Ur 1 Stop Shop 4 CVax HELP

Toolkit for those declining the vax lawfully

Click Here For All The Resources You Need

Templates (Oz)

Available for Download (Thanks to Advicate Me)

We are very aware that many people are impacted daily through coercive tactics, and are forced to acquiesce to false directives or policies that go against the government guidelines, or one’s own rights. 

So the purpose of this initiative is to provide you with template letters that will help you address as many of these issues as you encounter them, without the need for our assistance. This means your immediate concerns can be addressed while we continue with our campaigns.

We will be updating and adding to our library of templates, as the need arises. 

Templates for Masking

Mandating COVID-19 & Flu Vaccinations

RT-PCR Testing

Covid-19 Vaccination Declination Letter




Stop Services Australia Sharing Your Vaccination History

Time is short since the federal government has already said they have everything ready to go for the vaccine passports and are only waiting on the States to complete their end.
Please visit this website – https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/organisations/health-professionals/forms/im017
 and fill in the form IM017. It cannot be submitted online but must be printed out and mailed – we recommend you do this by express post and also if you don’t mind spending a few dollars extra, paying for the proof of delivery so you have the signature of who has received it should they claim they never got it.

🇦🇺G&B Lawyers 🇦🇺
📌2nd July 2021 ·

Any law that purports to make it mandatory for a person to submit to a COVID-19 vaccination is invalid.
In 1945, the then Chief Justice Latham held that quarantine laws “may be regarded in most, if not all, of its aspects as a form of public health legislation”.
The Commonwealth has the power under section 51(ix) of the Constitution to make laws with respect to ‘quarantine’. This is a power granted to the Commonwealth. Not the States.
At [257] of the decision, Latham CJ held that the Commonwealth “could not pass a law requiring citizens of the States… to submit to vaccination or immunization”.
So there are several important things that flow from this High Court decision.

  1. Vaccinations and immunizations are matters that fall within the category of ‘quarantine’.
  2. Only the Commonwealth has the power to make laws with respect to ‘quarantine’ under section 51(ix) of the Constitution.
  3. The Commonwealth is prohibited from passing laws requiring citizens to submit to vaccination or immunization (which are quarantine matters).
  4. The States have no power to make laws with respect to quarantine, including matters dealing with vaccinations and immunizations (as Latham CJ held that these things are ‘quarantine’ matters).
  5. The States are unable to do something that the Commonwealth is prohibited from doing under the exercise of the quarantine power.
  6. Therefore the States cannot pass any law that requires citizens to submit to vaccination or immunization.
  7. Part 3B of the Public Health (COVID-19 Air Transportation Quarantine) Order (No 2) (NSW) 2021 is invalid.

All workers who have been identified under the ‘NSW Airport and Quarantine Workers’ Vaccination Program’ should consider the above before making any decision as to whether to have a COVID-19 vaccination.

see comments for screenshot from G&B Lawyers

Thanks to G&B Lawyers

🔸share🔹 share 🔸share 🔹

The best resource I’ve seen yet

Military on the Streets – Legal Origins with the recent camera footage of military patrolling streets with the State Police forces, the question arises, what if any powers exist for this to occur in Australia in 2021? Well there are some relevant legal provisions starting with the Australian Constitution and proceeds to the Defence Act 1903 (the Defence Act) and regulations made pursuant to it. There may be another legal basis for Commonwealth intervention which is not explicitly spelt out in the Constitution, but which is considered to be no less compelling, but how are these managed when it is a virus with a high survivability rate? and does that constitute an emergency?

Section 119 of the Constitution
As mentioned above, the Constitution makes some provision for Commonwealth assistance to the States in the maintenance of law and order. Section 119 of the Constitution provides as follows:

“The Commonwealth shall protect every State against invasion and, on the application of the Executive Government of the State, against domestic violence”.

Insofar as its secondary aspect is concerned, Section 119 requires first of all that a state of ‘domestic violence’ exists and secondly there must be a request for assistance from the State Government. Section 119 does not authorise unilateral action by the Commonwealth Government. The need for the section is linked with the fact that the States are unable to raise a military force themselves (Section 114 of the Constitution).

The States called for Commonwealth assistance under Section 119 on several occasions earlier in the century and on each occasion the Commonwealth refused.(7) Refusal was based on the Commonwealth’s independent assessment as to whether a state of domestic violence existed. Although commentators agree that the Commonwealth would be bound to give the assistance sought under Section 119,(8) practice suggests that the Commonwealth will make its own assessment in relation to the degree of unrest and that mere allegation by a State will not invoke the section.

