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                                                               


Sparkles the Pony, a systematic look at Phedophelia





XXXXXXXXX

________________________________



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. (11) The Green Agenda is to remove the religious exemptions from the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 & 1994 homosexual vilification amendment http://nsw.greens.org.au/search/node/same%20sex%20Marriage
  12. NSW Homosexual villification ammendment put forth by Clover Moore in 1994 to the NSW parliament,  http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LC19931117022


____________________________________



This has been put up by Garry Burns and Jeramy Smith as he can't keep the 
evidence 

of his paedophile activity off the internet and John Sunol just posted it on his Scribd account:



http://filebin.ca/2TdepWwPIvjw/150911GaryBurnsretractionthreatandthreat.jpg


this is a systematic look at Phedophelia - this is the sort of play that Phedophiles use and I am afraid to say that NOT only the catholic church has Pedophelia in it. 

So has the homosexual lobby and other such groups which is far more prelevant than the Catholic church. This is the lifestyle and culture of those in the Pornography areas which the gay lobby live in - this is the culture of the gay lobby where as with the Catholic church, those who get involved are not doing so as part of their culture, it is just a few individuals who sin and create a dilemma for the whole church. Where as in the gay lobby the whole lobby are involved with this. 


Gay lifestyle revolves around parades like the Sydney Mardi Gras and those in the Pornography area which child Pornography is a major part of this. 

You Tubes on what can be deemed to be a

Pedophile

_______________________________

Eventhought it has been proven that the Catholic church did have some pedophelia, this was from some renegade priests only most of whome have been disciplined for this crime. 

Where as the homosexual lobby live in this area, Pedophelia is part of their culture and the whole lobby hide behind and use the catholic church with a few bad eggs in what is a good lot of people to show the church up. Whilst the whole gay and lesbian Culture is involved. 

People do not realise this and this is one of the reasons why I get taken to court, to shut me up which has failed so far


_____________________________


Garry B is NOT the problem, the problem is far bigger than just Garry B in the
 Burns vs Sunol cases. Garry is only a Patsy (or in more academic terms "Fall Guy"
using me as a cover up for the real party wanting to push their Left Wing Femenist polititics onto all Australians, I found out this as David Shoebridge turned up at the Burns vs Sunol cases on the 12th November 2015 which was over calling the definition of homosexuality sin an offence of villification, Homosexuality must be recognised as an alternative way of living and given the same rights in all areas as Hetrosexuals (The Green party whome Shoebreidge is part of, want legislation to state what THIS SAIS and to call homosexuality sin is villification, it is an alternative lifestyle so they are using Burns vs Sunol of November 12 2015 to try and set case law. That is why I beleive David Sheobridge was present in support of Garry Burns - I definetely do not agree with the Green and left wing definition of homosexaulity, as Homosexuality is Sin in Gods eyes and same sex marriage is pure wickedness which will bring down Gods wrath and judgement on all who venture into this. 



I beleive THIS is heresy and Gods wrath will shurely come upon all who accept this. 



I say keep away as you do not know where you are going if you venture into same sex marriage and will come under the wrath of God. 



My case of Burns vs Sunol in November 12 2015 wasnt to re-define this in case law and it is the Greens and affiliates with the use of David Sheobridge - a human rights lawyer, majistrate of family law courts and a Green - homosexual supporter who is the real target. Garry Burns is only'the ""Fall Guy" or "patsy" the Greens are using via David Sheobridge to get this case law in place and doing it unethicaly. Garry is the Green Australian Green Parties fall Guy by the use of David Sheobridge



I come direct against both the Green Party (You need to read point 3 of this Green Policy statement on same sex Marriage: they are to remove religious exemptions from the anti discrimination act 1977 and Villification act on homosexual villification put by Clover Moore in 1994 as an ammendment to the 1977 Anti discrimination act: which iI state s very evil and dangerous: (This is why Garry Burns is just a fall guy to David Sheobridge of the Green Party at the Sunol vs Burns November 12 case and the GLRL and affiliate groups as they are the real trouble, not Garry. 



If Garry suddenly got sick and passed away, or became unable to take me to court, it would still go on as someone else would come in. 



The main problem is far bigger than Garry, It is the GLRL and all affiliated groups which are seeking for equal rights in the Political world for the Marriage equality and homosexual rights groups. (GLRL and Associates



They see an excellent opportunity is allowing Garry to gain the Qutos in taking John Sunol, and the others to court to set case law and they are the ones backing and supporting him. They are even controlling him. 



This is totaly unacceptable as why should they even be allowed to use a man with social and mental problems to abuse the law like he does and set case law for them.



I delcare all out open warefare with all members of the Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby and all affiliated groups that work for social change and social justice. 



They have one big enemy in me and me knowing this I am not willing to come to consensus with these groups as I see them as being evil and the nemisis of society. I have a duty unto the General person in the public to oppose them on all levels. 



Even as far back as the start of these cases in the Collier vs Sunol cases, it was not Henry Collier who was a very controversial figure and very eccentric - to most decent human beings. 



It was this group using and abusing  Henry to set their policy structures and 
pre-cendents in case law so the they could push for political change. This is what they have succeeded in doing but no more as I am very aware of this and I will make it my duty not to ever give in not apologize any more and not stop  writing aht I have to write. i intend to tell the whole world the truth over these matters. 



I have a duty under God to do just this and that I am dedicated for, 
NOTHING WILL STOP ME as I see NO REASON WHY TO STOP I DONE NOTHING WRONG.



If you wish to contact me: 

I do not beleive that John M is one person, it is a Psuedo name which a number of people are using to attack me with - this is what the comments on my videos are from a John M - this also goes for those under the name of Beanie Hynes adn Mr Shiny Pants - all of whome write adverse comments on me not related to my videos - I lost control of being able to delete these comments - which come from Stalkers who want to destroy me -  but untill I get this control and I am able to delete these comments - please ignore all adverse comments on me as I am constantly under attack by troble makers and cyber thugs due to the controversity of my messages and personal hates to me by those on a political bias





Please take note all: I have adverse comments on a number of my you tubes, this is only people attacking me and none of this is true - I lost control of being able to delete these comments but when I regain control these adverse comments will all be deleted emediatly

where all my you tubes when made up go onto at first





I wish to state that if anyone things that anything I write villifies or 
harasses anyone then that is not what I mean to do. It is not right 
and I am not taking ownership of any such statements. 



This blog is NOT to harrass, villify or do anyother thing that is illegal,
 If that is in the mind of the reader it is certainaly not of my intention. 



This blog is primarily to inform the world over agenda 21 and the
 issues I talk on I give my own interpretations all through the blog and 
do not state that all must beleive this. This is my beleifs and it is up
 to your own choice to follow me or not,.



Yours



John Christopher Sunol






Pope Pushes Malthusian 

Elite Agenda In Historic Ca



Date and time of posting
Sunday January 17th 2016  9.30