ISSUE: 20190812- Supplement 67- maritime security coalition

As a CONSTITUTIONALIST my concern is the true meaning and application of the constitution.

* Gerrit, do you view it is in the interest of Australia to participate in what is claimed to be a

maritime security coalition?
**#** INSPECTOR-RIKATI®, there is this article:
https://www.politico.eu/article/trumps-coalition-of-one/ Trump’s coalition of one
This article does expose some concerning issues:

https://www.politico.eu/article/trumps-coalition-of-one/
QUOTE

“Clearly, a military operation in the Gulf would increase exponentially the potential
triggers for a confrontation with Iran,” Nathalie Tocci, an adviser to European Union
foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, said via email. “So long as [Europeans] see a
chance of freedom of navigation being secured through dialogue and diplomacy with
Iran, they will opt for this route.”

Even for countries that also consider Iran an adversary, the prospect of a military confrontation with
Tehran is not appealing.

END QUOTE

https://www.politico.eu/article/trumps-coalition-of-one/
QUOTE

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo didn’t help calm tensions when he indicated to Fox News in July that
the U.S. won't necessarily come to Britain’s aid in its standoff with Iran. “The responsibility ... falls to
the United Kingdom to take care of their ships," he said.

Pompeo went on to lay out another expectation for the maritime security coalition: that other countries
will play the major roles. “The United States has a responsibility to do our part, but the world’s got a
big role in this, too, to keep these sea lanes open,” Pompeo told Fox News.

On Wednesday, Vice Adm. Michael Gilday told the Senate Armed Services Committee that "the idea is
for the regional partners to bear the lion's share of the burden" of protecting international tankers.
While the U.S. will deploy vessels and aircraft to protect American-flagged commercial vessels, "there
aren't that many" that pass through critical areas like the Strait of Hormuz, Gilday said. The U.S. will
offer intelligence support to other coalition members, he said.

Pompeo and Gilday appear to be following Trump’s lead. The president — who has long been skeptical
about the value of multilateral alliances — believes that other countries take advantage of U.S. resources and
generosity.

Trump in June tweeted out some of his frustrations about the security in the Persian Gulf, asking,
“Why are we protecting the shipping lanes for other countries (many years) for zero compensation”?
p1 12-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
 Trump also noted that the U.S., now the world’s top oil and natural gas producer, doesn’t even need
the petrol that traverses the Gulf the way other countries do.

END QUOTE

https://www.politico.eu/article/trumps-coalition-of-one/
QUOTE

Even for countries that also consider Iran an adversary, the prospect of a military
confrontation with Tehran is not appealing.

END QUOTE

When one considers the rhetoric of the USA that it doesn’t have that many American flagged oil
tankers to go through the Strait of Hormuz (Gulf) then why on earth would Australia get
involved and risk to be drawn into a war with Iran, when we have next to nothing at all on
flagged ships?
If we had responsible politicians then we could have had some 90 days of stored fuel capacity.
We got in my view politicians more interested to look after their own financial future rather then
what is needed for the general community.
.
There were surveys as to if a leader should be able to make decisions ignoring parliament and the
courts and the majority of all 27 countries held that this would be bad for democracy.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/question-search/?qid=2858&cntIDs=&stdIDs= .

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/04/29/many-across-the-globe-are-dissatisfied-with-how-democracy-is-
working/ .

They also held that politicians are too much interested feathering their own nest by corruption,
etc. Many hold that it makes not one iota of difference which politicians are in power as they
generally are all acting corrupt.
Look at PM Scott Morrison, where is his agenda to restore trust in Government, when as I
understand it he is willing to risk getting involved into a war and sacrifice the lives of our
soldiers, obviously not his own children, and beg for the USA to provide any fuel if needed,
rather then to take the upper hand and make clear the Australian Government is not in any
begging situation as it will ensure it will generate its own supply short comings as a matter of
extreme urgency.

Our constitution was based upon Australia having its own maritime flagged fleet and we need to
get back to this. This is why the Framers of the Constitution held it so important that the
Commonwealth had industrial relation legislative powers over maritime unions regardless in
which state they were,. This as they made clear maritime unions often would combine their
industrial strikes over state borders as they did with Colonial borders before federation. In my
view Peter Reith as the Minister for Industrial Relations made the big mistake not to understand
the legislative powers the Commonwealth had in regard of the maritime unions in the Patrick
case. Neither did so in my view the courts!

