Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

COVID-19

Australian court rules COVID jab mandate for first responders violated Human Rights Act

Published

3 months ago

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By David James

Mining billionaire Clive Palmer, founder of the United Australia Party, funded the action and said afterwards that he was willing to back other class actions by affected workers. He called for the presidents and executives of the Queensland Police and Ambulance unions to “do the honourable thing and resign from their roles

In another blow to the legitimacy of Australian governments’ anti-COVID-19 measures, among the most severe in the world, a judge in the Queensland Supreme Court has ruled that the COVID shot mandates for police and ambulance staff were unlawful.

The judge, Glenn Martin, found that there was a breach under the Human Rights Act: specifically the right not to be subjected to non-consensual medical treatment. He ruled there was a failure “to give proper consideration to a human right relevant to the decision,” rendering the mandate unlawful.

The judge ordered that the police commissioner no longer take steps to enforce the mandates or continue any disciplinary proceedings. He ordered that the director general of Queensland Health also be restrained from any enforcement of the vaccine direction, and that no disciplinary proceedings could be taken against those applicants.

READ: South Australian court rules employers who mandated COVID jabs can be held liable for injuries

Although on the face of it the decision has potentially far reaching consequences for the many Australian workers who refused to comply with mandates, the finding was based on a technicality, rather than a matter of ethical or legal principle.

Health Minister Shannon Fentiman said the ruling was made “in relation to how the directives were made, not the directives themselves.” She said the judge found that limiting people’s human rights in having healthcare imposed upon them without consent was “justified because of the pandemic.”

It indicates that Australian judges continue to work on the basis that COVID-19 was a deadly pandemic, which justified suppressing individuals’ right to make decisions about their own health. Contrary to that assumption, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), which compiles its records from death certificates, found that 2020 and 2021 had the lowest level of deaths from respiratory diseases since records have been kept.

So where was the pandemic? The answer is in computer modelling that turned out to be totally wrong. An example of this irresponsible use of modelling, rather than actual evidence, was referenced in the case. The police service claimed that “modelling” indicated that Queensland Police Service (QPS) personnel would have over two million contacts with the community every year. The judge criticized this, noting that it was for 2019/20 and “did not provide any predictions of the effect of the pandemic on the QPS.” Queensland Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll resigned the day before the decision was handed down.

All Australian state governments relied on deeply flawed modelling, especially the former premier of Victoria, Daniel Andrews.

  1. The PCR test used to identify COVID “cases” was not suitable as a diagnostic tool, as the inventor Kary Mullis noted.
  2. Because the specifics of the Sars-CoV-2 virus were not available in the early stages due to Chinese reluctance to provide details, the PCR test was based on an old flu virus. The FDA admitted that the test was developed not with actual samples of COVID-19, but with what appears to be genetic material from a common cold virus. Tellingly, in 2019 the ABS recorded 4,124 deaths from flu. In 2021 it recorded only two.
  3. According to the Worldometer, 80 percent of people in Australia who tested positive to COVID-19 experienced no symptoms. This meant either that the test was flawed or their immune systems had dealt with it.
  4. Mortality from respiratory disease in the period when there was supposed to be a pandemic was unusually low. According to the ABS deaths from COVID-19 in 2020-21 were under 2,000 – far lower than the 4,124 in 2019 from flu.
  5. The epidemiological modelling was based on “cases,” following positive testing from the PCR or lateral flow tests. This resulted in an absurdly inflated picture of the risks.

Even if it is accepted that these were understandable mistakes, the fact remains that the Australian authorities got it completely wrong; that should have legal implications for the people who lost their livelihoods. Courts, after all, typically focus on evidence, not speculation, even when that guessing comes from complex computer modelling.

Mining billionaire Clive Palmer, founder of the United Australia Party, funded the action and said afterwards that he was willing to back other class actions by affected workers. He called for the presidents and executives of the Queensland Police and Ambulance unions to “do the honourable thing and resign from their roles in supporting the decisions to have officers vaccinate against their wishes.”

If there is to be widespread justice, however, it would seem to be necessary to go beyond just the wording of the vaccine mandate directives and expose how wrong the authorities were when they imposed savage restrictions on the Australian work force and community.

Until judges realise that their assumptions about the “pandemic” are wrong they will continue to put a false idea of the common good above respect for individual rights.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Economy / 3 hours ago

Prime minister’s misleading capital gains video misses the point

COVID-19 / 4 hours ago

Tucker Carlson and NFL star Aaron Rodgers discuss Bill Gates, COVID-19, US Deep State

Frontier Centre for Public Policy / 15 hours ago

The PM as Leaf’s coach

COVID-19

Tucker Carlson and NFL star Aaron Rodgers discuss Bill Gates, COVID-19, US Deep State

Published on May 19, 2024

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Stephen Kokx

The star quarterback argued that Dr. Anthony Fauci was financially incentivized to suppress COVID treatments like ivermectin, adding that Americans should have compassion on those who were convinced by the ‘full-court propaganda.’

NFL quarterback Aaron Rodgers has not been shy about his opposition to the COVID shot in recent years. During many public appearances on television, he has strongly denounced mandates, lockdowns, and government and media officials who pushed the jab. Now, he’s striking a somewhat different tone. 

