Pelvic mesh victims held to ransom by Labor

In a new low for Labor, Health Minister Mark Butler has sneakily attached an amendment to a bill which was designed to support pelvic mesh victims following a 2022 class action.

If successful, the additional measure gives the government unprecedented power to approve overseas substitute medicines that haven’t been through Australia’s regulatory pathway. Sounds pretty familiar, doesn’t it?

Tying this significant change to support for pelvic mesh victims in the Therapeutic Goods Amendment 2022 Measures No 1 Bill 2022 is a disgraceful act and a dangerous precedent. It must be stopped.

/3 Comments/by

RBA rate rise pain caused by Government incompetence

May be an image of 1 person and text
$969 represents the total rise in repayments on a $500,000 mortgage since Treasurer Jim Chalmers has been in office.

While rate rises may have been foreseeable, they are only happening because of the Government’s incompetence causing inflation in the first place.

The government printed hundreds of billions of dollars out of thin air, leading to massive inflation which the RBA is trying to bring under control with a sledgehammer.

Australians who bought a house under the RBAs promise that rates wouldn’t rise until 2024 are struggling with more pain to come.

/13 Comments/by

Did National Security Imperatives Compromise COVID-19 Vaccine Safety?

By Phillip M. Altman1 BPharm(Hons) MSc PhD, James Rowe2 BPharm, MSc, PhD FRSN, Wendy Hoy3 AO FAA FRACP, Gerry Brady4 MBBS, Astrid Lefringhausen5, PhD, Robyn

Cosford6 MBBS(Hons) FACNEM FASLM and Bruce Wauchope7 MBBS – DTM&H, Dip OBS RACOG, FRACGP

1 Pharmacologist – Clinical trial and drug regulatory affairs consultant

2 Pharmaceutical formulation, manufacturing and quality control consultant

3 Professor of Medicine, Univ. of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia Univ. of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

4 Retired General Practitioner, Publisher

5 Scientist – Molecular Biology and Biochemistry

6 Professor of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine, Retired Medical Doctor

7 General Practitioner, Diploma of Tropical Medicine

Abstract

The US Department of Defense (US DoD) has had a dominant role in the response to the SARs CoV2 virus and in the subsequent development, manufacture and distribution of the Covid 19 vaccines. This has been kept hidden from the general public since early 2020. The US DoD clearly perceived a threat to national security and all decisions from that point onward to the present day were subject to full command and control from them. Strong evidence for this has now become readily available in the public domain, published on the US Food and Drug Administration website (US FDA). Many adverse consequences have been the outcome of this secret military response to a public health matter.

We present the key elements of what happened and warn that what took place was unwise. The lesson is that the development and production of vaccines and other therapeutic products for general civilian use should never again be allowed to be under full military command and control.

Many aspects of the Covid 19 event, which began in January 2020, and the responses to it have been confusing, especially to the general public but also to many scientific and medical observers. The origins of the SARS CoV2 virus itself have been shrouded in controversy. A debate has raged about whether the virus was of zoonotic origin or of laboratory origin. The clinical outcomes of infection were exaggerated from the very beginning in what looked like a coordinated bid to create a panic reaction in the general public. Other health consequences were ignored.

A globally coordinated program followed of suppression of well known pharmaceuticals and nutritional products which may have had utility as therapies in the early stages of viral infection. And only one solution was promoted

— a new vaccine technology that had never been used before in human beings on a large scale.

Since the introduction of the Covid vaccines, many questions have arisen about lack of adequate manufacturing practices, of quality control, of basic pharmacological and toxicological studies and of appropriate clinical safety and efficacy studies. There seems to have been a reluctance on the part of drug regulatory authorities in many nations to acknowledge both the unprecedented level of reported serious adverse drug reactions and deaths reported in association with these products.

Given the considerable safety concerns following the introduction of these gene-based COVID vaccines, why are governments around the world, including Australia, planning to make further significant investments in this unsafe, rushed vaccine technology driven by the US military?

Operation Warp Speed

Following the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorisation of the first COVID-19 vaccines in the US (FDA, 2020) and the Provisional Approval of the first COVID-19 vaccine in Australia (TGA, 2021), they were hailed as a remarkable and innovative life-saving response by the pharmaceutical industry to a deadly pandemic which was sweeping the world.

The development, testing and drug regulatory approval of these novel COVID-19 gene-based vaccines using messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology was said to be done in less than one year, as opposed to the normal development and approval time of about 10 years for conventional vaccines (Seneff and Nigh, 2021). The public was told this achievement was assisted by the financial support of the US government under Operation Warp Speed working to support vaccine companies including Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Novavax and Biontech.

The public was told that these COVID-19 gene-based vaccines were proven to be “safe and effective” (CDCa, 2022). This was echoed by the US FDA and other drug regulators around the world. We were also told these gene-based vaccines would prevent infection and reduce the chances of serious illness and death from the virus SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, we were told these innovative gene-based vaccines would prevent transmission of the virus so everybody needed to be vaccinated to prevent the spread. Vaccine mandates were introduced to

coerce as many people as possible to be vaccinated. There was a relentless fear campaign generated by so-called “health experts” and epidemiologists predicting massive numbers of death.

Unprecedented lockdowns deprived the population of their freedoms, businesses were destroyed, children were denied education, psychological stress and depression was commonplace and those suspicious of the safety of the gene-based vaccines were ostracized from society and blamed for the viral spread (“pandemic of the unvaccinated”). Mass censorship by the media ensured that the public, and even the medical profession itself, were provided with only limited information about the true nature and risks involved in using the COVID-19 vaccines. The very worst of human nature was revealed.