We have seen the result of our unconstitutional involvement in the Iraq invasion.
Consider this:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-11/islamic-state-jihadists-yazidi-village/11399192
Wounds opened by Islamic State are still healing in Sinjar, five years after their terror began
And
p2 12-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-07/how-i-escaped-the-islamic-state-terrorists/9406286
How I escaped from Islamic State's sexual slavery
We as a nation are responsible also for the harm that was caused upon the Yazidy people,
where untold young girls and women were tortured and used as sex slaves and yet where is our
responsible conduct to seek to rescue those females? After all we allowed the creation of the
terrorist groups to eventuate by unconstitutionally invading Iraq and hence bear an emotional,
mental, legal obligation to seek to come to the rescue of those females!
Are we yet to get involved in some war with Iran and let the same or worse eventuate? That to
me is not leadership but to be some puppet-on-a-string for the USA. It has got nothing to do
with the ANZUS treaty because the ANZUS treaty cannot override legal principles embedded in
the constitution. In fact in my view any politician who deliberately and knowingly pursues a
military conflict should be charged with treason!

HANSARD 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
Australasian Convention)
QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-
Then, again, there is the prerogative right to declare war and peace, an adjunct of which it is that the
Queen herself, or her representative, where Her Majesty is not present, holds that prerogative. No one
would ever dream of saying that the Queen would declare war or peace without the advice of a
responsible Minister.
END QUOTE

HANSARD 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
Australasian Convention)
QUOTE
Mr. DEAKIN: We can make an exception in favour of imperial interests. We have no desire to interfere
with the imperial prerogative in matters of war and peace!
END QUOTE
.
HANSARD 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
Australasian Convention)
QUOTE
Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: At all events, I would ask hon. members to pause before they determine upon
asking the Queen to surrender all her prerogatives in Australia. For my part, I believe that all the
prerogatives of the Crown exist in the governor-general as far as they relate to Australia. I never
entertained any doubt upon the subject at all-that is so far as they can be exercised in the commonwealth.
END QUOTE

As I made clear in previous writings the Commonwealth can override the States when it comes to
securing fuel supplies. Not because of its powers as to armed forces, but as part of its trade &
commerce powers to secure the viability of transport on land, in the air and on the seas. After all
to have legislative powers for trade and commerce only to be denied ability of transport to
eventuate because some rough state(s) might not want to have gas /petrol resourced than as the
Framers of the Constitution made clear the Commonwealth has incidental legislative powers.

Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
Australasian Convention)
QUOTE
Mr. BARTON.-They do not require to get authority from home, for this reason: That the local
Constitutions empower the colonies separately to make laws for the peace, order, and good government
of the community, and that is without restriction, except such small restrictions as are imposed by the
Constitutions themselves, and, of course, the necessary restriction that they can only legislate for their
own territory. The position with regard to this Constitution is that it has no legislative power, except
that which is actually given to it in express terms or which is necessary or incidental to a power given.
END QUOTE

p3 12-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
Again:
or which is necessary or incidental to a power given

This means that if for example the Commonwealth desires to operate a post office but the State
decided to block of the access to it, or for example in Watsonia the State creates a ditch for a
highway then the Commonwealth can exercise its incidental powers to ensure it maintains
appropriate access to the post office or an army barrack, etc.
* Is that the use of incidental powers for the postman to drive a motorized vehicle on a footpath
to deliver postal items?
**#** Not at all. I do not accept that the Commonwealth can flaunt ordinary road laws unless
there is absolutely no alternative. Even in war it must abide by road laws and other State laws
and if it fails to do so it can be taken to court. Obviously the courts would consider any violations
of state laws in the circumstances those violations eventuated. Say like that you are not allowed
to smash your neighbours windows but if you notice a fire and desire to rescue your neighbour
then unlikely would a court convict you of smashing in the rescue attempt the windows to gain
access.
* Getting back to the maritime issues, in your view Australia should stay out of it?
**#** Absolutely. We must never ignore the cost of human life, let alone those of any soldier.
They are not to serve the political ambitions of politicians but to serve in ‘defense” of the nation.

https://www.ukonward.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Politics-of-Belonging-Deck-v.4.pdf (UK)

QUOTE
In fact, it suggests the pendulum of liberty is swinging back the other way and that voters are now looking for
a government that will protect them and their families, and provide a greater focus on place, community and
security – the “politics of belonging”.

END QUOTE

Most of the so called anti terrorism laws could have been avoided had we stayed out of the Iraq
conflict altogether. In my view the real terrorist where the politicians who authorized directly
and/or indirectly to invade unconstitutionally that is Iraq.
The absurdity is that politicians are talking about wanting to be independent from the UK, even
so we still are under its constitution, and yet have unconstitutionally registered with the District
of Columbia and so under direct legislative powers of the USA Congress. That is also why our
politicians are like puppets-on-a-string to do what they are told by the USA rather then showing
any real independence they so much argue about. How much can we really claim the UK is
dictating what we are doing? Yet the USA basically determines our foreign policy and than we
need to be prepared to sacrifice our national security to protect foreign flag ships not our own.
And perhaps end up in a war to serve the USA military purposes. It is not about securing fuel
supplies as we can do this peacefully otherwise. That is if we just had a real leader and not some
puppet-on-a-string.
We need to return to the organics and legal principles embed in of our federal constitution!
This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL® (Our name is our motto!)

p4 12-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati