The definition needs to be changed to: A homosexual is a person who
does sexual acts with the member of the same sex, and only ever to those
people over the legal age of consent for sex or prostitution. This is clearly a better definition that what we have now: "A homosexual is a [male or female] homosexual" leaves what just is a homosexual and what they aren't undefined. This would also ensure children can't legally be homosexuals because they are too young to do gay sex acts or to be obsessed with wanting to do them.
This is a thought experiment, because though it's medically proven that pedophilia is more common among the gay demographic, lets pretend we put this legal fiction created by Garry himself that 'gays can never be pedophiles' pushed into case law by the NSW ADB enshrined in an amendment to the Anti-Discrimination act and see what will happen when we enforce the legal fiction fairly considering the body of case law pedophilia normalization activist Garry Burns has created under the gay rights banner.
Some interesting things will happen....
1) Garry Burns would be ineligible to sue you, me or anyone else,
because we are now in possession of evidence (leaked emails) he hires
underage Melbourne CraigsList Rent Boy Teen Prostitutes whilst visa
sponsoring Sri-Lankan gay men to live in the country. Immigration
confirms there are gay-partner visas, but no gay-orgy-partner visas
and by immigration law Garry Burns is ineligible to sponsor other men
to come into the country if he can't have an exclusive sexual
relationship with them. You can see more information on this if you
Google "Luke Ledgerd McKee". We are in possession of the forwarded (not hacked) email
pictures of Garry's penis he spammed us with as well as the teen
prostitute's ass spread-eagled as Garry Burns was doing contact
negations with a boy 3 times younger than him to have anal sex with, treating the teen as only a peace of meat to have sodomy with. Garry Burns is "bigcutcock" on Manhunt.net and "AussieRoo" on the Sri Lankan gay dating website where he picked up his rent-a-spouse to keep him busy between rentboy interludes.
Why should Luke get 5 years jail for the crime of merely knowing (i.e. obtaining personal information) he was a victim of a homo-cop hate crime that the NSW Anti-discrimination board president calls LAWFUL DISCRIMINATION just like Rosa Parks was lawfully discriminated against in her time for not getting to the back of the bus? (60C NSW Crimes Act) Gays may commit hate crimes to others, as heterosexuals are not a protected group. These bias related hate crimes by law the ADB can't investigate even include murder, arson or perverting the course of justice like Kate Howe did in Luke McKee's case - 14 years jail - and the ADB can't investigate the serious discrimination complaint because by law gays can't unlawfully discriminate when they do it - it's lawful - if someone who is not gay does it is a crime! One law for them another law for US, but if you hate fag-bigoted gay apartheid, they will call you a bigot, and go after your family members as was the case for Luke & I. It does not compute! http://bit.ly/aurefugee2 https://www.scribd.com/document/252658925/Luke-Mckee-Final-Submission-to-Operation-Prospect-Inquiry
The then gay rights spokesperson for the Greens Lee Rhiannon at the law's [60C] inception said only corrupt police would use the law. When only NSW Police GLLO homocops did, the Greens dropped their own human rights agenda and redacted press releases against the law, because what was human rights abuse if heterosexuals used the law, but becomes right proper and an expression of gay power if authoritarian gays with guns, (aka http://facebook.com/policeglbti) use the law. Greens hypocrisy knows no bounds. I've even seen a video of Lee Rhiannon demanding the "Homophobic Scott Morrison" must give an an infant sex porn lover FBI child porn fugitive Matthew Hydn, a gay marriage activist who only became famous as one whilst on-the-run as sex-offender fugitive MUST give his gay sex Muslim photographer boyfriend a visa even though the paki was an illegal over-stayer therefore ineligible to marry without first returning to his home country. And she did all this whilst screaming at the top of her lungs outside the Sydney Immigration Building.
The government gave in to the Greens demands that global Interpol registered (since 2013) pedophile fugitives can select their 3rd-world buddies of their choice to come over and live among our children, even still after the visa sponsor is in jail Paki Photographer of choice, of the baby infant sex child porn fugitive is in Australia and a ABC/SBS Gay Marriage activist super-star. And Like Mark Netwon and Peter Truong ABC/4ZZZ praises him weekly. You'll notice the video embedded on SBS's AUS gov news page was redacted after Mr McKee's activism by the pedophile suspect who doesn't like any attention he previously craved after being outed.
But he saved a copy of the mad trans-humanist gay scientist who loves anal sex with infants and his paki photographer boyfriend circumventing immigration law to kick out overstaying illegal scum through gay power. This isn't the first time Luke McKee saw this either, why do you think he's a refugee in the first place (for the backstory see this video his father did before his dad was sued too
Immigration has a gay manager on the tip-off line so you can't even complain about this child safety concern and immigration breech of visa conditions ("Character Concerns") issue and have it recorded. That's right it's hate speech to air concerns about a jailed pedophiles boyfriend still in Australia because he claims to be a gay rights activist, but not only that the fact they were in a relationship together when the infant sex porn was downloaded. How many children need to be gay anal raped for this gay loving political correctness and inaction to stop before we can get on with fixing this problem? Knowing how this works, you wouldn't be surprised to learn that EVERY PEDOPHILE would want to be a high-ranking gay rights activist as it is a very effective shield from arrest at the highest levels. Even FBI fugitives have successfully tried it for a time. Nobody wants to arrest a close friend of the Mayor of Brisbane right? It works! Just get the ABC Leftist Government TV/Radio to sponsor their child abuse and you'll be able to get more kids with the authorities too scared to even question you, because an army of gays will complain.
