Make Australia Healthy Again

Comment and Opinion

This site was Highly Commended in the 2020 Millenium Awards. The citation read:

Sometimes someone comes along who is so unhinged that, like Humpty Dumpty, it would be impossible to put him back together. Solihin Millin is just such a person. It is difficult to do justice to his state of mind, except to say that he probably doesn't believe in "the State" (unless it's the "Deep State" that really rules the world) and using the word "mind" in the same sentence (day?, month? year?) as his name is probably committing an oxymoron. Sol obviously possesses something like a mind, but I predict that after his death there will be much competition to study his brain from neurosurgeons, psychiatrists, psychologists and philosophers, all trying to work out how it worked, how it was different to a human brain and how epistemology might have to be modified to accommodate delusions as facts.

It's deja vu all over again (22/2/2020)
Back in 2003 I reported on what might have been seen as the silliest and most useless waste of the time and resources of the High Court of Australia that anyone could imagine, but all these years later there is a new contender.

A loon wants to sue the Commonwealth of Australia and has applied to the High Court to try to get it to rule that vaccination is both unconstitutional and illegal under international law. Anti-vaccination liars are wetting their pants about this, even going so far as to claim that the High Court has endorsed their insanity. Those of us of sound mind realise that asking a court to look at something is not the same as the court looking and agreeing. At the time I'm writing this the Court has not even agreed to read the writ let alone empanelled some expensive judges to consider its worth, but facts have never bothered the opponents of vaccines. If the Court does decide to amuse themselves by actually having a hearing I might have to take a trip to Canberra to watch the fun, although I imagine that eating popcorn in the courtroom is probably discouraged.

I could go though the thing line by line offering criticism and comments, but there are only so many hours in a week. You can read the masterpiece here,, but I will extract some parts to give the flavour.

It's good to get the aggrandisement out of the way right up front. You wouldn't want the High Court Justices to think this was a trivial matter.
Dr Judy Wilyman? I just snorted coffee out of my nose.
Spelling is sort of important in legal pleadings. Perhaps Solihin should have sought the assistance of a dictionary.
At least he didn't say "Big Pharma", but if it's "one of the biggest industries on Earth" it probably doesn't need the adjective.
Nothing like a bit of hyperbole to lighten the mood, is there?
As a card-carrying member of the journalists' union and therefore a member of the Fourth Estate I'm going to recommend that we all wear t-shirts saying "Sheer Immoral Evil" to the next union get-together. It's also going to be the name of my new band.
Some rather extreme claims there, but I'll leave it up to the Court to rule on the truthiness of them.
Actually, Australia is not a "party" to the Nuremberg Code (or even a "Party"), but why should a fact intrude into the writ?
I can hardly wait.
Oh, that's the sort of "legal and scientific evidence" is it? That would be the "thesis" I commented on just after it was accepted and Dr Wilyman was endoctorated.
I must be a dreadful person. Not only am I member of the Fourth Estate, but I have appeared on television with Professor McIntyre. Even worser, I am a member of the committee of the Australian Skeptics (founded by Dick Smith in 1980) (to give it its full and bold title) and therefore complicit in influencing the media even beyond my unionist fifth-column activities and I have been a speaker at Global Skeptics conferences. I should have to wear a warning label.
That would be my friend Mr (he's a surgeon) John Cunningham, who was quite disappointed that he didn't get a mention until Page 10 of the writ.

It would be sad if it wasn't so funny.

That High Court writ (21/3/2020)
Back in February I mentioned that someone was asking the High Court of Australia to rule on the legality and constitutional validity of vaccines. Actually, he was asking the High Court if they would consider doing this. At the time I predicted that the Court would not bother wasting its time on such nonsense. Was I right?

I'm sure this loon really believes that the High Court convenes a full bench to look at applications to appear, but out here in the real world we know that the Court has a filter to prevent it wasting its time. I can confidently predict that if Sol does actually apply to appeal, his application will receive the same treatment as his original writ. I also predict that the anti-vaccination liars who were wetting themselves a month ago about how the High Court was giving legitimacy to their delusions by hearing his claim will now be saying that it has obviously changed its mind about rejecting the writ and has accepted his appeal.

I do like the irony of someone who demands that the Court does things it can't and won't do warning people about the offence of Contempt of Court. What could be more contemptuous than wasting the Court's time and resources on trivial idiocy?

As I said at the time: 'It would be sad if it wasn't so funny".

Sol suddenly supersizes the silliness (9/5/2020)
In February I mentioned that some kook was asking the High Court of Australia to rule that vaccination is unconstitutional. One thing you have to give anti-vaccination liars credit for is their optimism and faith in the impossible. The kook, Solihil Millin, has resurfaced with a plan to disrupt Australia's major cities with protests the likes of which we haven't seen since the anti-war assemblies in the streets in the 1970s. Tens, or maybe even elevens of protestors are expected to gather outside parliamentary buildings to express their concerns about the restrictions on personal rights and freedoms dictated by governments in their attempts to control the (fictional) COVID-19 pandemic. Protestors will gain extra credit for carrying signs about 5G telephone masts and expressing their disappointment at the continued staying alive of Bill Gates. (Look at Bill Gates' initials and remember that the song "Stayin' Alive" was performed by the Bee Gees. Coincidence? There's no such thing.)

