Australia
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/joseph-goebbels-on-the-quot-big-lie-quot
‘“Eco-anxiety” is now a popular term. It is being increasingly used in the media to describe an anxiety condition resulting from the fears about the coming environmental destruction.
Climate Xchange for example, defines Eco-anxiety as a “feeling of stress, grief, helplessness, and fear of uncertainty associated with the grim outlook for our climatic and ecological systems if business continues as usual.” The American Psychological Association defines Eco-anxiety as “a chronic fear of environmental doom.”
In essence, it is a psychological condition wherein people are anxious about earth’s future and the changes in climate due to burning of fossil fuels. The mainstream media has been harping around the idea of eco-anxiety for quite sometime now. Interestingly, it has been associated more with the climate fears of the school-going generation.
The coverage of the student climate strike movement and dramatic speeches by celebrity child activists like Greta Thunberg has only added momentum to the eco-anxiety phenomenon among the younger generations.
A survey of 2000 children in the UK found out that 58 percent of them were worried about the impact of climate change on their lives. It also revealed that 1 in 5 of those children had nightmares about climate change.
The root of the eco-anxiety condition is the belief that the climate system is doomed because of anthropogenic global warming, a belief which depends entirely on predictions about the future state of climate.
But how much of these supposedly trustworthy predictions are actually trustworthy? Can eco-anxiety be justified and promoted on the basis of the available evidence?
Greenhouse Gases: Earth’s Temperature Control Knob, or Are they?
Among the various Greenhouse Gases (GHG) blamed for climate change, carbon dioxide (CO2) is one of the key gases. Climate doomsayers believe that CO2 emission from anthropogenic energy sources are driving temperatures to dangerous levels and are likely to cause global catastrophe if CO2 emissions are not reduced.
However, this popular belief has failed to stand the test of time. While it is true that human GHG emissions do impact atmospheric temperatures, the extent to which they do is still unclear to scientists.
The world’s atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations rose rapidly between 2000 and 2019. But the change in Global Average Temperatures (GAT) did not follow the same rapid pattern. Instead, satellite temperature measurement show that GAT has remained largely stable since the year 2000, increasing at a rate that is much slower than the warming rate displayed between 1979 to 2000.
What Do We Know About Climate Predictions
The discrepancies between CO2 concentrations and the anticipated warming rates led scientists to admit that their computer climate models are faulty and incapable of reflecting real world temperature changes.
The models were originally designed to be highly sensitive to the increases in the atmospheric CO2 concentrations, and therefore consistently predicted higher than actual temperatures. Scientists term this as “hypersensitivity” of models to CO2.
The faulty nature of computer climate models (and their hypersensitivity) were testified before the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space & Technology in 2017. More recent analysis in 2020 revealed that these models exaggerate the warming rate by 4 to 5 times higher than the actual observations (1998 to 2014). Some models show a warming rate that is as much as 10 times higher than the actual warming rate.
These are the very same models that the alarmists and mainstream media use to scare us about the future warming. In fact, the model predictions are the primary justification used for the climate doomsday theory.
Unfortunately, the models have not been corrected for their errors in the past decade, and remain highly faulty. Even the next generation of climate models—known as CMIP6—are highly inaccurate with their prediction, exaggerating the warming rate similar to levels of their predecessor models.
Other False Fears about Climate
Though central to the climate doomsday movement, temperature has been just one of the many issues that the alarmists want us to be anxious about. Their scare-mongering has been centered around other factors that are influenced by climate. But sadly, they too do not stand a chance against ground reality.
Melting Poles: It is often said that the on-going global warming is melting the Arctic and Antarctic at unprecedented rates. But the truth is that the ice extent at both the poles are currently at some of the highest levels for the 10,000-year period. Besides, multiple claims about Arctic being ice-free did not come to pass and the fake news peddlers continue to deceive the masses.
Dying Polar Bears: When it comes to the emotional claims about the extinction of various species, it is again evident that illegal hunting and encroachment have been responsible for the decrease in population numbers, and not climate change or seasonal variations. Through conservation efforts, various popular species like Tiger and Polar bear have made a comeback in the wild.