Remember Gay news in Australia also complained when the Gay Rights Activist Baby Anal Rapists Mark Newton and Peter Truong had their child removed by authorities too!
^^ That's right even after having their child abuse victim being taken away from them they used the Leftist Fairfax Sydney Morning Herald Gay Reporter David Marr to strike back in the defense of all gay dads baby rapists!
So it worked for Mark Newton and Peter Truong too. Also 130,000 gays said this infant sex lover @slurptea1 Matthew Hydn needs to get his foreign paki photographer boyfriend a visa. How could so many gays support an FBI infant anal sex lover child porn fugitive in Australia? Ah yes, the gay rights movement and George Takei of Star Trek told them to support the pedophiles on Facebook. The Great Gay Activist George Takei after being contacted on the phone/twitter by a Washington Times McCain reporter could not say sorry for intervening in an Australian politics demanding a infant anal sex porn lover have his wish granted to have his Muslim Photographer Ali Choundhry get a visa. That's right Star-Trekkie Sulu aka George Takei is an' unrepentant supporter of baby anal sex lovers, and one of the world's greatest gay rights activists! Why is it so hard for him to say "Oops - I praised baby rapists just like Ginger Gorman did too I'm so sorry it won't happen again". But no, in his mind he did nothing wrong, because being gay he knows what being a homosexual is better than most, and what desires it's inclusive of: young boys, just like Garry a fellow "gay rights activist" has as evident from his leaked emails. The NSW Civil and Administrative tribunal accepted in every one of his cases "he is a homosexual". Evidence suggests he's is also a boylover. So there is no difference between the two?
The problem is so big it mustn't even be acknowledged is the strategy he and the Anti-Discrimination Board / media are employing. George Takei mixed is gay rights activism up with the interests of infant sodomizing pedophile ring and it's a crime of homosexual vilification to call him out on it! The NSW Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 - amended by crypt-lesbian Lord Mayor of Sydney "Clover No Moore" only protects pedophiles and those who support their interests.
Garry is very close to Clover Moore of 36 Kepos Street Redfern who made the homosexual vilification law come into existence and he even worked as her staffer. Her legacy too is normalizing pedophilia.
The core interests of gay rights and pedophiles are one and the same: "Let's get custody of young boys." That's all they write about all day in their pornographic texts, or so I've been told. Allegedly the only difference is what happens next, but I strongly doubt it. There a cluster of gay dads in the blue mountains, where Garry likes to go party. Like in the 'fictional' texts they dream of a utopia and isolated communities (a cult) where all in it are accept boy-love.
Robert Stacy McCain's the journalist who broke the Mainstream news cover-up of the gay marriage activist they praised only a year before being arrested for being a infant sex porn sex fugitive had his twitter account was censored against shortly after exposing all this! #FreeStacy
Ali Choundhry and Matthew Hydn were a couple when the baby anal sex child porn was downloaded according to their own statements to immigration yet immigration lets Ali stay. If that isn't "Character Concerns" I don't know what is. @AliRChoundhry ran from twitter when this was exposed rather than defend himself, because like we do he's on borrowed time in Australia now.
http://theothermccain.com/2016/05/14/australian-gay-marriage-crusader-was-fugitive-wanted-on-kiddie-porn-charge/ <- See all comments.
The first arrest warrant for Luke McKee in exile was fabricated by the Boylover Garry Burns as obtained by NSW Police FOI, because Luke McKee did have and still has evidence to charge Catherine Burns with a Malicious prosecution (60C), and her pedophile associate was only giving back for the protection she gives. This was confirmed by NSW Police FOI Unit itself.
Remember Under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977, with provisions added in 1993 by former Garry Burns Clover Moore employer only a "homosexual" can lodge a complaint about any "homosexual" (not even themselves) being vilified. Garry Burns wouldn't qualify as a decent or qualified "homosexual" as the first Gay Marriage activist on National TV after Keven Rudd Announced Gay Marriage because his sexual partners are not always over the agent of consent, or at least the age for Gay Rent-boy prostitution if this amendment was made to the Anti-Discrimination Act to define what a homosexual is and what a homosexual isn't.
2) All of his case law would be invalidated on appeal on that point alone,
he's NOT GAY! He's something else far more disgusting. Then of course there is the "Garry Burns Sparkles The Pony" incident involving a young Queensland boy. http://bit.do/sparklesthepony (<- link so popular the content went down)
3) All the case law that said it's wrong to criticize people like Mark Newton and Peter Truong who did rape Russian babies wouldn't qualify as homosexual vilification anymore and be successfully appealed. This would stop homosexual vilification law being used to protect gay marriage activists who had
anal sex with children by their allies like Garry Burns. Garry Burns own associate Rodney Chaing-Cruise of Gay Dads Australia who he meets on a regular basis praised Mark Newton and Peter Truong before their arrest whilst they had custody of the baby boy they were sodomizing, before 40 years jail for infant sodomy. None of Mark Newton's and Peter Truong's pedophile associates in Australia were arrested. They do exist according to US Supreme Court documents. Ginger Gorman on the employ of the taxpayer deleted only her 2010 tweets to protect the pedophile ring that suggested Pete and Truong come on her radio program "gender on the agenda".