However, since the introduction of these gene-based vaccines, disturbing facts are now emerging. We now know that these vaccines do not prevent infection nor transmission of infection as recently confirmed by a senior Pfizer executive in testimony before the European Parliament (News, 2022) and have not prevented a continuing high incidence of COVID-19. We now know these vaccines are not as safe and effective as originally claimed (Turni and Lefringhausen 2022; Altman, 2022; CMN, 2022; Blaylock, 2022). These vaccines appear to have been associated with an unprecedented incidence of serious adverse events and deaths compared to any other drugs in the history of the pharmaceutical industry.

Based on the US CDC Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), there are now 1,476,227 adverse event reports through December 2, 2022 including 32,621 reported deaths and 185,412 hospitalizations associated with these gene-based vaccines (CDCb, 2022). A disturbing rise in unexplained excess deaths including heart attacks, strokes, cancer and neurological diseases have been reported around the world coincident with the introduction of these vaccines. In Australia, up to August 2022 there were 18,671 excess deaths (17.0%) more than baseline average with most of these deaths not due to COVID-19 (ABS, 2022). Literally, millions of people around the world have either been seriously affected and/or died. We are probably facing the worst health disaster in history.

How did the pharmaceutical industry, our governments and our drug regulators get it so wrong? A simple and plausible answer to this question has now emerged within the last few weeks.

A National Security Operation

There is now evidence to suggest that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was interpreted by the US as a national security threat in early 2020.

Furthermore, there appears to be strong evidence that the United States Department of Defence (DoD) was, and still is, in full control of the Covid Vaccine development program, including the clinical trials, development, manufacturing, quality assurance, distribution and administration since early 2020 (FDA, 2020; Rees and Latypova, 2022; KEI, 2022; Medical Defense Consortium, 2022; Rees, 2022). The evidence shows that the Chief Operating Officer for the Warp Speed vaccine program is the US Department of Defence. It also shows that the Chief Science Advisor is the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It appears that all the pharmaceutical manufacturing and distribution is being done under contract with or by the US Department of Defense.

The major pharmaceutical companies, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Moderna, Novavax, Biotech/Pfizer and Sanofi, have been involved as “Project Coordination Teams” acting under contract to the US Department of Defense.

Communications to the American people by Anthony Fauci (Chief Medical Adviser to the President), Rochelle Walensky (Director of the CDC) and Alex Azar (Secretary of the US Health and Human Services) have been disingenuous from early 2020 to late 2022.

Contrary to popular belief that international pharmaceutical companies drove the COVID vaccine development programs, evidence published on the US FDA’s website (FDA, 2020) reveal a chain of command and control under Operation Warp Speed whereby Covid vaccine manufacturers effectively performed as subcontractors to the DoD. Such overall authority and control could account for the apparent readiness of the FDA to significantly compromise or trade off the normal safety standards for the sake of expediency given the DoD imperatives and the perceived emergency.

The Nature of Gene-based Vaccines

The true nature of the COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ has been largely misrepresented by mainstream media, big pharmaceutical companies and governments and these serious therapeutic agents consequently are poorly understood by the population at large. Referring to these products as “vaccines” led most people to consider these therapeutic products to be relatively safe and well researched and they readily accepted their widespread use without question.

However, these COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ are not really vaccines – they are serious gene-based therapies which employ a gene-based technology which has never before been deployed in a fully approved therapeutic product. In this sense they should properly be considered to be experimental, and much safety and efficacy information has been gained since the introduction of these products almost two years ago.

COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ fall under the US FDA Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies’ definition of “gene therapy products”, in that these products involve “introducing a new or modified gene into the body to help treat a disease” (FDA, 2018). Despite this, the FDA did not evaluate this therapy in relation to the specialised and established gene therapy guidelines. Gene therapies have never been widely used in a general population.

While gene therapies have been the subject of considerable research over the last couple of decades their application has been limited to the treatment of usually rare, serious and debilitating disease or genetic conditions. The reason being is that these products have a potential to cause permanent intergenerational genetic damage, cancer and interfere with reproductive capacity. Gene therapies are viewed as a special class of therapeutic agents due to these potential risks including death and irreversible harm. For this reason, the US FDA and other drug regulatory agencies have put in place detailed rules and guidance documents to direct manufacturers in the development and testing of these products. These guidelines cover both preclinical (FDA, 2013) and clinical (FDA, 2015) research. Due to the obvious and accepted inherent risks, gene therapies have never before been considered for mass deployment in a population, especially to healthy individuals including children, infants and pregnant women.

To facilitate general population acceptance, there was a concerted effort to avoid referring to the COVID-19 “vaccines” as gene therapy products. However, the fact is that these products utilize the delivery of genetic

material to produce a pharmacological effect. Advocates of the gene-based vaccines argued that because the genetic material in the COVID-19 vaccines was not intended to be incorporated into an individual’s DNA or modify the expression of genes within DNA, these products should not be considered as “gene therapy”. However, such a distinction would appear to have more to do with market acceptance than with science.

Due to the risky nature of gene-based therapeutics, there are only a few examples of RNA based genetic therapies in early clinical research. Isolated examples of such products have been approved for serious and relatively rare genetic defects. The first such product ever to be approved by the FDA was Onpattro (patisiran) in 2018 (FDA, 2018). But even this RNA gene therapy was unlike the RNA payload contained in the COVID-19 vaccines because the RNA contained in Onpattro was only a very small short chain RNA called “short interfering RNA” or siRNA. This was only intended to silence or modify the expression of a target defective gene. The RNA in COVID-19 vaccines is much larger and coded for the production of a very large spike protein which was intended to induce the production of antibodies. Unfortunately, it is now understood that the spike protein itself has considerable toxicity in its own right and is responsible for the serious adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines (Cosentino & Marino 2022 and Seneff & Nigh, 2022).

No therapeutic products similar to the COVID-19 vaccines have ever been previously approved anywhere in the world. There was no prior short-term or long-term safety data in relation to these completely new gene-based vaccines with which to predict the safety of these products. Advocating the administration of this completely new class of therapeutic to the world population with no historical safety experience was an unprecedented risk in human health and it appears the gamble has not paid off.