Extreme Weather Events: Contrary to media lies, there has been no significant increase in extreme weather events owing to climate change. The United Nations—considered to be the chief authority on climate change—says that there is no significant correlation between temperature increase and extreme weather events.
Almost all the major scare-mongering about the climate and the ecosystem are false. If anything, the world has become a better place in the past 100 years, with unprecedented improvement in energy, agriculture, technology and management practices which has enabled us to efficiently utilize the natural resources for the benefit of society.
The notion that we are in a climate emergency or that we are headed towards a climate doomsday is completely unscientific and amateurish. Unfortunately, it has resulted in mass hysteria about climate, plunging millions of children and uninformed adults into an anxiety conditions that could have been averted.’https://papundits.wordpress.com/2020/10/15/eco-anxiety-a-dangerous-and-unscientific-doomsday-construct/
Genesis 8:22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.
Thankfully there are those in the law profession that see the lockdowns that have been imposed upon those of us here in Australia are a violation of our individual rights. Therefore, take some time to read what Professor Augusto Zimmerman has to say.
‘As a constitutional lawyer and legal theorist who appreciates our classical liberal tradition of constitutional government I have been against the imposition of the draconian measures to fight COVID-19 since they began. I believe they are arbitrary and ultimately a gross violation of individual rights.
Of course, there never was an emergency that could justify the use of such extreme measures. Politicians have justified the incredible harm they are causing to the Australian people by getting completely drunk on their own sense of self-righteousness. Full of themselves, they proudly warned that we face a great threat but their policies have saved us from the spread of a deadly virus. The privileged members of our political class are therefore able to block our peaceful protests because they think they know better what needs to be done, and even if we are eventually oppressed, silenced and destitute as a result.
A reasonable concern for our well-being is one thing, but the actions taken by politicians during this pandemic have gone well beyond the extreme. What is happening is unacceptable and it gives new meaning to the phrase, ‘a cure worse than the disease’. Of course, some of the worst crimes against humanity have been committed by individuals who believed they were simply doing a ‘great good’. Listening to their patronising remarks brings to mind a famous quote by Christian apologist and novelist C.S. Lewis:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive… Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”[1]
The political philosophy of John Locke is particularly relevant to our understanding of the matter. Locke is known as the ‘Founder of Liberalism’ due to his immense contributions to political philosophy. In the constitutional struggle of parliamentary forces against the Stuart monarchs in 17th Century England, Locke elaborated a theory in which the primary justification for civil government rests on the preservation of our fundamental rights to life, liberty and property. Locke’s main concern in his political writings was the elaboration of a legal-political philosophy to underpin the Glorious Revolution of 1688.
Locke developed a distinctly Western political tradition based on the idea that everyone is endowed by God with inalienable rights, and that no government must ever violate these basic rights of the individual. More importantly, Locke distinguished what is legitimate political power from a situation in which the exercise of power becomes despotic and/or paternalistic. As Locke himself pointed out:
“The great mistakes about government have … arisen from confounding this distinct power [political power] with another [paternal power]”.[2]
Hence, as noted by Dr Kalle Grill, “paternalism is opposed by the liberal tradition” of limited government under the law.[3]
According to emeritus professor of government Geraint Parry, one of the primary purposes in Locke’s political theory, “was to separate political power from despotic power and paternal power – in other words, to deny that there is any analogy between the political relationship and the relationships which exist between either masters and slaves or father and children.”[4] Accordingly, the paternal leader is the political ruler who does not distinguish the difference between such relationships and limits the liberty of the people with the supposed intent of promoting “their own good” regardless of their personal will. Such an attitude displays a profound disregard for the will of other individuals and it involves behaviour that reveals an attitude of superiority coupled with profound arrogance and self-righteousness.
