The Big Digital ID Sell & The FOI Solution
robynchuter.substack.com
The Big Digital ID Sell & The FOI Solution
We have BIG problems with government. But we also have potential solutions, if we work together to develop them.
Recently, Mitch interviewed former Senator Rex Patrick, aka the Transparency Warrior, on his dogged work to bring the COVID-era National Cabinet documents to light - among Rex’s many other Freedom of Information requests.
In this week’s Stand Up Sits Down podcast, Mitch and I discuss our major take-aways from that interview, as well as unpacking the implications of the recent passing of the Digital ID bill (hint: it’s not great).
Or watch here:
Thanks to the inspiration of
, we’re launching a project to harness the power of FOI requests to restore accountability to our out-of-control government and bureaucracy. Whatever your talents - whether you are already experienced with making FOI requests, know how to set up and manage a database to track multiple requests, are an independent journalist who can turn FOI requests and responses into engaging news content, or any other relevant skills, we want to hear from you! Use the contact form on https://www.standupnowaustralia.com.au/stand-up-sits-down-podcast/episode-55 to get in touch.
Robin, Its ALL in commerce and what they did not and do not teach even the Legal profession is that Common Law including Law Merchant is in a Jurisdiction ABOVE statute/legislative and national law jurisdiction. We are ALL classified as Merchants and have the ability to make contract one to one, man to man, woman to woman, and woman to man, and NO national legal action can interfere with such agreements. Law Merchant is not law the Law professors will declare - Wrong!! Check www.gov.au 'Bills of Exchange Act 1909 as current and amended. Look in Part One section 5 sub-para 2 and see what you find. Its there in clear text, ....Common Law including Law Merchant applies... Then consider that Lord Mansfield in about 1760 or so had the 1611 King James Version of the Christian Bible (in Latin script) incorporated into English Law, and that it is still in there, and apparently Law sufficient that a true commercial contract can be written with it. Charlie swore his oaths on this book (and is in contract for breaking them).
Now make a Counter Offer to anyone suitable and if they do not respond and rebut your claims, point by point, Tacit agreement applies and the contract agreement is binding because that is what is done constantly with everyone in this commerce based system we have.
How many see the offer to Contract in this scenario? Doctor, "Its cancer! (the threat) though we may have caught it in time (the hope)". Doctor, "the treatment we recommend will be.... (the deal or contract condition)". The supposed diagnosis and possible solution are the 'offer' and the treatment planned is the condition of a 'conditional offer to contract'. How many patients would see this and how many of those would think to 'Counter Offer' with their own conditions binding the 'doctor and agents' to the patient's conditions in the 'deal' to be agreed. How many doctor's would agree?
We can do the same thing in regard to what people did or are doing throughout this scamdemic. We can make people accountable for what they did or are doing by establishing a commercial contract, a private one on one contract, though we had better do so in honour, with full disclosure and know what we are doing and how it all functions. We are in a commercial community system only 'they' forgot to ell us what and how.