Accelerating Development

The evidence suggests that the plan from the outset was to accelerate development of the messenger RNA platform vaccine technology involving lipid nanoparticles and viral vectors. RNA platform technology is not new to the DoD and has been under research by DARPA (Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency) since 2012 (McCullough, 2022).

The mRNA platform technology is an example of a dual use technology which can either be applied for vaccine use or for military use (Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology, 2018) in much the same way as nitrogen- based fertilizer can be used for agriculture or to make explosives.

With regard to the COVID-19 vaccines, to save time, certain critical research and development activities were either not done at all, not done in a normal and logical sequential manner or not done to established laboratory or manufacturing standards normally required by the pharmaceutical industry. The failure to study the toxicology of the spike protein in animal toxicology studies is an example of critical research which was not done.

It has not been recognised or appreciated to date that the mRNA contained in the lipid nanoparticles in the case of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines is actually, in pharmacological terms, a prodrug (Cosentino and Marino, 2022). It is the spike protein which is the active drug and which is directly responsible for the immune response. However, the pharmacology and toxicology studies of the spike protein in animals or humans were not done as would normally have been required. This is the major fundamental error in the research and

development of these COVID-19 vaccines and this oversight is directly responsible for the failure to predict the serious adverse drug reactions and mortality which have now been reported in association with these vaccines.

Other examples of the total failure to conduct critical research include the lack of properly designed carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, genotoxicity and reproductive toxicological studies in appropriate animal species. In particular, the potential for reverse transcription of mRNA genetic material into an individual’s DNA was not investigated.

An example of the failure to conduct research and development in a logical and sequential manner included the premature scale up manufacture without adequate quality control to ensure that product made in large batches is the same as made in smaller batches. Without proper scale up research, the potency, mRNA integrity, presence of contaminates and stability cannot be guaranteed. There are problems in relation to scale up manufacturing even for conventional small molecule drugs. These gene-based vaccines are highly complex biopharmaceuticals where scale up problems would be expected. This would mean that any toxicological or clinical safety and efficacy data generated using early production batches of product may not be relevant or applicable to the safety and efficacy of product derived from large scale manufacture.

In order to mitigate risk, the plan was to use multiple technologies, multiple facilities and redundancy. Leverage of existing facilities would also take place. In the interest of expediency, the plan was to avoid using traditional pathways from early development to large scale production. This approach necessarily embodied obvious and predictable product safety risks.

Avoidance of time consuming and conventional oversight and quality standards and guidelines such as Good Manufacturing Practice and Good Laboratory Practice guidelines was necessary to speed development. The plan also avoided conventional New Drug Application (NDA) and Biologics License Application (BLA) approvals, moving rapidly using compressed timelines and overlapping stages of development towards Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Scale up and large volume manufacturing was planned in parallel with clinical trials which may have contravened accepted codes of Good Manufacturing Practices.

Such circumvention of normal development and quality control systems and pathways was arguably a recipe for potential disaster. Safe drug development requires sequential, step by step, accumulation and verification of data upon which to plan and adjust the following research, development and manufacturing steps in light of the knowledge gained. In the rush to bring these novel gene-based vaccines to market as quickly as possible, the normal logical safety considerations were compromised (Latypova, 2022; Watt and Latypova, 2022).

The Legal Framework

Three key legislative elements enable the US government to authorise, fund, contract and control many DoD research programs including COVID-19 gene-based vaccine development, testing and manufacture. These elements are:

  • the Emergency Use Authorisation regulations (1997) allow a new drug to be made available with less supportive safety and efficacy data than that normally required for full approval in cases of emergency
  • the Other Transaction Authority regulations (2015) to permit contractual transactions to occur that are not required to comply with Federal laws and regulations, and
  • the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act 2020) established limited liability for those companies involved in the contract arrangements with the DoD.

Two US Department of Defense Agencies, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), possess considerable resources themselves to undertake research and development and gain approval for various products themselves but they also contract with a large number of companies in relation to research and development programs.

The products of these research programs are sometimes classified or referred to as “countermeasures”, “prototypes” or “demonstrations”. This simple change in nomenclature permits these products to avoid conventional lengthy regulatory, commercial development and testing pathways in order to expedite their availability.

BARDA promotes the advanced development of medical countermeasures whether they be chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN). With regard to COVID-19, the activities of BARDA include the diagnosis, detection, treatment, prevention and manufacture of medical “countermeasures” to combat COVID-19. The countermeasures include vaccine platform mRNA technologies, viral vector technology and protein expression technology.

One could imagine that such an operational system and legislative framework is necessary to respond to a biological, chemical or nuclear attack as quickly as possible. However, it appears that this infrastructure was used to rapidly develop the COVID vaccines for general civilian use without the application of the time-consuming safeguards normally required to produce safe therapeutic pharmaceutical products.

The capability of these Agencies is substantial and include raw material supply, manufacturing, testing and scale up facilities including large scale manufacturing facilities in parallel with clinical development.

Applying Emergency Use Authorizations to “countermeasures” appears to be a mechanism to avoid the normal, conventional clinical trial regulated pathways. However, “countermeasures” should not be conflated with conventional pharmaceutical products which are required to be extensively tested for safety according to established international guidelines (ICH, 2022).

Examples of technical areas of interest of DARPA and BARDA include: therapeutic prototypes targeting viral, bacterial, and biological toxins and other countermeasures. Enabling technologies include single and multiple- drug autoinjector delivery devices, vaccine-manufacturing platforms, prototypes for the prophylaxis, treatment and diagnosis of CBRN threats including Acute Radiation Syndrome and chemical nerve agents. Collaboration

also includes the development of systems to increase the speed, accuracy and confidence of agent identification and disease diagnosis and advanced development and manufacturing capabilities.

