Just be thankful you live in Australia and stop winging.
David

Of course there are concerns about the removal of freedoms, but the politicians and the media have most people too frightened to say anything, apart from this lady, who is not "winging", nor is she whingeing. She had the experience of totalitarianism, and deserves to be listened to. And, while she probably is glad to be living in Australia, clearly Australia is not what it used to be. Just because Australia is not exactly like China (yet) doesn't mean Australians should not be vigilant and be prepared to protect themselves from governments and politicians. Remember, the Coalition government is in power only because it is slightly "better" than Labor. But it is gradually becoming more like Labor, which could eventually mean that we have the equivalent of one party, a la China. It will be too late to listen to common sense then. Sadly, Australians are unlikely to listen, given their increasingly ovine behaviour. Baa, baa.

Dear David,

It does appear the author may be more at home in the US given language like this: "It is up to us to protect and preserve our God-given inalienable freedoms and rights - will you stand with me on the right side of history, and against tyranny and oppression?"

Although she may well find kindred spirit with the PM's mate.

"A WA Liberal Party election candidate has quit after revelations she shared her “dangerous conspiracy theories” that linked 5G technology with COVID-19 on a conservative Christian website.

Andrea Tokaji was forced to withdraw as the candidate for Baldivis after it was revealed she had written an article titled ‘Are Our Fears of the Coronavirus Undermining Our Freedoms?’ on the Caldron Pool website in April last year.

In the very lengthy article, she claimed 5G towers were “being rolled out against our knowledge — despite the known under-reported health risks” while WA was self-isolating during the COVID-19 pandemic."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/breaking-news/wa-liberal-party-candidate-andrea-tokaji-quits-after-her-dangerous-covid19-conspiracy-theory-was-exposed/news-story/aecd13e3022c3b87e0ac5f19e33dbfd0

Not that there aren't some valid points in what she is putting, it's just that the well is so toxic.

Nationals George Christensen was censured yesterday for comments he made on lockdowns and the unbridled powers of public health officials still getting their big bucks while putting thousands out of work.

Comrade Scott backed Comrade Anthony on the censure. More and more it is the political class against the people.

In the meantime, the scaremongers and would-be dictators are coming up with the idea of mandatory vaccination.

At the moment, our Constitution makes it clear that:

Australian government, either federal or state, or those acting on its behalf, is constitutionally authorised to force any individual to take medicament against his or her own will, or force them or their children to be, among other things, compulsorily vaccinated.

".... the Australian Constitution explicitly prohibits any form of legal compulsion upon the medical profession to carry out any form of medication, including vaccination. In fact, no government, either federal or state, can impose compulsory vaccination in this country, or prevent medical practitioners from remaining entirely free to choose whether or not to provide certain medical services, including vaccination". Dr Augusto Zimmermann Professor of Law)

VK3AUU

Well said!

Andrea,

May I suggest you find another topic to write about. A lawyer with a brain bigger than most, London based barrister Geoffrey Robertson QC, on his arrival in Australia recently was egged on by a talking head on ALP TV (sorry, "ABC" TV) to chastise the Morrison Government's strict application of health focused restrictions. He was asked in particular about denying "ordinary" Australians the right to free movement.

His reply: "the Government has a MORAL duty to allow such movements". Not once did he say or even hint that the Crown was in the wrong imposing such restrictions. Not once did he indicate that the Crown was trampling on "our" rights or was breaching any law or regulation.

I don't give a flying french frankfurt about your so-called legal (mischievous vexatious) concerns about lockdowns! But a shipload full about the implied noncompliance you apparently support? Which continues to spread a deadly killer virus among the non-vaccinated population!

Make no mistake, even those who present as quite well when infected? Could be suffering significant internal harm to vital organs and shortening their expected lifespan by ten years or so with every repeated infection!?

Not for nothing is it writ large, if ignorance is bliss, tis folly to be wise!
Alan B.

Australia is NOT in 'the middle of a (sic) biochemical warfare with China'.
We are battling to control the same lab-concocted virus that every other country is, including China.
And yes, according to currently-accepted wisdom, China was the first country to report its presence, but that does not mean it originated in China.
And it does not mean that China is engaging in biowarfare with Australia, or with anyone else. China did not and is not releasing this virus intentionally, which is what biowarfare would entail.
The author has made some worthwhile points, but ending her article with this fearmongering hyperbole tends to invalidate all that's gone before.

As for vaccinations? Wouldn't make them mandatory, but you'd need an up to date vaccination passport/certificate to get on a train, plane, or any other form of public transport or into any entertainment venue, pub, club, shopping precinct, or school ground etc!

And if ignored could cost the licensee their licence to trade, conduct or operate any future commercial enterprise!

Nonetheless, you'd remain free to refuse any vaccination, be it against whooping cough, polio, smallpox, scarlet fever and so on! But a greater freedom than that, would be a freedom to leave the country ASAP and never return!
Alan B.

Why bother with "legal concerns", picking out issues with this or that particular mandate?
Why choose this worst of all times to complain, when a pandemic is rampant: where was the author in previous years?

If you accept the legitimacy of the existence of states as they stand, then the rest follows automatically, because states by nature are predators and predators do what they are best designed for - to prey on the weak!

