 This leads to a ‘‘state
action’’ (or ‘‘governmental action’’) limitation similar to that applicable to the Fourteenth Amendment. 346
The limitation has seldom been litigated in the First Amendment context, but there is no obvious reason why
analysis should differ markedly from Fourteenth Amendment state action analysis. Both contexts require
‘‘cautious analysis of the quality and degree of Government relationship to the particular acts in question.’’
347 In holding that the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is a governmental entity for
purposes of the First Amendment, the Court declared that ‘‘[t]he Constitution constrains governmental action
‘by whatever instruments or in whatever modes that action may be taken.’. . . [a]nd under whatever
congressional label.’’ 348 The relationship of the government to broadcast licensees affords other
opportunities to explore the breadth of ‘‘governmental action.’’ 349
END QUOTE
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-22/coming-show-trial-julian-assange
QUOTE
The publication of classified documents is not a crime in the United States, but if
Assange is extradited and convicted it will become one. Assange is not an American
citizen. WikiLeaks, which he founded and publishes, is not a U.S.-based publication. The
message the U.S. government is sending is clear: No matter who or where you
are, if you expose the inner workings of empire you will be hunted down,
kidnapped and brought to the United States to be tried as a spy. The extradition
and trial of Assange will mean the end of public investigations by the press into the
crimes of the ruling elites. It will cement into place a frightening corporate tyranny.
Publications such as The New York Times and The Guardian, which devoted pages to the
WikiLeaks revelations and later amplified and legitimized Washington’s carefully
orchestrated character assassination of Assange, are no less panicked. This is the
gravest assault on press freedom in my lifetime.
END QUOTE
It are the media fools and others who allowed themselves to be used as puppets on a string to
ignore the plight of Julian Assange, even denounce him, that they now themselves are targeted.
You find that if it suits the government to leak information then this is not appropriately dealt
with as after all it seems to benefit the deception upon the people.
https://insidestory.org.au/hyperbole-meets-hypocrisy-when-governments-take-on-some-leakers/
Hyperbole meets hypocrisy when governments take on (some) leakers
QUOTE
Whoever engineered this attempt to discredit Wilkie clearly committed an offence. The document was a fairly
recent one and all copies were accounted for at ONA. A few days before the leak, though, foreign minister
Alexander Downer’s office had requested a copy. When questioned about the leak and the possibility either
he or his staff were involved, Downer prevaricated and blustered.
Yet the police investigation failed, even though a senior security official told Canberra Times editor Jack
Waterford that “a cop who couldn’t solve this one couldn’t find his bum with both his hands.” Current
treasurer Josh Frydenberg was among Downer’s staff members at the time; it would be interesting to have his
recollections of events.
One particularly worrying feature of this month’s raids was the open-ended nature of the searches and the
large amount of material consequently taken from the media organisations. In this situation, journalists can
only rely on the police exercising voluntary restraint in their handling of information not related to the alleged
offence.
At least once, though, that faith has been abused. In February 2003, a Nine Network news report forced
Alexander Downer to deny the “completely outrageous” allegation that Australia was already
committed to fighting the Iraq war. The story was based on a minute of a conversation between
Downer and the New Zealand high commissioner in which the foreign minister said that Australia