Garry Burns says if you vilify gay Marriage Activists in his own circle of friends praised as gay icons who rape children you vilify all gays, because he has successfully argued homosexuality is inclusive of pedophile activists who must not be disrespected even after the child rape charges. Remember his own associates said they were 'gay inspirations' before the were arrested.
To link to a youtube video that only vilifies Newton and Truong is just plain
old gay bashing (http://www.theherald.com.au/story/3172166/ex-cabbie-told-to-stop-gay-bashing/ Notice the date - June 25th 2015), because Newton and Truong are special "homosexuals" with special rights not just plain old
pedophiles, which is exactly what Peter Truong's lawyer said in an email this year, he identifies as a "homosexual" not "pedophile" and is seeking a second California taxpayer funded appeal. The Newcastle Herald's article combined with the FACT that I John Sunol linked to (http://tinyurl.com/abcplugspedos and did nothing more) clearly states IF YOU LINK TO CONTENT CRITICIZE GAY MARRIAGE ACTIVISTS RAPING BABIES, OTHER PEOPLES WORDS AGAINST THE BABY RAPISTS IN COMMENTS WILL BE FALSELY ATTRIBUTED TO YOU, AND THE TARGET OF THOSE COMMENTS RE-ATTRIBUTED TO "GAY BASHING" ALL GAYS. THIS IS CLEARLY CRIMINAL DEFAMATION NCAT IS ENGAGING AGAINST ME AND MR MCKEE. THIS IMPLIES AT LEAST WAKEFIELD WHO DEFAMED ME IN SUPPORT OF PEDOPHILES AND THE NEWCASTLE HERALD SEND A STRONG MESSAGE BABY ANAL SEXERS AND GAYS IN GENERAL ARE ONE AND THE SAME WHEN YOU PUT IN CONTEXT THE MATERIAL I ACTUALLY LINKED TO CITED IN THE CASE LAW (i.e. http://tinyurl.com/abcplugspedos).
That's the Newcastle Herald showing us that the words that baby rapists and gay can be used interchangeably, or the new precedent that once someone is known as a baby rapist, they still are a gay man that must not be disrespected by order of queer judges. And of course the big one, the gay community is inclusive of and defensive of the baby rapists in their midst, and the state will prosecute anyone who sounds alarm bells with 1.7% of the population (US CDC) doing 35% of all child abuse (Bravehearts inc Australia). What a brave new world! Think about that!
Discrimination can be a beautiful act of love for children, if gays were not allowed to adopt, buy, human traffic children no doubt the accessibility of kids to 10% of the pedophile minority who do 3.5x times more child abuse per pedophile than their heterosexual counterparts on average would be greatly impeded. But no, as we'll see the elite says the needs of gay men should be put above the needs of children [not to be raped by the queer demographic] and anyone who dissents against this relatively new "gay dads" social experiment increasing child abuse statistics worldwide must not interfere. Remember 40 years ago, were there any cases of gay dads incestual baby rape from near birth, where the rapists could walk the street and go on national TV with their victim, like Newton and Truong? This is clearly a modern invention.
Angelyn Gates Peter Truong's lawyer sent that email to the special prosecutor Steve Debrota who put Peter in jail for 40 years, the very same who watched the Gay Dads "boycuddule2"
infant anal sex videos talked about here on the US Supreme Court Website:
AND SAID PETER TRUONG NOW IDENTIFIES AS HOMOSEXUAL NOT A PEDOPHILE. WHAT AUDACITY FROM AN UNREPENTANT PEDOPHILE!
(you should see the reply!)Angelyn,
I am hoping your client can make a public statement condemning a paedophilia normalization activist twitter.com/garryburnsblog successfully arguing in court that Peter Truong must not be a "vilified" for what he did to that 22 month old Russian infant.
My family risks loosing it's house for the crime of homosexual vilification of boylover.net members.
Here is my 70 year old University professor (gamckee.com's) legal document site http://scribd.com/smokehaze and mine is at scribd.com/luke_mckee
In addition to my father being prosecuted for gay dads baby rape hate crime (crime not loving child sex as ruled by this gay judge who admits he represents pedophile here:http://www.holmanwebb.com.au/
blog/how-is-the-royal- commission-into-institutional- responses-to-child-sex-abuse- relevant-to-health-care- providers
John Sunol is getting the same wrap from the same "NCAT Member" with the authority of a judge and no legal training, no rules of evidence in his tribunal (www.ncat.nsw.gov.au). The court's most recent John Sunol decision is publishing pictures of my mother in case law to persecute my family and is not publishing my father's full comment including a video about Peter Truong.
au/decision/ 570ecd62e4b05f2c4f04ce8d <- my mother's picture is in there.
This is the case law relating to your client: https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.
And the appeal was blocked too!