The Rush to Large Scale Manufacture

RNA technology has been an area of interest in relation to national security. However, COVID-19 vaccines using this technology, by their complex nature, are difficult to manufacture, stabilize and quality control especially on a large scale.

In the rush to make available the Covid vaccines, the bypassing or compromising of normal manufacturing and quality control safeguards has reportedly led to batch-to-batch variability whereby some batches are associated with a high incidence of adverse vaccine reactions and mortality (Gutschi, 2022). In addition, at least 26 researchers/research teams in 16 countries, using various microscopic methods of analysis, have reported the presence of undeclared microscopic geometric and tube-like structures in Covid vaccine vials for which there is no satisfactory or official drug regulatory explanation at this time. Furthermore, various spectroscopic methods of analysis have detected the presence of undeclared and unexpected metals (German Working Group, 2022; Hughes, 2022).

Under normal circumstances, even a tiny fraction of the reported quality, efficacy or safety problems associated with the Covid vaccines would have led to their immediate withdrawal from sale – but this has not happened. Pharmaceutical regulators around the world seem to be wilfully blind to the problems. Governments and the main stream media appear to show no interest in uncovering the truth or conducting a public debate on these critical matters of individual health, rights and wellbeing. Why?

The answer appears to be that, in the interest of national security, the US DoD took charge of the Covid vaccine funding, development and testing right from the very start of the perceived threat in early 2020. The panic that then ensued created the circumstances whereby the normal prudent quality, safety and efficacy considerations in the development of vaccines were compromised. Drug regulators played, and continue to play, an acquiescent role in approving these vaccines and declaring them “safe” based on an absolute minimum of quality, safety and efficacy data and no long-term safety data. After two years, we now see this was a mistake. Contrary to the governmental and main stream media narrative, many are of the opinion that the Covid vaccines appear to have done more harm than good (Dopp and Seneff, 2022).

Uncovering the truth has been a slow and arduous process since December 2020. This has been exacerbated by the intense and unprecedented censorship of doctors and scientists which continues to this day.

Are the COVID-19 Vaccines Pharmaceutical Products?

The US DoD had complete command and control over the research, development, manufacturing, testing, distribution and release of the COVID-19 gene-based vaccines. However, under various specific US government regulations, the US Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued Emergency Use Authorisations for a number of “countermeasures” (called COVID-19 vaccines) to be released for use. This nomenclature is of critical importance. By designating the COVID-19 vaccines as “countermeasures” these products were (and are) not subject to regulatory control by the FDA because, by definition, they are not pharmaceutical products.

Under the US Emergency Use Authorisations the COVID-19 vaccines were not required to be proven safe and effective or conform to normal quality standards as do pharmaceutical products approved by the FDA. The Australian government, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and presumably other governments and their regulatory bodies, should have known that the COVID-19 vaccines they approved for use and contracted to purchase did not have the status of normal pharmaceutical products in the US and they should have never declared them “safe and effective”.

Conclusion

Since the introduction of the Covid vaccines, many questions have arisen concerning the lack of adequate manufacturing practices, quality control, basic pharmacological and toxicological studies and the lack of appropriate clinical safety and efficacy studies. In addition, there seems to be a reluctance on the part of drug regulatory authorities to acknowledge both the unprecedented level of reported serious adverse drug reactions and deaths that have been reported in association with these products.

There is also the serious concern regarding the ominous rise in excess deaths from all causes in many countries suspiciously coincident with the introduction of the COVID vaccines – yet our health authorities steadfastly refuse to consider that the vaccines themselves may be to blame.

The public was told these COVID vaccines were “safe and effective” without qualification even though they were not fully approved. Why was the public not advised that the normal standards of quality, safety and efficacy were compromised in the name of national security and not applied to the development and testing of these vaccines? Why was this kept secret?

Also, are these national security arrangements still in place for future vaccines and other pharmaceutical products?

Given the considerable safety concerns which have occurred following the introduction of these gene-based COVID vaccines, why are governments around the world including Australia, planning to make further significant investments in this unsafe vaccine technology driven by the US military?

The lesson to be learned here is that development and production of vaccines and other therapeutic products for general civilian use should never again be allowed to be under military command and control.

The fate of humanity and all future generations to come is literally at a critical tipping point and few global power brokers and political decision-makers appear able to realise the gravity of the situation.