It has been suggested that in view of the Bowral call-out and the mechanism that was used there, it appeared unlikely that Section 119 will ever be invoked, however, it appears as though COIVD-19 has created an exception. Professor Blackshield has argued:

Since almost any social controversy can nowadays be injected with ‘national security’ implications, it would seem that a way has been found of circumventing Section 119 and intervening in State affairs whenever the Commonwealth chooses. In the long run, that may be the significant new precedent created at Bowral.

Military on the Streets – Laws – Section 51 of the Defence Act
The operation of Section 119 is reflected in Section 51 of the Defence Act which reads as follows:

“Where the Governor of a State has proclaimed that domestic violence exists therein, the Governor-General, upon the application of the Executive Government of the State, may, by proclamation, declare that domestic violence exists in that State, and may call out the Permanent Forces and in the event of their numbers being insufficient may also call out such of the Emergency Forces and the Reserve Forces as may be necessary for the protection of that State, and the services of the Forces so called out may be utilised accordingly for the protection of that State against domestic violence”:

Provided always that the Emergency Forces or the Reserve Forces shall not be called out or utilised in connection with an industrial dispute.

It has been suggested that Section 51 is unconstitutional to the extent that it imposes a further requirement on top of Section 119 of the Constitution, i.e., the need for the State Governor to issue a proclamation that domestic violence exists, before the assistance envisaged in Section 119 can be rendered. There may be some sympathy for this view although it is equally possible to argue the opposite view based on the approach that Section 51 merely sets out one way of making an approach to the Commonwealth Government and does not in fact preclude other approaches by the State. On this view, Section 51 does not attempt to negate Section 119 of the Constitution but merely sets out one way in which it can be applied. It would be argued that Section 51 of the Defence Act relies on Section 51(vi) (the defence power) and Section 51(xxxix) (the incidental power) of the Constitution as a sensible means of catering for the protection envisaged by Section 119. If however, Section 51 of the Defence Act was interpreted as imposing an absolute requirement for a proclamation by the State Governor as a pre-requisite to Commonwealth intervention, then constitutional invalidity seems inevitable. ( See, for example, B. D. Beddie, ‘Aid to the Civil Power’, paper presented to conference of the Australasian Study Group on Armed Forces and Society on Law, Change and the Services, R.M.C. Duntroon, 24 June 1983, University of New South Wales, Faculty of Military Studies, Department of Government.)

The Constitution provides that the Commonwealth may make laws with respect to “the naval and military defence of the Commonwealth and of the several States, and the control of the forces to execute and maintain the laws of the Commonwealth” (s 51(vi)). Further “The Commonwealth shall protect every State against invasion and, on the application of the Executive Government of the State, against domestic violence” (s 119). So can the military be called out to attend your home to enforce the law? In November 2018, the Morrison government passed the Defence Amendment (Call Out of the Australian Defence Force) Bill 2018 (the Defence Call Out Bill).

It streamlined the process of calling out ADF troops to assist in state and territory domestic violence incidents.

“Domestic violence” is a vague term contained in section 119 of the Australian Constitution, where it stands as something different from the threat of “invasion”.

And while section 39 of the Defence Force Act, limits troops from being called out to “stop or restrict any protest, dissent, assembly or industrial action”.

The troops can be sent in to “stop or restrict any protest, dissent, assembly or industrial action” if there’s a “reasonable likelihood” of death or injury, or “serious damage to property”.

The ADF may be used to protect Commonwealth interests and, when requested, to assist the States to quell ‘domestic violence’ (Defence Act 1903 (Cth) Part IIIAAA). Section 51B says that the ADF may be used to protect a State against domestic violence if that violence is occurring or likely to occur and the is unlikely to protect itself.

To ‘call out the troops’ various steps are required. Section 30 of the Defence Act provides a simplified guide to the process. It says:

The Defence Force can be called out under a call out order made under this Part. A call out order is made by the Governor-General if the Prime Minister, the Minister and the Attorney-General (who are called the authorising Ministers) are satisfied of various matters.

There are 2 general kinds of call out orders: Commonwealth interests orders and State protection orders. …

Under a Commonwealth interests order, the Defence Force is called out to protect Commonwealth interests in Australia or the Australian offshore area. The order might apply in a State or Territory, or in the Australian offshore area, or in more than one of those places. Each State or self-governing Territory in which domestic violence is occurring, or is likely to occur, must generally be consulted before the Governor-General makes a Commonwealth interests order.

A State or self-governing Territory can apply for a State protection order to protect the State or Territory from domestic violence.