Here is just the beginning of Sol's latest rant.

You can read this in its full unhinged glory by clicking on the picture.
I couldn't fit it on the page here.

I checked with University Microfilms and found Sol's qualifications.

Speaking of whom ... (5/9/2020)
Earlier this year I paid some attention to Solihin Millin, a kook showing weapons grade stupidity by trying to sue the Australian government over vaccination policies, claiming that vaccination is unconstitutional and illegal under international law. He wasn't very happy when the High Court flicked his complaint into the bin, but that's life. Finding himself flat on his face he followed the advice in the Frank Sinatra song "That's Life" and picked himself up and got back in the race by organising massive protests against any and all restrictions placed on the citizenry because of the COVID-19 outbreak.

On this very day, September 5, millions of people were going to take to the streets across the country, defying the police and the politicians who made the rules. To make sure that the rest of the population took notice, one of the sites chosen for the protest was the Shrine of Remembrance in Melbourne, because nothing is more certain to attract sympathy to a cause than a rabble rousing desecration of a war memorial.

Protestors turned up in their tens, but Sol wasn't among them because he had been arrested for inciting people to break the law. He was obviously not happy about this, and has now decided to take legal action against the Victorian police for among other things "misprison (sic) of treason.

Spelling the name of the supposed offence incorrectly twice (it's "misprision") suggests that no lawyers were harmed in the production of the legal claim. Also as "misprision of treason" is an offence of inciting treason I'm not sure how the cops were actually doing that, as Sol and his associates seem to be suggesting that they committed treason, not asked other people to do it. Or something. Treason is, of course, a federal offence, not a state one, but let's not get all nitpicky here.

By the way, treason is quite clearly defiled in the Commonwealth Criminal Code:

causes the death or harm, resulting in death, imprisons or restrains the Sovereign, the heir apparent of the Sovereign, the consort of the Sovereign, the Governor-General or Prime Minister;
levies war, or does an act preparatory to levying war against the Commonwealth;
intentionally assists, by any means whatsoever, an enemy, at war with the Commonwealth;
intentionally assists, by any means whatever, another country or organisation that is engaged in armed hostilities against the Australian Defence Force (ADF);
instigates a person who is not an Australian citizen to make an armed invasion of the Commonwealth or a Territory of the Commonwealth;
or forms an intention to do any of the above acts and manifests that intention by an overt act.

I'm not sure how the Victorian state police enforcing state regulations fits any of these criteria, but I'm not a lawyer. And neither are Ben Shaw or Solihin Millin.

We look forward to the next chapter in the continuing saga of Sol's legal battle to overturn centuries of case, constitutional and statute law and lead us into a world where the law is based on opinion, feelings and whatever you want it to be today.

The madness not only continues, it escalates (3/10/2020)
Back in September I updated the continuing saga of überarchkook Solihin Millin and how he had been joined by another refugee from the asylum, Brian Shaw, in a continued legal attack on the instruments of government in Australia. Brian has taken it a step further and has issued paper accusing the police in the state of Victoria of doing dreadfulness.

A few points:

I have no idea what the Governor of the state of Western Australia has to do with the Victoria Police.
It's not clear how the cops did all those things related to the Queen or any oaths.
Brian seems to be confusing state and federal laws. The Oath of Allegiance to the current Monarch is part of the Australian Constitution, a fact which seems to be recognised by Brian's use of the words "within the Commonwealth of Australia".
I'm not sure how the offence of misprision applies, as it refers to either encouraging treason or hiding it. Actually doing it is neither of these. At least Brian spelled it correctly this time.
We don't have Grand Juries in Australia, and if we did they would not be convened in a suburban court house, especially for something as serious as this.
As Grand Juries don't exist here it is difficult to understand how they could indict anyone for anything. (I did find a web site which described the Common Law Grand Jury system as implemented in Australia, but it was a Freeman of the Land delusion.)
Treason is a matter of statutory law, not common law. Or even "Authority Law", whatever that is. Or "Common Law" as understood by kooks and cranks.
The offence of treason does exist in Victoria, but it has essentially the same definition as in Commonwealth legislation.
Brian Shaw is nuts.

I look forward to this major development in Australia's jurisprudence, although I would hope that we don't return to the days when men convicted of treason were hung, drawn and quartered and women were burnt at the stake. Surely being forced to discuss the law with Sol Millin and Brian Shaw would be a sufficiently horrible punishment.

By the way, if you believe Wikipedia nobody has ever been convicted of the crime of treason in Australia. Some have been charged (for example the "Sydney Twelve") but the charges were later changed to other offences.