“How do we call these people forward, in love and acceptance… to step into the truth?” Rodgers asked Tucker Carlson in reference to Americans who bought into the “full-court propaganda” and received the shot.  

 

“They went through all the mass-formation psychosis that we all did… and are now going, ‘Oh s***. Maybe that wasn’t the best. Maybe they lied to us. Maybe this wasn’t safe.’” 

Rodgers spoke with Carlson earlier this month in a timely, two-hour long interview on his  The Tucker Carlson Show. As previously reported by LifeSiteNews, they touched on an array of subjects related to how global elites control the world, including blackmail and pedophilia. 

There are “a lot of really interesting secret societies, not just the Skull and Bones at Yale, which has produced all those presidents and Freemasonry at its highest level,” Rodgers said. “There is a sexual component, I think, to a lot of that.” 

Rodgers won Super Bowl XLV with the Green Bay Packers in 2010. A sure-fire Hall of Famer, he was one of the highest profile professional athletes to push back against the shot at the time. During an appearance on ESPN’s Pat McAfee Show in January, he courageously argued that Dr. Anthony Fauci had a financial incentive to vilify alternative treatments like ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, zinc, vitamin D, and vitamin C. He made similar points with Carlson.  

“If we’d called this ‘gene therapy,’… maybe we thought it was about 5 to 10 percent of people that might take this. We call it a ‘vaccine’ then that brings in all the potential [of] being canceled as an anti-vaxxer, because that’s what they did to me and you as well,” he said. 

READ: Bill Gates predicts mRNA ‘vaccine factories’ worldwide and $2 vaccines for every disease 

“There’s a top line in a lot of those organizations that are actually at their core anti-American and are not doing things that [are] in the best interest of our people,” Rodgers said. “[Trump] had four years to do it and didn’t drain the swamp, and whether he just got scared because of what he learned when he was in there, I think it’s very plausible.” 

Rodgers and Carlson also discussed COVID propagandist Bill Gates.  

“I think there’s some people that want depopulation… Bill Gates… if you look at his track record and what he’s done around the world,” Rodgers said, referring to Gates’ vaccine activism in Africa. 

“I think he’s strongly pro-death,” Carlson replied.  

“I think he’s not the only one. I think there are a lot of other people. I don’t understand what that motivation is… but I think those are some of the evils that we’re up against,” Rodgers commented.  

Rodgers revealed that he has done a seven-day fast to improve his health and encourages others to try it as well. He also explained that he doesn’t eat a lot of sugar because cancer cells thrive off of it. He then pointed out that there has been a proliferation of ailments developed by children in recent decades, seemingly hinting that he believes that is a result of the massive increase in vaccines they receive.  

Although raised in a Christian home, Rodgers told Carlson it is possible religion is a tool to “control” people. At the same time, he said there is a “demonic” element to UFOs and that, regarding the COVID shot, he thinks “evil kind of overstepped a little bit too far. And now that the tides are turning.” 

“There’s a battle that’s going on between the seen and the unseen world, between good and evil, between the powers that we can see and the powers that we can’t see,” he stated. 

At one point in their conversation, Carlson asked Rodgers, “do you know anyone who didn’t get the vax who’s upset he didn’t get the vax? Does anyone regret that decision?”  

“No,” Rodgers replied. 

“Right. Not one person, ever,” said Carlson. 

Continue Reading

COVID-19

NIH Quietly Altered Definition For Gain-Of-Function Research On Its Website, Former Fauci Aide Confirms

Published on May 16, 2024

By

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By JASON COHEN

 

National Institutes of Health (NIH) Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak confirmed on Thursday that his agency’s communications department altered NIH’s definition for gain-of-function research, with the change being “vetted” by “experts.”

The NIH until Oct. 20, 2021 defined this research as “modif[ying] a biological agent so that it confers new or enhanced activity to that agent,” while “some scientists use the term broadly to refer to any such modification,” according to the House Oversight Committee. Republican Rep. Nicole Malliotakis of New York questioned Tabak, a former aide to Dr. Anthony Fauci, about the agency changing its definition of the research on its website, asking him who authorized the alteration.

WATCH:

The current website does not define gain-of-function research, but asserts this research is usually uninvolved with enhanced potential pandemic pathogens.

“The change was made by our communications department because of the confusion that people have about the generic term of gain-of-function and the specific term gain-of-function,” Tabak testified.

Malliotakis responded by suggesting the communications department would not be qualified to make a change like this and must have had other input.

“The content was vetted,” Tabak testified. “By individuals who are subject-matter experts.”

Fauci firmly denied that the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) funded gain-of-function research on bat-based coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) before the COVID-19 pandemic during a Senate hearing in May 2021.

“The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Fauci said.

Tabak testified on Thursday that the NIH did fund this research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but it “depends on [the] definition.”

The NIAID, which Fauci previously led, funded the nonprofit group EcoHealth Alliance to study bat-based coronaviruses in China that consisted of the transfer of $600,000 to the WIV, the Daily Caller News Foundation previously reported.

Continue Reading

Trending

X