3 Comments

Actions speak louder than words in not allowing a debate to take place. I guess after being caught lying with "it's "ONLY" One Page debacle didn't want to risk being caught lying again.

So much for fill in the petitions voicing concerns and objections and the whole they work for us.

So where to from here?

Expand full comment

Appreciate your comment. I have just updated this article to include South Australia's Tim Dwyer's call for (lawful) political civil disobedience in the wake of the unlawful decision to 'ram' through the communist WEF digital ID without debate.

He is advising all Australians to drop into their Federal MPs office Tuesday 2nd April & Wednesday 3rd April and hand them a signed piece of paper that says:

No Digital ID Without Consent

No Debate = Not Lawful

No Consent

And leave it there.

(Tim's graphic in his video says 'I do not consent', which is incorrect and I have let him know and adjusted his wording accordingly. He is not a lawyer but is a well meaning Australian who is not standing for this political BS).

Video link: https://rumble.com/v4m11et-there-now-must-be-political-civil-disobedience-by-all-good-people.html

’NO CONSENT’ IS CORRECT WORDING

Anyone who tells you to say ‘I Do Not Consent’ is giving incorrect guidance. I was advised a couple of years ago by a helpful legal guide that ‘No Consent’ is the correct wording.

Notes:

Silence in the hoodwink world of legalese means that you consent. The term ‘I do' means ‘consent’. I/Aye means Yes. Not/Knot means something which Joins/Binds.

‘No Consent’ is the correct wording to use, as it clearly reflects No Contract, No Joinder and No Jurisdiction.

Expand full comment

Thank you for your resonse and clarification. Greatly appreciated.

Expand full comment