If you consider the state to be legitimate then do not complain of what they do because it is their nature to do so - and if you understand that states are, violent and therefore illegitimate by nature, then do not complain either because it is not going to help anyway: http://fablesofaesop.com/the-wolf-and-the-lamb.html

Yuyutsu

Many of the totally frustrated arrive at the sharp end of decision called anarchy,
for many and varied reasons.
I’m a bit perplexed, but otherwise very interested to know how you got there.

Dan

Lockdowns delay the inevitable, destroy small and medium sized businesses, allow the Australian Treasurer Frydenberg to provide corporate welfare no questions asked yet harass those getting unemployment benefits who might be overpaid $10 a week. This Cdn site provides a wide range of opinions on this pandemic. https://www.globalresearch.ca/fake-delta-variant-fourth-wave-another-lockdown-upcoming-financial-crash-worldwide-economic-social-sabotage/5751819

Dear Dan,

«I’m a bit perplexed, but otherwise very interested to know how you got there.»

By faith and logic:

The first observance in Hinduism (akin to the Bible's 10 commandments) is non-violence ("ahimsa"). One cannot even begin to approach God while hurting others (who are, in Christian terms, His children). While none of us is a perfectly non-violent saint, at least we should try.

Controlling others against their will, ordering them what to do and not do, is hurtful, is injurious, it instills fear, so one should do their best to avoid it.

If a group of people takes control and threatens everyone who lives in a given land to obey them or else, then this is violence, no matter what the group calls itself. Had participation in that group been voluntary this could be different, but as it stands, participation in the group which calls itself "The State", is not - not just in Australia but throughout the globe. Some such groups are relatively better (i.e. less violent and fearful) than others, but still, such behaviour is unacceptable.

As spiritual seekers we should not stoop down to their level telling others how to behave, especially those who are not interested in God thus would not listen anyway, yet we ourselves who know better, should keep away from bad company, not benefit from it nor cooperate with evil.

We have units of the Australian military roaming our streets helping the police to force, ultimately at the point of gun, Australian citizens to abide by rules made up by a government who never had and never will have those rules tested or approved by parliament. Why would anyone be concerned about the civil liberties aspects that? </sarc>

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" Ben Franklin

Dear mhaze,

Let's do a wee comparison.

Mhaze's world: “We have units of the Australian military roaming our streets helping the police to force, ultimately at the point of gun...”

The reality: “Australian Defence Force soldiers will undergo training on the weekend before beginning unarmed patrols on Monday.” BBC

That's right, UNARMED.

You really are one of those misinformation spreading, fear-mongering pillocks aren't you.

Oh and by the way, anything to say about the recent death of yet another Australian in their 30s who has died of Covid? Something you claimed they were safe from.

Dear SteeleRedux,

«Oh and by the way, anything to say about the recent death of yet another Australian in their 30s who has died of Covid?»

Yes, yet another victim of government who neither provided enough vaccines nor would allow us to import our own vaccines!

SR,

I know this will be too hard for you to follow but I'll mention it for the benefit of others.

I didn't say the military were armed. But ultimately their power to enforce these government dictates is based on the fact that they have a preponderance of force as against the ordinary citizen. Its a philosophic issue. In the end a citizen who resists the authorities sufficiently will be overwhelmed by the authority's monopoly on legitimate force..... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence)

"Oh and by the way, anything to say about the recent death of yet another Australian in their 30s who has died of Covid?"

If you like....he had, according to the "Chief health officer Kerry Chant Berejiklian....significant underlying health conditions” and was unvaccinated."

"Something you claimed they were safe from."

Well that's not true. Lying or just a comprehension problem?

"even though the risks to an 18 year old of dying from the A-Z jab are vanishingly small, they are still significantly greater than the risking of dying of the WuFlu."

Dear mhaze,

So a non-literal and philosophical remark from you then was it?

Bollocks.

As to your

“ A healthy 18 year old is effectively safe from it” you also said: “The government has lockdowned themselves into a bind where they can’t admit that the under 50s are and always have been safe.”

That is about as straight forward as it gets.

Or was this another of your non-literal and philosophical remarks?

Seems to be getting to be a habit.

SR wrote:"Bollocks"

which, sadly, is probably the most eloquent thing he's said in the past month.

"they can’t admit that the under 50s are and always have been safe"

Still parsing every word to try to find something, eh SR? Yeah sure, when I said they were safe I meant it was impossible to get the virus. When I told my grandkids its safe to cross at the zebra crossing I also meant it was impossible for them to come to harm there. That's all sarcasm BTW.

Poor old SR. His self-esteem has taken quite a hit over the past month with his innumeracy and historic ignorance bought to the fore. So he's desperate for some vindication. But reading every word as literally as possible is really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Let's see how that works. SR said the military were "UNARMED". By which he clearly meant they were amputees.

Dear mhaze,

Lol.

Off again talking about me rather than to me. Every single time after you are shown to be speaking complete bollocks you resort to this.

Anything but unpredictable.

Well Mr 'I was literal when I first wrote it but now I don't know', perhaps you had better starting to put a disclaimer in your posts, at the very least giving us a heads up when you decide to be figurative rather than literal.

And of course my self esteem is in shatters after your eloquent and reasoning along with your sublime use of statistics. What else could it have been?

ROFL.

Congratulations on a stimulating, well-written, well-researched article. Keep up the good work.

Kudos mhaze

hi andrea i would love to connect... ive tried emailing and messaging via facebook but it appears u are shadowbanned? i'm in margaret river and would love to do some advocacy training like u did at the baldivis venue... please get in touch x