See the video cited in the case law goes back to an ABC video about your client you have already seen that has been deemed a crime to link to , because hiding away in the comments are some small snippets of text that dare critize those who have sex with infants.
A few things.
First, I don't know what ABC did with any statement of Mr Truong. But I believe nothing Mr Truong said to them is a crime.
Second, it seems to me that your situation and cases are civil not criminal. So your reference to crimes and "criminal" are confusing.
Third, I don't have any idea what you think you know about Mr Truong or his case but from the little you say it seems ill informed.
Fourth, Mr Truong is not a pedophile.
Fifth, it seems like you and/or your father or blog or whatever, are anti gay marriage and perhaps anti gay activists. My client is gay. There is no chance that he would want to align himself with people who seem to hate gay men. Makes no sense to me.
And lastly, regardless of all of this, Mr. Truong is in no position to make statements about events in Australia.
So neither he nor I can do anything to assist you or the court from what I can tell.
556 S. Fair Oaks Avenue
Pasadena CA 91105
Luke's dad is being prosecuted for implying he is GAY, not just a pedophile as Garry Burns says in court. I thought if you identify as gay you are gay right? This just shows how boned NCAT is right now!
Even Lesbian Journalist Carol Melrum-Hanna at the ABC confirms the "boycuddle2" alias used in graphic descriptions of acts of sodomy with infants on the justice.gov link above belongs Peter Truong, who Wakefield says must not be vilified because he is a "homosexual".
You really should for the shock value alone read the graphic descriptions of the gay dads baby rape on the US SUPREME COURT website that Gay Judge Wakefield says you must not dissent against and judge for yourself, has he outed himself as a pedophile fellow "boylover" by making this ruling that to insult boylover.net members Peter Truong and Matthew Newton insults all gays that are one and the same as boylover.net's membership?
That's right Geoff McKee is being prosecuted for saying Mark Netwon and Peter Truong are "gay dads" just like the ABC only in a different spot on the time-line, and not different to Peter Truong says he's gay not pedophile HE's GAY from behind bars. You can look up where he is at bop.gov's inmate finder. Florida last time I checked.
4) Anyone who is gay could file a complaint against anyone who has
praised pedophiles as homosexuals, or said homosexuals are pedophiles,
knowingly OR UNKNOWINGLY (see below due to precedent and case law)
5) Ginger Gorman who praised Mark Newton and Peter Truong would be
guilty of Homosexual vilification. She said PEDOPHILES CAN BE GAY
"People who abuse children come in all shapes and sizes. They are gay,
they are straight. They are everything in between. The only label you
can possibly categorize them with is 'evil'." BUT that's not the only
6) Ginger Gorman would also face extra charges of homosexual
vilification for her original story praising convicted pedophiles "Two
Dads Are Better Than One"
Even today, Mark Newton and Peter Truong and their child victim are used as symbols of Gay Pride on Gay Activist's websites (Yawningbread.wordpress.com Alex Au).
The first appeal against this perverse decision that normalizes pedophilia by criminalizing dissent against it was was blocked by Anne Briton, because she too thinks it's a just judgement to say we not to vilify those who have sex with children, because child rapists in her opinion too must be respected both before and after being caught for acts of child sexual abuse. Why? They said "I AM GAY" (I am a [NSW ADB] protected species [pedophile]) on national radio, therefore they can do no wrong ever in the eyes of the NSW Tribunals (but not the US Supreme Court - Oops!).
Uncensored Image of Gay Dads baby rape victim uploaded by most famous Gay Marriage Activist In Singapore, first to open a gay orgy bar in that country 8 months after the child rapists arrests. Wordpress says its homophobic to request the child rape victim's image be removed, and that that boy grow up seeing a picture of him being used to further the cause of those who sodomized him as a baby.
Again that's another example of a gay marriage activist doing homosexual vilification under the new definition of homosexuality.
Why Is Ginger Gorman Liable to prosecution?
This is because the confirmed gay NCAT member adjudicating my case who
said it's a crime of homosexual vilification to link to http://tinyurl.com/
not directed against homosexuals in general, but against the content of the video they were commenting on, i.e. Mark Netwon and Peter Truong the gay marriage activists who have sex with infants, ironically featuring Ginger Gorman speaking about them being "Gay Dads". I truthfully claimed I didn't know or didn't read the full YouTube description that includes a link to a Child Safety Activist and former homosexual's of
InternationalChildrensRights.com Robert Oscar Lopez's PHD paper "Same
Sex Marriage is Child Abuse"-> http://www.thepublicdiscourse.
aka as Wakefield writes it up:
- The sixth post says “read the thesis gay marriage is child abuse – last link. It describes gays saying exactly what you said”. The target of the publication is homosexual parties to gay marriage. The words convey that parties to a gay marriage engage in child abuse. The language is abusive and imputes serious criminal conduct. The words are not mere insults or invective or abuse but in our view have the effect of urging or prompting among ordinary internet users at large hatred towards or serious contempt for or severe ridicule of parties to a same sex marriage by reason of the substantial contributing factor of their homosexuality.
And anyone who puts children above gay dads, and anyone who links to his writing must be prosecuted! That's the ruling from gay Judge Wakefield!