The Australian Prime Minister is a typical paternal leader. Morrison says he is quite happy that his subjects are behaving well. He is thinking about rewarding us for our “good behaviour”. Meanwhile, he warns that there will be “many more [restrictions] in front of us before [the government] can even possibly contemplate the easing of restrictions.”[5]
“There’s got to be a reward for all of this great effort that’s going in, and there will be, but we’ve got to make sure that’s done at the right time,” the Prime Minister told Sky News.[6]
Morrison recently urged his ‘faithful subjects’ to download a phone app that allows the federal government to trace our every move. His government was initially aiming for a 40 per cent take up of control of ‘people’s movements and the people they come in contact with’.[7] While the app that the federal government developed apparently is voluntary, its introduction naturally raises concerns of such measures becoming more permanent in the future. It also raises serious privacy issues and concerns that the app will later be used for permanent surveillance. The app presently monitors people’s daily interactions using GPS. It uses Bluetooth technology to record contact with other people even if they do not know each other.[8]
Although people under 60 have an extremely small chance of dying from coronavirus, the Prime Minister strongly believes that 95 per cent of the population must take the vaccine against such a virus. His first instincts are always inherently authoritarian and he appears to have developed a visceral distrust of the Australian people. That being so, he initially wanted the vaccine to be as mandatory as possible.[9]
“I expect that it would be mandatory as you can possibly make it,” he said, adding that he is, “talking about a pandemic which has destroyed the global economy and taken the lives of … 430 Australians”.[10]
First of all, what has really destroyed our economy is the behaviour of incompetent leaders such as Morrison himself. There were far better and more efficient ways to fight this virus apart from savage bans and gross violations of fundamental rights being inflicted on the people. Second, the Prime Minister appears to ignore that Australia is a country in which the State has been conceived as deriving from the law and not the law from the State.[11] The Morrison government has no more valid powers than those explicitly granted by the Australian Constitution.[12]
Morrison’s comments about vaccination follow the signing of Australia’s first vaccine deal with drug maker AstraZeneca.[13] This vaccine has been rushed through trials and has never been successfully produced for a coronavirus: it might do more harm than good. Of course, this is the same government that told us that roughly 150,000 Australians would die from COVID-19. It is also the government that unreasonably banned therapeutics such as hydroxychloroquine/zinc, which numerous health experts say “could be our best cure” in the fight against the coronavirus. [14] Furthermore, the Morrison government has miserably failed to protect nursing homes where the highest incidence of victims of COVID-19 has occurred.
During this coronavirus crisis, our politicians seem to be driven less by a reasoned, evidence-fueled strategy of limiting the spread of the disease and the disorganisation of economic life, than by an urge to be seen to be taking action. As a result, countless people are losing their jobs, particularly in the entertainment industry. Inevitably, job losses will lead to far more homelessness, with financial pressures leading to more marriage breakdowns and a dramatic growth in crime, which always increases in times of economic crisis.
What is happening here is nothing short of deeply tragic because, in many ways and on many levels, Australians have been miserably betrayed by their own federal and state politicians. Remarkably, Locke famously argued that governments have no other end, “but the preservation of these rights, and therefore can never have a right to destroy, enslave, or designedly to impoverish the subjects”. If a government exceeds the limits of its legitimate power, citizens have the fundamental right to resist.
As Locke famously put it:
“Whenever the legislators endeavour to take away and destroy the rights of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence.”[15]
We should not be too hasty in dismissing Locke’s advocacy for fundamental rights and the traditional concept of lawful resistance against political tyranny. This is our classical liberal tradition and it firmly communicates that there cannot be one rule for some and another for the rest of us. Federal, state, and territory leaders in this country have been exposed for their authoritarian behaviour as there was never an emergency that could possibly justify the exercise of such arbitrary powers.
The Australian people have a lawful right to resist such acts of tyranny and demand from their ruling political class the lifting of arbitrary restrictions and full restoration of our fundamental rights and freedoms.
Dr Augusto Zimmermann PhD, LLM, LLB, DipEd, CertIntArb is Professor and Head of Law at Sheridan Institute of Higher Education in Perth/WA, and Professor of Law (Adjunct) at the University of Notre Dame Australia, Sydney campus. He is President of the Western Australian Legal Theory Association (WALTA), and former Law Reform Commissioner with the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, from 2012-2017 (appointed by then state Attorney-General Christian Porter). Dr Zimmermann was chair and professor of Constitutional Law at Murdoch University from 2007 to 2017.
[1] C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics (William B. Eerdmans, 1948), 74.
