Popular Posts

Saturday, 16 January 2016

Sparkles the Pony - a systematic look at the case of pedophilic behaviour in the homosexual community

To all my readers
THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA AND HOMOSEXUAL VILIFICATION CASE-LAW IN NEW SOUTH WALES, AUSTRALIA
We would like to show our readers around the world what is going on in New South Wales, Australia, to create dangerous new case law relating to homosexual vilification.
We will start by showing you a Facebook account belonging to a network of male homosexual persons.
It is prima facie evidence of pedophilic behavior and interest.
You will notice that on page 14/18 of this Facebook page, it is visited and given sanction by a person by the name of Gary Burns. This person (Burns) describes himself as a 'gay activist'. He was convicted in the Waverly Local Court on August 5, 2011 of telling “vexatious lies” and ordered to pay me $4800 in damages.
He is used by the Anti-Discrimination Board of New South Wales and also The Greens political party, to act as serial complainant initiating homosexual vilification actions against owners of blogs that oppose the Homosexual Agenda.
The Freedom of Expression unit at Columbia University in America appears concerned about how I am being used to make case law that curtails freedom of speech.
Two months ago, on the morning of November 12, 2015, David Shoebridge, Member of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly, was present at my public hearing at the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
The presence of Mr Shoebridge, who was working with the complainant Gary (a.k.a. Garry) Burns, shows that my cases are part of a political campaign. They are designed to deepen and strengthen homosexual vilification case law.  Possibly Mr Shoebridge was not aware of the type of sexually perverted behavior displayed by the Burns and Smith network, because it seems a very bad career move to be associated with such unsavory characters.
The hearing was attempting to make case law to support the notion that if a Christian calls homosexuality a sin then he or she is vilifying homosexual persons.    In effect, they are trying to develop complex case-law to make certain Christian biblical teachings unlawful.
This hearing on November 12, more likely than not, is linked to the Tasmanian case, wherein the Catholic Bishops in that State have been called up by the Anti-Discrimination Board by a complainant, who is a Greens Party parliamentary candidate. The complaint was that a booklet the Bishops endorsed presented arguments against 'same sex marriage' that vilified homosexual persons.   
So far Burns has lodged 70 complaints against this blog and all have been referred to the civil court - the New South Wales Civil & Administrative Tribunal.
I would hate to think of how many millions of dollars of Australian taxpayer’s money have been wasted on this political campaign to unsuccessfully silence only one blog.  The problem for the tribunal is that in Australia under our Constitution we have the implied right of political discourse.   The presence of Shoebridge at my hearing shows that we are involved in a political struggle here.  
The referrals by the Anti Discrimination Board are designed to make homosexual vilification case law in New South Wales, Australia.
I am the perfect case-law 'donkey' because I have no legal, financial or social resources with which to defend myself, until recently.   
This homosexual vilification case law is predominately designed to de-link homosexuality from pedophilia.  This is important because pedophilic acts are a crime in Australia but homosexual acts between two adults are no longer a crime.  
What is legally significant is that the persons who are being used to lodge homosexual vilification complaints against this blog, appear to have pedophilic tendencies, judging by the above prima facie evidence in the offending Facebook page.  However, they self-declare themselves, without evidence, to be 'homosexual' for which there is no legal definition in the New South Wales Anti Discrimination Act that specifically addresses 'homosexual vilification'.  
Based on the case law being developed through this campaign against me, once a person has been accepted as 'homosexual' by the authorities, it will be legally impossible for that person to also be a 'pedophile' or have any erotic pedophilic interests of the kind as illustrated on the above offensive Facebook page. That is because the case law being set up will entrench the principle that, in effect, a person cannot be a 'homosexual pedophile'. A person can only be one or the other, either a 'homosexual' or a 'pedophile', but not both categories at the same time.
For anyone (such as an alleged young male victim) to make such an allegation that a person is a 'gay pedophile', it will be deemed 'homosexual vilification' and unlawful.
This case law is very dangerous, for it will have the effect of providing legal cover and protection for pedophiles who operate as a protected species called 'homosexual'.