The gay judge Alexander Wakefield also ruled, it's a crime of homosexual vilification to link to a youtube channel that in it's description links to a website made by a former gay man and child safety activist who was abused as a child by lesbians - but that is wrong the judge said in his June 25th decision, because he implies a gays rights must always be put above the free speech and redress rights a child abuse victim to talk about their life experiences, and child abuse victims of gay pedophiles even when they grow up and
become tenured professors at University (http://www.huffingtonpost.
This makes a new subclass of child abuse victims,
as wards of the state, children of single parents and other children
of unfortunate circumstances relating to their upbringing have the
right to complain about their childhood, but children of gay parents
can never say anything was wrong for them as a child. Gay Judge
Wakefiled therefore ruled children of gay parents when they grow up
must say "Everything was awesome" in Rainbow family land even when if it wasn't.
The key factor in this and other decisions from NCAT, Wakefield and his buddies said it is irrelevant if I didn't know (and have intent) I was linking to a youtube page that linked on to ex-gay now child safety activist's website and article now deemed a hate speech site against "homosexuals" (if inclusive of pedophiles). Most people when they link to a video link to a video, and don't even read all the comments or full description. Wakefield says everytime you link to a video you could be liable if convicted pedophiles are not respected in the hundreds of comments you ignored under the video, or the text in it's expanded description. So to prevent being sued, and appease Gay Lord Wakefield and avoid liability that I found existed every time you use a youtube link chant to yourself "I love Child sex" scanning ALL youtube comments and their links for possible content that is critical of pedophiles, and self-censor posting the link if anything comes up. How is this feasible? Are you friggen kidding me?
He said it was hate speech to have the title "Same Sex Marriage is Child abuse" hidden away on a YouTube video description people have to click on an expand button to even see that I did link to and didn't even write, yet didn't even factor in the link it went to, that describes emotional and other abuses that was done to Robert Oscar Lopez Phd by his lesbian parents.
The "abuse" described in that article wasn't only about child sex but Wakefield in his decision assumed it was with his case of pedophilia on the brain, either that or he simply can't read the source material given to him with Robert Oscar Lopez PHD's article's link next to those words.
Wakefield who ruled a link was relevant if I linked to it and attributed all Luke McKee's and other 3rd parties comments on that youtube channel as my own - also ruled a link next to that text "same sex marriage is child abuse" on the youtube video's description wasn't relevant, along with the background on it's author being ex-gay child safety advocate who wrote that article "Same Sex Marriage is Child abuse?"
Therefore, This is the case of a gay judge saying formally in a court ruling you must only judge a book by it's cover, or title not by it's complete content if someone links to it, yet in the same judgement ruling that if you link to something you are responsible for ALL the 3rd party's content. This is a big inconsistency.
How can these two legal opinions be published in the same judgement if the judge wasn't an incompetent baboon?
This is either incompetence, or extreme fag bigotry. Why not go to the YouTube video in question cited in case law as a crime to link to and see fir yourself it's only targeted towards gay marriage activists who rape infants http://tinyurl.com/abcplugspedos (not modified since upload).
I linked to this video in 2014, and Robert Oscar Lopez PhD wasn't a big name, but during the course of Wakefield's over year long taxpayer funded deliberations, Robert Oscar Lopez became something really big.
The greatest argument against the same sex marriage in the US Supreme Court case was "SAME SEX MARRIAGE IS CHILD ABUSE" and the main witness giving an AMICI CURIAE was none other than Robert Oscar Lopez PHD. This case against me gave a rare-outlet to an Australian homosexual judge who says "with respect to gay activists" every second breath in the court room an opportunity to criminalize opposition to same sex marriage, and be an undemocratic tyrannical fag bigot and join on legal proceedings in this US Supreme Court case by ruling American men raised by lesbians, who turned their back on the new-age-faith of sodomy handed down to them by their gay parents a heretic to the religious issue of gay power and write them up homophobes of the highest order in Australian case law. It's a very loose definition of homophobe he has if someone who tried gay sex can be a homophobe. Next stop they'll sue self-hating-conservative queers right?
Sweet Cakes by Melissa who were being persecuted by a homosexual judge too, Brad Avakian who in turn is on the payroll of Terry Bean. Terry Bean is the same guy that NCAT's member Anne Briton says it hate speech to link to content disrespecting him after he too was charged with sodomizing a young 17 year old boy (that boysex would have been legal in Australia land of pedophilia normalization). Also have a listen to Garry Burns argue for legal 16 year old boysex on tape when it was still a crime, and then later say only pedophiles (like him) would have done such a thing after the fact, in effect coming out as a pedophile according to the benchmark Garry set himself: http://www.renegadebroadcasting.com/twos-company-threes-allowed-luke-mckee-4-7-16/
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/08/6065/ <- Growing up with Two Moms the Untold Children's View - Lopez.