[2] John Locke, The Second Treatise, (Cambridge University Press, 1960), para. 169,
[3] Kate Grill, ‘Paternalism’, in R. Chadwick (ed.) Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics (2nd ed., Elsevier, 2011). <http://kallegrill.se/texts/Paternalism%20preprint.pdf>
[4] Geraint Parry, ‘Individuality, Politics and the Critique of Paternalism in John Locke’, (1964) 2 Political Studies 1, 1.
[5] Malcolm Farr and Daniel Hurst, ‘Australian Government Plains to Bringing in Mobile Phone App to Track People With Coronavirus’, The Guardian, 14 April 2020. <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/apr/14/australian-government-plans-to-bring-in-mobile-phone-app-to-track-people-with-coronavirus>
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Andrew Probyn, ‘Coronavirus Lockdowns Could End In Months If Australians Are Willing To Have Their Movements Monitored’. ABC News, 14 April 2020. <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-14/coronavirus-app-government-wants-australians-to-download/12148210>
[9] Richard Furgason, ‘Future Vaccine Should Be Mandatory, Says PM’, The Australian, August 19, 2020. <https://www.australian.com.au/nation/coronavirus-australia-live-news-fears-grow-of-sydney-hotel-breach-outbreack/news-story/cf35fb9ae2901600276fa78ee89a2dc5>
[10] Jade Gailberger, ‘Coronavirus Vaccine Should Be Mandatory: PM’, PerthNow, 19 August 2020, <https://www.perthnow.com.au/lifestyle/fitness/coronavirus-vaccine-should-be-mandatory-pm-ng-fc7dc9cd495bcc7332487c07731b4c98>
[11] W A Wynes, Legislative, Executive and Judicial Powers in Australia (Sydney: The Law Book Co, 1955), vii.
[12] For instance, whereas Section 51 (xxiiiA) of the Australian Constitution allows for the granting of various services by the federal government, this should not be to the extent of authorising any form of civil conscription. This means that no government in this country, or those acting on its behalf, is constitutionally authorised to make the Australian people take any medicament against their best will, or force children to be vaccinated in order to maintain benefit payments.
[13] Jade Gailberger, ‘Coronavirus Vaccine Should Be Mandatory: PM’, PerthNow, 19 August 2020. <https://www.perthnow.com.au/lifestyle/fitness/coronavirus-vaccine-should-be-mandatory-pm-ng-fc7dc9cd495bcc7332487c07731b4c98>
[14] Andrew Bolt; ‘I must call Prime Minister Scott Morrison to Account’, Sky News, 10 August 2020. <https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6179768424001>
[15] John Locke, Second Treatise on Civil Government [1690] Ch 19, Sec 222.’https://goodsauce.news/its-time-to-resist-the-paternalistic-oppression-of-australias-politicians/
Is it rebellious not to accept just anything and everything or is it prudent? Well, as the Marxist/Communists and other Leftist Loony elites push their totalitarian agenda and ‘As public trust in a coronavirus vaccine continues to wane, Facebook has ramped up its restrictions on vaccine criticism by banning all ads that discourage people from getting vaccinated.
Ads that advocate for or against legislation and government policies related to vaccines are still allowed but anything else that discourages vaccination will be rejected. While Facebook didn’t go into specifics, this ad ban will presumably prohibit ads that criticize vaccines or question the safety of vaccines.
Not only is Facebook banning ads that discourage people from getting vaccines but it’s also going to be inserting messages on US user’s timelines that tell them to get a flu shot.
Additionally, Facebook will be working with the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) on public messaging campaigns to increase vaccination rates. This work will involve monitoring discussions about vaccines on Facebook’s platforms and then using it to “build public trust in vaccines.”
Facebook wrote that its pilot vaccine messaging work with UNICEF across 10 countries has already shown that this information can be used to make Facebook users more trusting of vaccines.
“Building demand for vaccination in communities worldwide is key to saving lives,” wrote Diane Summers, a Senior Advisor for Vaccine Acceptance & Demand at UNICEF. “Our collaboration with Facebook is part of our efforts to address vaccine misinformation and share resonant and reassuring information on vaccination.”
Facebook’s amplification of pro-vaccine messaging, censorship of vaccine criticism, and attempts to change user sentiment so that it’s more favorable towards vaccines follows several other changes the platform has made to restrict content that questions or criticizes vaccines.