References

  • BARDA — The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), within the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services – 2022 https://www.medicalcountermeasures.gov/BARDA
  • Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Chapter 6 of the 2018 edition.
  • National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Division on Earth and Life Studies; Board on Life Sciences; Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology; Committee on Strategies for Identifying and Addressing Potential Biodefense Vulnerabilities Posed by Synthetic Biology.
  • Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2018 Jun 19.
  • https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK535870/
  • Blaylock Report – The COVID-19 “Vaccines:: What is the truth? International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research 21 Sept. 2022. https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/57
  • CDCa – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines updated Dec. 5 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/safety-of-vaccines.html
  • CDCb – Centers for Disease Control Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) through December 2, 2022. Open VAERS data. https://openvaers.com/covid-data
  • Cosentino, M .and Marino, F.: Understanding the Pharmacology of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Playing Dice with the Spike? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 10881. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms231810881
  • Dopp, K. and Seneff, S: COVID-19 and All-Cause Mortality Data by Age Group Reveals Risk of COVID Vaccine-Induced Fatality is Equal to or Greater than the Risk of a COVID death for all Age Groups Under 80 Years Old as of 6 February 2022. https://vixra.org/pdf/2202.0084v1.pdf
  • FDA Announcement 2020 https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press–announcements/fda–takes–additional-action-fight-against-covid-19- issuing-emergency-use-authorization-second-covid
  • FDA – US Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee October 22, 2020 Meeting Presentation — Operation Warp Speed – Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response – Unclassified Document from US FDA Website (hereinafter “FDA Presentation”) https://www.fda.gov/media/143560/download
  • German Working Group for COVID Vaccine Analysis – Summary of Preliminary Findings – July 6, 2022. https://guerrillatranscripts.substack.com/p/german-working-group-for-covid-vaccine
  • Gutschi, M.: Quality Issues with mRNA Covid Vaccine Production. 2 Nov. 2022. https://www.bitchute.com/video/muB0nrznCAC4/
  • Hughes, D.: What is in the so-called COVID-19 “Vaccines”? Part 1: Evidence of a Global Crime Against Humanity. International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), September 3, 2022 Page 455 https://doi.org/10.56098/ijvtpr.v2i2
  • International Conference on Harmonisation – https://www.ich.org/page/ich–guidelines
  • Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) – COVID Contracts https://www.keionline.org/covid–contracts
  • Latypova, S. – https://www.bitchute.com/video/BGIqC6ufcyjF/ Bitchute interview Oct. 25 2022
  • McCullough, P: mRNA and DNA vector vaccines made by DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) – 3speak.tv December 2022. https://3speak.tv/watch?v=rairfoundation/idclxvii
  • Medical Defense Consortium – https://www.medcbrn.org/current-members/https://www.medcbrn.org/about– mcdc/
  • Pfizer did not know whether Covid vaccine stopped transmission before rollout, executive admits. News.com.au October 13, 2022. https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/human–body/pfizer– did-not-know-whether-covid-vaccine-stopped-transmission-before-rollout-executive-admits/news- story/f307f28f794e173ac017a62784fec414
  • Open Letter from the Covid Medical Network (CMN) To Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI), the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and Australian Federal Health Department. 8 March 2022 https://www.covidmedicalnetwork.com/open–letters/open-letter-to- atagi.aspx
  • Prep ACT Immunity from liability for COVID-19 vaccinators. US Dept. of Health and Human Services. March 2020. https://www.phe.gov/emergency/events/COVID19/COVIDVaccinators/Pages/PREP-Act- Immunity-from-Liability-for-COVID-19-Vaccinators.aspx
  • Rees, H. and Latypova, S. Toxic by Design: Big Pharma experts speak out 22 Nov. 2022. https://www.ukcolumn.org/video/toxic-by-design-big-pharma-experts-speak-out
  • Seneff, S. and Nigh, G.: Worse Than the Disease? Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19. International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(1), May 10, 2021
  • TGA provisionally approves Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. 27 August 2021. https://www.tga.gov.au/news/media– releases/tga-provisionally-approves-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine
  • Turni, C and Lefringhausen, A.: COVID-19 vaccines – an Australian Review. Journal of clinical and Experimental Immunology, Vol. 7, Issue 3, p491. 21 Sept. 2022. https://doi.org/10.33140/jcei.07.03.03
  • US Dept. of Defense Plan – Alexandra (Sasha) Latypova – 4 Nov. 2022 https://zeeemedia.com/interview/uncensored-bombshell-team-enigma-whistleblower-us-dod-plan-to- exterminate-population-sasha-latypova/
  • Watt, K. and Latypova, S. – November 8, 2022 https://rumble.com/v1sjz4u-discussion-with-katherine- watt- regarding-american-domestic- bioterrorism-pro.html
/8 Comments/by

Treasurer Chalmers unleashes his inner soviet dictator

In a recent economic essay released for weekend newspapers, Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers has cobbled together some cliches about how best to run the world’s 13th largest economy. To summarise, it is a blueprint on how to destroy a $1.3 trillion dollar economy. Of course, Doctor Chalmers has learnt from a master at economic shrinkage, his PhD dissertation was on the economic and social legacy of Paul Keating.

Unfortunately for the Treasurer, his blueprint was released on a weekend when news hit that his tax on beer is set to rise sending the price of beer towards $12 a schooner. Just for the record though, and I’ll get to details soon, Chalmer’s blue print will surely classify your beer as a ‘bad’ investment, because it is full of carbon. Prices will get even higher.

We have to take our hats off to the spin doctor in the Treasurer’s office who released the essay to coincide with the increase in beer prices.  

Schooners of beer are exactly what the Treasurer’s blueprint boils down to. Prices of goods are inflating exponentially, and it is the main topic for discussion at kitchen tables right across Australia. Families are now having to choose between new school shoes or eating; getting the roof fixed or having a holiday at the beach.

A basket of goods that only cost $100 in 1990 set you back $217 in 2022. With sky high inflation, that $100 basket now costs us an eye-watering $234 in 2023, a nearly 8% increase in just one year. Unfortunately, prices will continue to go up. Much of Australia’s price rises in groceries and the bills we can’t avoid are even worse than the headline inflation rate.

Meanwhile in Canberra, the Treasurer is writing new short stories about how to add more pressure to our inflation cooked economy and what he can do to make life even harder for Australians.

Chalmers references the polycrisis of converging pressures. What we really have though in Australia is a pollie-crisis, due to politicians in Canberra making terrible decisions .

Australia’s inflation hasn’t been this high since the Keating days. Families should be terrified, because for those of us who can remember, Paul Keating sent mortgages to 19% and much of the country went broke.

The Treasurer’s neo-Marxist catch-phrase ‘sustainable finance architecture, including a new taxonomy’ to label the climate impact of different investments, has been a topic of much discussion in recent years. Soviet extremists on the left argue that this system is necessary for their fight in the climate change scam and promoting ‘sustainability’. Others, including One Nation, argue that it is misguided and ultimately harmful to economic growth and people’s prosperity.

First and foremost, using a ‘new’ taxonomy to label the climate impact of different investments is the worst and most damaging form imaginable of government intervention in the market. In short, Chalmers says he wants to classify all investments made, including in your superannuation, into ‘good’ and ‘bad’. Ergo, beer full of carbon will be a ‘bad’ investment and need a higher price, while a tree (which is actually made of carbon like much of everything else) will be ‘good’.

This market intervention is the most serious and concerning idea that a government has offered since Ben Chiefly dabbled with communism in the late 1940’s.