The law is an ass, for we do not know what 'homosexual' means, in a legal sense.
You will notice that on page 10/18 of the above linked pedophilic Facebook pages, there is a comment by a person by the name of Jeremy (a.k.a. Jez) Smith.  This person is the web page administrator and friend of the above-mentioned Gary (a.k.a. Garry) Burns who has lodged all 70 complaints against myself as owner of this blog.  
This person, Smith, thinks it is funny to make very perverted and pedophilic comments in relation to a real young boy, aged maybe 9 or 10, sitting on a toy pony.  Concerns about the welfare of this little boy have been expressed to the Commonwealth Police of Australia, as recommended by the child protection group Brave Hearts in Brisbane Australia.  
Now I ask any ordinary reasonable person, after looking at the above homosexual activist's offensive Facebook page, would they allow any one of these characters in the network to get a job at a kindergarten looking after their children?  Of course not!
The irony here is that on January 31, 2013, Gary (a.k.a. Garry) Burns lodged a homosexual vilification complaint against a well-respected grandmother who resides in the town of Lake Bolac, Victoria.   And what did the grandmother say to get her into great trouble with the homosexual political lobby?  She said this.  "I don't want gays, lesbians or pedophiles to be working in my kindergarten."   I say that is a perfectly reasonable and understandable statement, if it comes from any responsible parent or grand-parent.  It is a statement of what is called The Precautionary Principle. Yet the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal upheld the complaint that this grandmother vilified homosexual persons!  This decision that broke new ground in homosexual vilification law is named Burns v Corbett [2013] NSWADT 227
Evidence like this gives credence to the opinions being expressed that operatives within the Anti-Discrimination Board of New South Wales and within the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal are attempting to set up homosexual vilification case-law that has the effect of allowing pedophiles to hide under the protected label 'homosexual'.
References:  
  1. Paul Joseph Watson talks about the ideology driving those who want to normalize pedophilia.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCUjZzuMQq8
  2. David Shoebridge, the Member of Parliament representing the Greens Party, who attended my political trial on November 12, 2015. https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/members.nsf/V3AllMembers/3127
  3. Bernard Gaynor, parliamentary candidate in Queensland, talks about Gary (a.k.a. Garry) Burns' Facebook friend Peter Tatchell. http://bernardgaynor.com.au/peter-tatchell-why-the-paedophiles-love-him/
  4. What is meant by The Homosexual Agenda. http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda
  5. What is meant by the Precautionary Principle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle
  6. The following ABC Four-Corners program shows why we must not allow the homosexual political lobby groups and their backers in the judiciary to de-link pedophilia from 'homosexuality'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xufh8XysHJ4
  7. This decision of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) makes it unlawful, in effect, to criticize 'gay dads' of the type reported in the abovementioned ABC Four-Corners program. https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/558b3c8ee4b0f1d031de9eb8
  8. Here is a link to the above-mentioned Burns v Corbett decision. https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/54a63b1f3004de94513db271
  9. Gary (a.k.a. Garry) Burns has been trying to de-link homosexuality from pedophilia for 10 years. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/02/1078191330293.html?from=storyrhs
  10. The precedents made in Burns v Sunol cases are a threat to freedom of speech to aid the Homosexual Agenda. https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/burns-v-sunol/
  11. The Green Agenda is to remove the religious exemptions from the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 & 1993 homosexual vilification amendment http://nsw.greens.org.au/search/node/same%20sex%20Marriage
  12. NSW Homosexual villification ammendment to the 1977 Anti Discrimination Act: put forth by Clover Moore, the then member for Bligh, on the 17th November 1993. Ms, Moore is currently the Lord Mayor Sydney, http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LC19931117022
  13.                                A list of all the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal cases that have been brought against myself as owner of this blog         http://www.johnsunol.blogspot.com.au/2015/04/lists-of-my-tribunal-cases-burns-vs.html                                                               


Post a Comment