That's right the strongest Arguments against Gay Marriage in the US SCOTUS supreme court decision is 1) Gay Parents Abusing Children (Lopez) 2) Authoritarian Homosexual "Victimization" law being used to persecute those not compatible with the US 1st Amendment to the Constitution in it's first use outside the jurisdiction of NSW Australia (Klein)
The patron saint of Homosexual Victimization law (crime of speaking out after being accused of vilifying gay pedophiles like I have) in America is a man Terry Bean who sponsors the gay judge Brad Avakian to be elected through Basic Rights Oregon who calls him their founder a "Queer Hero". That's the same gay judge that ruled against the Kleins. I, John Sunol have been prosecuted for linking to content that is critical of Terry Bean being charged for sodomizing a 17 year old boy, an act that is not legal in America by NCAT defending their sister court and only other jurisdiction we know of in the world to use Homosexual Vilification law - the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry (BOLI).
You will notice that NCAT cropped out the newspaper article saying the same "offensive" stuff that Luke McKee said in the images on their case law. They had the picture of Terry Bean flying on Air Force one With Obama. I later found out that the other man pictured above also charged with sodomy in the first degree was on the plane with Obama too according to the child abuse victim's statement, leaked by Steve Myers a journalist who was fired for taking the story too far. They also like putting up pictures of Luke McKee's mother the real enemy when there is no need to, yet they don't want to link to the ACTUAL page that includes pictures of Mark Netwon and Peter Truong. Garry argues in court transcripts the video wasn't even on his father's causes comment. You see the web archived page - the video is the title of the page for god's sake.
Notice the title of that page "TNRA: ABC Ginger Goreman's puff piece" using gay dads' rape victim to promote "rainbow families" · Causes". That's the same causes.com/posts video autoplay link Garry gave to the Anti-Discrimination board, yet he argues in court for unprecedented 3rd sitting day that Luke's dad's comment has nothing to do with the youtube video with the same title. He also swore under oath he never saw this video in court, even though it Auto-plays on Causes link he submitted to the ADB. In Correspondence he sent to Hereward Fenton of Truth News Radio Australia before swearing in court he never saw the video, he mentioned the upload date of the Video that is only visible on youtube.com - again another website that auto-plays the video. This is evidence of boylover perjury he did will be used in another contempt of tribunal a prosecution in due course. Yes there are already others laying charges against for contempt of court, criminal state sponsored ADB extortion, and possibly pedophilia.
That clearly Internet Archive cached causes page clearly shows this video about Mark Netwon and Peter Truong was embedded. Who will the gay judge believe? Boylover Garry Burns perjury it wasn't there or the reality that is self-evident on the internet? He's left his decision in reserve for over 2 years holding up the case that will shut down homosexual vilification law so more people can be prosecuted in the mean time. McKee vs Burns destroys the Corbett decision and most other homosexual vilification case law ever filed in Australia, hence the hold up.
Garry and his gay judge mate even prosecutes me for comments I put on his blog, after which he pressed the I APPROVE OF THIS COMMENT AND I WANT TO MAKE IT A PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE AND A PUBLIC ACT SO I CAN SUE JOHN SUNOL BUTTON, and then runs of to NCAT to get a gay judge to agree with him the comment he now doesn't approve of gay vilified butt-hurt him so bad he needs some free money. That's nothing. The extortion prosecution is coming up. How many 10k donations did he get to his bank account saying give me the cash or I will use my corrupt NCAT buddies to sue you - look what happened to Sunol. Pay up or you will be next! We have his finances!
Wakefield and Garry are there to stand up for Peter Truong and Mark Newton rights as "homosexuals" not to be vilified as they in order to uphold the decision against me that maintains baby rapists can be homosexuals and they must be shown respect even after being found and pleading guilty to having anal sex with a baby.
Speaking of showing respect, the number of times Wakefield said "With Respect to [the boylover] Garry Burns" in the transcripts are beyond a joke. The institutionalized bias towards pedophilia normalization activists is obvious to anyone who reads them.
They are therefore the biggest homophobes in this story, not me John Sunol. They bring shame and disgrace on the gay rights movement more than any critic of it could, by making the formal ruling in case law: homosexuality is inclusive of boylover pedophiles jailed for 40 years, who by law the rest of us must respect and not vilify.
You should see what Other Australian journalists said about these published gay rights activists in the Russian documentary SODOM. Yet why is only little old me being prosecuted? I am no John Laws as the Newcastle Hearld put it when Garry had his first win against me with Public Interest Law Clearing house lawyers who were there from the beginning when Henry Collier filed the first landmark homosexual vilification case in world history against me. I am an easy target to make pedophilia normalization case law because I can't properly defend myself. Why is the taxpayer paying for Garry Burns pedophilia normalization case law with free "public interest" lawyers through the piac.asn.au? They love as they put it "experimental law". It shows!
It was the consequences of the action - not any intent on your part Wakefield said in his June 25th and other NCAT decision. How says dare you link to that hate speech "gay marriage is child abuse" paper title wrote by an ex-gay child safety activist Robert Oscar Lopez.
So if a gay judge doesn't like it the 2000 year old legal principal of mens rae - criminal intent is thrown out the door! Oh The power of elite gay sexing judges above all living and dead in history brought to you by the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board's pedophilia normalization campaign and it's proxy Garry Burns.
So the same procedural fairness needs to be awarded to Ginger Gorman. You can't say you didn't know the inferences others would draw from your actions after the fact. Not having intent to make homosexuals look bad doesn't figure into it. So therefore Ginger Gorman is guilty of homosexual vilification, if she was to be treated equally to me.