The federal government classifying an Aussie family’s assets into ‘good’ and ‘bad’ is a terrifying intervention. Firstly, it creates a level of uncertainty for investors, including you, as they may be unsure of how investments will be classified under the new system. Labor has a track record of changing the goal posts at any minute to suit any Greens, union or factional deal on the table. The classification system is purely subjective and cannot be based on evidence or data.

Secondly, it will lead to market distortions, as certain investments are favoured over others simply because of their classification as good or bad, rather than any economic, financial or productive merit. This will lead to a misallocation of resources, as investments that may not be the most economically efficient or profitable are chosen simply because they are classified as more ‘environmentally’ friendly. For example “this model of car (an Electric Vehicle) is ‘good’, while that diesel 4WD is ‘bad’”, even though Australia is not a country suitable nor ready for the forced uptake of 100% electric vehicles in any way.

The good or bad decisions are made based on the Treasurer’s mood as he gets out of bed in the morning. It is simply a chaotic system that is being proposed.  The Soviet-level bureaucracy necessary to write, disseminate and enforce this controlled economy will result in significantly higher taxes and lower economic growth – an inevitable result of bigger government. Higher taxes and debt will continue to be the Labor way.

These plans will trash our economy. When the Government tries to pick winners, the country loses.

All realistic thinkers will reject and debunk the idea that we can accurately classify and label the ‘climate impact’ of different investments . Any policy setting Australia makes with the aim to ‘adjust’ the world temperature will barely be a drop in the ocean, even if you believe we need to do anything, which the science clearly says is neither necessary nor possible.

The emphasis on ‘sustainable finance’ and labelling the climate impact of different investments as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ misses the point that the issue confronting Australians is inflation and a lack of economic advancement. Controlling and directing the economy to favour only climate-friendly projects from ALP donors will not deal with inflation. Instead, concentrating economic power in the hands of a woke few, it will increase inflation.

One Nation proposes, and has always advocated for, systemic economic reform with the primary objective of reducing government waste to reduce the tax burden on families and eliminate government debt.

If Australians think it’s a rough deal that the Treasurer must raise tax on beer this weekend because beer is ‘bad’, they are best reminded that the cost of beer will be small fry compared to other cost of living pressures Chalmers will soon unleashed

The Treasurer can take away one important lesson from this battle, One Nation will fight the Labor party every step of the way. We will fight for lower prices, better working conditions and a safer economy. The Liberals may have abandoned the field to socialism, but we haven’t. When I ran on as a rugby and league halfback as a teenager and young adult, the job was clear; get that ball and drive it up the middle.

So Labor had better realise it won’t get away with trashing the economy just because of a fractious, demoralised Liberal party destined to become totally irrelevant. The Australian political landscape is now far more pluralistic as One Nation’s continuing growth demonstrates.

The Orwellian use of catch phrases like ‘sustainable finance architecture’ and a ‘new taxonomy’ to label the ‘climate impact of different investments’ is designed to hoodwink the public while winning back Labor’s Green voters, who already exist in this world of doublespeak and concocted reality.

Chalmers is proposing an unnecessary and frightening intervention in our economy that has already been screwed over thanks to years of government COVID restrictions. These measures have had questionable impact on our health, and have certainly decimated our economic well-being. Investors can no longer invest with certainty. Banks have introduced their own version of the Treasurer’s “worthiness” index that is forcing the closure of critical industries in mining, agriculture and manufacturing.

Chalmers is promising more of the same. More wealth reduction, more employment loss, more unemployment and more misery for everyday Australians.

One Nation is having none of this Soviet-style economic management. Let businesses get on with what they do best – creating jobs, creating wealth, and creating a future for workers and for all everyday Australians.

In our beautiful country the best method of providing a future for everyone has always been personal enterprise.

/7 Comments/by

Lidia Thorpe division shows The Voice is completely flawed

The idea that one Voice can speak for every indigenous and Australian is flawed and fundamentally racist. The Voice will just be more well paid bureaucrats in Canberra that will do little to help Australians in remote communities.

Transcript

Greens Senator Lidia Thorpe has broken ranks with her colleagues. Again. She’s declared the party won’t support a referendum on the indigenous Voice to Parliament unless the government meets her demands.

I disagree with Lidia Thorpe on a lot of her ideas and conduct, and this latest disagreement shows how ridiculous the proposed Voice to parliament is.

There is no single Voice or opinion for all the indigenous or all Australians. What Torres Strait Islanders need is completely different from what mainlanders need. What people in Cape York need is different from Melbourne and that’s different again from country Tasmania, the Alice, the Pilbara or musgrave park.

Just look at Lidia Thorpe. There’s only a handful of aboriginal greens senators, yet on the Voice they can’t even make their mind up on whether they support or OPPOSE THE VOICE.
The idea of the Voice is that some over-paid bureaucrats sitting in Canberra can speak on behalf of every aboriginal person and that they can’t think or vote for themselves.

There’s nothing more racist than dividing us on race. Vote no to the Voice.

/13 Comments/by

New Zealand Authorities Legally “Kidnap” A Child

Warning: Distressing Content. New Zealand authorities have lawfully ‘kidnapped’ a child from his parents to forcibly perform a medical treatment on him when there was an equally valid treatment available that the parents supported. Baby William required a blood transfusion which the parents agreed to as long as the blood was from unvaccinated donors. The parents had found suitable donors for the request yet NZ health authorities declined it. The matter ended up in the courts which ruled in favour of the authorities.

The judge said the parents would remain the guardians of the child but all health matters would now be determined by the State. The Mother was not allowed to hold Will all night. She was not allowed to cuddle him. She was also not allowed to sleep all night, as she was told that if she did any of this, she would be forcibly removed back to the ward, from the pre-op room, and would not see the baby before the operation.

The traumatic way in which this situation has been treated does not make sense. This video is confronting but it is the reality of what medical tyranny really means.

