Anthony’s email

Privatesolutionsjd@protonmail.com

An example of what an Australian certificate of live birth looks like

I obtained it by printing out this form in the link and taking it to the nearest service centre with proof of identity and payment

https://www.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-02/apply-for-original-registration.pdf

This will be different for other states

Groundbreaking COVID decision in family law

While judges across Canada have parroted the accepted catechism about COVID vaccinations for children, Justice Pazaratz has provided the first in-depth analysis and may be the first judge in Canada to deny a parent’s application to vaccinate young children.
He begins his reasons by asking: “Should judges sit back as the concept of ‘Judicial Notice’ gets hijacked from a rule of evidence to a substitute for evidence? And is ‘misinformation’ even a real word? Or has it become a crass, self-serving tool to pre-empt judicial scrutiny and discredit your opponent? …[A] childish — but sinister — way of saying “You’re so wrong, I don’t even have to explain why you’re wrong.”
The facts of the case reveal that a father applied for an order that his 2 children, L.E.G. 12YO & M.D.G. 10YO, receive C19 vaccinations, while their mother opposed this. The parties, who separated after 7 years of marriage, have 3 children: a 14Y0 son, C.B.G who lives with father, a 12YO son & 10Y0 daughter,  who live with mother. The parties agreed in minutes of settlement that each party would have sole decision-making authority for the child(ren) in their care & control, however, their agreement also stated that: “The issue of L.E.G. & M.D.G. receiving  C-19 vaccine shall remain a live issue & shall be determined at later date. The child CBG can determine whether or not he wants to be vaccinated now.”
The mother’s evidence focused entirely on medical & scientific evidence while father focused on labeling & discrediting his children’s mother in a dismissive attempt to argue that her views weren't worthy of consideration. Why? Because she had a political affiliation with People’s Party of Canada led by Maxime Bernier; had perpetuated COVID-related conspiracy theories & vaccine hesitancy on social media; & failed to wear a mask at a large rally.
Puzzled by this evidence, Justice Pazaratz queries how any of these allegations & many similar are relevant, & how far is one to take “guilt by association”? He remarks that “it is of little consequence that an individual litigant chooses to advance such dubious &0 offensive arguments. Even though the father may not admit this, this is still a free country & people can say what they want…including him. But there’s a bigger problem here. An uglier problem.”
Justice Pazaratz identifies the intolerance, vilification & dismissive character assassination in family court. He presumes that he is seeing more of it because it is “rampant outside the courtroom” & appears to be socially acceptable to denounce, punish & banish anyone who doesn’t agree with you. An example? A recent case where mother sought to terminate a father’s equal parenting time with their child because he was “promoting anti-government beliefs.” Judge Pazaratz declares: “…in Communist China that request would likely have been granted.” But thankfully, not in Canada.
Of course, what it all boils down to is the best interests of the children, as it must, & the children’s views took centre stage in the analysis. A Views of the Child Report indicated that neither child wished to be vaccinated, & Justice Pazaratz agreed that their views were not determinative, but also couldn't be completely ignored, relying on Article 12 of the UN Convention on Rights of the Child & list of factors to be considered as set out in Decaen v. Decaen 2013 ONCA 218.
The court reviewed the children’s histories of regular immunizations, & their consistent reasons for rejecting a C-19 vaccination, which didn't appear frivolous, superficial or poorly thought out.
Finally, the court considered information obtained from the Internet including a “Position Statement” from the Canadian Paediatric Society; a document from the Government of Canada entitled “Vaccines for Children: Deciding to Vaccinate” and an article from the Canada Communicable Disease Report entitled “COVID-19 Cases and Hospitalizations Surge Among Children,” all proffered by the father.
The mother’s material included an article by Dr.

Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA vaccine; a Pfizer fact sheet; a peer-reviewed article entitled “Immunization with SARS Coronavirus Vaccines Lead to Pulmonary Immunopathology on Challenge with the SARS virus”; & article from CDC entitled “Clinical Considerations: Myocarditis & Pericarditis After Receipt of mRNA C19 Vaccines Among Adolescents/Young Adults.”
Justice Pazaratz noted that information obtained from Internet can be admissible if it's accompanied by indicia of reliability, including whether it comes from official website from a well-known organization, whether information is capable of being verified & whether source is disclosed so that the objectivity of the person/prganization can be assessed.
However, he also remarked that in almost all cases in Canada where C19 vaccinations have been ordered the court has made a finding that on the face of it, the Internet materials presented by the objecting parent have been grossly deficient & at times, dubious. “The lack of an equally credible counter-point to government recommendations may have well been determinative in those earlier cases.”
Notably, the court recited the warning from Pfizer, a company that makes the vaccine, as follows: “There is a remote chance that the Pfizer vaccine could cause severe allergic reaction… Signs of an allergic reaction include difficulty breathing, swelling of the face and throat, a fast heartbeat, a bad rash, dizziness and weakness. Inflammation of the heart have occurred in some people who have received the Pfizer vaccine….”
Justice Pazaratz also quotes from Dr. Robert Malone who warns that “therapeutic approaches that are still in the research phase are being imposed on an ill-informed public” & that “public health leadership has stepped over the line, now violating the bedrock principles which form foundation upon which the ethics of clinical research are built.”
With respect to judicial notice, the court reviewed the analysis of the safety and efficacy of the vaccine as promoted by the federal government & illustrated in other COVID/child vaccination cases in Canada, where judges routinely “judicially noticed” the evidence, endorsing the government views. Judge Pazaratz asked: “After considering all of the evidence — or often the lack of evidence — can the court just fill in the blanks & take judicial notice of the fact that all children should get vaccinated?... Because if ‘all judges just know’ that children should be vaccinated, then we should clearly say that that’s what we’re doing.”
We're reminded that judicial notice is intended to avoid unnecessary litigation over facts that are clearly uncontroversial or beyond reasonable dispute, however, Justice Pazaratz points out other areas of life & law where the government was wrong, including the Motherisk expert evidence that turned out to be disastrous for families; the residential school system; the sterilization of Inuit women; and the thalidomide crisis of the 1950s.
In closing, Justice Pazaratz comments that both parents are excellent; the children’s mother has the responsibility to make decisions for the children in her care; and that she has consistently made informed and child-focused decisions. He says she's not a bad parent, simply by virtue of asking questions of government. The father’s application to vaccinate the children is dismissed, with a postscript:
“It’s irrelevant to my decision & it’s none of anyone’s business. But I'm fully vaccinated. My choice. I mention this because I am acutely aware of how polarized the world has become.”

Transcript for this case

https://constitutionwatch.com.au/groundbreaking-covid-decision-in-family-law/

I’ve uploaded the zoom meeting to rumble

https://rumble.com/vwzw9p-q-and-a-with-anthony-protecting-your-assets-during-the-great-reset.html

I’ve noticed many different new businesses being created as a result of what has been happening. A lot these align with our Values and better ways/ideas moving forward.
If anyone is interested or would like assistance with developing the image and promotion of their business I can highly recommend reall.com.au

re:all is a Not-For-Profit Conscious Design & Advertising Agency committed to creating a new and improved world based on truth, love and integrity.

A lot of useful information on Peter Wilson’s YouTube channel about the strawman and claiming it back Etc

https://youtube.com/channel/UCne3h6d7qH2hLTG4lalSVCg

For those who are not aware and jobs have mandated the 💉
Register a positive test (which does not require proof) on service nsw or whatever system your state uses and can go to your gp and get a 4 month exemption using a form in this link - show this link to your gp

https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022/02/atagi-expanded-guidance-on-temporary-medical-exemptions-for-covid-19-vaccines.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2q9itDE2hxbmOjwXSu8iGqMh3AhkT45i7UL7n1wol-HEH_mMd4NQ08duM

At least this gives you an extra 4 months - anything can happen during that time

Two types of law
https://fb.watch/c6BJ__QGyl/

Putting all magistrates from NSW on notice - a friend of mine has done this and now all her court cases keep getting adjourned lol

I just created the simplest way to protect your marriage, relationship, children and finances from being plundered by the public system, specifically the Family Court. Just click on this link, follow the prompts and enter into a private agreement which removes the public courts.Here is the link and please share far and wide: https://www.peacemakerequity.com/agreement

For parents who are separated - useful for family court