would be sending troops to Iraq irrespective of any UN decision. Nine’s interpretation of those remarks
seemed to be confirmed the following month when prime minister John Howard announced the
commitment of troops.
END QUOTE
QUOTE
The pursuit of leakers is marked by inconsistency, hypocrisy and this kind of opportunism. A look at which
leaks were pursued vigorously, and which were not, shows that the energy of the police efforts seems to align
almost perfectly with the government’s political priorities. For anyone who thinks the AFP investigation of
leaks is marked by independence, consistency and competence, I have a harbour bridge you might like
to buy. •
END QUOTE
https://russia-insider.com/en/cia-role-russiagate-department-justice-
investigating/ri27251?ct=t(Russia_Insider_Daily_Headlines11_21_2014)&mc_cid=84b5ece91b&mc_eid=2c57cd92c9
CIA Role in Russiagate? The Department of Justice Is Investigating...
QUOTE
The interview plans are the latest sign the Justice Department will take a critical look at the C.I.A.’s
work on Russia’s election interference. Investigators want to talk with at least one senior
counterintelligence official and a senior C.I.A. analyst, the people said. Both officials were involved in
the agency’s work on understanding the Russian campaign to sabotage the election in 2016. -New York
Times
https://russia-insider.com/en/cia-role-russiagate-department-justice-
investigating/ri27251?ct=t(Russia_Insider_Daily_Headlines11_21_2014)&mc_cid=84b5ece91b&mc_eid=2c57cd92c9
CIA Role in Russiagate? The Department of Justice Is Investigating...
QUOTE
A third operative, Australian diplomat Alexander Downer, targeted Mr. Papadopoulos in a London
bar. It was Mr. Downer’s “tip” to the FBI that provided the justification for the start of Russia
counterintelligence investigation, complete with fraudulently-obtained FISA warrants to spy on the
Trump campaign.
All of these interactions reek of entrapment. Mr. Papadopoulos now says, “I believe Australian and
UK intelligence were involved in an active operation to target Trump and his associates.” Like Mr.
Halper and Mr. Mifsud, Mr. Downer had ties to the CIA, MI6 and (surprise!) the Clintons.
END QUOTE
As I understand it Mr Alexander Downer was connected to Hilary Clinton campaign, the CIA
and MI6 and well considering the 5-eyes intelligence service involving then USA, Canada, UK,
New Zealand and Australia we obviously seem to have had that the intelligence organisation
decided that there was to be an invasion into Iraq and regardless it was unconstitutional
nevertheless the Federal Government went ahead of this. As such our NATIONAL SECURITY I
left within the hand of the DARK FORCE which are unelected person who behind the screen of
SECRECY and claiming NATIONAL SECURITY to cover their tracks where war crime, etc,
are committed
As I came across the intelligence services have journalist on their payroll to publish their rubbish
(that is what the intelligence services are feeding them) to seek to get citizens to support or try to
get them to support warmongering. As such our own intelligence service are the enemy within.
https://russia-insider.com/en/difference-between-russiagate-and-watergate-watergate-started-
crime/ri27258?ct=t(Russia_Insider_Daily_Headlines11_21_2014)&mc_cid=968d5f4434&mc_eid=2c57cd92c9
The Difference Between RussiaGate and Watergate? Watergate Started With a Crime
QUOTE
Three years after FBI Director James Comey began the investigation of Trump, however, the final
report of his successor, Robert Mueller, found there had been no conspiracy, no collusion and no
underlying crime.
How can Trump be guilty of covering up a crime the special counsel says he did not commit?
END QUOTE

Hannity_ The swamp is in full panic mode
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s4d0OsEOqI -
PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYS HE HOPES AG BARR WILL REVIEW BRITISH
AND AUSTRALIAN ROLE IN RUSSIA INVESTIGATION
This very well may turn out to be a major problem when it comes to NATIONAL SECURITY
where the Australian Government acted in violation to a friendly nation the USA to not just
undermine but interfere with the USA election to have reportedly Mr ALEXANDER DOWNER
being a spy for the CIA and others. Then the Australian Government working with Hilary
Clinton and others to seek to undermine candidate Trump political campaign, and after that to
undermine his presidency.
The Jimmy Dore Show - CNN _u0026 Facebook Coordinate To Silence Dissenting Voices
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9pWE_PGSGY&list=UU3M7l8ved_rYQ45AVzS0RGA&index=192&t=0s
Simon Bracey-Lane who I understand is a British intelligence person, but when in the USA
pretending to be just a backpacker but being a staffer for the Democrat Bernie Sanders claiming
not to be involved in politics. Reality is he as I understand it runs an organisation smearing
certain politicians and heavily involved in publishing untruths about politicians.
What we have is that we have the Australian Government interfering in election of other
countries, even overthrowing a government such a in Iraq and this where the intelligence service
are not making an error of judgment such as the aluminum tubes, but rather deliberately are
publishing false and misleading article and smearing anyone who they see a an opposition and
then we have complete zombies in the government who go along with the so called
NATIONALSECURITY advice those intelligence service are cooking up.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-26/why-the-abc-is-going-to-court-over-police-raids/11249092
Why the ABC is going to court over police raids
QUOTE
3. Raise the bar for issuing search warrants against journalists.
Police should have to apply to a judge to search a media organisation or to access a journalist's metadata
(mobile phone records, for example). It should be a contested process. And warrants shouldn't enable police
to chase confidential information provided by sources (as opposed to leaked official documents).
END QUOTE
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-26/why-the-abc-is-going-to-court-over-police-raids/11249092
QUOTE
All of this invited unflattering commentary, here and overseas, about national security
overreach and Australia's constitutional shortcomings in protecting free speech.
END QUOTE
QUOTE
Suspicions that the Howard government leaked against former Office of National Assessments analyst
Andrew Wilkie (left) weren’t resolved by a half-hearted police investigation. Mr Wilkie is shown during a
visit to Washington in July 2003. Scott J. Ferrell/Congressional Quarterly/Getty Images
END QUOTE
And
QUOTE
Whoever engineered this attempt to discredit Wilkie clearly committed an offence. The document was a fairly
recent one and all copies were accounted for at ONA. A few days before the leak, though, foreign minister