So Ginger Gorman even though she had no intent to praise gay dads baby rapists pedophiles, is guilty of associating homosexuality with pedophilia after the fact. Unless leftist ABC journalists are not
going to be treated equally to me, someone who has diminished mental capacity due to an injury and shouldn't be in court without legal representation, as I'm just a pastie to easily get pushed through new homosexual vilification law she should be prosecuted too.Like I didn't know I what was in the description of the youtube video I linked to because I copied and pasted from Luke McKee) Ginger Goreman allegedly didn't know she was praising boylover.net members saying it was homophobic to oppose them getting kids. Ginger Goreman is a Dutch Jew just like the founder of the Boylover.net network and was working for the state broadcaster in Holland when the boylover.net network was at it's peak, and just managed to come back to Australia and find pedophiles linked to a Dutch Jew ran pedophile ring. What a co-incidence eh?
6) Because of this I believe the Greens David Shoebridge MP who goes into
court with Garry Burns November 10th 2015 supporting him for prosecuting
me for linking to someone else's blog (Luke McKee) would probably OPPOSE
legislation that takes away the rights of convicted gay pedophiles to
have the same rights as regular homosexuals not to be "vilified".
Let's see if we can take this thought experiment further by getting Fred Nile to make a private members bill to stop pedophiles using homosexual vilification law, as highlighted by this case!
However, Once it is proven in court Garry Burns is a pedophile, all the homosexual vilification case
law he has created has been invalidated including the first such case in Australia - Burns vs Dye And Sunol vs Collier. We have his emails. We have the proof. It's in our interest to define homosexuality isn't inclusive of pedophilia and then see people who unwillingly praise gay pedophiles be prosecuted.
Gay judge Wakefield has recently removed this paper (included below) from his law-firm's (Holeman Webb) website where he says he works with pedophiles representing them at the Royal Commission into institutionalized responses to child sexual abuse, all parents should pay more insurance money with their school fees, to pay
hush money to keep adult child abuse victims out of the criminal justice system, instead going through the arbitration society which he heads.
After a Washington Times reporter Robert Stacy McCcain re-tweeted Luke
McKee (@vgb_opsec) talking about this paper he wrote, @NCATNSW who blocked Mr McKee was then notified and saw it, then immediately called Wakefield who deleted the blog post he made from his own lawfirm Holeman's web site within 24 hours of NCAT's notification US journalists were on the case. It's an admission of guilt he deleted the post, and we are in posession of evidence that proves he can't deny writing it now.
Fortunately the blog post of Wakefield's National Child Sex Lottery Cover-up Program, where if your child is abused you with the hushmoney was mirrored on another website.
Luke McKee has collaborated with Robert Stacy McCain on other occasions first attacking Garry Burns proven associate (from emails) he swears in court he doesn't know (perjury) who twitter follows him and visa versa.
@gaydads threatened Luke McKee's father with harm, a month later his associate Garry Burns started suing Geoff McKee for the same crime, disrespecting Mark Newton and Peter Truong infant sodomization.
http://www.truthnews.com.au/web/radio/story/cultural_marxism_101 (Geoff McKee Special Guest Hour #2)
^^ Yet another Australian gay Marriage activist pedophile demanding visa's for their foreign sex partner ^^
Nearly the whole Australian Football team didn't make it to the first day of to a Gay Football event because they were all detained for questioning because at least one of their members had agreed to have sex with a gay dads son in a FBI sting operation.
Wakefield also sat on a panel as a judge where the debate was titled
"Is arbitration is a way to cover things up!" No wonder he want's
child sexual abuse cases going through there.
(Moved location - website under maintenance in our possession now - you can search their members on their website and get the document for yourself)
@NCATNSW will have to try harder to destroy evidence of judicial bias
next time, like they delete audio from the November 10th hearing, and
then falsely attribute my comments in a judgement. Imagine if the
police deleted the audio or destroyed the statement of a confession
then got a conviction based on a confession. Only in Crooked corrupt
courts can these kind of things happen.
Just look at the NCAT Guardian Division - new cases every day of
convicted sex offenders arguing for the right to have a Working with
Children Clearance certificate. NCAT.nsw.gov.au is literally the court
of child sex normalization, staffed by gay judges, and it's not just
me saying it's the newspapers!
Wakefield lives in Sylvia with his adult Gay Male partner. He is a
homophobe by the new definition of what is a homosexual if we can put
it through and can be prosecuted for saying pedophiles have the same
rights as gays. That's not bad, people who do incest will soon have
gay rights said another gay judge scoutmaster!
7) Another suggestion would be to completely remove the legislation to
ensure pedophiles never have special powers to do state sanctioned and
paid for prosecutions by the lesbian feminist pedophilia Normalization
activists working at the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board. Australia
breaks it commitment to the United Nations that our tribunals must
treat ALL people equally regardless of sex, sexual preference race
etc. Only a "homosexual" whatever that means can claim homosexual
vilification. The hypothetical situation of a Gay Marriage activist
Burning down Fred Niles church couldn't be investigated as a hate
crime by the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board because by law it's lawful discrimination to discriminate against heterosexuals or do bias related crimes to them as heterosexuals are not a protected minority and fair game, at least under the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act NSW 1977 or if a biased Gay Police Officer is delegated to be officer in Charge, such as in Luke McKee's case.
