-------- Original Message --------
The following addresses point 7 of your Issues paper 6.
redressverb
1.
remedy or set right (an undesirable or unfair situation).set upright again.
"some ambitious Architect being called to redress a leaning Wall"
Firstly I must address the irrationality of the way this is posed. Claimants have rights to pursue civil litigation, to raise the question as to them retaining their rights in this manner is both disgusting and abhorrent.
The suggestion is that the claimant should give up some rights on the basis that they have been sexually abused.
Another way of saying that may show cause for such an abhorrent suggestion and would show that done in this manner the Royal Commission is seeking information from all areas of the community on how to take away or to reduce the rights these abused people have.
Further it can be said that the underlying cause of that is the direct connection with the fact that the vast majority of pedophiles and those who committed torture were highly placed religious leaders from a broad spectrum of religious communities to the point where it can be clearly said that Christianity must be questioned.
Each of these sects that follow this religion claim perfection in belief and accuse all others (more than 30,000 other individual sects or groups) of being wrong. Clearly this is an absurd state as if any are to be correct it can only be one.
That the Royal Commission, it's mandate, it's origins, it's development and the stated reasons for it's existence are the result of or a product of this centuries long battle for supremacy of belief.
While none of these religions and church entities can provide any proofs reaching beyond the bounds of the lowest form of validity required by the "beyond reasonable doubt" level of evidence; none can provide a single piece of evidence that can meet the higher standard of beyond reasonable doubt. One of the problems associated with that is the fact that the tomes upon which their claims are made are deemed as evidence for those claims. This is an absurdity. There is no precedent in law that permits a claim or statement that cannot be supported by the evidence to hold sway or to be given credence in applying the law.
When considering the contradictions with these tomes any veracity test must fail them immediately. Added to that are admonishments, directions, instructions including instructions with threat of murder, sexual slavery, ownership of people and many other crimes against humanity. Further to that there are a seemingly endless set of guidelines on how to harass your neighbor, engage in conflict, usurp power and control over a country through the take over of political and legal systems. Further to this these systems have been developed to such a point of sophistication over the centuries that they have polluted our education systems all with the intention of inculcating and indoctrinating children into perpetuating what is obviously a human sacrifice culture.
To pose the question that claimants should wish to consider relinquishing or giving away further rights when already the rights that the structure built under the guidance and direction of the Christian religion have never been in effect for these people and it beggars belief that the Royal Commission would let such an abhorrent suggestion be posed in plain sight of the entire community. It is not only an abhorrent suggestion it is also evidence of the depth that the thinking and the influence of this Christian culture has infiltrated all areas of our lives and our communities with the intention of continuing to empower themselves and to profit from the largess of our governments as they too are heavily under the influence of this failed and flawed culture.
Had the Royal Commission been holding the rights of the claimants at the forefront when posing this it could have asked claimants if they had any suggestions as to how the law can directed so that the methods that were used against them can never be implemented again and so that any exemption or benefits derived from tax payer funding is never again used to abuse children let a lone sexually abuse and to torture them simply because we give exemptions and benefits written into our laws. Would it not have been better to seek the knowledge of those who have survived. Instead to this point the Royal Commission has focused on those who are still very much victims of both their abuse and the abuse of the legal and political systems that have been developed over centuries to deny them.
Asking to take away further rights is simply further evidence of the depth and the toxicity of this corrupted and failed system; a system that has no evidence as described above.
The interests of the claimants is to have redress. Redress is to remedy or to set right.
Despite the claims of these religions there can be no right without evidence. Today science has advanced at an astonishing rate and the past 5 years or so have produced endless evidence of what it is to be a human being. Setting right centuries of errors and mistakes in thinking and direction can not be remedied through the application of more of that which has failed us. The evidence of history shows that these failures go back centuries into almost an insane litany of crimes against humanity and the acculturation and abuse of children.
