Donna Bugat: I DO NOT CONSENT to state 'experiment' of adoption, involving coercion & overwhelming force with identity theft, deportation & extradition, torture & attempted murder, incl. grossly negligent medical treatment, that bypasses informed consent in absence of legal representation, to perpetuate... cronyism (23.11.2020)



... I DO NOT CONSENT to state 'experiment' of adoption, involving coercion & overwhelming force with identity theft, deportation & extradition, torture & attempted murder, incl. grossly negligent medical treatment, that bypasses informed consent in absence of legal representation, to perpetuate... cronyism... 







An adopted person can too often live in a state imposed legal limbo of extreme uncertainty in a vicious endless cycle of persecution from multiple state agencies and states, throughout our lives, particularly if we are female and classified by the state as mixed race, because the whole experiment in coercion, is really only designed to perpetuate… cronyism.


My name of Donna Bugat is obviously culturally different from Barbara Paterson etc, which was… intended to hide my mixed race Mediterranean Italian cultural identity in ‘Whites Only’ Australia when Italians were (and are sometimes still) called ‘wogs and dagos’ or the ‘Chinese of Europe’ which are… intended to be derogatory terms, and not because the state wants to… protect us.


The people who posed as my parents and godparents from the highest echelons of the British and Australian intelligence services did not socially mix with a single Italian person, or indeed any Mediterranean people, at all.


The ‘Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption’ (and ‘inter country’ adoptions are very easy to hide) is nothing but an egregious political free for all, around the world, that only unites politicians who otherwise claim to have differences. United States citizens who are resident in Germany for example are able to adopt children from anywhere, through the German 'inter country adoption' while the Swedish government who portray themselves as liberal, refuse to cancel adoptions. 


Adopted children can more generally be trafficked anywhere, by ‘consenting’ states, which involves what would  otherwise also be called deportations and extraditions, when it doesn't involve adopted people, and unlike adopted people, usually has legal representation.


... its just a free for all between 'consenting' states...


The ‘Convention’ overlooks the legal reality informed consent is required from all adopted children and adults because there are alternative options, so adoption is an experiment in bypassing informed consent because it is just being used as an ‘experiment’ in… coercion, to perpetuate… cronyism.


The British Commonwealth stole my identity as a small child, which along with my adoption stopped my having any contact with or information about my own family is and was disproportionate, because I have never given my informed consent, as a child or adult.


A government that cruelly steals a child’s identity to stop a child having any contact with or information about their own family including any medical information is clearly not acting in the best interests of that child but is instead using… coercion to… force an adopted child and later adult to participate in experimental ’treatment’ without any informed consent, or protections like legal representation.


Any attempt by the state to try and make the victim of the identity theft have to ask permission and pay the state to have our own identity, not only discriminates against people who are adopted, but is… intended to hide the only real purpose of adoption is to force and coerce someone to participate in what is really an experiment in bypassing informed consent and any other checks and balances and safeguards, like legal representation.


I was treated the same way in the UK in Europe because I am adopted.



… politicians are not remotely bothered that prolonged physical and emotional state violence, can seriously damage immune systems and trigger auto immune illnesses too…


I had, while I was a single divorced working mum living in my own home, my adopted name illegally leaked to the press in the UK so cronyism could make… money, while I was under 24/7 surveillance (in Parliament Square, Central London) but not for my… protection, because it is a matter of fact the government refuse without lawful excuse to hand over the CCTV of their torture and attempted murder of me, which is not only discriminatory, but… intended to harm me. The available records show the government intended to murder me because they refused to call a doctor, in the knowledge I was injured after their own CCTV also shows me being coward punched from behind (that time) that sent me flying to the ground, which was obviously directly related to the previous violent attack by their ‘unknown male assailant’ who violently used a coward punch to my head, that connected with my temple by my left eye. Not that long after the government are filming their press in my face, while I am unsurprisingly wearing a t-shirt that says “you make me sick” !! (the court records show they had previously illegally ordered the destruction !! of my pink sequinned banner because it said “I am not the Serious Organised Criminal” in the seriously libellous ss 132-138 SOCPA 2005 legislation they had to repeal.


Too many adopted people are treated worse than criminals who are convicted of the most serious criminal offences.




Grossly Negligent medical treatment:


I can only have a CT Scan for example if that happens to suit the whim of a politician who denies my absolute right to my own identity, while also reserving the right to access my own personal medical information for… themselves, but only because and at the same time !! politicians refuse without legal excuse to hand over the CCTV of their torture and attempted murder of me that happened to me (it is common sense and law, there is 100% legal certainty that CCTV that is evidence of… intentional… harm, by the state belongs to me) politicians are only trying to avoid legal accountability over.


It is actually grossly negligent for politicians to refuse to hand over to me, my evidence, directly related to my physical and emotional health.



I don’t personally accept any... politician deciding if, when and what medical treatment I should have according to whatever happens to suit them, and particularly during… any global pandemic, and regarding any vaccinations (which are not all the same and so on) because I am legally entitled to make my own informed choices, with the available information from health professionals, and with proper regard to …my own medical situation, including auto immune illnesses etc, and with the back up of legal representation, because I should have my own global fully comprehensive health and insurance cover… because of what politicians have… already done, to harm me.


Politicians are really only publicly funded ‘special advisers’ for corporations, so they obviously only consider first and foremost protecting themselves and their own paychecks.



the number ten ’special adviser’ racket,  the british pm johnson the pretender's 'public persona' has always been a complete media invention by 'special advisers' (who are legally liable too) including australia with crosby, and incl. labour's rudd (who got $1.4 billion for zero hour contracts from the tories in the uk) … brandis and cicero/amo etc al…



... a media invention, there's a long list of 'special advisers'/'reputational management' who are literally only paid to... cover up wrongdoing by the pm, with any diversion...



... gilligan's on the payroll because he covered up the violent attack on me for livingstone and johnson...



The political limitation on the public use of natural CBD oil for medicinal purposes is an example of massive vested interests putting money before public health because governments like France, have been unable to present any evidence… in courts, of the medicinal use of natural CBD oil being harmful.


I am using my own home in France as collateral so I can have a jury because I do not reasonably believe publicly funded politicians who are in practise demonstrably really only ‘special advisers’ for specific corporate interests (and do not have to be experts in anything themselves) have any ‘recognized defence in law' to have an absolute right to do whatever they like to any/most people, without any checks and balances and safeguards.


It really is the peace and harmony of the rule of law, rather than advertising from publicly funded ‘special advisers’ posing as politicians for corporations, that has the greatest… potential to protect the most people, from unnecessary harm.




Donna Bugat (formerly known as Babs Tucker)