/11 Comments/by

Rishi Sunak shows his true WEF colours

Just months after the globalists got tired of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, new Prime Minister of England Rishi Sunak has shown his true colours. He has abandoned election promises and is instead implementing the WEF agenda of more control. “We want to rewire the entire global financial system for net zero” really means “we want to be able to cut you off if you don’t do what we say”.

/16 Comments/by

The video that got me BANNED from LinkedIn

It’s been nearly three months since the platform LinkedIn inexplicably banned me for sharing this video. Big tech censorship is getting out of control. Just imagine the consequences when getting labelled with “wrongthink” is combined with the power of a Digital Identity.

/7 Comments/by

Join me at Post Office Square this Saturday

I’ll be at Post Office Square, Brisbane from 12 noon Saturday 29th October to participate against the protest against ongoing vaccine mandates. See you there!

/5 Comments/by

We are in unconscionable levels of debt – Alan Jones and Malcolm Roberts on ADH TV

,

Australia’s trillion dollar debt is eye-watering. But here’s the government wasting money on ridiculous grants and schemes. We have to turn this boat around.

Transcript

Alan Jones:

We’ve heard endless overtures from the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, about his budget on October 25, there’ll be no new taxes. And yet, as I said earlier tonight, we have unconscionable levels of debt. Labour has to honour more than $2,000,000 of election promises. The growth in spending for the NDIS is forecast to be over 12%. That’s just growth. And in defence spending over 4%. And, of course, then there’s aged care and health and, of course, the cost of servicing the Commonwealth debt will increase by 14%. That’s why they’re carrying on about Stage 3 tax cuts, but that won’t get them out of trouble.

The way to go, if you’ve got the guts, is to cut waste. Let me give you some examples. I’m all for the arts, but how do we give a female artist $20,000 for her Yawning Room at a Woolloomooloo gallery? How do you give $20,000 to an art group for Project Immaculate where a Melbourne artist is filming and recording, listen to this, quote, “monthly live self insemination to elevate the experience of queer reproduction and disrupt heteronormative parenting narratives.” Why is $80,000 given for drawing a bum puppet with the image of the then Prime Minister Scott Morrison, on its posterior? $80,000 went to a Chinese Australian poet writing about toilet rolls and bodily fluids. Another $80,000 went to a bloke, this is last year, and what were the Labour Party saying about it in Opposition. It should have been a field day, but $80,000 to a bloke who said he was an experimentalist and a poet and that quote, “Poetry always accompanies bowel movements. There is a mysterious connection between the two.” $80,000. Is that a palpable waste of taxpayers money? Ideologically driven rubbish? And Government and Opposition have done nothing?

Then you get the staff levels of politicians. As I’ve said many times, I worked for a Prime Minister. We had five staff. Now I know things have changed, but does any Australian leader need almost 60 staff? If Dr. Chalmers wants to talk about waste and saving money, which he should, rather than raising taxes, let him start with his indulged ministerial colleagues.

Senator Malcolm Roberts is an outstanding, highly intelligent, splendidly credentialed One Nation Senator from Queensland. Only this week he has raised what he called wasteful Federal Government spending, where two government departments alone spent nearly a quarter of a million dollars of taxpayers money last financial year on lavish business class flights. He cited one public servant charging taxpayers $4,955 for a 55 minute business class flight from Canberra to Sydney.

Senator Malcolm Roberts joins me. Malcolm Roberts, thank you for your time. Hang on. $5,000 for 55 minutes. What was going on?

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, he must have been very, very tall and very cramped to justify the extra room in business class for just 55 minutes. I think he should be able to hang on. But, Alan, this just is symptomatic of the sense of entitlements, the low accountability and the absolutely atrocious governance in this country.

Alan Jones:

I mean, you’ve provided a list here as long as your arm. I mean, if it’s someone else’s money, of course, taxpayers’ money, away they go.

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, Alan, when I walk on board a plane, I walk through business class and I go to the back of the bus. I walk past the Greens and business class, past the Liberals in business class, past the Nationals in business class, past the Labour in business class and plus past the bureaucrats in business class. Why can’t they go to the back just like I do? And in fact, you get a better flight because you listen to people. You have a good natter to people. Isn’t that what it’s about? Listening to constituents?

Alan Jones:

Yes, I mean, you make this point, don’t you? And it’s so true that many hardworking, tax paying Australians who are watching you tonight have never flown business class in their life. Yet here is workers’ money, taxes, being used for staff to fly up the front of the plane.

Malcolm Roberts:

That’s right. And these people are paying their wages. These people are paying their flights. These people are paying the premium for the business class experience, the free booze, and yet they’ve never been on a plane, some of them, and yet they’ve never been, certainly on business class.

Alan Jones:

There is a case for ministers and others flying business class where they get some work done and whatever, but on a 55 minute flight, for God’s sake, I wouldn’t know how you’d run up a bill of $5,000. But, why, ministerial staff, Malcolm? I mean, you’ve never been a minister. Your boss has never been a minister. This is completely over the odds. The indulged way in which these people have staff that could never, ever be fully occupied because there’s the department as well. I mean, if you’re the Minister for Industrial Relations with a stack of staff or the Treasurer, then there’s a Treasury as well full of bureaucrats. How the hell can these staff numbers be justified?

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, they can’t be, Alan. You made a very good point at CPAC. Let me just quote your figures. The gross national debt was at 20% of GDP in 2013. That was the end of the Labour party, time in Canberra. We are now at over 42% of GDP. And that’s with what? Nine years of Liberal National Party government.

Alan Jones:

Absolutely.

Malcolm Roberts:

The so-called restrained ones, the fiscally conservative party.

Alan Jones:

Oh yes.

Malcolm Roberts:

And yet we’re at 42% of GDP.