Before Luke McKee's father was targeted by their ex-offico officer and Boylover Garry Richard Burns (his online stalker since 2009) he had this to say about the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board's extreme bigotry.
IF YOU DON'T LIKE PEDOPHILES HAVING THE SAME SPECIAL RIGHTS AS GAYS - SHUT THEM DOWN - SHUT THEM DOWN NOW BY ANY MEANS! PROTEST THE SPECIAL STAR CHAMBER TRIBUNAL AKA COURT OF CHILD SEX NORMALIZATION AKA The NSW Civil And Administrative Tribunal and their SISTER COAT.GOV.AU tribunals TODAY!
How is the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child SexAbuse Relevant to Health Care Providers?
Sep 4, 2015 11:37:00 AM / by John Wakefield
There has been recent media coverage in relation institutional
responses to child sexual abuse in schools, however, hospitals and
other health care providers who provide children’s health services
should also implement risk minimisation strategies.
Child safety strategies include:13
A statement of commitment to the safety and wellbeing of children and
the protection of children from harm;
A code of conduct for interacting with children and young people;
Recruitment, selection, training and management procedures for paid
employees and volunteers (including working with children checks);
Policies and procedures for handling disclosures and suspicions of
harm, including reporting guidelines;
A plan for managing breaches of the risk management strategy;
Risk management plans for high risk activities and special events;
Policies and procedures for compliance with legislation, including
regular reviews of the operation and effectiveness of the
organisation’s child safe policies and practices; and
Strategies for communication and support including:
1. written information for parents/carers, paid employees and
volunteers outlining the organisational child safe policies; and
2. training material for paid employees and volunteers to help them
identify risks of harm and handle disclosures.
The laws regarding working with children checks differ from state to
state. In some States, such as New South Wales, you are required to
have a working with children check if you have face to face contact
with children and work in children’s health services.14
However, this is not the case in all States, for example Victoria,
where, if you are supervised you do not need the working with children
The Royal Commission released its report on Working With Children
Checks on 17 August 2015, recommending a national approach. The Royal
Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse
commenced its public hearings in Sydney on 6 May 2015 to inquire into
a number of matters including:
1) The experience of a number of people who were sexually abused as children in:
a. private medical practices; and
b. private hospitals;
2) The experience of a number of complainants who made complaints
against a medical practitioner to the New South Wales Health Care
Complaints Commission (HCCC) and the then New South Wales Medical
3) The systems, policies, practices and procedures for receiving,
investigating and responding to complaints against medical
practitioners of child sexual abuse of:
a. the HCCC;
b. the Medical Council of New South Wales; and
c. the Royal North Shore Hospital;
4) The experience of an out-patient who alleged child sexual abuse by
a psychologist at the Royal North Shore Hospital, in the late 1960s;
5) The systems, policies and procedures of the Northern Sydney Local
Health District and the NSW Ministry of Health for preventing,
detecting and responding to child sexual abuse;
6) The experience of an in-patient who was allegedly abused by a
volunteer at Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne in the early 1980s;
7) The response of the Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, to an
allegation of child sexual abuse made against a hospital volunteer;
8) The systems, policies and procedures of the Royal Children’s
Hospital, Melbourne, for preventing, detecting and responding to child
Persons believing they have a direct or substantial interest in the
scope and purpose of the public hearing were invited to lodge written
applications for leave to appear at the public hearing by 22 April
2015. The hearings have for the moment concluded. One aspect of
institutional response is the way in which claims are dealt with by
the institutions. Many civil claims are being made well past the
limitation period for claims for damages for personal injury under
statute. Respondents are regularly requested not to rely on technical
defences and to agree on a process to allow such claims to be dealt
with on their merit. Claimants also regularly seek suspension of
limitation periods during the conduct of an agreed claims process.
Such process is aimed at resolving claims without recourse to
In appropriate circumstances, an agreed resolution process might
enable the parties to resolve abuse claims in ways which are
respectful and dignified and minimise the risk of re-traumatization
otherwise inherent in the adversarial process.
Insurance issues may also arise in respect of the acts of employees or
others for whom the principal might be vicariously liable by reason of
a non-delegable duty of care or otherwise or the costs involved in
directors and officers managing the claims process.
If a complaint or claim arises in relation to child sexual abuse,
consideration should be given to:
The question of any insurance cover and, if so, notification of the claim;
Consideration of liability as a principal, vicariously or otherwise;
Consideration of limitation or permanent stay issues; and
Subject to the above, consideration of a non-adversarial resolution of
Holman Webb Lawyers has recently acted for a number of religious
organisations and schools in relation to claims in connection with
child sexual abuse.
13 Queensland Commission for Children and Young People and Child
Guardian “Submission to the Royal Commission into Institutional
Responses to Child Sexual Abuse”, October 2103.
14 Section 6 of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012
(NSW). 15 Section 9 of the Working with Children Act 2005 (Vic).
15 Section 9 of the Working with Children Act 2005 (Vic).