Alexander Downer’s office had requested a copy. When questioned about the leak and the possibility either
he or his staff were involved, Downer prevaricated and blustered.
Yet the police investigation failed, even though a senior security official told Canberra Times editor Jack
Waterford that “a cop who couldn’t solve this one couldn’t find his bum with both his hands.” Current
treasurer Josh Frydenberg was among Downer’s staff members at the time; it would be interesting to have his
recollections of events.
One particularly worrying feature of this month’s raids was the open-ended nature of the searches and the
large amount of material consequently taken from the media organisations. In this situation, journalists can
only rely on the police exercising voluntary restraint in their handling of information not related to the alleged
offence.
At least once, though, that faith has been abused. In February 2003, a Nine Network news report forced
Alexander Downer to deny the “completely outrageous” allegation that Australia was already
committed to fighting the Iraq war. The story was based on a minute of a conversation between
Downer and the New Zealand high commissioner in which the foreign minister said that Australia
would be sending troops to Iraq irrespective of any UN decision. Nine’s interpretation of those remarks
seemed to be confirmed the following month when prime minister John Howard announced the
commitment of troops.
END QUOTE
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-21/read-cheering-next-war
Read THIS Before Cheering the Next War
QUOTE
In reality, however, wars are often planned for political reasons (having to do with money, resources or other
goals which may have nothing to do with directly protecting one's country or people) and then false
intelligence is created to "justify" the start of the war.
Britain's MI5 intelligence service explained about the claimed justifications for the Iraq War:
The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.
9/11 Commission Co-Chair and 34-year veteran Congressman Lee Hamilton, who served on numerous
foreign affairs and intelligence committees, said:
My concern in these situations, always, is that the intelligence that you get is driven by the policy, rather than
the policy being driven by the intelligence.
Or as newsman Tom Brokaw put it:
All wars are based on propaganda.
Because war not only kills, maims and displaces a lot of innocent people, but is also bad for the economy and
destroys the environment (and puts out a lot of carbon dioxide), we passionately believe that people need to
understand a little history so that the same mistakes are not repeated, and disastrous wars are avoided when
they are not necessary to actually defend ourselves.
And because we believe that the Constitutional right to peacefully assemble and speak out is a large part of
what makes us great, we will also put a spotlight on those who are trying to shut down our First Amendment
rights ... and how they're doing it.
False Pretenses
Scores of officials throughout the world have admitted (either orally, in writing, or through recordings,
photographs or videos) to carrying out, seriously proposing, or faking attacks which they blamed on others as
a way to falsely start wars or shut down free speech:
END QUOTE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
QUOTE
Operation Gladio is the codename for clandestine "stay-behind" operations of armed resistance that was
planned by the Western Union (WU), and subsequently by NATO, for a potential Warsaw Pact invasion and
conquest in Europe. Although Gladio specifically refers to the Italian branch of the NATO stay-behind
organizations, "Operation Gladio" is used as an informal name for all of them. Stay-behind operations were
prepared in many NATO member countries, and some neutral countries. [1]
The role of the CIA in Gladio and the extent of its activities during the Cold War era, and any relationship to
terrorist attacks perpetrated in Italy during the "Years of Lead" (late 1960s to early 1980s) are the subject of
debate. Switzerland and Belgium have had parliamentary inquiries into the matter. [2]
END QUOTE
Do keep in mind:
The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.
And that I view really was what happened with the WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction).
https://russia-insider.com/en/history/lets-be-honest-stalin-was-less-criminal-churchill-truman-and-lbj/ri8303
Let's Be Honest - Stalin Was Less of a Criminal Than Churchill, Truman, and LBJ
QUOTE
"It's time to recover the truth about Stalin and the USSR from a cesspool of hostile propaganda"
This article from our archives was first published on RI in June 2015
Churchill murdered 100s of 1000s of defenseless German women and children in fire bombing raids
when Germany had already lost the war. He was a monster.
For reasons of sheer class interest among the plutocrats of the West, the business elites that still rule
most of the so-called “capitalist democracies,” the demonization of Stalin was a necessity, a campaign
only briefly interrupted by World War Two and quickly resumed literally a few hours after its ending.
END QUOTE
Concealment of the truth never can be protected by a claim of NATIONAL SECURITY.