Last year, Facebook started redirecting searches about vaccines to pro-vaccine information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the WHO.
And last month, Facebook assured the Australian government that it was making it difficult for users to find content that’s skeptical of vaccines by removing groups and pages that spread “vaccine misinformation” from its search recommendations.
These efforts to boost pro-vaccine content while suppressing anything that opposes vaccines aren’t exclusive to Facebook. Twitter pushes pro-vaccine search results in Ireland and Pinterest’s search results are also filled with pro-vaccine posts.
Despite this aggressive push to eliminate vaccine skepticism on social media and frame vaccines as safe and effective, the general public is far from convinced. A recent Gallup poll revealed that the public’s willingness to get a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) backed COVID-19 vaccine has been falling since July and just 50% of Americans are now willing to get a vaccine.’https://reclaimthenet.org/facebook-bans-anti-vaccine-ads/
The UN is an anti-Christian, anti-Capitalist organization as is the World Economic Forum. Now, what or who is the World Economic Forum? ‘The World Economic Forum is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation.
The Forum engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas.
It was established in 1971 as a not-for-profit foundation and is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. It is independent, impartial and not tied to any special interests. The Forum strives in all its efforts to demonstrate entrepreneurship in the global public interest while upholding the highest standards of governance. Moral and intellectual integrity is at the heart of everything it does.
Our activities are shaped by a unique institutional culture founded on the stakeholder theory, which asserts that an organization is accountable to all parts of society. The institution carefully blends and balances the best of many kinds of organizations, from both the public and private sectors, international organizations and academic institutions.
We believe that progress happens by bringing together people from all walks of life who have the drive and the influence to make positive change.’https://www.weforum.org/about/world-economic-forum
The UN and the World Economic Forum are a part of the New World Order that so many governments are seeking to implement. It was interesting to read that the World Economic Forum Founder and Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab is calling for a new kind of capitalism. What does Schwab mean by a new kind of capitialism? Well, he writes that ‘..we must rethink what we mean by “capital” in its many iterations, whether financial, environmental, social, or human. Today’s consumers do not want more and better goods and services for a reasonable price. Rather, they increasingly expect companies to contribute to social welfare and the common good.’ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/coronavirus-covid19-recovery-capitalism-environment-economics-equality/
Is the above true? Would you rather have a better automobile or a company that is a social welfare agent? These people are exactly what the Marxist/Communists are! When you go the the World Economic Forum’s web site it will be evident that this group is pushing the Marxist climate change scam along with many others programs that will not only CHANGE but CONTROL every facet of your life! They say ‘We are living in a more complicated and fast-changing world with interconnected problems and challenges.
Businesses, governments and civil society are undertaking initiatives to define these problems, search for solutions and take action.
But how do the world’s efforts to address these challenges feed into interconnected global systems, or attract wider public attention for more impact?
The Forum offers Platforms to integrate and aggregate these efforts:
- COVID Action Platform
- Shaping the Future of Advanced Manufacturing and Production
- Shaping the Future of Cities, Infrastructure and Urban Services
- Shaping the Future of Consumption
- Shaping the Future of Cybersecurity and Digital Trust
- Shaping the Future of Digital Economy and New Value Creation
- Shaping the Future of Energy and Materials
- Shaping the Future of Financial and Monetary Systems
- Shaping the Future of Global Public Goods
- Shaping the Future of Health and Healthcare
- Shaping the Future of Investing
- Shaping the Future of Media, Entertainment and Sport
- Shaping the Future of Mobility
- Shaping the Future of Technology Governance: Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
- Shaping the Future of Technology Governance: Blockchain and Digital Assets
- Shaping the Future of Technology Governance: Data Policy
- Shaping the Future of Technology Governance: IoT, Robotics and Smart Cities
- Shaping the Future of Trade and Global Economic Interdependence
- Shaping the Future of the New Economy and Society‘ https://www.weforum.org/platforms
Note the first Platform is Covid Action Plan. The China virus is being used to CHANGE forever your and my life! The World Economic Forum is like the UN in that it is anti-Christian and anti-Capitalist!