Members of the Defence Force can exercise certain powers if the Defence Force is called out under a call out order. There are 3 categories of powers:

powers that generally can be exercised only if authorised by an authorising Minister; and
powers that can be exercised in an area that has been declared by the authorising Ministers; and
powers for protecting infrastructure that has been declared by the authorising Ministers…
We saw the ADF ‘called up’ during the 2019-2020 bushfires crisis. We can see what a call up (as opposed to a ‘call out’ order looks like – see Calling out the troops (January 5, 2020). To the best of my knowledge there has been no formal order such as the one we saw in January. Further, the use of the ADF in hotel quarantine is not protecting the states from domestic violence; it is therefore not an example of a state protection order. Nor is there ‘domestic violence that would, or would be likely to, affect Commonwealth interests is occurring or is likely to occur in Australia’ (s 33) so this is not a Commonwealth interests orders. In short the ADF has not been called out under Part IIIA and is not providing Defence Aid to the Civil Authorities.

This must, therefore, be an example of Defence Aid to the Civil Community (DACC). DACC is not provided for in the Defence Act, rather it is governed by the DACC Manual. I would infer that the current use of the ADF is either DACC category 4 or 6 that is:

Category 4—significant non-emergency assistance provided to other Government departments or authorities, to Local, State or Territory Government or other authorities or organisations, commercial enterprises, not-for-profit organisations, individuals or bodies in the general community (DACC 4).

Category 6—law enforcement non-emergency assistance to civil authorities in the performance of law enforcement related support. As is the case with all DACC categories, there must be no likelihood that Defence personnel will be required to use force (DACC 6).

Under those categories the members of the ADF have no particular power. They cannot use force nor compel compliance with directives. They are in the same position that the SES or a private security guard would be in if they were asked to help maintain the quarantine. They are a well disciplined, self-sustaining force that are willing to turn their minds to any task they are given. That means they are an effective labour force but as guards at hotels, the most they could do is ask (with some moral authority) people not to leave and report them to police if they do. It’s no offence to disobey the soldier but it may be an offence under relevant public health orders and the Biosecurity Act 2015 (Cth) to leave the hotel or otherwise not comply with the directions that have been given.

They have a power of arrest, just as any citizen does, but it would be ‘brave’ (as Sir Humphrey Appleby might say in ‘Yes, Minister’ for those old enough to remember) for an ADF member to try to arrest someone who failed to comply with a requirement under a public health direction.

the ADF provide a very effective surge capacity to help maintain quarantine at the various hotels, but they have no particular legal authority or power. https://emergencylaw.wordpress.com/2020/07/02/using-the-adf-to-maintain-quarantine/

Print this and make a badge to wear or save to phone

Fake sign in!

Here is one for NSW

Fake check-in procedure for mobile phones in Vic, NSW and Qld (more states coming):


In order for it to work properly, the URL needs to be saved as an icon on your home screen (this deletes the URL at the top and correctly emulates the site). Name it ‘CoVID-Safe’ or ‘Check-in Qld’, as appropriate.

To add an icon to the home screen on iPhone :


Service Victoria

It works!
Just check the name of the store on the QR code flyer. It just depends how thorough you want you to be..

6 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Shaun McGurgan
    Aug 04, 2021 @ 20:35:27

    Thank you



    • Shaun McGurgan
      Aug 04, 2021 @ 20:36:59

      I have been asked to stay home from work because I wouldn’t wear a mask. So these documents will help me.



  2. Trackback: Know Your Rights Or You Simply Have None | thrivalinternational
  3. Trackback: How Covid Is Affecting Aboriginal Communities In Australia | thrivalinternational
  4. Trackback: Protection For All Under Tribal Law | thrivalinternational
  5. kim foley
    Sep 12, 2021 @ 15:23:18

    deadly sis thank you so much will pass on all information



Leave a Reply to Shaun McGurgan Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

A little about page admin Kaiyu Moura (Bayles)

Now living in QLD raising her children on their traditional country, gathering food, learning the old art of building shelters, dance and the local language. For the past 20 years with her late Grandmother Maureen Watson and a dance group with 6 of her sisters Kaiyu travelled schools, festivals, events etc sharing the beauty of First Nations Culture through song and dance, stories, art, theatre, nursery rhymes, poetry etc and engaging all ages in different projects that inspire positive change. Also a poet, documentary maker, songwriter, artist, event organiser, media consultant, testing the waters of micro social enterprise by starting her own tshirt and sublimation printing business and with her own label, Kaiyu creates what she calls Freedom Threads.

After building their own home on Tribal Sovereign land, Kaiyu is now homeschooling and teaching the kids about making our own tinctures, learning about bushtucker and mushrooms, growing food, building with aircrete, setting up wind turbines, composting toilets and ram water pumps... Really learning what it truly means to thrive. This is our Group where we share alot of what we do

Kaiyu and the Tribe
%d bloggers like this: