Djokovic looking for ScoMo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk6O0-qO450

Wow, too much of this happening:

https://twitter.com/CraigKellyMP/status/1481908701506457601?cxt=HHwWgsDS7ZmH5pApAAAA

How can the media be impartial if it is reliant on the people they are meant to keep honest.

Also if true from Craig’s Twitter feed, Judge Kelly convened at 8:45pm. A wild guess he may be a tad hot under the collar to agree to come in late Friday night to hear this.

mh is covering the unfolding events on dash Cat…

So Djokovic is a problem because he would have killed x number of people apparently.

Vaccination is not mandatory. Maybe this needs to be made clear. There is nothing that is being opposed, then, by an unvaccinated person. Nothing to upset the apple cart.

And Hawke

Vaccination is not mandatory. […] There is nothing that is being opposed, then, by an unvaccinated person.

Nothing to be opposed?
To enter Tasmania a person must be “vaccinated”. It is true that few people these days are forced to enter Tasmania, and a potential tourist or returning resident can choose not to enter Tasmania and therefore can opt not to have the, so far, two not-mandatory-but-necessary injections.
This year all students at the University of Tasmania must prove that they have been doubly injected before they may study at a campus. It is true that few are forced to be enrolled at the University of Tasmania and a potential student or returning student can choose not to enrol and therefore can opt not to have the, so far, two not-mandatory-but-compulsory injections.
Currently, all Tasmanian SES volunteers must supply proof that they have had, so far, two injections of alleged vaccines; otherwise, they are ineligible to attend call-outs. It is true that few are forced to be SES volunteers and a potential volunteer therefore can opt not to have the, so far, two not-mandatory-but-pretty-damned-obligatory injections and choose to be, effectively, stood down.
Nonetheless, even if governments were not forcing children—who are at negligible risk from COVID-19 but demonstrably at risk from the effects of the various, supposed vaccines—to be injected with those substances and, even if mandates were purely hypothetical, I for one should still oppose dangerous, alleged vaccines, the wicked propaganda (such as insinuations that young, unvaccinated children are selfish and must want to murder their friends and relatives) which promote their use, and, above all, mandates.
After all, a danger need not be present already for me to oppose it; in fact, it is surely better to oppose, say, authoritarian measures before they come into existence than wait until they are enforced. I oppose, for example, the statist overthrow of all worthwhile traditions without perforce insisting that the statist overthrow of all worthwhile traditions has begun. (No, not at all!) I can oppose replacing the current national anthem with some ditty by acclaimed hip-hop artists, the Hilltop Hoods, without, I hope, being accused of thereby believing that such an exchange be underway. It is wiser to oppose a Bill before its second reading, I contend, than to attempt to remove an Act after its royal assent.

being in an unvaccinated state is not unlawful.

Not yet.
I thank you, Franx, for your ontological* distinctions.
We are, I hope, in complete agreement that Mr. Djokovic, has done nought wrong merely by his being unvaccinated (by the current definition—he has, I imagine, been vaccinated many times over the years); but, according to our benevolent Minister for Immigration, his mere presence whilst officially and outrageously unjabbed in Australia might encourage others—against the maintenance of public order!—to be even more fervent in their opposition to the new vaccines (whether or not being coerced into being jabbed equals a mandate). That, of course, cannot be tolerated.
I do maintain, however, that there’s a great amount that is being opposed by unvaccinated people.

* a wee drollery on ??, ????? (“being”); never mind.

Deadman, yes, thanks.
Ontological drollery indeed.
And I have no real idea about the Greek.
But the ‘yet’ you note is one reason why I worry about the Djokovic situation.
Because – at present – BEING unvaccinated is not unlawful, although ‘privileges’ are denied.
Meaning that if, as with Djokovic, a state of BEING becomes tantamount to intention to corrupt the the innocents (called Karens, I believe), then the intention works to make it that we are all and equally stuffed.
Except that that I do not think we are, despite indications to the contrary, these indications being mere presuppositions. For they will try.