1John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
In Victoria, Australia the China virus has brought out into the open the real Leftist leaning Labor government. The Labor government in Victoria has gone China virus mad with its lockdowns and foolish rules. These lockdowns and rules have been made, believe it or not, according to Premier Daniel Andrews by using a super computer, the virus data, and science. Now, it must be understood that the rules only apply to those who are not participating in the BLM protests or are a member of an Afghan family. Otherwise you are under the most China virus strict rules in the Western world. ‘Every single day we’re hearing stories of law-abiding citizens — families, really — who are being ticketed and fined by overzealous police and bylaw officers.
We’re not talking about the rambunctious house parties that fly in the face of social distancing and make a mockery of us all.
No — we’re talking about people who are being fined for going out for a walk without a face mask, people who go out shopping with more than one family member, people who are just going to work, and even people who are more than 5 KM outside their homes.
We’re sick and tired of this! So, we’re going to fight back in court.
We are going to crowdfund a lawyer for Australians who want to fight their outrageous tickets.
We are going to fight for Australian’s civil rights.’https://www.rebelnews.com/fight_the_fines_australia
This China virus is just another tool of the Marxist Leftist Lovies for their totalitarian takeover. According to these people one may do many things BUT no church meetings! Hmm, does that remind you of Communism or a Muslim governed nation?
Here in Australia about the only conservative news we get via television is Sky News. Today on Sky ‘US President Donald Trump has warned the “radical left” is addicted to power and a Joe Biden victory would change the United States forever. “If (Biden) wins the radical left will be running the country and they are addicted to power and God help us if they ever got it because we would never have the same country again,” he said. Speaking in front of a large crowd in the key swing state of Florida, President Trump said radical left wing politicians such as Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will dictate policy should the Democrats win the White House. “You don’t make a comeback from where (the left) will take us,” President Trump said. “He (Joe Biden) has no strength left.” “If I don’t sound like a typical Washington politician it’s because I’m not. “If I don’t play by the rules of the Washington established because I was elected to fight for you and I fight harder than anyone has ever fought for you.” “Joe Biden and the Democrat socialists will kill your jobs, dismantle your police officers, confiscate your guns…destroy your suburbs and drive God from the public square.”’https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6200013423001?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20Sky%20News%20Australia%20%20Newsletter&utm_content=Daily%20Sky%20News%20Australia%20%20Newsletter+CID_7e82ec1c5566c484ca350ea6ff5f786d&utm_source=Daily%20newsletter&utm_term=God%20help%20us%20if%20the%20radical%20left%20get%20power%20Donald%20Trump%20at%20Florida%20rally
In Victoria, Australia they have a demented leftist leaning Premier that has gotten away with murder during this China virus. However, ‘Forget that a bungled hotel quarantine program led to the deaths of 800 largely helpless Victorians. The real scandal is that Peta Credlin asked questions about who was responsible.
Twitter went into meltdown after the newspaper columnist and television host grilled Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews in a tense exchange at his daily coronavirus press conference on Friday.
Her crime was to have made the Victorian Premier uncomfortable. Never mind the dead.
“Peta Credlin is NOT an accredited journalist and should have been thrown out of Dan Andrews’ presser,” tweeted Louise Gill, whose comment quickly received thousands of likes.
Apparently, our elected officials can only be questioned by state-sanctioned ‘accredited journalists’, by which the twitter mob presumably mean socialist, Andrews supporting, ALP card-carrying puppets – or the ABC, for short.
But so-called accredited journalists have sat meekly through 98 press briefings over months of disease and lockdown, ogling the Premier as he has trampled civil rights and obfuscated over who was responsible for citizen deaths.
They have seemed more interested in who Daniel Andrews is backing in the footy than why, after $5.4m spent on an inquiry, we are still clueless as to who caused the death of 800 people and sent Australia’s second most populous city into a draconian lockdown.
Peta Credlin showed up to one press briefing and took just a few minutes to expose the utter inadequacy of much of the Melbourne media.
Wouldn’t phone records reveal who it was that phoned police chief Graham Ashton to advise private security guards would be used at quarantine hotels? And wouldn’t it clarify things if the Premier and other key figures provided their phone records?
Good questions. But wait …
More important than who made the fateful decision over hotel security is to decide whether Peta Credlin is a real journalist.