Electors vote for candidates in political elections and are entitled to have all relevant information
before them. If for example a candidate was hiding behind NATIONAL SECURITY purported
confidentiality when horrific conduct on his watch was being committed being it interfering with
corpses and/or murdering unarmed civilians, etc, then any person purportedly elected should
have the seat declared vacant, where a recount cannot fill the vacancy.
As I submitted to the court in support of my successful appeals regarding FAILING TO VOTE
Convictions which were set aside:
ADDRESS TO THE COURT
County Court of Victoria, Case numbers T01567737 & Q10897630
QUOTE
The Defendant submits, that even so he does not require to state his religion and neither
which part of his religion is relevant for a religious objection as it can be a secular
objection, he has religious objections and one is that “THOU SHALL NOT KILL” where
Mr. John Howard unconstitutionally authorised the murderous invasions into Afghanistan
and Iraq. How on earth could anyone expect me to vote by preference voting for what I
consider a mass murderer and one who committed treachery, treason, sedition and
committed crimes against humanity, and by this voting for anyone who supported the war,
such as members of his political party.
My right to abstain from voting could not be denied, neither be punished.
END QUOTE
Therefore any soldier/former soldier who had relevant details concealed from electors regarding
war crimes, etc, should be held not to have been validly elected, this as even the High Court of
Australia has made clear that (as the Framers of the Constitution embedded in the constitution)
political liberty should be provided for. It cannot exist under the cover of war crimes committed
and concealed from the voting electors.
Official - Subject to Final Review IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x HARRY F. CONNICK,
DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ET AL., Petitioners
v. : No. 09-571
JOHN THOMPSON :
Washington, D.C. Wednesday, October 6, 2010