I ask that the Royal Commission establish case studies to examine the evidence available from science and from survivors so that we each get at least one opportunity in our lifetime to experience what it would be to be a human person able to experience our genetic and psychological variations without the influence and directions of a broken system that will given the opportunity use any tool available to it to retain and to hold its grasp upon children. It must be stopped from threatening children with eternal punishment as the evidence shows just how detrimental that is to children and in my opinion that is a crime against humanity in its own right - despite that its use in the grooming and the seduction of children for the sexual gratification of clergy and the religious is an abhorrent fact that must be halted immediately.
Only claimants and Institutions who wish to further the power and control that these failed religions hold over children would give their assent to the removal of any right to redress by those claimants. To suggest so is an obscenity of the most egregious kind.
Should seeking redress or compensation through a redress scheme be optional for claimants?
Again this is simply an absurdity to suggest in light of the history of failure of access to legal redress over the past centuries. Thousands of citizens of this country have spent their entire lifetime being denied access through the legal system, they have been obstructed at every level of policing and politics, education, health and community. As far as survivors go their understanding has been that remedy in reality has never been an option for them and now the Royal Commission poses a situation where people can give up their entire right to having things set right.
There is and can be no such option or way to look at this situation where the Royal Commission itself is suggesting the eroding of the rights of individuals when it has been the lack of right to access that has caused the greatest harm to these individuals. Surely the Royal Commission understands that is why they refer to themselves as survivors. Surely the establishment of a redress scheme allows for the overlooking of the root cause of the many many problems and difficulties these survivors encountered in their lifetime of survival against every legal and community system in the country.
The question of redress must take into account the pain and suffering experienced over a lifetime of struggle against such a repressive and pervasive regime; these people have had to over-ride not only their moral feelings and obligations to the families and their children, to their partners, siblings and extended families they have had to over-ride their obligations to their communities and to those fellow men, women and children they share this planet with. They have had to over-ride the impossible or be punished or imprisoned simply because they were unable to over-ride their own genetics and a range of other aspect of human nature as shown with evidence by science a thousand times over if they were to survive so that they could protect their children from such an obscenity and such a travesty of justice that there is no precedent set for it.
Setting right a life of second class citizenry and setting right a lifetime of exclusion from the same benefits and rights both claimed and afforded to members of the Christian religion can never be achieved unless remedy is afforded to each and every individual in the population as each has been adversely affected through the centuries long cover up of the systematic and endemic abuse, torture and sexual abuse of children by clergy and members of each of these religions
Further to the general aspects of redress it is my opinion that setting matters straight for each person does require an individual assessment. I refer to my own circumstances where in my private submission I attempted to describe where I had been cheated out of an inheritance as a 14 year old - this would have made an astonishing difference to my life had legal and moral procedures been followed, instead I encountered activities of the Catholic coverup that denied me my right to justice then and on through out each year of my life.
Added to there are a number of additional circumstances that have been directly adversely affected as a result of the failures of the Australian legal and political systems to afford me my right to justice despite having contacted more than 100 lawyers over my lifetime in an endeavor to set those matters straight. In addition as described in my testimony there is the matter of my business receiving a government grant and engaging with the small business support system that was provided to me via the Queensland government and it repeated requests that I should take my business to the world at that time via an IPO (Initial Public Offering). These matters are in addition to the pain and suffering we have all experienced (Direct victims, family, siblings, children) and as such I would like to suggest that a base figure for that of $10 to $15 million be directed to all who have suffered from this experience while knowing that this is an insufficient amount to compensate for a lifetime of pain and suffering and rejection from their rightful place within humanity it would go in some way to assisting those survivors in the final years of their life
The loss of earning potential is in addition and as described above and with the knowledge that there are many amongst survivors who did surmount the challenges of the systems of the entire country being deployed against them individual losses of those earning potentials must be assessed on an individual basis as without that there can be no sense of setting things right should those matters be cast aside in the haste of forging a settlement and closure of this possibly the most abhorrent and disgusting long term abuse of all that is deemed to be just, moral, ethical and legal redress.
regards
John A Brown
Toowoomba QLD
john@tfyqa.biz 0756412311