Veteran Courier-Mail columnist Terry Sweetman tweeted: “Sky can employ anyone it likes but after 50 plus years’ experience I am offended #PetaCredlin is called a journalist. Real journalists have shovelled shit, reported courts, covered councils or parliaments and made educated decisions about the legality of what they write or say.”
A real journalist wouldn’t argue about who is or is not ‘a real journalist’ when questions about who was responsible for the death of 800 Australians remain unanswered. They’d put the public’s right to know — accountability — ahead of who has what piece of paper.
Perhaps the give-away that Credlin was not ‘a real journalist’ was that she sounded well informed, well researched and determined to get to answers.
Real journalist Mike Carlton tried to assure the #IStandWithDan crowd that Credlin’s questions would not upset the status quo in Daniel Andrews’ Victoria.
“Look, Credlin doesn’t matter. She has an audience smaller than the crowd at a weekday country race meeting. She is utterly irrelevant,” he tweeted.
If a conservative commentator dismissed say, ABC host Leigh Sales as “utterly irrelevant” he would be immediately called a misogynist.
Peta Credlin may be a woman, but she is the wrong kind of woman.
So the tolerant mob did not hesitate to dismiss her as the “Sky after dark vampire”, “a flapping yapping mouthpiece”, “abbott’s bitch”, a “menace to the public”, “a hack who loves the sound of her own voice” and “Peta Cretin”.
Not an accredited journalist? “Peta Credlin is not an accredited human being,” wrote one compassionate Lefty.
Many of these same people had only hours earlier been frothing at the mouth because they perceived US Vice President Mike Pence had not been sufficiently respectful of his female opponent.
All this because Peta Credlin dared to forensically question the man responsible for one of the greatest government failures in Australian history.
The Terry Sweetmans and Mike Carltons of this world may well care about the qualifications of the questioner, but the rest of us just want answers – regardless of who asks – as to why 800 of our fellow Aussies are dead.
Keep going Peta … real accredited journalist, or not.’https://spectator.com.au/2020/10/peta-credlin-accountability/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=FLAT%20%2020201012%20%20AL&utm_content=FLAT%20%2020201012%20%20AL%20CID_b7bb57d4709637bab75cf2de4c492dbe&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Australia&utm_term=Peta%20Credlin%20stood%20up%20for%20accountability%20We%20dont%20know%20about%20Twitter%20has-beens%20but%20thats%20what%20all%20good%20journos%20do&fbclid=IwAR20VLqaplmEayzvU8bCwcyR8yooOwJh60_3cP18CBmUbQ5Lvw7qlWEIm0I
Speaking the truth in love hurts but ‘Since we have not learned from history, we are now about to repeat it.
In past plagues, officials, thinking they were doing good, passed laws that often did short-term good and long-term damage. They passed laws that fixed prices and wages (and always failed); forbade a man to change jobs; forced a son to follow in his father’s job; required people to do unpleasant and dangerous jobs; forced people to stay indoors; prohibited people from moving to a different town; and on and on.
With the Chinese coronavirus racing around the globe, people are panicking as they fight for food (and toilet paper); purposely trying to infect others; committing suicide, and insisting on close contact with friends and strangers.
Dummies are ever with us.
Almost daily, we see hazardous events to personal freedom as desperate politicians try to fight the Chinese coronavirus pestilence. Rhode Island used military personnel for hunting down New Yorkers and sent them back home; former British Prime Minister recommended temporary world government; Trump forced Ford and General Motors to build ventilators; NYC mayor told Jews to close down their synagogues, or he would close them permanently; DC mayor threatened 90 days in jail for leaving home; New York Governor sent thousands of coronavirus victims into nursing homes to infect others; a Tampa megachurch pastor was arrested after leading a packed service; and California pastors face jail time for having services as they have for 50 years.
It seems politicians act as they always have in times of major disasters–badly.
Governors closed all schools in their state forcing students into homeschooling—maybe that is where they should have been from the beginning. Since many students were fed by their schools, the government fed them during the shutdown. I am reminded that Rome, as it was in decline and soon fell, also fed the people and provided games and circuses to keep their minds off the strange barbarians beating on their city gates.
As I watch the “peaceful” protests each night, it seems the barbarians are already within our gates. Some are in the mayor’s office.
