Ballarat mum recalls her ‘arrest’ by Dangerous Dan’s Covid cops in 2020, may file charges against police after her charges were dropped

Dr. Coleman: Deadly Covid-19 jab will kill more people than will die in Ukraine

There is now no doubt that the covid-19 jab is a deadly fake vaccine – useless but far more dangerous than depleted uranium grenades or cluster bombs. Like bombs, missiles and bullets, its only conceivable purpose is to kill people.

The evidence that the over-promoted, over-sold covid-19 jab is the most dangerous pharmaceutical product ever used is denied only by the fools or touts of the conspirators and the pharmaceutical industry. I have repeatedly warned that the covid-19 jab could cause or exacerbate a huge range of serious health problems – including heart disease, clotting problems and cancer. And as I warned two and a half years ago, the immune system problems caused by the “vaccine” are deadly, writes Dr. Vernon Coleman .

Read on –

https://www.frontnieuws.com/dr-coleman-dodelijke-covid-19-prik-zal-meer-mensen-doden-dan-er-zullen-sterven-in-oekraine/

Arthur said – “… you appear to be well informed but continue to believe the bullshit about the Gestapo…”

Au contraire, Mon Ami.

Which BS in particular are you invoking?

Whatever alleged history has been passed down over the decades concerning Adolf Hitler’s Germany is IMO just that – alleged.

However, as for the private armies of heavily armed shit-for-brains mass-murdering hired mercenary thugs impersonatiing “police” here in Australia, they happen to be OUR Gestapos – and there is nothing whatsoever alleged about it.

It’s sufficient that most people understand the intended implications of that term, historically flawed as it may be, to grasp the treasonous and brutal criminality of these mongrel bastards beating down the innocent unarmed Australian people.

One might also apply the term “Nazi” to these uniformed mercenary psychopaths – in which case any number of historians might rightly dispute the veracity of that description, given that Hitler’s Nazis were arguably a force for good in a topsy-turvy world. Don’t quote me on that – because I wasn’t there.

However, IMO that argument of exoneration would be moot, because the colloquially accepted meaning of the term perfectly describes the behaviour of the genocidal Globalist stooges masquerading as Australian “police”.

Case in point – the UkroNazis unashamedly celebrate their Nazi credentials as they torture and butcher prisoners of war, burn Christians alive and boast about it on the Web, and farm, harvest and trade childrens organs and body parts along with the children themselves. It would be proper to observe that these f*cking psychopaths are Ukraine’s Nazis, NOT Hitler’s Nazis – but Nazis they are, and they’re proud of it.

Arthur is correct, Pat. Under the Cheka/GPU run by the alien genocidal parasites every Russian civilian/worker/peasant had to fear for their lives under ‘Article 58’. Under the Gestapo, only the alien genocidal parasites had anything to worry about.- the citizens were kept safe.

Hi Pat, you appear to be well informed but continue to believe the bullshit about the Gestapo. You should concentrate on the State Political Directorate of the Soviet Union/Bolsheviks mass-moerdering GPU or it’s former Cheka.

Re the photo of the shit-for-brains hired Gestapo thugs – best to take and keep a copy of that, so we can identify every last one of these treasonous arseholes and when the time comes, hang each and every one of these mongrel bastards from a lamp post.

As for those lowlife arseholes who ganged up in a pack to “arrest” a heavily pregnant mother in her house and in her pajamas, for the egregious crime of discussing a rally on social media, this all just serves to drive home the essential fact – in Australia, there ARE NO “good cops”, there aren’t even any bona fide police AT ALL, just private armies of heavily armed hired mercenary thugs.

What’s more, these mall-cop wannabes have NO LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER – they are employed and paid by PRIVATE MERCENARY COMPANIES which trade under the names of the respective “police services” of each Australian state and territory. The only “authority” that these disgusting bastards have is by holding a gun to your head, much like the Mafia might choose to do in its business dealings (but make no mistake, the Mafia is a FAR MORE reputable and respectable outfit than these hordes of power-mad f*ckwits in uniform who make a living from impersonating “police” and get an extra special thrill every time they get to beat up a little old lady or helpless little child).

I say, throw ALL of these mongrels onto a container ship and send them off to Ukraine. Let’s see how they stack up against a REAL fighting force, instead of the helpless unarmed civilians here in Australia.

BTW, don’t send the body bags back – let Zelensky keep them, all lowlife treasonous mass-murdering arseholes together. Maybe he can get a good price for their organs on the black market.

I have been fighting many court cases for many years but NEVER with a lawyer as they are ‘officers if the court’ and do not have your best interests at their being or raison d’etre. From one of my court submitted Affidavits of Truth here are some precedents she can use if acting ‘sui juris’ or ‘pro se'(cutor).

a) Port of Portland v State of Victoria upholding the Bill of Rights and no threats of forfeitures or penalties before conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction under Chapter III of the Constitution
b) Munday v Gill [1930] HCA 20; (1930) 44 CLR 38 (14 August 1930) where police have to prove all aspects of the case including the lawfulness of the Acts referred to in the alleged offence.
c) Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1997) 189 CLR 51 where Victoria Police have acted beyond its power in issuing fines and penalties i) as though they were a court of competent jurisdiction under the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Chapter III and ii)before conviction
d) Attorney-General (NT) v Emmerson (2014) HCA 13 (10 April 2014) where it is confirmed that only a court of competent jurisdiction under Chapter III of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution can provide a court order to forfeit property.
e) Common expressions such as: ‘The Courts have declared a statute invalid’ sometimes lead to misunderstanding. A pretend law made in excess of power is not and never has been a law at all. Anybody in the country is entitled to disregard it. Naturally, he will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favour, but such a decision is not an element that produces invalidity in any law. The law is not valid until a court pronounces against it – and thereafter invalid. If it is beyond power, it is void ab initio HCA 1942 (65 CLR 373 at 408).
Chief Justice Latham – High Court of Australia – Uniform Tax Case
f) Yanna v Easton 1999 – Magistrate can disregard State law in conflict with Federal law
g) Forge v ASIC Sept 5, 2006 All courts to abide by the Constitution Chapter III
h) Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead [1909] HCA 36; (1909) 8 CLR 330 (7 June 1909)- Power which every sovereign authority must of necessity have to decide controversies between its subjects, or between itself and its subjects, whether the rights relate to life, liberty or property
i) Dietrich v the Queen – 1992. This ruling established the application of the ‘International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights’ which provides for a ‘fair trial’ before conviction and penalty
j) Commonwealth v Tasmania – 1983 commonly known as the ‘Tasmanian Dam Case’ was upheld by the High Court of Australia primarily citing the international ‘World Heritage Convention’ of which the Commonwealth of Australia is a signatory to including the ‘International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights’
k) Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co Ltd (1920) 28 CLR 129-This established the Federal authority under section 51 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution as well as the Judiciary Act Section 18 and confirmed the supremacy of the Constitution and eliminated implied intergovernmental immunities
l) Hockey v Yelland-Chief Justice Gibbs said, “It is a well recognized principle that the subject’s right of recourse to the courts is not to be taken away except by clear words… The provision that the board’s determination shall be final and conclusive is not enough to exclude certiorari… The words of the further provision… are in my opinion quite inapt to take away from the Court its power to issue certiorari for error of law on the face of the record
m) Church of Scientology v Woodward-High Court Justice Brennan said. “Judicial review is neither more nor less than the enforcement of the rule of law over executive action; it is the means by which executive action is prevented from exceeding the powers and functions assigned to the executive by law and the interests of the individual are protected accordingly”
n) South Australia v Totani [2010] HCA 39 (11 November 2010,) Chief Justice French stated that even magistrates’ courts must be in accordance with Chapter III of the Commonwealth Constitution.

There is many more ‘bullets’ of information that she can use in her fight against fascist tyrants like Chairman Dan and his cohorts.