Alan Jones:

I mean, it used to be raison d’être that the coalition, the Liberals would manage your money better. And those figures that I cited indicate that it’s just been an extravaganza. Look, Malcolm, it might be unfashionable to say it. And I’m offering no reflection on a court case currently taking place in the ACT, but here were ministerial staffers, plural, out on the town, getting drunk. Now, when I worked in Canberra, we had no time to be going to clubs or bars, even if we knew where they were. We were just too damn busy. It prompts a question, doesn’t it? What kind of worldly informed advice could any 24 year old give to a government minister?

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, Alan, I find the same problems at Parliament House. I never stop. I haven’t got time to go out into the clubs. I haven’t got time to go and get boozy. But what it is is the rot always starts at the top. The fish rotting starts at the head of the fish. And the same with government. What we’ve got is a very lax system in Parliament. We’ve got very low accountability between the Labour Party and the Liberal Party. And what we see is, I mean, we are talking about $5,000 flights to Sydney. We’re talking about the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, $5,500 flights, $4,300 flights, $4,184, $4,095, $5,063 flights on business class. We’re talking about that. But the bigger malaise in this country, that is almost insignificant compared to the bigger malaise. We are talking about policies in this country that are not based on data and that contradict the real world data. We’re talking about policies that are costing people trillions of dollars, not billions, Alan, trillions of dollars. You know that from the energy consequences.

Alan Jones:

Well, I’m going to talk about …

Malcolm Roberts:

We’re talking about …

Alan Jones:

I’ll cover that energy thing in a moment. I just want to finish on staff. See all this nonsense about the Teals being refused staff by Anthony Albanese. I give Anthony Albanese full marks. These people automatically have four staff and they want more. I’d like to know what Zali Steggall has done that benefits any constituent in the seat of Warringah.

Malcolm Roberts:

There’s no reason for that in a small seat of Warringah. Look at Anthony Albanese’s seat. It’s three kilometres across in radius roughly, 32 square kilometres in total area. Queensland is, what was it now? I’ve forgotten the figures, but you know it’s 2,800 kilometres from north to south. It’s 2,000 kilometres east to west. We need staff to get around and listen and with us. So there is a need for some staff for senators, but not for MPs in inner city suburbs.

Alan Jones:

I don’t want to let you go without talking about this cost that you talked about, which was a very valid point. What are the costs to the taxpayer of policies? Now, we’ve seen this week, the very thing that you and I have warned about, energy price is going to climb through the roof. Up to 35% increases next year. Business and households won’t be able to cope. You and I have warned of this. We talked about 17 internationally respected climate scientists from six nations including Australia and covering many disciplines of climate science and climatology who have confirmed your conclusion that CSIRO, our leading research entity in this country, had never presented logical scientific points needed as the basis of policy in climate change.

Malcolm Roberts:

That is correct. And what’s more, what we find is that the CSIRO in their first presentation to me, which lasted two and a half hours, as did the other two presentations, the first one, they admitted that they have never said to any government that there is danger from carbon dioxide from human activity. So I said, “Who has said that danger?” And they said, “Well, you’ll have to go and ask the ministers who’ve been saying it.” The second presentation, they admitted to me, Alan, under cross examination of their presentation that today’s temperatures are not unprecedented. Yet the whole global warming, global climate live was based on the premise that we’ve got unprecedented temperatures. Complete rubbish. Complete rubbish. And now we’ve got trillions of dollars going to be blown and wasted and opportunity costs. We’re going to have Australia decimated.

Look, Alan, when I was a boy, I was born in India for first seven years there. Then we moved to the Hunter Valley. I lived in the bush outside of a town called Kurri Kurri. I used to cycle to school and I went past the aluminium smelter at Alcan. That was built, as was the Tomago smelter, because they were attracted to Hunter Valley because of our clean, high quality, coal, which made cheap electricity. Australia had the world’s cheapest electricity. We’ve now got amongst the world’s highest.

Alan Jones:

We certainly have.

Malcolm Roberts:

But the primacy of energy is really fundamental. You don’t get human progress without ever decreasing energy prices. From 1850 to 1970, we had a relentless reduction in the unit cost of electricity, which dramatically rose productivity, which dramatically gave us our standard of living. We went from scratching in the dirt in famines in the course of 120 years to being free of all of that.

That’s human progress. In the last few decades, we have reversed that. And instead of having a decreasing price of electricity, we’ve had a doubling and a trebling of electricity prices. Now the significant thing of that is that not only does human progress get reversed, but manufacturing, these days, the largest cost component is not labour. The largest cost component has been electricity for quite some time in manufacturing. When we increase our electricity prices due to the highest subsidies of solar and wind in the world, we are double the next highest per capita. We are sending our manufacturing to China. China is manufacturing with our coal, wind turbines and solar panels, shipping them to here where we subsidise the Chinese to instal them. We subsidise the Chinese to run them. We are gutting our manufacturing. We have got farmers in North Queensland, Central Queensland, Southern Queensland, during the last drought, not planting fodder crops because the cost of electricity for pumping water was too high. And this is absurd. We are destroying our country. I call it the solar and wind, a kamikaze malinvestment. Kamikaze malinvestment. That’s what these things are. Parasitic.

Alan Jones:

Well, I’ve called it a national economic suicide note. We’ve run out of time, Malcolm, but I just want to commend you, this man called the Climate Change Bill. Talks in simple language, and I’ll say it slowly. Malcolm Roberts, Senator. Malcolm Roberts, that’s this bloke here, has said, and I’ve said this too, but he’s put it in different lingo. The Climate Change Bill is the biggest change to Australian lives, the Parliament of Australia has ever considered. I’ve called it a national economic suicide note, and that’s where we’re heading.

Malcolm, good to talk to you. We’ll keep talking to you. We’ll have you back. Thanks for your time tonight.

Malcolm Roberts:

Thank you, Alan. Thank you for what you’re doing.

Alan Jones:

Not at all. There he is. Senator, Malcolm Roberts.

/5 Comments/by