However, there is not an endless supply of food. Soon, it may be gone and who will feed the students who have become dependent on the system to feed them? Without food, there is anarchy—always. But not to worry since that is a few weeks away following weeks of rioting, looting, arson, and murders.
Americans have been warned not to assemble for any reason, well except for a few protests and a couple of spontaneously scheduled riots. Many people have attended church once or twice a week for a lifetime and are now told it is illegal. However, it seems to be legal for hundreds of protesters to gather and do their thing. Does the government have the power or the authority to forbid a church to meet? Or, if they meet, they cannot sing? Power yes, since they own the biggest guns, but in my opinion, they do not have that authority.
However, church leaders have a responsibility to act in the best interest of everyone. While they have a right to attend church and others may voluntarily join them, what about exposing innocent children? Do they have that right?
Will more oppressive laws be demanded as we see even more depravity, drunkenness, child abuse, robbery, and murder? Will honesty, loyalty, kindness, honor, and compassion become obsolete and even suspect? Will those of us who profess normalcy exhibit significant character flaws and not be true to our highest ideals? Will church members permit hatred, fear, and bigotry to take control instead of faith, hope, and love?
Will real Christians get weary in the battle and surrender their long-held Bible principles to accommodate the soft, sinister purring of unbelieving liberals who tell us the Bible is antiquated and unreliable in times of disaster? Probably so! In times of distress, disease, and death, even good people often capitulate to evil to gain safety, succor, and sustenance.
Will law and order break down with looting and vandalism common? How can the release of felons from prison help the innocent and helpless? We’ve already had felons kill and rape shortly after their release from prison. Will stores close for the safety of the owners? If so, where would you get the supplies you need? If most stores closed, what will that do to our economy? Will officials refuse to permit a store to close or go out of business?
The stock market is going up and down like a yoyo. Many older people have lost most of their retirement funds and won’t live long enough to recoup them. What if the market hits bottom and stays there for months? What would that do to your retirement?
We have seen the military take over some police duties contrary to the posse comitatus law. How will that impact your daily life? If you are a police officer or military, will you arrest or harm a citizen who refuses to be vaccinated or insists on attending church or visit grandchildren? Remember, “I was just following orders” has never been legitimate even in totalitarian times.
There is no doubt that new, intrusive laws will be passed (or implemented) that will restrict our freedom of movement. There will be mandatory vaccinations whenever one is developed, although billions of dollars have been spent seeking an AIDS vaccine without success. What if you think the shots would be far worse than the risk of getting the disease? What if you refused the shots?
Much of the world was under lockdown and forced to stay at home. Have you lost a constitutional right to travel? Does a dangerous disease override your rights? What about your traveling job? What about seeing your children in another city? Will you obey a law that restricts public meetings such as church services? If so, for how long?
Two of our major problems would be obtaining health care and eating. Where will we get the necessary nurses and physicians if the pestilence worsens? What about hospital beds? How could we exist if only 30% of the farmers were no longer producing food? If politicians react as they have in the past to major disasters, they will freeze prices and wages and even prohibit a person from changing jobs. Would you support a law that requires a man to stay in his present job? Well, what if he is a farmer, and if he doesn’t farm, you won’t eat? Would you support that law under that condition?
How firm are your convictions when it affects feeding your family? These questions must be faced now; however, our leaders do not indicate that they are being considered, and some will question my loyalty for asking the questions!
Patriotic Americans will ask some questions and demand answers from the people whose salaries they pay. Keep in mind that we are the masters, and the politicians and bureaucrats are the hired servants! Very well paid servants, I might add!
As the Chinese coronavirus gallops around the world, there will be further limitations on personal liberty, but hopefully, lawmakers will think these issues through, debate them, and implement only those most necessary. Reasonable people will argue that, in times of emergency, unusual measures must be taken for everyone’s good; however, there is always a problem. When oppressive laws are passed “for the present time,” some of them will persist after the danger is past. There are many examples of that in our history. So ask questions and expect answers from the authorities.
This pandemic will change our constitution, community, commerce, churches, and culture; and could affect our character as well.’http://donboys.cstnews.com/unlawful-unwanted-and-unnecessary-laws-are-coming-and-may-stay-with-us
whatyareckon 