QUOTE
"exculpatory evidence"
And, third, if you have evidence that can conclusively establish to a scientific certainty the innocence of the
person being charged, you have to turn it over or get it -- get it tested. You can't just put it in your hip pocket
and say, I know -
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. What evidence is there that they put this in their
hip pocket?
There was a disclosure that the evidence existed. Where is the evidence that the defense counsel didn't have
access to asking for it?
MR. COONEY: Yes, Your Honor
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: So that you are claiming there was suppression of that evidence?
MR. COONEY: Absolutely, Your Honor.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Yes. My understanding is -- I don't -- I'm not an expert in criminal law. I need
training in that. But my understanding is that comments in a closing argument can give rise to a constitutional
violation.
Here's the deadly force standard under Tennessee v. Garner: Don't shoot people unless there's a reasonable
probability of physical danger to yourself or to others. You've got to tell them that.
END QUOTE
We now have Prime Minister Scott Morrison meeting with USA President Donald Trump
reportedly about all kinds of media outlets being curtailed.
Well, as it is enshrined in the constitution to have political liberty then this means disclosure of
all relevant matters relating to a candidate standing for election.
Let us not forget that ASIO was created because Menzies was reportedly told to do so by the
USA. Well reportedly ASIO then went about to direct schools not to hire political opponents of
Menzies, etc.
Hansard 10-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
QUOTE Mr. DIBBS:
Our own police are quite sufficient for the preservation of order within.
END QUOTE
Therefore ASIO in my view is unconstitutionally operating within the States jurisdictions.
There is massive exposure of ordinary citizens using recordings and yet the government that is
supposed to be open and transparent is hiding war crimes behind the veil of NATIONAL
SECURITY.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-25/surveillance-capitalism-how-facebook-google-collect-your-data/11243362
What is surveillance capitalism and how does it shape our economy?
QUOTE
'Big data' says you're a cancer risk. Do you want to know?
The growth in health data is leading some experts to call for a new negotiation of trust between patients and the groups
that want their most intimate information.
Third-party data brokers, as opposed to companies that hold the data such as
Google or Facebook, are also on-selling our data. These companies buy data from a
variety of sources, collate information about individuals or groups of
individuals, then sell it.
Smaller companies are also cashing in on this.
Last year, HealthEngine, a medical appointment booking app, was found to be
sharing clients' personal information with Perth lawyers particularly interested
in workplace injuries or vehicle accidents.
Cambridge Analytica was a wake-up call
Last year's Cambridge Analytica revelations highlighted the extent to which
internet companies surveil online activity.
Cambridge Analytica's actions broke Facebook's own rules by collecting and on-
selling data under the pretence of academic research. Their dealings may have
violated election law in the United States.
Despite the questionable nature of Cambridge Analytics actions, the bigger
players and leading actors in surveillance capitalism, Facebook and Google, are
still legally amassing as much information as they can.
That includes information about their users, their users' online friends, and
even their users' offline friends (known as shadow profiling).
END QUOTE
* No wonder they never have you on a list for Queens Birthday honours or Australia day
Honours, etc, as you get stuck in any politician regardless of which political platform a politician
might be.
**#** I wrote often that in my view Malcolm Turnbull was not competent in constitutional
matters and reportedly he sought advice from Federal Attorney General Porter as to involve the
Governor-General against Peter Dutton. Well the Governor-General has no constitutional powers
to interfere in an internal political party struggle. As I wrote even if say Peter Dutton would have
become the leader of the Liberal Party then the Governor-General could still have left Malcolm
Turnbull as Prime Minister. Anyone who doesn’t understand this in my view should not sit in the
Parliament. Our constitution doesn’t allow us to elect any Minister!
We can only elected who shall represent us in the Parliament.
We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal constitution!
This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL® (Our name is our motto!)


ISSUE: 20190627-Re: The Theft of Our Democracy, Etc & The Constitution - Supplement 55-NATIONAL SECURITY-etc

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

ISSUE: 20190627-Re: The Theft of Our Democracy, Etc & The Constitution - Supplement 55-NATIONAL SECURITY-etc

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

ISSUE: 20190627- Re: The theft of our democracy, etc & the constitution-

Supplement 55-NATIONAL SECURITY-etc

As a CONSTITUTIONALIST my concern is the true meaning and application of the constitution.

* Gerrit, how on earth do you manage to get information?

The Framers of the Constitution did make clear:

p1 21-6-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE Mr. GILLIES:

By then the 14TH AMENDMENT in the USA was already applicable.

p2 21-6-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

PREPARED BY THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

p4 21-6-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

p5 21-6-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

p6 21-6-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

Or as newsman Tom Brokaw put it:

All wars are based on propaganda.

p7 21-6-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

Concealment of the truth never can be protected by a claim of NATIONAL SECURITY.

Official - Subject to Final Review IN THE

Washington, D.C. Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Therefore ASIO in my view is unconstitutionally operating within the States jurisdictions.

p10 21-6-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

Você também pode gostar